In addition

I wanted to follow Jim's post with this from Lew Rockwell's blog:

In his City of God, St. Augustine tells the story of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great. Alexander demands of him, “How dare you molest the seas?” The pirate replied, “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a small boat, I am called a thief. You, with a great fleet, molest the whole world and are called an emperor.” St. Augustine called this answer “elegant and excellent.”

I have been stressing on our radio show that Americans do NOT have a government, not one that can be defined as one, but most are under the allusion of such.
I was sent this today by one of my brother's:

What the America is supposed to be -
A Constitutional Republic
where the rights of the individual are protected

What we pretend it is -  
A Democracy
where the individual is forced to comply with the will of the majority

What it actually is -
A CORPORATION OWNED BY AN INTERNATIONAL BANKING CABAL, WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL HAS NO RIGHTS AND WHOSE LABOR IS USED AS COLLATERAL IN AN UNLAWFUL PYRAMID SCHEME.

  So the question of how would we take care of "X" without the State, is really missing the point, as Jim pointed out. Who cares? The real question is, how do rid ourselves of it?

 

Gay marraige

I tortured myself today, and forced myself to listen to Sean Hannity, to listen to what he was saying about the gay marriage debate before the US supreme court.
The whole theme made me sick. Mr. Small government, is so afraid of this that he wants, and is advocating, BIG government. "The government needs to regulate", "The government should have a say in who can be married", "It's in the governments best interest to decide what kinds of marriages should be allowed".

No doubt Sean. But is it in our best interest?

 "What next, will we allow"...blah blah blah.

Stupid conservatives, do you realize what you are saying, what you are advocating? Don't you see in your zeal to deny same sex marriage, sanctified by the State, that you are ultimately giving the State the power to decide on ANY marriage? One of the arguments for the same sex marriage advocates was that the "Right to marriage" was a Constitutional Right. Sean says "no it is not!!"

Marriage isn't a Right? You really want the State's involvement in this? Are you such a fool?

I hope I am not the only one to see how stupid this is.

While I do not think that getting married is a Constitutional Right, I do think it is a Right that man has given by God, sanctified by Him. Constitution be hanged.
What business is it for a third party, namely the State, to be involved with it?!

As a Christian, I do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle.

But I also do not think the State should be in the business of marriage. Advocating for the State to regulate marriage is so stupid and ANTI Liberty, I don't know how else to explain it.

If you don't want homosexuals to be permitted to get a marriage license, and that's all this is about anyway, getting State sanctification for it, then you should be fighting against the State claiming the right to be involved with marriage period!!!
If the State didn't have the authority, no let's not say it has that, the POWER to regulate marriage, this issue would be mute, over, done.
Marriage licenses were originally issued because conservatives didn't want whites marrying blacks. Is that the legacy you wish to continue to fight for?!

The proper argument is this, the State has no business granting or refusing marriage, and granting the benefits that it gives to a married couple with It's marriage license.

Take away the States involvement in marriage, and the bogus "benefits" the States license creates, and this whole issue is over.

Wake up!

Voting Is Violence

From Rev. Emmanuel Charles McCarthy on Lew Rockwell.

Once one has the office, and is vested in the myth and the mystique and the moral validation that go with it, he or she cannot only torment, torture and kill other people, he or she can make the laws that validate the agony and slaughter he or she is pouring down on others. Hitler did nothing illegal, which is why U.S., England, France and Russia had to create the trumped-up ex post facto law – so called crimes against humanity – to convict and kill Hitler’s cabinet and military officers. Hitler saw to it that everything he did was legal by simply creating the laws he needed to legalize what he wanted to do. A contemporary local example of this process would be the Patriot Act in the United States.
President William Clinton kills 400,000 children under twelve years of age in Iraq, his Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, says on national television that this most grotesque form of child abuse "was worth it." Yet, neither one is in prison nor in the electric chair. Why?
No one is born with the right to kill 400,000 children. Yet, President Clinton, and to a lesser extent King Herod, killed children with abandon. From whence comes their right to do this. Clinton’s right to kill children came from being elected President. Herod’s right came from his being the son of a King. That is it! Human beings endowing human beings with the right to kill human beings is what the divine right of kings, drawing straws or elections are all about. If either Obama or Romney were not going to be endowed, if elected President, with the same right to use violence against their fellow human beings that Clinton and Herod had would anyone beyond their family, friends and acquaintances care a jot about what these two guys had to say?
Given the choice would Jesus have voted for Herod or Pilate or neither? In governmental elections is there ever anyone to vote for but Herod or Pilate? Since the make-believe lesser of two evils standard is still evil, why not just write-in "Lucifer" as your vote?

Read the whole article here. 

Choose, then shut up and accept the consequences.

<sup>This goes along perfectly with the previous post today. 

Get on out there and VOTE your life away.

"Give us a King".

Here you go.

Leave God alone, you have chosen whom you will serve.</sup>

1 Samuel 8:10-18

¹⁰ So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. ¹¹ He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. ¹² And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. ¹³ He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. ¹⁴  He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. ¹⁵ He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. ¹⁶ He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men^[a] and your donkeys, and put them to his work. ¹⁷ He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. ¹⁸ And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”


"No Kings, No Priests"!!!!

The Politics of Obedience

A very powerful read. A must. Written by Etienne De Le Boetie, in 1552

A small excerpt:
 I do not know how it happens that nature fails to place within the hearts of men a burning desire for liberty, a blessing so great and so desirable that when it is lost all evils follow thereafter, and even the blessings that remain lose taste and savor because of their corruption by servitude. Liberty is the only joy upon which men do not seem to insist; for surely if they really wanted it they would receive it. Apparently they refuse this wonderful privilege because it is so easily acquired. Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives. All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves? You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them, you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows—to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check. From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces?

Download the full writing here, The discourse of voluntary servitude.

Government is morally wrong

Another excellent interview with Lew Rockwell. For you Christians, I especially want you to think about the point he makes with Satan and the Temptation of Christ. The Devil takes Christ to the top of a mountain and says, "all these kingdoms I will give you if you will bow to me". So, were they his to give? He obviously thought so. And nothing is said otherwise. So can we assume by this that the kingdoms of earth, the governments of earth, are the devils? Then why oh why do we put so much energy in trying to make them ours? Do as Christ did, reject the offer of kingdoms. Reject the State.
The state is nothing more than the enemy of the people. It always has been. It cannot be anything else.
We tried to emphasize this on our radio program a couple of weeks back. How can you, if you say you are moral, vote for evil, no matter how small it is, knowing in your heart that it is evil?
This takes no courage or moral fortitude. It is admitting defeat, it is moral slavery. It is nothing more than compromising with evil.
Take a stand, let the chips fall where they may, at least you can go to bed at night in peace. You can tell your posterity that you rejected evil, and no matter what the cost, you rejected it, you would not consent.
This takes much more inner fortitude than following the masses and being a state-owned serf. This requires one to be moral, to be strong, to be one who stands for that which is Right no matter what the consequences are.
Think I am being melodramatic? Try telling your friends you refuse to participate in this evil. They will mock you and hate you for it. Why? They have no moral fortitude themselves.
No matter what the cost, do Right. Do good. Fight for good, reject evil. Don't get caught up in the futile attempts to control the state. Reject it.
Refuse consent.
Then, you will see change. At least in your life. And you can look in the mirror, and know you did more than 10 million voters. You said NO!
The power is in consent.
Take it back.
Lew Rockwell, "The government is morally wrong."

A few quotes from John Locke

"Whenever violence is used, and injury done, though by hands appointed to administer justice, it is still violence and injury, however coloured with the name, pretences, or forms of law".

"Everyone has property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his."

"For a man's property is not at all secure, though there be good and equitable laws to set the bounds of it, between him and his fellow subjects, if he who commands those subjects, have power to take from any private man, what part he pleases of his property, and use and dispose of it as he thinks good."

"And thus the community perpetually retains a supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject." 

"For there are no examples so frequent in history, both sacred and profane, as those of men withdrawing themselves, and their obedience, from the jurisdiction they were born under, and the family or community they were bred up in, and setting up new governments in other places...."

I really like the last one, VOTE WITH YOUR FEET!

Some thoughts

The Israelites had it made. Think of it, God was their King, they only had Judges that would listen to their legal problems and they only dealt in matters that involved the individual vs. other individuals, and in matters that involved God's Law.
Eventually, they cried for a king, and why not...every other Nation had a king, why couldn't they??!!
Samuel tried to discourage them, and reminded them that a king would bring taxation, military conscription, and the potential for tyranny. But they demanded it anyway.
It's interesting that God tells Samuel to give them a king, and says that in this request, they are rejecting Him, not Samuel.
We could say that God saw the people wanting someone to rule over them instead of individually ruling over themselves as a rejection of Him.
And look what they got.

Fast forward several hundred years, and God's law is given to us in a nutshell, "Love the Father with all your heart, and love your neighbors as yourselves."
That's it.
We could have a perfect (as perfect as man can be) society based on those two laws. If you love your neighbor as yourself, what need is there for any law anyway? Based on that Law alone, you could truly live free.
We are never told to force this law on anyone, but to spread the "Good News."  And in part, the Good News is that man can live free, free from bondage and slavery.

Fast forward to today. Today we have people who want to use this "Good News" to enslave a free people.
Of course, it's for your own good, and for the good of society, but it requires that individuals conform to a certain idea that THEY decide is right.
Does "love your neighbors as yourselves" mean to support laws made by a government you know to be evil but that throws people in jail for not following their own personal beliefs?
So then it is ok?
"Well, even though I know this government to be  evil, and that it sanctions the murder of the unborn, and murders the innocent at will, that it steals from our posterity worse than the most villainous mobster, I will support it when it is in line with one of my moral beliefs."
Really? Are you willing to let a murderous, thieving government be your "moral compass" when it passes a law that fits into your own moral code, even when that law is punishing someone who is harming none other than himself, or, more often than not, no one at all??
Where in the Bible are you told to support government-sponsored "moral laws" that merely image what you deem to be good? If you are willing to allow the government to be your moral compass, you cannot pick and choose which morals you will decide to be right. The government has and does decide that for you. I hate drugs. But I see no biblical authority to force others to not use them. I like to have an alcoholic drink, but I know some "Christians" think that it is wrong. What authority do they have to force their belief on me?
None. 
Yet we see the religious ones clamoring for the government to legislate their morals on others. Because it is "right." They allow themselves to be blinded by the fact that some day, that same government could decide that the views they hold should be illegal, and what recourse would they have then? They already had everyone who they disagreed with locked up, so who is left to defend them?
They have told God, "give us a king," and they pay the consequences of their desires, forgetting that in supporting this king, they have rejected God.