Freedom Requires Moral Citizens

I know of people who contend that the road to America’s re-adherence to constitutional principles of government isn’t through the ballot box, but through the collapse of the Federal Government. I contend that the make-up of the Federal Government and their current style of governance isn’t the problem; it’s only a symptom of the problem. America’s collective proclivity to shun traditional religious influence is the problem, plain and simple. Until this problem is fixed, the demise of our Federal Government will only result in the birth of another one equally or more corrupt.

James A. Garfield, 20th President of the United States, offered the following which has the ring of truth to it:

“… the people are responsible for the character of their Congress [and Executive Branch].

“If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature... If the next centennial does not find us a great nation... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”

I would expand this to say that America’s greatness is suffering not only because Americans failed to aid in controlling the political forces, i.e. were excessively apathetic, but more so because selfishness, greed, and immorality have spread widely across the Fruited Plain. America is walking away from God.

Our experience in America today validates John Adams' assertion that,

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

And James Madison's,

“Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks, no form of government, can render us secure. To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”

Our citizens have not always rejected religion. Cleon Skousen's book 5000 year leap discusses Alexis de Tocqueville's observations of our young nation in 1831.

"The philosophers of the eighteenth century explained in a very simple manner the gradual decay of religious faith. Religious zeal, said they, must necessarily fail the more generally liberty is established and knowledge diffused. Unfortunately, the facts by no means accord with their theory. There are certain populations in Europe whose unbelief is only equaled by their ignorance and debasement; while in America, one of the freest and most enlightened nations in the world, the people fulfill with fervor all the outward duties of religion." (Pg 80).

Skousen explained Tocqueville's observation that the American clergy, while wholly separated from the government "collectively had a great influence on the morals and customs of public life. This indirectly reflected itself in the formulation of laws and ultimately in fixing the moral and political climate of the American commonwealth."

"Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever cease to be good, America will cease to be great." (Pg 84).

Unfortunately, America has been spiraling into the ignorant, debased condition Tocqueville described in the populations of unbelievers in Europe. A major factor in America’s collective rejection of virtue has been a concerted secularist campaign to re-label good bad, and bad good. In a Heritage Foundation speech, “How Modern Liberals Think”, Evan Sayet described perfectly the growing cult of "indiscriminateness". The strategy has been to make morally inclined people believe that,

"...indiscriminateness is a moral imperative, because its opposite is the evil of having discriminated… In order to eliminate [discrimination] the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."

I.e. we cannot tolerate any morality or religion in our public life because it results in someone saying certain public behaviors are WRONG and those who uphold such behaviors will be discriminated against. The ironic aspect of the cult of indiscriminateness is that advocates of morality end up being highly discriminated against for their beliefs.

We can see the success of this campaign around us. Sin is denounced increasingly less often and year after year the accepted standards of behavior in America sink lower. The declining civility in our society and the corresponding decreases in liberty are the fruit that this seed of indiscriminateness has brought forth.

In an online forum, Gary Jeffryes insightfully posted,

“If we choose pleasure over morality, morals decline. When morals decline, and the number of people participating in immoral activities increases, the number of people willing to hold politicians and educators responsible for their actions declines, because people who are immoral are disinclined to hold other people to a moral behavior, though they may gossip about it. They may gripe about it, but when it comes down to the crunch, the will do nothing about it because that requires righteous judgment and the unrighteous are less willing to condemn their own kind, but eager to condemn the righteous who's behavior is a shining light.

“So the immoral masses keep reelecting the same immoral politicians and things continue to decline as one group feeds the corruption of the other.”

The solution to re-secure our lost liberties is in more preaching, more faith based testimony, more exhortation to virtue and righteous living. Our nation must collectively return to our Creator, begin to obey His laws, and love our neighbors as ourselves. On these laws “hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matt 22:40).

If the majority again begins to live the Golden Rule, they will not accept legislators or presidents whose governance results in harm to others, when said governance is exposed for what it is (ballot box choices). They will pull their own weight and not attempt to live off the backs of their neighbors. They will eschew government entitlements and those who would deal them out. They won’t need excessive regulation to do the right things. They will eliminate the poor around them through voluntary acts of service and charity.

The solution in heaven is the same solution that we must pursue:

Revelations Chapter 12:

"7 And there was a war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. … 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony”.

SOCIALISM: The Core of the Health Care Debate

Being stationed overseas sometimes makes it challenging to keep abreast of the latest political and social debates and developments back home. I spent some time this Labor Day weekend catching up on the health care debate in congress. It appears that the proponents of nationalized health care are on the ropes, so patriots need to maintain the momentum and defeat their cause. There are many well meaning citizens in our country that support nationalized health care because no one has yet laid bare the real issues and exposed the fallacies in the health care debate. Nationalized health care is not charitable, is calculated to increase dependency on government, and significantly erodes the freedom established by our Founding Fathers, furthering our nation’s decline towards the absolute despotism of a socialist government.

The prophet Ether wrote, “…when ye shall see these things come among you …awake to a sense of your awful situation, for it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries; and it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies;" (Ether 8:24-25).

The big fallacy, I mean lie, perpetrated in the health care debate is that since it is good to take care of the poor and needy, a public health care system must be good. This is the same argument used in the War in Heaven – Satan’s position was that he could bring to pass a great good if no one had free agency and he forced them to keep the commandments. Satan spoke of lofty goals, but power and control were his real goals.

Nationalized health care is about force and control – granting more power to the government to forcibly take the fruit of one person’s labor, and control it’s disposition. This is not charity. Jesus commands men to follow his example and be charitable, but allows them the freedom to choose.

Watch the following clip and think about the main points that Milton Friedman attempts to teach Phil Donahue’s audience:



Clip Summary:

There is a difference between greed and self interest.

Socialism has failed to deliver on its promise to eliminate poverty to every nation who embraced it.

More people rise out of poverty when societies are free and citizens rely on their own industry instead of government doles.

There are no “angels” in our government we should trust any more control or power to than our constitution grants them.

The prophet Ether warned that, “… whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed;” (Ether 8:22).

Some of our citizens support the idea of nationalized health care because they haven’t adequately considered the Christian implications of forced charity. Others do so because they want power and gain – power over someone else’s money for their gain. Many ignore the commonsense realities of the law of the harvest and desire to get something for nothing, or more for less. Many that are currently on the government dole desire to stay on it, and not earn their own way. Many politicians want to increase their political power by making the citizenry increasingly more reliant on government solutions and increasingly less reliant on themselves. Most disturbing to me are the many that desire to divorce their aging parents with their health care problems and force society to pay for them. This in turn creates many who realize that they have not provided for their own future healthcare needs, cannot rely on their own offspring to tend to them in their waning years, and therefore desire that government forcibly take money from others in society to pay for what they and their thankless children cannot or will not.

Patriots should ensure that the debate on nationalized health care is centered on our national decline towards the despotism of socialism. The core of the issue has always been about greed, lusting for control over the fruit of another's labor; in a word, socialism. Wherever this greed exists, we should expose it and not allow someone to camouflage it with altruistic platitudes.

Isn't Spreading the Wealth Christian?

Increasingly often, I run across individuals who mistakenly believe that the underpinnings of socialism are the Christian values of love and charity, i.e. taking care of the poor and needy. Invariably, they are good, well-intentioned individuals and it almost pains me to burst their bubble. I don’t know what percentage of people who support liberal agendas do so misguidedly, but a concerted effort by conservatives to educate and convert them is in order. The underpinnings of socialism are the non-Christian values of greed and control.

“But, didn’t Jesus teach that we should give to the poor?” Yes, here is what he taught:

Matt. 5:42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Furthermore, he taught that giving to the poor should be a personal and private act.

Matt 6:2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet …3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Alms by definition are voluntary contributions. At no time did Jesus suggest that anyone should be compelled to give to the poor, or that his followers should forcibly take from one person in order to provide for someone less fortunate. Rather, voluntary acts of charity are to spring from love -- love towards God, and love towards neighbors. Note again in the following passage that Jesus gives no hint of coercion or force:

Matt. 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom… 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me…

37 Then shall [they] answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?...

40 And the King shall answer … Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Jesus’ ideal of giving to the poor is very different from the socialist doctrine of taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots. One doesn’t have to be a Christian to appreciate the differences. Furthermore, socialism is not only antithetical to Christian values, it is also incompatible with the principles of our Constitution. The following is one of the best descriptions of socialism that I’ve ever read and highlights the underpinning values of greed and control:

"Socialism... is the theory and practice of coercive collectivism. It is the evil fruit of greed for other men's possessions and greed for control over other men's labor.

"This greed for goods and power is as old as man and as widespread as the human race. It goes by many names, disguised in many forms, as men think up many excuses for robbing and ruling their fellows.

"Socialist theory is a modern excuse, an elaborate rationalization for this greed and for the organized looting and despotism it seeks to achieve. But its materialism, its collectivist point of view, its reliance on violence and coercion, even most of its economics, are as old and as common as sin.

"It holds out to men the hope that they may reap where they have not sown. It teaches that man is the creature of his environment, and that he may be happy and good if he gets enough wealth, regardless of how or where. All that is needed, says the Socialist Tempter, is to bow down and worship the Socialist State, turning over to it authority and power to take wealth where it finds it and to direct labor as it wills. Just a little class hatred, a little lying propaganda, a little violence on the picket lines, a little suppression of adverse critics, and a few generations of compulsory education in Socialistic thought, then surely we shall see the bright new day of equality, peace, brotherhood, and freedom! So says the Socialist." - Dr. V. Orval Watts, Political Economist, quoted by Ezra T. Benson, December 10, 1963, BYU Speeches of the Year

Socialism is about greed and control, not love and charity. We need to get the word out and set the misguided straight. We must aggressively counter what I perceive to be a growing trend to accept the principle of re-distribution of wealth.

[cross-posted at redstate.com]