I’ve been thinking about the mess that America is in and the attempts that are being made to get us out of it. It is still accurate to say that God is judging America, but what He is doing, in my opinion, is to let us stand in our own dirty diapers. There are folks that are planning a big day of prayer and fasting in Washington D.C. on May 1, begging God to give us a clean diaper. We promise that we won’t dirty the next one. Read the rest of this entry »
The Muslim world has its shorts twisted over the Israeli capture of a ship carrying Iranian arms for Syria, even calling it a war crime.
I just don’t understand the hullabaloo. The missiles, rockets and such were supposed to go to Syria, who would send them over land to Hezbollah who would fire them into Israel. So the final destination of those arms was Israel and they are in Israel. The only thing that Israel did was to lower the carbon footprint of the transaction by getting the weapons into Israel without them being fired. Iran wanted those weapons in Israel! So, why are they complaining?
Environmentalists should be rejoicing that Israel was helping to reduce “climate change”. Instead, these same people are upset.
The “Religion of Peace” controls the politics of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, so I know that they rejoice that these weapons won’t be used to conduct war.
Can someone explain this to me?
In 2006, I left the land of my birth, the United States of America, and moved to Finland. My only reason for moving was to be wed to a woman that I loved, a Finn. I still love her dearly. But I miss my homeland.
Why does the government (any government) collect taxes? The answer should be obvious. Government cannot create money. To get money, government must take it from someone who creates it. You cry, “Foul! The government creates money all the time.” No, the government prints money.
The following declaration has been making the email rounds. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen it. Some take what it says seriously and others regard it as just wishful thinking. I take it seriously. One of my brothers sent it to me this time. I wanted to give him a thoughtful, realistic, Christian response. After the original text of this declaration is my reply to my brother and to all who call themselves Christians.
The people of California, through a direct vote made a law. Judges of the California Supreme Court decided that the law violated the rights of a small minority. (It is supposed that the California Constitution spells out what rights the people have, but I don’t know which of those rights were violated.) The people of California were emphatic, embedding into the Constitution itself what their will is.
And those same “justices” are now going to determine whether the vote that declared their declaration of the law to be unconstitutional is now in the Constitution are going to decide whether or not the Constitution is constitutional. Arg-g-gh! Oh, what a tangled web we weave…
There has been the suggestion that it may become necessary for Constitutional Americans to form a new government. (See Joseph Farah’s column and my earlier post.)
With this in mind, I have updated the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. I have brought the language up to date from 18th century English and have modified it for present circumstances. I am asking readers to help me complete the document. This may be done in two ways:
I’m reading a lot of columns that tell us how badly things would go for a lover of American style freedom under an Obama administration.
It is a good thing to try to frighten people about what an Obama administration would bring. The fact is that the possibility of a Socialist States of America is a very real possibility. Socialism lite is already a part of our governmental policy, even though it is unconstitutional.
The question is, “What are you going to do about it?” Bellyache? Cry? Some (including me) are talking about setting up a new national government — secession. I’ve seen a lot of naysayers who claim that it can’t be done. If you believe that something can’t be done, then you won’t try to do it or support those who are trying. So you are back to bellyaching.
Submit yourselves to God. Seek His will in every detail of your life. Then live your life in faith, not in fear. The Bible says that the fearful are among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. Then claim the freedom that God gives.
Michael Farris wrote in a column on World Net Daily:
There are only two meaningful ways to interpret the Constitution. The originalist theory is that the words mean the same thing today as they meant when they were written and ratified. This is an approach that is necessary if we believe in both self-government and the rule of law. Self-government requires us to accept the meaning from the elected officials who made the law. The rule of law requires us to accept the rules established by the law as fixed principles until such time as another law of equal rank formally amends the first law.
The other theory of constitutional interpretation is the “living Constitution,” which asserts that the meaning of the Constitution changes over time. Words no longer have a fixed meaning. They now mean whatever the judges of today think they should mean. This is the rule of men, not law.
Obama’s theological wanderings may be interesting, but we have all that we need to know for voting purposes by the revelation that he is unwilling to address or follow the original meaning of the Constitution.
If he is unwilling to following the original meaning of the Constitution on life and death, why would we think he will follow it on anything less important?
Mr Farris makes a valid point, but what he points out about Obama is also true of Mr. McCain. McCain may be more “constitutional” in some of his views, but that is only because the Constitution agrees with McCain, not because McCain agrees with the Constitution. Where McCain disagrees with the Constitution, his voting record shows that he is willing to ignore the Document.
America is defined by the words of the Constitution. Because the Constitution is being ignored in all three branches of our federal government, the America that our founding creationists gave us is dead. The idea is still alive in the hearts of some people.
http://www.selfgovernment.us/aip
A while ago I wrote a blog post that posited that it was sinful for a Christian couple to decline to deliberately include God and His will into the fabric of their marriage.
In the responses to an article in World Net Daily, California bans ‘brides,’ ‘grooms’, about the fallout of a California Supreme Court decision wherein the Court made a law(!) that overturned the will of the people by legalizing sodomite marriage.
The story is about a couple being denied a marriage license under the new law because they wanted to be Bride and Groom instead of Party A and Party B. Among the Digg comments about the story are two links that give information I wish that I had known many years ago. They point out that the government has no legitimate role in a God ordained marriage; only in one that excludes God. Here are the two links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiTGhQOYZv4
Name: Alan Lake
Identity: Christian
Nationality: American
Profession:
Computer programmer
Residence:
Jyväskylä, Finland
Trips around the sun: 68
Interests:
Spiritual life
Computers:
Linux (Fedora)
Akelos
American politics
You are currently browsing the archives for the Politics category.