Category: politics

Second Column Published on WND.com on Malthus

Today Worldnetdaily.com published a second column of mine. Title: Christians Beware the Malthusian Mind!

Jesus said, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”

Thomas Robert Malthus would have disagreed. The philosophical forerunner to Darwin, Malthus argued that there are limited resources, and competition for them is intense. When there are too many people competing for those resources, you have war, famine and a continual threat to civilization itself.

For Malthus, the pie is only so big: We must reduce the number of people who want a share of it.

Christianity embodies another solution: Make a bigger pie.

In Christianity, God takes a few loaves and feeds thousands with them. Entrance to heaven is not contingent on space available. Jesus came that we would have life, and life to the fullest. Not just for some, but all.

None of what follows is an argument for Christian indifference to the plight of other people. However, Christians should not advocate “solutions” that repress human liberty, dignity and freedom. For some reason, all of the Malthusian’s solutions do just that.

Read the whole column on Malthus and Malthusians.

Share

A theological basis for rank individualism in society and elsewhere

In short, dear Christian, I contend that we already have in front of us all the ‘higher level organisms’ we need: the community of the family and the community of the faithful. Here and only here are individuals respected, welcomed, and free. Here only are individuals understood to be forever, and here only do we see the context in which they will be forever- in community through Christ.

It is therefore with great caution that we must approach the efforts of the Statists. True, very often they propose programs that we can in good conscience get behind. However, even then they do not share our views about the individual, and so, they can, quite unexpectedly, change things. They would only be acting on their own values, and so we should not be shocked. Thus it should be evident that the more power we give them to help us the more power we give to them to hurt us.

As such, it is worth positing that we should give them no power at all, and the power that we do give them come with very robust checks and balances. Our trust in their sincere intentions seems, increasingly, to be poised to do us all great harm- or at least, the weakest among us, and those who are the heaviest burden on society. In the name of the “Most good for the most people” great evil is being inflicted, and history tells us a great deal more is possible.

Share

Generous with other people’s money

My challenge is this: on what basis can we possibly justify taking money from other people by taxation (ie, through coercion, threat of punishment, etc), to achieve that which we think is a worthy charitable end? [More...]

If you see a beggar on the street, it is perfectly right and proper to want to help him. If you proceed to go over and help him, you’ve done what pleases God. If instead you go across the street, stick a gun in a rich man’s rib, and take the rich man’s money and go over and help the beggar, I am not so sure that is what God had in mind.

Using the government to do our good deeds is essentially being generous with someone else’s money.

I see no basis in the Scriptures for Christians to condone or participate in such a methodology.

Share

Health Care Solutions from a Conservative

As you shall see shortly, that does not mean that I am advocating that we leave the Health Care Insurance Corporations in charge of our health, guided as they are by the profit motive. (Still, the profit motive is better than the Government’s ‘sincere motives’ in my book).

The chief problem in the health care situation in this country is not health care insurance coverage. It is health care costs, period.

Naturally, how many of us can afford to pay for a surgery that runs into the tens of thousands of dollars? Not many; hence, insurance. But if that same surgery cost only $1,000? Or less? Now we’re getting somewhere.

Share

We have no rights, health care or otherwise, unless…

One purpose of the post is to highlight the obvious dangers, illustrated over and over again throughout history, and in the last century in particular, of having secular humanists and atheists in charge of bestowing rights. What they giveth, they can taketh. And they have often taketh.

But another purpose of this post is to point out to the many Christians calling for ‘universal health care’ that if you are claiming that God has bestowed certain rights such as health care, you’ve got to back that up somehow. Your sentimental arguments, sincere and well meaning, have as much weight to me as sentimental arguments like “God makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, don’t you want that, too?” have weight with atheists. In short, none.

Why? Does it mean that I am indifferent to those who struggle to receive adequate health care? Not at all. It does, however, have important implications as to how we proceed to address that issue

Share

The Health Care Slippery Slope and Saul Alinsky

As presented, it would include as many of the liberal and socialistic dream policies as they think they might reasonably be able to get passed, but as passed, a large number of these would be dispensed; but many would be retained.

This may strike the average, patriotic American, as fair. Compromise is one of those things that we think fair play requires. There is only one big problem: liberals who are operating on the activist play book (Read: Obama standing on Alinksy’s shoulders), have an entirely different notion of ‘compromise’ then the average fair minded American. Consider this long quote from Alinksy’s book Rules for Radicals:

…to the organizer, compromise is a key and beautiful word. It is always present in the pragmatics of operation. It is making the deal, getting that vital breather, usually the victory. If you start with nothing, demand 100 per cent, then compromise to 30 per cent, you’re 30 percent ahead. (pg 59 emphasis mine)

Share

Radio Interview with WLEA on Saul Alinsky

Many thanks to Kevin Doran from WLEA for having me on to discuss Saul Alinsky. Read the original post that inspired the interview on Saul Alinsky.

You can download and listen the interview here:

Share
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next