“Natural Law, Natural Allies”

Aristotle - Avoiding Criticism(graphic credit)

By Keith DeHavelle, 6/19/2015
Reblogged from

Natural Law, Natural Allies

From time to time, I mention in these writings that I am non-religious. This has always been true of me; I am not a “converted” or “lapsed” or “apostate” anything. But many of my fellow conservatives are indeed deeply religious, and sometimes express disbelief or even disdain that a non-theist could support American conservative beliefs.

I have written elsewhere about the separation of church and state; to me, this should not be a large bone of contention. The point that seems to come up frequently involves the phrase “inalienable rights” in the Declaration of Independence and how it is to be understood.

Natural Law

A key element of the difference has to do with this famous line in the Declaration of Independence:


To a non-theist, there is another passage nearby that helps clarify:

“… the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them …”

This line suggests that, at least to the writers (mostly Thomas Jefferson) and acceptably enough to the signers, “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” is blended together in a way that makes the resulting laws arguably a single body. This concept has been referred to by religious and non-religious alike as “Natural Law,” which addresses both moral and legal concepts.

The “scientific laws of nature,” those properties discoverable by scientific experimentation, are usually excluded from the rest and from “natural law” in this sort of discussion.  But the founders were referring here to moral principles that undergird human interactions. In this case, they urged that natural law provided guidance even to nations, which are entitled to “separate and equal station” if they follow those just principles.

Two Paths

But what is natural law, exactly? How do you know what moral and legal laws are included in natural law and what is not? First, the concept has a presumption that the answer can be known, discovered, or reasoned out by thinking persons and keen observers, much like the scientific laws of nature. The theological approach through religion relies upon sacred revelations for clues, and the secular approach from observing man’s interactions and deducing what laws must be evidenced thereby. But these approaches often overlap, with secularists making reference to religious notions and theologists incorporating the enlightenment understandings and observations of secularists into their treatises on natural law.

The founders of the United States, and specifically the framers of the US Constitution, followed both methods. Most of them were religious, but they also had a keen and insightful understanding of the Enlightenment’s secular writings as well. It is clear that the founding of the United States was a triumph with roots in the Bible, the Enlightenment, and the thinking of classical Greek philosophers and Roman jurists. Natural law figured into this heavily….

[1720 more excellent words — Continue reading at….]



About Necessary and Proper

Jeff believes in the Individual's ability to excel when liberty and freedom of choice are protected. Also believes in the Community's ability to take care of the vast majority of its own issues and needs when the federal government leaves the Community's resources and sphere of control alone. State and local choice produce better results than centralized federal control.
This entry was posted in Theory of Gov't and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to “Natural Law, Natural Allies”

  1. fathercharlescoughlin says:

    We have to distinguish, more than ever, Natural Law from Rule of Law. Because every day now we must ask the question: Whose “Rule of Law.”


Chime in! Leave Jeff a comment...


You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Google+ photo


Connecting to %s