If someone were to ask me this 3 years ago, I would have said, "It is not a sin... show me in scripture!" I would have done what most do, and branded that person a legalist. No longer...
1. A crucial and unbiblical assumption is made BEFORE I send my child to the pagan school of humanism. It is assumed that scientific materialism is NOT a religion. Truth: ALL EDUCATION STEMS FROM A FAITH BELIEF SYSTEM. Either you will educate your child from a biblical worldview, or an unbiblical worldview. Text: Colossians
2. Would you send your child to a Mormon School, a Buddist School? Then why would you consider public school something less than a cult school? It is because you assume that public school is somehow religiously neutral. It is not. The faith of the "system" is atheistic naturalism. It is anti supernatural, and presents science, social studies, math, etc. as if God was irrelevent. THAT is a faith system. It's religious worldview is humanism (man is the ultimate decider of right / wrong).
Since I would love to say more, but someone said it already, I have copied and pasted an article from American Vision:
A Spectre is Haunting America. Don't Let itby Dr. Richard A. Jones11/12/08
Now that what some might call the “unthinkable” has actually happened, it’s certain that a vital remnant in the Church will wake up and realize that, “It’s time to start paying attention.” Had McCain won, the Christian Right likely would have given another overconfident sigh of relief, hoping that the other side would somehow not be able to advance its anti-Christian offensive in 2012. (It would have advanced anyway.) Either way, it’s folly to forget that the difference between the American Dream-killing, wealth-redistributing leftist, Obama, and the RINO McCain is negligible. A tip-off that both are operative socialists was made clear last primary season when mainstream media palmed off these two inexplicable “choices” onto us. Values voters never had a say. But that’s all spilled milk. It’s time to explore how it was that what was once essentially a Christian-leaning, U.S. voting populace was so easily set up for passive acceptance of a clear-cut socialist candidate in each party. Don’t be surprised by the major cause.
Dedication to Marxism by East Coast political, academic and media types goes back to the days of FDR and even before. But, it neared max toxicity in the 1960s with Viet Nam. By 1989 and 1990, Marxist devotion in the U.S. had not weakened in the least even though the Cold War had ended and the USSR folded. That’s because, as we’ve argued here, true socialism at its core is an intense, life-dedicated hatred of God and the Christian family. And hatred of God is ever-present. This passion is what keeps the fires of nihilism and Marxism burning on campuses nationwide (and eventually in the public schools) even though it waned (for a season) in the Soviet Motherland. Viet Nam era zealots like Bill Ayers never stopped pushing radicalism at ever-lower grade levels in the schools. So it’s no surprise that mind-programmed young voters (and plenty of church goers, per Barna polling) have slowly fallen for Washington’s “equality, compassion (and vote-buying) plan;” i.e., socialism. How did this catastrophe come to pass with nary a whimper?
Many think that a deceived Protestant Church in America was the key. It abetted the slippery slope to socialism via a century-long bad habit of effeminate pietism and its cave-in to an “it’s just about over,” irrelevance-guaranteeing, dispensationalism. (Both of which developed mainly because due to loss of the best U.S. men during the cynically contrived Civil War.) Once the shroud of pessimistic end-times resignation had smothered what de Tocqueville experienced as “pulpits aflame,” the soft undermining effect of passive church irrelevance in a fast-changing society was assured. By election time 2008, scores of feminized, liberal-leaning pulpits had been taken in by the Left’s vague slogan of “change;” a change that a “truly loving God” supposedly desires.
As 1960’s radicals like Ayers and company wormed their way into the teacher colleges, the plan was that children…especially Dr. Benjamin Spock’s permissively trained and spoiled victims…would be progressively dumbed down to accept humanistic, anti-Christian socialism. The zeitgeist of the age was one of busy Baby Boomer parents marching resolutely to the beat of “me, mine and materialism.” While both parents took two salaries in order to pay their taxes and feed a consumption mentality, the planners knew that schools would be the perfect holding tank by day for “open minded” (read “gullible”) children who were getting, if any, only minimal moral guidance at home. What was being surreptitiously taught in the mega-compliant government schools was less critical to parents than the convenience of the handy babysitting. A passive Church, meanwhile, yawned. Only Rev. Rousas J. Rushdoony, virtually alone through the 1970s and 1980s, warned about the grave threat on the near horizon should government-controlled education be allowed to prevail. Has it prevailed? Having to ask the question gives the answer.
It was during this pivotal and still feasible-for-action time frame that others besides Rushdoony should have perked up and given the alert. Pro-active response conditions were still favorable. Post-Viet Nam, as socialist fruit began growing apace in the schools, pastors and young parents alive in the 1980s and 1990s (who would have been born at a time when the Cold War’s lessons about communism’s threat were still vivid) should have paid attention. And communism, as is well known, is merely the freedom-hating socialism of Obama and McCain worked out to its inevitable conclusion. With the facts so clearly visible, why didn’t those Boomer parents and their pastors figure it out?
It wasn’t just Dr. Spock. It wasn’t just end-times misinterpretations that led to irrelevance within church leadership. Post-Viet Nam pastors had other concerns stopping them from storming pulpits and with rhetorical swords drawn, proclaiming; “Parents: Remove God’s children from the humanist schools.” With Christianity under attack on all fronts, especially media, academia, and the entertainment sectors, humanistically-deceived moderns began leaving church. With tithing and giving down, pastors had worries other than the pesky socialism threat. They caved in to financial “reality,” very often using the wholly unjustified “salt and light in the schools” pretext. Instead of “taking a chance on God” and declaring truth, they ignored the get-them-out warning. They feared backlash from parents and public school teachers among the congregants. It was and is that simple.
But there’s plenty of blame to go around. All of the best known national power ministries on radio and TV happily followed suit. They too feared jeopardizing their donations and product-sales base. True, these national voices gave occasional, random attention to the school problem, but were quick to say, as a covering mantra, that the two alternatives, home education and private schools “are not for everyone.” Result: Only a few previously pro-materialism-leaning parents were sufficiently aroused to change gears, even for their own children. From pew to pulpit to the big production ministries, the ball was dropped, and the youth contingent response in the 2008 election reflects this failure. Millions of younger voters from churched homes (and often joined by their parents) had, in fact, succumbed to school socialism-based, pro-permissive, pro-class envy, pro-homosexual, pro-green, anti-defense and anti-capitalism deception. Twenty-first-century parents and leaders must wake up. “If you forebear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain…. If you say, behold, we knew it not, does not he that ponders the heart consider it? And he that keeps the soul, does he not know it? And shall he not render to every man according to his works” (Proverbs 24:10-11).
“Children of the State” in World Magazine for November 1, 2008, unintentionally revealed the degree of American reluctance to grasp 40 years of brutal truth…years at least somewhat reminiscent of 1930s Germany. It stated: “If you want a classic example of how fast a whole culture can be turned on a dime, redirected by 180 degrees, try this: Just when it seemed, through the 1980s, 1990s, and even well into the past decade, that a socialist mindset had been successfully put down in the United States, back it comes- with a vengeance.” No! 2008 was not a “here it comes back,” inexplicable surprise. Exactly the opposite! Since the 1970s, youth socialism-indoctrination has been like a freight train coming. And in 2008 it arrived-with a vengeance, right on schedule and just as planned. If not addressed now, 2010 will be worse. Today’s younger voters are politically illiterate, socialist-leaning, damaged goods and much of this because of a church-wide, millstone-risking refusal to protect Christ’s “little ones” (Matt. 18:6). “For the leaders of this people cause them to err, and they that are led of them are destroyed”(Isa. 9:16).
Wiser heads in the Church; in some rare pockets of government, and we here at American Vision, know that this trend to socialism and, with it, the soon loss of our freedoms, must end. That pitiable throng of those taken in by this fairy tale must decline. Those adults-to-be of tomorrow (and already-adults of today) who would help lead us out of the trap must increase. American Vision’s specialty in the culture wars has always been to supply God-honoring materials for Christians who want to enhance their Kingdom-advancing skills. But AV’s offerings will fall increasingly on deaf ears if the adult readers of tomorrow continue “learning” in the other side’s youth training camps. Why not tell your pastor to think over the challenge? Tell him that an obedience-respecting God will honor his leadership. This is a transformational hour in history and the hour is late. As Cliff May wrote last week in National Review; “The Democrats, i.e., the Left, now have the White House, control of both houses of Congress, a majority of governors’ mansions, a majority of state legislatures, the entertainment media, the elite news media, the unions, the educational establishment, the lion’s share of the philanthropic community, and increasing power over the courts.” ACORN is on its way to OAK status. Christians need to grow trees of influence of their own, their own forests, and fast. Failure to act now guarantees that things will all only get worse, and not just in the political realm but in all of them. We ask you to join us by removing your own children and encouraging others to do the same. Set January, 2009 as your target date. We don’t have forever. Thank you.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The Height of Hypocrisy
This is a good example of where we are at today... This is put out by Associated Press, November 5, 2008 - 2 days after the election).
Exit polls on Tuesday revealed dramatic demographic gaps in the homosexual-marriage vote. While about six in 10 voters under 30 opposed the ban, about the same proportion of those 65 and older supported it. There were sharp racial discrepancies as well. Even as black voters overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama -- a homosexual-rights supporter -- in the presidential race, about seven in 10 of them voted against same-sex marriage, compared with about half of white voters.
Hello... So, because I am black I vote for Barack EVEN THOUGH I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THE ISSUES??? What do we call that?
Again, humanism leads to insanity...
See here for article: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=312706
Exit polls on Tuesday revealed dramatic demographic gaps in the homosexual-marriage vote. While about six in 10 voters under 30 opposed the ban, about the same proportion of those 65 and older supported it. There were sharp racial discrepancies as well. Even as black voters overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama -- a homosexual-rights supporter -- in the presidential race, about seven in 10 of them voted against same-sex marriage, compared with about half of white voters.
Hello... So, because I am black I vote for Barack EVEN THOUGH I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THE ISSUES??? What do we call that?
Again, humanism leads to insanity...
See here for article: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=312706
College?
Here are some informative links
http://www.collegeplus.org/
http://www.ameprogram.com/
http://www.biblicalconcourse.com/
http://www.collegeplus.org/
http://www.ameprogram.com/
http://www.biblicalconcourse.com/
Senate Bill 08-200
I don't know what surprises me more: Homosexuals getting away with banning the bible in Colorado and outlawing boys / girls bathrooms, or Christians NOT believing that it was actually happening.
I talked to a precious loved one. I told her about Colorado's recent ban on the bible. She merely said, "No... I don't believe that... they can't do that..." It was similar to me cocking my head like a dog the first time I tried to comprehend partial birth abortion.
It is insanity to call the murder of a child "legal abortion" as long as the head is still in the birth canal when you kill the baby. If you move the baby 1 inch out of the birth canal, the doctor goes to jail as a murderer. It is insanity to make laws which allow boys to enter into girls restrooms. Humanism leads to insanity.
The specific part of this bill in qustion (SECTION 4: 24-34-601: Discrimination in places of public accommodation). It can be found on pages 7-8 at the following link. http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2008A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/BD7A295EB6F4460E872573F5005D0148?Open&file=200_01.pdf
Some will say that this bill does no such thing. The fallacy here is that quite honestly, he who defines the terms of the argument wins. When you take this bill to court, it will depend upon the interpreters of this bill (judges). If you have a liberal homosexual judge reading this bill, what definitions do you think that he will give to this bill?
I talked to a precious loved one. I told her about Colorado's recent ban on the bible. She merely said, "No... I don't believe that... they can't do that..." It was similar to me cocking my head like a dog the first time I tried to comprehend partial birth abortion.
It is insanity to call the murder of a child "legal abortion" as long as the head is still in the birth canal when you kill the baby. If you move the baby 1 inch out of the birth canal, the doctor goes to jail as a murderer. It is insanity to make laws which allow boys to enter into girls restrooms. Humanism leads to insanity.
The specific part of this bill in qustion (SECTION 4: 24-34-601: Discrimination in places of public accommodation). It can be found on pages 7-8 at the following link. http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2008A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/BD7A295EB6F4460E872573F5005D0148?Open&file=200_01.pdf
Some will say that this bill does no such thing. The fallacy here is that quite honestly, he who defines the terms of the argument wins. When you take this bill to court, it will depend upon the interpreters of this bill (judges). If you have a liberal homosexual judge reading this bill, what definitions do you think that he will give to this bill?
Seceding from the union? Conservatives and Libertarians
I copied this off a blogger's comments. He is an example of what the libertarians will not get, and what the Christians will not speak up about.
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible.
It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward.
Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The BibleIt is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else.
The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..." I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
See here for Iowa's. http://www2.legis.state.ia.us/GA/76GA/Legislation/HJR/00000/HJR00007/
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to.
The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible.
It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward.
Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The BibleIt is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else.
The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..." I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
See here for Iowa's. http://www2.legis.state.ia.us/GA/76GA/Legislation/HJR/00000/HJR00007/
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to.
The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Obama, Socialism, Public School, and Marxism
The fact that Obama will not admit that his political strategy is socialistic is telling. Why is Barak afraid to admit that redistribution of the wealth is the economics of Marxism. That socialism is the economics of communism is plane to see for anyone who can google "Communist Manifesto." Surprisingly, Obama will not admit this is his idea of a good government.
More surprising is the American lack of understanding. I wonder if Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh are getting frustrated yet. They have not asked for my input... I do not think they will either. But in my humble opinion, they ought to be nailing the worldview and education issue.
The contemporary worldview is humanism. It is ingrained into the heads of all public school students. The fruit of humanism is socialism. All the conservatives who I love to listen to should be hitting this one daily! The crises is one of worldview. Obama is consistently Marxist in his ideology. I do not know why he is afraid to admit the obvious. What is wrong with being Marxist? Most university students and professors do not even seem to mind admitting it anymore.
The Humanist worldview:
This worldview judges people. Humanists hate truth. They say, "Capitalists are selfish... If you do not want the government to take your wealth and give it away, then you are bad, bad, selfish." They judge people, and hate those who will not agree with their humanism. The homosexual humanist hates the Christian, and judges him most severely. He hates anyone who will not affirm HIS beliefs. His thinking is irrational. Humanism is irrational.
But Christians, and conservatives still send their children to public schools. They continue to produce irrational children taught to think irrational thoughts like: redistributing the wealth is good... it cares about people... and anyone who disagrees must be a judgmental, selfish person.
Glenn, Shawn, Rush, and Christians especially... if you want to hit the target, expose the source. Public Schools teach humanism. The public school is involved in faith based education... the faith of relativism, humanism, socialism, atheism. All education is under girded by presuppositions. Public / Government schools presuppose that God is irrelevant. Yesterday's students are today's liberals. They have bought the lie that you can have education void of political biases. All education has a bias. All facts will be viewed from some set of predetermined lenses.
In short, public schools teach facts about the world (science, economics, sociology, etc) and tell students that they can form their own definitions, propositions, and arguments about these facts. THIS IS A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. To teach students that God is irrelevant in the interpretation of facts concerning life IS a religion. Whether you call this religion atheism, socialism, agnosticism, materialism, etc., they all are a result of a humanism worldview. Humanism is, "Man determines what is right." The opposite is Theism which says, "God determines what is right."
Christians should have consulted the Bible (Deuteronomy 6.4-10) and never sent their children to the public schools of humanism. Conservatives should recognize (as the homosexuals do) that the source to changing worldviews is teaching the children...
For further explanation on the absolute bankruptcy of socialistic economic policy, see Gina Cobb here:
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2008/10/the-horrors-of.html
More surprising is the American lack of understanding. I wonder if Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh are getting frustrated yet. They have not asked for my input... I do not think they will either. But in my humble opinion, they ought to be nailing the worldview and education issue.
The contemporary worldview is humanism. It is ingrained into the heads of all public school students. The fruit of humanism is socialism. All the conservatives who I love to listen to should be hitting this one daily! The crises is one of worldview. Obama is consistently Marxist in his ideology. I do not know why he is afraid to admit the obvious. What is wrong with being Marxist? Most university students and professors do not even seem to mind admitting it anymore.
The Humanist worldview:
- Short-term (decisions are pragmatic, or utilitarian: "What works for right now" determines what is right)
- Individual (what is right is determined by each individual)
- Consumer (each individual fights for personal rights)
This worldview judges people. Humanists hate truth. They say, "Capitalists are selfish... If you do not want the government to take your wealth and give it away, then you are bad, bad, selfish." They judge people, and hate those who will not agree with their humanism. The homosexual humanist hates the Christian, and judges him most severely. He hates anyone who will not affirm HIS beliefs. His thinking is irrational. Humanism is irrational.
But Christians, and conservatives still send their children to public schools. They continue to produce irrational children taught to think irrational thoughts like: redistributing the wealth is good... it cares about people... and anyone who disagrees must be a judgmental, selfish person.
Glenn, Shawn, Rush, and Christians especially... if you want to hit the target, expose the source. Public Schools teach humanism. The public school is involved in faith based education... the faith of relativism, humanism, socialism, atheism. All education is under girded by presuppositions. Public / Government schools presuppose that God is irrelevant. Yesterday's students are today's liberals. They have bought the lie that you can have education void of political biases. All education has a bias. All facts will be viewed from some set of predetermined lenses.
In short, public schools teach facts about the world (science, economics, sociology, etc) and tell students that they can form their own definitions, propositions, and arguments about these facts. THIS IS A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. To teach students that God is irrelevant in the interpretation of facts concerning life IS a religion. Whether you call this religion atheism, socialism, agnosticism, materialism, etc., they all are a result of a humanism worldview. Humanism is, "Man determines what is right." The opposite is Theism which says, "God determines what is right."
Christians should have consulted the Bible (Deuteronomy 6.4-10) and never sent their children to the public schools of humanism. Conservatives should recognize (as the homosexuals do) that the source to changing worldviews is teaching the children...
For further explanation on the absolute bankruptcy of socialistic economic policy, see Gina Cobb here:
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2008/10/the-horrors-of.html
Conservatives, Libertarians, and Seceding From the Union
I copied this off a blogger's comments. He is an example of what the libertarians will not get, and what the Christians will not speak up about.
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible. It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward. Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The Bible
It is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else. This sounds good, but has no foundation. The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..."
I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us See Iowa's at bottom.
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to. The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible. It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward. Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The Bible
It is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else. This sounds good, but has no foundation. The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..."
I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us See Iowa's at bottom.
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to. The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)