In a recent blog I posed some questions, including the rhetorical query as to why the federal government was - obviously - gearing up for the insurrection of the likes of ‘Patriots’. My unspoken charge was that it was doing so for political reasons: the socialists/communists making their moves to take over this country by stealth, in a Der Tag-like operation (google it), with the corporate-government-complex fascists rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect, in place to pick up the pieces. But there is another dimension to the matter. It has to do with the inclusion, in the list of ‘potential domestic terrorists’ that the Obama administration has identified, of, quote, Christians.
Ah yes. That little issue. Of this nation having been founded on and with, quote, ‘Judeo-Christian values and principles’. Which, in the event, meant, mostly, Christian values and principles.1 Which the New World Order crowd need to knock down, to have their way with the populace. Chief among which ‘principles’ is the concept of essential liberty. And which I, for one, prefer over statist totalitarian control.
Why? Why not force people to be ‘good,’ according to your lights??
For one ‘little’ reason. Which brings in the larger dimension of the picture, that I mentioned. To wit:
It is preferable for people to live under essential liberty, because they have free will, and thus, the inalienable right to exercise it. Because the universe has Purpose; and that Purpose is Good. To say, because there is a God; and that Being is a benevolent Being. Not a malevolent one. Which is interested in our spiritual development. Not as chattel, or cattle, of the all-powerful state, in the physical dimension. And the revolutionaries these days are not just socialists/communists on the one hand and fascists on the other. They are atheists. And they are determined to wipe out any vestige of religious belief - at least, any such belief that would stop them from imposing their totalitarian state on the people - from the national psyche. Thus the war on crosses, and Christian chaplains in the U.S. military, and so forth. And thus, to be more specific:
* The New Mexico state government prosecuted Christian photographers who declined on religious grounds to photograph a homosexual ‘commitment ceremony’.
* The Illinois state government sued Christian Bed and Breakfast owners who declined on religious grounds to host a homosexual marriage ceremony.
* Police in Massachusetts actually arrested a father who objected on religious grounds to classes designed to indoctrinate his six-year-old son in the homosexual lifestyle.2
* The government in Colorado ordered Christian bakers to bake a wedding cake for homosexuals - refusing to do so on religious grounds - or be arrested.3
Whose side would I be on in these matters? I think it’s obvious by now: I am on the side of essential liberty., within a framework of law, and the rule of law.
And that means, for example, there should be allowed to be - in America; the champion of the individual, & for the world’s example - LGBTQ Only bars and restaurants. As there should be allowed to be - in America - Females Only such places. And Males Only. And Blacks Only. And Whites Only. And Jews Only. And Christians Only. And Muslims Only. And Italians Only. And Japanese Only. And…
And you get the point. (That people have a right to flock with their own kind, if and when they so choose to.)
And I hope that I have made mine. In this little dissertation on
living by, and with,
essential liberty, under the clear rule of law. And thus:
Small Government ONLY Need Apply.
Because the alternative is too horrible to contemplate.
Without God in the picture.
And, we are going to be entering a New Era
Just not the New World Order of our erstwhile masters. Because
it’s time for something completely new.
Having learned our lessons.
See you on that Other Side. Of Power With, and Within. Rather than the old-age business of Power Over. As we create our reality. using the Right Stuff:
1 ‘What America’s Founders Believed’
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
John Adams - America’s Second President, and a Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.”
Thomas Jefferson - Author of the Declaration of Independence, and America’s Third President
“While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of artist, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.”
General George Washington - America’s First President
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization not on the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all f our political institutions on the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
James Madison - Primary Author of the U.S. Constitution, and America’s Fourth President
“I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God Governs in the affairs of men.”
Benjamin Franklin - A signer of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and one of the leading theorists of the American revolution, and its aftermath
(N.B. I am indebted to Dr. Ralph Reed’s ‘Faith & Freedom Coalition’ for this handy list of quotes.)
And thus, of course, why the nation-wreckers have been busily tearing down our Founding Fathers. You can’t have the people respecting the Founders of the nation if you are trying to bring down the nation. And merge it into something you might call, oh, say, the New World Order.
It has a certain felicitous ’ring’ to it; doesn’t it. Must be something nice.
2 The wording in this litany of examples of “the strong arm of Big Government to silence Christians” comes from a letter from the Christian Reviving America’s Values’ organization; thus the ‘slant’ on the wording.
3 All of these examples are on the issue of so-called civil rights’ (and what about MY ’civil rights’ as a potential owner of a business? Who the hell are 'you' to force yourself on me?? I'm not your slave. Go down the street to that other business that caters to your kind - or start your own business) because of the same-sex marriage decision by the SCOTUS. Which is not only unconstitutional on its face, but opens a whole huge can of worms. Where, e.g., the door has been opened for ‘marriage’ between a man and his male-child 'lover.' or a woman and her dog, or a whole slew of challenges to the law, for there being no hard definition of marriage, except with ‘who (or what) you love’.