Conservatives Who May Forfeit the Protecting Hand of God

We have an ever-increasing crowd of leaders who are spoken of as “conservative” who will not defend the historic, traditional mores of the American nation. With them, “conservatism” is either:

1. An unbridled thirst for wealth expansion, open markets—principled or not principled on how their trading partners might use the wealth that it also affords them; some of them being in reality enemies of our free way of life—free trade on libertarian grounds that does not take into account that business people abroad do not have the same definitions of honesty and integrity, that despite the minority of American cheats, had been written in the heart of the American commercial instrument. And/or . . .

2. A strong military, a second-to-none national defense structure—willing to name and confront our enemies; being willing to fight them nose-to-nose if and when necessary—but weak in morals; ignorant of, or deliberately ignoring, the true history and spiritual and moral foundations of the nation. They are weak on the murder of the unborn; weak on the onslaught of the ungodly—sodomites; perverts.

Morality and culture in any nation or region are based and built upon the historic faith system of the people, yes, its prevailing religion. American business had been honest because Christianity teaches honesty; like it or not, the American nation began with the Bible and Christianity being brought on to the shores of the continent by Protestant Christians.

Protestant Christianity produced the faith system and the standard of integrity in the English colonies that became our integrity in business, commerce and contract law. I recommend the Reading of Earth and Man by Arnold Guyot, written after the Civil War. The torch of spiritual Revival was passed to Baptist and independent Christians in the Appalachian Mountain regions later in the 18th Century, and Baptists like John Leland of Virginia were very directly involved with James Madison in securing the promise of a Bill of Rights to be added to the Constitution. Many of our forefathers stated outright or suggested, and they are recorded in the annals of the American people, that the Constitution will not work without a “religious” people, and they were obviously speaking of nothing other that the Christian religion. And I suggest that that is the reason that the Republic would not survive as a Libertarian nation in the modern usage of Libertarian.

Honesty and integrity do not mean the same things in nations where the universities have taught two generations of business and trade students that it is patriotic to cheat foreigners, and use their wealth against them in the long run; patriotic to seek the demise of the western capitalists by entrapping them in debt and making it very difficult to repatriate their profits. I speak particularly of China, where university instruction says, “The western nations did us dirty for two hundred years, and it is now patriotic to do them dirty, and gradually, by nook and crook, transfer the wealth of the west into Chinese coffers.” Destruction of the American economy is the long-range goal of communist countries and what has been called “The Communist Internationalle.”

And now, former Vice President Dick Cheney says that he supports sodomites being able to marry, with this condition, that states, not the federal government, should make the decision. I have held high regard for Mr. Cheney. I have always considered him to be the actual brain of the Bush Administration.

A “conservative” in economics and use of the might of the United States, Richard Cheney now openly registers as a conservative who wants to run away from the historic, traditional Christian mores of the American people. I am terribly saddened by Mr. Cheney’s position. I wonder if his pastor agrees with him. I stand to be corrected, but I believe that Dick Cheney is a member of a “Christian” church. If his pastor agrees with Mr. Cheney’s position, then I really wonder why Mr. Cheney would remain in such a church (because of his ungodly daughter, perhaps?). If his pastor would not agree, would Mr. Cheney back him up when two sodomites approach his pastor to perform their “wedding” ceremony and he refuses? I guess not.

At the National Press Club Vice President Cheney said, "I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone." "I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish."

Mr. Cheney did not say that he is opposed to the ungodliness and perversion of sodomy and purveyors of it, but because of his faith in Federalism, he believed the states themselves should and would put a check on it. No! He believes in Federalism, and he believes that freedom means the countenancing of a perverted form of union which he would willingly admit to being “marriage.” He did say “people ought to be free to enter into ANY kind of union they wish, ANY kind of arrangement they wish.” (emphasis mine, but also of Mr. Cheney’s, for he said “any” twice in the same sentence). Sodomites want to call the union of a man with a man “marriage”—that is what they “wish.” Therefore, Mr. Cheney appears to be very fully in support of this wickedness.

Mr. Cheney appears to be a “conservative” who is in favor of the destruction of the home and family, for that is what state sanction of sodomite unions will bring about, and it will do it rapidly. Sodomites do not want their sin in the privacy of their own dwellings. They want it in the public places, they want it in the school classrooms, they want it in the Boy Scouts, they want it in the churches, they want it among our children, they want it in YOUR bedroom, as well as in their own. The idea that someone wants sexual perversion to be left unchecked behind their own walls is ridiculous; utterly foolish.

The sodomites in Genesis chapter nineteen of the Holy Bible serve as illustration enough, if that were the only illustration God gives us in the Bible (it is not the only illustration). Those perverts were in the street, on parade, if you will. They were united in their insistence that sodomy be brought in to a just man’s house; the man’s name was Lot (2 Peter 2:7). They were ready to break down the door of Lot’s house to “do so wickedly.” If it wasn’t sodomy—the men wanted to carnally know the angels that visited Lot’s house—then you have no explanation for what the men of Sodom wanted to do once they had used violence to break down the door. They weren’t there to steal anyone’s TV, computer, or jewelry. They were there to destroy a family and its friends.

Sodomy is a sin that fosters violence, and in our day it still seeks to break down the doors of our homes, schools, and institutions, and destroy the Christian foundations and witness of our nation. No government on earth has leave of our Holy God to put its stamp of approval on it, either tacitly or by legislation or court decisions.

Vice President Cheney is a “conservative” who is as wrong as he could be. He opposes Barack Obama with regard to the use of our military and our defense against Islamic-incited terrorism, but then climbs in the same bed with Obama with regard to the wickedness of sodomy in our land—which is spiritual and moral terrorism.

Both Barak Obama and Richard Cheney are stomping all over the standards of our Holy God; one a leftist, the other known as a “conservative. Do I “get it?” You may know that I do get it; that is the kind of apostasy and peril prophesied of these days in the same Book that warns us against sodomy. Whatever Mr. Cheney’s personal motives, he is part and parcel of the peril that confronts the American people. Both of these men want to ignore that they will answer to God, and so will the entire country, which, as a whole, seems unwilling to stand up for the words of God and for the principles that brought the human race to manhood on the American continent.

America can only look for further receding of the protecting and blessing Hand of God. Without that Hand, we are safe against no enemy, political, military, economic, spiritual, or moral. Without that hand capitalist economics and free enterprise will fail, for these were gifts from God who has the power and prerogative to withdraw them. That is the explanation for the fascism and socialism taking over our once very stable industries. Our military, too, though appearing successful in Iraq and Afghanistan, will see the fruits of their sacrificial work buried in the rushing resurgence of militant Islam once we have brought our troops home. It seems that our Generals are even unwilling to allow some Christian soldiers from distributing Bibles to Iraqi friends. That is substance for a different article, but I declare that because Christianity is forbidden in those countries to so many, they will once again be radically Islamicized beyond what have ever seen in the past . . . once American restraints are removed. We can keep troops there for another hundred years, but in 2110, Islam will again crush those people, and Islam will still be seeking to destroy us.

Or will America already be destroyed by then through our allowance of all that that which offends God? It won’t take another hundred years for the Hand of God to be entirely withdrawn and America left utterly vulnerable.

William Jennings Bryan was an economic progressive. He was mistaken in his economics. But he was a man who loved God and sought the glory and the standards of God in American life. That is why he supported prohibition, opposed evolutionary teaching, and that is why he actively promoted the evangelistic work of Billy Sunday. A nation and its leaders can make some serious mistakes in economics and still not forfeit the protecting, blessing, and rescuing hand of God. On the other hand, a nation and its leaders can be absolutely correct in conservative economic principles as well as its military strategies—but if they trample on the word of God, ignore His Holiness and His standards, live as humanists or practical atheists, and countenance wickedness and perversion, they can not depend on God’s protection. Free enterprise, a strong military, and I dare say the Constitution itself will all fail unless God holds its framework together in mercy for sinners like us.

Protectionism is tyranny.

You have no right to tell me what I can and can not purchase.

Also, as corrupt and criminal as the American Labor Unions have become, we MUST have a way to avoid supporting them, even if it means, sometimes, a foreign competitor.

It is obvious that the lust for wealth drives many so called, conservative, leaders. They've pandered to us for our votes, but now, when they think more votes will come from other sources, we are told we aren't needed, and accused of hurting the party.

My principles aren't for sale.

I look at my grandson every day, and it reminds me that my duty is now to pave his way as best I can, not to worry about my comfort. I can't leave much material wealth, best I can do is try to pass on freedom.

God will protect the nation through our economic debates, whether we agree or not agree on the extent of “free trade”. That is my point. He has not spelled out any specific requirements with regard to an economic system or trade philosophy.

God is very interested in what we do as a nation with those things obviously stated to offend Him. Righteousness exalteth a nation but sin is a reproach to any people.

If unbridled international free trade is a correct course, principally, then fine. But it will also fail, and turn to bite us, if we don’t have God’s protecting hand on our nation.

I disagree, at least in part.

Jesus certainly seemed to favor the man who would not bury his money in the ground, but instead used it to help his neighbors. I think nearly every capitalist does the country more good than ANY Communist!

Joseph proved that Tax Cuts make a country wealthy, during the Seven Fat Years.

There are many places where the Bible seems to show favoritism to the honest capitalist.

“Jesus certainly seemed to favor the man who would not bury his money in the ground, but instead used it to help his neighbors. I think nearly every capitalist does the country more good than ANY Communist!

“Joseph proved that Tax Cuts make a country wealthy, during the Seven Fat Years.

“There are many places where the Bible seems to show favoritism to the honest capitalist.”

Every example you can find of “capitalism” in the Scriptures actually supports . . . capitalism.

Your citations do support a free enterprise system, which is certainly the correct one.

But God does not promise His protection to the system for the system itself. If capitalism is the god of a man to the exclusion to the True and Living God, and he ignores the other precepts of morality and spirituality found in the same Scriptures, He has the prerogative to remove His hand and allow its failure.

Jesus didn’t fail in any of the words of God, and Joseph loved the God of the Scriptures with all of his heart, and ran from the immorality of Potifer’s wife.

God would have no obligation to protect or use Joseph if Joseph had the same attitude toward perversion ad Mr. Cheney, regardless of Joseph’s “capitalism.”

My argument is not against Free Enterprise. My argument is for the Nation not to countence perverts who offend God, so that we will not forfeit (as a nation) the blessings upon our free enterprise, which I state in my article to be a gift from God.

The constitution does not give the Federal gov’t. authority to legislate any kind of social behavior. That is a matter for state legislatures entierly.

Frankly, I’d rather leave it that way than say something like: Ok Liberals, you’ve had your fun stomping all over the constitution, now we’re going to do it our way.

I see the problem as not being a lack of morals in Washington, but the very fact that it believes it can impose whatever kind of morals or lack thereof on society at will.

“The constitution does not give the Federal gov’t. authority to legislate any kind of social behavior. That is a matter for state legislatures entierly.”

Mine was not an argument against Federalism, but an argument against any level of government countenancing very obvious wickedness.

The sodomites who are allowed to “marry” in one state or another can be counted on to push their agenda by (1) trying to adopt the children they can’t produce, and then (2) moving to states that do not sanction sodomite “marriage” to create situations that will force the courts to (unconstitutionally) legislate in their favor for benefits and so forth.

The sodomites are going to keep pressing until there is no federalism. And they know exactly what they’re doing.

like it or not, the American nation began with the Bible and Christianity being brought on to the shores of the continent by Protestant Christians.

I'm curious what you mean here. Surely you are aware that the Spanish and the French were evangelizing on American soil before the English/Dutch/Swedish. Heck, even the Russian Orthodox had a respectable claim to the Northwest. And the English colonies weren't even exclusively Protestant either--Maryland certainly was not.

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.