Posted on 04/21/2010 5:38:50 PM PDT by Christian_Capitalist
I favor smaller Federal Government, and more local control, but I don't know what your statement means. I don't know which "goals" you're referring to.
Count me firmly in the second camp. It would be every bit as wrong for the Fed Gov to -mandate- school prayer as to -forbid- it.
On the face of it, I would agree with your statement.
Nope.
When Government requires Taxes to finance those specific activities which are directly mandated by God, then its Taxation is not Theft.
Ergo, the Government is commissioned by God to punish Civil Harms: Adultery (and other breaches of contract), Murder (including foreign invasions and domestic abortions), Theft, False Witness, and Covetousness (abuse and malfeasance short of theft; see differing punishments for these two clases of crime in the Old Testament).
That's it. That's what the Government is supposed to do.
If Government just helps itself to the contents of your pocketbook for any other reason than the Punishment of Civil Harms, which is its "job description" under God -- then it is as much a thief as any other Embezzler, who steals money from his employers for his own purposes he considers "good".
Your interpretation of scripture does not allow for a Democratic Republic.
Fair enough, but the candidate seems to believe, and there are plenty here who can correct me if I’m wrong, that one does not have to disagree with conservatives on social issues in order to feel that government’s role in social issues should be limited.
In other words, there is no inconsistency is saying:
“I think there should be prayer in schools.” and saying, “I don’t think the federal government should ensure that there is prayer in schools.”
If fact, if you truly believe that people have a right to worship, then by definition, you believe that people have a right not to worship, and you find equally a government that enforces worship and one that enforces its exclusion.
Now I’m not the candidate, but that seems to be his view, and in my opinion, that view is a good one.
Only MOST of government.
Hi neighbor :-)
If you had seen my post #44, I had gone on to say that I had no problem with Rand Paul’s position on this issue.
P.S., IMO, the Federal Government’s role in social issues depends on the particular social issue under consideration.
I believe in government according to the US Constitution, according to which, the Federal Govt. is way too large. Too many departments, administrations, and unelected people handing down regulations (as if they were Moses coming down from the mountain).
On the contrary. There is nothing about God's "job description" for Government in Romans 13, as a Punisher of Civil Evils, which prevents people from freely electing Magistrates to execute those Punishments.
All that "my interpretation" of Scripture (which is simply reading Romans 13 for what it says, about the Duties of Government -- and neither adding to it nor subtracting from it) would prevent is the notion of a majority of the populace "democratically" voting to help themselves to the bank accounts of the rest of the citizenry, for whatever "good" social purposes they decide entitles them to the forced confiscation of Other People's Money.
Both God and Thomas Jefferson (hardly an opponent of democratic republics) argue against this sort of "democracy".
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." -- Thomas Jefferson
Ergo, mandatory, tax-funded Government Schooling is intrinsically evil.
Its very existence violates and profanes the 8th Commandment.
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.