conservative

Translating the Declaration of Independence

/ warriorwoman91 / 4 Comments

The Declaration of Independence makes several definitive statements regarding the rights of the people and where those rights come from.  First, the Declaration acknowledges that the source of rights is the Creator, calling them the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”
Second, it claims that all men are created equally free to govern their own actions, thus requiring the consent of the governed in order for just government.  Being unwilling to recognize these truths, the British government had failed in it’s sole duty of government of securing the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for the people, according to the Founding Fathers.

These ideals come in direct opposition to modern liberal and Progressive thought.  For instance, the Declaration states that “all men are created equal,” meaning that they are all born with the same human rights that the government needs to respect.  The modern liberal or Progressive definition is that men are not created equal and the government needs to step in via redistribution and make them equal.  These definitions are fundamentally incompatible, and one cannot coexist with the other.

This concept of unequal wealth distribution reflecting the inequality of rights is not simply an idea dreamed up by modern day politicians like Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.  Karl Marx, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson are only a few historical names associated with this Progressive ideology.  According to Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Necessitous men are not free men,” meaning that poor men are not free.  This notion is flawed in that simply because a man is poor does not mean he is prevented by government from being wealthy.  It may mean that circumstances or a down economy caused his lack of wealth. Or it may mean that he is unwilling to do the work in order to be prosperous.  As long as all men have the opportunity to choose what to do with their lives, they are free from government tyranny.

Why Should We Care About the Declaration of Independence?

/ warriorwoman91 / 1 Comment

The Declaration of Independence is one of the most important founding documents of the United States.  However, in modern days it becomes overlooked–why should we care about the complaints of some colonists over 200 years ago against a king long dead? What I have come to realize is that the Declaration is the heart and soul of the United States; it defines it’s purpose as a whole.

Thomas Jefferson said that the purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to express and justify the position of independence that the colonies were taking against the British government.  It acknowledges the fact that human beings have certain “unalienable rights” simply by being born, from “nature and nature’s God.”  This is the foundation of the Unites States–the idea that the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness [property]” are inherent to the people that can neither be given or taken away by the government.

The best way to look at the Declaration of Independence is in the context put by Abraham Lincoln. He called the principle “Liberty to all”, embodied by the Declaration, the “apple of gold.” He also called the Constitution the “frame of silver.” Lincoln said that the frame of silver (the Constitution) was made to “adorn” and “preserve” the “apple of gold” (the principle “Liberty to all”).  The frame is not to take precedence over the apple, but exists to perpetuate the existence of the apple.

Ultimately, the reason that the Constitution is so easily being dismantled, is because we have forgotten what its purpose is: to protect and preserve the principle “Liberty to all.” The Declaration of Independence is still crucially important to American society because it reminds us of the principles that define the United States and gives us a sense of urgency to uphold its constitution.

How Liberals Argue

/ warriorwoman91 / 6 Comments

The way liberals argue about gun control is to refer to the gun, not the person, as the criminal. This gives them emotional license to regulate and ban guns or magazines however they want, because anyone in favor of the gun rights is therefore in favor of the criminal. This tactic of demonizing and disregarding a political argument is designed to effectively shut down all opposition to liberal perspectives on the issues.  If you identify, for example, the conservative position with the criminal’s position, you’ll never even consider their argument for fear you’ll be identified with the criminal.

This is similar to the gay marriage argument.  Liberals refer to gay marriage as a civil right, therefore by that definition if you are against gay marriage you are against a civil right.  This again gives them license to treat you and your arguments as bigoted, subhuman, and not deserving of any kind of respect or consideration.  This results–intentionally–in scaring away all who might consider the position against gay marriage, but fear to be identified with an idea that is associated with a heinous social sin.

So how do you successfully debate with someone using this kind of tactic?  Conservatives have to define the issue right from the beginning. Guns do not commit crimes, people do.  Therefore, the argument for gun rights is not to be associated with the side of the criminal. Likewise, gay marriage is not a civil right, it is a lifestyle choice.  Therefore, to be against the gay lifestyle is no more heinous than being against any other lifestyle such as that of a smoker or a vegetarian. Conservatives need to redefine the premise in order to win the argument, otherwise real political debates will cease to exist.

An Old Testament Look at Homosexuality

/ warriorwoman91 / 11 Comments

Far too frequently do I hear people advocating the atrocity of homosexual marriage. Shockingly, 00384794many of these gay rights activists also claim to be Christians. These are people that we sit next to in church, who claim to read the Bible and are seen doing what would seem to be “Christian” things.

These so called “Christian” gay rights activists seem to interpret God’s love as tolerance for anything that we do. To them this includes tolerance of non-Biblical lifestyles that other so called believers and non-believers may lead.

This belief is diametrically opposite to what the Bible really says concerning homosexuality and any other ungodly lifestyle for that matter. Genesis 13:13 states that, “[…] the men of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the Lord.” Scrolling down to Genesis 19:5-7 we find that among their many sins was homosexuality. “They called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.’ Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, ‘No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing.'” Verses 24-25 outline Sodom and its sister city Gomorrah’s punishment. “Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land.” Obviously, God is not “tolerant” of sinful lifestyles.

So how should Christians treat gay rights activists? Well how would you treat anyone who is about to burn their hand on a stove? Warn them of what they are doing before it is too late. The best way you can help someone is by telling them the truth.

“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8:32