The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest

Vol: 38 Issue: 8 - Monday, November 08, 2004

Morals? You're Kidding, Right?
by Jack Kinsella

The mainstream media is evidently as astonished as the DNC to discover
that the biggest issue on the minds of voters was 'moral values'.

And they were even more astonished to find that, of the segment who put
moral values first, 87% of them voted Republican.

Does that mean that I am equating the Republican Party with being the
'party of God' or that all Republicans are Christian?  To quote the
Apostle Paul, "God forbid!"

The American Republican Party is a political party and are as adept at
political intrigue, subterfuge and spin as the Democrats -- indeed, the
results of the election proves they are better at it.  But, at the same
time, the basic platform of the Republican Party is one that Christians
can agree with.

The basic political difference between a Democrat and a Republican is
rooted in where each side believes their source of the authority to govern
comes from.  The Republican Party embraces Blackstone's definition.

William Blackstone was an 18th century British jurist whose commentaries
set forth two main categories of common law; the law of nature and the law
of revelation.

His "Commentaries on the Laws of England" established a sort of Common Law
'Bible' for the United States from the time of the Founding Fathers.

James Wilson, one of the signers of the Constitution and one of the first
five Supreme Court justices, looked to Blackstone's 'Commentaries' to form
his decisions both in Congress and on the bench.

Blackstone explains that the law of nature establishes a rule of moral
conduct based on God's law, which recognizes man as created in the image
of God.

This rule of moral conduct imposes a rule of action upon man that includes
duties to God, self, and neighbor. "And it is that rule of action, which
is prescribed by some superior, and which the inferior is bound to obey."

Government has the authority to pass laws that set forth a rule of civil
conduct only, and such laws must be in accordance with the law of nature.
Such laws would make certain actions 'malum in se' or, 'bad in and of
itself'.

Blackstone argues that the role of government is not to enumerate rights,
but to protect those rights already imparted to every individual by God.

His common law model establishes that the duty of government is to commend
what is right and prohibit what is wrong.

Blackstone states, "The principal aim of society is to protect individuals
in the enjoyment of those absolute rights which were vested in them by the
immutable laws of nature."

Blackstone defined the word 'law' as it applies to government in his
Commentaries, calling it, "A rule of civil conduct prescribed by the
Supreme power in a state, commanding what is right, and prohibiting what
is wrong."

Are you with me so far?  Blackstone's Commentaries outlined the duties and
responsibilities of government in a Constitutional Republic.

The difference, Blackstone explains, is that the US Constitution creates
the powers that exist according to Divine Revelation, whereas in other
countries, the existing powers determine the nature of the constitution.

In the American republic, then, there were "principles which did not
change" and which were "certain and universal in their operation upon all
the members of the community", which were the principles of Biblical
natural law.

For example, Blackstone's Commentaries explained:

"To instance in the case of murder: this is expressly forbidden by the
Divine. . . . If any human law should allow or enjoin us to commit it we
are bound to transgress that human law. . . . But, with regard to matters
that are . . . not commanded or forbidden by those superior laws such, for
instance, as exporting of wool into foreign countries; here the . . .
legislature has scope and opportunity to interpose."

The Republican Party, in theory if not always in practice, is founded on
the principle that the authority to govern is of Divine origin, and that
human government is limited by certain Divinely-inspired unchanging
principles.

On the other hand, the working theory of the Democratic party is that the
authority to govern is derived from the majority of the governed.

This is one reason that the Democrats howled 'unfair' when Gore won the
popular vote but lost Election 2000.

The majority voted for Gore, but the Constitution gave the authority to
elect the Chief Executive to the States via the Electoral College.  That
prompted a short-lived Democratic effort led by Hillary Clinton to abolish
the Constitutionally mandated Electoral College in favor of a simple
majority.

The Democrats prefer a 'pure' American democracy, similar to that of
France, where secular humanism is the state religion and a simple majority
makes the laws without Divine oversight.  Rights are extended or withdrawn
by the majority.

That is why, in the pure democracy of the Democratic Party, abortion is
about a 'woman's right to choose' and homosexual marriage is a human
rights issue.  But in that worldview, religious 'rights' exist only to the
extent that they are shared by the majority government.

Of pure democracy, President James Madison observed;

"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have
ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of
property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have
been violent in their deaths."

John Adams warned the Founders, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It
soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet
that did not commit suicide."

Noah Webster uttered this unintended prophecy regarding pure democracy;

"Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is
often the most tyrannical government on earth."

To summarize, then, a pure democracy operates by the direct majority vote
of the people. When an issue is to be decided, the entire population votes
on it and the majority wins and rules.

A republic differs in that the general population elects representatives
who then pass laws to govern the nation. A democracy is the rule by
majority feeling (what the Founders described as a "mobocracy").

A republic is rule by law.

Assessment:

In the runup to Election 2004, the Democrats were convinced they had a
lock on the election.  They ran on a platform of accusations, denunciation
and division.

To the Democrats, opposition to homosexual marriage was regularly
denounced as 'gay bashing'.   'Abortion opponent' is a synonym for 'right
wing zealot'.

It is impossible for a pro-life Democrat to rise to national prominence
without first converting to reflect the 'pro-choice' worldview of the
Democrats.

To be a prominent Democrat means embracing the entire liberal agenda,
mirroring Noah Webster's observation it is "often the most tyrannical
government on earth."

(Two of America's most prominent Republicans are Rudi Guiliani and Arnold
Schwartzeneggar, both staunchly pro-choice.  I don't know what that does
say about the GOP, but it doesn't imply GOP-imposed thought control)

The Democrats arguably lost the election on Nov. 18, 2003, when
Massachusetts's highest court, by a 4-to-3 vote, conjured up a right to
gay marriage that nobody else had ever located anywhere in the state
Constitution.

In a backlash, state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage passed
easily in all 11 states that had them on the ballot last week, including
Ohio.

The Democrats are now scrambling to find religion in the wake of the
election, but religion is incompatible with their political worldview.

I've received a couple dozen emails from allegedly 'Christian' Democrats
since Election Day.  One of my favorites read like this (please forgive
the profanity, even masked, but it makes a point.): "Dear Jack.   F***
you!  And may God have mercy on your soul."

I got lots more from people slamming me for the 'JesusLand' parody map,
complaining that being a Democrat and a Christian are not mutually
exclusive, generally citing Jesus' alleged 'tolerance' that I don't
reflect, usually signing off with a profane suggestion for me or an
observation about the likelihood my parents were ever married.

(Wasn't it the 'tolerant' Jesus Who overturned the money-changer temples
and called the religious leaders of the day a 'generation of vipers?')

In the first three chapters of the Book of the Revelation, Jesus outlines
a letter to each of the seven churches then existing in Asia Minor.

Looking back over time, it is apparent that each of the Churches
correspond to 'epochs' in the life of the Church over the past two
thousand years.  These seven periods of time traversed in chronological
order, beginning with Ephesus and ending, in our times, with Laodicea.

The Church Epoch that preceded Laodicea was the Church of Philadelphia, or
Church of Brotherly Love.  It shared a distinction with the Church of
Sardis, in that it received no words of condemnation from the Lord.

The Church of Sardis corresponded with the Reformation Period from
1500-1750, during which time, the Word of God was redistributed to the
common man, ending the Roman Church's monopoly on the Bible.

"Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their
garments; and they shall walk with Me in white: for they are worthy."
(Revelation 3:4)

The Church of Philadelphia was the 'missionary church' (1750-1900) during
which time, the Word of God was carried by missionaries into the far
corners of the world.

"Because thou hast kept the Word of My patience, I also will keep thee
from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try
them that dwell upon the earth." (Revelation 3:10)

Then we come to the final Epoch of the Church Age before the Return of
Christ.

"And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things
saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the
creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I
would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and
neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of My Mouth. Because thou
sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and
knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind,
and naked:" (Revelation 3:14-18)

(The DNC's argument that being a Christian and supporting abortion and gay
rights are not mutually exclusive positions fits this description rather
neatly.)

The word 'Laodicea' is a compound Greek word meaning,  'justice of the
people' or, literally, the 'Church of the People's Rights'  -- a virtual
synonym for the 'democratic Church'.

That the Democrats were stunned to discover that America still has a moral
code is therefore unsurprising.

Indeed, the fact that America's moral code prevailed is the big story
here.

We are living in the last days, as foretold by Scripture. Thanks to the
war on terror, America is now recognized as the world's only Christian
country.  (The 'JesusLand' parody map is a perfect example).

It appears America has been given one more chance to obey the warning
given in 2nd Chronicles 7:14:

"If My people, which are called by My Name, shall humble themselves, and
pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear
from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

America has dodged the bullet, for now. May God continue to bless America.
Until He comes.