It IS All About the Money

Just as the love of money is the root of all evil, so too, is the hate of money.

Like it or not, money is this realm’s “currency.” It is, at its essence, the means for freedom; freedom to choose whom you will serve.

A poor person, unless introduced to and accepting of God, feels he has no choices in life. His is an existence of mere existence; one fraught with constant worry and peril.

But, through God, all things are possible. The acceptance of God into one’s soul opens one’s eyes to the temporary nature of poverty. If one aspires to be better and educates himself, and works hard to attain money, that person elevates his economic status.

By disdaining wealth, and the very idea of Capitalism, one shackles himself to poverty, and the notion of “Fairness.”

Fairness is a notion that results in the desire to have “good intentions,” instead of “measurable results.”

Wealth is a measuring mechanism. Good Intentions are bricks of self-indulgence that are useless, except to line the road to Hell.

While idolization of money is evil, so, too, is the vilification of money.

God invented money for us to use as a means to have earthly worth and freedom.

The more money you have, the more options you have. The more options you have, the freer you are. The freer you are, the freer you feel to decide whom you will follow.

This may be why Progressives, who publicly eschew money (while idolizing it privately), are so invested in instilling in others the notion that they should gladly enslave themselves to Poverty, or Envy, or Covetousness, in order to be “better” people.

But, these better people end up serving The Other. Why? Because they cannot meet their basic needs. Because they value envy and sloth over independence and industry. And so, they get poorer, and more desperate, and desperate people are so much more susceptible to corruption.

There are over 2300 passages in the Holy Bible about money, and how to steward it.

If money weren’t important to God, it wouldn’t have been created. God also created Free Will: the ability to decide whether to believe in God, or not, and to follow Him, or not.

So, money is an aspect of Free Will. It’s all in how we choose to see it and use it.

So, those among us who decry Capitalism and who extol Socialism serve The Other, not God.


Obama Breaks Nearly All Ten Commandments

For a purported Christian, President Barack Hussein Obama disregards most of God’s Commandments on a daily basis.

Since coming into Office, President Obama has not conducted himself much like a person who believes in Christianity. To the contrary, he has disregarded traditional Christian holidays and ceremonies, while going out of his way to respect and acknowledge Muslim practices and ideology. That is, until public scrutiny arises because of his behavior, and some brave member of the media finally gets around to pointing out the president’s dichotomous behavior. And then, Obama gets on television, acting the very paragon of Christian Virtue. In fact, one cannot escape his media sycophants’ not-so-subtle comparisons to Jesus.

Certainly, there has been much already written about the “Chicago Jesus”: from the way the media first photographed him during and after the 2008 Presidential Campaign (with suggested halos behind his upturned head), to the paintings of Obama by left-wing artists (who literally depicted him as a black Jesus). Even today, film director, Davis Guggenheim, who is making a seventeen-minute documentary for Obama’s 2012 campaign re-election, says he can find absolutely no fault in Obama.

But, how evident is it to people that Obama breaks nearly every one of God’s Commandments? For a “Christian,” Obama seems to act as if the Ten Commandments don’t exist.

1st Commandment: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”
Obama comports himself with an air of arrogance and self-love that no other president has ever displayed. He is literally worshiped by liberals and the politically-ignorant. His secular ideology places Mother Earth above Man, and then Man above God. Existing rules of law do not apply to Obama. He routinely disregards the Constitution, and has said he will circumvent Congress in order to dictate. His wife, Michelle Obama, has lectured us about what Obama will and will not “allow” us to do. Through his words and actions, Obama has made it clear that HE is God.

2nd Commandment: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.”
Obama is the only president in American History to discard the Presidential Seal in favor of a symbol that venerates himself and not the nation. Like Communist propagandists of old, the use of symbolism and imagery as a focus of adoration and power has been a tactic of the Obama Machine since he first ran for the presidency. His iconic Hope and Change posters are ubiquitous.

3rd Commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.”
In a multitude of speeches, Obama has openly invoked the names of God and Jesus to justify his radical policies and false premises. Most recently, he claimed that Jesus would support taxing the Rich.

In one of his most famous speeches, he said, “Whatever we once were, we’re no longer a Christian nation. At least not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, and a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers…” America was founded by Christian leaders and believers. Our traditions and values are based specifically on Christian-Judeo principles. Pew Polling has consistently shown that more than 70% of Americans self-identify as Christians. Yet, Obama chooses to down-play our religious heritage in favor of attacking those on the Right when he said, “Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and started being used to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it’s because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us…”

Ironically, it is Obama himself who uses faith and class warfare to divide Americans.

4th Commandment: “Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy.”
Since he entered the presidency, Obama has rarely attended church. Instead, he famously spends his Sundays playing golf or basketball. On the few occasions that he has attended church, it was after public questioning of his faith occurred. Even then, one of those times was primarily to meet with a Muslim religious leader who was visiting at the same church.

Christmases for Obama have seen controversy, as it was discovered that Marxist and Maoist decorations have adorned the “Holiday Tree.” In 2011, Obama issued no proclamation about Easter. However, his administration released statements recognizing the observance of major Muslim holidays, such as: Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.  He not only neglecting Easter, but Good Friday, as well. In place of a public acknowledgement of Good Friday, Obama released an eight-paragraph statement heralding Earth Day, which fell on Good Friday.

6th Commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.”
Much has been made by Progressives in the media about Obama’s “gutsy call” regarding the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Despite hesitating for a day before issuing the okay to take out the terrorist leader, Obama did not hesitate to politically “spike the football” for weeks afterward. His subsequent ordering of military actions in support of the taking out of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi (without Congressional authority) indicates he no longer has any compunction about the assassination of foreign leaders.

The most disturbing thing about President Obama’s claim of being a Christian has been his support of abortion; and, of partial birth abortion, specifically. In 1997, as a Junior Senator of Illinois, Obama voted in the Illinois Senate against SB 230, a bill designed to prevent partial-birth abortions. He consistently refused to support legislation that would define an infant who survived a late-term induced-labor abortion as a human being with the right to live. He insisted that no restriction must ever be placed on the right of a mother to decide to abort her child.  He says he did so because if the bill passed, and a nine-month-old fetus survived a late-term labor-induced abortion was deemed to be a person who had a right to live, then the law would “forbid abortions to take place.” Obama further explained the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not allow somebody to kill a child, so if the law deemed a child who survived a late-term labor-induced abortion had a right to live, “then this would be an anti-abortion statute.”  And, in addition to supporting abortion rights, Obama, in the U.S. Senate, consistently voted to expand embryonic stem cell research.

8th Commandment: “Thou shalt not steal.”
What is Socialism if not institutionalized theft? President Obama is a Marxist who demonstrates disdain for individual property rights. He has taken over various segments of our economy, and disregarded established bankruptcy laws in favor of rewarding his union worker constituency. When he ordered the taking over of General Motors and Chrysler, corporate bondholders were the biggest losers; exchanging their securities for just 10% of the stock of the restructured company.

Chrysler’s declaration of bankruptcy happened even after the company had reached a deal with Fiat giving the Italian automaker an eventual 35% stake on top of the United Autoworkers’ 55%. The U.S. government got 8% and the Canadian government got the other 2%. The automaker’s current majority shareholder at the time, equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, which held approximately 80%  of the shares was essentially wiped.  So, too, was Daimler (Chrysler’s former German parent company), which held 20%.

What is remarkable about Obama’s view of finances is that he has increased the Federal Debt to an economy-crippling $15.2 trillion (from the $8.5 trillion deficit under President Bush).   As a U.S. senator, Obama denounced then President Bush as being “unpatriotic” for increasing the debt limit. Yet, under Obama as president and the Democratic-controlled Congress, the debt limit has been increased numerous times. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the U.S. gross domestic product reached $15.17 trillion at the end of the third quarter of 2011. The debt now equals 100% of the Gross Domestic Product of America. In other words, Obama’s use of Keynesian Economics to spend his way out of the recession has not only failed, it has enslaved future Americans to higher taxation and lower standards of living.

Meanwhile, he and his wife take lavish holiday vacations at tax payer expense, and have weekly soirees with celebrity guests who eat expensive food.

Through his continual debt spending, Obama has stolen our futures.

9th Commandment: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
When a prominent black Harvard professor (and friend of Obama’s) in Cambridge, Massachusetts was arrested after a confrontation at the man’s home, President Obama said that police in Cambridge, “acted stupidly” in arresting him. “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played.” In other words, Obama insinuated that the police officers involved may have been racists. He nationally bore false witness against them, without knowing the facts of the case.

President Obama routinely vilifies Republican leaders and misrepresents their positions to the American People. This conduct is unbecoming the President of the United States of America. Yet, sadly, it is his daily modus operandi. As a result, there has been renewed racial polarization within the populace.

This was further exacerbated by President Obama’s references to citizens participating in the Tea Party Movement as, “Teabaggers.” This is a reference to sexual act; a reference the president most certainly knew about by the time he started using it on nation television. When Tea Party activists were falsely accused of saying racist slurs by Congressional Democrats, Obama perpetuated those slurs through innuendo. He bore false witness against members of the American populace who decried his policies.

10th Commandment: “Thou shalt not covet.”
President Obama routinely starts his speeches with false premises based on false choices. He has waged a war against the Rich that expressly breaks the Tenth Commandment. He is encouraging covetousness and envy when he claims the rich are “not paying their fair share of taxes.” This is patently false, as nearly 48% of Americans don’t even pay taxes. Do they pay their fair share? No. They are the government-dependent poor who reliably vote Democrat in order to retain their entitlement monies and programs. Instead, the top 1% of Americans who already pay over 40% of all taxes are vilified by Obama as being “greedy and selfish.” Breath-taking.

When the Occupy Wall Street protesters took up Obama’s mantra against the top 1% of Americans, we watched as Obama and the liberal media glorified the OWS’s radical protestations for jobs,  free education, and free food. And, interestingly enough, for the socialization of America. They claimed to represent the other 99% in America.

Class warfare has been Obama’s primary weapon against American traditions and institutions. And, against the Constitution itself.

Thus, it is plain to see that Obama has a great deal of work to do before he can accurately claim to be a “Christian.” Of course, to him, even being a Christian is subject to “interpretation.”

In God We Still Trust

Despite what the militant atheists on YouTube and various political opinion forums would have you believe, adult Americans as of 2007 are, as a whole, people of faith.

According to Pew, 17.3% of Americans identify as Atheist (16.1%), New Age/Pagan (0.4%), or Don’t Know (0.8%).  This means that 82.7% of Americans identify as one of many types of religious denominations. In a nation with an approximate population of 305 million people, there are 252,235,000 people who believe in a power greater than themselves.

God bless America.

The Moral Crucible of Our Time

The following is my response to a Facebook discussion some of my friends were engaged in.

I chimed in with the following opinion. I have edited areas that had grammatical errors and added passages because my original commentary didn’t fully reflect the breadth of my opinion:

“I have given this issue a lot of thought over the past year. I am still torn. On the one hand, I am a Christian. On the other, I am an American Conservative Constitutionalist. These are not mutually exclusive philosophies, as the founding of our nation was based on Christian-Judeo precepts. However, they do have areas where no clear agreement may exist.  The area of gay marriage is one of these.

It seems to me that marriage is both a sacred (blessed by God) and legal (sanctioned by society) union traditionally-represented by the archetypes of Adam and Eve. As a sacred union that is normally officiated by religious institutions (institutions that do not accept homosexuality on principle or practice), it seems to Christians that homosexual activists have chosen to wage war against “God.” These activists are demanding the redefinition of marriage as opposed to solely seeking to attain equal protection under the law for civil unions. Thus, the issue is one of mainstreaming a segment of the population that has ever always been viewed as fringe and perverse.

97-99% of society, depending on whose stats you review, is heterosexual. To redefine cultural norms that have been in existence for thousands of years isn’t justified to me because the greater society is being rent apart by a minority of that culture’s members.

Better to me, it seems, homosexuals accept equal legal status as lifelong partners under civil unions than to demand and legally force religious heterosexuals to change their beliefs and values so that the institution of marriage be rendered meaningless.

As a Constitutionalist, Americans have freedom of religion, not from religion. There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the Constitution as described by activists in this country. The only thing the Constitution says is: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

So, criminalizing churches that preach homosexuality as a sin or being against their religion is unconstitutional. Period.

However, I am also struck by the following precepts which serve as the foundation for the law of the land: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Our government is not allowed to deny us these rights. Thus, how can I believe in and uphold the Constitution if I denied my fellow Americans their God-given rights? Homosexuals have every right to pursue their happiness. They are human beings! They love just like everyone else.

Throughout my life I have worked with, lived with, and befriended many individuals whose sexual orientation happens to differ from mine own. In fact, one of my favorite teachers ever was Mr. Robert Reed (Mr. Brady from the Brady Bunch).

Mr. Read was a wonderful person. I had heard jibes about him prior to attending Shakespeare courses under him at UCLA, but I dismissed the spurious comments because I didn’t care one way or another. Besides, the man knew far more than I did about the subject. And, I went to UCLA to learn about theatre from experienced professionals.

During my time with him as my teacher and unofficial adviser, he never once introduced the subject of his sexuality into our conversations. To the contrary, he was a stern professional who addressed everyone by their last names, and who expected their best. He was generous with his time and money, as evinced by Thursday afternoon video pizza parties for those who chose to attend.

When I had written my first play at UCLA based on my previous relationship with a woman I feared had given me AIDS, Mr. Reed was non-judgmental. I really was in a panic and heartbroken because I had discovered just before transferring to UCLA my fiancee was a drug addict who was secretly sleeping with a dealer, a lesbian housemate, and a butch homosexual with a “queen” boyfriend. Perfect play material, I thought.

In open office door meetings, he genuinely asked my how I felt and why I chose to depict certain characters the way I did. In taking the time to do so, he made me feel more confident as a person and as a student; and for that I will be forever grateful. He was simply a good person. Thankfully, my deep-seated fears of affliction were never realized.

There is one moment, a year later, that I now recognize revealed a great deal about Mr. Reed.  The moment I am recalling is when I walked up to him after reading, “The Engines of Creation” by Eric Drexler. This was the first book I had read on the subject of nanotechnology, circa 1989. I told Mr. Reed that some scientists were working to develop microscopic-sized robots that could course through our veins, cleaning our blood and eliminating plaque and other dangers.

Excitedly, Mr. Reed asked, “Really? When will this be?” “Not for twenty years, or so,” I replied. In my mind’s eye I now see how crestfallen and disappointed he felt at the response. He brushed the subject off and called the class to order. To my deep regret, I only now remember seeing the tears that had barely formed in his then sad eyes.

Three years later, Mr. Reed passed away. According to his death certificate, he had HIV, but unrelated cancer is what did him in. According to reports publicized by such journalistic empaths as Geraldo Rivera, Mr. Reed was a “conflicted” person. Though he had been married in the 1950s and had a daughter, he was also allegedly homosexual. I say homosexual instead of bisexual because publicly he had always kept the subject of his sexual preference to himself; like a shameful secret. I did not know that when I knew him.

When I happened to learn of his passing while surfing the Internet one day, I was very saddened. We lost a caring human being. But, it seems, any time he comes up in conversation, he now serves as the brunt of gay jokes and lambasting memoirs.  I sometimes wonder how hard it must’ve been to be “in the closet” as he was; how his life was diminished because of his self-loathing. I read in several articles about him after his death that he genuinely refused to accept he was a homosexual. Yet, he must’ve engaged in sexual behavior that resulted in his acquisition of the HIV virus. Such conflict shaped him as he went through life, and as a result, he was not considered a nice person by some. My experience was different, and I choose to remember him as a genuine person.

Therein is the crux of my moral dilemma on the matter of same sex marriage. It is not as simple as concluding it is normal or abnormal. As a Christian, I appreciated Mr. Robert Reed for who, not what, he was.

As yet, I have not committed myself to a definitive opinion because my intellect and spirituality are not sufficiently developed at this time for me to be able to do so. I do pray I have the courage and wisdom to come to the correct conclusion. Doing so, though, would require me to subsume one set of beliefs to the other. And, that may not be such a terrible thing. I think I owe it to Mr. Reed to give this my utmost consideration before making any further proclamations on the subject.

What I would like to understand is why it is so crucial to homosexuals to redefine “marriage.” If they seek tolerance of their differing views and lifestyles, that is one thing. If they demand outright acceptance from others whose beliefs are anathema to such acceptance, then that is another thing. After all, in order for homosexuals to have “marriage,” religion has to be compromised, or even destroyed. That is unacceptable; not only because it would be wrong, but, because we have the Constitution saying it is illegal to do so.

Congress simply cannot compel Christians to stop being Christians. It is against the law of the land. By the same token, Christians cannot compel homosexuals to stop being homosexuals. Despite that not being possible *, the primary “law” Jesus told us Christians to practice was to love our brother as we ourselves would want to be loved.

And, as a Christian, who am I to break one of God’s laws?

Who are you?

* To clarify, I do not subscribe to the idea that homosexuals spontaneously explode into existence somewhere around their pre-teen years. I believe they, like me, were born they way they are.

A Theory About Why Some Republicans Are Trying to Redefine Conservatism

I may be completely waaay off base, but I think I figured out why there’s even a debate about what Conservatism is. After all, hasn’t Ronald Reagan already articulated our philosophy clearly enough? It seems pretty simple: It means Smaller Government, lower taxes, more individual freedom, and strict adherence to The Constitution.

Nothing complicated. However, there is one more aspect to the philosophy of Traditional Conservativism that I believe is absolutely intrinsic to it: a Belief in God.

The civil war we are engaged in today as a party to redefine conservativism could be the result of Republican elites attempting to remove God from the Party in order to “widen the tent.”

While once, being a Conservative was synonymous with being a Christian, today, there seems to be movement to remove that aspect of the Party philosophy in order to “not offend.” When the hell did God become offensive to Americans, much less to Conservatives? What true Conservative would ever say and do such a thing? A person of principle would never compromise on core values, especially when it comes to deeply-held religious beliefs.

For decades, liberals have mocked “holy rollers,” and the “Moral Majority” in order to marginalize Christians in the eyes of Society. And, to an undeniable degree, they have been successful. Today, Liberals continue to harp that Republicans want to establish a theocracy. This absurd meme furthers their goals in diminishing us as a traditional culture. Over the last five years or so, there has also been a steady rise in Militant Atheism; a politically-driven philosophy of nihilism that has been adopted by a growing number of Americans. AMERICANS, for God’s sake! It is no secret that The ACLU and subversive Communist groups have fomented a hatred of the concept of God; and in the religion of Christianity in particular. In one generation, we have lost Christmas Pageants, Nativity scenes in the public square, and the Ten Commandments in our Courthouses.

Liberals, who now seem to worship Gaea instead, have successfully promoted atheism through the media for over a decade. They have done so subtly, but effectively. Nowadays, there is rarely any mention of God (in the Christian sense) in movies, and especially on television. If God is referred to at all, it is in a vague, “COEXIST” bumper sticker sort of way. The average American has heard the fallacious and disingenuous “Separation of Church and State” meme for so long, that they no longer feel free to discuss God or religious issues at school or in public. The liberal atheists have damaged our country.

They have done so because they not only believe there is no God, but also because they believe religion in general must be eliminated from society. Their militancy goes beyond what is acceptable because their words and actions (lawsuits) are intolerant to all religions. They don’t want anyone to believe in what they call “superstitious myths.” In doing these things, liberal atheists are obstructing our freedom of religion in favor of freedom from religion. This makes them dangerous to our society; a society they wish to reshape (along with liberals in general) into a secular nanny state. They want us all to be “progressive,” and leave behind a perceived stone age mentality.

Thus, given empirical evidence, I conclude that either liberal atheists have insinuated themselves in the Republican Party in order to destroy it from within; or, we have a growing number of spineless, agnostic party operative pussies in our midst who only want to secure power for themselves by transforming the Republican Party into a secular, Democrat-Lite Party.

Now, if I’m sounding like a conspiracy nut, I somewhat agree. I don’t know for a fact that these agenda are the reasons we are in the midst of a Conservative Civil War. But, after seeing thousands of disparate real-world incidents, reading thousands of Internet posts, and watching countless MSM and cable news talk show segments, a pattern has begun to emerge. It’s a pattern I find deeply disturbing; a pattern of concerted efforts to destroy the Republican Party by removing faith as a core value, and, an effort to discredit Christianity in America.

This is disastrous because Christianity is the very foundation of our guiding principles as a people. Many of our Founding Fathers rooted their governing philosophies in the belief in God, if not in also in Jesus. Without faith as the foundation of our values, America as a culture is open to continued corruption by the enemies within and without.

So, I throw this theory out there. Am I wrong? And if I’m not, what do we do about this?

Do we proudly and openly declare that to be Conservative, one must also be a Christian? If so, what of Jews who also consider themselves conservatives? Perhaps there are Jewish members of our party who feel that Conservative Philosophy focuses too much on Christianity, and that Judaism is unfairly excluded. Perhaps we need to expand the definition of  “traditional conservativism” to include patriotic persons of all faiths (though, for obvious reasons, there wouldn’t be such a thing as Islamist Conservatives).

I do think that if a poll were taken of people who self-identified as Conservatives, we would see a surprising drop in the number of “Faithful,” compared to twenty years ago.

Of course, I just may be a complete screw ball. After all, I just found out that squishie Congressional Republicans and liberals alike have a new name for guys like me who believe Obama is hiding something: “Birther.”


I had lunch this weekend with a colleague and friend. He and I inevitably end up talking politics and religion. As he is black, his views are informed from a perspective and experience different from my own. It is an experience he often cites during our debates. During this recent discussion, he called the United States a “young, arrogant nation.”  The moment he made this statement, I was rankled and on the defensive.

Because I am so fatigued by the endless insults against our nation by those from without this country as well as from within (read: the Media-Activist Complex), I could not help feeling otherwise. As I tried to debate him on various points, he too became upset. The focus of our conversation was on the cultural conflict we have been experiencing for the past forty (perhaps even 221+) years. His position is that this cultural conflict is the natural maturing of a culture toward Liberalism. My premise is that Liberalism is the antithesis of progress, and is, rather, the catalyst for cultural degradation.

He cited the cosmopolitan elegance and multiculturalism of European countries, which, unlike America, instill in people a maturity that we don’t have. In rebuttal, I pointed to the fact that these cultures have all but crucified God Himself, by arrogantly dismissing Him from their cultures. “But, religion should be a private thing,” he replied. To which I countered, “Jesus Himself said that fellowship is a crucial component for being a Child of God.” So, to me, attempts to eliminate God from public life is not only a mischaracterization of Jesus’ teachings, but a very dangerous thing to be happening to our country.

It is my position that because of the liberalism that pervades them, European countries are in a state of decline. What my friend extolls as “maturity,” (the acceptance by a culture of the changing of or loss of its traditions and founding values), I view as “resignation.” This maturity my friend is admiring is really the loss of self-respect by such a culture. According to my friend, this process is natural. As we age, we come to accept things as they are, and to not to get upset about that which is minor. I suppose socially unhealthy rates of out-of-marriage births, economic miasma arising from oppressive governmental policies, and the cultural subversion by Islamists of European societies as the result of unfettered immigration are ‘minor’ things.

Of course, it is natural not to want to fight the fight any more as you get older. That’s because old people do not have the strength, drive, and energy that young people have to be able to do so. Interestingly, our Congress is populated by octogenarians. You would think that at some point, they would know when to step down and let the next generation resume the battle. But, since their battles are merely verbal ones, and, their weapons are not much more than lies, deception, and pork barrel payoffs, I suppose it isn’t surprising they go against my contention. After all, what better fountain of youth is there than power?

Now, my friend and I didn’t get very far in our discussion, as I recognized that every time I raised a question about morality, he would counter by asking, “Ah, but according to whose morality?” Each time he’d do so, it would confuse me. As Christians, I would have thought that he and I would automatically view morality as derived from God’s Word, the Holy Bible. But, instead, he often discounted the Bible (and religion as a whole) as the filtered control mechanism of governments past and present.

I would not refute his implication that the Bible was the result of convocations that have edited the “Inspired Word of God” (and, three hundred years after the time of Jesus, at that). Or, that Christianity is the amalgam of Jesus’ teachings with the rituals and practices of many pagan cults, along with successive infusions into the dogma by Roman emperors and by priests of the Catholic Church. With such a revised tome of truth and wisdom, it is easy to question its accuracy and relevance.

But, relevant it is, for Truth is immutable. It does not change over the ages, nor is it completely erased as the result of revision or whitewashing. Just like our Constitution. I argued that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, and that The Constitution still contains the governing wisdom we need to serve as a relevant instrument for running this country. To this, my friend said Puritanism has lead to many a cultural foible, and that The Constitution is really not that important. Instead, he said, it is The Declaration of Independence that is more culturally important.

I wasn’t sure what to say to that beyond realizing my friend is a dyed-in-the-wool Liberal who reinterprets the Bible just as he reinterprets our founding documents. The fact is that the Declaration and the Constitution serve two completely different purposes. And it is apparent that a large segment of our population does not understand this. They also are uneducated about just how integral God was to the people who forged both documents.

As our conversation wound down, I expressed my concern about militant atheism, which has teamed up with liberalism to subvert this country. As I wrote in my previous commentary, atheists these days seek not only the removal of religion from the public square, but the destruction of God Himself. They have great disdain for Faith. Ironically, these same people become devotees of causes and movements with the same religious fervor of a Jesuit priest. Such arrogance.

Which brings me to the point of this commentary. I realized that even the most talented, most powerful, and most intellectual among us can be blinded to Truth because of Arrogance. Why do Hollywood stars flock to a made-up religion that charges them to be audited? Why do politicians invariably become corrupted and break their vows to serve their constituents? Why do university students so easily become seduced by romanticized representations of a murderous Cuban henchman and by the failed policies of Communism?


Once a person starts to reject God- the fountainhead of truth- and starts to believe he knows all there is to know, that person becomes blinded to Truth’s presence in this world. Such a person will begin to believe that he is smarter, better, and wiser than everyone else. And, soon, he will begin to crave power; the power to reshape the world, to make it a “better place.” Consequently, this champion of progress will seek to control what others think or do, so that there is no war, or hate, or injustice.  Only a Socialist Paradise on Earth- with him on top of everyone else, of course, to make sure they are all equal. Even if it’s all equally poor and miserable.

Arrogance. There is none so blind as He who will not see.