OVERSTEPPING AUTHORITY

When man is left to himself, he becomes arrogant. An arrogant man will eventually overstep his authority. Man acts as though he is the supreme ruler over all things. Man refuses to acknowledge that he is merely a creature with limited authority. There is only so much a man can do. A man cannot know everything, cannot be everywhere all at one time, and cannot rule over all of mankind. Rather than acknowledging his limitations, he exalts himself as if he is the creator and ruler of all things. An arrogant man is also full of contempt for others.

Humility is good thing. Humbleness of mind recognizes limitations and seeks to live within established boundaries. Humility is freedom from being prideful. Arrogance, on the other hand, is bondage. Humility realizes its place, whereas arrogance knows no boundaries and will attempt the impossible. When arrogance is never checked, it will attempt to grow into absolute control. Arrogance leads to totalitarian dictatorship. Humility leads to limited government.

Man in his arrogance refuses to admit that he is a creature and not the creator. Because of his arrogance, he will act as though he has all power and control over all of creation. An example of this comes from the state of Texas. Two men where convicted of breaking a federal law which outlaws taking illegally captured or prohibited animals across state boundaries. Both of these men will serve prison time for violating this federal law.

These two men where taking deer from Minnesota to Texas for trophy hunts. What is wrong with that? Why is this against the law? The question gets down to who owns the animals of this world? Texas and Wildlife Department officials said that these two men were caught trying to bring 14 white-tailed bucks into the state. Yes, and what is the problem here? The problem is that the government says that it owns all of the animals of a particular state.

This is unbelievable. This boggles my mind. If there is a fish in the stream the government has said that it belongs to them. The government has arrogated itself into a position that I have to get permission from them to hunt or fish. This is why we have hunting and fishing licenses. On what basis does the government have this authority to say that all animals are its property? It should be obvious that the government does not own the animals of a state. They are the property of God and he has given man the authority to have dominion over His creation.

This is just another instance of the government overstepping its authority. This is because the government has set itself up as lord and master. This is what happens when man rejects the law of God. He will overstep his boundaries every time. Since man refuses to recognize any authority above him, he will fill the void with his own authority. His arrogance will also be his downfall. It is time to question all government licensing.

SOUNDS GOOD BUT DOES NOT WORK

For those in the know, they can see through to something that will not work. In reality, a proposal will have the opposite effect of what is proposed. The intelligence level of our elected officials is at an all time low. I do not know if elected officials have ever been blessed with intelligence. A wise politician is not something that I have ever seen in my lifetime, nor do I think that there ever will be one.

All government policies are designed to make it look as though the government is doing something. When the government should refrain from doing something that is when you can be assured that the government goes into high gear. Since most people’s thinking is characterized by what is physically visible, they see the government putting men to work and think that this is a good thing. They do not understand economics and that these government expenditures will prolong any economic recovery.

Governments do not create employment, entrepreneurs do. What the government needs to do during this period of economic crisis is to allow the market to correct itself. The government needs to sit on the sideline and ensure that contracts are enforced. The government will not do this because they are being pressured by the voters to do something, anything. So the government wants to give the impression that they are riding to the rescue.

"Obama said on Saturday he was crafting an aggressive two-year stimulus plan to revive the economy, aiming to save 2.5 million jobs by January 2011 through projects including transportation infrastructure, school modernization and alternative energy." (Yahoo News). Notice Obama’s economic policy is based upon one time projects and also on investing in non existent alternative energy.

When a bridge or a road is complete, there is no recurring work. A business that produces a product that people need employs people year after year. Government employment that Obama is proposing is a one shot project i.e. short term. Businesses creating jobs is long term. Obama’s proposals are thus designed for the immediate moment, not for the future. This means that his economic policies will not work long term. He thinks mistakenly that spending is what gets an economy going, not savings.

Obama’s economic policy will stimulate the economy in the short term but will not be sustainable long term. In other word’s, his policies are already a failure before he has been sworn in as President. Of course, he and his advisors think that they are doing what is going to work. It sounds good on the surface, but it will end up making things worse, not better. His failed economic policies will prove that intelligence and politicians are mutually exclusive terms. The two can never be merged together.

IMMATURITY ON DISPLAY

What is the goal in life? People who have no goals just exist physically. They have no understanding as to what makes life meaningful. We are living in an age of extreme immaturity. This is because people have abandoned the family as the source of maturity. Marriage and its incumbent responsibilities has been rejected by many. The sexual revolution is an attempt to evade family responsibility. The sexual revolution has had the effect of increasing adult immaturity.

Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines immaturity as, "Not perfect; not brought to a complete state." The height of immaturity is demonstrated by homosexuals. Homosexuals are seeking to avoid the responsibilities associated with having a family that is a husband and wife with children. Raising a family means responsibility on the part of a husband and wife. Children must be provided for financially and nurtured spiritually. This requires being mature and taking responsibility. This is something that homosexuals cannot do because they cannot reproduce.

What is the goal of homosexual marriage? Since they cannot reproduce and have the responsibility of raising a family, it follows that homosexual marriage is meaningless. It serves no purpose. If it serves no purpose, homosexual marriage is abnormal and if abnormal, it would be considered to be queer. The end result of homosexual activity is death. Life can never come from a homosexual liaison, only death. A lesbian wrote an article titled "When all women become lesbians." If this were possible, the world would be depopulated within a generation. Not a very bright future.

Immaturity has been on display recently in California, where the voters approved a ban on homosexual marriage. The homosexuals have been protesting ever since. They refuse to accept the position of others. They want to force their beliefs down the throats of others. They are not mature enough to accept their defeat and seek to work to change the voter’s minds. What they will do is to try to win their victory by the only avenue available to the immature, through physical force.

They will use the court system to get their way. Their goal is to get their way because they want all the benefits of marriage. For one if homosexual marriage is allowed, then they could get a lower tax rate by being able to file married filing jointly rather than filing single. They could get medical insurance for their partners. They want all the protection of a family without the responsibility of a family. The voters of California have spoken. The homosexuals have refused to abide by this decision.

Homosexuals are nothing more or less than grown up babies. They throw fits if they cannot get their way. They may even hold their breath until they turn blue. They are wholly imperfect and until they renounce their immature ways, they can never be brought into a state of maturity. They hate the responsibility that bringing a child into this world requires. The word to the homosexual should be, it is time to quite being an immature child. Grow up and take the responsibility of a legitimate family.

JUDICIAL TRAVESTY

I could be accused of picking on women, especially Mary Winkler for her heinous act of cold blooded premeditated murder. The feminists would say that I am a male chauvinist and seek to disregard all contrary evidence regarding men. This accusation is incorrect because it matters little to me whether it is a male or female that commits murder. They both equally deserve the death penalty. It is the judicial travesty that I oppose that is given to particular individuals.

Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines travesty as, "to translate into such language as to render ridiculous or ludicrous." Our judicial system is no longer oriented toward justice and victim’s rights, but all the rights are given to the criminal. This is because of the notion that criminals are to be rehabilitated, not punished. The concept of restitution is wholly missing from our judicial system. If anything, the taxpayer has to make restitution for the criminal. We have a reversal of ethical cause and effect.

A recent judicial travesty was in the sentencing of Eric McLean. McLean was convicted of reckless homicide in the death of his ex-wife’s lover Sean Powell. McLean claimed that he did not intend to harm Powell when he confronted him with a gun outside his home. What was McLean thinking when he took a gun and confronted Powell, someone who was causing him emotional distress? If he did not intend to harm Powell, why did he pull the trigger? Of course, he intended to murder Powell. Even if he did not intend harm, what was the result?

While Powell was committing sin, it was not McLean’s position to do what he did. McLean should have divorced his wife rather than murdering her lover. He had other options, but he chose to take matters into his own hands. He operated outside the law and deserved the consequences of his actions which for a murderer is forfeiture of his own life. McLean is evil. It matters little that he had no previous criminal record. He now is a murderer.

His sentence given by the judge is ludicrous. The penalty is not commensurate with the heinousness of the crime. One of Powell’s relatives said that McLean is a "master manipulator." His act was an act of premeditation and he fully intended to harm Powell. McLean was given a sentence of 90 days in jail and 12 years of probation. This sentence is even worse than Mary Winkler’s. It is the most ridiculous sentence I have ever heard of for someone who has murdered someone in cold blood.

This is when you know that life is cheap when criminals, such as McLean, receive such a light sentence for such a heinous act. This is truly a travesty. Powell did not deserve to be murdered by McLean and McLean no longer deserves to live. The judge in this case has reversed ethical cause and effect. McLean forfeited his right to continuity of life and yet he is going to be released in 47 days because he has already served 43 days. This is why people have no confidence in the judicial system. The judicial system is an absurdity.

PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL JUSTICE

Words either mean something or they mean nothing. All words are theologically based as God is the creator of language. No matter how much the religious left tries to hide their true intent, they cannot because their use of language will betray them every time. They say one thing as a camouflage to hide what they are going to do. It is questionable whether or not they are aware of what the results of their actions.

The religious left can only think in one direction, in terms of effects. They can only deal with the visible world. This is why they are always materialists and Darwinian. To them progress is where no one has to earn a living. They think it is unfair that someone has more economic resources than someone else. To them, everyone should be equal and this means that everyone should have the same amount of money. No one should have more than anyone else.

It makes no difference to them whether or not this scheme comports to reality. They will force it by government decree to make it work. This is the only avenue open to them. They lack the ability to persuade anyone to accept their ideas because their ideas will fail unless the use of physical force is applied. Coercion is essential to those who lean to the left on any issue. They will not tell you what there policy consists of until it is too late.

The visibly oriented will seek to gain control of the government so that they can implement their failed policies. The religious left will tell you that they are motivated by compassion. It is easy to be compassionate with other people’s money. If they want to show true compassion, let them give their own money to the poor. This is not something that they are going to do. What they really want to do is level the playing field by wanting to tax the rich and give to the poor. They are motivated by envy, not compassion.

When envy becomes prevalent, there is no amount of progress possible. What the religious left is preaching is politicized envy. They resent the successful and the wealthy. They hate capitalism with all their heart. Their desire is to give the earned to those who have not earned it. What happens is that the productive of a society begin to hide their wealth and not use their wealth to expand employment opportunities for those who have less means.

If the religious left was really motivated to social justice, they would not want to tax the rich into submission. The wealthy are the ones that employ others. True progressive justice would allow the wealthy to use their wealth to expand employment opportunities. This would be progressive in the standard of living of the poor. Since the religious left supports the Democratic candidates, it is apparent that they are not motivated by compassion, but envy. They are not interested in economic progress, but their failed policies will ensure the opposite, regression.