Little Alfie Evans and Gun Control

Little Alfie Evans and Gun Control

Well, Italy has announced that it is willing to open its doors wide to poor little Alfie Evans. Alfie is a child in England whose PARENTS do not want to deny him life support. Alfie is not vegetative or brain dead, but has developed a life threatening neurological condition that requires him to be on life support. The Children’s Hospital in England that he is in is actively working against his parents wishes that he continue to receive life support. In fact, the hospital staff and the Government of England have agreed together that Alfie should die in accordance with the European Court of Human Rights. Yesterday the hospital turned off the life support machines over his parents pleas. However, Alfie has hung on, and in the words of his father, “gobsmacked” the hospital and doctors. That, translated into American english means that little Alfie has “punched them in the mouth.”

What makes this worse is that Italy has offered him and his parents asylum. A hospital supported by the Vatican there has made themselves available to continue Alfie’s care. But England would rather kill him than ship him off to Italy for further care. And these are the people (national governments) that we are, according to the Left, supposed to willingly give our right not to be killed. What is commonly called the right of self-defense. A right that is enshrined in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

When the framers wrote the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution there were two groups of people that they had in mind that people needed to be able to defend themselves against. They believed their citizens needed to be able to defend their life and property against criminals for sure. But they also believed that the citizens of the new nations needed to be able to defend their life and property against government intrusion too. Their knowledge of the history of England and the bloody civil wars of Europe, along with their current dilemma with of King George’s standing English army in their villages and towns, was enough to cement in their minds that governments were more dangerous than individuals. And I for one, do not understand why we have to learn this lesson again in the United States.

Stephen Paddock kill nearly sixty people in Las Vegas. Adam Lanza killed nearly thirty, mostly children, in Newtown. Nick Cruz killed more than fifty. Dylan Roof killed nine African-American parishioners in South Carolina. And the list could go on and on. For sure, there has been a change going back to 1967 with the birth of the modern mass shooter in Charles Whitman’s rampage on the campus of the University of Texas that killed sixteen people. There is a problem, it is just not a firearms problem. It is a moral and spiritual problem that transcends firearms. Recently the murder rate of London topped that of New York City. Firearms have been outlawed in London for years. Now they are banning knives. In Toronto yesterday a man rented a delivery van and mowed down twenty five people, killing ten. The problem with the Alfie Evans case is the same problem that haunted us with Charles Whitman, and the same problem that haunts us now with Nick Cruz. Across our land, and indeed across Western Civilization there is now a callous, evil, and nihilistic disregard for human life. The governments and universities of the Western World are rife with these people. Just because abortion is state sanctioned doesn’t mean that it is not mass violence. But if there is no God, nothing beyond this life, no meaning whatsoever to any thing, and all is random, then why not snuff out the mobil clumps of cells as well as the in-utero ones. If someone has Down’s Syndrome what do we do? Execute them, it’s better that way. Neurologically damaged babies? They worthless drains on society, useless eaters. Whose next? The aged? The infirm? Whose next? The Ideological opponents that disagree with this ideology of death we are all witnessing.

When mass shooters kill, we get deaths in the tens. When government kills we get deaths in the millions. The twentieth century was a century of mechanized death at the hands of ruthless Marxist dictators who systematically disarmed their populations so that they could not resist their will. David Hogg and Emma Gonzales are following the same ideology that the doctors of Alder Hay Children’s Hospital in England are following, as well as Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood followed. They all think they know what is best for everyone else. They all think that they are best equipped to make decisions regarding who should live and who should die. When Margret Sanger convinced the elites of this nation that incapacitated people, blacks, and other poor populations should die in the womb, she did it using public safety and quality of life as arguments. When the doctors at Alder Hay tell us Alfie should die, it is because of quality of life arguments. When Hogg and Gonzales (historically ignorant children that I doubt could tell me about anything that happened before the year they were born) make their arguments about gun control, they make public safety and quality of life arguments.

The Left in America has become a Marxist cult of death. First, they shout you down on college campuses and mock the death of a former first lady. Next, they make it impossible for those with whom they disagree to do business (like they are doing to the NRA and firearms makers now). Then they disarm you completely. After that, they do what they always do, to ensure public safety and quality of life issues, they kill you.

Advertisements
Syria: This Is How Domestic Policy Influences Foreign Policy

Syria: This Is How Domestic Policy Influences Foreign Policy

Legendary foreign correspondent Robert Fisk gave an informed account from the ground on the Syrian (likely non) gas attack. You can read his account via the UK Independent here. It is a good thorough read, written by a man familiar with Syria, it’s people, and it’s leaders.

I have read many critiques of those of us, like Fisk, who do not believe Assad used chlorine gas upon the people of Douma. Most of the reasons given by critics show that they do not understand the region, and are either Russo-phobic (the Left) or have a blind trust in the American State Department (the Neo-con right). Conservatives on the right are a confusing bunch to me. I feel a close kinship to them in many ways. But there is no explaining their complete mistrust of the U.S. government on domestic policy and their blind trust of it in international affairs. If the U.S. government doesn’t do what is right by its own people, why would you assume that they would do what is right anywhere else in the world? But I digress.

For those of you that may not know, I want to explain something to you in very clear and irrefutable terms. We are backing radical Muslim jihadists in Syria. No, really, the “moderate rebels” in Douma that claimed that there was a gas attack there, are a part of a group that calls itself the “Jaish al-Islam” (Army of Islam).

No, we are not fighting ISIS in Syria, we’re helping them. When those same fighters cross an imaginary line in the sand and enter Iraq, we call them ISIS. U.S. weapons are often found among ISIS fighters in Iraq because they were carried from Syria to Iraq by these so-called moderate rebels. It is schizophrenic. But I am going to try to explain in brief below why we knowingly maintain this schizophrenia.

And, no we are not helping Christians there, we are ensuring their annihilation. Assad, as bad as he is, is himself a minority in his own country. He is an Alewite, and is aligned with the Shi’as in Syria, who are themselves a minority. Most of the Sunni majority there are non-violent and live in peace with the minority populations (Shi’a, Alewite, Christian, Yazidi, Kurds, etc). But among the Sunnis are Wahabists, like Osama Bin Laden was when he was alive. These are the radicals that kill, rape, and maim in the name of Islam. The so-called moderate rebels in Syria are Wahabists that are financially backed by Saudi Arabia. They are of the, “convert or die brand”, and we are aiding them in their crimes against minority populations in Syria, among whom our Christian brothers and sisters are a part.

What are we doing in Syria? Be skeptical here and do your own research. What we are doing is helping the Saudis (Sunni Islam) gain control in the Middle East against the Iranians (Shi’a Islam). The Saudis are aligned with us, and will only sell oil in U.S. dollars. This is called the petro-dollar system. Countries around the world must exchange their currencies for dollars before they can trade them for oil. And we can’t have oil countries like Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Syria selling oil in something other than dollars. All of these nations were either Shi’a controlled or secular Sunni dominated until we arrived in 2003. They were friendly to Iran, which is the major Shi’a power in the Middle East, and consequently, Saudi Arabia’s primary rival for regional dominance. Why is it important to us that Saudi Arabia gain control in these nations so that the world will continue to have no choice but to trade commodities in U.S. dollars only?

Remember back in 2009-2012 when we printed 4.5 trillion dollars out of thin air in order to keep us from slipping into economic oblivion? Why didn’t this massive influx of fresh cash cause massive inflation and destroy the value of our currency? Because the world needs dollars to do business, and most of the new currency was soaked up by foreign banks who needed them to buy oil. But what would happen if the countries of the world began to trade their currencies directly (or gold, or another currency) for oil? All the dollars that are sitting piled in banks all over the world would no longer be needed there, and they would come crashing back to our shores. The U.S. dollar would plummet in value.  We’d be stuck with 21 trillion dollars in debt, and a massively devalued currency to use to pay it off. The inflation that would occur would make 21 trillion feel like 40 trillion in an instant. We also could no longer be able to run deficits because we would not be able to print money to cover those deficits without immediately feeling the consequences, if the world stopped using the petro-dollar. Have you ever asked, “why, if we run a deficit, can government checks get cashed?” It is because we monetize that debt… we print it up and send it out by selling debt backed securities like bonds and treasuries. The interest on the debt in the scenario I describe would equal our GDP overnight. We’ve painted ourselves into a corner. We will do anything to keep the status quo as the reserve currency of the world because a change in the world monetary regime would cause a multi-decade depression, and usher in severe austerity in the U.S.. Here’s the kicker. Our whole Middle Eastern foreign policy is predicated on our need to maintain the world reserve currency status. That’s why we side with Saudi Arabia. That’s why in Yemen, people… children, are dying of Cholera because the Saudis, with our help, have bombed them into the stone age. Where is that in the news?

Saddam Hussein, a Baathist secular dictator started selling oil in currencies other than dollars. He now sleeps with the fishes. Iraq is in shambles. In Libya, Gaddafi did the same thing, moved to non-dollar oil sales. He’s dead and Libya is a mess with no one really in control. The whole Arab Spring that we instigated and supported in 2012 was merely either the toppling of Shi’a controlled countries or the strengthening of Sunni (Saudi) control in countries across the Middle East. In Egypt we saw the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, that were, like the Jaish al-Islam in Syria, Saudi (Sunni) controlled, and Wahabist to the core. Coptic Christians were, and still are, being slaughtered by them and their ilk. This is all linked to reserve currency and oil sales. No other reason can be given that would make the United States fight ISIS in Iraq and fund ISIS in Syria. Because the day we are not the reserve currency the party is over. We could not, at that point, continue to live our debt fueled free spending lifestyle. Like it or not, our profligate spending has spilled over into profligate warfare. This is how domestic policy influences foreign policy.

U.S. Christians should begin to systematically eliminate their debts and invest in precious metals, land, and other physical assets. The party is going to end. Our reserve currency status is going to cease, my guess, within the next decade. There is a lot going on around the world, especially in the East, meant to extricate eastern countries from being under our financial thumb. And America has been foolish enough to spend more than it has brought in for decades, placing itself in a precarious position that will eventually over come it. I would, if I were you, begin to personally build networks of Christian friends that are committed to helping one another in the future. Erecting things like homeschool networks, using orthodox Christian businesses where you can, and gaining real world skills like gardening, animal husbandry, carpentry, and small motor repair. And more than anything, building small intimate communities of disciples (churches) that truly care for one another and maintain the faith once delivered to the saints. Finally, we should be rebuilding the types of churches that created networks of care for the legitimate poor (widows, orphans, and refugees) as the Church in Judea and the Greek speaking churches established by the Apostle Paul did, when they enrolled widows (Acts 6; 1 Tim 5) and created the office of deacon (1 Tim 3) to carry out that care. There is a time coming in the U.S. where the church will be needed as a house of prayer and a house of care for the legitimate poor.

Perhaps I’m wrong and none of what I said will come to pass in your lifetime. I hope so. But Christians should act on my prescriptions regardless. We should not be indebted to and entangled in the World’s system. We are a separate Kingdom with a whole different moral code, and a completely different set of ethics. We certainly should not be encouraging blood shed in foreign lands to prop up our currency that will come at the expense of our brothers and sisters in Christ. There are worse things than poverty.

 

The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.

Proverbs 22:3 ~

 

Blessings

EL

Free Trade, Fair Trade, or Just Trade

With all the talk recently about the Trump Trade War and tariffs, I thought I’d explain my personal position. I’m gonna take some flack on this one from other libertarians. While I do not agree with President Trump’s tariff proposals, I am not opposed to the idea of tariffs as a form of tax. I understand it will be passed on to the consumer. But if I have to choose a tax, I like “low” tariff, even over a sales tax.

Why am I not a free trader even though I am a libertarian? Free trade is on one hand great, and on the other hand a myth. NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is thousands of pages long detailing trade restrictions in each and every sector. Calling it free trade is a misnomer. The U.S. does not practice free trade. Fair trade is mythical too….. as the term usually means it is advantageous to the poorer country. It is not “fair and equal.” Fair trade is nothing but a form of charity. A bad form.

It is better to allow funds/goods to flow based on supply and demand. Then allow citizens of each nation to direct their own charitable giving the way they see fit, instead of silently fleecing them in unbalanced trade deals. Who pays the balance? The American worker/taxpayer/consumer, that’s who! In job losses, wage stagnation, wage decreases, and tax subsidies levied against their paychecks and businesses. Fair Trade is allowing our government to choose other governments to be charitable too. Which is a bad idea. Let me explain.

Let’s say the U.S. decided to make a “fair trade agreement” with Venezuela. How much of the benefit would go to the people of Venezuela verses the government of Venezuela? The people would barely notice at all, as government bureaucrats would either waste or embezzle those funds long before they reached those in need.  This is exactly what happened in New Orleans (after hurricane Katrina), Haiti, and in Puerto Rico too. Governments are inefficient and full of corruption, especially in poor countries. Corruption is one of the chief reasons poor nations are poor nations. I know there are oppressed peoples, but who are their oppressors? Usually their own government. And their government is the last group of people that our government needs to be giving money too.

US. Trade agents should negotiate based on America’s needs first, getting the best deal possible for their citizenry. Their first obligation is to the citizens of their own nation, whom they represent. When their own citizens are prosperous, then those good and generous free citizens decide how to direct their own charitable giving to the actual benefit of the poor of the world. This is why left/right statist proposals never work as intended, because government solves very few if any actual problems, and is in fact the source of many of our woes. And if they are not the source of our woes, often government action exacerbates them rather than helps.

This will be unpopular, but I think the proper response is a very low tariff that is equal for all nations friend or foe. Paid on all goods without exception as a market entrance fee. We should then eliminate the income tax on citizens. Free Trade is not the answer because we cannot find reciprocal partners. In theory it is the best way, but in reality it won’t work because it is utopian in nature. No one else in the world is really for free trade and all the “free trade” agreements are actually highly restrictive trade.

This proposal would make government pro-trade, less apt to go to war, much leaner as it would shrink government in size, pro-business in general, and allow citizens to keep all of their hard earned money, flushing the domestic economy with actual cash rather than just lowering the amount  government takes. It would make Trade just…. not free or fair, or protected.

P.S. it is also close to the original way we did business in the world. You know, when we were a producing nation instead of a consuming nation. When we had the largest savings rather than the largest debt.

The War On Terrorism: A Libertarian Christian Perspective

The War On Terrorism: A Libertarian Christian Perspective

If you enjoy the article please remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox. 

TSA

The “War on Terrorism” is one of the worst things to ever happen to this country. The long term effects and changes to our culture and government that were brought in on the back of the 9/11 attacks were atrocious. The Patriot Act, the most pernicious and un-American piece of legislation that has ever been written, changed every important institution that we hold dear. Such as,

  1. Banking and finance- Your bank now reports to the government how much money you have and how you use it. You cannot store cash or precious metals/jewels in safe deposit boxes, which of course was their original purpose. If you make a large withdrawal you are reported, by the bank, to the Department of Homeland Security as a possible terrorist. Financial privacy is a thing of the past.
  2. Airport Security- The TSA randomly checks old ladies and targets attractive women for body scans, while routinely failing weapons checks run by outside auditing agencies. Contrary to popular belief, the TSA has also never thwarted a single terrorist attack.
  3. Border Crossings- It turned the U.S. Border into a Gestapo. Borders are scary places full of self-important and harsh people. The U.S. is now little more than an open air prison. You may retort that you can leave whenever you want, and that’s true, for now. But wait till there is a time when you think that you might need to leave in order to be safe. Then you will find travel outside the U.S. impossible, and transferring your financial assets to another jurisdiction even more so, thanks to FATCA.
  4. Privacy- A few weeks ago the Amash Amendment (which would have ended blanket collection of American phone records) was quashed by our fearless leaders in Washington, who now believe the 4th Amendment means nothing. Warrantless searches and seizures are now so common that if you question them you are viewed as unpatriotic. FISA Courts were extended for another six years recently too, despite what we are currently watching unfold concerning the FBI’s abuse of the system in collusion with the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
  5. Foreign Wars- Trillions of dollars were spent bombing Iraq and Afghanistan. Trillions more are spent in Black Budget Operations run by the CIA and other alphabet soup organizations in places like Syria, Yemen, and Iran. Our enemies are arbitrarily chosen based on who will play ball with us. Russia is our enemy, but China is our friend. Russia builds churches while China blows them up. Iran is our enemy, yet Saudi Arabia is our friend. Iran, a Shia State, has many Christians within it, and Shia Muslims generally aren’t radicalized. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, a Sunni State, has very few Christians within it, and is the practical source of all Wahabi radicals. Al Qaeda and ISIS are Sunni Wahabists, and it has been proven that Saudi Arabia supports them with cash and intelligence. We learned recently that some of the 9/11 hijackers were on the Saudi government payroll. Nine of the eleven hijackers were Saudi Arabian, as well as the mastermind himself, Osama Bin Laden. Our foreign policy is schizophrenic in every way, and the “War on Terrorism” is part of why that is the case.

It is impossible to describe to people who never experienced America as she was before 9/11, all that has changed. The government’s power, audacity, and corruptness has grown exponentially. It has even changed the local police’s attitude towards citizens. We are now viewed by local authorities as possible threats….. guilty until proven innocent. This is the very opposite of the founding principle. Local police are SWAT’ed out with left over military gear from foreign wars. And the ranks of the local police are filled with vets returning from foreign theaters who first learned to police the streets of Baghdad and Kabul. Many are suffering with PTSD. My point is not to disparage local police officers, most of them are wonderful people and can be trusted. My only point is to demonstrate that sixteen years of unending war against ghost-like enemies has changed us, and made us a more fearful people. In my opinion The Patriot Act was a mistake. We should have looked our enemy in the eye, defeated them, and changed nothing about our way of life and the nature of our government. But instead, those in government capitalized on a moment of fear to pass an atrocious and culture changing piece of legislation. In this writer’s opinion, we sold our native birthright of liberty for a cold pot of safety porridge. We are now an emotionally weaker and less robust people than we once were, and the War on Terrorism, which appealed to our basest fears, bears some responsibility for that development.

Stop and consider all of the jokes currently being told about Millennial behavior. It should not escape our notice that they were becoming personally aware just as the Patriot Act was passed. Their parents set an example for them that safety was to be preferred before liberty, in fact before everything. We mock them for being weak-hearted, but who made them so? Who wrapped them in bubble wrap, told them they were special, and helicoptered around in their life solving all their problems? Who protected them from the truth about the real world? No wonder they need safe spaces and think speech they disagree with should be outlawed. We made the whole country a safe space and allowed our speech to be monitored first. Why wouldn’t we expect the macro-aggressions against liberty that we accepted, to go on to become micro-aggressions on college campuses? We cried safety, safety, and all we are hearing now is our own echo.

Remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox.

Alphabet Soup: News Agencies Are Supposed to Suspect Intelligence Agencies Not Shill For Them

Alphabet Soup

Somebody needs to tell these ex-CIA (and current…. nobody leaves the agency) yahoos on all the cable news channels that the President is the “boss” of the Executive Branch, which is the branch of government that the CIA is a part of. The Legislative Branch created them too in case they have forgotten, and has, as the people’s representatives, a role in their oversight. What is President Trump supposed to do now? Trust the DOJ? Trust FBI? Trust CIA? What evidence can they now provide that proves they can be impartial?

Ex-CIA Phillip Mudd Warning Trump on CNN

John Brennan Says Nunes Abused His Office

Over the last year or so we’ve learned that Loretta Lynch met with a presidential candidate’s husband on a tarmac to talk about his “grand kids.” That the FBI interviewed Mrs. Clinton without putting her under oath while her subordinates were practically in the the next room smashing devices with hammers. That her team had her hard drives acid washed the day after their contents were subpoenaed   Across the hall a perjury trap was being set for Trump’s man Michael Flynn, while other agents were busy rifling through Paul Manafort’s financials from more than two years previous. The FBI wrote Clinton’s exoneration letter before the investigation was anything near complete. Over at the DOJ Bruce Ohr was shoveling his CIA operative wife’s (Nellie Ohr) research through Fusion GPS into the hands of the FBI. Who then used it to get a FISA Warrant. While getting the warrant the FBI quoted from a Yahoo News story that was written based on the very Dossier they were using to get the warrant. That’s right, confirming the Steele Dossier’s contents with an article written based on the dossier itself. A Dossier that turned out to be pure trash that was paid for by the DNC that Hillary Clinton, according to Donna Brazil, was running at the time. If rank and file agents in the CIA and FBI are pissed, let them be pissed at the politicization of their beloved agencies by their leaders, as they OBVIOUSLY were pulling for Team Clinton over Team Trump and let their bias and political friendships get in the way of doing their jobs.

The CIA, which is not suppose to be operating domestically without an attaché (the FBI provides this service sometimes) is not a branch-less unaccountable group of black operators. They have a mission and should get back to it or get fired. It is scary and UNHEARD OF BY THE WAY, in our Republic to have the CIA in front of the cameras engaging in political influence peddling. This is a psychological operation being run on the American people being allowed by the blind hatred of the so-called Fourth Estate. Things are really out of control if secretive agencies feel free to walk around in the daylight to blather on nightly news shows. Journalists are supposed to be suspicious and objective, but these “news entertainers” are eating out of the hands of the intelligence services. Hands that write narratives, deceive, and kill for a living. 

Just to butter this bread a little more, Rob Reiner, Meathead, and hippy from the 60’s and 70’s came out today with a tweet that I’ll quote in full below. Folks it is unbelievable what these people say. You just can’t make this stuff up. Real life is truly stranger than fiction.

“When you libel James Clapper and John Brennan you libel America. The desperate attack on men who have given over 90 years of dedicated service to our country is clear evidence of a conscientiousness of guilt.” – Rob Reiner

Reiner, who was once rabidly opposed to the CIA run Vietnam War, now wraps himself and the CIA in the American flag, and tells us they are untouchable moral angels. But we know better. Remember that Brennan worked for the agency when they were selling crack on American streets. When they destroyed poor Gary Webb, the journalist who uncovered their untoward deeds and wrote about them, to the point that he was so ruined that he took his own life. The recent Tom Cruise film, “American Made” is about CIA drug running and is based on a pilot’s real life account of his activity with the agency.

So come now Mr. Reiner, Mr. Mudd, Mr. Brennan, and Mr. Clapper, stop trying to sell the idea of innocence to us. It is rotten, and no one is buying it. Or haven’t you noticed that the channel you love to talk on the most has the worst ratings. If no one believes you look no further than a mirror to find the reason why. I mean, Mr. Clapper in March of 2013 was asked point-blank while under oath testifying before congress whether his agency was “collecting any type of data at all?” He said, “No sir.” But of course Edward Snowden proved that was a lie. So let’s get back to party-less intelligence work shall we, and out of our governing processes. We like it better when it is as it should be… when we don’t know that you are there.

 

The War On Drugs: A Libertarian Christian Perspective

The War On Drugs: A Libertarian Christian Perspective

If you enjoy the article please remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. 

war-on-drugs

All the so-called “wars” on ideas like, The War on Poverty (LBJ), Drugs (Reagan), Terrorism (Bush 43), etc. are ridiculous. They never have an end, continually expand the government’s scope and power, while at the same time they reduce the liberties of  U.S. citizens, and never actually solve the problem they were created to solve. In reality, they make them worse. Don’t think so? Go to a border or an airport. If you are too young to remember the U.S. as she was before September 11th, 2001, the historic point where we chose to embrace fear over courage, I’m sorry. I really am sorry. That you have not known a world without permanent military intervention, weaponized politics, and a militarized domestic police force is truly, truly sad. Let’s take a look at the The War on Drugs and its effect on our society.

I believe the The War on Drugs has been one of the worst polices in the history of the United States. Domestic drug laws create the climate for black markets and crime. Drug users are obviously not deterred by criminalization, else there would be no arrests, or at least very few. I don’t have to tell you, this is not the case. The War on Drugs has filled our prisons with people who were originally non-violent criminals. But after serving lengthy prison sentences, they emerge from that caged-climate less human, with a network of prison relationships, and a place on the employment blacklist as felons. Now, with their new morally wounded consciences, received from the sexual and physical violence inherent in U.S. prisons, compounded significantly by reduced employment opportunities leading to poverty and disenfranchisement, they are far more likely to become life-long violent criminals. I don’t throw the word “disenfranchisement” around lightly. There are thousands, possibly millions, who are forever closed off from gainful employment other than self-employment, due to youthful mistakes. The truth is, self-employment is more than most sober, well-connected people are capable of sustaining. Many of these people never committed another crime. Yes, many states have written laws that allow non-violent felonies to be removed, that is, if you can afford it. After paying thousands at the time of trial in court costs and lawyer fees, and then serving a prison sentence, the now productive law abiding citizen is told anew they must pay more in court costs and lawyer fees just to file a piece of paper. For a person closed off from employment these financial hurdles remain insurmountable in most cases. One should look no further than the permanent felonization of people, men especially, to explain why millions of men are not in the work force, and why male labor participation rates are near great depression lows.

We should ask ourselves, if we are Christians anyway, “why God did not institute prisons in Old Testament Law?” All crimes, not punishable by death (Murder and forms of Sexual Assault aside), were dealt with through fines and personal restitution. Could God himself not be showing us that there are better ways to structure your society and deal with non-violent crime? Are our modern “Three Strikes You’re Out” laws and heavy handed prison sentences that feed the coffers of private prisons better than the biblical ideal? I don’t think so. And no Christian, especially an evangelical one, who claims to believe in the inerrancy and THE SUFFICIENCY of Scripture, should think so either.

With the amount of money being spent on enforcement agencies and prison complexes, we could engage in free or low cost voluntary rehabilitation, a much more humane and culture building activity. This is also a space that Christianity can inhabit, and do what it was meant to do, what the state cannot do, which is transform human lives. I know this will not be a popular opinion among “law and order” conservatives, but I think we can all admit that what we are doing ain’t working. More people have died via The War on Drugs than have died from the drugs themselves. That especially applies to marijuana which has never in the history of the world produced an overdose, and is currently proving medically useful. Yet, the opioid crisis that has enveloped the nation is largely built upon legally prescribed drugs, not black market substances. Proving beyond all doubt that the FDA and Congress cannot protect us from drug use no matter how much power we give to them, or how many drug laws they make.

Remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox. 
Ask The Evangelical Libertarian Abortion: After 45 Years, Is It Libertarian?

Ask The Evangelical Libertarian Abortion: After 45 Years, Is It Libertarian?

If you enjoy this article as always remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox. 

ultrasound

Today is the 45th Anniversary of the landmark court decision known as Roe vs Wade. It allowed abortion to become a legal practice in the United States. With that in mind, I thought it would be a good day to answer the question, “What is the Evangelical Libertarian’s position on abortion?”

Abortion is a clear case of aggression. It is a violent act against the most defenseless of persons. The hallmark of libertarian thought is the Non-Aggression Principle. Children, within the womb or without, have all the natural rights of life and liberty afforded to other moral persons. “You shall not murder” is the bedrock of human society, and any society that abandons it will soon devolve into violence. If in-utero children can be dispensed with because of inconvenience or financial strain, then the next persons to be placed on the list will be those born with special needs and the infirm among us.  Iceland has already nearly eradicated Down Syndrome through abortion, believing that it would be better if those children were spared existence. This type God complex has no real limits, only temporary social taboos that eventually fall to corrupt and inconsistent reasoning. We often think of Jewish persons being gassed to death in Nazi Germany, but so were those with special needs, and the infirm. The difference between aborting unwanted children for reasons determined by the mother, and murdering unwanted people for reasons determined by society, is a difference only in degree, not in principle. Humans have many liberties, this however, is not one of them.

The Libertarian thinker Murray Rothbard, who had many good things to say in regards to property rights and economic principles, was incredibly wrong on this point. He treated the child, who made no moral choice, as the aggressor, and the mother’s womb as her private property. The child in his understanding was an invader. This is why we need a biblical filter for Libertarianism, and human freedom in general. His view of abortion is monstrous and should not be looked to as a standard for Libertarians.

A child in-utero makes no moral choice. She is not an aggressor, but a neutral party that was brought into being through the procreative sexual act. Now the government has no right to tell the mother how to use her sexuality, this is the Church’s role. She is to be convinced through truth and encouraged to surrender her sexuality for the good of others voluntarily. The government does have a right to see that human contracts and covenants, like marriage for instance, are enforced. They can place civil fines and punishments for violations and should expect full cooperation from the community to aid in enforcement of those rulings. But once the truth (guarding sexuality for marriage and family) is ignored by the mother and procreation has occurred, a new and separate life has been created, altogether distinct from the life of the mother. Women possess no special “right” to murder for convenience, or any other reason that maybe put forward. It is her body, but the violent act is being committed against another person, her unborn child. They are separate persons, physically, emotionally, and spiritually.

Which brings us to the difficult question. What about conception by sexual assault? All previous principles apply. Whether the life came into being voluntarily or involuntarily, it still exists separately from the life of the mother. The child feels pain, responds to stimulus, has a beating heart and brain function within days of conception. She is a miracle of miracles. Adoption should be the choice of just societies. We should recognize the innocence and goodness of the life, separate from both its sources, as it is truly separate from them. Difficult as that may be to apply in principle for women who have undergone terrible and traumatic experiences. Obviously to cherish and nourish these unfortunate mothers is paramount as well. Providing comfort and aid, giving to them the space and resources for healing are equally important. But murdering an innocent life will not heal their soul, but will most likely only deepen the moral wound. Often abortion alone causes a psychological crisis in the mother. When combined with rape or incest, it becomes part of a complex and compound moral wounding that can bring a woman to the edge of her sanity, and affect her mental state for the rest of her life. Abortion is the murder of a child. It is not good for the mother, leaves a trail of mental illness in its wake, and is therefore bad for society as a whole.

Abortion runs contrary to the virtues of generosity and self-sacrifice that are the hallmarks of free peoples that intend on remaining free. Without the protecting and cherishing of life, the most basic of protections necessary for human civilization, nothing lasting, or in fact even worth building, can be built. Murder is not a liberty, but an act of aggression, and therefore abortion should fall outside of the bounds of an authentic expression of libertarianism.

Remember to FOLLOW us on FACEBOOK, LIKE the blog, COMMENT, and SHARE it with others to get a conversation going. You can SUBSCRIBE to the blog too and get Christian-based, liberty-oriented, and occasionally snarky content sent directly to your inbox.