ESSAYS on THE “FEUDALS”

A FEW DEFINITIONS THAT MAY PROVE USEFUL IN THIS SECTION:

conserative - cautious, prudent, moderate. - opposed to great or sudden changes, supporting the existing regime, believing in established principles, not taking risks.

conservation - the act of preserving resources from loss, decay or injury.

idealist - believing in reality as perception, seeing things as they wish they were rather than as they are, striving for perfection, a dreamer, an impractical person.

liberal - progressive in thinking or principles - open handed, generous, broad minded, especially in religion or politics.

libertine - given to lewdness, free from moral restraint. (The Clintons?)

pragmatist - dealing with events as to show their relation; practical, springing from experience, not theory; officious, meddlesome, opinionated.

reactionary - wishing to return to the real or imagined ways of the past, rejection of the present ways, wishing to go back to a previous state of affairs. (The Amish?)

realist - dealing with things as they actually are, as opposed to idealism or romanticism - emphasizing what can be done with things as they are.

Be not the first to try the new nor yet the last to cast the old aside. - Biblical -


BEWARE THE LIBERALS WHO ARE FEUDALS
- June 20, 2000 -

As a long time listener to Rush Limbaugh I enjoy hearing him whenever I can. This worries the more liberal members of my family who won’t listen to him, but do listen to the even more prejudiced main stream media. No need for them to worry! I find his positions on many subjects as myopic and prejudicial as those of the media. I like him because he blatantly admits to a prejudicial position and is proud of it. I despise the media when they claim to be objective and just “report the news!” That they color their reporting to suit their own agenda is patently obvious. Of the two, my experience tells me Limbaugh is far more truthful than the main stream media.

I remember a time in Cleveland when I frequently had lunch with a reporter from the Cleveland Press with whom I had major differences of opinion on most of his articles. During one heated discussion about something in the paper that was obviously in error, he stated emphatically, “We don’t report the news! We create it!” That statement has stuck with me through the years and I believe it has become the typical attitude of many in the media. I thought about it during one Peter Jennings special on our war with Japan and the dropping of the A-bomb. The essence of this so called “documentary” was how brutal we were to the poor Japanese. To one who didn’t know the truth, it painted the US as the aggressor against the poor defenseless Japanese. The attack on Pearl Harbor, the Bataan death march, the use of American POWs as slave labor in places of great danger, the rape of Nanking - none of these were ever mentioned during the program. I have never even heard of such a blatant rewriting of history while so many were still alive who lived through it. The thing about it that makes my hair stand on end is the question, what is the agenda of those in the media who perpetrate such blatant frauds? Also, who is pulling the strings of this Canadian school dropout with the pretty face and smooth vocal ability?

The more highly slanted and even downright false “news” like the previous example, I hear from the main stream media, the more nervous I am about the forces behind it. I see more and more hate campaigns being mounted in the media against any and every obstacle to the control of the individual and his freedom by the state. These campaigns are mounted with fiercely emotional diatribes and name calling against any person or group that disagrees. Facts are grossly distorted or ignored and mantras are developed that are repeated over and over again, word for word by controlled liberal politicians and so-called journalists. Any question that might have a negative answer asked of our current administration by any of the very few honorable journalists will elicit a jumble of meaningless words or be completely ignored with statements totally unrelated to the question. I myself have heard this time and time again so it isn’t second hand information. If they can’t silence any opposition by force, ridicule or coercion, and particularly if the general public begins to understand the truth, they will mount these highly organized and cleverly orchestrated hate campaigns to sway public opinion. In all fairness I can’t call these people “liberals” for they have usurped an honorable title and perverted it into a cause for amorality, hatred, and perverse ideals which destroy the individual and substitute subjects for their complete control and domination. To call these would be world dominators with their new world order “Liberals” would dishonor those dedicated souls who started this country for freedom and respect of the individual. These patriots, another word the new world order despises, were called liberals and were truly so as they destroyed the bonds of totalitarianism and started a new nation based on representative government.

A new, more fitting name for these people is “Feudals.” I have coined the term “Feudals” to designate those who have taken control of the liberal wing of the Democrat party and who manipulate most of the media. This, because they are actually reactionary and seek to return us to a form of feudalism where the all-powerful state controls every aspect of the lives of the general public. Recognizing there are many decent, concerned “liberals” like my sister, her husband and my wife, Barbara, “Feudals” seems to fit. It seems unfortunate to me that many of the few true liberals feel they must to go along with (and vote with) the Feudals who are so obviously in control. These Feudals have perverted the Constitution and promoted numerous emotional hate campaigns to destroy the moral fabric of our nation in order to gain control over the general public. While professing to be for oppressed people they use and promote bigotry and hatred to keep and strengthen their control over many groups.

A classic example of this is the hate campaign being waged against the NRA by the Feudals. I understand there is a group trying to block the NRA from opening a restaurant in New York’s Times Square. Hate posters and protests are certain to follow should the restaurant be opened. No action seems beyond use by these people in their efforts to silence and destroy any dissenting opinion. They do not want to debate, just shout hate mantras. Could it be their opposition has no basis in fact? As long as the current Constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech stands and is interpreted as it is now, unreasoning hate and emotional diatribes will be used by the Feudals and their lackeys to silence any voice that dissents from their “holy” view.
________________________________________

To better understand the deceptions, infringements and subversions, every concerned citizen and serious student should thoroughly read and study "Our Enemy, The State", the classic and brilliant critique distinguishing "government" from "STATE" by Albert J. Nock, and "The Law", by Frederick Bastiat. See also “Feminist Follies” elsewhere in this section.
________________________________________

The second amendment says, "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the Security of a free State, the Right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment Stands as the Guarantor of All other Rights and of the Defense of the Constitution itself.
_________________________________________

Let’s continue describing the current, cleverly orchestrated attacks on the 2nd amendment. I am not a member of the NRA nor do I intend to become one. However, I certainly stand with them rather than against them in their current battle with the Feudals. The second amendment was put into the Constitution for the expressed purpose of protecting the individual from an overpowering government. So far it has worked quite well, all things being considered. There are already many federal, state and local laws controlling gun ownership and use. Gun registration has already wrought havoc in several countries including South Africa, Canada and Australia where gun registration was followed by the outlawing of some weapons and then their confiscation from owners who registered them. In other words, the guns were confiscated from law abiding citizens only.

Since few criminals registered their guns, this left only the criminals and the government in possession of weapons. In South Africa, home invasions and gun murders have skyrocketed. People there with the means have turned their homes into fortresses to keep the criminals out. Police are frequent victims as they are viciously attacked and murdered by criminals who steal their guns and ammunition. In both Canada and Australia, where not all guns are yet outlawed, gun crimes are on the rise as criminals realize their victims are less able to protect themselves. The Feudals will do everything in their power to keep you from learning about this and about similar statistics in our own country.

Federal government statistics, published by the NRA show that with few exceptions, those parts of our country with the fewest gun control laws also have the lowest gun crime rate and those with the most stringent laws have the highest. When our Philanderer in Chief was asked about this at a televised interview session, his answer was typical and quite telling. He refused to acknowledge this information from the records of the federal government saying, and I paraphrase, “Setting that aside, lets talk about the gunshot deaths of children.” In the ensuing comments he neglected to mention that the NRA program of educating children about guns has substantially reduced the number of accidental gunshot deaths of children in the school systems where it has been implemented. He also neglected to mention that most of the gunshot deaths of children (all people under the age of twenty are considered children in these government statistics) were not accidental, but were from acts of inner city criminals under the age of twenty.

Could it be that the criminal element in this country and the billions in drug money is the force behind these attacks on the use of guns and the NRA? With illicit drugs as one of the largest sectors of our economy, it stands to reason that there is a great deal of money available to buy politicians and public officials. It is my contention that drug money supports all anti-gun and anti-drug campaigns. Keeping drugs illegal, drives the price through the roof, benefitting those drug moguls with a seller’s market. Since interdiction catches only a small part of the drugs being distributed, the so-called “War on drugs” should be called the “War for drug profits.” Did we learn nothing from prohibition? The real answer for this would be a Federal system to deliver drugs free to anyone who wants them in a controlled environment. This would cost far less than present interdiction efforts and put all drug criminals out of business, stopping all drug related crimes instantly! It would also provide a system to treat drug addicts rather then make them criminals. The details of this is described in another essay in my book, “Thoughts on the Cultures of Today.” Unfortunately, money from the illegal drug trade going through Feudal politicians and the media would fuel a hate campaign of unprecedented proportions to stop any such challenge to their lucrative illegal business. They want it to stay illegal and will do anything to keep it so!

Making guns illegal would do the same things for guns. The criminals would then have another business to syphon money into their coffers. The organization to handle illegal guns is already in place. Few criminals need more than fifty to a few hundred dollars to obtain an illegal gun right now. Imagine the situation that would exist after the Feudals passed universal gun registration and then confiscation. The criminal organization to supply guns would become a major source of new revenue and honest, law-abiding citizens would be disarmed.

It is imperative to recognize that the registration of guns followed by the confiscation of guns would leave a citizenry disarmed and facing a growing army of heavily armed criminals! That is the reality! It has happened in South Africa and is happening in Canada and Australia where efforts are now being mounted to reverse the new gun laws. It is the rule in many parts of the world. Remember the War Lords in Somalia and their Jeep mounted machine guns?

It is apparent the Feudals plan to repeal the 2nd amendment. Let’s not permit the US to slide down this dangerous path. Concentrate on taking weapons away from criminals, not from honest, law-abiding citizens! Let us not erase or subvert our precious second amendment rights. An armed citizenry is proven to be the best defense against criminals and gun crimes throughout the world! The Feudals would remove that protection and leave guns in the hands of criminals. Did you ever wonder why they are so adamant and determined to remove your right to protect yourself? Think about it! Increased theft, including home invasions, provides income for the illegal drug business as money from many crimes are used to pay for drugs. The drug criminals will realize greatly increased income from this increase in business. Powerful anti gun legislation like anti drug legislation will move much more money into the hands of the drug criminals. For them it is a business decision and a very powerful one to support such legislation and to do what harm they can to those like the NRA, who support the second amendment. True, the NRA is a powerful lobby, but they are up against a powerful, secret lobby backed by billions of dollars from illegal drug sales. These criminals can buy many politicians while the NRA can only try to persuade with the comparatively puny funds they have. The Hollywood Feudals frequently glorify drugs and criminals in their movies and TV shows while demonizing the NRA and other honest and legal groups. Are they also the beneficiaries of this illegal drug money? They are certainly the hotbed of drug use, so why not also the recipients of drug money?

I have proposed a revolutionary progam to eliminate much of the drug problem and its associated criminal activity. To view this unique, workable solution, Click Here!

Political use of the death penalty: Another example of the methods used by the Feudals to obtain control surfaced during the Bush/Gore campaign and was noted by Rush Limbaugh on his radio program. He commented on several current articles in the media about the death penalty. The articles subtly linked Governor Bush with the death penalty. Rush said he smelled a concentrated effort to mount an attack on Bush in the media by linking his name with articles on the death penalty. This was quite obviously to boost the lackluster performance of Gore by pumping up an issue that would affect a governor but not a vice president. He predicted a flurry of articles on the death penalty in the printed media followed by comments in the electronic media. All would use the same mantra he predicted of tying George Bush and the death penalty together. Within a month of that prediction numerous articles appeared in many newspapers and then Time and Newsweek with a cover story in Time of June 12 entitled “Death on Hold - Bush Ponders the Penalty.” I can’t remember how many times Rush has made similar predictions. If he is correct, we will be pounded by death penalty articles and coverage on TV right up until election time. The Feudals have created a controversy involving Bush that Gore is immune to. Hitler’s propaganda minister Goebbels would have fit right in with the Feudal’s arrogant propaganda organization. His, “If you tell a lie often enough and without apology, people will begin to believe it.” is obviously the basis for their efforts. It will be interesting to see how well this plays. It could backfire on them since polls indicate the overwhelming majority of Americans favor the death penalty. Should this prove to be the case in the polls, this propaganda push will be dropped like a hot potato and will quickly disappear from the scene. The old “Poisoning our waters, starving our children and taking from our elderly” mantra will probably be wheeled out in its place. Time will tell.

Think about one more thing. Those who are fighting against new gun control legislation are not pressing for laws to force you to have a gun. Anyone who so chooses can remove all weapons from their home and many do. You now have freedom of choice about this. Those Feudals, who promote new gun control legislation, plan to take this freedom from you. This voluntary personal choice is one of the foundations of our democracy and tenets of our freedom. With freedom comes the responsibility for our own actions and accountability for their effects as well. As a nation, we won the cold war by being armed against an evil that would destroy us and our freedom. There were those among us, well-meaning people, who would have unilaterally disarmed our nation in the name of pursuing peace. History still tells us that would have been a grievous mistake. I firmly believe that a disarmed citizenry would fall victim to an overwhelming criminal conspiracy. That is the path that Hitler’s Germany took in the thirties. After guns were taken from all citizens, the NAZI criminals held free reign and look what happened then. When both criminals and government have nothing to fear from the citizenry they will merge into one overwhelming force. We’re closer to that than you may think!
________________________________

THE NEW FEUDALISM - June 2000 -

The feudal system of the middle ages is my model for what I believe the new form of liberalism will do to America. For this reason I have coined the term “Feudals” to be used in place of “Liberals” for those entertainment world activists and their cohorts who most definitely do not follow the old idealistic “Liberal” concepts. They are much more like Fascists and others of the extreme right than like the idealistic left. Make no mistake, their political goal is for government to control every aspect of our lives and they intend to control that government. They intend it to be, Government of the people, by the Feudal Lords and for the benefit of the Feudal Lords. Read also my essay, “Beware The Liberals Who are Feudals.”

The Feudals hate any form of personal freedom or individuality as they steal for themselves more and more decisions from the individual. At the same time, they mouth their mantras about the poor and downtrodden multitudes as they seek to enslave them. Ignorance is their ally, emotion is their tool and reason is their enemy. Mass hysteria is the tool they use to manipulate those who have lost the ability to reason. They have adopted this tool and the other tactics that Herman Goebbels used so effectively to enslave Nazi Germany for Hitler. This is nothing new.

When the 13 colonies were still part of England, Professor Alexander Tyler, a Scottish historian, wrote about the fall of the Athenian democracy over 2000 years earlier. “A democracy can not exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates promising them the most money from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship.”

This explains the effectiveness of the Feudal’s vote getting powers. Their “Tax and spend” philosophy is based in this reality. By pledging more and more money to more and more people, the Feudals are buying votes primarily from the poor, the weak, the helpless and anyone else looking for a handout. In spite of their “help for the downtrodden” rhetoric, they are not really interested in helping these people. They just want their vote, their blind obedience and political enslavement, promising anything to get it.

The Feudals will do anything to control their people, even evil things they constantly accuse their opposition of doing. While eschewing racial bigotry, they practice political bigotry on a massive scale. If you are pursuing a career in the entertainment world you had better speak like the Feudals or you will go nowhere. One conservative comment, or any statement in conflict with Feudal ideals and you will be black-balled. Many an aspiring actors has been dumped after making a conservative political comment. They are constantly being told by fellow aspirants never to speak their conservative political views or they won’t get work.

The only conservatives in the entertainment world, are those who achieved high position before their political positions were known or who became conservative after they achieved stardom. Even they are subject to ridicule which grows more vocal as the Feudals gain power. Charlton Heston is one example. Since speaking out for conservative causes, he has become the brunt of vicious jokes and ridicule from countless comedians and TV news people. Dan Quail and the “potato” incident is another example of how the Feudals use ridicule to destroy an adversary’s credibility, even when it is trumped up. Actually, the word Dan understood he was spelling was “potatoes” and he was interrupted before he had a chance to add the s. That was never mentioned in the media. Here is a talented, highly educated man being repeatedly called “stupid” by the media for the purpose of silencing a voice speaking out in favor of things they oppose.

A Feudal attack tool: This tactic of calling Republicans stupid or disparaging their intelligence is a tool the Feudals have used effectively for years. It first came to my attention with the totally unwarranted attacks on Gerald Ford. By both innuendo and direct statements he was called stupid and confused by many in the media. I heard one commentator say, “Ford took too many hits in the head when he played football.” In truth, Gerald Ford was and is a very intelligent man who was an effective congressman and republican leader in the house. I have never heard any media commentator question the intelligence of any Democrat. It has happened with every single Republican President from Ford to the present. In the current Presidential election Feudals have repeatedly impugned George Bush’s intelligence while insinuating near genius status to Junior Gore. In fact, Bush’s educational performance and accomplishments are far greater than those of Gore who dropped out of both law school and divinity school because he couldn’t make the grade.

Feudals never let facts stand in the way of what they say. These false accusations are constantly used by the Feudals to condemn and vilify opponents and their positions. Nearly all voices in the media are party to this vicious and untrue activity. Jay Leno of the Tonight Show is one rare exception. I have no idea what his political leanings are, but the effect of his political jokes fall fairly equally on all. In contrast, Roger Miller, the clown who displays his ignorance each week on the Monday night football TV show, is positively vicious in his attacks on any who are not firmly in the Feudal camp. He frequently repeats the Feudal mantras about poisoning the water supply, starving the children, stealing from senior citizens and other false and ridiculous charges that were used so effectively in the last few National elections. Maybe he’s a reincarnation of Goebbels or at least one of his students. He certainly speaks the same language, the language of class warfare and hate. Many popular comedians do the same thing. This constant hate barrage fired against conservatives and conservative values has taken its toll. As Goebbels said, “Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.” The Feudals most certainly use that and most effectively.

What do the Feudals want “for the good of the people?” Check the following list:

1. Killing of babies - abortion on demand, Government paid
2. Unrestricted sex for all ages (sex with children is coming)
3. Promotion of homosexuality as normal, is bestiality next?
4. Teaching of all kinds of sexual activity in schools
5. Elimination of truly free speech. (Unless it agrees with them)
6. Unlimited immigration (more votes for them)
7. Silencing of all views that differ from their own
8. Free government controlled healthcare for all (regardless of cost - the government will determine who gets what care)
9. One person, one vote (including criminals, the mentally ill, the incompetent and possibly even a few dead folks)
10. No moral standards for holding office (except for conservatives)
11. Complete registration and Federal control of all guns
12. Bigger, more powerful labor unions and government
13. Bilingual everything (they want the Latino vote)
14. Lowered education standards (ignorance makes people easier to control and manipulate)

What can we look for as their goals for the future? Maybe:

15. Incorporation of our military into the United Nations
16. Destruction of all organized religion (Christianity first)
17. Subordination of our laws to International law
18. Confiscation of all guns in private hands
19. Repeal of the second amendment
20. Sex between children and adults OK (its already on the agenda in a national library association and NAMBLA)
21. Complete amoralization of the public
22. Increased taxation to “spread the wealth more equally”
23. Complete amnesty for illegal aliens.
24. Complete healthcare and welfare for illegal aliens
25. Federal control of the entire education system
26. Removal of all personal responsibility for actions

What the Feudals are against

1. States’ rights (counties’, cities’, even individuals’ rights)
2. True freedom of speech - they want to suppress dissenting views
3. The 2nd amendment to the Constitution
4. Big or small business and corporations
5. Any kind of successful business or responsible organization
6. Personal wealth (except for themselves)
7. Individual liberty and initiative
8. Family values, especially Christian
9. Christianity
10. Religions of all kinds other than Atheism
11. Sexual morality
12. Marriage (except for same sex)
13. Responsible fathers (men are unnecessary after conception)
14. Personal responsibility (environment is the cause of . . .)
15. Honor of any kind
16. The US Military
17. The Police
18. Innovative school principles, teachers, board members
19. The NRA and any other organization that doesn’t agree with their agenda
20. Any kind of power in the hands of a Non-feudal
21. Conservatives, Libertarians and their ideals
22. Rules or laws that don’t agree with their philosophy
23. Rules or laws that interfere with anything they want to do
24. Unbiased courts, reporters, judges, or politicians
25. Any person or thing that doesn’t agree with them

The Feudals strive to change many words from good to evil, thus destroying historically good character traits. See how often these words are used in derision, sarcasm, misuse or branded as obsolete by the Feudal Media: patriotism - loyalty - honor - decency - reverence - fidelity - respect - responsibility - kindness - marriage - affection - diligence - tradition - beauty - honesty - trust - charity - friendship - friend - morals - glory - plus many more. If you believe most of what the Feudals say about these kinds of words, they are signs of weakness or evil. They even twist the language to suit their views. There is nothing as insidiously evil as to call the movement that promotes the killing of human babies in the womb, “Freedom of Choice.” The baby being killed certainly has no freedom of choice. It is merely butchered to satisfy the needs of some floozy who helped create it and then didn’t want it. Is this female so different from the one in Texas who recently drowned her four small children because she didn’t want to have to take care of them anymore? The only difference is the age of the infant. Maybe we should let mothers kill their babies under a year old. That would provide more “Freedom of Choice.”

The Feudals do not want, or believe in democracy. They want a dictatorship with them as dictators. Raw power is their goal so that each and every one of us will do their bidding every day of our lives. Every single factor that promotes individual freedom is currently under some form of attack by the Feudals. Some are very subtle, but other are being brought more and more into the open. These attacks are more open because the Feudals are winning. At each new victory they become more brazen with their attacks on personal values and responsibility which are the foundation of true freedom. While overtly praising and promoting diversity, they soundly condemn any who disagree with them. Angry, hate-filled words are used to promote laws to punish those who have principles and ideals that differ from their own. Make no mistake! The media use ridicule and promote hate for any who disagree with them. There are very few voices raised in opposition to this one-sided monster of political misinformation.

The elitist, intellectuals who lead and support the Feudals, see themselves as above the rules that govern the masses. Armed with vast wealth and teams of like minded and frequently unprincipled lawyers, these power-hungry demagogues seem able to get away with murder. They will viciously attack opponents with the willing aid of the media, holding them to account for actions far less damning than what they themselves have done and then escaped punishment. They are held to a far lower accounting than conservatives in every venue, particularly in the media.

Examples are legion. I will sight only a few. Richard Nixon was severely criticized, even vilified by the press and many others when a single FBI file was found in the White House. When over 700 missing FBI files mysteriously appeared on a table in the Clinton White House it was treated like an every day occurrence and there was almost no criticism and certainly no vilification by the media. There is no doubt that those files were used to find out about GW Bush’s DUI of the far distant past. This was then provided to the press at the most damaging moment. I see it as a testimonial to the integrity of Bush’s past that they couldn’t find anything else. Undoubtedly these files were used by the Feudals to search for information which they could use to control or wound opponents and even to control and manipulate their own members. Why no media outrage?

There is no doubt about the use of these files on Newt Gingerich in concert with the so-called accidental (and very illegal) taping of one of his private cell-phone conversations the Feudals managed to obtain. If Republicans had done such a despicable thing, the media would have had a field day of crucifixions. Since it benefitted the Feudal Democrats by destroying an extremely effective Republican, it was OK according to the media. I wonder just how much those who now pull the strings of Junior Gore have gleaned from those FBI reports since their mysterious appearance.

The Feudal Whitehouse: The travel office affair, Monica Lewinsky and all the other women who were groped, fondled and who knows what else by our Philanderer in Chief are but the tip of the iceberg in a White House sea filled with many other invisible icebergs virtually unmentioned by the Feudal media. In comparison, look at the treatment of Senator Bob Packwood who certainly was guilty of far less than Clinton. He was vilified in the Feudal media and crucified by the “feminazis” while the attitude toward Clinton was, “His private life didn’t interfere with his ability to govern.” Clinton was let off with a press attitude of “Boys will be boys” rather than the hue and cry for blood that the Packwood incident created. The complete silence of the “Feminazis” on Clinton’s many dalliances displayed their monstrous hypocrisy. They have become merely another group politically enslaved by the Feudals.

How Clinton gets the female vote. It is a known fact that many women are fascinated by men who are rogues. Young women are overwhelmingly fascinated by young men who are less than decent. Guys just over the edge , who lie to, cheat on and mistreat women, seem to hold a fascination for many of them. Remember the Fonz on the TV program “Happy Days?” He was a caricature of the guy from highschool who was so fascinating to so many girls. Just over the moral, legal, ethical and honest edge, these boys danced with danger, mocked authority and almost always attracted a number of giddy female followers. Often, the farther they were from decent, honest boys, the more girls they attracted, the more that would sneak out to be with them. These guys were the ones with whom most girls first had sex. They fathered the most babies in most high schools and would brag about cheating on their girlfriends and later, their wives.

Behavioral scientists who study Chimpanzees say this is common behavior among our nearest relatives. Female Chimps will frequently sneak away from their group to meet rogue males for sex. These males skirt the edge of the female’s territory looking for females from family groups other than their own. This has the effect of broadening the gene pool of the group and thus promotes diversity and prevents inbreeding. As many as half the offspring in any group may be sired by these rogue males.

Bill Clinton certainly fits the description. Since so many females make decisions based on emotion which is in fact genetically controlled instincts, it is not surprising that he appeals to so many of them. No logical argument will sway them. No despicable act he has committed has yet turned them off; they still love him, not in spite of his actions, but because of them. They are genetically programmed to behave in just such a manner. They just can’t help themselves. When I hear four well known females in a TV talk session laughing coquettishly while talking about the really despicable acts of Bill Clinton and referring to him as a “naughty boy” it makes me realize just why the women vote so overwhelmingly for him. His sexual dalliances and misconduct didn’t hurt him with women, they helped him! “Who cares that he’s an admitted liar, cheat and womanizer? That’s what we like! No goody two-shoes nerd for us!” These females still love that paragon of morality, Ted Kennedy don’t they?

How about Judges Bork and Thomas? Both were vilified because they held different opinions from the Feudals. Those arrogant, self-righteous, self-serving media critics vilified both Bork and Thomas simply because they held conservative views. Again, anyone who disagrees with their divinely ordained views will be subject to the worst kind of emotional diatribes. Hate-mongering at its worst is a constantly used tool of the Feudals!. The hate campaign against Judge Bork succeeded, but when it appeared to be failing against Judge Thomas, two old Feudal war lords got together to trump up sexual harassment charges. Ted Kennedy, an exemplary moral man, joined Ohio senator Howard Metzenbaum in a smear campaign. Together they convinced Anita Hill to make charges against Judge Thomas while his confirmation was before the Senate. Isn’t it amazing that she came forward after all those years and at just this time?

How about the aspiring first female president, Hillary? She has been held virtually innocent by the media of the many known lies, vilifications and “I just can’t recalls” emanating from her and her cohorts. Newt Gingerich was demonized and virtually crucified by the Feudals and their darlings in the media for his four million dollar, two book advance a few years ago. In stark and obvious contrast, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s eight million dollar, single book advance is apparently OK with the same people. The media hounds vociferously claimed possible mischief and conflicts of interest from Newt’s book deal. Those are small potatoes compared to the same possibilities inherent in the book deal of the new Feudal Senator from New York. While Newt stood down on his book deal and took only a one dollar advance in response, it was a genuine deal and is being consummated. In stark contrast, there is no chance Hillary will stand down since the voices of the media will only support this obvious payoff which has virtually no chance of making money for her publishers even if she does write the book. I seriously doubt this “marvelous” book will ever be written, certainly not for many many years if it is, and it will have to be the best selling book ever for the publishers to make any money. I recently received the following via an email, "Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs. His wife, Hillary, got $8 million for her memoirs. That's $20 million for memories from two people who for eight years repeatedly testified, under oath, that they couldn't remember anything"

Unfortunately there are a lot of decent, caring liberals who seem to have to accommodate their evil, Feudal comrades. I wonder how their conscience handles these kinds of increasingly frequent occurrences? These kinds of frauds must be obvious to all but the most dull-witted, even in the liberal camp. There are none so blind as those who will not see. I fear many feel the end justifies the means and any activity that promotes their cause is therefore OK. Didn’t things happen in just that way in Hitler’s Germany? How many decent Germans closed their eyes to NAZI evils in exactly the same manner? How many American Liberals are doing precisely the same thing now? Who are those being demonized by Feudals in precisely the same way Jews were demonized by the NAZIs? NAZI-like hate speach is more and more coming from the mouths of the Feudals. Though they don’t call directly for violence, many like Jesse Jackson, repeat impassioned calls for their people to take to the streets when they don’t get their way. If that isn’t a call for violence then Hitler was a benevolent dictator.

The feudal view of reality: I recently held a rather heated discussion with a liberal female friend about our growing government and how the erosion of personal freedom concerned me. She countered by saying how much the evil people in big corporations control our lives by hiring and laying off at will and demanding overtime and the like. It was the typical class warfare theme of the little people against the all powerful corporations. I had just heard a talk by a Silicon Valley billionaire entrepreneur about what he did with all his money. In the last ten years, the investment of his money into his company provided good incomes for more than three thousand families. Those families had been able to send several thousand students through college, buy homes, take vacations and support the community themselves. He had paid millions in local taxes to support the community and even more millions to the federal and state governments. This “evil” capitalist, in her view, was providing the livelihood for thousands directly and tens of thousands indirectly in the surrounding communities. His genius and hard work were raising the living standards of the area far more then any government welfare could possibly do. He was using his wealth to create wealth for himself and many others. There are thousands just like him all over our country. These are the men and women who do the most to raise the living standards for everyone, not the government.

I’m sure there are evil corporate people at all levels. I am equally certain there are at least the same percentage of equally evil government people. It has been proven time and time again, by business managers from as far back as Henry Ford, that genuine concern for the health and welfare of employees is essential to the long term success of business. Sooner or later evil management will cause a business to fail just as surely as poor management. In contrast, government can hide evil and ineffective people as they have no bottom line to meet; business cannot. All that any government agency needs to do to survive and grow is please the politicians who vote the funds for their operation. When they are a tool for the reelection of those same politicians, the incentive for evil cooperation is monstrous. Why do you suppose the vast majority of government employees vote for the Feudals? Like Tyler’s comment, they are voting themselves money from the public treasury. Only government employees can do that directly.

American business profits pay the entire cost of the government with taxes they pay directly and those paid by their employees. And just who creates the wealth that pays for this bloated, wasteful government? In fact, Privately owned business and creative professionals generate all wealth in this country. Every penny the City, County, State and Federal governments spend comes ultimately from private business of some sort including individual enterprise. Governments create no wealth, they only consume wealth. Every penny comes from the pockets of businessmen, professionals and their employees. The average American currently works about a third of each year to pay taxes. The wealthy can work as much as two thirds of the year to pay their taxes. Those taxes feed our bloated government

The three groups who are involved with wealth are, producers, consumers, and organizers. Of these three groups, producers are the only ones who actually create wealth. Organizers help in the creation of wealth by increasing the efficiency of the producers. Consumers do just that, they consume what wealth the producers create. Money has no value of itself. It is merely the agent used to facilitate the transfer of goods and services between individuals and organizations. Without the medium of money, barter and trade would have to be used in any exchange of goods and/or services. The “private sector” consists of producers, organizers and consumers. Government consists mostly of consumers with a very small number of organizers. Taxes are the means government uses to remove money from the “private sector” and place it under the control of bureaucrats. A large portion of this money is needed just to pay for the bureaucrats and attorneys. The amount left over is divided between national defense, infrastructure, welfare and Social Security. In a manner of speaking, all of this money is used to “buy” votes In other words, to provide money from the public treasury to voters. (See Tyler quote, page 11)

At the present time, this money amounts to 31% of the Gross National Product. In other words, 31% of what the producers create with the help of the organizers is diverted into the treasury controlled by the various government agencies and bureaucrats. This steadily growing amount of money buys many votes including those of workers in the many government agencies and bureaucracies. They vote to keep their jobs. Certainly those receiving welfare of any kind as well as other handouts for any purposes will vote for those who promise to continue or increase the handouts. Government subsidy programs buy many more votes as do the many contracts issued for products and services requested by all sectors of the government. As laws grow more complex, attorneys’ votes are bought by the promise of growing need for legal services by, for, because of and against government. Many professional services fall into this same category as government growth increases the need for all kinds of services both by government and by those who must battle with or comply with growing red tape. I would like to know just what portion of support for Democrat candidates comes from these bought and paid for voters. My guess is it adds up to at least half of Democrat votes, maybe more.

It wouldn’t be so bad if government payrolls were not so bloated. A number of years ago a friend of mine from a university managed a test program in one of the US Navy departments. This particular department dispersed the checks for all naval veterans. The purpose of the test was to determine the fewest number of people who could handle the load of creating, organizing and distributing monthly checks for the entire country. They made records of all traceable activities and supplies for a two-month period before making any changes. They then reduced the total work force of 320 by forty to 280. These people were moved to other jobs or chose to retire. No one lost their job.

After a month to adjust to the new arrangement, things settled down to routine and all the checks went out on time. Again records were made for two months as before. The employees were told there were to be several adjustments to the workforce during the following year, but nothing else. Only the manager and my friend who was acting as the assistant manager knew what was happening.

At the end of the two-month record period the workforce was again reduced by forty people. The same sequence of events occurred. Again there was a month for adjustment followed by a two-month period of careful record keeping. Similar reductions continued until the workforce was reduced to a scant sixty people which they found could not handle the load. At this point the last forty people were returned to the group. The workforce was retained at that level, 100, doing the work that previously was being done by 320.

Research statistics of the study showed only one significant change. While there was some small reduction in paper and other office supplies, the reams of “Inter Office Memos” previously required was reduced to a few pads. Communications had changed drastically. In spite of the increased workload for each individual, morale was better than it had been when the test began. The employees were very proud of their ability to get so much done with so many less workers. To my knowledge, none were told about the experiment.

If you applied that same effort to all government departments, the payroll would probably be cut at least in half. That will never happen as long as the Feudals control the bureaucracy. Most of those excess people vote for the Feudals since they know they are voting for their jobs. When you hear politicians crying for money for “the schools,” “the poor,” or any other seemingly benevolent program, remember, most of that money goes to pay for the people used to administer and police the program. It’s a wonderful way to buy votes with public money. Those bureaucrats and their political mentors want bloated payrolls. The bigger they are, the more votes for them.

Republican threats to reduce the size of government and eliminate many jobs must mobilize many government workers to work hard for the election of Democrats with their continuing efforts to grow the Federal Government in particular. My guess is that among those who are private sector producers and organizers, at least 70% and maybe as much as 80% vote Republican. It is amazing that Republicans get as many votes as they do considering the huge number of bought and paid for votes combined with the labor unions and minorities adding to the Democrat totals. Add the effects of the extreme bias of the main stream media on a vulnerable public and the amazement grows. The one bright spot for Republicans is that the public is increasingly skeptical of the main stream media as their bias grows more desperate and thus obvious to all but the most dull-witted. Thinking people increasingly doubt the truth of network TV news and search elsewhere for information, particularly political information. Growth of cable news programming is burgeoning, particularly those channels showing less liberal bias.

This bias appears in many ways exemplified by the following story after the Supreme Court ruling in the Florida Election case. In the first report after the decision, Dan Rather referred to the court as “The Republican Supreme Court” several times. An enterprising radio news man counted the times this term was used on network TV broadcasts and came up with 48 including the three by Dan Rather. During the same period, the Florida Supreme Court was referred to at least fifty times without mention of any party affiliation. No one called it the Democrat Florida Supreme Court! There are seven Republican appointees on the Supreme Court and five Democrat. The Florida Supreme Court consists of six Liberal Democrats, a Liberal Independent and no Republican appointees at all. The media does not miss an opportunity to word things to Liberal Democrat advantage.

There are so many examples of this bias and so many complaints it is taken for granted by most thinking people. Most of our media has become as one-sided and inaccurate as all but the most blatant NAZI and Communist propaganda in the political arena. For more in-depth information on this read, “Bias” by Bernard Goldberg.

My liberal friend could not see any of this and saw no media bias. Neither could she see the difference between a businessman seeking wealth to invest to create more wealth and a politician seeking control of wealth to dispense as he wishes to enhance his power. To her, the businessman was a greedy capitalist and the politician a dedicated servant of the people. Actually, the businessman gains power and wealth for himself while providing wealth and freedom for his workers. At the same time he must comply with endless regulations and red-tape which take a lot of money out of the pockets of his workers and transfers it to lawyers and accountants. The politician gains power over the people without creating anything. At his best, he takes some money from the haves and gives it to the have nots. At his worst he becomes a Rostenkowski or other crooked product of a corrupt political machine. Sadly, the vast bulk of this money goes to government paper pushers, investigators, attorneys and accountants who must pore through endless forms and investigate endless applicants, to determine who gets the remaining money and how much. One provides a net gain, the politician, a net loss. You only need look as far as the lavish offices and lifestyles of the two Clintons to view examples of the total, selfish disregard for the money American workers pay into the public treasury. Nicholas and Alexandra couldn’t have done better. These Feudal “Royals” believe it to be their due.

The Feudals have a real attitude problem with business people. For some reason, they express the view that all business types are heartless crooks while government people are dedicated public servants and the entertainment elite are gifted performers with hearts of gold. If there is a difference between business people and these other two groups it is that business types and their employees, tend to be self-reliant, hard working and more independent. Many are quite willing to risk new ideas and new ventures. Obviously Feudals hate anyone displaying independence and initiative over whom they have little or no control. Government types tend more to be dependant and in need of long term security. That’s why they work for the government, security. The entertainment elite, are self centered, self serving, egotistical role players without a clue about real people in the real world. In contrast to the expressed views of the Feudals, I doubt there is much difference between the business and public types in their basic greed, intelligence or moral character. Character tests have indicated a slight difference in honesty between the groups favoring the private sector workers over the public sector. I see the results as so close there probably is very little real difference although my instincts tell me the test is right. The entertainment, elite are a completely different story. With their fiction, glamour and fan adulation, they come from a totally fake world and have little grasp of reality.

When you look at those in power among the Feudals it is an entirely different story. Contrast the darlings of the Feudals, Bill and Hillary Clinton with George and Barbara Bush. When it comes to integrity there is no contest. The goings on in the Clinton White House make even Richard Nixon look like a saint. As long as you are a Democrat, lying, cheating, maybe even murder is acceptable behavior. Bill has not only redefined government, but adultery, perjury, honesty and the functions of the oval office as well. No republican could possible get away with the lies and unconscionable actions of Bill and Hillary, and the rest of their unsavory bunch. They have honed escape from prosecution to a fine art. The phrase, “I just can’t recall.” was spoken many times by poor little Hillary when she was questioned about so many recent happenings. This stands in stark contrast to her perfect memory of other things that happened many years ago. Perhaps she is a victim of selective memory loss.

I guess it must be true that Republicans are held to much higher ethical and moral standards than Democrats. Certainly this is true with the media.

Where are the Feudals leading us? As more and more of the people’s money is taken in taxes, this money is given, with strings, to more and more people. Total control is their aim. They seek to expand their power over everyone by punishing those who are hard-working and successful while rewarding those who are not. Clinton’s multitude of last minute pardons and executive orders were clearly payoffs and deliberate policy traps for the following administration. The media did question a few of the most blatant, but there was certainly no hue and cry. He certainly got away with it with only minor repercussions, didn’t he? At least so far.

Incidently Professor Tyler, the previously quoted Scottish historian, had a bit more to say about democracy. He added, “The average age of the world’s great civilizations has been about 200 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”
Just where in this sequence would you place us at this moment?
_____________________________________

THE FEUDALS’ WAR ON GOD AND RELIGION

Indeed, there is a war going on right now for your soul and you are losing. With prayer, God, the Ten Commandments and any kind of religious expression removed from all public places, the Atheist arm of the Feudals has already succeeded in its first major effort. That goal is to make Atheism the state religion of the new order. Make no mistake, Atheism is a belief system and thus is truly a religion. The Feudals will not rest until they have destroyed all other religions and America is Atheist. Other religions are an anathema to their control. Their desire to be the supreme power leaves no room for a God of any kind more powerful than they. They are the primary reason for the Muslim world’s hatred for us.

The first steps taken here are the same exact steps taken by the NAZIs in Germany. Step one is to destroy all religion and the individual family along with it. Then take the children away from their parents and place them in youth camps. The state will then become their parents. This process is well underway in our country right now. The Feudal media attacks religion at every opportunity. Religious values, indeed even morals, are held up to furious ridicule. Anyone who speaks out in opposition to this effort will be attacked unmercifully, both directly and subtly. If you doubt my words, read on.

A few weeks back I was watching “The West Wing” TV program. Perhaps it should be renamed “The Left Wing.” During one ten minute section of the program, the “President” was to meet with a group of radio talk show hosts. The meeting had nothing to do with the story line and I was curious as to where it was going. Leading up to the meeting there were a number of side references uttered by members of the staff, phrases like “Is she here?” and “There she is.” followed by a fleeting glimpse of a fortyish, blond woman walking by. This was followed by, “I see she has a new hairdo.” I was beginning to suspect a spy or assassin was in the White House.

Finally the “President” was ushered in to meet the group of ten or twelve radio talk show hosts. It was completely out of context of the story and I was mystified. The blonde woman stood in the center of the group and as the scene progressed its purpose became obvious. It was a direct personal attack on Dr. Laura Schlesinger, a real talk show host who is a strong spokeswoman for religious ideals, the family, individual responsibility and some of our most sacred personal values. The intent of the piece was unmistakable. The blonde woman was Jewish, a PhD and not a medical doctor, and had recently changed her hairdo just like the real Dr. Laura. The “President” proceeded to use the typical Feudal mantra, first ridiculing her use of “Dr’” which is quite legitimate, with the phrase. “You are not a real doctor are you?” He then proceeded with a vicious diatribe against her use of the Bible, citing as many conflicting passages in the Bible as he could in the several minutes the scene took. Particular emphasis was made of her calling homosexual behavior a sin by citing the Bible. Unlike the real Dr. Laura, the blonde in the scene just stood there looking beaten and with no response. I would love to hear the real Dr. Laura’s response. Her efforts must be getting to some of the powerful Feudals. So much so they had to strike back overtly.

This was not just an attack on Dr. Laura. It was a highly organized, well written diatribe against religion and the Bible which had absolutely nothing to do with the story line of the program. Most of these attacks lie well hidden within a script and are quite subtle. Using these kinds of tools, Hollywood has worked diligently to erode the moral character of our country. They have refined the promotion of sex, drugs and violence to a high art, usually in a more subtle fashion than in this show.

Atheism, the new state religion: Not only have the Feudals worked to establish Atheism as the official state religion in the US, but they are in the process of stamping out Christianity completely. Recently in Lawrence Kansas, the High School banned anything to do with Christmas from the school. No Christmas tree, no Christmas Concert, no Christmas Carols, children are even forbidden to wish each other Merry Christmas or exchange Christmas cards. December 25th is not referred to as Christmas day. It is no longer Christmas vacation. It’s now called Holiday vacation. What will they call it when they realize “Holiday” means Holy Day? Decorations are inspected for any possible Christian content which must be removed. Calendars do not even list Christmas. In a blatant display of animosity against Christians, Halloween and Quanza are still shown and there is no effort to remove their symbols. Check any new calendar you may have. A Catholic school recently purchased several hundred calendars for use in the school. While both Quanza and Halloween were on the Calendars, Christmas was not, and this was a religious calendar for a Catholic school. In contrast to Christmas, Halloween is celebrated in the Lawrence Kansas Highschool with all the usual devil worship icons and symbols. Apparently this is quite all right since it is anti-Christian.

When I was in highschool, the student body was about half Christian and half Jewish. I sang in the Choir along with many Jewish friends. Our annual Christmas concert was a really big, sellout affair attended by both Christian and Jewish families. We sang both Christmas carols and songs for Hanukkah. In three years, I never heard a single word of concern, a remark about offensive or a complaint of any kind from anyone about anything to do with Christmas or Hanukkah. We were all good friends, Christians and Jews together. We respected and acknowledged each other’s religious heritage and celebrations. At our fiftieth reunion, choir member sang several religious songs with complete joy and pleasure. The Feudals don’t like that kind of harmony. They would have us at each other’s throats, or at least divided into competing camps, each offended by the other’s expressions of beliefs.
_____________________________________

The Myth of the Separation of Church and State

Anytime religion is mentioned within the confines of government today people cry, "Separation of Church and State". Many people think this statement appears in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and therefore must be strictly enforced. However, the words: "separation", "church", and "state" do not even appear in the first amendment. The first amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The statement about a wall of separation between church and state was made in a letter on January 1, 1802, by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut. The congregation heard a widespread rumor that the Congregationalists, another denomination, were to become the national religion. This was very alarming to people who knew about religious persecution in England by the state established church. Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God. Jefferson's letter from which the phrase "separation of church and state" was taken affirmed first amendment rights. Jefferson wrote:

“I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.” (1)

The reason Jefferson choose the expression "separation of church and state" was because he was addressing a Baptist congregation; a denomination of which he was not a member. Jefferson wanted to remove all fears that the state would make dictates to the church. He was establishing common ground with the Baptists by borrowing the words of Roger Williams, one of the Baptist's own prominent preachers. Williams had said:

“When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that there fore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world...”(2)

The "wall" was understood as one-directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values.

The American people knew what would happen if the State established the Church like in England. Even though it was not recent history to them, they knew that England went so far as forbidding worship in private homes and sponsoring all church activities and keeping people under strict dictates. They were forced to go to the state established church and do things that were contrary to their conscience. No other churches were allowed, and mandatory attendance of the established church was compelled under the Conventicle Act of 1665. Failure to comply would result in imprisonment and torture. The people did not want freedom from religion, but freedom of religion. The only real reason to separate the church from the state would be to instill a new morality and establish a new system of beliefs. Our founding fathers were God-fearing men who understood that for a country to stand it must have a solid foundation; the Bible was the source of this foundation. They believed that God's ways were much higher than Man's ways and held firmly that the Bible was the absolute standard of truth and used the Bible as a source to form our government.

There is no such thing as a pluralistic society. There will always be one dominant view, otherwise it will be in transition from one belief system to another. Therefore, to say Biblical principles should not be allowed in government and school is to either be ignorant of the historic intent of the founding fathers, or blatantly bigoted against Christianity.

Each form of government has a guiding principle: monarchy in which the guiding principle is honor; aristocracy in which the guiding principle is moderation; republican democracy in which the guiding principle is virtue; despotism in which the guiding principle is fear. Without people of the United States upholding good moral conduct, society soon degenerates into a corrupt system where people misuse the authority of government to obtain what they want at the expense of others. The U.S. Constitution is the form of our government, but the power is in the virtue of the people. The virtue desired of the people is shown in the Bible. This is why Biblical morality was taught in public schools until the early 1960's. Government officials were required to declare their belief in God even to be allowed to hold a public office until a case in the U.S. Supreme Court called Torcaso v. Watkins (Oct. 1960). God was seen as the author of natural law and morality. If one did not believe in God one could not operate from a proper moral base. And by not having a foundation from which to work, one would destroy the community. The two primary places where morality is taught are the family and the church. The church was allowed to influence the government in righteousness an d justice so that virtue would be upheld. Not allowing the church to influence the state is detrimental to the country and destroys our foundation of righteousness and justice. It is absolutely necessary for the church to influence the state in virtue because without virtue our government will crumble -- the representatives will look after their own good instead of the country's.

Government was never meant to be our master as in a ruthless monarchy or dictatorship. Instead, it was to be our servant. The founding fathers believed that the people have full power to govern themselves and that people chose to give up some of their rights for the general good and the protection of rights. Each person should be self-governed and this is why virtue is so important. Government was meant to serve the people by protecting their liberty and rights, not serve by an enormous amount of social programs. The authors of the Constitution wanted the government to have as little power as possible so that if authority was misused it would not cause as much damage. Yet they wanted government to have enough authority to protect the rights of the people. The worldview at the time of the founding of our government was a view held by the Bible: that Man's heart is corrupt and if the opportunity to advance oneself at the expense of another arose, more often than not, we would choose to do so. They firmly believed this and that's why an enormous effort to set up checks and balances took place. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. They wanted to make certain that no man could take away rights given by God. They also did not set up the government as a true democracy, because they believed, as mentioned earlier, Man tends towards wickedness. Just because the majority wants something does not mean that it should be granted, because the majority could easily err. Government was not to be run by whatever the majority wanted but instead by principle, specifically the principles of the Bible.

Our U.S. Constitution was founded on Biblical principles and it was the intention of the authors for this to be a Christian nation. The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians.(3) We can go back in history and look at what the founding fathers wrote to know where they were getting their ideas. This is exactly what two professors did. Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman reviewed an estimated 15,000 items with explicit political content printed between 1760 and 1805 and from these items they identified 3,154 references to other sources. The source they most often quoted was the Bible, accounting for 34% of all citations. Sixty percent of all quotes came from men who used the Bible to form their conclusions. That means that 94% of all quotes by the founding fathers were based on the Bible. The founding fathers took ideas from the Bible and incorporated them into our government. If it was their intention to separate the state and church they would never have taken principles from the Bible and put them into our government. An example of an idea taken from the Bible and then incorporated into our government is found in Isaiah 33:22 which says, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers took this scripture and made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive. As mentioned earlier, the founding fathers strongly believed that Man was by nature corrupt and therefore it was necessary to separate the powers of the government. For instance, the President has the power to execute laws but not make them, and Congress has the power to make laws but not to judge the people. The simple principle of checks and balances came from the Bible to protect people from tyranny. The President of the United States is free to influence Congress, although he can not exercise authority over it because they are separated. Since this is true, why should the church not be allowed to influence the state? People have read too much into the phrase "separation of church and state", which is to be a separation of civil authority from ecclesiastical authority, not moral values. Congress has passed laws that it is illegal to murder and steal, which is the legislation of morality. These standards of morality are found in the Bible. Should we remove them from law because the church should be separated from the state?

Our founding fathers who formed the government also formed the educational system of the day. John Witherspoon did not attend the Constitutional Convention although he was President of New Jersey College in 1768 (known as Princeton since 1896) and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His influence on the Constitution was far ranging in that he taught nine of fifty-five original delegates. He fought firmly for religious freedom and said, "God grant that in America true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable and that unjust attempts to destroy the one may in the issue tend to the support and establishment of both."(4)

In October 1961 the Supreme Court of the United States removed prayer from schools in a case called Engel v. Vitale. The case said that because the U.S. Constitution prohibits any law respecting an establishment of religion, officials of public schools may not compose public prayer even if the prayer is denominationally neutral, and that pupils may choose to remain silent or be excused while the prayer is being recited. For 185 years prayer was allowed in public and the Constitutional Convention itself was opened with prayer. If the founding fathers didn't want prayer in government why did they pray publicly in official meetings? It is sometimes said that it is permissible to pray in school as long as it is silent. Although, "In Omaha, Nebraska, 10-year old James Gierke was prohibited from reading his Bible silently during free time... the boy was forbidden by his teacher to open his Bible at school and was told doing so was against the law."(4) The U.S. Supreme Court with no precedent in any court history said prayer will be removed from school. Yet the Supreme Court in January, 1844 in a case named Vidal v. Girard's Executors, a school was to be built in which no ecclesiastic, missionary, or minister of any sect whatsoever was to be allowed to even step on the property of the school. They argued over whether a layman could teach or not, but they agreed that, "...there is an obligation to teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality." This has been the precedent throughout 185 years. Although this case is from 1844, it illustrates the point. The prayer in question was not even lengthy or denominationally geared. It was this: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country." What price have we paid by removing this simple acknowledgment of God's protecting hand in our lives? Birth rates for unwed girls from 15-19; sexually transmitted diseases among 10-14 year olds; pre-marital sex increased; violent crime; adolescent homicide have all gone up considerably from 1961 to the 1990's -- even after taking into account population growth. The Bible, before 1961, was used extensively in curriculum. After the Bible was removed, scholastic aptitude test scores dropped considerably.

There is no such thing as a pluralistic society; there will always be one dominant view. Someone's morality is going to be taught -- but whose? Secular Humanism is a religion that teaches that through Man's ability we will reach universal peace and unity and make heaven on earth. They promote a way of life that systematically excludes God and all religion in the traditional sense. That Man is the highest point to which nature has evolved, and he can rely on only himself and that the universe was not created, but instead is self-existing. They believe that Man has the potential to be good in and of himself. All of this of course is in direct conflict with not only the teachings of the Bible but even the lessons of history. In June 1961 in a case called Torcaso v. Watkins, the U.S. Supreme Court stated, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others." The Supreme Court declared Secular Humanism to be a religion. The American Humanist Association certifies counselors who enjoy the same legal status as ordained ministers. Since the Supreme Court has said that Secular Humanism is a religion, why is it being allowed to be taught in schools? The removal of public prayer of those who wish to participate is, in effect, establishing the religion of Humanism over Christianity. This is exactly what our founding fathers tried to stop from happening with the first amendment.

1. Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson Writings, Merrill D. Peterson, ed. (NY: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), p. 510, January 1, 1802.

2. John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution (MI: Baker Book House, 1987), p. 243.

3. M.E. Bradford, A Worthy Company: Brief Lives of the Framers of the United States Constitution (Marlborough, N.H.: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1982), p. 4-5.

4. John Witherspoon, "Sermon on the Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men" May 17, 1776; quoted and Cited by Collins, President Witherspoon, I:197-98.

To contact the author for any reason, Click Here!