JESUS WAS A COMMIE!

Atop the list of things driving America’s leftists insane over the 2004 election, is the fact that all of their secular socialist ideas of an irresponsible, increasingly government dependent society, were shot down in flames by Christian conservatives who reclaimed their moral high ground, and the country they built upon that rock…

Atheists and Agnostics from those blue dots sprinkled in a few corners of the country are scrambling to advance their theory that “morals” and “religion” have no connection.

Christians who claim Jesus was a Commie are scrambling to advance their argument that the conservative Right is cherry-picking their morals, attacking Abortion and Homosexuality in a bigoted fashion, while selfishly over-looking the poor and the disenfranchised.

Both are convinced they have a severe “image” problem, but find no flaws in their basic ideology. "We need to work really hard at reclaiming some language," said the Rev. Robert Edgar, general secretary of the liberal-leaning National Council of Churches.

“The religious right has successfully gotten out there shaping personal piety issues - civil unions, abortion - as almost the total content of 'moral values,'" Edgar said. "And yet you can't read the Old Testament without knowing God was concerned about the environment, war and peace, poverty. God doesn't want 45 million Americans without health care."

Now I’m no preacher, but I have read the good book a time or two, and I don’t recall free national health care being mentioned in the Bible anywhere. Personally, I’m for a free Rolls Royce in every driveway, but I couldn’t find that in the Bible anywhere either.

As for the Atheists and Agnostics, it seems to me the miraculous outcome of the 2004 election alone, indicates there might be something to that Christ fellow. He hasn’t physically been on earth for some 2000 years, yet he managed to “get out the vote” in record numbers. Now that’s impressive!

America, being the most generous nation on earth, not only feeds those Americans who can not feed themselves, but those who won’t, and also those around the globe who are having trouble. Who do you think is picking up the tab for all of this American generosity? Largely those rich right-wing Christian conservatives whom everyone loves to hate, that’s who…

Not only is our tax code geared to send them the bill for all our generosity, in addition, they represent the majority of folks supporting charities over and above that which is taken from them by the government. You almost never hear any of these givers complain…meanwhile, the left, who contribute little or nothing, never stop complaining.

Just as the left attempts to re-write American history, they also attempt to re-write a few definitions. Morality: “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality. Virtuous conduct.”

Can anyone tell me what is “virtuous” or “moral” about Abortion? Don’t give me the garbage about a woman’s Right to do what she wants to her own body, it isn’t her body we’re talking about. It’s the body of an innocent unborn child, and it’s Right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, at the center of this debate.

Can any Christian tell me what the good word says about Homosexuality? Don’t bother, I already know what the good book says’s about Homosexuality, so does anyone who has ever read the good book.

What really happened in the 2004 election is Christians reconnected these issues with their core Christian beliefs, leaving behind the idea that they can continue separating their core moral beliefs, from the decisions they make in their lives. Moral people took a moral stand…

This is exactly what the left is afraid of, moral people making moral decisions that infringe upon their Right to remain immoral without consequence. Atheists and Agnostics much prefer their set of morals, which don’t include such basics as a Right to Life or personal liberty. Some Christians prefer their “turn the other cheek, peace not war, communal living Jesus”.

In either case, on close inspection we find that it is of course the left, who cherry-pick which moral standards they will subscribe to and support. Their moral standards lead them to defend the life of a baby seal, but not that of an unborn child, their Right to drop the F-bomb anywhere anytime they like, while they insist the dirty word “God” be removed from public view.

They read the part about forgiveness in the Bible, but not the part about turning from sin. They enjoy the stories of Jesus speaking with prostitutes, accepted the message of salvation, but not the responsibility that comes with it.

I don’t doubt that in all cases, they have convinced themselves that they are as moral as anyone, even more than some. I don’t even doubt that we can find secularist individuals who do behave better than some individuals on the religious right; we are after all, sinners, all of us.

But this idea that the conservative right is cherry-picking moral standards is simply untrue, as is the notion that moral people can embrace immoral behaviors. I’m sure there are exceptions, but by and large, the general rule applies that religious people (by definition) subscribe to standards, a system of absolute right and wrong, and the best among them practice what they preach.

One can make a compelling argument, that those who have no bedrock standards or system of absolute right and wrong, those who cherry-pick which issues they will apply those standards to and which ones they will separate themselves from, have no standards at all really.

We can cherry-pick scripture too; it seems to have become a favorite American pass-time.

But when we look at the scripture as an entire work, their can be little doubt that Jesus was no Commie, quite the contrary. He was no sissy either, having died a brutal tortured death, standing up for his moral convictions, and his very death demonstrated his unwillingness to compromise.

The left needs to reclaim more than some language. Contrary to the wisdom found in those little blue dot areas today, not only was Jesus not a Commie, he wasn’t a hypocrite either; not prone to biting the hand that feeds the world, which means, by today’s standard, he couldn’t possibly be a sniveling liberal either…

My letter to my pastor:

What makes a good Christian when it comes to choosing a ruler or can government do the work of God?

What I have read and understood from the Bible is that God and Jesus wants us to help each other by using our own time, treasure and talent and to give from our hearts. Nowhere have I found anything along the lines of “Go out and institute huge bureaucracies that will take money from some people at the point of a sword and give that money to other people as a politician sees fit.”

Our Founding Fathers were Christian and very pious men. They founded this country under strong Judeo-Christian tenets and reflected on their religious beliefs on all their decisions. They wrote nothing into the Constitution of any type of government “aid” to help the poor, children or anyone else on purpose. They wanted a very limited government for good reason. Limited government is the best way to ensure that freedom will be preserved. The Scottish philosopher Alexander Tytler, who lived during the time of the American Revolution and writing of the US Constitution, summed these views:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure.

From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years.

These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

There are many interesting questions if citizens rely on government to do “God’s Work.”

If a government takes a portion of a man’s wages and does good with it, has the man also done good? If a government takes away a portion of a woman’s property and does evil with it, has the woman also done evil? When a rich man pays more in taxes than a poor person, is he more Godly? If the government then does evil, is he more to blame? A woman works for the government and uses other people’s tax money and does “God Work” with it, is this government woman now a good/Godly woman? If I legally try to avoid paying taxes, does that not make me an “Ungodly” man?

Today, the US government takes nearly 50% of a middle-class person’s paycheck after all taxes are factored in (income taxes, Social Security, sales tax, real estate taxes, gas tax, death taxes, phone taxes, highway tolls, sad etc.). Uncle Sam will spend more money in just this year (2004) than it spent combined between 1787 and 1900 - even after adjusting for inflation. I cringe at those numbers. The Founding Fathers wanted nothing like the tax-consuming monster that we have as a government today. I also think of all the good work that could have be done if people were allowed to keep more of their own money and give it to organizations/people that they believe in their heart are doing God’s work. Maybe it comes down to trust. Will people do the right thing with their own money or must a government take a huge chunk of it to do the “right things?”

Except government rarely does anything right except for those tasks that were explicitly outline in the Constitution as the Founding Father intended. I could cite many examples (such as where would you rather put $10,000 in retirement money - in Social Security or in your own 401k plan?) but the plight of black America illustrates this failure beyond comparison.

In 1965, the US government was going to wipe out poverty by the “Great Society” programs, in which to date over 3.5 trillion dollars has been spent. These federal programs were designed to “help families and children” or “buy votes” depending on your political viewpoint.

At the beginning of the 1960’s, the black out of wedlock birth rate was 22%. In the late 1975 it reached 49% and shot up to 65% in 1989. In some of the largest urban centers of the nation the rate of illegitimacy among blacks today exceeds 80% and averages 69% nationwide. As late as the 1970’s there was still a social stigma attached to a woman who was pregnant outside marriage. Now, government programs have substituted for the father and for black moral leadership. The black family and culture has collapsed (and white families are not that far behind).

Illegitimacy leads directly to poverty, crime and social problems. Out of wedlock children are four times more likely to be poor. They are much more likely to live in high crime areas with no hope of escape. In turn, they are forced to attend dangerous and poor-performing government schools, which directly leads to another generation of poverty.

Traditional black areas of Harlem, Englewood and West Philadelphia in the 1950s were safe working class neighborhoods (even though “poor” by material measures). Women were unafraid to walk at night and children played unmolested in the streets and parks. Today, these are some of the worst crime plagued areas of our nation. Work that was once dignified is now shunned. Welfare does not require recipients to do anything in exchange for their benefits. Many rules actually discourage work or provide benefits that reduce the incentive to find work.

The black abortion rate today is nearly 40%. Pregnancies among black women are twice as likely to end in abortion as pregnancies among white and Hispanic women.

The “Great Society” programs all had good intentions. Unfortunately, their real world result are that they have replaced the traditional/Christian models of family/work with that of what a government bureaucrat thinks it should be.

I could make an excellent argument that if the US government had hired former grand wizards of the KKK to run the “Great Society” programs, and if they had worked every day from 1965 to today without rest, they could have hardly have done better in destroying black America than the “Works of God” that the government has done or is trying to do.

I have visited many countries in which the government “guarantees” that everyone has a job, a place to live, education, health care and cradle to grave “government help” for all children and families. It all sounds great except that the people in these countries are/were miserable. They wanted to escape but were forced by their governments, at the end of a gun, to stay. The “worker’s paradises” of socialist and communist counties are chilling reminders of letting governments do “God’s Work.”

The Bible clearly states that we are to help those in need. The question is “Who should help those in need?” I firmly believe that scripture and the historical evidence strongly support that individuals, private organizations and churches should be the ones doing the heavy lifting. Government help should be the last resort.

Very Sincerely,

2banana

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.