Author Archives: roybeaird

AMERICA’S ROOTS and REMEMBRANCE…


BLOG POST 2 - Duty of Nations

I have had people fiercely attack me because I boldly declare and adamantly affirm that America was founded on Christian principles and our founders valued God’s influence on our government and lives.  Believe what you will, but I suggest it is difficult to ignore the writings readily available if one will examine the volumes written about and by them.  I cannot imagine America winning her independence in the Revolutionary War had it not be for the reliance upon and providence of God as He smiled favorably on this ideal of a Free Republic.

A Bible passage that was key in my conversion to Christianity is Proverbs 3:5-6 and in that passage I see the directive and reminder that it is incumbent on all of us individually and collectively to “acknowledge” God in all that we are, say, and do.  This is true for nations as well and I am reminded of the proclamation of 1 Samuel 2:30 that “Those who honor Me [God] I will honor, and those who despise Me [God] will be lightly esteemed.”  That was a proclamation, encouragement and warning not to religious leaders but the civil authorities.  I had someone ask me, “Do you think God is interested in politics?”  I thought about that for a moment and said, “God is not interested in politics as we are but is interested in the hearts of men and thereby the course or path of a nation.  So, in that light, YES God is interested in politics.  However, I am convinced God will not interfere and will allow man to choose their course or path.” 

I am convinced as many writers and quotations from the time period of our nation’s inception that they understood a principle we may have forgotten or appear to be forgetting that whenever we stop acknowledging Him as individuals or nations we invite grave consequences.  I have often quoted or referred to a quote by George Washington, “It is the duty of nations to acknowledge the providence of the Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor.”  That is so foreign to the mindset and mentality of today’s political world, were that said today the speaker would be ridiculed and scorned derisively and attacked incessantly.  Yet, the father of our nation and our first president unashamedly made that declaration not because he thought that is what people wanted to hear but what he believed.  That declaration parallels Proverbs 3:5-6 magnificently giving us four dimensions of duty by this or any nation.  We are to ‘acknowledge’ God, ‘obey’ His will, exhibit ‘gratitude’ for His help, and ‘seek’ His guidance and protection.  The more I discover about the mindset of our founding fathers them more I appreciate what they accomplished and become more determined than ever to fight to protect our inalienable rights against governmental usurpation.

America’s second president, John Adams was in wholehearted agreement and declared, “The safety and prosperity of nations ultimately and essentially depend on the protection and the blessing of Almighty God and the national acknowledgment of this truth is…an indispensable duty which people owe to Him.”  Even a man whose faith is sometimes called into question, Thomas Jefferson expressed the same sentiment and belief.  Then in the middle of the 19th century, President Abraham Lincoln uttered a warning that America was possibly or definitely drifting from those founding principles and feared that we were beginning to ‘forget’ God.  He called it the ‘duty of nations’ to recognize the truth of Scripture and insisted that this is proven in history and warned that the nation was exhibiting signs of ‘forgetting’ God’s hand on the nation and that people and government was becoming too self-sufficient and no longer relying on God’s guidance, provision, and protection.  President Lincoln issued a call for a time of ‘public humiliation, fasting, and prayer so that the nation would once again REMEMBER THE LORD.”

Our nation no longer, at the national level, acknowledges God.  Oh, politicians will say, “God bless America” but an acknowledgment of God on a national level is clearly not part of the makeup of our federal government.  The opposite is a more likely reality in today’s political climate and operation.  The assault on the Pledge of Allegiance where we declare that we are one nation UNDER GOD is evidence of our forgetting and refusal to acknowledge Him.  The court mandates that nativity scenes no longer stand on public property and the move to censor the declaration of “Merry Christmas”, the rejection of prayer in schools, at athletic events, and school sponsored activities and even political gatherings, although not universally practiced is a sign of our rejection of the idea that we are to ‘acknowledge’ God.  The evidence is mounting that America is rapidly becoming a nation that has rejected God rather than a nation that acknowledges Him as was the desire and plea of our founding fathers and many subsequent generations.  The PC Police have become so present and powerful that some universities are banning the use of the term ‘man’ because it is somehow incorrect.  Where will it end?  Will it end in our complete destruction?  A QUESTION WE SHOULD ALL BE ASKING…

This president, Barack Obama, boldly declared that “America is no longer a Christian nation” and I hope he is wrong but if we continue on the current path his assertion will be both prophetic and factual.  I believe that it is in our failure to properly and truly acknowledge God that many of the problems we now face as a nation are the outgrowth of the seeds of destruction sown in the attitude of rejection. May God help us prevent the further erosion of our values and moral moorings by taking steps to reject those politicians who reject God’s hand of providence and His guiding principles!

God bless you and God bless America is my prayer and desire!

 

RECOMMENDED LISTENING:  I would encourage everyone to tune into Broadcast Prayer Network with my friend Dale Gentry at http://www.bpnradio.com a 24/7/365 internet radio station purposed to call the nation and the world to prayer as well as inform.  I have a daily short spot at 11:55 AM CST and then a weekly boadcast each Tuesday at 1 PM & 7 PM CST.  God bless you and God bless America!

 

I CONFESS I USED THIS “N” WORD…


BLOG POST 1 - N WORD

Caution!  Before you break out the rope to lynch me hear me out on using this “N” word.  I am not talking about the racial epithet but another “N” word that is not only beneficial but necessary for progress and development personally and nationally.  It surfaces in accusations by political parties but never seems to be acted on in Washington, except when it comes to our individual rights, freedoms and liberties then it is demonstrated even when it is not spoken.  We need to reinstitute the use of the “N” Word – NO!  That’s right the “N” Word I am speaking of is the two-letter word N-O! 

It is high time that WE THE PEOPLE of these United States of America say ‘NO’ to corrupt politics and cronyism in Washington.  It is high time that WE THE PEOPLE relearn the word ‘NO’ and apply it regarding the incessant assault on the Constitution and our inalienable rights.  It is high time that WE THE PEOPLE use and act on the word ‘NO’ regarding the many intrusive policies and unsustainable spending by the federal government.  It is high time that WE THE PEOPLE restore the word ‘NO’ to our vocabularies when it comes to the erasing of our borders, the diminishing of our military, and the weakening of our national security.  Yes, the “N” Word ‘NO’ needs to be reinstituted for the preservation of the Republic.  Politicians seem to know the word only when it applies to our calls for them to act constitutionally, reduce spending and the size of the federal bureaucracy.  In those cases, they use the word frequently and repeatedly.

BLOG POST 1 - Party of NO

The Democrats have accused the Republicans of being the party of that nasty “N” Word ‘NO’ and I wish they were on many fronts.  As a parent, I had to learn and apply the word in raising my children.  A significant problem I have observed in our society is that too many parents eschew their responsibility to use that dastardly “N” Word ‘NO’ with their children.  I had one parent come to me lamenting that his child was totally incorrigible. When I addressed the use of that totally unacceptable “N” Word ‘NO’, he said, “But if I do she won’t like me.”  WHAT?  Parenting is not a popularity contest it is a responsibility to “train the child in the way he/she should go” in order to help them develop into responsible and productive citizens in society.  It is to teach them a ‘work ethic’ and to ‘respect’ the rights of others.  It is to help them grasp and develop the ability to ‘function’ in a diverse society.  It is not about being their BFF it is about being their mentor and guide through the developmental years of their life.  Likewise, it is the responsibility of elected officials to stand by the constitution even if it results in losing the next election. It is about responsibility, not popularity. 

If the federal government enacts a law that violates the constitution and moral reason using that “N” Word ‘NO’ is apropos and necessary.  If we cannot get their attention with our letters, phone calls, texts, and/or emails then we must get their attention at the ballot box.  I still believe that WE THE PEOPLE can regain control of our government if we band together regardless of Party affiliation and send those home who fail to stand by the Constitution.  However, there are many in today’s society who, like the spoiled brat child that never hears the “N” Word ‘NO’ want the freebies and handouts from Big Brother and are willing to sell their freedom and liberty for the manna from Uncle Sam.  Politicians understand the game and learned long ago they could buy or bribe the voting public with their promises which are often unrealistic and certainly unaffordable. When those, such as myself, protest we are tagged with every derogatory label imaginable and called haters, bigots, racist, and phobic insensitive and disgusting examples of human refuse.  The Bible speaks in a very germane way to this, “Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.” [Proverbs 13:24 NIV].  Any politician that cannot say and act on the “N” word ‘NO’ to protect the constitution does not love the constitution or respect the American people!

BLOG POST 1 - No

I say NO to trampling on our constitutional liberties and rights.  I say NO to the increase in size and scope of the federal government.  I say NO to increased spending.  I say NO to allowing Amnesty to Illegals and an open border.  I say NO to the packing of the Supreme Court with liberal activist jurists who will rubber stamp the agenda of those who want to “totally transform” America into something other than our founding principles.  I say NO to the revisionist history being taught in our public schools primary and secondary.  I say NO to the refusal of this administration to identify our true enemies and the ceding of our sovereignty to the United Nations.  Yes, I can, will, and do use the “N” Word ‘NO’ and not only say it but will follow through by doing what must be done to see its intent is realized.

November is not only important for the preservation, restoration and continuation of the Republic it is critical.  If we allow four more years of the agenda of Barack Obama and the leftist we may not and probably will not have an America to be concerned about in 2020.  We do not have four more years to get this right, we have now!

God bless you and God bless America!

 

A VIEW OF AMERICA FROM THE OUTSIDE…


AMERICA FROM THE OUTSIDE 1

Sometimes we are so close to the forest we cannot see the trees in life and that is true in politics as well.  In the fledgling state of the nation, I believe that the vast majority of people recognized what they had been given and understood how morality, spirituality, and integrity related to stability in government.  As I consider the conditions and attitudes in the new nation I often turn to what those ‘outside’ saw and said.  It is one thing to read the writings of the founding fathers and those living in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s and while that is tremendously revealing it is even more revealing when I read what those ‘standing outside the fire’ saw.

One example, and possibly one of the best examples, is the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville in his work “Democracy in America” published in 1831.  He spent approximately 8 months traveling this fledgling nation and interviewing people in power, pulpits, pews, and the man on the streets.  He was so moved by what he saw, he wrote this work describing what he witnessed and what he believed would be required for this new nation to not only survive but thrive.  His evaluation is powerful and should be required reading for everyone aspiring to elective office in this nation and for everyone participating at the ballot box.  I want to give you a long quote from de Tocqueville in hopes it will alert, inform, and inspire you as we continue in the 2016 Electoral Process which will largely determine America’s future and fate.

“Upon my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention: and the longer I stayed there the more did I perceive the great political consequences resulting from this state of things, to which I was unaccustomed.  In France, I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom pursuing courses diametrically opposed to each other, but in America, I found that they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. 

…they brought with them into the New World a form of Christianity which I cannot better describe than by styling it in a democratic and republican religion.  This sect contributed powerfully to the establishment of a democracy and a republic, and from the earliest settlement of the emigrant’s politics and religion contracted an alliance which has never been resolved. 

…there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America; and there can be no greater proof of its utility, and its conformity to human nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth. 

Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must nevertheless be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of free institutions…I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions.  This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation, and to every rank of society. 

The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.”

That is an incredibly powerful observation from someone with no skin in the game, no ax to grind, and no agenda to advance.  Today, the idea is pervasive that religion and government are like oil and water and should never be remotely connected.  That is totally foreign to the views of our founders and the views de Tocqueville and others observed in our infancy.  I had a liberal attempt to quote the Bible as a justification for his rejection of the influence of religion on government saying, “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” (1 Corinthians 13:11).  I was stunned at the amazing ignorance and arrogance of that assertion as a justification for banning religion and the Bible from all matters political or in government.  What a declaration and example of an “attitude of superiority” that this man would suggest, intentionally or unintentionally, that our founding fathers were “intellectual and/or emotional children” and that he and the liberal, progressive, and socialist were the mature persons and that America had now grown up and should put away the foolishness of the very principles of our founding.

We have a history that, unmistakably entwines faith and government.  The moral moorings learned through the Bible’s tenets and our relationship with our Creator are essential to our survival as a republic.  When a nation drifts into lasciviousness and every man becomes a law unto himself, morally, socially, economically, and politically ANARCHY is the result and from ANARCHY comes TYRANNY.  That, I fear, is the clear path this nation is taking and if we do America will cease to exist as a Free Constitutional Republic.  We must not fail to protect this nation against those who would ‘fundamentally transform’ her into something other than that which she was founded to be and has been for over 200 years.

God bless you and God bless America!

 

DREAMING THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM


BLOG POST 2 - iMPOSSIBLE dREAM

The song “The Impossible Dream” was composed by Mitch Leigh, with the lyrics written by Joe Darion and was the most popular song from the 1965 Broadway musical “Man of La Mancha”.  It was later recorded by Frank Sinatra, Andy Williams, Elvis Presley, and Luther Vandross to name a few.  The lyrics are:

“To dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatable foe, to bear with unbearable sorrow, to run where the brave dare to go.  To right the unrightable wrong, to love pure and chaste from afar, to try when your arms are too weary, to reach the unreachable star.  This is my quest to follow that star – no matter how hopeless no matter how far.  To fight for the right without question or pause, to be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause.  And I know if I’ll only be true to this glorious quest that my heart will be peaceful and calm when I’m laid to rest.  And the world will be better for this, that one man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage.  To reach the unreachable stars.”

Those lyrics are nothing short of amazing and inspire me every time I read or hear them.  In many ways, that is exactly what the colonist and our founding fathers faced when declaring America’s Independence in 1776.  The DREAM of FREEDOM, for many, seemed an IMPOSSIBLE DREAM and a STAR TOO FAR.  Yet, they had a dream in their hearts of a nation where there could be true freedom in a constitutional republic that recognized that all men were created equal and held inalienable rights that should and could never be stripped from them.  They dreamed of a system of government in which men were free to pursue their dreams, risk their all, soar to the heights of accomplishment and enjoy the bounty of their success WITHOUT the interference or suffocating overregulation of the federal government.  In the eyes and mind of the world that was THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM but they dared to dream and made an unshakable commitment to pursue that dream which became a reality and gave us the United States of America the Free Constitutional Republic.

Today, there are sinister forces at work to reduce that dream to ashes and ‘fundamentally transform’ America into something completely other than that nation which embodies and embraces THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM of our Founding Fathers and the Colonist of America in 1776.  In past decades the erosion of our freedoms and the reshaping of our Constitutional Republic was slow but in the past decade, the slow wearing away has become more akin to a bulldozer razing everything we stand for and demolishing our Republic.  Not all who vote Democrat want the destruction of the Republic but by continuing to elect uber-liberal politicians who have an agenda of ‘fundamental transformation’ that is anti-constitutionalism and limited government they are complicit in the collapse.  I have had some, when confronted with that thought, become incredibly angry.  They first directed their anger at me and all who embrace the views I hold of constitutional conservatism and then as the light came on they became bitterly angry at the deception.  Yet, some still vote Democrat and today there are Republicans who are insisting, “Hillary won’t be that bad” as a justification for allowing her to become the 45 President of the United States of America.  I challenge you to examine her history and the views of the Establishment of the Democrat Party and I believe if you do that openly and honestly you will change your mind about Hillary.  I truly believe that she will, through misguided ignorance or malicious intent, destroy the remaining shreds of our Constitutional Republic and wage full-scale war on the Constitution and our Rights, Liberties, and Freedoms.  CONTROL is the objective and aWORLD GOVERNMENT their destination.  We allow it at our own peril.

I ask only that you carefully and earnestly examine the facts, consider the possibilities and pray, pray, pray for America.  If you do so, then the decision you make will be one not based solely on emotion or preference but with a clear view of the future or failure of America.

God bless you and God bless America is my desire and prayer!

DREAMING THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM…


BLOG POST 2 - iMPOSSIBLE dREAM

The song “The Impossible Dream” was composed by Mitch Leigh, with the lyrics written by Joe Darion and was the most popular song from the 1965 Broadway musical “Man of La Mancha”.  It was later recorded by Frank Sinatra, Andy Williams, Elvis Presley, and Luther Vandross to name a few.  The lyrics are:

“To dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatable foe, to bear with unbearable sorrow, to run where the brave dare to go.  To right the unrightable wrong, to love pure and chaste from afar, to try when your arms are too weary, to reach the unreachable star.  This is my quest to follow that star – no matter how hopeless no matter how far.  To fight for the right without question or pause, to be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause.  And I know if I’ll only be true to this glorious quest that my heart will be peaceful and calm when I’m laid to rest.  And the world will be better for this, that one man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage.  To reach the unreachable stars.”

Those lyrics are nothing short of amazing and inspire me every time I read or hear them.  In many ways, that is exactly what the colonist and our founding fathers faced when declaring America’s Independence in 1776.  The DREAM of FREEDOM, for many, seemed an IMPOSSIBLE DREAM and a STAR TOO FAR.  Yet, they had a dream in their hearts of a nation where there could be true freedom in a constitutional republic that recognized that all men were created equal and held inalienable rights that should and could never be stripped from them.  They dreamed of a system of government in which men were free to pursue their dreams, risk their all, soar to the heights of accomplishment and enjoy the bounty of their success WITHOUT the interference or suffocating overregulation of the federal government.  In the eyes and mind of the world that was THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM but they dared to dream and made an unshakable commitment to pursue that dream which became a reality and gave us the United States of America the Free Constitutional Republic.

Today, there are sinister forces at work to reduce that dream to ashes and ‘fundamentally transform’ America into something completely other than that nation which embodies and embraces THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM of our Founding Fathers and the Colonist of America in 1776.  In past decades the erosion of our freedoms and the reshaping of our Constitutional Republic was slow but in the past decade, the slow wearing away has become more akin to a bulldozer razing everything we stand for and demolishing our Republic.  Not all who vote Democrat want the destruction of the Republic but by continuing to elect uber-liberal politicians who have an agenda of ‘fundamental transformation’ that is anti-constitutionalism and limited government they are complicit in the collapse.  I have had some, when confronted with that thought, become incredibly angry.  They first directed their anger at me and all who embrace the views I hold of constitutional conservatism and then as the light came on they became bitterly angry at the deception.  Yet, some still vote Democrat and today there are Republicans who are insisting, “Hillary won’t be that bad” as a justification for allowing her to become the 45 President of the United States of America.  I challenge you to examine her history and the views of the Establishment of the Democrat Party and I believe if you do that openly and honestly you will change your mind about Hillary.  I truly believe that she will, through misguided ignorance or malicious intent, destroy the remaining shreds of our Constitutional Republic and wage full-scale war on the Constitution and our Rights, Liberties, and Freedoms.  CONTROL is the objective and a WORLD GOVERNMENT their destination.  We allow it at our own peril.

I ask only that you carefully and earnestly examine the facts, consider the possibilities and pray, pray, pray for America.  If you do so, then the decision you make will be one not based solely on emotion or preference but with a clear view of the future or failure of America.

God bless you and God bless America is my desire and prayer!

GRIDLOCK or CHECKS and BALANCES???


BLOG POST 2 - Checks and Balances

If I listen to the Main Stream Media, Political Pundits, Activist, and Democrats I would be forced to conclude that what is called “gridlock” in Washington is a very bad thing and a sign of gross inefficiency.  Please understand, I am not saying Washington is not inefficient but is what they are calling “gridlock” a bad thing?  It is, only if you find an impasse to your agenda and are unable to muster enough support or concessions to get your bill passed and your laws or regulations enacted.  You would, naturally, consider that “inefficiency” and call it “gridlock”.  If you are protecting the American Republic, defending the Constitution, and fighting against federal bureaucracy you call it “checks & balances” as designed by the Constitution.  If you are one of the millions who believe what is presented by the leftist media and the Democrats you give Congress increasingly bad marks and seek to oust all Republicans and/or conservatives.  The idea presented by this administration and some previous administrations is that if we have ONE PARTY, RULING in Washington, namely the Democrats things will get done and all will be peachy.  IT WON’T! That is the road to tyranny not triumph and if we don’t realize it we will lose the Republic.

If you are on the freeway or major thoroughfares in our cities and experience “gridlock” that is a bad thing.  Sadly, millions are unable to divorce government from that type of thinking and thereby fail to realize that government’s job is not to make money, produce consumer goods or even make everyone happy.  It is designed to exercise power and the more power it amasses the more power it wants and thereby amasses more power.  That is why this monstrosity we have allowed to be created in this massive overreaching and the overpowering federal government is a bad and incredibly dangerous thing.  Power has the potential to corrupt and usually does to some extent.  We have, or hopefully, we have witnessed the insatiable lust for power among the power brokers and politicians over the past few decades.  It is frightening in the sense that the masses do not understand government or how our current system works or has evolved from what the founders established.  Thus, we have a populace that detests what is called “gridlock” when in fact, it may not be a sign of inefficiency but a sign of the system working as it was designed.

BLOG POST 2 - Federalism

Most, who have studied government, history, and civics understand that the founders worked laboriously to ensure that no individual or group of individuals could have tyrannical control in our federal government.  That is failing for many reasons, not the least of which is the voting public’s willingness to let it happen or the failure to understand we do not have to allow it to continue.  Our system of government is a “three-pronged” system so the powers are divided between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches.  That was designed with purpose and we make a fatal error if we fail to grasp that and if our elected and appointed officials fail to do so.  Our system has what the founders understood as “checks & balances” in which the president has veto power over any bill passed by Congress and then Congress has the ability to override his veto with a two-thirds majority.  Checks & Balances!  The Supreme Court can rule on any law or case but Congress can limit its appellate jurisdiction.  The president nominates appointees and Congress can accept or reject them.  Therefore the system was designed to make it difficult to get a bill passed or nominee confirmed without serious vetting and examination and then if deemed in the best interest of the Republic it would pass or they would be confirmed.  Checks & Balances not Gridlock!  Additionally, the founders specifically spelled out what power would be under the purview of the federal government and all other things not specifically spelled out would belong to the states and local municipalities WITHOUT interference from the federal government.  LIMITED GOVERNMENT with a system of Checks & Balances is what we are supposed to, but no longer have.

The federal government seeks more power and control and has totally violated the 10th Amendment so often that it is almost non-existent.  One candidate and party want more of that usurpation and the other is “pro” limiting the federal government.  Each time Congress passes a law or the president enacts a regulation the more control they have over the citizens, cities, and states in direct violation of the constitution UNLESS we grant them that power via a constitutional amendment.  Thus I would argue that what is being called “gridlock” and the lack of “bipartisanship” is a sign that they system the founders sought could work effectively and is doing so limitedly.

BLOG POST 2 - Moral Obligation

That brings me to my affirmation about this year’s presidential election.  I understand that some feel they cannot vote for the Republican presidential candidate on moral grounds and to do so would violate their conscience.  I would never ask anyone to violate their conscience.  Let me explain why I will do whatever to keep Hillary Clinton from becoming the 45th president of the United States of America.  That is included in my previous paragraphs and the fact that I am 100% certain that her administration would be the Obama administration on steroids and the assault on the constitution and our freedoms and liberties would be vicious.  She could and probably would destroy the republic.  Therefore, I believe that it is my moral obligation to STOP HILLARY CLINTON and the only way I see that being possible is by voting Republican in the presidential election.  You may disagree and that is your right as a human being and I will defend your right to do so.  I only ask that you carefully consider what it would do to America for Hillary Clinton to become president.  Do you truly think we can survive?  I do not from a political and constitutional standpoint.  I am a Christian and know that God will protect His people but as has been the case in history and is revealed in Revelation not all will have their lives spared.  Therefore, for the sake of my nation, my conscience, my children, my grandchildren and future generations I will vote Republican in November for president.

God bless you and God bless America!

LET ME RAISE A QUESTION THAT SOMETIMES CAUSES SPARKS TO FLY…


BLOG POST 4 - Power To Tax

Not that any number of questions do not have the potential of volatility but this question has exposed me to threats of physical violence as much as any question I ask.  “Should the government be allowed to tax churches, places of worship, and religious ministries?”  I am fully aware that there are churches and religious organizations that step over the line of being truly ‘non-profit’ and operate what could only be identified as businesses.  Some of those, so suspected or accused, are funneling the monies into various ministries and charities and some appear to be building a massive financial war-chest which benefits a few without demonstrating a clear path to ministry or charity.  This issue is one that people on both sides of the aisle have incredibly strong opinions and people within each group have wide disagreement among their contemporaries and colleagues.

Our founding fathers adopted the idea and belief that churches and religious institutions should not be taxed and in a measure that is rooted in a biblical directive found in Ezra 7:24, “We also inform you that it is not allowed to impose tax, tribute or toll on any of the priests, Levites, singers, doorkeepers, Nethinim or servants of this house of God.”  In today’s world of secularism and progressivism that idea is offensive to many and for politicians who are truly money-grubbing and power-hungry they see those entities as sources of untapped revenue.  Today, the ‘tax exemption’ of churches is frequently in the cross-hairs of some politicians and activist groups.  I have to wonder if it is truly a desire to achieve ‘fairness’ or is it something more and sinister.  I say that because although the Supreme Court, in times past, has upheld the ‘exemption status’ of churches, places of worship, and religious ministries the assault never ceases.

In one particular case challenging the ‘tax-exempt status’ of churches reached the Supreme Court the court ruled in favor of ‘exemption’ stating:  “All of the 50 states provide for tax exemption of places of worship, most of them doing so by constitutional guarantees.  For so long as federal income taxes have had any potential impact on churches – over 75 years [the time since the federal progressive income tax was originated] – religious organizations have been expressly exempt from the [federal] tax…Few concepts are more deeply embedded in the fabric of our national life, beginning with pre-Revolutionary colonial times.”  Chief Justice John Marshall, one of our founding fathers spoke about taxing, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.”  He knew, as should we, that if the government can tax, including churches, even if that tax was a seemingly minor and insignificant amount it would open Pandora’s box and a path to CONTROL which would ultimate ERADICATE the church and would virtually relegate it to being a Pawn of the State could and likely would occur.  That would be a direct violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  John Dickinson, another of our founders said, “If they have a right to levy a tax of one penny upon us, they have a right to levy a million upon us, for where does their right stop?  If they have any right to tax us, then whether our own money shall continue in our own pockets or not depends no longer on us, but on them.”

I find a ruling by the Supreme Court in 1874 powerfully important regarding the Power to Tax and the evidence of how it has completely destroyed various businesses, individuals and industries are impossible to miss.  The ruling stated:  “The power to tax is therefore, the strongest – the most pervading – of all the powers of government, reaching directly or indirectly to all classes of people.  It was said by Chief Justice John Marshall, in the case of McCULLOCH v. the STATE OF MARYLAND, that the power to tax is the power to destroy.  A striking instance of the truth of the proposition is seen in the fact that the existing tax of ten percent imposed by the United States on the circulation of all other banks than the national banks drove out of existence every state bank of circulation within a year or two after its passage.”  TAXATION is a tool or weapon in the hands of politicians and if we want to maintain our Freedom of Religion and our Freedom as a Republic we must deal with the POWER TO TAX by dealing with those in whom that power is vested.

I hope this warning is sufficient to cause each of us to take note of what is happening in our nation and what can happen if we continue on the path we have embarked politically.  The word I keep hearing in my spirit is “BEWARE and PREPARE!”  So I urge you to take note, earnestly pray and STOP THE LEFTIST from further harming our nation.

God bless you and God bless America!

SECOND AMENDMENT – – The Need or Reason to “Keep and Bear Arms”…


BLOG POST 4 - Second Amendment

I know some sincere lovers of America and our freedom that have difficulty with some aspects of the 2nd Amendment with regard to various types of firearms.  Their concerns and questions are often attacked without hearing their heart, and I believe that a wrong reaction.  I personally am a staunch 2nd Amendment defender and believe that means we have THE RIGHT to have handguns, shotguns, rifles, and semi-automatic firearms called “assault weapons” such as the AK-47 or AR-15.  That I believe!

Back to the issue of NEED.  There are those who question THE NEED for some of those firearms and my feeble attempt to allay the fears or concerns some have regarding those ominous imposing looking rifles of concern is being offered.  The 2nd Amendment was inserted in the Bill of Rights for the specific purpose of DEFENSE.  The founders clearly believed that it was imperative and important to ensure that the citizenry always has the means necessary for SELF-DEFENSE against all threats including a rogue imposing central government.  They said it and adamantly defended the rights of the citizens to “keep and bear arms”.   It is important to remember that the muskets of that day were Military Grade Weapons so please do not attempt to use that argument that we can only have single-shot or super limited shot firearms in keeping with the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, the argument fails.

BLOG POST 4 - Self Defense

The 2nd Amendment had and has nothing to do with HUNTING.  The founding fathers and the colonist considered the freedom, need, and the right to HUNT so part of natural life there was no reason to present an amendment addressing the rights of hunting or hunters.  However, they did consider DEFENSE such an imminent and pressing need they addressed the rights of citizens to “keep and bear arms” and those were arms available and desired by the individual citizen.  They focused on threats to person and property and understood those threats could come from without our borders or within them.  So THE RIGHT to “keep and bear arms” should never be a question.  You have to completely reinterpret, misinterpret and misrepresent the intent of the founders in the 2nd Amendment to question that as a right.  Some do, and that is a problem.

Yet, the legitimate questions and concerns that some supporters of our constitution, rights, and are themselves owners and possessors of firearms need to be addressed and not from a condescending or condemning attitude.  The Leftist such as Hillary Clinton and largely the powers that be in the Democrat Party want to strip us of our 2nd Amendment Rights.  They have expressed that and this president has taken steps to facilitate that.  So, I am not talking about their questions for regardless of their questions, their intent it to reduce or revoke the 2nd Amendment.  My focus is those who are legitimately concerned and confused as to NEED regarding certain types of firearms.  In my mind, this is a simple but complex issue and my response may or may not be satisfactory but I offer it in hope.

BLOG POST 4 - Self Defense Rules

THE NEED to own a so-called “assault rifle” is the question not THE RIGHT to own one.  They actually can be and are used by gun owners to control varmints and the increase in the wild hog population in the South and many areas is certainly one reason to own a high-capacity firearm with a small caliber bullet.  They can be used for hunting other game animals but are not normally the first choice of those hunters.  THE NEED, in my view, is DEFENSE.  If intruders or marauding terrorist sweep through your area the one thing that most defense experts will tell you is, “You need ONE MORE ROUND than they have.”  If there is a threat from forces seeking your destruction and those forces have those types of firearms but you are relegated to having a single-short or low-capacity firearm you are at a disadvantage.  NO, you are doomed!  I would hope the Federal Government would never attempt to impose sweeping martial law, weapons confiscation, and bans, or become so rogue that it would use military force on citizens.  But, should it do so, our Founding Fathers wanted the citizens to be able to DEFEND THEMSELVES and have the firepower to pose a formidable opposition to that type of tyrannical action by the government.  MAY IT NEVER BE! 

THE NEED and THE RIGHT are not always the same and, in some ways, this will become a preference and commitment to DEFENSE.  Some of our forefathers and leaders in other lands considered the well-armed citizenry of America such an imposing deterrent they believed that an Armed-Citizenry was a National Defense benefit.  THE NEED, in my view, is rooted squarely in DEFENSE and that includes personal self-defense as well as defense against tyranny from within or without our borders.  Again, this may or may not alleviate the concerns and even fears some have but hopefully, it will give you a basis upon which to continue your personal evaluation, consideration, and investigation of this issue.  I STAND 100% WITH THE 2ND AMENDMENT!  I believe that means THE RIGHT to address our NEED for DEFENSE and each citizen can and should decide for themselves what ARMS they desire and are6 comfortable with.

God bless you and God bless America.  REMEMBER NOVEMBER for this is one of the issues at stake.

 

 

PRINCIPLE or PREFERENCE???


BLOG POST 5 - Principle

The hate, vitriol, and divisiveness that continues to manifest itself in today’s political scene are troubling.  No, I am not suggesting that anyone abandon their principles for without principles and a strong core belief system places an individual or nation in dire peril.  Therefore, stand by your convictions and adhere to your principles.  The concern I have is are we truly talking about Principles or have we transitioned to Preference?  Immediately, I lost some and the barbs are being hurled or prepared to hurl at me.  No problem, hurl them but as you do I beg that you tap the brakes, take a deep breath and ask yourself a few questions and then hurl your barbs if you still desire.

Some of the things I read, see and hear seem to be more interested in identifying the “Warts on the Frog” than “Saving the Republic.”  No, I am not naïve enough to believe that any political candidate can single-handily save the Republic but an individual politician in the Oval Office can do fatal harm to it.  That, in my view, is the critical issue before us in this year’s electoral cycle.  Donald Trump is the frog with warts, without question.  He is not perfect and some of his ideas resonate with me and some leave me wondering.  There are things about the GOP candidate that are uncertain, in my mind.  However, there are no uncertainties in the Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Barack Obama has been the most destructive president in history regarding the Republic and its preservation and continuation.  I have NO DOUBT that Hillary Clinton would be even worse and because of the damage that has been done by the current administration would further destroy if not inflict fatal wounds to the Republic.  Her character, as well as her agenda, are incredibly dangerous and troubling.  I would love to give her the benefit of the doubt but she continues to assassinate that desire with her loose use of truth and incredibly leftist proposals.

BLOG POST 5 - Warts

It is one thing to stand on Principle and no principled person would object to a person doing that.  However, when we allow our Preference to so bias and blind us as to the potential and possibilities of good we become “Wart Inspectors.”  In life and politics, there are times when we have to set aside Preference in the interest of standing against something.  There are those who are so adamantly NEVER TRUMP they would accept nothing he said or did and have expressed a willingness to see Hillary win the White House rather than consider any possibility they might not be totally right.  This will make some made and some will say, Amen.  Mr. Trump was not my first choice but he is the choice of the Republican Party.  Almost every politician in this cycle has left me disappointed from time to time and if I could take the things I most like and compile them into one candidate, I would.  That is not possible, therefore, we have to either focus on the “Warts on the Frog” or the “Republic” and the known danger in Hillary Clinton.  Some of the NEVER crowd will argue that both are diabolical and dangerous and if that is what you believe, nothing I can say will change your mind.  I just hope that we do not come to a decision in November based on Preference.  I am concerned that some have a greater interest in being able to say, “I told you so” than saving or salvaging the Republic.  I am not saying that is the case in all or even most NEVER people.  I am simply asking that we all look deep inside and decide if our angst is truly Principle or has a strong element of Preference driving our decision.

I would also like to ask that we consider the Party Platforms of both the Republicans and Democrats.  I would suggest we consider who surrounds each candidate, for that will be quite revealing, I believe.  Barack Obama told us before his first term, “If you want to know who I am, look at those I most closely associate with.”  That was incredibly revealing and yet millions ignored those realities or found them acceptable.  We have endured almost eight years of fundamental transformation, divisiveness, denigration of America and Americans, and policies that have damaged our economy, weakened our national security and rolled back the clock on race relations decades.  Can we continue on this path and survive as a Republic?  My answer is NO!  Your answer may be, I THINK SO or YES!  Each person has to decide what they believe and they are willing to accept.  Each person has to determine what we can afford as a Republic?  Each person has to consider what is at stake in this election and either set-aside Preference and vote their hope for the Republic.

BLOG POST 5 - Party Platform

Some have called all those of us who are so adamantly NEVER HILLARY and even though we see the “Warts on the Frog” we believe that any vote that allows the Democrats to keep the White House is fatal for the Republic, STUPID.  Yep, they boldly and angrily declare that we are deficient in our mental capacity.  When I believe I am right I believe I am right and so do you, but I do not consider everyone disagreeing with me STUPID nor am I willing to call them vile names.  I believe them to be misinformed.  I accept they may see things differently than I see them.  I have learned, as the Bible declares, “…we see in a mirror, dimly…”  None of us have a corner on truth and none of us know all the facts.  When I hear the assertion that anyone disagreeing is STUPID I immediately suspect that the person making that charge has moved from Principle to Preference and Preference and that has become more important than Possibility.  Sorry, you can unfriend me, hate me, and vow to never listen to me again, but AMERICA is my major focus politically and I have had, at times, to move past the “Frogs Warts” and rest my dreams in Hope!  Some will find that idiotic and tell me that Hope is not enough.  I do not disagree that Hope alone is not the answer but Hopelessness and Surrender are not part of my core convictions.  Therefore, if there is a glimmer of hope I will reach for it.  I will not ignore the “Warts on the Frog” and make them serious matters of prayer.  I will also not ignore the KNOWN THREAT to the Republic in the person of Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party.

It is my prayer that God will turn hearts and help this nation return to our founding principles and become the Constitutional Republic our founders established and envisioned.  It is my prayer that we not allow Preference to be viewed as Principle and do what is needed to salvage the Republic.  How you vote in November is your personal decision and one should be and must be made with deep introspection, careful evaluation, and hopefully much prayer.  We may disagree but I still believe we want the same thing, an America that is restored to the status of being the Constitutional Republic and preserved for posterity.  All I ask of anyone and everyone is PRAY.  

God bless you and God bless America!

WELFARE & ENTITLEMENTS – Whose Responsibility Are the Poor?


BLOG POST 4 - Welfare Nation

I keep hearing from many, including many Christians, that it is the federal government’s responsibility to care for the poor and indigent in our country.  That runs contrary to the writings of many of the founding fathers, our U.S. Constitution, and the Bible.  Please give me a chance to explain in a little more detail what I mean.  I ask that you hear the conclusion of the whole matter before rendering a decision or judgment.  If at the conclusion you still disagree, we will agree to disagree and I will continue to support limited government and you, whatever government you believe is appropriate.

The poor, Jesus said, in Mark 14:7 we will always have.  There is no magic formula to eliminate poverty in the world and the idea that the federal government has the right and obligation to take from one to give to another even in the name of benevolence is wrong, in my view.  Since many will accuse me of lacking compassion for my stance that IT IS NOT the federal government’s responsibility to care for the poor and chide me as being unbiblical let me go to that source for my beginning arguments or explanations.

When Israel was about to enter the Promised Land, the land of Canaan, Moses made a diligent effort to ensure they would always remember from whence they came and who it was that enabled them to succeed in their journey.  One of his first directives was concerning the poor among them or those who would become poor in their midst.  Of course, with the opulence of the land they were entering it is almost unimaginable that there would be any poor among them.  Remember the ten spies brought back such abundance of produce that it took two men to carry a branch of grapes.  But, Moses had insight into life and people and understood that situations could change and people could make errors in judgment which might result in a time of lack in their lives financially.  He said in Deuteronomy 15:11, “For the poor will never cease from the land; therefore I command you, saying, ‘You shall open your hand wide to your brother, to your poor and your needy, in your land.”  But not to leave it as Old Testament principle move forward in time to Paul’s writings in Galatians 2:10 where he said, “Remember the poor.”  In fact, that was one of the key thrusts of the New Testament Church, caring for the Widows, Orphans, and Poor.  However, nowhere in Scripture do we find a government program for welfare or entitlements.  That should be worthy of note.

BLOG POST 4 - Poor

The biblical directive for caring for the poor has numerous prongs but the central element was that it is Individual Responsibility.  In fact in Deuteronomy15:7-8; 10-11 we find a clear direction for individuals in responding to the needs of the poor.  Jesus emphasized that in His preaching as is seen in Matthew 25:34-40 and informs us that if we take care of the poor we are, in fact, ministering to God Himself.  Proverbs 19:17, informs us that if we “give to the poor we are lending to the Lord.”  That is amazing!  Again, it did not mandate the government do so but individuals.  The next emphasis was for local churches to care for the poor. That is demonstrable throughout the Old & New Testaments.

What is government to do with regard to the poor?  They are charged to protect the rights of the poor as they do everyone else.  (Exodus 23:3, 6; Leviticus 19:15; Proverbs 29:1-4).  Our founding fathers recognized the problem of poverty and believed it an individual, congregational and community function and duty to care for the needy.  In fact, Thomas Jefferson said, “I deem it the duty of every man to devote a certain portion of his income for charitable purposes, and that it is his further duty to see it is so applied as to do the most good of which it is capable.  This I believe to be the best insured by keeping within the circle of his own inquiry and information the subjects of distress to whose relief his contributions shall be applied.” Mr. Jefferson was giving some advice, I try to strictly adhere to in my charitable giving.  I want to know WHERE it is going, to WHOM it is going, and WHAT the results are.  If I cannot determine the organizational overhead (how much of each dollar goes to overhead and how much to the cause) I do not give to that charity.    Charitability and accountability were emphasized.  According to all accounts, Jefferson practiced what he preached and was quite charitable as has been documented in numerous writings and research.  George Washington recognized the importance of charity or caring for the poor by directing those charged with oversight of his estate, “Let the hospitality of the house with respect to the poor be kept up.  Let no one go hungry away.  If any of this kind of people should be in want of corn, supply their necessities (provided it does not encourage them in idleness); and I have no objection to your giving my money in charity… What I mean by having no objection is, that it is my desire that it should be done.”  The other founders often expressed this same sentiment.

Their numerous statements on this issue cannot be overlooked.  When Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who had fled the insurrection in Santa Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison, recognized as the father of our constitution stood on the floor of the House of Representatives and said, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”    He also said, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.”  Who better to know the intent of the Constitution than the man known as its father?  Thomas Jefferson echoed much the same sentiments saying, “To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”  To adopt the philosophy of Government Entitlements is to violate the Constitution, encourage idleness, and robs the church, community, and individual from the blessings of fulfilling their duties.

BLOG POST 4 - Charity

When the church and individuals allow or transfer responsibility to the federal government for the welfare of the poor and needy we create an unconstitutional bureaucracy and perpetuate a condition of continual poverty.  In light of today’s welfare rolls and the professional idleness of many, we have created and are creating an Entitlement Mentality that encourages sloth and idleness rather than industry and entrepreneurship.  That is foreign to the biblical directive issued by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 3:10, “…If anyone WILL NOT WORK, neither shall he eat.”  The operative words are WILL NOT WORK not COULD NOT WORK.  There is a definitive difference and if we allowed people who would not feel the pinch and hunger of their idleness or laziness we would find many more motivated to WORK.  I fully understand that some would but can find no work.  However, often, they cannot find what they want and decide that being idle is more financially rewarding than doing a lesser job than their pay-grade, training or experience.  My attitude is, GET A JOB even if it is sweeping floors or flipping burgers.  Do something to demonstrate your willingness to work and then a hand up is appropriate for individuals, communities, churches and even companies but it is not the responsibility of government.  I am perfectly willing to see the truly disabled, widows who have no other hope of help and orphans assisted.  I realize that opens the door for other exceptions but if we need to realize that the Government is not constitutionally allowed to take taxpayer funds for welfare.  We can respond by either changing the constitution or returning to the original and biblical intent of caring for the poor by individuals, churches, communities and benevolent businesses not the government and I believe we would see a dramatic improvement in the numbers of poor among us if we did the latter.

We have the Democrat Party which is the Entitlement Party and the Republican Party which, at least claims to be for limited government and reduced spending.  Who we allow to be in charge will determine our future or failure as a nation.  November is an opportunity for us to express our views on this matter.  

God bless you and God bless America is my prayer and desire!