Rand Paul: Religious Freedom Dying at the Altar of Political Correctness

[idiom]

If someone does not rob you, that means you are taking bribes from them?

If you make an agreement with them that if they rob you less, you won't speak out, then yeah its a bribe. In fact, you are siding with them.

The moral position is to make them rob you more, publicly, and then eviscerate them for it. Being a pastor/priest/rabbi/imam has a moral element to it, or at least it used to.

Instead they agree to shut up about everyone else getting robbed if you pass them over.

[Brett85]

Yes, and I disagree with that, but I don't see what that has to do with being better on the war on drugs.

You said that theonomists are better politically than the religious right in general. I don't see how someone who supports executing homosexuals and adulterers is better than someone who supports drug laws.

[Ronin Truth]

Must be some pretty wimpy religious freedom if wacko weenie PC can threaten to kill it.

[Christian Liberty]

You said that theonomists are better politically than the religious right in general. I don't see how someone who supports executing homosexuals and adulterers is better than someone who supports drug laws.

I was only talking about the issue of drug laws in particular, but I would say theonomists are far better than the religious right politically when considering all of the issues.

Theonomists support not only imposing the OT civil code, but also repealing everything that isn't in it. Most of them are also radically for decentralization, supporting the imposition of most of their polices at the county level.

Here's an article where a theonomist talks about some of the similarities between his views and libertarianism:

http://americanvision.org/5675/theon...ibertarianism/


Its not just drug laws, BTW. Its virtually everything else as well.

[Christian Liberty]

You said that theonomists are better politically than the religious right in general. I don't see how someone who supports executing homosexuals and adulterers is better than someone who supports drug laws.

To expound on my answer to this.

If it was just "executing homosexuals and adulterers" on one side and "drug laws" on the other, I would of course agree with you.

Its not.

Theonomists agree with libertarians on:

Economics (with minarchists, at any rate)

ending the surveilance state

ending the empire

Abolishing almost every Federal agency

Cutting military spending dramatically and using the military solely for defense

Deciding social isuses county by county (and yes, they do think homosexuality, adultery, blasphemy, etc. should be capital crimes at the county level)

repealing gun laws

There's probably more that I'm missing, but that in and of itself is pretty huge

Also, I'm not sure if all theonomists are the same on this point, but the ones I know don't want government police either. Local administrators, but no police.

By contrast, the religious right supports

Big Federal government

Some economic regulation

Some gun regulation

FEDERAL laws banning drugs and also often sexual sins as well (although the punishment wouldn't be death)

maintaining the surveilance state (this is one of the big ones for me, theonomists may have tough laws on certain things but its fairly likely you'd get harassed for doing them in your own home because nobody would know. For the "religious right" on the other hand...)

Maintaining the empire.

Murdering people, including children, in foreign countries with drones

I could go on, but if you can't tell why I'd take President Gary North over President George W. Bush based on that, I'm not sure what to tell you