Liberal Academic Says America’s Founding Document Outmoded

Top Vatican adviser Jeffrey Sachs says that when Pope Francis visits the United States in September, he will directly challenge the “American idea” of God-given rights embodied in the Declaration of Independence.

Sachs, a special advisor to the United Nations and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, is a media superstar who can always be counted on to pontificate endlessly on such topics as income inequality and global health. This time, writing in a Catholic publication, he may have gone off his rocker, revealing the real global game plan.

The United States, Sachs writes in the Jesuit publication, America, is “a society in thrall” to the idea of unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But the “urgent core of Francis’ message” will be to challenge this “American idea” by “proclaiming that the path to happiness lies not solely or mainly through the defense of rights but through the exercise of virtues, most notably justice and charity.”

In these extraordinary comments, which constitute a frontal assault on the American idea of freedom and national sovereignty, Sachs has made it clear that he hopes to enlist the Vatican in a global campaign to increase the power of global or foreign-dominated organizations and movements.

Sachs takes aim at the phrase, which comes from America’s founding document, the United States Declaration of Independence, that “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.”

These rights sound good, Sachs writes, but they’re not enough to guarantee the outcome the global elites have devised for us. Global government, he suggests, must make us live our lives according to international standards of development.

“In the United States,” Sachs writes, “we learn that the route to happiness lies in the rights of the individual. By throwing off the yoke of King George III, by unleashing the individual pursuit of happiness, early Americans believed they would achieve that happiness. Most important, they believed that they would find happiness as individuals, each endowed by the creator with individual rights.”

While he says there is some “grandeur in this idea,” such rights “are only part of the story, only one facet of our humanity.”

The Sachs view is that global organizations such as the U.N. must dictate the course of nations and individual rights must be sacrificed for the greater good. One aspect of this unfolding plan, as outlined in the Sachs book, The End of Poverty, involves extracting billions of dollars from the American people through global taxes.

“We will need, in the end, to put real resources in support of our hopes,” he wrote. “A global tax on carbon-emitting fossil fuels might be the way to begin. Even a very small tax, less than that which is needed to correct humanity’s climate-deforming overuse of fossil fuels, would finance a greatly enhanced supply of global public goods.” Sachs has estimated the price tag for the U.S. at $845 billion.

In preparation for this direct assault on our rights, the American nation-state, and our founding document, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon told a Catholic Caritas International conference in Rome on May 12 that climate change is “the defining challenge of our time,” and that the solution lies in recognizing that “ humankind is part of nature, not separate or above.”

The pope’s expected encyclical on climate change is supposed to help mobilize the governments of the world in this crusade.

But a prestigious group of scholars, churchmen, scientists, economists and policy experts has issued a detailed rebuttal, entitled, “An Open Letter to Pope Francis on Climate Change,” pointing out that the Bible tells man to have dominion over the earth.

“Good climate policy must recognize human exceptionalism, the God-given call for human persons to ‘have dominion’ in the natural world (Genesis 1:28), and the need to protect the poor from harm, including actions that hinder their ascent out of poverty,” the letter to Pope Francis states.

Released by a group called the Cornwall Alliance, the letter urges the Vatican to consider the evidence that climate change is largely natural, that the human contribution is comparatively small and not dangerous, and that attempting to mitigate the human contribution by reducing CO2 emissions “would cause more harm than good, especially to the world’s poor.”

The Heartland Institute held a news conference on April 27 at the Hotel Columbus in Rome, to warn the Vatican against embracing the globalist agenda of the climate change movement. The group is hosting the 10th International Conference on Climate Change in Washington, D.C. on June 11-12.

However, it appears as if the Vatican has been captured by the globalist forces associated with Sachs and the United Nations.

Voice of the Family, a group representing pro-life and pro-family Catholic organizations from around the world, has taken issue not only with the Vatican’s involvement with Sachs but with Ban Ki Moon, describing the two as “noted advocates of abortion who operate at the highest levels of the United Nations.” Sachs has been described as “arguably the world’s foremost proponent of population control,” including abortion.

Voice of the Family charges that environmental issues such as climate change have become “an umbrella to cover a wide spectrum of attacks on human life and the family.”

Although Sachs likes to claim he was an adviser to Pope John Paul II, the noted anti-communist and pro-life pontiff, Sachs simply served as a member of a group of economists invited to confer with the Pontifical Council on Justice and Peace in advance of the release of a papal document.

In fact, Pope John Paul II had worked closely with the Reagan administration in opposition to communism and the global population control movement. He once complained that a U.N. conference on population issues was designed to “destroy the family” and was the “snare of the devil.”

Pope Francis, however, seems to have embraced the very movements opposed by John Paul II.

Sachs, who has emerged as a very influential Vatican adviser, recently tweeted that he was “thrilled” to be at the Vatican “discussing moral dimensions of climate change and sustainable development.” The occasion was a Vatican workshop on global warming on April 28, 2015, sponsored by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences of the Roman Catholic Church. Sachs was a featured speaker.

The plan going forward involves the launching of what are called “Sustainable Development Goals,” as envisioned by a Sustainable Development Solutions Network run by none other than Jeffrey Sachs.

“The Network has proposed draft Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which contain provisions that are radically antagonistic to the right to life from conception to natural death, to the rights and dignity of the family and to the rights of parents as the primary educators of their children,” states the group Voice of the Family.

In July, a Financing for Development conference will be held, in order to develop various global tax proposals, followed by a conference in Paris in December to complete a new climate change agreement.

Before that December conference, however, Sachs says the pope will call on the world at the United Nations to join the crusade for a New World Order.

Sachs says, “Pope Francis will come to the United States and the United Nations in New York on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the United Nations, and at the moment when the world’s 193 governments are resolved to take a step in solidarity toward a better world. On Sept. 25, Pope Francis will speak to the world leaders—most likely the largest number of assembled heads of state and government in history—as these leaders deliberate to adopt new Sustainable Development Goals for the coming generation. These goals will be a new worldwide commitment to build a world that aims to harmonize the pursuit of economic prosperity with the commitments to social inclusion and environmental sustainability.”

Rather than emphasize the absolute need for safeguarding individual rights in the face of government overreach and power, Sachs writes that the Gospel teachings of humility, love and justice, “like the teachings of Aristotle, Buddha and Confucius,” can take us on a “path to happiness through compassion” and “become our guideposts back to safety.”

Writing elsewhere in the new issue of America, Christiana Z. Peppard, an assistant professor of theology, science and ethics at Fordham University, writes about the “planetary pope,” saying, “What is really at stake in the collective response to the pope’s encyclical is not, ultimately, whether our treasured notions of theology, science, reality or development can accommodate moral imperatives. The real question is whether we are brave enough and willing to try.”

The plan is quite simple: world government through global taxes, with a religious face to bring it about.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org

All I know is that Obama’s petition for naturalization was granted on September 16, 1983.

No you don't, otherwise you would have proven it by now. You've been saying this for over six years now, with absolutely no evidence.

I remember back in 2010, you said you were going to be famous. What happened?

and look here Jim Robinson:
FR Blogger: Obama Naturalized As A U.S. Citizen In 1983; Court-Ordered Sealed Records?

We have an official British blogger for the Free Republic?

and from Orly:
Sven Magnussen is a resident of Sweden, not an employee of the State Department, there is no proof to his story about Catholic charities adopting Obama

SvenMagnussen wrote:

“Rather than attempting to verify factual statements I swore to be true to the FBI,why don’t swear a statement to the FBI you know to be true and request an investigation. For example,you know you have read numerous statements posted on the internet that Obama naturalized as a US citizen in 1983. As a US citizen,you are very concerned and would like to verify Obama’s current citizenship status with an FBI investigation.

The FBI investigates criminal activity based on tips provided by individuals. Ask the FBI to investigate and swear out a statement of facts you know to be true.”

Because —you— already did all that;
-—you-— claim that: (see post #81 linked below):

Obama naturalized in 1983
You told the fbi about it
They did an investigation
Obama admitted to the fbi that he naturalized in 1983

-—HOW did you know what 0 told the FBI??!!?? ——

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3291368/posts?page=81#81

” To: 2harddrive

Barack Hussein Obama II naturalized as a US citizen in 1983,Los Angeles,CA. I notified the FBI Director,James Comey,of this fact and complained Obama assumed the Office of the President of the United States in violation of the US Constitution.

An FBI investigation ensued and President Obama admitted he naturalized as a U.S. Citizen in 1983 to FBI investigators. Contact FBI Director Comey for confirmation.

81 posted on Wed May 27 2015 19:30:10 GMT-0500 (CDT) by SvenMagnussen (1983 ... the year Obama became a naturalized U.S. citizen) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies | Report Abuse]”

“Barack Hussein Obama II naturalized as a US citizen in 1983, Los Angeles, CA. I notified the FBI Director, James Comey, of this fact and complained Obama assumed the Office of the President of the United States in violation of the US Constitution.

An FBI investigation ensued and President Obama admitted he naturalized as a U.S. Citizen in 1983 to FBI investigators. Contact FBI Director Comey for confirmation.”

I tried to call Comey yesterday. He wasn’t available because he was partying.

I decided to get the truth from the ass’s mouth. I called the president on AF1 on his way to Europe. He flashed a big smile on the videophone and said that none of what you said ever happened.

I’ll have to take the president’s word over yours.

Call the president for confirmation.

Proof? You dare ask me about proof?

You said you were an eyewitness:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3291368/posts?page=125#125

To: Brown Deer

Only an Obot and Orly Taitz would dismiss an eyewitness account as a lack of evidence.

125 posted on Sun Jun 07 2015 09:40:25 GMT-0500 (CDT) by SvenMagnussen (1983 ... the year Obama became a naturalized U.S. citifzen) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

You are in a better position to do what you suggest I and other freepers do (post #117)

Eyewitness testimony is better than second hand information, which is what is being posted on the internet.

Link to #117

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3291368/posts?page=117#117

It is never outmoded to protect the rights of individuals, even those you disagree with. But it is inconvenient for people like Sachs who think they know better what is good for everyone else. And of course, it is people like him who will make these decisions without the justice and mercy he thinks does not currently exist. Eats you peas, they are good for you! This is what tyranny looks like.

An FBI investigation ensued and President Obama admitted he naturalized as a U.S. Citizen in 1983 to FBI investigators. Contact FBI Director Comey for confirmation.”

Sven, when exactly did you contact Comey and how long did it take for Comey to order an investigation?

A complaint was filed in the US District Court alleging Obama was born on Aug 4, 1961 in Hawaii, issued a CLN in 1968 while residing in Indonesia, returned to the US in 1971 to live as a permanent resident alien in the US until 1983 when he naturalized as a US citizen.

The court considered the allegations in the complaint as true and then dismissed the case as frivilous on a motion by the US government before allowing discovery to begin. An Appointments Clause challenge was raised in a timely manner to challenge the authority of appointees of Obama moving the court to dismiss the case before a challenge to America’s sovereignty could be addressed by the court. A new precedent has been set. Appointments Clause challenges are addressed by the court unless the complainant can prove the President is ineligible.

And no, I’m not going to give you the case number because I’ve already been the victim of ID theft and I don’t want to compound the problem.

After I was informed the FBI questioned Obama about naturalizing as a US citizen in 1983 and Obama admitted, I amended a complaint filed in the US District Court to include the FBI and Director James Comey in his personal and professional capacity. Further, I requesting a restraining order on the US government and other defendants with accompanying affidavits alleging threats made to myself and my witnesses.

I was ignored by the court and then informed by the IRS and others that I have had my personal date compromised and should begin to prepare for the consequences of ID theft.

My witnesses have withdrawn are afraid for their personal and financial safety. I’m concerned that providing public details about witness statements, dates of notification, details with respect to whistleblowers or anything specific will jeopardize their safety.

That why I said members of the public should contact Comey directly. Tell Comey what you’ve read, that it concerns you and you would like a competent, independent investigation.

From #118:

Barry Soetoro was in Pakistan for a while.

That is the reason our government paid for his education in Hawai’i, California (Occidental College) and NY (Columbia).

The government was desperately concerned over the nuclear program the Pakis were developing. Also the Russians invading Afghanistan didn’t help. It is difficult to find an agent who can fit in culturally with others who practice Islam, can speak a number of different languages, and is a homosexual like so many of the Pakis attending Occidental College in the early 1980s. Barry had the arrogance and confidence to pull it off.

Barry Soetoro was rewarded for his exploits in Pakistan with a college degree - (unearned), a job in a CIA front company -(which he quit), and a naturalized U.S citizenship.

Thanks, SatinDoll.

Sachs, a special advisor to the United Nations and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, is a media superstar...

Media superstar??? Well, I for one never heard of him (and I consider myself well-informed as to current events). Maybe that's because the media outlets he appears on are all far left, and I don't generally get exposed to them because of the anger they provoke in anyone with the capability of rational thought.

That very question was debated a lot in the early days of the conservative movement.

It still hasn't been resolved, and it's ignorant to simply dismiss the whole debate.

I'm reading an early Enlightenment book, Discourses Concerning Government by Algernon Sidney. This English nobleman was martyred for his reliance on God given rights. His writings were reflected in the 1720s Cato's Letters, which taught republicanism to 18th century Americans. Thomas Jefferson stood on the shoulders of giants.

The crap-weasel social justice emotions of some twit in support of UN global government mean nothing to me.

Kinda strange for a pope to be knocking against rights endowed to us by our creator.

He's not. This is Jeffrey Sachs's view of what he thinks the Pope ought to be saying, not what the Pope actually is saying.

The relationship between freedom and virtue is something people have been discussing for hundreds, even thousands of years. The answers are a lot more complicated than what Sachs wrote (or than what any of us can come up with on the spur of the moment).

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.