In minimizing the impact of government upon the people (and the financial costs associated with that impact), it is important to remember that there are many issues which we currently address at the Federal level that we should not. Pitting Religious Ideology against Scientific Observation is not the province of the Federal Government.
Article 2 clearly states that Self Defense is -not- a crime. You have not only a personal responsibility to your own daughter to stop a rapist by any means necessary, but you have a societal obligation to apprehend the offender before they can commit atrocities upon other innocents.
If there is an assault of any kind, if one individual witnesses another individual violently breaching a third party's right to live in peace, it is their ethical obligation to society to do everything in their power to aid the victim. The point about tyrannical governments applies to the responsibility of the group (the nation) to assist those populations who find themselves being victimized by their own governments. On a policy level, I do not agree with invasions or occupations - but would in specificity say that our current best tactic is similar to our actions in Libya, where we aid the rebels in taking back their own country, and we surgically use remote weaponry to disarm the military might of the despot himself.
I am not here to take sides in civil or religious issues. I feel that if both sides wish to live in a world free of strife that we must agree to maintain a purely secular governance. At the same time, we need to understand that no one 'likes' abortion, and it is merely symptomatic of other problems within society. Our efforts need to be directed towards the causes of our problems, not towards the symptoms of those problems.
If they consent to that, then it seems to imply that they derive satisfaction from caring for another person on that level. It is my feeling that there should be a universal welfare system that guarantees at least a modicum of shelter and sustenance regardless of an individual's mental state, or capacity to contribute to society. However I see no reason to make the apathetic and unwilling -comfortable- to any real degree. A bunk in a dorm where one can have a small locker to keep possessions, access to real running water and proper hygiene (hard to find work when you life under a bridge), and a supply of government cheese actually costs almost nothing 'per person'. It is not a life anyone would strive for, but it's a true safety net to help keep people from falling into utter despair and ruin. Even all that would largely be a stop-gap measure until we can figure out how better to insure employment for all who are willing and able to contribute to society.
That's the tricky part for most people - as soon as they realize that some people enjoy life in ways that seem foreign or even obscene to them, they react strongly and often violently. Personal behavior is personal business, until they make it more public. Honestly, I think people should be more open about sex as a concept, but I have seen enough of this world to know that most people really should keep the details to themselves.
I mean, don't cut down entire valleys worth of trees, when we have better sources of fiber. People should harvest Deer and Elk for food, if for no other reason than with the lack of large predator species, it falls on us now to cull the herd and keep numbers down (unfortunately most hunters go for the strongest and healthiest, rather than the old and weak, as nature does, to promote a -strong- population). I mean don't blow up entire ecosystems just to dig out some more cheap coal when we could invest into renewable energy sources that are safer for the planet. I mean don't open a factory and pump your waste into a river or lake just because it's cheaper than dealing with your own mess. We can only do what we are capable of right now, so people will drive gas-powered cars until we have a proper solution, since there aren't enough Rare Earth Metals on the planet to give everyone electric cars, we still need to find a better way - and that is the reasonable approach to the problem (I do believe low MPG vehicles should have an additional tax added, that would be used directly for research into energy and fuel science, but banning should always be avoided).
I am referring here mostly to past modes of governance. You can hold dear to you anything that you -feel- is right, as an individual, Article 1 basically says "leave me to my own, and I will leave you to yours, and we can both be different but happy", but as a collective whole, we need to always be ready to adapt. America's format of government and economic model have both remained largely unchanged ~230 years which I believe is a record for longevity of both a brand new nation, and new method of administration. This is notable because other great nations/empires who did not change their methods of operation to follow the times, inevitably fell to economic collapse, or civil war, or they one day dissolved their union and went their separate ways. The world has changed more in the past 100 years than in the 200 before that, and in those 200 changed more than in the previous 1000. We must refine our methods of governance before waste and corruption rip our nation (and with it perhaps our world) to pieces.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4oHSgMgrIk - This video sums up my stance on religious differences in the world
There is not enough space, there are not enough words to go into excruciating detail on every point. Each point can be looked at from a multitude of perspectives, and it is my goal here to leave the messages as brief, concise, and simple as possible so that they are easy to digest (for example, have you ever read the Declaration of Independence in its entirety? how many people do you know who have?), so that they are not weighed down with 'contemporary' terminology or topical points that may lose relevance, and so that they provoke thought within the individual reader. I am here to illustrate myself and my view of the world as clearly as possible, because when these words are viewed through this particular lens, there is no ethical gap between the words and their intent.
It is entirely understandable that you have lost faith in our political system, because there is an infuriating disconnect between statements and actions. We no longer have Stewards in our offices, we have Politicians, and they will use spin, fear, mistrust, and hyperbole as their weapons with only one goal - to secure political office.
When someone such as myself comes to tear away the veils of corruption and greed within our system, and makes a sincere promise to remain true to exactly their stated virtues and principles, it may seem terrifying - but let me assure you that I am only here to convince people to agree to get along, and to cooperate to shift our world's #1 industrial product from weaponry to energy infrastructure so that we all may live productive, comfortable lives.
<3
