The Dualistic Dilemma

12 07 2015

Guest Column by Jana Rea

When I was a kid, if I said something about God, people would ask me if I wanted to be a missionary. A neighbor friend once told me I should be a nun. That unsolicited advise puzzled me then, but now I understand it: Relegate the ‘religious’ to a profession so they stay put in a tidy place where ‘normal’ people don’t have to bother with the “Thees, Thy’s and Therefore’s” of dealing with a Presumed Presence from Whom we would rather keep a comfortable distance unless we need something. Let the religious do their bit while the rest of us live in the real world. The Real World. And what, pray tell, is that exactly?

I didn’t know it then but I had been subtly introduced to dualism—the assumed disparity between the seen and the unseen, between faith and reason–a kind of mental construct that assigns categories to our efforts to grasp Reality. Life assumptions—like dualism can go undetected until a conflict, or irony opens them for full view.

Recently I read an article about a movement in Australia to call the world to pray for America. The press release from the National Day of Prayer, Australia read:

“We in Australia believe it is our turn to bless the nation of America and pray for healing for the USA through prayer and fasting according to II Chronicles 7:14. We in Australia are grateful for the protection that America gave Australia and the nations of the free world during World War II.”

About the same time, a friend loaned us a copy of a self-published compilation of Kingdom Stories; The Life and Labors of Rev. G.V. Albertson (Copyright 1935 by Ruth Hill, Boston Ma). A cowboy turn preacher is a fascinating coming-of-age account that gives color and context to the territory days in ‘Bleeding Kansas’ and early settlements in Oklahoma. It is a personal narrative that reveals the hardness of life that forged the characters of our mid western fore bearers. From one chapter, “ Ill shoot the Preacher”, the author writes,

Many of this generation, hearing the gospel from fine cushioned pews, and enjoying most conventional up-to-date services, could scarcely be made to comprehend the hard beginnings of many of our churches a generation ago and particularly of some of the 2200 that have been founded by Sunday School Missionaries on the frontier . . . Good people who had taken homes there had to be most watchful for property and life; . . . all manner of crimes were being enacted. With those who stood for law and order, the Sunday School Missionary under took to build up a church. (p. 68)

While I work with our son on the renovation of a tiny house in East Lawrence, my husband oversees the building of a school in Africa as a volunteer. Continents apart, our very real worlds could not be more different. I order tile from a warehouse; a contractor measures for kitchen cabinets with special compartments for spices, trash and recycle. Meanwhile Ed admires African workers who pat down the hand-mixed pavers into the earth for the classroom floor; a wall shelf is a luxury and an unexpected convenience. The slow and steady work of missionaries is opening new opportunities and casting doubt on the efficacy of witch doctors for relief from sickness or demons. Demons–now there is a worldview indicator word!

Whether on another continent or during an earlier era, what determines this fundamental difference, besides geography and genetics? In these three cases a Judeo/Christian worldview has taken root or is taking effect; the result permeates every aspect of society—family, economy, and the judicial system. Justice in the Wild West was settled in the streets until law and order was established by a Biblical moral code. African villages under the tribal influence of ancestral loyalties and Islamic customs in some places are yielding to the good news of the God of the Bible. Industry replaces dependency so the disinherited wives and children have a livelihood; education is made affordable and opens doors to new futures for the young. America’s foundation was firmly Judeo/Christian. The unprecedented prosperity that resulted propelled prosperity else where, like Australia.

Ironically, it is not the foreign fields at risk now—it is the homeland of America. Our dualism has finally dealt us a dilemma. We have politely excised our religion out of our public square and left chards where once there was a vibrant fountain. Thankfully the mission fields in Africa and Australia and church plants of yesterday are now returning the favor by praying for America. So what does that say of our maturity, our supposed progress? It sounds more like a civilization in its dotage than its vigor. There is something very full circle or ironic about the pairing of these accounts– this frontier account of fledgling churches that became the root system of communities for generations while the fruit of their labor spread into foreign fields now offering solace to our morally bereft nation.

You have to wonder how did we get here. Critical thinking and self-examination are casualties of a culture that prefers delusions for now then simply pass the nonsense on to the next generation as they observe it practiced by us. And practice it we have. And do. Our dualism is so perfected we stay on cue, going from church to club to work to party to home and hearth and never realize how compartmentalized we have become. Split.

What is it if not schizophrenic to assert “In God We Trust” but refuse to acknowledge Him publicly or privately as the Giver of all of our Nation’s bounty? Or refuse to recognize that the Founders were devoutly determined to invoke God’s favor and did everything necessary to set their lives in agreement with His revealed Word. Divorcing sacred from secular by insisting that politics and religion cannot co-exist does not alter reality. It does however reveal the modern fault line in the American mind. However, I do believe that this split in consciousness is amendable. Where there is a will to examine one’s belief systems and make changes where necessary.

Dietrich Bonheoffer wrote, “All things appear as in a distorted mirror, if they are not seen and recognized in God.”

In Jesus Christ the reality of God has entered into the reality of this world. The place where the questions about the reality of God and about the reality of the world are answered at the same time is characterized solely by the name: Jesus Christ. God and the world are enclosed in this name . . . we cannot speak rightly of either God or the world without speaking of Jesus Christ. All concepts of reality that ignore Jesus Christ are abstractions. As long as Christ and the world are conceived as two realms bumping against and repelling each other re, we are left with only the following options. Giving up on reality as a whole, either we place ourselves in one of the two realms, wanting Christ without the world or the world without Christ—and both cases we deceive ourselves . . . There are not two realities, but only one reality, and that is God’s reality revealed in Christ in the reality of the world. Partaking in Christ, we stand at the same time in the reality of God and in the reality of the world the reality of Christ embraces the reality of the world in itself. The world has no reality of its own independent of Gods’ revelation in Christ . . . [T]he theme of two realms, which has dominated the history of the church again and again, is foreign to the New Testament. (Bonhoeffer, Eric Metaxas, pg469)

Biblical support is easy to find. Colossians 1:15-20.

What governs moral law whether in remote villages, the Old West or ‘progressive’ American cities? Whether codified or not, what places a schematic in place that explains the cause and effect of human behavior within the known universe? The worldview of the inhabitants. But dualism renders it blurry.

It is time as a nation to realize that the foundation of our county and the subsequent buildings upon it are grossly incongruent. Never before has it been as obvious. There is nothing faulty with the foundation. It is brilliant. But over time we have allowed slip shod construction and derelict leaders to occupy prominence, preeminence over our Constitution and our conscience until our national contract is in shreds.

Wherever there is a virtue, there is a counterfeit.

Socialism pretends to correct American individualism with collectivism, which of course has been tried and failed and yet under the current administration has been resurrected with new meanings to our lexicon of trusted words like ‘Hope’ and Transformation, all of which peddle the deranged ideology of Saul Alinsky, exalted to czar status empowering governmental mandates from every agency; all substitutes for what God had in mind:

“Love God with all your heart and strength and mind and your neighbor as yourself.” It has been called the Golden Rule but it is much more than that because it is predicated on self-love. That only happens by first acknowledging God the Creator, Sustainer and Giver of life thus giving Him the proper honor. Then in gratitude we live as stewards of a world we did not make and do not own. Agenda 21 is the pretender of this virtue as it doesn’t recognize the proper created order and seeks to demonize ‘Man’ as the persecutor of the Earth and all the species in it. For sustainability, only an “all- wise world order” would be able to control the evil capitalists who seek profit at the expense of undeveloped counties. The problem is— who gets to make the rules in the New World Order? I hope no one I see on the world stage. No person, because human nature is not trustworthy. Government was instituted to keep human nature in check. The bigger government gets, the more humans can mess it up. It becomes a god and functions like a tyrant. God, not government rights all relationships. Self-governance precedes generosity and ethics.

It has always been about worldview, which asks the big philosophical questions of the individual and society: What is the nature of Reality? (Metaphysics), How can we know it? (Epistemology) How then shall we live? (Ethics) You would think in a university town the residents would have the tools for critical thinking but when slow cooked in the toad water of liberalism, it has fallen prey to a ploy of social justice and redistribution. Of course justice matters. But defining justice is a prerequisite to a workable solution. Muslims and Christians are worldviews apart on definitions of that word. Let’s not pretend.

In an America that is being ‘fundamentally transformed, reduced to the diminished and awkward role of a “Post-America World” player, I have dusted off my textbooks on Western Civilization which is clearly out of vogue as the current President was photographed carrying a book with that title to and from Air Force One—his free ride. Recently published textbooks enhance the view of Islam and minimize Christianity as a persecutor of all things Islamic; our universities are substituting Western Civilization with Middle Eastern Studies. To appeal the Middle Eastern dollars of course and sell our soil and soul! There is nothing more important now than a coherent worldview and to be able to articulate it. Right now we are not a melting pot, we are a cacophony of chaos due to implode.

The Judeo/Christian worldview was fundamental to the shaping of our government. Man, left to himself will corrupt, pervert and mask his intention to do so as long as possible to hold power until tyranny is inevitable. Education cannot redeem– government doesn’t succor the soul. It is not the socialist worldview nor is it the Islamist worldview that founded this country—it was the Biblical worldview.

Not long ago I was asked, “Has the Douglas County Republican Party become too religious? ”

I love the question. A perfectly legitimate one and deserves a well-reasoned answer. But before that, I need to ask questions.

What is meant by the word “religious”? The term usually has connotations of the moralistic. So if by the question they intend to ask, is it proper for a political party to assert that we live in a moral universe? I reply, Yes. And is that assertion necessary to the scope of the Republican Platform? Again I say, Yes.

If by ‘religious’ they are asking, are we promoting one religion over others, I would ask which religion is foundational to our Republic? Is it Hindu, Islam, Rastafarian Atheism, Secularism? None of the above. Only the Judeo/Christian Bible is quoted more than any other source in our founding documents. Judaism gave us the Law; Christianity gives us the only One who was able to keep it, revealing the true nature of God and paid the penalty we deserve. The Founders celebrated this. Allusions and overt references in their writings are unmistakable to the literate. Therefore when George Washington pens words like:

“… Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties move men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. What ever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

(George Washington excerpted from Farewell Address 1796)

I would ask, are we then being too religious to recall, to recite and to seek to reinstitute them? I think not. In fact I would go so far as to say, we utterly fail without them. John Adams says it better than I:

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

(John Adams, in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, on October 11, 1798)

The question itself is very revealing about the American mind—it is incredibly dualistic. When we assert a belief but subvert it in word or in practice that mind is divided and integrity is at risk. If faith does not permeate all of life it is infantile at best. The unexamined mind leads to unexamined groupthink and so goes society. The only remedy is the entrance of an objective Truth and the hard work of self-examination for a unity of mind and spirit. But that of course begs the question of a spiritual dimension to our existence.

So I would ask, if the questioner is a Republican by affiliation? If so, how do they ignore the fundamental premises of the Republican Platform? If the questioner is of the Democrat party, then I understand the disassociation from God. It is systemic. Sporting a collage of contradictory worldviews is not open-minded liberalism –it is maniacal schizophrenia. We are way past resuming the integrity of our thought, word and deed as a Nation.  We must exhume rather than resume.

The confusion I have felt for the better part of 8 years is how to invest my life energy, how to live faithfully when every system in our society is teetering toward collapse. I have chosen to stand squarely on the Republican platform admitting no contradiction to my worldview. I have chosen to stand in a political field erstwhile it questions the viability and relevance of faith; I have chosen Christianity while that faith field in practice often dismisses the immediate or ultimate benefit of the political endeavor. I must somehow find those contradictions illogical as did Dietrich Bonheoffer, whose integrity inspires me in these days.

In the meantime, the Judeo Christian worldview is on the public scaffold. Adherents may follow. However, the God of all Time and all nations will not be mocked and laughs at the derision of Man. Psalms 2. He would shepherd the fatherless and the widow at the very end of all time, and draw nearest to the broken-hearted. Psalms 145. Eventually we will no longer see darkly through the dust of dilemmas but clearly when we see Him face to face. II Corinthians 13:12, Psalms 17:15.

Until then, Reality begs for participants.





Federal Over-reach Part 2: Bundy Ranch Commentary

19 04 2014

Quite a few friends and acquaintances have been asking for my take on the Bundy Ranch controversy in Nevada.  I have reserved much response until I felt I could express an honest and educated opinion.   I’ve read a lot of reports, watched a few video reports, and since I don’t get Fox News I haven’t seen much reporting on television that I can depend on to give any kind of honest critique that isn’t skewed by a pro-Obama, pro-Progressive ideology.  Today an article came across my screen that helped clarify the situation for me.  Even though I am “Johnny Come Lately” to the discussion, here goes!

As you know, the BLM backed down from a 2 week long standoff with the Bundy Family and a crowd of protesting supporters, some armed, some unarmed.  I was

Standoff in Nevada: Bundy supporters vs. BLM Rangers via Human Events

personally relieved to hear this news.  I really did not expect the Feds to de-escalate the situation.  Here we are burgeoning on the anniversary dates of Waco, Columbine, and the Oklahoma City bombing.  The recent KKK lunatic who attacked the Jewish Center’s in Kansas City, attempting to kill Jews and killing 3 Christians instead, has now added to the “weirdness” of April, not to mention Adolph Hitler’s birthday and Earth Day.  It would have been true to form had a backfiring truck engine, or an accidental weapon discharge initiated a massacre, similar to Wounded Knee.  Of course, as Senator Harry Reid cautioned, This ain’t over.  He is right about that.  But thankfully, a potential powder keg was diffused.

Speaking of Harry Reid, there are all kinds of strange ties and accusations flying about concerning his interests in the Bundy case.  Most of those ties lead to Chinese interests.  The Communist China energy giants China Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) and Sinopec have already bought large interests in almost 28 million acres of US petroleum development, all since Obama took office, reversing a Bush administration policy blocking China based on national security concerns.  (For reference that is half the size of the state of Iowa!) Chinese corporation ENN Energy Group, an alternative energy giant, is connected to a solar panel farm in Clark County Nevada, the same county as the Bundy Ranch, but not the same property.  Harry Reid’s son happens to work for ENN Energy.  (More on the Reid/China connection here at WND and this YouTube video)

Then there’s Reid’s connection to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).  Former staffer for Harry Reid is Neil Kornze, now the head of BLM.  At the ripe age of 35, he has spent his career in government since college, probably never getting any dirt on his shoes.  None of this really bodes well for Harry.

My real concern is that the BLM, supposedly an environmental impact and administrative management office, is hiring contractors to confiscate private property (cattle) when they are not trained or equipped to manage or provide for the health and welfare of those cattle causing many of them to die (reportedly young calves were separated from their mothers during the gathering, mostly by helicopters), and shooting others outright.  Add to that the deployment of paramilitary spec-ops type “Rangers” who are directly employed by BLM, for the purpose of enforcement against private citizens.  (The Rangers were deployed before the militia or the crowd of protesting supporters arrived).

In a recent letter, dated April 15, and addressed to the President of the United States, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Director of the BLM, Texas Congressman Steve Stockman challenged the Administration, citing US Code that the BLM has no authority “to assume peremptory police powers, that role being reserved to the States” and that the federal government must “seek assistance from local law enforcement whenever the use of force may become necessary.”  Rep. Stockman goes further pointing out that it appears the the Secretary of the Interior has violated federal law by by-passing the local law enforcement offices.  Read Stockman’s letter here.

Whether Bundy is guilty of trespass, failure to pay fees, or whatever, this obvious over-reach by a federal administrative office seeking to enforce law by use of deadly force, or “peremptory police powers”, is very, very, dangerous.   The BLM spent over $3 million on the Bundy standoff.  According to documentary film-maker Dennis M. Lynch, he has not seen this much firepower deployed on the Southern border where drugs and people are routinely smuggled across.   “I never see the M-16’s down on the border stopping the drugs, and the terrorists, and the day laborers coming through on BLM property,” he says in this video.  Please watch it.  The BLM spent over $3 million on air and ground resources to lock down a piece of ground the size of Delaware.  This to confiscate 400 cattle with a current estimated value of about $350K which they then released.

Commentator Dana Loesch had this to say (via Human Events story “Cowmaggeddon“):

Dana Loesch also says mainstream media reporting about the immediate cause of the government’s futile cattle roundup is incorrect, as Cliven Bundy has not categorically refused to pay grazing fees:

“Those who say Bundy is a “deadbeat” are making inaccurate claims. Bundy has in fact paid fees to Clark County, Nevada in an arrangement pre-dating the BLM. The BLM arrived much later, changed the details of the setup without consulting with Bundy — or any other rancher — and then began systematically driving out cattle and ranchers. Bundy refused to pay BLM, especially after they demanded he reduce his [herd]’s head count down to a level that would not sustain his ranch.

Bundy OWNS the water and forage rights to this land. He paid for these rights. He built fences, established water ways, and constructed roads with his own money, with the approval of Nevada and BLM. When BLM started using his fees to run him off the land and harassing him, he ceased paying. So should BLM reimburse him for managing the land and for the confiscation of his water and forage rights?”

Then you can throw in a term called “prescriptive rights” and it is possible that Bundy may have a legal position that BLM is afraid of, according to this story on Benswaan.com.  According to Todd Devlin, a Montana rancher, and county commissioner with real working contacts in the Dept of Interior having taught workshops for the agency in the past, prescriptive right is similar to an easement across another property owner in order to access yours. I’ll let you read Ben Swaan’s story for yourself to understand it better.  Devlin also said the amount owed by Bundy is probably closer to $200K than the $1.1 million that BLM wants, which most likely is comprised of penalties and fines for trespass cattle.  Devlin went to BLM to find out why they weren’t using other channels to work with Bundy.  He said the logical and conventional means of collecting such debt is to place a lien on the cattle.  This will prohibit the sanctioned owner from selling the cattle. It’s kind of like the IRS garnishing your paycheck, or the bank imposing a lien on your car.  When asked why the BLM hadn’t placed a lien on the cattle in question, they responded, “We hadn’t thought of that…” But they are considering it now.

Wow…

I won’t even go into the “Free Speech Zones” that were cordoned off by BLM for the express purpose and intent of containing the citizens who were exercising their right of grievance against the government in a peaceful protest.  Silly me.  I thought America was a “free speech zone”…

 





Federal Overreach-Did You Know?

5 02 2014

Forrest Knox is State Senator for the 14th District in Kansas.  He puts out a weekly newsletter to keep his constituants up to date on happenings at the Capital, just as many other Legislators do.  He is not my Senator but I do receive his letters, and I appreciated his last so much I asked his permission to include it here in its entirety.

 Federal Overreach – Did You Know?

February 2, 2014

 Did you know that SB 276 enacts the state sovereignty over non-migratory wildlife act?  The bill states that Kansas is successfully managing the prairie chicken and that this is none of the U.S. government’s business (my paraphrase).

Did you know that the 2nd Amendment protection act was passed last year protecting the sovereign right of Kansans to manufacture and possess firearms within Kansas without federal interference?

Did you know that the federal government is exerting its reach into more and more parts of our lives that are outside its constitutional function and that further legislation is being considered to limit the federal government when it comes to environmental issues, healthcare issues, etc.?

 Did you know that the U.S. Constitution clearly delineates the powers and function of the federal government and makes clear, in the 10th Amendment, that “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.”  The 9th Amendment clearly states that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Did you know that the Democratic Republic of Korea, North Korea, has a constitution which clearly delineates “genuine democratic rights and liberties” of its citizens; equal rights for all its citizens “irrespective of sex, race, occupation, length of residence, property status, education, party affiliation, political views, or religion?” Which defines the fact that the state’s sovereignty resides in its people; that the “organs of state power” are “elected on the principle of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot;” that these elected bodies have “close ties with their constituents and are accountable to them;” that the elected officials can be recalled “if the latter are not to be trusted?”  That “the State shall guarantee conditions for the free activity of democratic political parties and social organizations?”  That “citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, demonstration and association” and “freedom of religious beliefs?”

In the North Korean constitution “citizens are entitled to free medical care; freedom to reside in and travel to any place;” that “marriages and the family shall be protected by the State” which “pays great attention to consolidating the family, the basic unit of social life.”

Their constitution guarantees private property; an eight-hour workday; a hygienic work environment; prohibits child labor; includes a compulsory, free 11-year public education system including preschool; and provides for protection for the environment.

Did you know that recently 80 North Korean citizens were executed in an arena full of people, machine-gunned down, for offenses such as possessing Bibles?

Did you know that virtually all authoritarian governments on earth have such constitutions guaranteeing rights?

Did you know that a constitution and the laws of government are not worth the paper they’re written on unless they are enforced?  If the government will not obey its own laws, or must “regulate” the rights of citizens…?

Did you know that the U.S. Declaration of Independence states that, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

 

Forrest Knox

Kansas Senate,  District  14

Kinda gives you pause for a little cogitation, doesn’t it?





What Attracts Liberals to Islam?

23 07 2013

It was one of those “Eureka!” moments as I read an article about Ramadan and the United States Department of Defense holding an Iftar celebration, at the Pentagon no less.

Yes, the very Pentagon that was attacked on 9-11-01 from the outside is now hosting the very ideology which killed 189 people on the same site.  (I did a quick search to see how many Easter or Christmas dinners are held at the Pentagon.  My query netted “zero”, but if anyone knows of such, please inform me. I won’t be surprised if there was a projected Ramadan message on the outer wall of the Pentagon like this one lighting up the wall of a Virginia church. Dhimmi’s.)

This is incredulous in itself, not to mention the huge influx of new mosques being built across the country, and the ever increasing influence of Islam in our educational, finance, and legal institutions.  The number of mosques in the US is up 79% since 2000, to over 2,100 not counting Nation of Islam mosques (true Islam does not recognize NOI) and according to USA Today there are now nearly 7 million Muslims in the United States-vast majority of those, immigrants.  The Pentagon official in that article boasted that 30-40 of Pentagon DoD personnel are Muslim.  Check Mate.

The Leftists in America are smiling.

And this,… this is what has been so elusive for many of us for 12 years! What is the common attraction for the American Left (Liberals, Progressives, Marxists, Communists, Socialist, etc.) to Islam?  It seems that this highly oppressive and restrictive ideology which unites government and religion, oppresses women around the world, still harbors the institution of slavery, stones or canes women for adultery (and even prosecutes female victims of rape), hangs homosexuals, and abhors freedom of speech, and instigates wars around the world, would be the last ideology that would be embraced by the pluralistic, multicultural,  homosexuality propagating, anti-religious, feminist, war-protesting, free sex hook-up,  tolerance preaching, American Left!

So what is the attraction?!  I have it! In one word! Poverty…

Huh?  What is so attractive about poverty and what is the connection to Islam?

Ok, so that’s a straw man question, but you wanted to know anyway.  Last part first.

Think about it…When has an Islamic state ever been a prosperous economic force aside from petroleum, which was developed by the West.  Without Western petroleum interests the Middle East would still be shipping spices by camel caravan and killing the neighboring tribe.  (Well…they’re not still dependent on camels.)  Even during the “Golden Age” of Islam (700-1100 AD) it’s economy was based on its conquests; jizya taxes, plunder, slave trade, etc. . It actually produced very little wealth, only redistributed it.  Islam begets poverty.

Islam is a non-productive ideology.  Similar to Communism, there is little incentive to produce and excel, so the gap between the “haves and the have nots” widen and the middle-class disappears while the ruling elite prosper.  The reason that Islam is non-productive is because death is such a central point of the theology, and life is about getting there.

There is a creed that surfaces occasionally when studying the Islamic culture which is so shaped by the obligatory act of jihad: “We love death more than you love life.” It has been a part of Islam since its earliest doctrines were formulated during that period immediately following Muhammad’s death in 632 (AD).  I have said it before, and I’ll say it again. Islam is a great black beast of which the Muslim is the first victim.  Sharia, the legal system of Islam, squelches creativity and incentive for capital gain, punishing those who question the authority of the Koran, even to the point of executing the apostate (who turns away from Islam). Life is despised and the highest honor is to die in the service of Allah, taking the lives of Allah’s enemies.  Palestinian children are routinely indoctrinated to pursue death for honor.  Muhammad spawned the largest death cult in the world.

On the other hand, the Judeo-Christian ethos, which is rooted in the Hebrew Torah wherein Jehovah calls to Israel (Deuteronomy 30:19), “This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live“, holding fast to the Lord God, who is Life.

Golda Meir, 4th Israeli Prime Minister from 1969-1974 summed up the contrasting ideologies when she said, “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.”

So there you have the connection of poverty to Islam. Poverty is a manifestation of a spiritual condition.  No, poverty is not singular to Islamic nations. Poverty is found around the world.  But what is poverty but the result of displacing God?  Don’t confuse “the poor” with poverty. Poverty denotes hopelessness.  There are many poor who are not hopeless. Jesus Himself said there will always be poor people among us.  But hopelessness is the result of an individual, society, community spurning God (Jehovah, not Allah), and choosing to go their own way, which the Bible says “leads to death”.  Thus, the Biblical admonition to choose God, and “choose life”.

So then, addressing the attraction of poverty.  It’s very simple…  Control.

When a society is stricken with poverty, it is very easy to control.  Hopelessness begets desperation.  A desperate population will do whatever is necessary in order to obtain sustenance and order, even if that means giving up freedom. When a government, any government, Islamic or otherwise, sets itself at odds with Biblical admonitions, poverty will follow. Government debt spikes out of control and chaos follows.  Recently Spain and Greece were both prime examples of this in Europe, and one needs look no further than Detroit City to examine the effects here at home.

This is where the US Government is headed and there is no turning back.  Every month the Fed prints another $85 Billion in order to maintain status quo, while pumping our debt to nearly $17 Trillion.  It is expected to reach $20T by the end of 2013. I’m not an economist, but anyone can see the folly in the continuation of this lunacy.  The point right now is obviously to keep the stock market inflated in order to deceive the masses long enough to procure enough support of the population by getting as many as possible voluntarily dependent on the government for basic necessities and standard of living, before the bubble bursts.  Currently, almost half (48.5%) of Americans are receiving some form of government benefit while 46.4% will pay no federal income tax this year.  As Abraham Lincoln said, “There’s too many pigs for the tits!”

Left wing ideologies propagate this kind of economic disaster, just as sure as water runs downhill.  It’s a natural phenomena.  Margaret Thatcher, UK’s Prime Minister during the ’80’s quipped, “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”  Someone has to be able to produce something in order to maintain government voluntarily, else the government will take what it needs from someone, it’s enemies or it’s own citizens.  World history proves it over and over.

Biblical principals lead to sound government just as they do to prosperous citizenry; live within your means, be diligent at the task and long at the labor, be a good steward of your resources as well as your gains, live within the law, and voluntary benevolence.

But these principals lead to independent citizens. That does not fit within the parameters of an authoritarian mindset.

There is much Power in the Poverty business.





Death of a Nation

13 11 2012

Polarization

The United States  has, since it’s inception of a common government, hosted political views that weren’t always in unison.  The Founders were seldom in agreement about how and what type of government to establish, and the very fact that it took 6 years to ratify a Constitution following the 8 year War of Independence, is testimony to the process and debate between men who were independent thinkers.  While the Founders may have been polarized politically at times, they were mostly if not nearly unanimously in agreement that Mankind was beholden, and responsible, to a Creator God for his actions in this life.  They also understood the gravity of their moment in the history of Mankind and what it would mean to posterity.  They fully comprehended, as John Jay said, “The Americans are the first people whom Heaven has favored with an opportunity of deliberating upon and choosing the forms of government under which they should live.”  

Noah Webster wrote, “When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, just men who will rule in the fear of God. The preservation of government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.”  [Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337, �49.] (http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=80)

This was the regulating factor alleviating the political polarization of early America.  This concept is readily availed within the opening and closing paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence and in the numerous documents and letters forged by those that we call “The Founders“.

How to kill a Giant…

The United States of America has, without question, been the single most powerful Nation the world has ever seen.  No military force ever fielded could have successfully invaded and taken this country by armed conquest.  No philosophy or ideology conceived or contrived has been able to break this Union of States or the American Spirit, which has bound her people with one resolve.  The ability of her people to assimilate into the great American “melting pot”, each culture of origin of her immigrants brought a flavor of their homeland which served to enhance, but not overpower, the uniqueness of what the entire world has aspired to, and what we have known simply as “America”.

America is not an empire; the concept is not temporal but spiritual; its very essence of greatness has been borne by an idea which has become but a whisper for fear of it vanishing.  No nation, kingdom, or empire ever ascended to such heights of glory and power as the United States of America, and yet afforded or preserved her citizens such individual rights and liberties.  This is the beauty and singular ideal that has separated America from all other countries and empires and kingdoms of the world; yes even for all of human history!

Until now.

…Divide and Conquer

What has become of America? How have we become such a balkanized, polarized, divided population?  We are not even an “American people” any longer.  The great melting pot of assimilation has become a TV dinner, cold and segregated lest any segment of our society actually merge with another.  The push for “Multi-Culturalism” and “Pluralism” have resulted in the exact opposite of the promised outcome.  We are more racially divided, our immigrants do not seek to assimilate into American language or culture and pretty much demand that we allow them to retain a separate community, culture and language, and if we ask them to come join us we are labeled as racist, xenophobic, hateful bigots.

There was a time, in fact up until recently, that immigrants to this country raised their children here to assimilate into American Society, insisting they learn the language and culture, and become American.  I personally know one such family who came here from Southeast Asia, narrowly escaping the Communist “cleansing” (genocide), which swept unbridled through the region post US/Vietnamese involvement, with the shirts on their backs and lost many family members on the way out.   These friends speak their language of origin in the home and as far as I know stick to a traditional diet in the home. (It is awesome Asian food!) I once asked the father why the elders of the family have Lao names and all the children have American names.  His answer was profound. “We were born in Laos. We have Lao names. Our children were born in America; they are Americans. They have American names.”  (Not once did he utter “Asian-American”.)  The children, all equally bilingual, are productive and vivacious young citizens who are happy to be Americans, cognizant of the American ideal, fully assimilated, yet retain a uniquely Laotian influence, while working hard to provide for themselves.  My friends do not demand that they be given special recognition, special rights, or that the rest of America make provision for them.

Modern America is the only nation in the world that acquiesces to, and encourages such nonsense, and our governmental policies ensure that these divisions are kept in place and those lines of separation remain clear. Why?

The answer is very simple: a divided people are much easier to control than a united one.  It’s classic Saul Alinskey- Create a state of chaos by overloading the system.  Use the politics of personal destruction to embarrass your enemy and exploit their own human faults.

If politicians can keep us labeled as “African-Americans, Native Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-American, and now even sexual preference merits the designation “Gay-Americans”.  (I remember when just about everyone I knew were “gay” because we were happy about most things in life.) Now I am hearing the term “Muslim-American” so now we can be further divided by our religion.  I have noticed, however, that when the media, or politicians, use these pandering terms it is never to integrate any people group with another, but to differentiate between people groups.  This type of labeling does nothing to unite or integrate society, but has a divisive connotation and serves to further fracture our society.  It is no accident.

I have no problem with people celebrating their heritage; I like to experience “cultural diversity” as well as the next person.  But while all people are created equal, and should be treated as equal, not all ideas are. This is why “Pluralism” is a failure.

Pluralism assumes that all religions are equal and that each is as valuable as the next.  The fact is, all religions, ideologies, cultures, and political systems are not equal.  Such equity would naturally require “Moral Relativism”. Moral Relativism which does not contrast by judgement of good and evil, also doesn’t differentiate between Adolph Hitler and Mother Theresa.   Definitively, (if that is “morally relatively” possible!) there is no absolute truth, no right or wrong, and we should all tolerate, if not embrace, any behavior of others no matter how destructive, even when we find it objectionable or wrong.  Oh, wait…hmm…sounds familiar doesn’t it?

The Last Great Virtue

“Tolerance” and apathy have been called “the last great virtues of a dying society”(Aristotle).  By tolerating evil whether it be in the form of “religion”, ideology, or culture, America has allowed it’s greatest legitimate virtue of a free and open society, to become the very avenue by which the enemy has gained access.  The cancers of tolerance and apathy have metastasized.

The very laws of nature demand and demonstrate truth.  An acorn always becomes an oak tree; it can’t decide it is going to be different than all the other acorns, and grow into a maple tree.  A stalk of wheat cannot bear a head of rice.  A kangaroo cannot eat a dingo, and a dingo cannot nest in a tree.  A bird cannot breathe water, and water always seeks its own level.  Failure of a wildebeest to exercise caution at the watering hole can result in being eaten by crocodile or lion.  Such are the laws of nature, set in place by nature’s God.

The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God have been a template for mankind since the beginning.  Unyielding and absolute truth tempered by the merciful character of God as set forth in the Bible, set the parameters for a civil and just human government, and when these boundaries are breached, chaos follows.  Thomas Jefferson referred to this template in The Declaration of Independence, and men like John Locke and William Blackstone, both scholars in law and Scripture, influenced the thinking of America’s founders, so much so, that the type of government created was so unique that it has been referred to as “The American Experiment” for nigh onto 250 years now.

This experiment commands the vigilance of an attentive people, so that “government of the People, by the People, and for the People, shall not perish from the Earth”.  That was the nature of the experiment, and a failure by the People to attend to those requirements has resulted in what seems to be impending doom.  When Benjamin Franklin was asked by a citizen just after the Constitution was ratified, “Well Doctor, what have we got; a Republic or a Monarchy?”  “A Republic,” answered Franklin, “If you can keep it.”

George Washington said, “Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness.”  He also warned against government expansion, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force.  Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Or in more contemporary language, “government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take everything you have.”

We seem to have lost our Republic, Mr. Franklin.





Ever Get Lectured by a Teenager!??!

7 10 2012

Yes, there is hope for the Future of America!





What Does Marxism Look Like? Retired Green Beret Lt. General knows

23 03 2012

In this video entitled “Marxism in America” General Jerry Boykin discusses his background and training in understanding Marxist insurgencies and how current government actions parallel Marxist tactics.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,701 other followers

%d bloggers like this: