Liberty or Democracy

For many years, the buzzword in the press and politics has been Democracy. We “fight for Democracy”. Keep the world safe for Democracy. America is “The Arsenal of Democracy”. Look to our founders, and read their writings. The last thing they wanted to form was a democracy. Democracy is, literally rule by the mob. The United States of America was founded as, and still is–despite many assaults– a Constitutional Republic.

As our politicians move us ever closer towards democracy they continue to reduce the one thing prized by the founders more than almost anything else. Liberty. Liberty is the ideal which motivated those great men to fight the troops of the King of England. Liberty is the reason the second amendment enshrined the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. A well armed populace cannot be cowed by an encroaching government. Proponents of democracy seek to restrict liberty in order to maximize control of the population by government. Frederic Bastiat wrote eloquently about this in “The Law“. I have linked to this pamphlet since the founding of this blog.

Democracy allows those in power to do whatever they need in order to maintain that hold on power. A constitutional republic has a founding document which restricts the power of government and it’s ability to curtail individual liberty.

The Bill of Rights is not a list of rights given to Americans by the government. Read it. The Bill of Rights was earth-shattering in it’s premise that people granted government the power to govern, and the first ten amendments specifically outline those rights which the government of the United States may never impinge. When is the last time a member of Congress, House or Senate, restricted a bill, or an agency because it conflicted with the Bill of Rights? Instead, they continue to use the force of government– and make no mistake, government backs up laws with force of arms–to seize property and money from some to provide goods or services to others deemed ‘more in need’ . Bastiat specifically described this while discussing “legal Plunder”:

“The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.”

Can you find a better description of the motives of those wishing to enact restrictions to the individual right to own arms protected by the Second Amendment?

There are those in this nation who argue that we need to ‘provide national health care’ for all. Why? Well, because some can afford it, and it is not fair for others not to be able to have the same insurance benefits as “the rich” have. And just how will this be paid for? Simple: We’ll increase taxes on the rich, make them pay their fair share, in order to provide for those ‘less fortunate’ than they are. Once again Mr. Bastiat was directly on point:

“Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole –with their common aim of legal plunder — constitute socialism.”

Does any of this sound familiar? Ring any bells out there? We are in the grip of a government out of control, which has broken free of the tethers which the Constitution originally placed upon it.

I’m not offering solutions here, just sending out a signal, a wake up call. I don’t pretend to be the first, nor the most eloquent. Just another voice. But each voice that joins the chorus makes it louder, stronger and more difficult to ignore.

The mainstream politicians have grown fat and happy while the people have been steadily fed a diet of pop culture, which breeds ignorance. It’s time look at other parties. Here’s a quote from someone interesting:

“To be for liberty, you must be for it consistently, respecting the lives of others in all matters. You cannot make an exception for the War on Terror. You cannot make an exception for the War on Poverty. You cannot make an exception for the War on Drugs. You cannot make an exception for gays or prostitutes. You can’t let bureaucrats deny dying patients life-saving medicine just because the FDA hasn’t yet approved it. You can’t take another’s money or land and give it to another.

Liberty is indivisible. It’s the one thing we can’t have unless we are willing to give it others. If someone tells you differently, they just don’t know how the world really works. Make sure that you don’t vote them into power.”

These words are from Mary J. Ruwart, Ph.D., She’s seeking the Libertarian nomination for president. She’s worth a look, at least.

I’m not endorsing anyone, just suggesting that it’s time to look for alternatives. Libertarian, Constitution, something, ANYTHING that’s not those in power.

As always, Keep The Faith!

The Rev

The Kharma Exchange

I’d like to announce the beginning of a monumental undertaking here at the Chruch of Kharma Futures.

Please wander over to the ‘About” page and look for the link for the Kharma Exchange. We will begin taking positive steps to help you restore the balance of your Universe. Check it out!

A note of recognition

I wanted to post a quick recognition here in this space. Look at the comment to ” Radical Christianity” .

James is a man of learning and faith.  Both of which he combines to provide an informative and ecclectic blog. I encourage you to check out the blog for yourself. I’ve posted a link to the right. Look for him as  Head-Dibs

 Keep The Faith!

The Rev

Radical Christianity Emerging, Emulating Radical Islam

Not many have missed the disgusting racial vitriol spewed by the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Not many have missed the “repudiation” from Barack Obama. What is it exactly that this represents and what does it mean to Christianity and to the United States? I will seek to analyze the meaning.

First, I must preface this document with what Christianity means overall to the non-radical. Jesus came for souls and yes, to end slavery. What’s that you say? He came to end slavery? Well yes, but careful now, lest we lose his message in this one statement. Jesus came to free man (all of man folks) from the slavery of sin. No more than this slavery of sin, no less. Jesus was specifically ignored, as the messiah, by the Jewish religious leaders because they expected, specifically, a conqueror and political messiah. What they misinterpreted, in the opinion of the Christian faith, is the nature of the prophecy and the nature of the messiah.

Now understanding this nature of The Messiah in the Christian Faith, we understand that indeed the Jews were subjugated by the Romans, yet Jesus made no attempt to address this. Jesus specified he came to open up the kingdom of God through his sacrifice. He did not come to free physically, the Israelites. Do we then understand, now, the reason some Jewish religious leaders helped to crucify him?

If Jesus did not physically free the Israelites, then should we consider Jesus specifically addressing the issue of the subjugation of the Africans? Would Jesus address this or would he again be concerned with their immortal souls? Is there again a misunderstanding of why Jesus came? What would Jesus say in this day and age about a past subjugation that no longer exists? I strongly doubt Jesus would come here with that specific endeavor in mind. Why then would a man who represents and purports to repeat the words of God, and his son Jesus Christ, have the audacity to hope that Jesus would speak these words? As a spokesman for the word of God and Jesus Christ, he should then be concerned as Jesus was, for the immortal souls of his “flock”. Is the hateful language something Jesus would use? Jesus was the one who spoke repeatedly of forgiveness. The messiah addressed his disciples on turning the other cheek and forgiveness numerous times. Jesus spoke the words “forgive them” while dangling from a cross bleeding profusely.

How then do we get to this point in a Christian church where hate and divisive language are cheered on by the congregation? Remember, the pastor, or priest, passes on the words of the Lord. Are these the words of the Lord? No they are not the words of the Lord, and as a matter of fact Mark 13:5 says “ And Jesus answering them, began to say, ‘Take heed lest any one may lead you astray’ ”. Even further in Mak 13, Jesus says to his disciples, “And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect”. The words of Wright are misleading, sure enough, and not of the Lord. Make no mistake about this. Making these statements in church and in the name of God is directly mentioned when Jesus mentions “false Prophets”.

Sermons, like those of the “Reverend” Wright, sound more like the vitriol and hate spewed from the Blind Sheik or speeches videotaped and sent out from Osama Bin Laden. The same hate for other groups of people can be found right in the radical mosques around the world. Are we seeing an emergence of a Radical Christianity much like the Wahhabi sect of Islam? What started as a radical group has spread throughout the world and throughout the Muslim world, like a cancer. Will we hail the days of Reverend Wright as the beginning of Radical Christianity? Will we then see your “typical white person” assaulted on the streets or blown up with car bombs in retaliation for “creating the AIDS virus to kill blacks”?

With divisive and vitriolic words from what the black community hails as its prominent leaders, what are we to think of the black community? Is this feeling much the same we have for Islam? Without those specifically speaking out against the hatred, then do we consider silence, agreement? Do we not consider the same for Islam? Hymie town, Zionists, Jewish being referred to as the diamond merchants, white greed, typical white people, and white conspiracy are all things we hear from Reverend Al Sharpton, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Islamic minister Farrakhan, and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. So exactly when do we consider what the real thoughts of the black community might be?

Jesus spoke of love and forgiveness. Osama Bin Laden, Muqtada Al-Sadr, “Reverends” Jackson, Wright, Sharpton, and Farrakahn, all speak of division and anger at past ills, and propagate hate and ill will. I see no difference between all of these people, except one, the Lord Jesus Christ. I find myself listening to the words from these “Christian” pulpits and ask myself the well recognized words, “what would Jesus do?”. I am surprised that these latter named “Christian men of God” do not seem to consider what Jesus would say or do. I do notice one other difference between the Lord and these other men. Christ had no personal wealth or possessions, yet these men who spout hate then foment anger, more hate, and riots, all live in houses like those the “rich white men” live in or have extremely large bank accounts. Wright speaks of white greed, yet when reverend Wright lives in a million dollar home with a 10 million dollar line of credit, I would say that is rich and a bit greedy. Note Wright’s attack on “the pursuit of middleclassness”, and his far surpassing it on the way to riches. Perhaps the hate and division is a means to an end for wealth or power, neither of which Jesus sought. Perhaps the black community should consider the words of God and his son Jesus Christ for themselves, rather than be led like lemmings, over the cliffs of hate, fear, anger, and envy by those who seek personal gain on the backs of their congregations.

What this means for the Christian church and the United States is division, racial violence, and possibly a future for Christianity that bears even more of a resemblance to Islam and the violence done in its name. This is in a stage that should be addressed before it reaches the epidemic magnitude that radical Islam has reached. I implore the congregations of churches and the people of the United States to ask themselves what means to an end the hate spouted from religious leaders brings. Who benefits and who suffers? What would Jesus say, folks? Remember that the next time you attend church. It’s a litmus test I think we all should apply.