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”.

Thanks For Your Service

I witnessed another instance of Americans honoring our troops the day before yesterday. I was on my way home from a business trip on a plane with many Army Privates, traveling home in uniform for their holiday break from Basic Training. The airlines had just closed the cabin doors and a flight attendant began making announcements, including the variety of lunch boxes and beverages that would be for sale shortly after take-off. She then announced that there were many uniformed personnel traveling home for the holidays and that an anonymous passenger had purchased a lunch box for any of them who wanted one and that the airline was providing complimentary beverages to them as a token of appreciation for their service. This event prompts me to re-post a previous blog.

Quite often, fellow citizens from all over the country who don’t know me thank me for my service after discovering I serve in the military. Candidly, this embarrasses me. I don’t serve for honor or recognition or expect any thanks for what I do, and I admit that I don’t handle compliments well either. Nonetheless, the tremendous outpouring of support and appreciation directed towards service members by grateful compatriots is deeply touching and I dedicate this post to highlight a few personal examples and reciprocate a most heartfelt thanks to all who go out of their way to extend these sentiments.

The first time a perfect stranger ever thanked me for my service was on September 14, 2001. I had been on active duty for just over six years. My family was on vacation in California and September 11 still dominated our thoughts. President Bush had declared a National Day of Prayer and Remembrance and at noontime, Disneyland ceased all activity to observe a moment of silence. I didn’t know exactly what the implications of the attack meant for the military, but I knew there would be some. Evidently, I was not the only one; later that day, a mother and daughter thanked me sincerely for my service.

This experience is now common. Most of my military brethren report a similar trend. However, the surge of support has not just been limited to expressions of gratitude.

Sometime during my first week or two in Iraq, a couple of my Soldiers came into the shop, each carrying a US Postal Service Flat Rate Box (O-FRB1). I marveled that their families were so quick to send them care packages. It turned out that the packages were from one of the many, many organizations sending care packages to troops. Over the course of my tour in Iraq I saw hundreds and hundreds of these care packages distributed. I never had to buy toiletries by virtue of the abundance available from care packages. I can’t think of anything we went without. These packages contained everything imaginable: candy, chocolate, Twinkies, Oreos, chips, dips, cookies, crackers, summer sausages, snacks, knives, scarves, gloves, personal hygiene items, games, books, Christmas cards, Christmas trees, thank you letters…you name it, they sent it!

I regret that I didn’t write down all of the organizations, churches, schools, businesses, and individuals from which I saw a package or letter flow through. The list would be very long if I had. I would like to be able to thank each one by name. There were various Any-Soldier and Adopt-a-Soldier type organizations. Many church groups, community organizations, and schools also contributed. I read several books sent over by knife maker A.G. Russell. His boxes also contained pocket-sized copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution along with an assortment of products (not cheap) from his own business. A box arrived once that was full of handmade scarves. I will always cherish the one made by Marilyn A. Borros of Lakewood, Ohio that I drew from the box.

Finally, let me highlight the U.S.O. Besides sending care packages and entertainers to Iraq, they organized one of the most touching experiences of my life at the Dallas Fort Worth Airport. After deplaning, we walked through a long gauntlet of cheering airport workers and passengers on our way to customs. Departing customs towards the buses that would take us to another terminal, we walked through an even longer, more densely packed gauntlet of boy scouts, cub scouts, girl scouts, brownies, athletic teams, veterans, and many other locals. Applause thundered, cheers and thank-yous rang out, cameras flashed, flags waved, hands clapped our backs and shoulders, hands reached out to shake ours, gifts were pushed at us, personal cell phones were offered to make calls home, welcome back and thank-you banners were everywhere. It was all I could do to maintain my composure, and I lost it as soon as I was on the bus. I still choke up whenever I think of it. A young Soldier exclaimed as he walked onto the bus behind me, “I feel like a rock-star! This makes it all worthwhile.”

You citizens who extend your support to the troops have done more to support the war effort than you probably realize. Some people wonder why Soldiers continue to re-enlist despite long and multiple deployments – I don’t.

So to all who reach out and support us service members in your various ways, please accept my deepest gratitude and know that you’re efforts are not unnoticed and make a huge difference.

Merry Christmas.

Christmas is My Favorite Time of Year

Cue one of my favorite Christmas songs sung by Kenny Rogers:

(Lyrics):
How wise the Wise Men must have been
To find the Child in Bethlehem.
He lives again and draws us near,
Christmas time is here.

A tail of love that never dies,
The laughter in the children's eyes,
The child in me is always there,
Christmas is my favorite time of year.

The mist of wonder lies under my tree,
The gift of memories is waiting for me.

The day will come and soon depart,
The spirit stays to hear my heart
With love for people everywhere,
Christmas is my favorite time of the year.

Christmas is my favorite time of the year.

Despite the unfortunate commercialization of Christmas, this time of year more than any other brings a greater degree of “peace on earth, good will towards men.” Christmas celebration results in more smiles, more public greetings, more acts of charity, and more worship. Christmas music, including the song quoted above reverently sung by Kenny Rogers, helps to bring about this increased spirit of love and its attendant fruits. A challenge in preserving liberty is getting more people to carry this spirit of love in their hearts throughout the year. Love is the foundation of all virtue and the public morality upon which our system of government rests.

Cleon Skousen treats this concept masterfully in his book “The 5000 Year Leap”. He first establishes that our Founding Fathers believed that “the only reliable basis for sound government and just human relations is Natural Law.” (pg 37.)

Natural Law according to the Roman Emperor Cicero is nothing more than “the Creator’s order of things.” (pg 39.) Skousen demonstrates that Cicero’s philosophy is in harmony with the Christian teaching that “all the law and the prophets” hang on the first and great commandment to love God, and the second greatest commandments to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” (Matt 22:34-40)

Cicero was conscious that love was a “mighty social bond.” He said that, “…virtues originate in our natural inclination to love our fellow-men, and this is the foundation of justice.” (pg. 43.)

“As one and the same nature holds together and supports the universe, all of whose parts are in harmony with one another, so men are united in Nature; but by reason of their depravity they quarrel, not realizing that they are of one blood and subject to one and the same protecting power. If this fact were understood, surely man would live the life of the gods!” (pg 46.)

After establishing what the philosophy of Natural Law is, Skousen gives evidence that the Founding Fathers “embraced the obvious necessity of building a highly moral and virtuous society.” (pg 46.) Public virtue in eighteenth century terms was a “willingness of the individual to sacrifice his private interest for the good of the community”, i.e. love and living the Golden Rule. He offers many quotes that show the Founders “universally acknowledged that a corrupt and selfish people could never make the principles of republicanism operate successfully.” (pg 50.) Two examples follow:

James Madison: “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.” (pg 54.)

John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (pg 56.)

During this Christmas season, consider the increase in kindness around you, which as a corollary means an increased suppression of selfishness. Consider the public merit of this increased “goodwill towards men” and whether it results from the secular/commercial or religious aspect of the holiday. Consider whether or not our Constitution and liberty will be better off if efforts to remove Christ from Christmas, and religion (morality) from public life are successful. Finally, consider how well you individually contribute to or detract from keeping the spirit of Christmas alive throughout the year.

America's Drift Towards Socialism

“America was built on the principle of faith in God, self reliance, the profit motive, individual action and voluntary charity. It was built by those who believed that the surest helping hand at was at the end of their own sleeves. These forefathers of ours shared one thing in common, an unshakeable faith in God and a faith in themselves. There are indications that America is moving away from the philosophy that made her the most prosperous nation in the world.” – Ezra Taft Benson

Health Care - Promoting the General Welfare

From the Center For Medicine in the Public Interest (CMPI). “The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational organization that seeks to advance the discussion and development of patient-centered health care.” (CMPI Website)




Our founders framed our government and intended it to be a limited government, recognizing as George Washington cautioned that government is “force” and “like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." The video above aptly illustrates the dangers of governmental involvement in free society. Unfortunately, many politicians point to the general welfare clause of the Constitution as justification for expanding government into increasingly more areas of our lives, the latest attempt being a national health care system.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." (read here)

In 1792 while arguing against a bill sponsored by general welfare government expansionists, James Madison provided the historical context of the general welfare clause. A Founding Father himself, his authoritative remarks refute any notion that the general welfare clause was intended as a “catch all” authority for government to do anything it deems as good for the population in general.

"There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow dearly from the doctrine combated [government expansion to promote the general welfare], must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may a point teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.

"The language held in various discussions of this house [House of Representatives] is a proof that the doctrine in question was never entertained by this body [Congress]. Arguments, wherever the subject would permit, have constantly been drawn from the peculiar nature of this government, as limited to certain enumerated powers, instead of extending, like other governments, to all cases not particularly excepted." (read more here)

Citizens, whenever government presents a governmental solution to problem sets in our society, please consider the realities presented in the Health Care Hoops video when deciding whether or not to support it.

Rejecting the Right

“We would not accept the yoke of Christ; so now we must tremble at the yoke of Caesar.” -Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.


A premise of this blog is that our constitutional liberties can only be preserved on the foundation of a moral citizenry. As Patrick Henry put it, “No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles”. Accordingly, I view philosophies and ideologies contrary to moral discipline, and those who espouse them, as threats to and enemies of the Constitution.

I want to highlight two speeches, one religious and one secular, which tied the degradation of our society to an effort to eliminate discrimination between right and wrong. I highly recommend everyone find time to watch both speeches. You can view, listen, or read the first speech entitled “Morale Discipline” by Elder D. Todd Christofferson in its entirety (15 min) here. You can view the second speech entitled “How Modern Liberals Think” by Evan Sayet in its entirety (48 min) here.

Elder Christofferson defined moral discipline as “self-discipline based on moral standards”. He posits that, “In the end, it is only an internal moral compass in each individual that can effectively deal with the root causes as well as the symptoms of societal decay. Societies will struggle in vain to establish the common good until sin is denounced as sin and moral discipline takes its place in the pantheon of civic virtues”.

Mr. Sayet’s speech describes some of the political and secular circumstances that exist in today’s society that result in just the opposite. He details a modern philosophy that brands any government, society, or even individual who denounces sin as bigoted. This philosophy, he says, attempts to eliminate discrimination between good and bad, right and wrong, or behaviors that lead to success versus behaviors that lead to failure in society.

Quotes from the speeches follow below (emphasis mine). The first quote from the Wall Street journal wasn’t directly quoted in either speech, but was included as a footnote to Elder Christofferson’s speech.


Wall Street Journal on Societal Decadence:

“Sin isn’t something that many people, including most churches, have spent much time talking about or worrying about through the years of the [sexual] revolution. But we will say this for sin: it at least offered a frame of reference for personal behavior. When the frame was dismantled, guilt wasn’t the only thing that fell away; we also lost the guidewire of personal responsibility. . . .

“The United States has a drug problem and a high-school-sex problem and a welfare problem and an AIDS problem and a rape problem. None of this will go away until more people in positions of responsibility are willing to come forward and explain, in frankly moral terms, that some of the things that people do nowadays are wrong” (“The Joy of What?” Wall Street Journal, Dec. 12, 1991, A14).”

Elder Christofferson on Societal Decadence:

“The societies in which many of us live have for more than a generation failed to foster moral discipline. They have taught that truth is relative and that everyone decides for himself or herself what is right. Concepts such as sin and wrong have been condemned as “value judgments.” As the Lord describes it, “Every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god”(D&C 1:16).

“As a consequence, self-discipline has eroded and societies are left to try to maintain order and civility by compulsion. The lack of internal control by individuals breeds external control by governments. One columnist observed that “gentlemanly behavior [for example, once] protected women from coarse behavior. Today, we expect sexual harassment laws to restrain coarse behavior. . . .

“Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become.”

“In most of the world, we have been experiencing an extended and devastating economic recession. It was brought on by multiple causes, but one of the major causes was widespread dishonest and unethical conduct, particularly in the U.S. housing and financial markets. Reactions have focused on enacting more and stronger regulation. Perhaps that may dissuade some from unprincipled conduct, but others will simply get more creative in their circumvention.3 There could never be enough rules so finely crafted as to anticipate and cover every situation, and even if there were, enforcement would be impossibly expensive and burdensome. This approach leads to diminished freedom for everyone. In the memorable phrase of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, “We would not accept the yoke of Christ; so now we must tremble at the yoke of Caesar.”

“In the end, it is only an internal moral compass in each individual that can effectively deal with the root causes as well as the symptoms of societal decay. Societies will struggle in vain to establish the common good until sin is denounced as sin and moral discipline takes its place in the pantheon of civic virtues”

Elder Christofferson on Intelligent Use of Agency:

“…[I] have heard a few parents state that they don’t want to impose the gospel on their children but want them to make up their own minds about what they will believe and follow. They think that in this way they are allowing children to exercise their agency. What they forget is that the intelligent use of agency requires knowledge of the truth, of things as they really are (see D&C 93:24). Without that, young people can hardly be expected to understand and evaluate the alternatives that come before them. Parents should consider how the adversary approaches their children. He and his followers are not promoting objectivity but are vigorous, multimedia advocates of sin and selfishness.

“Seeking to be neutral about the gospel is, in reality, to reject the existence of God and His authority. We must, rather, acknowledge Him and His omniscience if we want our children to see life’s choices clearly and be able to think for themselves. They should not have to learn by sad experience that “wickedness never was happiness”.

Evan Sayet on Modern Liberalism:

“[Modern Liberalism] is diametrically opposed to that which is good, right or successful”.

“[Modern Liberalism] sides with evil over good, wrong over right, and the behaviors that lead to failure rather than the ones that lead to success”.

“The modern liberal looks back on [the history of] human civilization and knows only one thing for sure, that none of the ideas that mankind has come up with, none of the religions, none of the philosophies, none of the ideologies, none of the forms of government – none have succeeded in creating a world that is devoid of war, poverty, crime, and injustice. So they are convinced that since all of these ideas of mankind have proved to be wrong, the real cause of war, poverty, crime, and injustice must be found, can only be found, in the attempt to be right.

“If no one ever thought they were right, what would we disagree about? If we didn’t disagree, surely we wouldn’t fight. If we didn’t fight, of course we wouldn’t go to war. Without war there would be no poverty, without poverty there would be no crime, without crime there would be no injustice. It’s a utopian vision, and all that’s required to usher in this Utopia, is the rejection of all fact, reason, evidence, logic, truth, morality, and decency.”

“The best way to eliminate rational though [or] the attempt to be right, is to work always to prove that right isn’t right, and to prove that wrong isn’t wrong.”

“[Modern Liberalism’s] one criterion for truth, beauty, honesty, etc, etc, is does it tear down what is good and elevate what is evil. Does it tear down what is right and elevate what is wrong. Does it tear down the behaviors that lead to success and elevate the ones that lead to failure so there is nothing left to believe in.”

Sayet on a Cult of Indiscriminateness:

“The way the elite do this is by teaching our children, starting with the very young, that rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry. That no matter how sincerely you may seek to gather the facts, no matter how earnestly you may look at the evidence, no matter how disciplined you may try to be in your reasoning, your conclusion is going to be so tainted by your personal bigotries, by your upbringing, by your religion, by the color of your skin, by the nation of your [7th] great grandfather’s birth, that no matter what your conclusion is, its useless, it is nothing other than a reflection of your bigotries; and therefore the only way to eliminate bigotry, is to eliminate rational thought.”

“[The rising generation is] raised to believe that indiscriminateness is a moral imperative, because it’s opposite is the evil of having discriminated… In order to eliminate indiscriminateness the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate. The problem is, of course, that the ability to discriminate, to thoughtfully choose the better of the available options, is the essence of rational thought [or as Elder Christofferson put it, ‘the intelligent use of agency’].”

Socialism: The Core of the Health Care Debate II

“…no true American can be a socialist or a communist or support programs leading in that direction.” -- Ezra Taft Benson, American Heritage of Freedom

In my recent blog, "Socialism: The Core of the Health Care Debate", I discussed how the unconstitutional principle of re-distribution of wealth is the selling point of a nationalized health care system, naively accepted by some well meaning individuals and embraced by the greedy. I also mentioned that many politicians champion health care reform to increase their political power by making the citizenry increasingly more reliant on government solutions and increasingly less reliant on themselves. I read an article today by Roger Hedgcock with a title I may well have used for my blog, "Health Reform is Spelled F-O-R-C-E". The article reminded me of additional reasons to eschew national health care.

If America socializes our health care, public costs will drive health care decisions, not individual choices or desires.

The government will eventually determine when “end of life” medical care is cost prohibitive, or wasteful and pointless. (See video where President Obama implies that individuals are incapable of making good “end of life” decisions; that government must save them from evil medical practitioners who will milk them dry by loading their elderly parents up with needless tests.)

Health care costs will cause Federal regulation to expand into a broader range of activities since nearly everything affects health in some way or another. For example, it is conceivable that the Federal Governement will try to regulate the likes of McDonalds out of business for nutritional reasons. It is conceivable that they will force doctors to perform abortions and euthanasia on demand.

Roger Hedgecock writes:

“When you cut through the different bills working their way through Congress, cut through all the speeches, all the charges and counter charges raging in the debate on health insurance "Reform"---at the bottom line is governmental force. A shift of power and money and choice from the citizen, taxpayer, and patient to Government.…

…The same mentality that led President Clinton to blurt out that taxes were good because "we know better how to spend your money than you do" is evident today in the arrogant attitude that only this behemoth increase in government power can save us from our inability to provide health care to ourselves and our loved ones.”

Beware of this Pandora's Box, America!