heavenlyboy34
11-01-2008, 10:42 AM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/dunaway-r1.html
Voting Is Immoral
by Rick Dunaway
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Reconciling Christian Principles with Present Day American Politics
During the preparation for this piece, careful consideration was given to the understanding that this stance is apt to be wildly unpopular. Without a formal training in the field of human psychology, the writer has been blessed (or maybe cursed) with an ability to discern man's motivations and expected actions.
Upon this realization, it should be noted that most individuals will have one of three predictable reactions to the following dilemma: the desperation to cling to long and deeply held beliefs versus the consideration of the validity of a new set of facts. First, what we can call the ostrich response: to bury one's head in the sand and pretend no controversy exists. Second, the inconvenient justification, involving staunch refusal to consider the facts laid out, despite their indisputable nature, and seeking to justify actions to render said inconvenient facts inapplicable. Finally, there is the old stand-by of killing the messenger; if the individual attempting to demonstrate the truth can be discredited, then one has no conundrum to reconcile. Perhaps it is foolish, but it is the intention of this work to elicit an entirely separate and distinct reaction from its readers. In the book of 2 Samuel, when King David was confronted by Nathan, who made his sin apparent, David immediately repented, saying "I have sinned against the Lord" (2 Samuel 12: 1–13, New American Standard). Carefully consider whether a similar reaction might be appropriate in response to these facts.
First, it must be acknowledged that the common denominator in this context is language. This is imperative, as many of the words and phrases that are now so commonplace in America's political landscape have connotations at odds with their intended meanings. In a variety of subtle ways, conditioning exists such that as a people, we accept the illogical notion that the essence of an entity can be altered by its title, as well as by the user of said title. George Orwell's Newspeak is alive and well... Just as Shakespeare taught us that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," let it be accepted that evil, regardless of its appellation, is still foul.
As a primary example, the word "freedom." In today's America, "freedom" means sending one's children to public school, or teaching them from home following the approved curriculum of the government. No matter which means, the end is the same: "they" are the deciders. Currently in America, "freedom" means that one can paint his or her house any color desired, so long as the city planner's office approves. "Freedom" also means obtaining the government's permission to travel. The list is inexhaustible. For those who do not converse in Newspeak, "freedom" retains its former, and intended, definition: the ability to live life as one pleases, so long as no injury is done to another.
Now let's examine the term "theft." Anyone who does not agree that the proceeds of a man's labor, and the purchases made with said proceeds, belong irrevocably to that man, is a proponent of slavery. When did our society decide that, as a group, we can steal – appropriate – levy – half of what a man earns? Certainly there is a "word of art," a term specific to politics, that will extraordinarily transform the essence of the act into something more palatable.
This brings us to a word far too common, "taxation." In the current political climate, "taxation" means paying one's "fair share." It is unconscionable that Americans have arrived in a circumstance in which a man can be forced at gunpoint to surrender half of what is rightly his. The claim then, is this: that he was simply "discharging the debt he justly and honestly owed as his portion," or, in other words, "paying his fair share." Upon what justification does anyone owe this debt? The only foundation upon which this claim can be made is the underlying immoral selfishness of mankind.
Finally, the cardinal theme of this work, "democracy." The romantic notion that aided in fostering our view of "democracy" as a benign form of self-governance is among the most dramatic examples of mass hysteria in the world's history. "We all have a right to vote," is Americans' arrogance again outreaching their intelligence. America's own founding fathers despised the idea of democracy and saw it as little more than hooliganism run amok (see here, here, here, here, here, and here). Benjamin Franklin stated "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner." This is one of Satan's most evil tricks, the idea that mankind can change the Laws of God provided a majority of mankind reach an agreement on such a change. This lie evicted Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (although they outnumbered God two to one), and it will be as successful or less so today.
Democratically elected legislative bodies are merely window dressing, calculated to provide justification for ignoring the Laws of God, and substituting the laws of man. Ultimately designed to create an air of legitimacy for the winning group of voters, the result is political rape of the losing group of voters. Because such "legitimacy" has become so entrenched as to no longer be questioned, the losers have effectively been indoctrinated into learning to lie back and enjoy it.
When one presumes to force others to bend to his or her will, he or she is insinuating an ego above God's, committing the original sin. Christians can wax eloquent for hours about the downsides of the endless list of regulations the Bible's Pharisees expected Jews to follow. These same Christians understand easily that the Pharisees, by expanding the Laws of God, were infringing upon territory justifiably only belonging to God Himself. However, these same Christians can scarcely wait to mass to the polling booth to force their will upon their fellow citizens. And certainly now that their long-held beliefs are being questioned, many of them will answer thus: "Everyone of age has the right to vote; it was my responsibility to make my voice heard." Not to mention, "it was the will of the majority, the people have spoken." But what is the difference between a lone tyrant enforcing his will upon his people or a mob of citizens doing the same at the voting booth?
On November 4th, do not hesitate. Utilize the secret ballot polling booth in order to vote in favor of stealing more of your neighbor's property, to keep your children in public indoctrination centers, to give your elderly parents a raise in their Socialist Insecurity, and to give yourself greater access to health care. Vote against issues that might allow people to exercise their inalienable rights as they wish, to spend their property in the manner they find befitting, to prevent smoking or drinking in any restaurants, to provide more handicapped parking spaces everywhere. Vote for the candidates that promise (lie?) to remake the world through legislation, in the image in your mind. Christians have again been duped by Satan, not only into willing participation, but into the defense of such action, in spite of what they know in their souls of evil.
The source of that evil can be traced back to God's conversation with Samuel. God said to Samuel, "...they have not rejected you...they have rejected Me from being king over them...they have forsaken Me and served other gods..." (emphasis mine). Today, Americans have chosen not only to reject God as King and to serve other gods, including the god of democracy (man-rule), but also to replace His Laws in favor of man's laws. Everyone who casts a ballot partakes in the responsibility. Voters have been enticed by Satan's whisper, as were Adam and Eve, "you will be like God."
In conclusion, a humble suggestion: if you want to vote on November 4th, instead of running to democracy's altar, get on your knees before your true King and repent of worshiping the false god of democracy. Ask the one true God to reign in your heart. For those that would like to see "CHANGE" in the world, let God be the bringer. Imagine for a moment the difference that could be wrought if all of those that claim His name would cease to scramble for the scraps from their neighbor's table; if they instead became true children of the King by obedience to Him, and were thereby entitled to a place at God's feast.
Voting Is Immoral
by Rick Dunaway
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Reconciling Christian Principles with Present Day American Politics
During the preparation for this piece, careful consideration was given to the understanding that this stance is apt to be wildly unpopular. Without a formal training in the field of human psychology, the writer has been blessed (or maybe cursed) with an ability to discern man's motivations and expected actions.
Upon this realization, it should be noted that most individuals will have one of three predictable reactions to the following dilemma: the desperation to cling to long and deeply held beliefs versus the consideration of the validity of a new set of facts. First, what we can call the ostrich response: to bury one's head in the sand and pretend no controversy exists. Second, the inconvenient justification, involving staunch refusal to consider the facts laid out, despite their indisputable nature, and seeking to justify actions to render said inconvenient facts inapplicable. Finally, there is the old stand-by of killing the messenger; if the individual attempting to demonstrate the truth can be discredited, then one has no conundrum to reconcile. Perhaps it is foolish, but it is the intention of this work to elicit an entirely separate and distinct reaction from its readers. In the book of 2 Samuel, when King David was confronted by Nathan, who made his sin apparent, David immediately repented, saying "I have sinned against the Lord" (2 Samuel 12: 1–13, New American Standard). Carefully consider whether a similar reaction might be appropriate in response to these facts.
First, it must be acknowledged that the common denominator in this context is language. This is imperative, as many of the words and phrases that are now so commonplace in America's political landscape have connotations at odds with their intended meanings. In a variety of subtle ways, conditioning exists such that as a people, we accept the illogical notion that the essence of an entity can be altered by its title, as well as by the user of said title. George Orwell's Newspeak is alive and well... Just as Shakespeare taught us that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," let it be accepted that evil, regardless of its appellation, is still foul.
As a primary example, the word "freedom." In today's America, "freedom" means sending one's children to public school, or teaching them from home following the approved curriculum of the government. No matter which means, the end is the same: "they" are the deciders. Currently in America, "freedom" means that one can paint his or her house any color desired, so long as the city planner's office approves. "Freedom" also means obtaining the government's permission to travel. The list is inexhaustible. For those who do not converse in Newspeak, "freedom" retains its former, and intended, definition: the ability to live life as one pleases, so long as no injury is done to another.
Now let's examine the term "theft." Anyone who does not agree that the proceeds of a man's labor, and the purchases made with said proceeds, belong irrevocably to that man, is a proponent of slavery. When did our society decide that, as a group, we can steal – appropriate – levy – half of what a man earns? Certainly there is a "word of art," a term specific to politics, that will extraordinarily transform the essence of the act into something more palatable.
This brings us to a word far too common, "taxation." In the current political climate, "taxation" means paying one's "fair share." It is unconscionable that Americans have arrived in a circumstance in which a man can be forced at gunpoint to surrender half of what is rightly his. The claim then, is this: that he was simply "discharging the debt he justly and honestly owed as his portion," or, in other words, "paying his fair share." Upon what justification does anyone owe this debt? The only foundation upon which this claim can be made is the underlying immoral selfishness of mankind.
Finally, the cardinal theme of this work, "democracy." The romantic notion that aided in fostering our view of "democracy" as a benign form of self-governance is among the most dramatic examples of mass hysteria in the world's history. "We all have a right to vote," is Americans' arrogance again outreaching their intelligence. America's own founding fathers despised the idea of democracy and saw it as little more than hooliganism run amok (see here, here, here, here, here, and here). Benjamin Franklin stated "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner." This is one of Satan's most evil tricks, the idea that mankind can change the Laws of God provided a majority of mankind reach an agreement on such a change. This lie evicted Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (although they outnumbered God two to one), and it will be as successful or less so today.
Democratically elected legislative bodies are merely window dressing, calculated to provide justification for ignoring the Laws of God, and substituting the laws of man. Ultimately designed to create an air of legitimacy for the winning group of voters, the result is political rape of the losing group of voters. Because such "legitimacy" has become so entrenched as to no longer be questioned, the losers have effectively been indoctrinated into learning to lie back and enjoy it.
When one presumes to force others to bend to his or her will, he or she is insinuating an ego above God's, committing the original sin. Christians can wax eloquent for hours about the downsides of the endless list of regulations the Bible's Pharisees expected Jews to follow. These same Christians understand easily that the Pharisees, by expanding the Laws of God, were infringing upon territory justifiably only belonging to God Himself. However, these same Christians can scarcely wait to mass to the polling booth to force their will upon their fellow citizens. And certainly now that their long-held beliefs are being questioned, many of them will answer thus: "Everyone of age has the right to vote; it was my responsibility to make my voice heard." Not to mention, "it was the will of the majority, the people have spoken." But what is the difference between a lone tyrant enforcing his will upon his people or a mob of citizens doing the same at the voting booth?
On November 4th, do not hesitate. Utilize the secret ballot polling booth in order to vote in favor of stealing more of your neighbor's property, to keep your children in public indoctrination centers, to give your elderly parents a raise in their Socialist Insecurity, and to give yourself greater access to health care. Vote against issues that might allow people to exercise their inalienable rights as they wish, to spend their property in the manner they find befitting, to prevent smoking or drinking in any restaurants, to provide more handicapped parking spaces everywhere. Vote for the candidates that promise (lie?) to remake the world through legislation, in the image in your mind. Christians have again been duped by Satan, not only into willing participation, but into the defense of such action, in spite of what they know in their souls of evil.
The source of that evil can be traced back to God's conversation with Samuel. God said to Samuel, "...they have not rejected you...they have rejected Me from being king over them...they have forsaken Me and served other gods..." (emphasis mine). Today, Americans have chosen not only to reject God as King and to serve other gods, including the god of democracy (man-rule), but also to replace His Laws in favor of man's laws. Everyone who casts a ballot partakes in the responsibility. Voters have been enticed by Satan's whisper, as were Adam and Eve, "you will be like God."
In conclusion, a humble suggestion: if you want to vote on November 4th, instead of running to democracy's altar, get on your knees before your true King and repent of worshiping the false god of democracy. Ask the one true God to reign in your heart. For those that would like to see "CHANGE" in the world, let God be the bringer. Imagine for a moment the difference that could be wrought if all of those that claim His name would cease to scramble for the scraps from their neighbor's table; if they instead became true children of the King by obedience to Him, and were thereby entitled to a place at God's feast.