In his analysis of the ongoing Henry Louis Gates embroglio, Christopher Hitchens makes a startling assertion (which Jason Kottke approvingly quotes). In defense of Prof. Gates, he writes (emphasis added) that

It is the U.S. Constitution, and not some competitive agglomeration of communities or constituencies, that makes a citizen the sovereign of his own home and privacy. There is absolutely no legal requirement to be polite in the defense of this right.

Superficially, this is quite correct. The Constitution does protect an individual’s right to free speech and the sanctity of his home.

But the Constitution is not, as Hitchens suggests, the origin of these rights. Even were they not mentioned in the Constitution, these rights would still exist: an individual would remain “the sovereign of his own home and privacy.” These “unalienable Rights” derive not from a simple document written by fallible men, but, as Thomas Jefferson put it, from “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” And it is “we the people” that grant the Constitution its powers, not the other way around.

Hitchens is right to revere the Constitution and the rights it protects, but he must remember that the Founders crafted the document to protect the existing natural rights of individuals. To argue that the Constitution is what “makes a citizen…sovereign” is in fact to diminish these rights and make man not sovereign at all but just another subject.

• Obama Is No Post-Partisan.
• Deconstructing a Poor Argument for Same-Sex Marriage.
• Samuelson on the Consequences of Big Government. “Without anyone much noticing, our national government is on the verge of a permanent expansion that would endure long after the present economic crisis has (presumably) passed and that would exceed anything ever experienced in peacetime.”

• Fisking President Obama. “There is a big difference between ‘most severe … since the Great Depression’ and ‘comparable to the Great Depression.’”
• Whatever happened to the Segway?
• Is Asian Supremacy Inevitable? Debunking claims about Asia overtaking America and the West.

• Does More Prevention Mean Lower Cost? Not necessarily, argues Mark Steyn.
• How Facebook is Gunning for Google (And Killing SEO)
• Echoes of Herbert Croly’s Promise of American Life. “For nearly a century, California offered ordinary people better lives than they could lead perhaps anywhere else in the world. Today, reflecting our intensely stratified, increasingly mobile society, California affords the Good Life only to the most gifted and ambitious, regardless of their background. That’s a deeply undemocratic betrayal of California’s dream—and of the promise of American life.”

• A Rare Defense of the Vietnam War. “Despite the fall of Saigon in 1975, Vietnam was not a “futile” conflict. The U.S. effort bought time for Thailand and other nations in East and Southeast Asia to develop in relative peace. Their prosperity, in turn, showed the world the difference between the fruits of capitalism and the poverty of socialism. Like the Korean War, Vietnam needs to be understood as an honorable battle fought to a draw in America’s longer and victorious Cold War.”
• Brightcove’s Facebook Chat.
• What Could Possibly Go Wrong? Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy propose that governments “no longer stand idle” and intervene in markets to keep oil prices at some ideal level.