The Irony of Religious Values in Politics

One of politics biggest ironies to me is when people try to line up their vote with their religious beliefs, and then get self-righteous about it.

“I voted for Obama because he will help the poor.”

Alternatively…

“I voted for Romney because he will keep America’s traditional values and a God-Fearing man.”

Really people? I’m about to reduce your soapbox to kindling. Let’s look at a few relevant scriptures in the Ten Commandments first.

“You shall not murder.” Exodus 20:13

If you were bombed at a wedding, would that be murder? What if, you were minding your own business and someone kicks open the door, you run and get shot down. Oh, it was a drug task force, raiding the wrong house. Murder? Let us go on…

“You shall not commit adultery.” Exodus 20:14

How many politicians have been caught doing this? Clinton, Gingrich and the one Governor with the Brazilian mistress spring immediately to mind. Not exactly people you can trust, let alone with a tool as powerful as the government.

“You shall not steal.” Exodus 20:15

Taxes? Civil Asset Forfeiture? Eminent Domain? Answer this honestly, how big of a check are you willing to write to the government? Should I have to write one too? What if I don’t want too? Then what? It is my money, I gave up time and effort to earn it, so who has a right to it?

“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” Exodus 20:16

What are politicians caught in all the time? Lies! Yet, people elect a person who has proven they cannot be trusted and get all self-righteous that they voted for them and when caught in a lie they cannot escape from, they quickly make excuses for them. Way to live by your principles people.

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.” Exodus 20: 17

What is Obama practically famous for? His ‘spread the wealth’ line in that interview. If you think along those lines then you are coveting.

Let’s look at the Golden Rule.

“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12

Good Principle? I think so, lines up well with the Non-Aggression Principle; however, when you force your morality on others but recoil when they do the same, then you both have broken the Golden Rule.

Now some may quote the Sermon on the Mount’s Beatitudes to me, however that is Jesus advocating charity from the goodness of your heart and property. That can be admirable, however saying ‘those poor souls, you go help them or else’ isn’t by any stretch. One is charity, the other is welfare.

Think about all this before you consider yourself a good Christian by voting for your particular political flavor to act as your proxy. For them to do what you ask they are committing sin so do not be so proud of yourself, after all you’re an accomplice to everything you proclaim to be against.

Is A Voter Accountable for the Ballots They Cast?

One of my favorite podcasts/radio shows is Free Talk Live and one of the hosts Ian is fond of saying, “not my government” which to a point is correct. However recently I have been thinking voters should be held accountable for the actions of those they voted for, especially if it is an incumbent politician! They have a track record you can look at, instead of the big game they talk. Technically, they do “work” for you in theory.

What if you had not voted though?

I would ask why? Was it apathy, or none of the several (there are more than two) running just didn’t line up with your principles? I can respect the second. If you are not involved in politics and making sure the government does not overreach then we will have few option since diplomacy failed. Fight or retreat. With the state of the electorate, I would leave and let the country fall, they deserve everything that comes to them.

People complain about things that affect them (understandably) but are so damn short sighted they do not realize and/or care about the ill effects on others. Yes, you may be having a hard time making ends meet and sign up for government assistance; but do you realize that your neighbors on the block just got saddled with the burden of your life as well as their own. Selfish if you ask me. Yet your vote in November made it possible by keeping the status quo.

On the other hand, as another example, you see unrest overseas and say someone should do something about it, so you vote for the neoconservative politician that will send troops overseas. The admirable thing would be if you went, not by sending proxies. That vote you just cast does more than waste money on things that does not matter to our well-being as a whole, you just ripped men and women from families to handle someone else’s business instead of their own. Because you are such a busybody, some will not make it home on his or her own. You were an accessory in their death, and a family loses a father/husband/son or mother/wife/daughter because you chose someone with a track record of sending troops overseas.

A voter’s hands are not clean. Those hands hit a button far more powerful than the trigger of a fully automatic weapon. It keeps a government that steals (taxes), enslaves (prison), murders (current wars/death penalty/civilians killed in battle or police raids), invades your privacy and subjugates everyone (victimless crimes). The common criminal only wishes they had it so good and Al Capone would be jealous he hadn’t thought of it.

Voting has consequences and you are fully accountable for those votes.

Where?

Where were you when she was at her lowest
Where were you when she needed you
Why do you expect her when you’re at your lowest
Why do you call when you need something

You claim you’re close as sisters
You claim that she’s your best friend
More like family when you want to move
More like a friend when it benefits

I remember a long night in the Emergency Room
Fear of the unknown, the what if
Where were you then
At home talking to a friend

Days later back at the ER
To my surprise you were there
Not for your sister, your closest friend
But for another friend

When she wanted to talk about her pain
Your answer was “Get over it, move on.”
When she went to a baby shower to support a friend
Where she broke down, yet remained

Where were you when she was at her lowest
Where were you when she needed you
Now you’re in pain
Insides are twisting

You called her, she came
But you’ll always stay the same
In past you were there
But that was then, this is now

Where were you when she was at her lowest
Where were you when she needed you
Why do you expect her when you’re at your lowest
Why do you call when you need something

You don’t realize how lucky you are she isn’t me
The kindest soul I know
I’m done with you for what you’ve done
Hurting me is one thing, hurting her is a deadly sin

Where will I be if you’re at your lowest
Where will I be when you need help
I will be where you were when she was at her lowest
I will be where you were when she needed help

Not there

“Marriage Isn’t About Desires of Adults”

I get a newsletter from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, and this week I got one concerning the Supreme Court’s taking on Prop. 8 and the Defense Of Marriage Act. I thought to myself that this might be interesting; it also was infuriating to my personal philosophy. Here’s a link here so let’s take a look.

Those pressing the Supreme Court to overturn the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 essentially argue that marriage as we’ve always known it is not constitutional. But redefining marriage would make marriage about the desires of adults rather than the well-being of children.

That was the takeaway from a media briefing Tuesday at the National Press Club featuring Heritage’s Ryan T. Anderson, Claremont Institute legal scholar John C. Eastman, and Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Austin R. Nimocks (who is also co-counsel in the Prop 8 case).

“Government is not in the marriage business to regulate citizens’ romantic lives,” Anderson said. “Encouraging marriage is the only way to ensure adults take responsibility for their children.”

And what is DOMA? Regulation.

Redefining marriage to include same-sex relationships would further separate marriage from the reality that every child needs both a mother and a father, Anderson said, and transform the institution into whatever emotional bond the government says it is.

Say what? The damn welfare state and irresponsible heterosexual people are doing a bang up job of screwing up the ‘sanctity of marriage’. Look at Hollywood and the amount of kids on food stamps, government insurance, etc. And you know what? Everyone of them came from a heterosexual relationship. Let’s move on…

 Among the consequences: erosion of religious freedom and growth of the welfare state.

There is nothing “equal” about redefining marriage, Anderson said, a point he also made in a piece this week in The Washington Post. And the Court has held that same-sex marriage is not a fundamental right, said Eastman, author of Heritage’s legal memo on the marriage cases.

Religious freedom? Is someone else’s actions in their life going to come between you and your God? Does your God not realize it’s not your doing? Not very omniscient if it doesn’t. It’s not Biblical? I offer this…

Welfare state? You know what grows that? Democrats do. Republicans do. A supermajority of straight politicians. Excuses. The real growth comes from politicians bribing constituents with ‘free’ money.

This line…”same-sex marriage is not a fundamental right” If it’s not, then neither is heterosexual marriage and in the name of equality all marriages should be annulled or government gets the hell out of it and stays out.

“What is at stake is the constitutional authority of the American people,” Anderson said.

To that I offer this…

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The Tenth Amendment. There is nothing in the Constitution that supports DOMA as legal. However, State’s can define marriage under the 10th, however it’s not right. The Constitution is flawed after all, but I can argue with this point from the Declaration of Independence...”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

All men and women, straight, bisexual, homosexual, all races and creeds, are created equal free to their Life, Liberty to do what they want without physically harming another and pursuit of happiness, such as marrying whoever they love. Stating that someone has power to limit this flies in the face of what this country was founded on.

What would you do if a majority voted that you couldn’t marry your sweetheart?

Is Honesty Too Much To Expect From People?

Honesty. What is so difficult about this concept, this principle that you do not deceive another for your own reasons?

I’m brutally honest; if someone does not want the truth as I see it, then don’t ask me. Even honest to what some would consider a fault and here’s an example of it. Little over a year ago, I ordered a 44lb kettlebell, costing me over $100.00 bucks with shipping. Well I got it, and a few days later, I got another one. So I called the company I ordered it from and told them about their mistake. Could I have used another kettlebell? Hell yeah. I would get to double kettlebell training eventually, and a friend suggested that I don’t tell them and keep it. Something I could use and a high value. However, that’s not me; so I called and one of the owners said let me call you back. A little later, I got a call telling me “Merry Christmas, keep it.”

I’m sure the difficulty of shipping a 44lb hunk of metal played on their decision, however, my conscience was clear, and would have been clear either way. Why is this important? Because when you are honest with others, they know that you are honest with yourself and what they see is what they get. When you lie to others, they cannot be sure, when you are honest. Or if how you present yourself is a façade or real.

The reverse is the same when I deal with others, if you lie to others, then I see I cannot trust you and any dealings I have with you will be superficial to nil. The amount and depth of the lies tells me the type of person I’m dealing with. Give me the brass-knuckled truth to the brain rather than the double-edged blade of a lie to my back. You make a vow, like a wedding vow, you stick to it until the other person absolves you of it. Face it, marriages die, but until released you are committed to that person. So if I see someone in a long-term relationship or marriage and they’re fucking around, they have shown me the type of person they are. If they will break a solemn commitment to another, it would be easy to be dishonest in their dealings with me. Therefore, I don’t associate with them, I am not giving someone I cannot trust or like an ounce of my time. We would have no chance at being friends until they see what is wrong worth them and actually change. I do give second chances, however not third chances. After that, you are dead to me.

How important is honesty?