Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lucifer, The First Liberal
The Wanderer ^ | March 6, 2002 | Dr. Arthur M. Hippler

Posted on 05/01/2003 12:23:02 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner

In his encyclical on The Nature of True Liberty (Libertas Praestantissimum), Leo XIII makes the remarkable claim that liberalism is diabolic in its origins. "But many there are who follow in the footsteps of Lucifer, and adopt as their own his rebellious cry, I will not serve; and consequently substitute for true liberty what is sheer and most foolish license. Such, for instance, are the men belonging to that widely spread and powerful organization, who, usurping the name of liberty, style themselves liberals" (Libertas Praestantissimum, n.14). Although the Holy Father’s comparison may seem hyperbolic, nonetheless the principles of liberalism mirror the Devil’s original revolt.

While many political opinions and projects are lumped together under the name of liberalism, we should remind ourselves of its most fundamental basis. As Leo XIII explains, liberalism begins with the rejection of both natural and divine law; the "followers of liberalism deny the existence of any divine authority to which obedience is due, and proclaim that every man is the law to himself; from which arises that ethical system which they style independent morality" (LP, n.15). Morality comes neither from God nor human nature.

For the liberal, morality is created by the free choice of society. Whether one studies Hobbes or Rousseau, one finds no law higher than the human law. In the words of Pope Leo, "just as every man’s individual reason is his only rule of life, so the collective reason of the community should be the supreme guide in the management of all public affairs" (ibid.). This divorce of the moral law from politics affects our understanding of democracy up to the present day, as Pope John Paul notes in Evangelium Vitae (n. 70).

This rejection of God’s rule through the moral law is the sin of Lucifer. As St. Thomas explains, the Devil rejected the law of God for a disordered form of freedom: "The end of the Devil is the aversion of the rational creature from God; hence from the beginning he has endeavored to lead man from obeying the divine precept. But aversion from God has the nature of an end, inasmuch as it is sought for under the appearance of liberty, according to Jer. 2:20: ‘Of old time thou hast broken my yoke, thou hast burst my bands, and thou saidst, I will not serve’" (IIIa, Q.8, art.7).

This rebellion was imitated by our first parents, when they decided to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of God and Evil, and "be like God." While sharing in the divine image and likeness is part of our perfection, St. Thomas teaches that man desired this divine likeness in a disordered way by eating of the forbidden fruit: "The first man sinned chiefly by coveting God’s likeness as regards knowledge of good and evil, according to the serpent’s instigation, namely that by his own natural power he might decide what was good, and what was evil for him to do" (IIaIIae, Q.163, a.2). Here is the liberal principle in its first expression: Man alone should decide good and evil apart from God.

While many understand liberalism as a freedom for certain political equality and civil rights, more fundamentally liberalism is a freedom from the moral law and the teaching authority of the Church. One cannot speak of "Catholic liberals" without contradiction, or at the very least, equivocation. Liberalism, like socialism and Communism, has been condemned by Pope after Pope in the social encyclicals. If we are tempted to minimize the evils of this error, we would do well to remind ourselves that Pope Leo XIII presents Lucifer to us as the original liberal.

+ + +

(Dr. Arthur M. Hippler is the director of the Office of Justice and Peace in the Diocese of La Crosse, Wis.)


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Miscellaneous; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: catholicism; catholiclist; leoxiii; liberal; liberalism; liberals; lucifer; luciferliberal; satanliberal; sin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-122 next last
The author draws an accurate and provocative comparison between liberalism and Satan. I look forward to responses from the libertarians among us, who I think would support individual authority as the highest.

A quick primer on Satan's various names: Originally, he was call Halael, or "Light Bringer" in Hebrew. This is rendered as "Lucifer" in Latin. After Satan's rebellion against God, he was renamed "Satan" or "adversary". "Devil" means "liar".

1 posted on 05/01/2003 12:23:02 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
Calling Satan a liberal sounds like slander to me : slander of Satan, that is...
2 posted on 05/01/2003 12:26:56 PM PDT by genefromjersey (Gettin' too old to "play nice" !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
"Here is the liberal principle in its first expression: Man alone should decide good and evil apart from God. "

That pretty much sums up their position.

3 posted on 05/01/2003 12:32:12 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flying Circus
ping
4 posted on 05/01/2003 12:37:16 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
For the liberal, morality is created by the free choice of society.

The problem modern liberals face is that some choices lead to negative consequences. This fact flies in the face of their claim that all choices are morally equivalent.

They react in two ways in an effort to prop up their view.

First, they turn to government. The role of government for a liberal is to remove the negative consequences of bad choices. This is attempted with enormous sums of money and grand social engineering schemes. Unfortunately, the results have been disasterous for society.

The second thing they do is argue that people are biological machines and not free moral agents. This removes personally responsibility and justifies social engineering theory. In other words, a person is just a machine. If you find the right tool, you can fix any problem. Ultimately, you are left with a population that is dehumanized, demoralized and hopeless.

The war on poverty is a perfect example of the failure of this world view.

5 posted on 05/01/2003 12:37:58 PM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: Forgiven_Sinner; .45MAN; AKA Elena; al_c; american colleen; Angelus Errare; Antoninus; ...
WANDERER Ping
7 posted on 05/01/2003 12:43:41 PM PDT by Polycarp ("He who denies the existence of God, has some reason for wishing that God did not exist.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
b ... t ... t ... t ---
8 posted on 05/01/2003 12:46:15 PM PDT by f.Christian (( The separation of state and religion means ... ideology // whacks --- NOT God ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Thanks. LOL ;-)
9 posted on 05/01/2003 12:47:52 PM PDT by Polycarp ("He who denies the existence of God, has some reason for wishing that God did not exist.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Forgiven_Sinner
You are all over the top. To claim that liberals are Satan is absurd. What is wrong with you? What is wrong with the country? There should be such a thing as dissent and it is absolutely essential to democracy. Political opinions and views are just that, they aren’t religion. By saying that liberals are Satan is to say Conservatives are God, do any of you recognize the danger of that equation? THINK. The decline of political discourse to this level is appalling. On both sides, so don’t argue that just because they do it is appropriate on this side, it is vile and pathetic for anyone to attack on this level.
11 posted on 05/01/2003 12:52:38 PM PDT by Theyknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
read later
12 posted on 05/01/2003 12:54:28 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
To libertarians, individual authority is the highest. But, unlike liberals, who define right and wrong by how things feel to them and to others at any given time (completely subjective), the libertarian (objectivist) believes that one can use his human reason to ascertain what is objectively right and wrong, using factual truths found all around us in nature. Thus, the objectivist doesn't need religion to tell him what's right or wrong, but rather strives for the full development of his mature human brain, with which he can then infallibly inform himself what is right and wrong, without anyone's help, be it religious or secular.
13 posted on 05/01/2003 12:54:43 PM PDT by Emile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
"Devil" means "liar". Since liberals are liars too, maybe we should just start calling them devils.
14 posted on 05/01/2003 12:58:06 PM PDT by RAT Patrol (Congress can give one American a dollar only by first taking it away from another American. -W.W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
What makes it wrong and appalling? Isn't it just another "opinion?" Why is your version of discourse better than Forgiven_sinner's version? Aren't you trying to impose your views on this thread?

Why not have a sense of humor about it?

15 posted on 05/01/2003 1:03:06 PM PDT by RAT Patrol (Congress can give one American a dollar only by first taking it away from another American. -W.W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
I wouldn't conclude that all liberals are Satanic; but I would also conclude that Satan was the first liberal.
16 posted on 05/01/2003 1:06:16 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
Humanism....the rally cry (hustle) of satan calling out man to join him in his self deceptive quest
He has always been the accuser and the rebel and a liar from the beginning...the father of all lies..
Liberalism is the call to rebel against God...to replace God with man as his own god...each man to be his own little god...(with satan as his guide of course)
Neat Piece...thanks
17 posted on 05/01/2003 1:06:30 PM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: Forgiven_Sinner
You might want to keep in mind that the word "liberal" in the 19th Century resembled about equally what we would now call libertarian and what we would now call conservative.

In essence, "conservatism" then was support for a government that actively favored the rich and powerful, liberalism was support for a neutral government, and socialism was support for a government that actively favored the poor. So a 19th century attack on liberalism -- such as that of this Pope Leo 13th -- would have to be considered quite reactionary by virtually everyone today.

The usurpation in the U.S., by FDR and others around 1930, of the name "liberal" for what is really socialism, was made more tenable given that there basically aren't any longer any people who are conservative in the 19th century sense (actively favoring the rich and powerful). (True conservatism does exist in some countries: for example, I understand that in Pakistan only the poor and middle classes pay taxes; the rich landholding aristocracy pays little or none). Since the socialists slid over to using the term "liberal," and these liberal-socialists controlled the government, media and academy and could thus enforce their use of the language, 19th-century liberals had to take on the name of conservatism or libertarianism.

19 posted on 05/01/2003 1:18:24 PM PDT by DWPittelli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
Until Jesus comes to rewrite the Constitution, the current version should settle questions regarding individual authority. Bible reading should be encouraged, not forced. Religious activism leads to Inquisitions and witch-burnings.

Interesting that the devil was known as the "Light Bringer." Even more interesting is the literal-to-the-hour interpretation of the first pages of Genesis. And even more interesting is the use of
King James' Olde English when Bible verses are quoted. What tedium! No wonder more kids aren't reading it.

Reaping what we're sowing, by Biblical standards, the U.S. is doomed anyway.
20 posted on 05/01/2003 1:24:17 PM PDT by okiesap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MasterBlue
And then, there is the Liberal Democrat version: "Government alone should decide good and evil apart from God. "

Good point, but I think we can refine their position further as:

"Democrats alone should govern and decide good and evil apart from God."

For they are clearly not willing to accept a Republican administration's assessment of what is good. Heck, they aren't even willing to accept an Iraqi's assessment of Saddam as evil when his downfall causes dancing in the street.

21 posted on 05/01/2003 1:25:28 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
The most convincing argument against secular humanism ever written: the Book of Ecclesiastes:

Chapter 5:18

¶ Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labor that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion.

19 Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labor; this is the gift of God.

20 For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart.

22 posted on 05/01/2003 1:39:29 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWPittelli
You're missing the point. The whole idea of individual liberty is rooted in rebellion, in the idea that "No one has the right to tell me what to do!". Evil began when Lucifer cried out his eternal non serviam to God in Heaven, and to this day human beings follow in his footsteps, refusing to submit their own wills to any authority.

Rebellion is pandemic in our society; everywhere, people cry out for freedom from Church, State, parents, teachers, or anything else that denies them the satiation of the senses or the deification of the Self. The worship of the goddess Liberty has become our national cult; piety towards our Creator and loyalty towards our ancestors (i.e. traditionalism) have been cast aside by our culture. Confronted with the majesty of God and His Law, we turn instead to the worship of the golden calf of that makes us happy -- our own selves. But there is no happiness there. There is no freedom there. There is only us, enslaved to our nerve endings for all eternity.

The freedom promised by this world is an illusion. Every man who "liberates" himselves from the Yoke of God only chains himself to the millstone of his own desires. The way of Self, as both Our Lord and the Buddha pointed out, is the most abject slavery of all. Only by dying to Self -- by renouncing the illusion of individual liberty and submitting our wills to God -- can we hope to live. In a very real sense, the only way to be free is to become a slave of Christ. "He that loses his life for My sake shall find it."

Only by acknowledging Jesus Christ as our LORD -- not our buddy or our peer but as our absolute Master -- can we ever be free. Christianity is a religion of humilty, not pride; of submission, not of independence. Only by throwing away our pride, by humbling ourselves before God and the authorities he institutes here on Earth (even when it hurts!), and by dedicating ourselves to obedience, order, and our duty can we ever cast of the shackles of unquenchable desire and truly be free.

"Where the Spirit of the LORD is, there is liberty."

23 posted on 05/01/2003 1:40:34 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
ping
24 posted on 05/01/2003 1:54:07 PM PDT by windcliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: genefromjersey
LOL, good point!
25 posted on 05/01/2003 1:59:46 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills Babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
LIBERTAS, ON THE NATURE OF HUMAN LIBERTY
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII JUNE 20, 1888
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13liber.htm
26 posted on 05/01/2003 2:00:23 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills Babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan
Very good ... protestant -- Christian -- republican -- hawaiian --- any questions !
27 posted on 05/01/2003 2:02:13 PM PDT by f.Christian (( The separation of state and religion means ... ideology // whacks --- NOT God ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
The Lucis (Lucifer) Trust and the United Nations seem very innocuous on the front but their agenda is the ruination of souls and the conversion of the world to Satanism.

The Lucis (Lucifer) Trust is on WOR radio, New York, New York City's 2nd-Largest AM Radio Station WOR Radio 710 AM on you dial every Sunday from 7:30 am - 8 am.New Age and Satan Worship.

Here are some links

http://www.lucistrust.org/arcane/nasymb.shtml

http://www.oneworld.ru/lucis-rus/lucispub/

Teaching God's children to worship "Divine Nature"
http://getusout.org/un/articles/essay.htm

The Earth Charter
http://getusout.org/earthcharter/

http://getusout.org/earthcharter/index.htm

UNESCO: A Budding Global School Board
http://getusout.org/un/articles/unesco.htm

http://getusout.org/un/articles/newworldreligion.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/12-16-2002/vo18no25_ark.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/focus/earth_charter/index.htm


Rebutting Rockefeller
http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/11-04-2002/vo18no22_rockefeller.htm

http://getusout.org/earthworship/index.htm

http://getusout.org/un/articles/rockford_ark.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/12-16-2002/vo18no25_ark.htm

The European Union's Stealth Attack on Religion
http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2000/07-31-2000/insider/vo16no16_eu.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/focus/religion/index.htm____________________________________________________

The Catholic Church is against Communism and Socialism, Make sure the socialists do not take over; they are working from within the church and are part of the media and will stop at nothing from destroying the Church.
 
QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO Xlll ON SOCIALISM
DECEMBER 28, 1878
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13apost.htm
 
NOSTIS ET NOBISCUM
ON THE CHURCH IN THE PONTIFICAL STATES
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS IX
DECEMBER 8, 1849
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9nostis.htm
 
QUADRAGESIMO ANNO
ON RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SOCIAL ORDER
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS Xl MAY 15, 1931
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11QUADR.HTM
 
GRAVES DE COMMUNI RE
Encyclical of Pope leo XIII on Christian Democracy
January 18, 1901
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13grcom.htm
 
MATER ET MAGISTRA
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE JOHN XXIII ON MAY 15, 1961
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/John23/j23mater.htm
 
Part of the 45 Goals of Communism
 
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
 
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
 
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
 
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
__________________________________________
Lucis Trust - The Spiritual Foundation of the United Nations
UN Logo

33 Segments surrounded by sprigs of acacia
'Welcome to the United Nations. It's your World'...

By, Atrayu

The Spiritual Foundation of the United Nations

The Lucis Trust

UN Meditation Room The Lucis Trust is the Publishing House which prints and disseminates United Nations material. It is a devastating indictment of the New Age and Pagan nature of the UN. Lucis Trust was established in 1922 as Lucifer Trust by Alice Bailey as the publishing company to disseminate the books of Bailey and Blavatsky and the Theosophical Society. The title page of Alice Bailey's book, 'Initiation, Human and Solar' was originally printed in 1922, and clearly shows the publishing house as 'Lucifer Publishing CoIn 1923. Bailey changed the name to Lucis Trust, because Lucifer Trust revealed the true nature of the New Age Movement too clearly. (Constance Cumbey, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, p. 49). A quick trip to any New Age bookstore will reveal that many of the hard-core New Age books are published by Lucis Trust.

At one time, the Lucis Trust office in New York was located at 866 United Nations Plaza and is a member of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations under a slick program called "World Goodwill". In an Alice Bailey book called "Education for a New Age"; she suggests that in the new age "World Citizenship should be the goal of the enlightened, with a world federation and a world brain." In other words - a One World Government New World Order.

Luci's Trust is sponsored by among others Robert McNamara, former minister of Defence in the USA, president of the World Bank, member of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Thomas Watson (IBM, former ambassador in Moscow). Luci's Trust sponsors among others the following organizations: UN, Greenpeace Int., Greenpeace USA, Amnesty Int. and UNICEF.

The United Nations has long been one of the foremost world harbingers for the "New Spirituality" and the gathering "New World Order" based on ancient occult and freemasonic principles. Seven years after the birth of the UN, a book was published by the theosophist and founder of the Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey, claiming that "Evidence of the growth of the human intellect along the needed receptive lines [for the preparation of the New Age] can be seen in the "planning" of various nations and in the efforts of the United Nations to formulate a world plan... From the very start of this unfoldment, three occult factors have governed the development of all these plans". [Alice B. Bailey, Discipleship in the New Age (Lucis Press, 1955), Vol. II, p.35.]

Although she did not spell out clearly the identity of these 'three occult factors', she did reveal to her students that "Within the United Nations is the germ and seed of a great international and meditating, reflective group - a group of thinking and informed men and women in whose hands lies the destiny of humanity. This is largely under the control of many fourth ray disciples, if you could but realise it, and their point of meditative focus is the intuitional or Buddhic plane - the plane upon which all hierarchical activity is today to be found'. [Ibid. p.220.]

To this end, the Lucis Trust, under the leadership of Foster and Alice Bailey, started a group called 'World Goodwill' - an official non-governmental organization within the United Nations. The stated aim of this group is "to cooperate in the world of preparation for the reappearance of the Christ" [One Earth, the magazine of the Findhorn Foundation, October/November 1986, Vol. 6, Issue 6, p.24.]

But the esoteric work inside the UN does not stop with such recognized occult groupings. Much of the impetus for this process was initiated through the officership of two Secretary-Generals of the UN, Dag Hammarskjöld (held office: 1953-1961) and U Thant (held office: 1961-1971) who succeeded him, and one Assistant Secretary-general, Dr. Robert Muller. In a book written to celebrate the philosophy of Teilhard de Chardin (and edited by Robert Muller), it is revealed "Dag Hammarskjöld, the rational Nordic economist, had ended up as a mystic. He too held at the end of his life that spirituality was the ultimate key to our earthly fate in time and space". [Robert Muller (ed.), The Desire to be Human: A Global Reconnaissance of Human Perspectives in an Age of Transformation (Miranana, 1983), p.304.]

Sri Chinmoy, the New Age guru, meditation leader at the UN, wrote: "the United Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to be a chosen instrument means to be a divine messenger carrying the banner of God's inner vision and outer manifestation."

William Jasper, author of "A New World Religion" describes the religion of the UN: "...a weird and diabolical convergence of New Age mysticism, pantheism, aboriginal animism atheism, communism, socialism, Luciferian occultism, apostate Christianity, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism".

http://www.lucistrust.org

You can find out much more about them and how they're involved with the work of the United Nations by following their link "World Goodwill" at the top of their home page.


The Aquarian Age Community

http://www.aquaac.org/

This Website is sponsored by the United Nations and the whole NWO philosophy is there. The page which explains the work of the Aquarian Age Community, as they call themselves, has this proud quote at the header of their page at http://www.aquaac.org/about/about.html

Such a grandeur is ahead!
Such a great step awaits a fiery affirmation.
Our teaching and the affirmation of the Higher
Principles will reveal so much that is great to humanity!
A great period is drawing near: Thus we do create together.

Fiery World
Vol. III, par. 149

Amongst the many 'enlightening' pages in this website, you can easily find 'fascinating' articles entitled:

"The New World Order and the Work of the UN" http://www.aquaac.org/un/nwo.html

"The World Spiritual Teacher, the Esoteric Community and the United Nations" http://www.aquaac.org/meetings/rttop.html

Preparing the Way for the Reappearance of the World Spiritual Teacher, the Work of the United Nations and the World-Wide Esoteric Community

http://www.aquaac.org/meetings/RT2001.html and many more articles.

This is not Christian theology but New Age paganism. You can also read the NWO quotes I posted, further down this page. Here's another by Curtis Dall, FD Roosevelt's son in law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father in Law:

"For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But, he didn't. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advanced by the Council on Foreign Relations One World Money group... Brilliantly, with great gusto, like a fine piece of artillery, he exploded that prepared "ammunition" in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people, and thus paid off and returned his internationalist political support.

The UN is but a long range, international banking apparatus nearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One World Revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.

The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market... The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."

 

Under the U.N. Gavel
By Sen. Larry E. Craig, R-ID 

At its founding, the mission of the United Nations, as stated in its charter, was "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war." It made no claim to supersede the sovereignty of its member states. Article 2 says that the United Nations "is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members," and it may not "intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

Since then, the United Nations has turned the principle of national sovereignty on its head. Through a host of conventions, treaties and conferences, it has intruded into regulation of resources and the economy (for example, treaties on "biological diversity," marine resources and climate change) and family life (hyping phoney liberalism while masculinity is scorned and western manhood is amputated - causing untold grief to the family unit) (conventions on parent-child relations and women in society). It has demanded that countries institute racial quotas and laws against hate crimes and speech (while the U.N. itself can jail someone for 30 years without trial). Recently the United Nations tried to undermine Americans' constitutional right to keep and bear arms (with proposed restrictions on the international sale of small arms).

Fortunately, many of these have been dead on arrival in the U.S. Senate, successive presidents have refused to endorse others, and in any case the United Nations had little power of enforcement. But in 1998, one mechanism of global government (there it is in the Washington Post folks) came to life with the so-called "Rome Statute" establishing a permanent International Criminal Court (and abolishing the Magna Carta in Britain). Once this treaty is ratified by 60 countries, the United Nations will wield judicial power over every individual human being -- even over citizens of countries that haven't joined the court.

While the court's stated mission is dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity (what about their own crimes against humanity when they committed widespread genocide in the Balkans and East Timor? Dare I say they are hypocrites?) -- which, because there is no appeal from its decisions, only the court will have the right to define -- its mandate could be broadened later. Based on existing U.N. tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, which are models for the International Criminal Court, defendants will have none of the due process rights afforded by the U.S. Constitution, such as trial by jury, confrontation of witnesses or a speedy and public trial (that's a communist court system!).

President Clinton signed the Rome treaty last year, citing U.S. support for existing U.N. war crimes tribunals. Many suppose the court will target only a Slobodan Milosevic or the perpetrators of massacres in Rwanda, or dictators like Iraq's Saddam Hussein. But who knows? To some people, Augusto Pinochet is the man who saved Chile from communism; to others he is a murderer. Who should judge him -- the United Nations or the Chilean people?

In dozens of countries, governments use brutal force against insurgents. Should the United Nations decide whether leaders in Turkey or India should be put in the defendants' dock, and then commit the United States to bring them there? How about Russia's Vladimir Putin, for Chechnya? Or Israel's Ariel Sharon? Can we trust the United Nations with that decision (the more evil these premieres are - the more the U.N. loves them)?

The court's critics rightly cite the danger to U.S. military personnel deployed abroad. Since even one death can be a war crime, a U.S. soldier could be indicted just for doing his duty. But the International Criminal Court also would apply to acts "committed" by any American here at home. The European Union and U.S. domestic opponents consider the death penalty "discriminatory" and "inhumane." Could an American governor face indictment by the court for "crimes against humanity" for signing a death warrant?

Milosevic was delivered to a U.N. court (largely at U.S. insistence) for offences occurring entirely within his own country. Some say the Milosevic precedent doesn't threaten Americans, because the U.S. Constitution protects them. But for Milosevic, we demanded that the Yugoslav Constitution be trashed and the United Nations' authority prevail. Why should the International Criminal Court treat our Constitution any better (they're already destroying the 2nd amendment with their gun grab and the 1st with their phoney 'hate crime' nonsense)?

Instead of trying to "fix" the Rome treaty, the United States must recognize that it is a fundamental threat to American sovereignty. The State Department's participation in the court's preparatory commission is counterproductive. We need to make it clear that we consider the court an illegitimate body, that the United States will never join it and that we will never accept its "jurisdiction" over any U.S. citizen or help to impose it on other countries.

28 posted on 05/01/2003 2:02:54 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills Babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
Barry Goldwater noted in Conscience of a Conservative that Liberalism emphasizes only the material side of man, Conservatism is based on the spiritual side. IMO, the focus on the material is what makes liberalism evil. It is a philosophy that is destructive to the human spirit.
29 posted on 05/01/2003 2:06:29 PM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan; DWPittelli
Ignoring God's commands is sort of like declaring "liberty" from obeying an automobile manufacturer's suggested maintenance.

You can refuse to change the oil. Insist on letting the timing fire at it's own convenience. And assume generally that as long as the car moves your ok.

But when you find that you have a worthless wreck on your hands, you can't very well blame the manufacturer.
30 posted on 05/01/2003 2:10:35 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Emile
To libertarians, individual authority is the highest. But, unlike liberals, who define right and wrong by how things feel to them and to others at any given time (completely subjective), the libertarian (objectivist) believes that one can use his human reason to ascertain what is objectively right and wrong, using factual truths found all around us in nature.

It seems that you are claiming that the individual is the highest authority, then that nature--or perhaps, truth--is the highest authority. Do you mean highest human authority?

Thus, the objectivist doesn't need religion to tell him what's right or wrong, but rather strives for the full development of his mature human brain, with which he can then infallibly inform himself what is right and wrong, without anyone's help, be it religious or secular.

The brain is *infallible* in matters of moral judgement? How? I don't think any of my rational faculties are perfected.

Speaking of rational faculties, must not one learn how to think before one can think well? Since the imperfect cannot make itself more perfect(you can't give what you don't have) the help of others is quite necessary for the formation of one's reason and for reason's continued quest towards perfection.

31 posted on 05/01/2003 2:12:26 PM PDT by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner

Libertarians also.

32 posted on 05/01/2003 2:12:44 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Sammy to Frodo: "Get out. Go sleep with one of your whores!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Whitey
From your post none of the freepers who believe in God
could join your group.

I always wondered what Libertarians thought!

Ops4 God Bless America!
33 posted on 05/01/2003 2:34:01 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
This has been a problem since the day the serpent lured Eve!

What we must do is expose agendas and work the ballot boxes
to make sure the votes get in against those who support
the Rainbow Serpent league.

Ops4 God BLess America!
34 posted on 05/01/2003 2:36:47 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
The main staple of freedom and rights in a just and open society, including the original intent of our constitution is All liberties are derived from GOD. You don't have to agree on the specifics of who God is. The main staple of socialism, and therefore liberalism is that all things are derived from the government. One of Satans greatest victories is to erase from everyones minds that there is truly a GOD and that everyone is god themselves. If you don't believe me investigate it.
35 posted on 05/01/2003 2:42:37 PM PDT by vpintheak (Our Liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #36 Removed by Moderator

To: Forgiven_Sinner
There's lots of folks who are ironclad sceptical about the 'teaching authority of the Church'. Actually, we of English heritage had a Revolution over it.

I'm still not buying it, 360+ years later.
37 posted on 05/01/2003 2:45:55 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Whitey
Realize, Satanism and its cohorts are not acceptable under any stretch of relgious doctrine based on right and wrong.

Right is the creators, wrong is those who try and oppose him!

The truth will never go away, my friend.

Ops4 God Bless America!
38 posted on 05/01/2003 2:52:12 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: Joe Whitey
Civil disobedience is a form of anarchy. Religion in todays terms has nothing to do with it. If a group is going to disrupt and kill civilians in some relgious coup, then they will need to be dealt with.

Satanic verses as Rushdy wrote, is what has created the terror networks in the traditions of satanic actions.

I as a Christian do not believe in the inquistion or the like, I just want those who terrorize the worlds good souls,
brought to a just end, by the hand of God.

Ops4 God BLess America!
41 posted on 05/01/2003 3:02:49 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: Forgiven_Sinner
What a fantastic (and true) title!

Bookmarked and Bumped!

43 posted on 05/01/2003 3:09:41 PM PDT by rightwingreligiousfanatic (I'm being followed by a moonshadow...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: genefromjersey
The next thing you know some wiseacre will compare Lucifer to the Clintons.
44 posted on 05/01/2003 3:10:36 PM PDT by LuisBasco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LuisBasco
That has allready bee done! And how true it is.

Ops4 God Bless America!
45 posted on 05/01/2003 3:13:50 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Joe Whitey
Disestablishmentarian bump!

I yam what I yam! LOL!

Actually, no word better describes my politics. Disestablish every conventional, politically-correct authority-- in the schools, in the courts,....

...then we would have a truly free society.

;^)
46 posted on 05/01/2003 3:23:20 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
Socialism is not liberalism. They are very different political philosophies, though both misguided. The Government was founded under God but is certainly not a theocracy, and the fact that the Church and State remain separate is a proud foundation of American Democracy. The fact that faith or the lack of it is tolerated and even celebrated in the United States is what makes us free. If you think that this Country can remain free but only tolerate Christian beliefs then you are not a patriotic American.
47 posted on 05/01/2003 3:29:55 PM PDT by Theyknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Yeah, like the pictures of the Watts riots.

Ops4 God Bless America!
48 posted on 05/01/2003 3:29:59 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
No! Just the religious beliefs that are outlined by Thomas Jefferson and Sam Adams, it had to do with the God of Abraham and the Son of God.

As Rushdy wrote, The Satanic verses are what has terrorized the middle east, it is hidden in the Koran and the rewrites,
by religious zealots.

Any religion that accepts Satanic Laws, should be banned,
since Good will prevail over evil, putting evil in the wrong I might guess, even by the standard of Ben Franklin as written in Poor Richards Almanac.

So much for the non-liberal socialist views that would
allow satan any room to be heard.

Ops4 God BLess America!
49 posted on 05/01/2003 3:36:20 PM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: OPS4
Sure, Watts.....

I find you disingenuous.
50 posted on 05/01/2003 3:38:01 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-122 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson