One Nation Under Surveillance

America prides itself in being called “the land of the free.” But, what, exactly, does it mean to be free? Does it mean owning a car and having a job? People in communist countries own a car and have a job. Does it mean going to a mall to shop. People in communist countries go to a mall to shop. Does it mean going to an amusement park to recreate? People in communist countries go to amusement parks. Does it mean going to the polls and voting? People in communist countries go to the polls and vote. In reality, many, if not most, of the things that most Americans would identify as marks of freedom are commonly practiced in the most oppressed communist countries of the world. So, what does it mean to be free?

Obviously, the freedom of speech is a crucial element of freedom, so much so that it is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. And the truth is, freedom of speech is not at all what it used to be in this country. If you doubt that, just ask the hundreds and thousands of journalists, news anchors, sportscasters, business executives, religious leaders, non-profit organization heads, teachers, scientists, government employees, etc., who have lost their positions for saying something politically incorrect. If you could, ask the late Howard Cosell or the late Jimmy “The Greek” Snyder. Ask Judge Andrew Napolitano, Glenn Beck, or Lou Dobbs. There are literally millions of people across America who daily “bite their tongues” and refuse to speak for fear of demotion, dismissal, retaliation, persecution, or worse! You call that freedom of speech? Gag!

Another critical element of freedom enshrined in the First Amendment is the right to worship freely. But, this, too, is not what it used to be. Can anyone remember when pastors and church leaders were free to say what they wanted in regard to issues that tread into government? If you do, you are probably over 50 years old or attend a non-501c3 church. On the whole, pastors and church leaders today are literally “scared silly” to broach any topic that might have political overtones, which means a sizeable percentage of the Bible is either ignored or spiritualized away by the vast majority of America’s pulpits. You call this freedom of worship? Barf!

Of course, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is one of the most crucial ingredients of a free society. It is this right that, for the most part, separates the United States from the oppressed nations of the world. And, of course, the Powers That Be have been chipping away at this fundamental tenet of liberty for nearly half a century, to the point that there are literally tens of millions of Americans who are forbidden by law from owning or possessing a firearm due to a conviction or plea bargain for some “crime” in which no one—nada–was injured. And in many states, even those who have never run afoul of the law are forbidden from owning–and especially–possessing a firearm. Can anyone say Massachusetts or California?

Government attacks against the Second Amendment notwithstanding, I am absolutely convinced that the ownership and possession of more than 100 million firearms in the hands and homes (and hearts) of the American citizenry is the main thing that has kept the overt forces of tyranny somewhat at bay to this point in our country. I suggest that even you folks who do not really care anything about guns and shooting, but who claim to love liberty, go purchase a firearm and learn the fundamental elements of firearm safety and usage–if for no other reason than because you are an American who believes in freedom and who understands that only free men own guns!

The right to be secure in your homes, papers, effects, etc., is also an essential element of liberty. But this right has been largely expunged in the United States–especially since 9/11/01. The NDAA (and other federal laws and executive orders) suspends the right to a trial by jury and the right to not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, among other essential liberties.

But perhaps the most essential element of liberty is the right to be left alone, the right to privacy, the understanding that a man’s home is his castle, the right of free people to live their lives without Big Brother looking over their shoulder. Without the right to be left alone, liberty does not exist! And ladies and gentlemen, it is this freedom that is under attack the most in this country.

This is an issue that cuts across all political, social, racial, and religious lines. It doesn’t matter to a hill of beans whether one is liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, white or black, or Protestant or Catholic. The right of free men to be left alone without government sticking its nose into our personal and private business is the quintessential ingredient of a free society. And in this regard, do you really believe America is still the “land of the free”? You’re kidding, right?

America is no longer “one nation under God.” Today, America is “one nation under surveillance.” Cameras monitoring our every movement, satellites taking pictures of our homes, listening devices being used to record our conversations, hi-tech computers capturing virtually every piece of correspondence, banking institutions forwarding our private financial records to Big Brother, and now armed drones flying over the neighborhoods of the American citizenry all reveal that America is anything but the “land of the free.” The following My Way News report is merely another example of this repulsive reality:

“The U.S. intelligence community will now be able to store information about Americans with no ties to terrorism for up to five years under new Obama administration guidelines.

“Until now, the National Counterterrorism Center had to immediately destroy information about Americans that was already stored in other government databases when there were no clear ties to terrorism.

“Giving the NCTC expanded record-retention authority had been called for by members of Congress who said the intelligence community did not connect strands of intelligence held by multiple agencies leading up to the failed bombing attempt on a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas 2009.

“‘Following the failed terrorist attack in December 2009, representatives of the counterterrorism community concluded it is vital for NCTC to be provided with a variety of datasets from various agencies that contain terrorism information,’ Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a statement late Thursday. ‘The ability to search against these datasets for up to five years on a continuing basis as these updated guidelines permit will enable NCTC to accomplish its mission more practically and effectively.’

“The new rules replace guidelines issued in 2008 and have privacy advocates concerned about the potential for data-mining information on innocent Americans.

“‘It is a vast expansion of the government’s surveillance authority,’ Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said of the five-year retention period.

“The government put in strong safeguards at the NCTC for the data that would be collected on U.S. citizens for intelligence purposes, Rotenberg said. These new guidelines undercut the Federal Privacy Act, he said.

“‘The fact that this data can be retained for five years on U.S. citizens for whom there’s no evidence of criminal conduct is very disturbing,’ Rotenberg said.”

See the report at:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120323/D9TLT6VG0.html

Go to any oppressed country, and what will you find? A surveillance society! This is the most glaring characteristic of an Orwellian state. And ladies and gentlemen, Communist China or Red Russia has nothing over the United States when it comes to the development and implementation of a surveillance society. And the truth is the US would have already plummeted into overt oppression if it were not for the fact that there are so many guns in the possession of the American citizenry. But, I say again, without the right to be left alone, liberty does not exist.

Folks, we must start paying attention to this surveillance society that it quickly taking shape in this country. No! Not just start paying attention to it, start RESISTING it! A surveillance society cannot emerge without the cooperation of State governors, attorney generals, legislators, senators, county sheriffs, city mayors, police chiefs, etc. And where are America’s pastors to sound the alarm bells from the church houses regarding this attack against our liberty? Where are the college professors? Where are the journalists and reporters? Where are the retired military personnel who were willing to sacrifice their lives on foreign shores? What good is it to fight for freedom overseas, if we are not willing to fight for freedom at home?

So, the next time you hear someone shout out that America is the “land of the free,” ask them if they have given any thought to the fact that virtually everything they do, everything they say, everywhere they go, and every financial transaction they make is being monitored, scrutinized, and surveilled by the federal government and the private institutions they control. Ask them what they are doing to resist this sinister surveillance society that is quickly enveloping this country. Ask them what their pastor is doing to resist this burgeoning surveillance society. Ask them what kind of country do they think their children and grandchildren are going to grow up in one day. Then ask them if they truly understand what it means to be free. And maybe more importantly, ask them if they understand what it takes to keep America free, because people who are not left alone are not free!

Memorial Day Matters

Memorial Day was originally designated as the 30th of May, but starting in 1971 it has been held the last Monday in May creating a convenient 3-day weekend. Memorial Day is observed today as a public holiday dedicated to the memory of the fallen who died in service to their country in wartime. Its origin dates to the terrible War Between the States. The day was actually inaugurated in 1868 as a holiday on which graves of Civil War veterans serving the Union were decorated. The South did not recognize the day as such, but set aside separate days on which to decorate graves belonging to its Confederate veterans. Indeed, organized women’s groups in the South had been decorating graves even before the end of the Civil War. Ironically the last Confederate Widow, Alberta S. Martin actually died on Memorial Day, 2004 in Alabama.

The word “memorial” (serving to help people remember some person or event) is ignored too often on Memorial Day by those of us who are the direct beneficiaries of thousands of men and women, who bore the ultimate sacrifice. It is perhaps a hard thing to come to grips with the fact that it is the willing sacrifice of life that has secured for us our blessed freedoms, and continues to do so every day. The least that we should do is to actively remember those who gave their all—our ancestors, family members, neighbors and loved ones who served in uniform and died in service defending and advancing our way of life. Traditionally we are invited each year on Memorial Day to do the following: to visit cemeteries and place flags or flowers on the graves of fallen heroes; to attend memorial services and other public events; to fly the U.S. Flag at half-mast until Noon; to observe moments of silence for special reflection and remembrance; to renew pledges of support and aid to the widows and orphans of veterans, as well as to disabled veterans; and to salute the fallen and/or to play Taps in their honor (Taps is a bugle call written during the Civil War, which dates to 1862 and was used by both sides).

Memorial Day of course has its counterpart in other nations, and amongst the Western nations in particular there is a very similar ethos surrounding the honoring of the dead, who died for freedom and the safety of their homeland. One of the most famous poems of remembrance was written by Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918), Canadian Army called “In Flanders Fields” and written in 1915. A beautiful response poem was written by Moina Belle Michael (1869-1944), a native Georgian and American professor, called “We Shall Keep The Faith” written in 1918. Moina Michael became known as the Poppy Lady after she conceived of the idea of using poppies (based on the poem by McCrae) as a symbol of remembrance for those who had served in World War I. A U.S. Postage Stamp was even issued in her honor. Together the two poems do much to bring to mind the importance of Memorial Day, its meaning and why the day matters so much.

John McCrae in his third stanza writes: “To you from failing hands we throw/The torch; be yours to hold it high. /If ye break faith with us who die/We shall not sleep, though poppies grow/ In Flanders fields.” Moina Michael writes this rejoinder in the first stanza of her poem: “Oh! You who sleep in Flanders Fields, /Sleep sweet—to rise anew! /We caught the torch you threw/And holding high, we keep the Faith/With All who died.” And in the third stanza Moina Michael refers to that one thing all soldiers and those who remember them ask and must reaffirm every Memorial Day and in all the days between, and that is that none of those who died shall have died in vain: “Fear not that ye have died for naught;/We’ll teach the lesson that ye wrought/In Flanders Fields.” It is up to us from generation to generation to teach the lesson wrought as it were, of life and blood and treasure, that so far has kept the Torch of Liberty burning bright in the heart of all true patriots. The lesson reduced to its core is that Freedom isn’t free. God bless those who died for it and those who fight for us still.

Memorial Day 2012

Memorial Day, of necessity, looks backward in time to remember with gratitude those who died in uniform, in order that we might be free.  It is appropriate that we remember, but it is obligatory that we pass freedom on to those who come after us.  To fail to do so is to (a) dishonor those who paid such a heavy price, and is to (b) fail those who follow — our posterity.

While more has been done by civilians than by the military to achieve freedom, it would have been impossible without the force of arms that carried out the resistance to governmental tyranny.  Most Americans have never considered that the American War of Independence was against a lawful, constitutional government which had become abusive and overstepped its own authority.  And while the official army was essential, they could not have succeeded without farmers who finally shouldered their guns and went off to war.  The homegrown Militia, for all the criticism it has received, gave us the victories of King’s Mountain, Cowpens, setting up the victory at Yorktown.

Americans can see so clearly what the answer to tyranny was in 1775, once peaceful petition and remonstrances had failed and the issues were finally “joined”.  We are only free today because the combined dedication to fight for our freedom, and the genius of that age which produced leaders of such magnitude that they could resist tyranny from above, and then resisted the temptation to replace it with a tyranny of their own.  Americans in uniform then stepped forward and paid the price for freedom.

When an invading army attacks, everyone recognizes the attack, and the necessary course of action is clear to each citizen.  But when tyranny grows gradually from within, like the slow boiling of the proverbial frog, it is such a comfort zone that most citizens are not aware of it, and some even like the warmth — the “security” that tyranny brings.

We would be poor Americans indeed if we deliberately refused to pass on the “blessings of liberty” to our own posterity.  Our descendents would rightly curse our names and our memories.

We have survived as an independent nation in spite of treason at the highest levels in this country, for more than a century.  However, Independence should not be confused with Liberty.  Cuba is an independent nation, and it may be free to pursue its own destiny, but the nation and its people may ne be regarded in any way as enjoying the blessings of Liberty.  It is nation enslaved by a government which professes to exist for the benefit of the Cuban people.

One of the requirements of a nation remaining independent (and thus, potentially, free) is that its military remain (a) adequate to repel attacks from without the borders of the nation, and (b) answerable to those who govern the nation.  (In theory, that is “We, the People,” which a topic for another day.)

When any person or group attempts to give away, sell, erode, delegate or otherwise reduce the sovereignty of a nation, they may rightly be called traitors, no matter how noble they regard the alternative for which they are working.  We can see that clearly in the actions of General Benedict Arnold in 1780.

Does a person who holds civil authority have some kind of immunity from the charge of treason, when they attempt to place our military under the control of any power on earth other than that of the United States government, which is (in theory) governed with “the consent of the governed”?  Do you remember being asked if it would be okay with you that our Armed Forces could be given away to the United Nations, or to NATO, or to SEATO, or any of a dozen international military expeditions? 

A sovereign people do not voluntarily give up their sovereignty, unless it can be sold to them as something else.  That is precisely what well-meaning politicians have done to America, certainly from the days of Woodrow Wilson to Barack Obama, and most presidents (of both parties) in between them have aided and abetted that process.

Amazingly, most Americans realize that we live today in a nation where a lawful, constitutional government has become abusive and overstepped its own authority.  Worse, we have presidents who are perfectly comfortable treating our military as if they were mercenaries, sending them off to fight, bleed and die under foreign commanders in wars that Congress (and hence, the People) have not authorized.

We have a military which has not sworn allegiance to the President, nor to Congress, but to the Constitution!  Why do you think they put that little clause in the oath, “…against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”???

Michael New was right — “Real Americans don’t wear U.N. uniforms!”  Nor should they serve in undeclared and unconstitutional wars.  And informed military is essential, both to Independence and to Liberty.

 


(C) Daniel D. New,   Permission to copy,
with credits, is hereby granted.

 

Update On NDAA And Drones Flying Over The US

In a stunning upset for the Obama administration and big-government zealots in general, a federal judge in New York has issued an injunction against the citizen detention portion of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Bob Unruh at World Net Daily has the story.

“A district-court judge has suspended enforcement of a law that could strip U.S. citizens of their civil rights and allow indefinite detention of individuals President Obama believes to be in support of terror.

“The Obama administration has refused to ensure that the First Amendment rights of authors and writers who express contrary positions or report on terror group activities are protected under his new National Defense Authorization Act.

“Targeted in the stunning ruling from U.S. District Judge Katherine B. Forrest of New York was Paragraph 1021 of the NDAA, which Obama signed into law last Dec. 31. The vague provision appears to allow for the suspension of civil rights for, and indefinite detention of, those individuals targeted by the president as being in support of terror.

“Virginia already has passed a law that states it will not cooperate with such detentions, and several local jurisdictions have done the same. Arizona, Rhode Island, Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Washington also have reviewed such plans.

“The case was before Forrest on a request for a temporary restraining order. The case was brought on behalf of Christopher Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Jennifer Bolen, Noam Chomsky, Alex O’Brien, Kai Warg All, Brigitta Jonsottir and the group U.S. Day of Rage. Many of the plaintiffs are authors or reporters who stated that the threat of indefinite detention by the U.S. military already had altered their activities.

“Constitutional expert Herb Titus filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the sponsor of the Virginia law, Delegate Bob Marshall, and others.

“Titus, an attorney with William J. Olson, P.C., told WND that the judge’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of paragraph 1021 ‘affirms the constitutional position taken by Delegate Marshall is correct.’

“The impact is that ‘the statute does not have sufficient constitutional guidelines to govern the discretion of the president in making a decision whether to hold someone in indefinite military detention,’ Titus said.

“The judge noted that the law doesn’t have a requirement that there be any knowledge that an act is prohibited before a detention, he said. The judge also said the law is vague, and she appeared to be disturbed that the administration lawyers refused to answer her questions.

“The opinion underscores ‘the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don’t think they have to,’ Titus said.”

Unruh went on to say, “The brief was on behalf of Marshall and other individuals and organizations including the United States Justice Foundation, Downsize DC Foundation, Institute on the Constitution, Gun Owners of America, Western Center for Journalism, the Tenth Amendment Center and Pastor Chuck Baldwin [yours truly].”

As an aside, was I the only pastor in America to be included as an amici in this brief? Let me challenge readers, the next time you go to church, ask your pastor what he is doing or what he would do to prevent military personnel from taking you off to a military prison without an arrest warrant, without issuing Miranda, without telling you why you are being seized, without allowing you access to an attorney, without recognizing that you have any constitutional rights, without any requirement to release you, or even without any requirement to keep you in the United States of America for a trial or judicial proceeding. I challenge you: ask him! And if his answer is something like, “The Lord will take care of you,” or “That could never happen in the United States,” what in the name of liberty are you doing attending that church?

See Unruh’s report at:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/obama-citizen-detention-plan-in-trouble/

Now, I wonder how many of these pseudo-conservative talking heads at FOX News, as well as the myriads of local reporters and journalists throughout the country, will at least be honest enough to admit that there was substantial reason to be concerned about the citizen detention provision of the NDAA? Ever since NDAA was signed into law, these phony guardians of liberty have been pooh-poohing the warnings that many of us columnists and independent journalists have been issuing. Now, a federal judge has also recognized the threat posed to our constitutional liberties by this provision of the NDAA, and has issued an injunction against it.

That’s the good news. The bad news is the US House of Representatives defeated an amendment that would have repealed the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. The Tenth Amendment Center covers the story.

“In a shameful display of disregard for the Constitution and for liberty, on Friday, the House of Representatives voted to perpetuate the president’s power to indefinitely detain American citizens.

“By a vote of 238-182, members of Congress rejected the amendment offered by Representatives Adam Smith (D-Washington) and Justin Amash (R-Michigan) that would have repealed the indefinite detention provision passed overwhelmingly last year as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012.

“The Fiscal Year 2013 NDAA retains the indefinite detention provisions, as well as the section permitting prisoners to be transferred from civilian jurisdiction to the custody of the military.

“‘The frightening thing here is that the government is claiming the power under the Afghanistan authorization for use of military force as a justification for entering American homes to grab people, indefinitely detain them and not give them a charge or trial,’ Representative Amash said during House debate.”

The report goes on to say, “Each of these freedom-phobes [the congressmen who voted to keep the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA] invoked the specter of terror (in one way or another: ‘terrorist,’ ‘al-Qaeda,’ ‘enemies’) to justify the abolition of constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties.

“Seemingly, those promoting these provisions would offer Americans as sacrifices on the altar of safety, the fires of which are fed by the kindling of the Constitution.”

Hear! Hear!

The report astutely includes this warning from “The Father of The US Constitution,” James Madison: “It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.”

Oh! Take a guess as to who was the only candidate for President who supported the Smith-Amash amendment to repeal the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA? You got it: Congressman Ron Paul.

See the Tenth Amendment Center report at:

blog.tenthamendmentcent…

This goes to prove that sometimes our enemies are not the courts; sometimes our enemies are the legislatures of this country. This was the case in the aforementioned actions. So, now we have a federal court and the US Congress (allied by the White House) in conflict. It’s going to get very interesting!

And speaking of how the legislatures are often the ones inflicting more and more tyranny upon the US citizenry, try this report on for size:

“The federal government is moving quickly to open the skies over America to drones–both for commercial and government purposes–and respected Washington Post and Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer is forecasting ‘rifles aimed at the sky all across America.’

“The comments from Krauthammer, who won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1987 after serving as a speechwriter for Vice President Walter Mondale and then beginning his journalism career at The New Republic, were on ‘Special Report’ with Bret Baier.

“‘I would predict, I am not encouraging, but I predict the first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down that’s been hovering over his house is going to be a folk hero in this country,’ Krauthammer said.

“The conversation arose as the federal government announced it is beginning to allow public safety agencies to fly unmanned aircraft–drones–with fewer and fewer restrictions.

“According to yesterday’s report from Bloomberg, police, fire and other government agencies now are being allowed to fly drones weighing as much as 25 pounds without special approvals previously needed.

“The Federal Aviation Administration said on its website that the move was an interim step until the agency finishes rules that will open the door for commercial operation of drones, as well as those uses for government purposes.

“Congress has adopted the position of encouraging more drone flights, with the ‘goal of adapting technology used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.’”

See the report at:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/feds-clearing-way-for-drones-over-your-house/

There you have it, folks. Your federal government–along with numerous local and State police agencies–is preparing to use instruments of war against the citizens of the United States. And numerous local and State police agencies are standing in line to participate. I ask you, do the US Congress, the FAA, and our local and State authorities plan to arm these drones with more than surveillance cameras (as if that’s not bad enough)? Should we expect that the drones that will be flying over our neighborhoods would be armed with machine guns and missiles? That’s the “technology used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan,” after all.

What is wrong with the American people? What is wrong with our representatives? What is wrong with our State legislators? What is wrong with our local and State police agencies? What is wrong with our pastors and churches? What is wrong with our reporters and journalists? Are they THAT blind? Do they want a paycheck THAT badly? Are they THAT willing to allow this free republic to be thrown into the trash bin of history, only to be replaced with a giant Police State? Are we THAT ignorant of history? Is THAT really where we are?

Ladies and gentlemen, the emerging police state is the foremost issue confronting the people of the United States today! And on this issue, the labels Democrat and Republican mean absolutely nothing! Nothing! If the voters of this country do not awaken quickly to what is going on in front of their very eyes, it won’t matter to a tinker’s dam which party or which candidate is put into office. If we do not have the right to live in privacy and peace, all of the other rights we talk about mean absolutely nothing!

Iron Ladies

A recent movie starring Meryl Streep and depicting the life of Lady Margaret Thatcher was called “The Iron Lady.” And the movie was aptly titled, as Lady Thatcher’s grit and determination proved that she was indeed an “Iron Lady.” In fact, Streep won an Oscar award for her performance as England’s only woman Prime Minister. (Has anyone won more Oscars than Streep?) However, I’m not sure the film itself truly did justice to Lady Margaret.

Since we have just celebrated Mother’s Day, and with the recent award-winning depiction of Margaret Thatcher, I thought it fitting to write a column on some of the great iron ladies of both Biblical and American history. Obviously, if we attempted to list all of the great women in both Biblical and American history, the list would require volumes of books to contain them all. Herein, let me list but a few.

Iron Ladies of Biblical History

Jochebed, Moses’ Mother

First, Jochebed is honored in the great “Hall of Faith” in Hebrews 11 for defying Pharaoh’s unjust and unlawful edict to kill the little Hebrew babies. “By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king’s commandment.” (Hebrews 11:23)

Imagine: Jochebed and her husband Amram (Moses’ parents) rebelled against their civil authorities and God praised them for it in Hebrews 11. (Please don’t tell the Romans 13-ers; it will only confuse them.)

Second, Jochebed taught her son, Moses, his godly heritage and instructed him to discern the difference between lawful and unlawful authority. She also taught him the Natural Law principles of liberty for God’s people. We know this, because when Moses saw that Egyptian taskmaster beating a Hebrew slave to death, he stepped in and defended the Hebrew by taking the life of the would-be murderer. And, once again, God praised Moses for his decision to save the Hebrew:

“By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.” (Heb. 11:24, 25)

When did Moses refuse to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter and to choose to suffer affliction with the people of God? When he stepped in to defend the life of the Hebrew slave. That’s when! Remember, as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter Moses was very likely in line to become the next Pharaoh of Egypt. Moses was willing to turn his back on riches and power in order to defend the principle of liberty for his people. What caused him to make such a choice if it wasn’t the training and instruction received from his mother and father?

Please remember Hebrews 11:24, 25 the next time you hear some misguided preacher say that Moses committed murder by killing the Egyptian taskmaster. Moses did no such thing! Defense of oneself or another is a Biblical Natural Law principle. And, of course, the rest of what Moses did is history.

Jochebed was a true Iron Lady.

Rahab, The Jericho Harlot

This story is found in Joshua 6. As with Jochebed, Rahab disobeyed her civil authorities and helped the Hebrew spies escape the Jericho soldiers. This included helping them escape out of a window and down a wall, and then lying to the authorities about it. And, once again, Rahab is honored by God by listing her in the great “Hall of Faith” in Hebrews 11: “By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.” (verse 31) She is honored again in the Book of James: “Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?” (2:25)

What is amazing to me about this story is the fact that even though Rahab was a harlot, she had the discernment to recognize the difference between true and false authority and the faith to act upon it. Why is it that so many “good” Christians today seemingly have little or no discernment when it comes to recognizing legitimate and illegitimate authority, and yet many un-churched and non-Christian people seem to be able to recognize this distinction? It truly baffles me!

Rahab was a true Iron Lady.

Deborah, The Judge

This story is found in Judges 4. Deborah was led of God to deliver the Israelites from the bondage and tyranny of the Canaanites. She teamed up with a man named Barak–a man who was not her husband, but who was equally chosen by God. (Don’t tell the legalists; this, too, will totally confuse them.) She provided the inspiration; he provided the battlefield leadership. Together they wrought a great victory and delivered their people from bondage.

Deborah was a true Iron Lady.

I would also nominate Vashti and Esther, the two queens of the Persian king, Ahasuerus, and Abigail, the woman who became the wife of King David, as true Iron Ladies. In each instance, these courageous women disobeyed their civil government’s–and at the same time, their husband’s–unlawful commands, risking their lives doing so, and stood as rocks for the principles of liberty and lawful authority. (Again, please don’t tell the Romans 13-ers, because it will totally confuse them!)

In the New Testament, I would nominate Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the women of Mark 15:40, 41 as true Iron Ladies.

Iron Ladies of American History

Abigail Adams

Abigail Adams just might have been the most influential woman in America during our fight for independence. In my mind, she was certainly the greatest. She was the wife of John Adams and the mother of John Quincy Adams–both men becoming US Presidents, of course. The letters Abigail wrote–especially the ones between her and her husband–should be required reading for all American patriots. (I have included a sample of John and Abigail’s correspondence in my compilation of great American documents that I simply call, THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS.

To learn more or to order THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/279

Here is a sample of her letters. She wrote this on Sunday, June 18, 1775, “‘The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but the God of Israel is He that giveth strength and power unto his people. Trust in him at all times, ye people, pour out your hearts before him; God is a refuge for us.’ Charlestown is laid in ashes. The battle began upon our intrenchments upon Bunker’s Hill, Saturday morning about three o’clock, and has not ceased yet, and it is now three o’clock Sabbath afternoon.

“It is expected they will come out over the Neck tonight, and a dreadful battle must ensue. Almighty God, cover the heads of our countrymen, and be a shield to our dear friends! How many have fallen, we know not. The constant roar of the cannon is so distressing that we cannot eat, drink, or sleep. May we be supported and sustained in the dreadful conflict. I shall tarry here till it is thought unsafe by my friends, and then I have secured myself a retreat at your brother’s, who has kindly offered me part of his house. I cannot compose myself to write any further at present. I will add more as I hear further.”

Her letters edified and encouraged many, if not most, of the men whom we would identify as Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson, particularly, paid great homage to the encouragement he received from Abigail Adams.

Elizabeth Lewis

Elizabeth was also the wife of a man who signed the Declaration of Independence, Francis Lewis. As with so many of the signers and their wives, Elizabeth was forced to endure unbelievable cruelty at the hands of the British. The Crown’s troops were sent to their home “to seize the lady and destroy the property.” And that is exactly what they did. After destroying her home and everything of value that she owned, they carried her off to prison and subjected her to some of the most inhumane treatment possible. Through Herculean efforts by George Washington, she was freed from prison but died shortly thereafter.

Deborah Hart

The wife of Declaration signer, John Hart, Deborah, too, paid a heavy price to help America win its independence. She and her 13 children had to flee for their lives from the British. They were scattered in all directions and had to live in forests and caves for more than a year. As with Elizabeth Lewis, Deborah did not survive. When her husband John was finally able to return home, he found Deborah had died, his children’s whereabouts were unknown, and his home and property were destroyed. John died a few months later of a broken heart.

Janet Montgomery

Janet was the bride of Richard Montgomery, who was one of eight brigadier generals of the Continental Congress. Richard was killed in battle, and Janet was widowed almost before her honeymoon was over. She made these comments regarding her husband’s death: “As a wife I must ever mourn the loss of a husband, friend, and lover; of a thousand virtues, of all domestic bliss; the idol of my warmest affections, and in one word my every dream of happiness. But, with America, I weep the still greater loss of the firm soldier and the friend to freedom.”

Abigail, Elizabeth, Deborah, and Janet–and thousands like them–were true Iron Ladies.

It is truly tragic that we do not come close to giving our great women of history the adulation and honor that they so richly deserve! Without the courage and sacrifice of these great women, none of us would have ever tasted the spiritual and national blessings that have been bequeathed to us. May God forgive us for our lack of appreciation and gratitude, and may He never leave us alone without wonderful, stalwart Iron Ladies such as these!

Dismantle our Schools and Start Over

In a recent exchange with a candidate for re-election to the State Board of Education in Texas, I made a suggestion that it might be possible to salvage the current system which is mislabeled as a “public education system”, but that to do so would require several radical steps.  (Frankly, I believe it to be a system that is beyond repair, needing to be totally dismantled and tossed into the dustbin of history, but hope springs eternal, and one likes to be polite in approaching candidates who think the office for which they are running is one in which they can possibly do some good.)

The first thing she told me was that, “our hands are tied,” and there is very little the state board of education can do, other than to hold a line on textbook content, and keep the worst textbooks out our classrooms.  That is something they do work hard to accomplish, and for the success they have achieved in that area, I must applaud.  Let it not be said that I don’t think they are conscientious and hard-working, investing their lives and careers into such a thankless task, however small it is in the overall scheme of things.  The fact that the Liberals hate the SBOE in Texas is one of the proofs that they are doing some good.  If we had truth in labeling, we would call it the “State Board of Textbook Examination”.

One of the suggestions I made was that we expand and implement a system of Vocational Education, making it available to all students, and mandatory for those who fail to maintain high academic grades, proving that they either cannot cope with the academic rigors of university study, or that they aren’t yet serious enough to be allowed to move in that direction.  I knew full well that the SBOE cannot bring this about — it would have to be done by the legislature, signed by the governor, and implemented in the face of huge opposition by all the “education” lobby groups in the state and the nation.

 

We need to recognize a few facts:

  • Many of our high school graduates are functionally illiterate, thanks to social promotions.  Many of them cannot read the diplomas they are handed when they walk across the stage.  This is a travesty, and the system that has brought us to this point is at fault.  My proposal is that any principal or superintendent who allows a student a diploma without having mastered the entire scope and sequence of the textbooks in their classes needs to be fired and forbidden to work in the field in this state.  They are liars and pretenders, but they don’t mind taking our tax money and failing to deliver.  This is fraud, and they need to go flip burgers – if they can get such a productive job.  (Teachers blame the Legislature.  The parents blame the teachers who are “teaching for The Test” instead of subject matter. There’s blame enough to go around – so let’s quit pointing fingers and fix the problem!
  • A college education is inappropriate for many of our students, who will wind up flipping burgers or working in a service industry after college anyway.  They can save time and money by going directly to Burger King.  That is, if they can find a job at all.  Those who plan to go on to medicine and science and engineering obviously need college.  Wouldn’t it be nice if they didn’t have to compete for a desk in the classrooms with party animals who are there on borrowed (taxpayer) money, much of which will never be repaid?  This system if fraudulent.  The “easy credit” and “free money” is at the root of the problem.  (Ask yourself how many people you know who have college degrees who are doing what they studied to do in college.  It’s a small percentage.)
  • A college education is therefore a huge waste of resources.  We have ten times the number of college level classrooms we actually need – we just need to send 90% of the students out to work at the ripe old age of 18 years old, unless they crave an education so much they are willing to overcome to get it.
  • American Industry is crying out, not for employees with a college diploma, but for skilled workers in every possible trade.
  • Our entire system called “public education” is a disaster, on several fronts:
    • Education – F
    • Cost-to-benefit ratio:  F
    • Meeting needs of 21st Century:  F
    • you name it – in all areas except supporting bureaucratic bloat, it’s a failure.

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION WOULD SAVE BILLIONS.  In the interest of economy alone, my recommendation should appeal to all fiscal conservatives.

I don’t expect this to appeal to those who believe that Social Engineering is the duty of the State.  That means it will fly in the face of radical humanist and socialist “educators” and Educrats who have owned our public school system for almost a century.  Since Humanism and Social Philosophy have dominated the schools which brainwash our teachers for more than 75 years, I can hear the educrats and their unions howling even before I complete this editorial.  Since they are the problem, I’m not at all concerned with what they think.  They should not even be allowed a voice in this public discussion – they have betrayed a trust, and need to be dismissed.  Their sacred cow needs to be slaughtered, and they need to go find productive jobs somewhere else.

If you are a teacher, and you find this offensive, please know that I consider classroom teaching to be the most important mission field in America, if not the world.  You have a job to do, and yet the legislature and the educrats have tied your hands in the areas of classroom discipline, of curricula, of methods, etc., so that you are working in a straitjacket to accomplish the almost-impossible job of educating students.  And yet, you still manage to strike the spark in a few fertile minds, and set them on a path to swim upstream and get a great education in spite of the system.  You are a modern-day hero – that is, if you see your role as such – teaching your students to overcome the very environment in which you are employed.  I’m on your side, and you are not the enemy.

On the other hand, if you are teaching in a classroom and you think it’s more important that the students come up with an answer to a math problem by democratic methods, such as voting on the product of two plus two, then you are the very cutting edge of what is wrong in our schools.  If you think diversity is more important than truth; if you think that a child who points a stick at another child and says, “Bang!”, is a criminal; if you think it’s the job of schools to guarantee meals for the hungry; if you think those meals must be nutritious, and that it’s important that you protect them from a candy bar, then you are certainly the ones about whom I am speaking.  Your social engineering does not belong in my classrooms.  That is a concept that was promoted by Karl Marx and Adolph Hitler, and has now come to dominate the entire philosophy of education in this country, and therein lies the problem.  We have hired people who think it their job to mold our children in their image of what the next generation should look like and think like, and frankly, that image is an appalling disaster.

We need Local Schools.  Locally controlled, in every aspect.  That means in funding first, in curriculum selection, in hiring policies, and in the demand for a quality education.  What we have are not local schools.  They are federal franchises, controlled from top to bottom by bureaucrats and educrats in Washington and Austin.

Are you old enough to remember the debate in the Sixties, about whether “Federal Aid means Federal Control”?  Well, the verdict is in.  The educrats who promised us that it would never come to that, have passed on to their rewards, one way or the other.  Apparently we as a society are just drunk on “easy credit” and “free money”.  Until we can develop the cojones to reject all federal funds for Texas schools, we cannot expect to regain control.  Like any other drug addict, we have to begin by admitting we have a problem, and resolving to quit taking the drug.

Did an education in the 1920’s and 1930’s have imperfections?  Yes, of course it did.  But they were nothing like the colossal failure of this grand experiment in brainwashing now before us.  I venture to say that American high school students today, across the board and on average, know far less than my generation did in the 60’s, and I assure you, my parents said the same thing about us!  Subsequent study and observation has proved to me that my parents were right.  The average law student today, having graduated from college, cannot read The Federalist Papers with comprehension.  In 1789, the average farmer in upstate New York could read them with perfect comprehension.  This devolution of society has been brought to us by the entire “public education system”, which needs to be scrapped.

The deliberate “dumbing down of America” has been documented and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by Charlotte Iserbyt, in her book by that title.1  Teachers’ colleges train our teachers to become “agents of change” to reshape the values of our children so that they will not reflect the values of their parents.  How very noble.  The problem is that the teachers themselves are being used as weapons of class warfare, and are not educated enough to recognize this fact.  They are pawns in an ideological war, and most don’t even know it.

If the average student today, at somewhere around 9th or 10th grade were to allowed to choose a course of education in one of fifty trades, and then work half days in that industry, spending the other half day in the classroom learning the history, the state, the future, and the theory of that industry, then by the time they graduate at 17 or 18 years old, they should be getting a diploma that recognizes they have completed an Apprenticeship, and are now ready to function as Journeymen in the trade of their calling.

If a student prefers to do what most college graduates are now doing – working in offices – then their study program should be to prepare them type and to file and to operate a switchboard and to deal with customers and to become office managers, if they have what it takes.  This saves the cost of four wasted years, and gives them the income of four years.  That’s an eight-year leap in productivity!

There are employers everywhere who would love to have serious student apprentices working in their offices, (for free, this is school, remember), learning to file or learning to change oil, or to rebore an engine, or to install an air conditioner, or to frame and wire a house, etc.  Many tradesmen would enthusiastically teach their students about the practical knowledge they have acquired since they left school and started getting a real education.  What a breath of fresh air.

Colleges today are spending millions of our tax dollars teaching incoming freshmen to do what we just got through spending millions of tax dollars paying our high schools teachers and educrats to do – to read and write and do basic math.  This is a national disgrace.

The next time someone tells you that they are a school administrator, express your sympathy and tell them you’ll pray with them that they can find meaningful employment.  I hear there’s always a demand for used car salesmen.

In the meantime, we need to start putting pressure on our local school boards, demanding to know why our students in our “independent school district” cannot read and write; demanding that they fire the administrators who do not see to it that they learn to read and write; and demanding that we quit focusing on more expensive buildings, when the ones we have are being used for social engineering instead of education.  Local school administrators need to fear what is coming, and either act to change the situation, or get out of the charade and go sell cars.

The school district turns out so many “graduates” every year.  Many go to college because they aren’t qualified to hold a job – industry doesn’t want them – they are illiterate and have no work ethic.  So they go on to party at college, learning a few good things, and a lot of bad ones, before their childhood is allowed to end and they must go to work.  This is child abuse as well, but let me tell you – an 18 year old should not be regarded as a child any more – he/she needs to be carrying his own weight in terms of earning more money than he costs, and giving that money to his parents until he’s able to get out on his own.  Have we, as a nation, gone stark raving mad?  We coddle children as if they are incapable of working, and they wind up being unable to work, and thinking that Uncle Sugar owes them a living.

This economy is about to come tumbling down around our heads, thanks to socialists of both major parties printing money out of thin air, running up an inexcusable national debt, and now leaving us with a generation that is so poorly educated in the important things of life that it’s scary to think we are going to have to depend on them to help us through the coming economic crisis.

Back to my friendly representative on the State Board of Education.  You have to read this for yourself.  She said she objects to a system of mandatory vocational education because that is what the socialist countries of Europe have, and look at them!  Oh… my… goodness.  Where does one start?

Well, first, let’s start with the FACT that we have a system here that is so socialist that Lenin himself could not make it more so – it’s virtually communist!  We peasants at the bottom are forced to send our children to government schools, the children are forced to attend.  (The State rewards the District with cash for each day of attendance.  Absurd.)  If they don’t attend the truancy police will be knocking on their doors.   The curriculum is written by unelected humanists who hate our religion and our culture, then crammed down our throats by the Police State.  Our only duty is to pay for it and to sacrifice our children on their altars.  Employers are forbidden by federal and state laws from taking in school drop-outs and giving them an education in a trade, without paying them more than they can possibly be worth in the beginning.

Our system is totally socialistic.

Second, just because Europeans walk in and out of doors, perhaps we should climb in and out of windows – is that the logic here?  Has it ever occurred to anyone that Europeans do some things right?  I guarantee you, the students graduating from high schools in Germany and Switzerland know far more in the areas of academics than American students do.  Look at any study on the subject.2  We spend more money than any other country, yet in a study of 30 comparable countries, we are at or near the bottom in every category.3

We don’t need reform.  We need revolution.  Vouchers?  Don’t make me laugh.  For what?  To support a history of planned failure?  I don’t think so!

We need to dismantle this failed system and replace it with something that works.  And it can be done for a fraction of the price.  We shouldn’t have to build another school building for three decades.  Twenty years ago, so I am told, the ratio of administrators to teachers was 1:5, but today it is 1:1.  If that’s true, then I can see where we can save more than 50% in our entire school budget, statewide, starting in June of this year, when 90% of them could be terminated.  (Administrators make more money than teachers, to explain my math.)  We must reduce the number of educrats above the local school district by 99%, and I am being generous.  I can easily be talked in to increasing that number.  The ones we keep need to live on a salary that is modest, perhaps on the median income of our community, plus 10%.  I’m in a generous mood.

Let’s develop a vision for, and an attitude that demands:  Local Schools, Local Control, Local Discipline, Local Funding, once again.  And then, just maybe, we’ll see students graduating with a real education once again.  If you live in a community that doesn’t meet your standards, then you have a choice – either find one that does, or see to educating your own children.  This may mean a private school, whether secular or religious.  It may mean home schooling – a phenomenon made necessary by the failed socialist experiment in mis-education.  It’s your duty, Dad and Mom.  Not the State’s.

There’s the rub – parents have been conditioned to accept the lie that it is the responsibility of the State (socialism) to educate their children, and sadly enough, they have accepted that lie as the truth.  Where there is no Vision, the People perish.

America has lost its Vision, and America is perishing.  If we hope to turn things around and escape the miasma of public schools, then we are going to have to acquire a Vision of a future where our children are required to study and to learn and to perpetuate the values of their ancestors!

© May 2012, Daniel D. New

1 The Dumbing Down of America, Charlotte Iserbyt, _________ .

2 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/07/us-falls-in-world-education-rankings_n_793185.html

3 http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-6866663.html

Should We Obey All Laws?

Let’s think about whether all acts of Congress deserve our respect and obedience. Suppose Congress enacted a law — and the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional — requiring American families to attend church services at least three times a month. Should we obey such a law? Suppose Congress, acting under the Constitution’s commerce clause, enacted a law requiring motorists to get eight hours of sleep before driving on interstate highways. Its justification might be that drowsy motorists risk highway accidents and accidents affect interstate commerce. Suppose you were a jury member during the 1850s and a free person were on trial for assisting a runaway slave, in clear violation of the Fugitive Slave Act. Would you vote to convict and punish?

A moral person would find each one of those laws either morally repugnant or to be a clear violation of our Constitution. You say, “Williams, you’re wrong this time. In 1859, in Ableman v. Booth, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 constitutional.” That court decision, as well as some others in our past, makes my case. Moral people can’t rely solely on the courts to establish what’s right or wrong. Slavery is immoral; therefore, any laws that support slavery are also immoral. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, “to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions (is) a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

Soon, the Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of Obamacare, euphemistically titled the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. There is absolutely no constitutional authority for Congress to force any American to enter into a contract to buy any good or service. But if the court rules that Obamacare is constitutional, what should we do?

State governors and legislators ought to summon up the courage of our Founding Fathers in response to the 5th Congress’ Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798.

Led by Jefferson and James Madison, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and 1799 were drafted where legislatures took the position that the Alien and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional. They said, “Resolved, That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government … (and) whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.” The 10th Amendment to our Constitution supports that vision: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In a word, if the Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional, citizens should press their state governors and legislatures to nullify the law. You say, “Williams, the last time states got into this nullification business, it led to a war that cost 600,000 lives.” Two things are different this time. First, most Americans are against Obamacare, and secondly, I don’t believe that you could find a U.S. soldier who would follow a presidential order to descend on a state to round up or shoot down fellow Americans because they refuse to follow a congressional order to buy health insurance.

Congress has already gone far beyond the powers delegated to it by the Constitution. In Federalist No. 45, Madison explained: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” That vision has been turned on its head; it’s the federal government whose powers are numerous and indefinite, and those of the state are now few and defined.

Former slave Frederick Douglass advised: “Find out just what people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them. … The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”

Theory of America’s Founding, (Part 2): Consent, Revolution, God and Honor

Besides Equality and Natural Rights (discussed last week), the ideas or principles that comprise the American theory of government, i.e., the proper conceptual building blocks for righteous government are Consent, Revolution, God and Honor. Consent is needed to form legitimate government. The Declaration of Independence says that to secure the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Indeed, people must join to form governments to secure all their natural rights, but governments do not derive unlimited powers to perform that function! Just powers are only those consented to by the people. The Founders believed that a republic was that form of government that best reflected consent, in that, all powers are derived directly or indirectly from the great body of the people” (The Federalist 39). I have observed, however, that consent may be measured differently from culture to culture–and not always democratically. Some people in the world don’t even value their vote. All I can say is that we Americans possess a political culture and explicit heritage that measures consent exclusively through democratic republican means. Notwithstanding, consent in and of itself is not the sole standard of legitimacy or goodness. The people do not have the right to consent to unjust powers. According to Thomas G. West and Douglas A. Jeffrey, the Founders would tell us we cannot rightly consent to powers of government that violate the unalienable rights of individuals. Consider then that the people are not supreme to the standard of Right per se. The standard of Right would be God’s province. Democratic majorities may not redefine what is right. The inalienable rights are set for all time by Nature and Nature’s God, and they are written and fixed in our founding documents. The Founders would not recognize any such thing as a “living” Constitution. They would impeach half our judges today for suggesting it.

Hence the real challenge of self-government: people must be of such character that they will only give their consent to good and just measures. And this extends to establishing government and to operating it. The Founders essentially took care of establishing a just government with the people of the first generation. They made a “social compact” with fellow citizens, and I would argue that they covenanted not only with each other but with God as their Witness and Gaurantor. But that still leaves the ongoing matter of consent in the operation of government. That’s something you should be doing on a regular basis, at least by casting your informed ballot on election day. But no matter what ballot initiative you consent to, you always retain the unalienable right to liberty and may never delegate to the government permanently. In a sense, the government rests on a renewable source of consent, which you give it through participation, acquiescence or peaceful protest.

The right to Revolution naturally follows. West and Jeffrey again: “Government exists to protect natural rights, and government derives its just powers from consent. If it is not doing this, the people should get rid of it and set up a new one. [Indeed], the right to revolution is reflected in the early American conviction that the people have a right to keep and bear arms and to govern themselves in all local matters through local governments close to the people.” Of course, the right to revolution doesn’t mean it is right or good to overthrow government at the drop of a hat. If government is doing a tolerably good and decent job, you put up with its shortcomings and mistakes. If the system remains open to a redress of grievances, you continue to participate. The Declaration says, “Prudence . . . will dictate that governments . . . should not be changed for light and transient causes.” Prudence is what we might also call “horse sense.” Revolution is dangerous–it throws men back into the state of nature, where destructive passions and violence may become uncontrolled. For that reason secession is probably the preferential form of revolution, should revolution ever be justified in America.

Additionally, the Founders placed God and Honor ahead of narrow self-interest when they established the government. They commended us to do the same in its ongoing operation. The Declaration says that when a people are subjected to a long train of abuses aiming at absolute despotism, it isn’t only their right– “it is their duty,” to change the government. The duty is higher than one’s own personal survival or selfish interest. The Founders’ sense of honor taught them that they must be ready to sacrifice their lives and property for the sake of their duty. In order to establish and preserve free government, they pledged their lives, fortunes, and “sacred honor.” In the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking up Arms (1775), Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson wrote: “We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we have received from our gallant ancestors. . . .” It was a notion behind much Southern chivalry before and during the War Between the States, i.e., the Founders’ conviction that political slavery and dishonor are worse even than death. As honor is a keen sense of right and wrong, it implies integrity and an adherence to right action or principles above else. In this view, people are legitimately supreme to government when it comes to upholding standards of Right. For standards of Right on earth become a nexus ultimately, where God and the individual meet in man’s conscience. Government may not arrogate to itself the legitimate power to speak for any individual at this level of communion or duty. There is no collective conscience and no collective Soul. One person at a time may redefine what is right, if and when government gets it terribly wrong. The inalienable rights are set for all time by Nature and Nature’s God. We end then where we started, with the Creator. Indeed, there are four distinct references to God in the Declaration of Independence. To the Founders, separation of church and state was meant to prevent a single religious sect from becoming official religion for the whole country. But the principles of this nation in fact constitute religious doctrine, the Declaration’s own theology–with God as author of Law and Source of rights for mankind, eternal and unalienable on earth as it is in Heaven.

Obama Most Morally Bankrupt Imposter President In Us History

Warning: Explicit language

Obama/Soetoro/Dunham is a champion of infanticide – the killing of infants. While serving in the Illinois State Senate, Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, voted three times to allow infants who survive abortion must be left to lay there and die.

Yes, he did vote against the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Click here to see the bills and his comments supporting murder.

Would you stand there and allow a living, breathing infant to die if you were a doctor or nurse? How could anyone, doctor, nurse or just plain human stand by and allow an infant who has survived the horror of abortion – just let them die without trying to save that precious life? Soetoro did because his soul died a long time ago. And, how did Barry justify it?

Listen to audio from Obama’s 2002 IL Senate floor debate wherein he argued that while babies might be aborted alive, it would be a “burden” to a mother’s “original decision” to assess and treat them.” In other words, the mother wished to kill the infant, so be it.

54% of “Catholics” voted for Soetoro in 2008. They voted to elect an individual who denied three times the right of a living, breathing infant born of madness the right to live.

Say, I wonder if those “Catholics” got the hope and change they voted into office even though they had no right to vote for an ineligible candidate? God will ask them someday.

On May 9, 2012, the usurper camped out in the White House “made history” by once again spitting in God’s face. He endorsed the legal fiction called “same sex marriage.” Oh, boy, the headlines have been burning up the Internet:

Drudge Report – just a sampling, May 10, 2012:

AP: GAY STANCE SETS ‘WORLD PRECEDENT’…
FLASHBACK 2009: Cheney endorses gay marriage…
WASHPOST: ‘Wink and a nod’ no longer enough…
Germany hails ‘courageous’ decision…
REPORTER: ‘I’m getting chills again’…
ELLEN: Obama ‘brave’ for evolving…
Raises $1 million in 90 minutes…

In December 2010, I wrote a column titled, The Queering of Our Military and God’s Wrath. Of course, it drew vile, filthy emails damning me to Hell and death threats for bringing out the medical facts about sexual deviants, their terrible diseases and recurring health problems.

Stop calling sexual deviants “gays”. There is nothing gay about bowel movement sex, males wearing diapers by the time they’re 40 (if they live that long) or dying of AIDS. If you play the word games of your enemy, you play right into their hands. Men who engage in sodomy (sex in each other’s rectums and feces) are sodomites.

Sexual deviants choose their immoral and dangerous sexual habits. Despite the massive propaganda eaten up by the “tolerant” out there, the so-called “gay” gene is a lie:

This is the Way God Made Me”- A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene”

Born WHAT Way? By Dr. Paul Cameron

“With the above in mind, consider our society’s future in light of D. Minkowitz’s December 29, 1992 editorial in the national gay magazine, The Advocate:

“I am increasingly impatient with the old chestnut that our movement for public acceptance has not increased and will not increase the number of gay men and lesbians in existence. “There are more of us than there used to be,” historian John D’Elmilio has written. Firmly believing this, I wanted to… argue the morality of teaching kids that gay is OK even if it means that some will join our ranks….”

“Indeed. Youth are often attracted to excitement and rebellion. The gay movement is growing.

“Minkowitz also argued that the ‘born gay’ claim is nothing more than a smokescreen: “most of the line about homosex[uality] being one’s nature, not a choice, was articulated as a response to brutal repression…. ‘We didn’t choose this, so don’t punish us for it!’ One hundred years later, it’s time for us to abandon this defensive posture and walk upright on the earth. Maybe you didn’t choose to be gay – that’s fine. But I did.”

Just like former WNBA star Sheryl Swoopes a few years ago. Ms. Swoopes was previously married to her high school sweetheart; they had a son. In an interview following her “coming out.” This was the exchange:

Interviewer: “You have said that you don’t believe you were born gay, which, as you said, may confuse many people. How do you believe you came to be gay?”

SW: “I think there are a lot of people — gays and lesbians — who believe you are born that way. I think there also a lot of people who believe it’s a choice. And, for me, I believe it was a choice. I was at a point in my life where I had gone through a divorce and was not in a relationship, and the choice I made happened to be that I fell in love with another woman. It might confuse some people, and some people may not understand that, but I think in life, no matter what it is that you’re doing, you always have a choice and you make that choice and you have to live with that choice. And it just happened that, you know, my partner and I were really, really good friends, and the more we hung out, the more we did stuff together, my feelings grew stronger and stronger for her, and it got to a point to where I said, “I can’t fight this any more.”

How you “came to be gay?” I thought you were born that way. Ms. Swoopes made the choice of embracing sin because she wants to, not because she was born that way. Is she really a lesbian or a product of years of propaganda shoved down her throat in massive doses by the media and special interest groups? How about men and women in prisons who have turned queer? I watched a cable program where the female prisoners said they turned to other female prisoners for sex because of loneliness. The male prisoners did it with each other just for the sex, not because they were born that way. I guess they’re not “real” lesbians and sodomites.

While this is a profound moral issue rotting our nation from the inside out, it’s also about science. There isn’t a scintilla of scientific evidence to prove any human is “born that way.” It’s all been debunked. The propaganda war regarding sexual deviants and same sex marriage should be focused on one thing: science. Not tolerance. Not acceptance. Not politically correct. Science. This is the one thing advocates and sexual deviants refuse to discuss because they cannot win the argument.

You can’t simply decide one day to change your race to another race. We are all the way God made us. Sodomites and lesbians leave their destructive, preferred sexual preferences all the time. Actress Anne Heche used to have sex with Ellen DeGeneres. Ms. Heche then went on to marry a man, have a child. Unfortunately, she divorced. However, she now lives with a man, not a female. Was she a fake lesbian?

As Coach Dave Daubenmire pointed out in his recent column: “Americans are not permitted to “marry” anyone we want. I can’t marry my son. I can’t marry my daughter. If marriage is a “civil right” why are their any restraints on it? Homosexual-sodomy based marriages are special rights…not civil rights…affirmative sin. It is the morality, stupid. Most folks vote the economy, but the economy is a moral issue. Governments lie, steal, cheat, and covet. An amoral government will produce amoral laws. Amoral governments force moral people to follow immoral laws.”

The U.S. government, the U.S. military, hundreds of members of the morally bankrupt U.S. Congress, too many state legislators and the government indoctrination centers they call schools, are now the biggest advocates of spreading AIDS and the “lavender diseases” which plague sodomites.

“Our” government and public schools are the biggest advocates in the world pushing to brain wash young boys into believing they are born to have sex in another man’s rectum. Little girls being force fed it’s normal for “two mommies” to slobber in each other’s vaginas and suck on their mammary glands like infants. (Don’t forget their “male” sex toys.)

Public schools and major college campuses across the country have been washing the minds of school children for decades to embrace sexual deviancy as normal and healthy. They are nothing more than incubators for churning out dumbed down, compliant cattle. This country is drowning in politically correct madness.

Now, the impostor president called Obama has jumped on the garbage truck to endorse such filth and sin. Just in time to scoop up the big bucks:

“President Obama and his aides claim they’re just not sure how his endorsement of same-sex marriage will play politically. But his campaign is pushing awfully hard to make sure it plays well.

“The campaign, within hours of Obama’s interview in which he declared for the first time his support for gay marriage, blasted out a fundraising email to supporters. At dawn on Thursday, the campaign released a web video highlighting the president’s new-found stance and lambasting likely GOP opponent Mitt Romney’s opposition to gay marriage.

“Now the president is preparing to head to a sold-out fundraiser Thursday evening at George Clooney’s home in Los Angeles — where he is sure to be embraced by well-heeled celebrity donors.

“Hollywood is home to some of the most high-profile backers of gay marriage and the 150 donors who are paying $40,000 to attend Clooney’s dinner Thursday night will no doubt feel newly invigorated by Obama’s watershed announcement the day before.

“Overall, the dinner is expected to raise close to $15 million — about $6 million from the guests and the rest from a campaign contest for small-dollar donors, the winners of which get to participate in the dinner. It is an unprecedented amount for a single event. And it means that in one single evening the Obama camp and the Democratic Party will collect more than Romney has amassed in his best single month of fundraising.”

Let me again quote the late, great, magnificent writer, Taylor Caldwell, from her book, Dear and Glorious Physician: The Story of St. Luke, writing about the fall of the Roman Empire:

Tiberius, the Caesar of the time, responded to this attack:

“I am a soldier. I am surrounded by sycophants and liars, and in that Diodorus speaks truth. What is lavish and uncomprehending praise given out of self-seeking and fear?

“What is flattery if lips that speak it only fawn, and in that fawning profit? The dull ear is servant to a duller tongue. As a I solider I prefer men of simple truth and without complexities who speak in honor and of patriotism. But where are men today in Rome?”….

“Let me tell you this,” said Tiberius, quietly. “Venal Caesars, power-mad Caesars, never seize power, never destroy law and their country. Their power is forced on them by an evil and despicable people, a selfish and cowardly people. Where are the guardians of the people’s liberty then? You are silent, you are slaves in spirit, you are thieves and cowards. But a people deserve their lawmakers.”……

“Rome!” he said. “Do I recognize this Rome of polyglot slaves, of Scythians, Britons, Gauls, barbarians, Greeks, Assyrians, Egyptians, and the scum of a whole world? Where are the Romans? They have lost their identity. They have lost their tongues, their minds, their souls, their virility. What have I to do with such a Rome? I am not an honorable man! I am what my people have made me. I am their captive, not their Emperor. Here is no escaping the evil of a debased people.”……

“I am here only to do the filthy will of a nation obstinately determined to commit suicide. If I break the law and the Constitution in their greedy behalf, they applaud me. If I have given up my hope of restoring the Treasury, they praise me for having their welfare at heart. Their welfare! Dogs and jackals!”

Despite all the howling denying Soetoro is a socialist, in fact, he is a communist. He was groomed to become one in Hawaii at an early age. He then spent 20 years in “church” under the tutelage of the infamous Rev. Wright learning “Black Liberation Theology”. A toxic doctrine:

The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology

“Black Liberation theologians James Cone and Cornel West have worked diligently to embed Marxist thought into the black church since the 1970s. For Cone, Marxism best addressed remedies to the condition of blacks as victims of white oppression. In For My People, Cone explains that “the Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism as a tool of social analysis can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are.”

“In God of the Oppressed, Cone said that Marx’s chief contribution is “his disclosure of the ideological character of bourgeois thought, indicating the connections between the ‘ruling material force of society’ and the ‘ruling intellectual’ force.” Marx’s thought is useful and attractive to Cone because it allows black theologians to critique racism in America on the basis of power and revolution.

“For Cone, integrating Marx into black theology helps theologians see just how much social perceptions determine theological questions and conclusions. Moreover, these questions and answers are “largely a reflection of the material condition of a given society.”

Soetoro claims he “evolved” into his position supporting the myth called marriage between sexual deviants. Big cash is what caused his “evolution”. But, spitting in God’s face and repudiating Christ will someday make all that cash meaningless in eternity.

I will never recognize marriage between sexual deviants and neither should any church in this country that preaches the word of God. Nor should any business owner who finds sexual deviants offensive. If you are threatened with a lawsuit, argue science because it is the truth that debunks the myth of “born that way”. Just because politicians pass some immoral law, doesn’t mean I have to swim in the sewer with them. This has NOTHING to do with civil rights. This is about seducing the American people into their own destruction:

“The Communists planned to create not only a new way of life, but new human beings. They sought to achieve not only the reconstruction of social and cultural institutions, but reconstruction of human beings. Communist totalitarianism has undergone tremendous growth over the past century only because it has “the support of a man of a new social and psychological type”—the “new communitarian (Communist) man.”….”In his book, Soviet Civilization, Andrei Sinyavsky states that the “idea of the new man is the cornerstone of Soviet civilization.” The “new man” is in fact the indispensable, fundamental basis of all totalitarian societies. Totalitarianism requires the support, approval, and fearful veneration of the masses; if the “new men and women” had not been created, totalitarianism would not exist today. The Communists planned to create not only a new way of life, but new human beings. They sought to achieve not only the reconstruction of social and cultural institutions, but reconstruction of human beings. Communist totalitarianism has undergone tremendous growth over the past century only because it has “the support of a man of a new social and psychological type”—the “new communitarian (Communist) man.”

The relatively new mantra chanted by sexual deviants and their supporters is “social justice”. That is nothing but more communist propaganda. It bears repeating:

Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35, January 10, 1963, Current Communist Goals, U.S. House of Representatives

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

The American people, out of fear in being called intolerant, have walked right into the jaws of the beast. This nation has forsaken all that God has bestowed upon our land in favor of moral rot passed off as “progressive”, “social” and other words meant to persuade individuals to turn their backs on what they know in their hearts Almighty God has told them is wrong. The created now think they are more powerful than the Creator. A big mistake.

Link:

Watch this video (less than 10 minutes). You will see through modern technology an unborn baby developing a heart at 25 days. At 32 days, that living, breathing baby is developing arms and legs. LOOK and see the truth. From conception to birth. Abortion IS murder.

Ted, Michelle & Hillary: “Family Values” from hell

There is no such thing as same sex marriage.

Silent No More

Susan G. Komen for the Cure Causes More Breast Cancers by Funding Planned Parenthood, Denying Abortion-Breast Cancer Link and Downplaying Pill-Breast Cancer Link, Charges the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

Theory of America’s Founding, (Part I): Equality and Natural Rights

The principles of America’s founding amount to a remarkable and radical departure from government, as practiced for centuries prior to the American Revolution. To be sure, a tradition is tied to the theory and to the men responsible. We are, however, quite remarkable as a nation today, because the Founders were indeed radical in their definition of liberty and their uncompromising demand for freedom. The theory of America’s founding may be said to be embodied in the Declaration of Independence. If anyone reads it, he or she finds that it is stated rather clearly, not hard to understand unless you’re a modern day bureaucrat or store bought politician. What comes as shock and discouragement to many, is the realization that it is no longer the dominant theory in our government or in American politics. A new political theory arose during the Progressive Era, which came to dominate outright during the 1960s. Popular and powerful today, it has already changed our government and society and now threatens remaining liberty. But let action proceed first from understanding, and to understand what’s happened, we should review the theory of America’s founding. The material that follows will borrow heavily from work by Thomas G. West and Douglas A. Jeffrey, two eminent historians associated with the Claremont Institute (www.claremont.org) in California.

The ideas or principles that comprise the American theory of government are posited as self-evident truths in the Declaration. They are universal in their application and may be true for men everywhere and for all time, because they are based on the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” They are the proper building blocks for human reason in matters of politics. They are themselves inherent in human nature. To be governed accordingly, is to be governed as well as man can be. These conceptual building blocks for righteous government are: Equality, Natural Rights, Consent, Revolution, God and Honor. The Declaration’s statement of principles begins: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . . .” Of course, humans are entirely different from each other in terms of their gifts and attributes. The Founders, however, meant to observe that regardless of differences like looks, talents or strength, etc., human beings are all equal in the life and liberty they are born with and deserve to keep. This kind of equality confers on everyone responsibility as well. James Madison explains in The Federalist 54 that every human being, but no cow, is held morally accountable for violence committed against others, because every man is free to choose his behavior. Moreover, because of the innate temptation to abuse power (part of human nature), equality as the Founders understood it meant that no one should have inordinate power over others.

Men are therefore equal in their potential towards depravity and cruelty, if entrusted with too much power. Madison observed that men are not angels; if they were, there would be no need for government in the first place. As it is, government should not concentrate too much power in the hands of anyone or any group of people. Note that if you deny personal responsibility or pass it along to someone else or worse, to some drug or psychosis or whatever, you practically lose your basis for equality as understood by the Founders. People recategorize themselves with cows all the time, and that’s just not good horse sense. The Founders expected us to walk on two legs and to get up off all fours–to behave like responsible moral agents, because we are equal in that respect. Only in this way are the great mass of men, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, unfit to be saddled, booted and spurred by the favored few.

The Declaration continues that human beings are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” A right, according to the Founders, is a claim that a person may rightfully make against someone who would deprive him of what is his own. You own your clothes for instance, and you have a right to them. If someone takes them from you, you have a legitimate claim against that person. He or she owes them back–or rather, he or she has a duty not to take them in the first place. A natural right is a claim to what one rightfully owns by birth, or by way of one’s nature as a human being. Natural rights are unalienable, because they cannot be alienated or given away to someone else. A right from this point of view is a duty from another. If you have a right to liberty, I have a duty to respect that right. The Declaration specifically mentions three unalienable rights. No one may rightfully deny us these things. Note the third one mentioned above is the pursuit of happiness and not happiness itself. But the Declaration also says these three are “among” our natural rights, so there must be others. Additional natural rights may be gleaned from official documents and writings of the Founding era, and they include the rights of conscience and property, free speech and free press, freedom of religion, and others protected in what became our Constitution’s “Bill of Rights.”

The Founders would never have said that you have a right to decent housing, health care, recreation, or anything else before you have worked to get them. It is only after you have acquired your property in some legitimate way that your right to own property comes into play. That said, property rights can be seen as part of the right to liberty and the right to pursue happiness. There is also a natural right to work, and property comes into play here too. We own ourselves and our labor by human nature; ergo, we are free to work and to keep the fruits of our labor. The right to earn property, and to keep the property one earns is fundamental to the conception of Natural Rights shared by the Founders. Moreover, the right of religious liberty was not a right to exclude religion from public life. Indeed, the right to religious liberty flows from the duty that all human beings have towards their Creator. The most basic reason for freedom of religion understood by the Founders, was not to free man from obligation to God or religion, but to free him to perform his duties to God, without obnoxious coercion into modes of worship by fallible human beings in government.