Cody Quirk: Reflections on the Growth and Virtues of the National IAP

Cody quirk

This was sent to me by the author for posting here on IPR. It was originally posted at Hammer of Truth .

by Cody Quirk

As of a few weeks ago, the Utah affiliate of the National Independent American Party has finally got on the ballot — joining the other state affiliates in New Mexico, Arizona, and Oregon, on their respective state ballots, and are now looking forward to fielding sincere and principled candidates for the 2014 elections this year.

Even as the National IAP keeps expanding and continues to bring in more patriots and concerned citizens that are not only tired of the political corruption and decay brought on by the vile Two-Party system, but also yearn for a party that will put principle above politics, will seek to restore limited constitutional government, will fight to preserve traditional moral values in a eroding society, and especially will put the interests of the average American above those of the Ivory-Tower elite, whom have brought our country towards the verge of ruin by such leadership and policies implemented upon the federal, state, and local levels- therefore diminishing and bringing our U.S. Constitution to presently cling to those last breaking strands of freedom.

Granted, while this party did come from small and almost insignificant beginnings; it was yet through the dedication of those passionate, determined members of this sincere and humble organization that the IAP has been able to take each vital stepping-stone onto those state ballots and into the significance of the American political field. This rise and growth was not easy however, yet through the persistence and overcoming a few minor and occasional setbacks, did we raise our banner high and gradually did others flock, and are still flocking to our cause, as we speak.

In fact, not only did we work hard to make it to the next step on our own, but soon the support and friendship of other like-mind state parties did join and affiliate with us, of which we are grateful for, and also assist and work together for the common cause of saving that precious document of ours which once provided the checks and balances that kept a federal government in restraint while also once maintained the wonderful liberties that the States and the American people enjoyed, but now through decades of adding on bureaucracy, red-tape, and intrusive legislation, are now out-of-joint.

Indeed, the National IAP still has quite a long road ahead, with many more steps of that journey soon to be taken, but through the grace of our Heavenly Father and His Gospel, along with the dedicated teamwork and relentless outreach of the leaders & active members of this growing organization, yet also with the inclusive cooperation of other like-mind parties yet to come into our fold; the question of the future of this once insignificant and small party has been answered, and it’s expected outcome is a bright and positive one.

To be fair, unlike some of the exclusive-minded and arrogant parties out there that claim to be the ‘only party to put principle above politics’, the IAP isn’t at all alone in holding such moral/constitutional-oriented beliefs, yet what sets us apart from most other parties is our pledge and adherence to not just advocate for such beliefs and principles, but to also hold ourselves above from the deceit, back-stabbing, manipulation, and internal fighting that sadly has occurred in such alternative parties like ours in past and recent history.

Nevertheless, we want to see all parties and individual patriots not just working together within our ranks, but seek to put the importance of the restoration of constitutional government and the values of virtue above our own party as well; we are not only eager to work with others outside of our camp, but will endorse and support other principled candidates in other parties (or of none at all), and stand by to assist and work with those like-minded parties and individuals that think and act like we do, regardless of if they express interest to join our cause or not. Our nation, our culture, our values, our vanishing freedoms very much come first before the National Independent American Party.

However, we still would like to reach out and include all true Independent Americans and sincere citizen patriots into our ranks in friendship, fairness, and harmony- for if God is with us, then who can be against us?
Our growth and outreach has been phenomenal, and we continue to expand and build upon our recent successes, of which there is no question of where we will be within a year, two years, even five years from now.

The only direction the National Independent American Party is going is forwards and upwards, and we Independent Americans will continue to carry it into more eminent and prosperous heights.

Cody is a frequent visitor to IPR, and often shares his knowledge of the Independent American Party with us here.

50 thoughts on “Cody Quirk: Reflections on the Growth and Virtues of the National IAP

  1. Cody Quirk

    You can still regulate it, otherwise there should be no laws on any kind of vice or obscenity.

  2. Cody Quirk

    Really wish you didn’t use a old pic of me when I was 60 pounds heavier, but oh well.

  3. David

    Where in the Constitution does it say we should regulate morality? I guess we do need a government review board to regulate or determine what’s moral or not moral and pass laws accordingly. Strict adherence to property rights is all we need.

  4. paulie

    Where in the Constitution does it say we should regulate morality?

    I don’t think that is the correct question to ask.

  5. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I’ve never met you, so I didn’t realize that you’ve changed, but I think you look handsome, Cody. Next time I’ll ask you for a photo.

  6. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    “There should be no laws on any kind of vice or obscenity.” I also agree with this.

  7. Cody Quirk

    Ok, so there should be no laws on child pornography, public lewdness or nakedness, or even age of consents?

    David, tell me where in the U.S. Constitution can we NOT regulate or legislate morality?

    Btw, even when you legalize same-sex marriage, you’re still legislating morality.

  8. paulie

    “There should be no laws on any kind of vice or obscenity.” I also agree with this.

    OK, it’s unanimous then, we have a winner 🙂

  9. paulie

    Ok, so there should be no laws on child pornography

    Evidence of a crime (child molestation). Children aren’t considered capable of informed consent, so that’s different from mutual laws involving cosenting adults.

  10. paulie

    David, tell me where in the U.S. Constitution can we NOT regulate or legislate morality?

    Also the wrong question to ask.

  11. Cody Quirk

    “Children aren’t considered capable of informed consent, so that’s different from mutual laws involving cosenting adults.”

    Problem- there are varying interpretations of what age a child is considered a consenting adult. In many cultures, societies, and in some states, the age of consent is lower then 18.
    And also, what is obscene and what is not does vary in such societies and cultures as well, so it’s not that simple, Paulie.

  12. Cody Quirk

    Actually I asked that one question on the Constitution to prove a point, and again, the 10th Amendment does give states leeway in some moral and social issues.

  13. Mark Seidenberg

    Cody,

    You getting yourself in a hole. Look at the give and take between Rothbart and Rand, on the
    issue of abortion before falling farther in the trap that Jill and Paulie are trying to put you in.
    Paulie and Jill know what they are doing to you. You just have not caught on.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg

  14. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I NEVER discuss abortion, Mark, NEVER, except to say that I never discuss abortion. No one knows my beliefs on that, probably not even my husband. I also had stopped commenting on this thread out of respect for Cody’s beliefs, since I know he’s sincere and there would be no purpose in continuing commenting.

    What is your problem?

  15. William Saturn

    As long as the States do not interfere with the powers expressly granted to the federal government in the Constitution, and do not violate any rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, States can do whatever they please respecting morality.

  16. Andy

    Cody Quirk said: “Btw, even when you legalize same-sex marriage, you’re still legislating morality.”

    Actually, I’d classify it as giving equal treatment under the law, however, the bigger issue here is that the government should not be involved in the marriage business in the first place.

  17. paulie

    there are varying interpretations of what age a child is considered a consenting adult.

    True. However, legally, it is a matter of law for all contracts and sex falls under that (informed consent, just like signing legal documents).

  18. William Saturn

    Paulie, did you just take what I posted out of context or did you not read it correctly?

  19. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    The more I think about Mark Seidenberg’s accusation, the angrier I get. What the heck? It came out of the blue. Do people forget we do this in our free time? I didn’t have time to post Cody’s article, but I took the time to do it because I respect his activism, even though I very much disagree with much of what he says. Okay, I left one mild comment one this thread, but decided there was no reason to continue disagreeing because this is his article, and everyone knows how I feel, so whatever. And now Mark attacks us–why?

    Maybe everyone is as testy as I am, since it looks like our bungling President might drag us into another war. Anyway, jeez.

    Have a good weekend, everyone. Maybe this is a good time to start drinking.

  20. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I also just had a most unpleasant conversation with someone at Godaddy. I actually got so angry I started yelling–and I rarely do that. There just must be someone in the air.

    Oh, and I recommend no one EVER does business with godaddy.

  21. paulie

    The more I think about Mark Seidenberg’s accusation, the angrier I get.

    Consider the source and chillax.

    Maybe everyone is as testy as I am, since it looks like our bungling President might drag us into another war.

    He knows exactly what he is doing, and it is nothing good.

    Maybe this is a good time to start drinking.

    I’m way ahead of you on that one 🙂

  22. paulie

    Paulie, did you just take what I posted out of context or did you not read it correctly?

    I shortened it, but my response is still the same even with your qualifiers and stipulations.

  23. paulie

    Why?

    Tastes just like apple juice with 5% alcohol. This crisp and refreshing cider mixes the sweetness of the apples with a subtle dryness for a balanced cider taste. The fresh apple aroma and slightly sweet, ripe apple flavor make this cider hard to resist.

  24. Jed Ziggler

    Been away, but I will enter into the chorus:

    There should be no laws on any kind of vice or obscenity.

  25. Cody Quirk

    “Actually, I’d classify it as giving equal treatment under the law, however, the bigger issue here is that the government should not be involved in the marriage business in the first place.”

    I can sympathize with that valid argument, but sadly it’s not that simple.

  26. Cody Quirk

    “True. However, legally, it is a matter of law for all contracts and sex falls under that (informed consent, just like signing legal documents).”

    That still falls under legislating morality- that its when does the state, or government, decide when a child, or teen, is a legal adult, or mentally competent to be legally considered as one.

  27. Cody Quirk

    Jill, if I were you, I wouldn’t take Mark’s comments too seriously, the man is way more eccentric then I am.

  28. paulie

    That still falls under legislating morality- that its when does the state, or government, decide when a child, or teen, is a legal adult, or mentally competent to be legally considered as one.

    Nope, that is not legislating morality, it is fundamental contract law. The basis of libertarian law is informed consent, which requres the capability to give informed consent.

    Jill, if I were you, I wouldn’t take Mark’s comments too seriously,

    Exactly.

  29. William Saturn

    Paulie, what you refer to as “fundamental contract law” and “libertarian law” are moral codes.

  30. paulie

    Legislating against crimes with victims is fundamentally different from legislating against voluntary activities among persons giving, and capable of giving, informed consent.

  31. William Saturn

    Maybe so, but there’s no mechanism against allowing States to restrict people’s activities as long as that restriction conforms with the Bill of Rights.

  32. William Saturn

    Man created the Constitution and Man is flawed. However, the Constitution can be amended. So what’s really standing in your way is Man. The conundrum lies in the fact that every time you strengthen the Federal government to guarantee rights, you weaken the States’ ability to self-govern. Would you prefer a strong Federal government of Man that enforces supposed rights of everybody, or would you favor moldable State and local governments that you, as an individual, can directly influence by participation or can avoid altogether by voting with your feet?

  33. Jed Ziggler

    “Would you prefer a strong Federal government of Man that enforces supposed rights of everybody, or would you favor moldable State and local governments that you, as an individual, can directly influence by participation or can avoid altogether by voting with your feet?”

    I’d rather die than blindly accept either horrible option. I want strong self-governance by individuals. You assume that I will accept as an axiom that there must be either a strong federal government or strong local governance. I do not accept that false choice, and I consider one as evil as the other. Sovereign individuals so armed with power that their governments, who only tenuously exist by their consent, tremble in fear at the notion of their wrath, is my goal.

    I seek to take power from government at all levels. 50 or 100 small tyrannies are not preferable to one large one.

  34. William Saturn

    There must be an instrument to protect the rights of the people. What that instrument binds is a balancing act. When you bind the lower governments too much, you reduce democratic action. When you bind the federal government too much, you allow despotism to reign in the lower governments. Our Constitution attempts to balance these competing interests. If you believe the Constitution is flawed because it allows for State governments to legislate morality, then you believe the federal government’s power to protect against the lower governments is not strong enough. That is what you seem to suggest above.

    If there is no instrument at all, as you now seem to suggest, then you allow tyranny to reign at all levels.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *