These people are more interested in their positions and keeping the District of Corruption on an even keel. None are worthy of our predecessors like Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry. None would show up in President Kennedy’s book Profiles in Courage. Yet there are some who do show signs of backbone – some who are willing to take positions that will have them pilloried in the press and even, if we follow history, could place them in physical danger.

One such legislator is Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall. One of the functions of the Old Dominion’s House of Delegates is looking into the qualifications of potential judges. As Victoria Cobb from The Family Foundation commented, “The General Assembly is tasked with reviewing and certifying judges. If that is little more than a rubber stamp, it means nothing. It has a duty to block judges deemed unqualified or unfit for the bench.”

This is what the Virginia General Assembly did last night. Out of the list of judicial prospects presented to the legislators was one Tracy Thorne-Begland. Some are making opposition to his appointment a matter of simple gay bashing bigotry. The are saying that what happens in his bedroom is no one’s business. They may have a point if this were simply the case. But it is not.

Whatever we may think of their activity, there are homosexuals that do a fine job in our society. However, it is not his private activities that presented a problem to the good delegate. The judicial candidate was not just an average guy minding is own business with other guys. He was an activist for the gay community.

Back in the day’s of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, Thorne-Begland made a big deal, appearing on ABC’s Nightline as a gay Naval officer. His problem was not his inclination – it was his dishonesty with the Navy and the government. He was subsequently discharged and found his calling as an activist for the gay community. In 2009 Thorne-Begland was selected as one of twenty four OUTstanding Virginians by gay rights group EqualityVirginia. In fact he has served on their board as they plotted and schemed to bring their activities the approval of the general public.

Far from being a garden variety homosexual, he was one of the driving forces in Virginia in pushing what has been called the “gay agenda”. Marshall noted, “I don’t even think it’s proper to put his name forward because of his behavior,” Delegate Marshall said in his press release. His concern is that “a homosexual activist” find his way the the bench, which is already populated by agenda driven activists whose regard for the law and the constitution takes a back seat to values that are not necessarily shared by the people these judges work for.

Speaking out against a protected class can make a man seem quite unpopular. Yet, after all the quibbling and moaning, the vote came down 33 to 31 in favor of the activist… with ten show their unwillingness to take a stand by abstaining. Apparently the rest of the hundred did not even show up to to collect their per diem that day. So, the vote that required 51 votes to move the nomination forward failed… and the accusations began flying.

To put the matter into perspective, consider how the progressive left would have reacted, had a judicial nominee been a pro-life activist, or worse yet, an outspoken Christian.  We don’t have to speculate, we only need to look back at the shameful treatment good men like Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas received simply because they believed that the Constitution said what it meant and meant what it said.

Of course the reaction was to be expected, but there is another lesson to be learned from this whole event. It took less than a third of the delegates to make a difference. We don’t need to have a majority to succeed. The other side has been manipulating the country for decades with an elitist minority. Samuel Adam told us, “It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men.”

Was this fight worth fighting? If the effort was put forth to make life difficult for some guy who liked guys, then the House of Delegates could have found a better use of their time. This is what the progressives are trying to make of it with their propensity of hiding their true intentions. We can no longer listen to their cries of victimhood as they victimize and attempt to terrorize the rest of us. We can never forget that it is never wrong to do the right thing… and Bob Marshall did the right thing.  Many people believe there is nothing we can do about activist judges.  Well, this is one thing – stop them before they get on the bench.

[Editors note: Here are some comments on first time election day activities from my son. For those who have never spent part of election day passing out literature or knocking on doors for your favorite candidate, you will see that it is not so frightening... in fact it can be fun. Whoever you support... get out and support your man or woman.]

Last week I got a call asking if I would help Ron Paul by working a poll on election day handing out little cards promoting the delegates who support Dr. Paul at the convention. It was not something I was planning on doing and that sort of political activity is not something toward which I am naturally inclined. There were things I really should get done at work that day and coming home and having dinner with my wife is something I really do look forward to. Well, they talked me into it by saying that even if I could get there by 6pm (the eleventh hour) and work until closing that would be a help.

On Tuesday I got there about six and first went inside and took care of my own business in one of the two little booths. There was no line and after showing ID and signing my name I was directed right in. I am in Doylestown (PA) District 1-1, the belly of the county beast, so to speak, and the polling is done in the Bar Association building, which is about as comfortable and amenable venue as one is likely to find. In almost every room it seemed that there was someone thanking me for coming out to vote.

Once back outside I paid more attention to the half dozen or so people standing around the door handing out papers that I had rushed by on my way in. I introduced myself to those there and learned who they were and what they were doing. Those on my left were promoting the democrats and had their lists of suggested candidates. Those on the right were doing the same thing and had their own lists. Now it was time for me to take my place. If I were to follow this scheme I suppose I should either be blocking the door or wandering around the parking lot somewhere, but I decided that since the delegates I was there to help were trying to get into the Republican convention I would stand on the right.

My fellow right-siders (actually we were on the left as you entered the building) were friendly, as were the folks on the other side of the sidewalk. One was the local committeeman, who looked at my cards and said I was welcome to hand them out. Another fellow, probably senior in years but not official rank was a lawyer and was the one I conversed with the most.

I learned that turnout had been light, about 250 so far out of about 1000 registered for this polling station and there apparently was not going to be any last-minute rush. Voters straggled in, mostly in couples or even as families in a few cases. Earlier in the day it was probably more individuals out on their lunch break or on their way to work. There was plenty of time for conversation between the times we offered our suggestions to the voters. As the letter that accompanied the pack of cards I received from the potential delegates suggested, I positioned myself so I would be the first to offer the voters something. Of course, those who were interested enough in voting for Republican delegates took the card I offered, were then handed a big sheet of paper by the other right-siders saying, “This is the same thing but in bigger print.” That is politics and carnivals, I guess. I let it slide.

The letter from the delegates also suggested that this setting was not best for debating the opponents. I agreed with that and was hoping the talk did not turn toward anything too political. As sure as I am in my thoughts on the subject, these people were in their element and held the higher ground tactically. Most people’s political views have been shaped such that no matter how deep and viscerally felt, they can be contained by identifying themselves to some degree with the “right” or “left”, just as if the range of all sane political thought could be expressed by taking a sheet of paper from one side of this sidewalk or the other and being funneled into the same door to give their consent. Many would say, “Of course that is how it works, that is part of what we call civilization.” Well…

For the most part, the politics that entered the conversation came only by way of a few comments here and there mostly from the right side that did not escalate beyond a small assent by those on the same side of the sidewalk. The closest I got to this was when a fellow was pulling out of the parking lot in a new Escalade “pickup” and the committeeman commented something like “Those are nice but I just couldn’t bring myself to get one after Obama bought the company.” Wanting to at least find a little common ground with this fellow I said “I’m with you there” although I thought it completely unnecessary to consider Obama the one primarily responsible for the bailout crimes and I cannot really see any use I would have for a vehicle like that. I guess that was my nod toward most democratic political debate, oversimplification of issues that should not be “issues” at all, made to get something from someone else that you think you will not get unless they think that you think you agree with them. Or something like that.

The strongest political expression came from the other side of the sidewalk by a couple of voters who stopped to chat with an acquaintance working there. The topic of having to show a photo ID to vote starting with the fall election. Their analysis of this, arrived at in about three sentences, was that requiring this would give the Republicans some short term gains and that it was intended to keep the urban people down and it really was racist. [I will just allow the reader to finish this paragraph themselves.]

I think I had established a little bit of credibility with my fellow poll workers in friendly small talk and telling them that although I had little experience in politics myself, my father was a county chairman for the party down in Virginia a few years ago. After a bit a woman came down the sidewalk and first to greet her, I offered her one of my cards by saying politely “Republican Delegates?” She smiled and shook my hand and said something like, “Oh, no thank you. I already voted.” The lawyer next me gave me a little nudge and told me with a smile “That is your mayor.” “Oh, I guess not then. Nice to meet you.” I said with my usual smoothness, thinking that she had looked somewhat familiar– it must have been from that parade…

That may not have added to my credibility. “I guess that shows how much I have been paying attention to that kind of thing.” I said. According to my thinking, of any sort of government, the local level should be the one that concerns me most, the one closest to my “little platoon.” Yet I have spent much more time studying much more distant powers because they seemed to be a much bigger threat. The most face to face interaction I have had with my local authorities recently was getting shaken down for a permit to take down a tree that was threatening to drop some limbs on my neighbor’s house by the chairman of the borough shade tree commission who lives down the street. The most speculation this inspired in me was to wonder how the shade tree preservation committee with the power to levy fines was dealing with the “Green” initiative I read about in a recent borough newsletter guaranteeing residents access to sunlight. I just never felt compelled to get involved with this sort of thing for some reason. Somebody coming into your yard telling you what you can do with your trees should be the worst of your problems when it comes to politics.

Yet there I was, focused at the other end of the scale, where, if one is to believe much of what one is often told, solutions can be found. If however, one believes that much skepticism is warranted in these conditions, the best one may be able to do, politically speaking, for now is limit the damage done by the greater forces and try to do good on your personal scale.

To finish the story. Two hours does not seem like a long time, and is indeed much less than the thirteen some others along that sidewalk put in, but it was an experience that put faces on things I had been thinking about.

I did pick up a bit of local history in the talk that evening. It was a very brief account of a prominent resident, Henry Chapman Mercer, seceding from the borough with his home, Fonthill, and his Tile Works. This would have taken place back in the early twentieth century sometime and was connected to the reason my neighborhood, just across from him and the normal boundary of Swamp Road (Rte. 313) was added to the borough in some sort of land swap. The mayor’s comment on this was something like “At least now we don’t have to mow his grass.”

Others see these similarities based on the inspirations to Obama and those he surrounds himself with. Some have been quoted as admiring Chairman Mao. Many are disciples of Saul Alinsky. Then, we have the family and friends who raised Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama: everyone, Marxist to the core with a dislike and distrust of our home, the United States of America.

Recent controversies have been associated with the selection of “Forward” as the campaign slogan. This word has been used frequently in the title of socialist and nazi publications. More recently the symbol of ObamaCare recognized as being strikingly similar to one used by one of the most evil personages of the last century, Adolph Hitler.

There may be more to this situation that the benign, coincidental relationship or the sinister Freudian appearances relating to past evils. Consider the way the President appears to delight in playing the birth certificate game, spending at least a million dollars defending against revelation of the real document – even go so far as to release an clearly forged certificate.

One of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is to isolate the opposition through ridicule. Thinking back, how has Obama dealt with requests for his birth certificate and college records. Such papers would be easily available and set the record straight… if, indeed, he really was eligible to hold his position. Instead of following this route, he chose, instead, to mock his countrymen seeking the truth about his eligibility to hold his high office. Many have speculated about the reason, but the administration and the complicit formerly mainstream media have done their best to assign such truth seekers to the tin foil hat brigade and minimize their influence by isolating them through ridicule.

Consider for a moment, that these references to communist and nazi mythology may be done by design – not so much through admiration of his philosophical forerunners, but to further the impression that his detractors are nothing more than racist Obama haters. The more he can get people fussing about about peripheral issues that are difficult to prove outright instead of the issue of the economic destruction and surrender to radical Islamic, the crazier his detractors appear… and that lack of credibility carries over to things that can be proven.

The administration made sport of Sarah Palin’s charge that ObamaCare was included “Death Panels”. Of course the plan did not use that term, but it did provide for panels to evaluate who would be eligible for various forms of treatment, and who would not. What we found was that they were the functional equivalents of death panels. Yet the derision continues. The attempts to isolate and denigrate anyone who stands in the way of the Obama agenda continues. They appear not to be too concerned if people know the truth… if the ones trying to spread the word can be marginalized to the point where no one pays attention… until it is too late. It’s the Chicago and Alinsky way.

I am reminded of that story when I read the Scriptural passage in Hebrews 12: “Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses.” The witnesses the Apostle speaks of are the great champions who have gone on before us, which are mentioned in chapter eleven. Included by implication in the great “Hall of Faith” of Hebrews 11 are the three young Hebrews: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (verse 34, “Quenched the violence of fire.”)

So, what was it that got these three young men included in this list that along with the likes of Abraham, Moses, and David? You’ll find their story in Daniel chapter three. In a nutshell, they refused to bow down to the image of the king. In other words, THEY DISOBEYED A CIVIL GOVERNMENT THAT HAD BECOME TYRANNICAL. And for refusing to submit to the king, they were thrown into a burning fiery furnace.

Come to think of it, many of the people named in the Hebrews 11 “Hall of Faith” got there because of civil disobedience. Speaking of Moses, the Scripture says, “By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king.” So, when did Moses forsake Egypt? When he killed the Egyptian taskmaster who was beating a Hebrew slave to death. That’s when!

Rahab is also mentioned in this Biblical “Hall of Faith.” Who was Rahab, and what did she do? She was a prostitute who lied to government soldiers and helped the Hebrew spies escape the city of Jericho. Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephthae are also listed. Who are they, and what did they do? They were men who led armed rebellions against oppressive governments to which they had been subject.

Daniel is inferred in Hebrews 11 when it says, “Stopped the mouths of lions.” What did he do? He refused to submit to his civil government when commanded to not pray aloud (for only thirty days). And for refusing to submit to his government, he was cast into a den of hungry lions. Yes, God delivered Daniel from the lions and the three young Hebrews from the burning furnace of fire. But the point is, they each DISOBEYED civil government, and God brags on them for it in Hebrews 11.

So, what are all these “Romans 13-ers” going to say to Daniel, Moses, and Gideon when they get to Heaven? What are they going to say to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego? What are they going to say to those men who “overthrew kingdoms” (Heb. 11:33), “waxed valiant in combat” (vs. 34), and “turned to flight . . . armies”? (Armies are government-sanctioned, government-supported, government-ordered entities–vs. 34.)

I cannot count the number of times I have heard some TV or radio preacher say something to the effect, “Well, I’m glad we were given freedom here in the United States, but our Founding Fathers were wrong to rebel against the British Crown. According to Romans 13, they should have submitted to King George.” Barf! Gag! Spit! What hypocrisy!

To all of the Romans 13 Pharisees out there, I say, if you are really going to believe and preach that garbage, at least be honest enough to stop celebrating Independence Day on July 4. It was the day when men became traitors to Great Britain and officially declared a revolutionary war. And stop flying the Stars and Stripes in your church auditoriums. It was the flag of rebellion. How dare you say America’s founders violated Romans 13 in one breath and with the next breath say you thank God for the freedom that was purchased AT THE SACRIFICE OF THE BLOOD OF THE MEN YOU SAY VIOLATED ROMANS 13! Pardon me, but I just cannot think of anything that is more hypocritical than that!

And remember this about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: it was AFTER they disobeyed their king and were thrown into the furnace of fire that they met the Son of God. It was King Nebuchadnezzar who said, “I see four men loose . . . the fourth is like the Son of God.” (Daniel 3:25)

Think about it: where did Moses meet the Lord? In the wilderness by a burning bush after he had defied Egyptian tyranny by killing an Egyptian taskmaster who was beating a Hebrew slave to death. Where did Gideon meet the Lord? In a threshing floor as he willowed his grain in defiance of evil civil authority. When did Stephen meet the Lord? When political and religious leaders were stoning him to death for refusing to submit to their iniquitous injunctions. And think of this, too: where did the Lord Jesus meet man? On a bloody Roman cross—being placed there by the civil and religious rulers of His day.

Most Christians today are looking to meet the Lord in a heated or air conditioned church sanctuary with padded pews and ornate windows, with an orchestra playing and a choir singing, and fried chicken waiting for them after the service. But that’s not where you’re going to find the Fourth Man.

When you resist the religious Pharisees who are trying to intimidate and coerce you into submitting to their legalism and tyranny, then you will see the Fourth Man. When you resist the power establishment that demands that you accept their politically correct philosophies and ideologies, then you will see the Fourth Man. When you refuse to be bought, bribed, or bullied by the “good old boy” network that seeks to control you, then you will see the Fourth Man. When you resist your family and friends who try to shame you into abandoning the principles of liberty and freedom that God, Himself, has planted in your heart, then you will see the Fourth Man. When you are threatened and persecuted and you say, “I must obey God rather than men,” then you will see the Fourth Man.

Do you really think you’re going to find the One who went to a bloody cross in a meadow of roses? The only roses He knew were the ones whose thorns were smashed on his skull. You won’t find him in a garden, unless it’s the Garden of Gethsemane. You’ll find the One who went to the Cross in the same place that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego found Him: in the Burning Fiery Furnace.

God said told us that when we pass through the floodwaters, and when we walk through the fire, we would find Him to be with us. (Isaiah 43:2)

Of course, let me be careful to say that real Christians are peacemakers. They desire to live a quiet and peaceable life with their neighbors, their civil authorities, and even with other nations. They readily recognize and respect lawful, God-ordained authority. But, at the same time, they will not surrender that which is holy and give it to swine! They absolutely will not become toadies for unlawful government that attempts to usurp the God-given authority and jurisdiction to which it has been divinely assigned!

I am often reminded of this quote from Mahatma Gandhi: “There are, I am sorry to say, many Temples in our midst in this country which are no better than brothels.”

Gandhi’s quote could be said of many so-called churches in America today, for they, too, have become little more than glorified brothels that pimp for the government. “Submit! Obey! Don’t resist!” they constantly preach. I wonder what they will say one day to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego?

For more by Chuck Baldwin, go to http://chuckbaldwinlive.com.

Some wisdom from one of our Catholic brothers, Father Frank Pavone. It puts things in perspective as we did nothing to warrant the love of God. He loves us because of who He is. It kind of sets the example for a mothers love.

Earlier this week, President Obama introduced us to Julia—a fictional character whose entire life is subsidized by the Federal Government (i.e., your tax money). Her website shows all the government benefits she would receive under President Obama from birth through retirement and compares them to what she would receive (or wouldn’t) under that eeeeevil Mitt Romney.

The narrative was written to emotionally appeal to the uninformed, as the information provided was extremely misleading, inaccurate, and incomplete, yet many of the President’s followers will undoubtedly accept it without question. Instead of taking time to pick apart every (non)factual representation myself—I’ll leave that for others to do—I’m going to focus on the most troubling aspect of this story from a faith perspective. Apparently, our friend Julia has no ability to provide for herself, as well as no family, friends, or faith connection to offer assistance when she has a need.

Government is her only hope.

This illustrates a topic I discuss in my book Saving America: A Christian Perspective of the Tea Party Movement. I line up the attributes and roles of God with the attributes and roles of our current governmental structure and conclude that government has usurped God’s authority, systematically decreasing our dependence on him, crowding out any room for his influence over our lives.

Fitting with this, Julia’s story is told as if the Federal Government is her only option for being able to live a fulfilling and healthy life. We learn that the Federal Government is her Provider, Comforter, Father, Hope, Foundation, Great Physician, Owner of All Things, One and Only Savior, and is Worthy of All Praise. In other words, government is her god. As a result, the actual God—the only one who can provide anything of eternal value—plays no role in her life.

The Bible has a word for substituting something else for God: idolatry.

The fictional life of Julia reflects the troubling reality that many Americans have bought into the Evil One’s lie that only government can meet their needs (and, in many cases, their wants). In tricking us into increasingly ascribing to government all the attributes I listed, he is separating us from the only one to whom they actually belong. And through that separation, God’s power over our lives decreases as government’s increases. We no longer know how to take care of ourselves or one another and instead become increasingly dependent on a cold, corrupt bureaucracy that is interested only in expanding its own power.

This is similar to what the Israelites did when they first demanded an earthly king to rule them instead of God, even against his stern warning about the tyranny their king(s) would ultimately impose, reducing the Israelites to slaves (1 Samuel 8). He also said that when they cried out to him for relief that he would not answer. They chose Big-Government rule anyway. And God, as he typically does, gave the people over to their idolatrous desires. He granted their wish to become subjects of an all-powerful government, and then exactly what he warned them would happen happened.

This is where we are in America today. Our government is trying to become our earthly king, ruling us, ultimately turning us into slaves. And if we willingly subject ourselves to government as Ruler instead of God, as the Israelites did, I fear he will give us over to our idolatrous hearts and not answer us when we finally cry out for relief.

OR …

We could collectively cry out to him now—many, including myself, already are—and repent of our allowing government to usurp God’s authority over our lives. We could reject government as Ruler and instead live by God’s Holy Spirit, exuding humility and kindness toward others, building self-sustaining communities that love and support one another rather than fostering helpless communities that disdain and take from one another. We will then naturally meet the needs of the hungry, the elderly, the widows and orphans—and anyone else in need, no matter what the cost.

And God, not government, will again be our Provider, Comforter, Father, Hope, Foundation, Great Physician, Owner of All Things, One and Only Savior, and Worthy of All Praise.

About Jon Wakefield

As a political independent, Jonathan Wakefield serves on the Board of Directors of the Richmond Tea Party. He is the author of SAVING AMERICA: A CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE ON THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT, and the novel FATAL REALITY (an inspirational thriller). Jonathan is also a computer programmer and the owner of a copywriting and editing business. Visit his other website at www.jonathanwakefield.com.

It is a necessary “evolution” for Obama as homosexuals are one of his key constituent groups. This happens because the Democrat Party, for all their rhetoric about standing up for the “common man”, really only sees constituency groups. They think of people as part of groups based electoral preferences. Are they union members? Do they work for the government? What is their race? We are told they are fighting racism by treating people differently and regarding them as worthy of assistance with taxpayer dollars because of their race.

In this case, though, they are segmented by sexual preference. The homosexual community had not been quite so free with their money or enthusiasm this time around as they were awaiting the announcement we heard today. Many were happy with the press conference… the hastily prepared press conference. They had pushed for the removal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” from the military. The got it, and wanted more.

When he moved into the area of supporting a redefinition of marriage, the president, once again found himself stepping into an area that is outside the constitutional authority of the national government. It was one more time to show his complete indifference to the Tenth Amendment that restricts Washington to the defined areas of power and reserves all others to the states… and the states define marriage.

Some would say that the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA), that Attorney General Holder refused to defend, opened the door to this sort of intervention. However, it simply codified the lack of enforceable reciprocity between states that recognized homosexual marriages and those that did not. That is, a state that did not recognize homosexual marriages was not bound to respect ceremonies performed in states that did.

We have a man in the White House who claims to be a Christian yet shows more affinity toward the radical Muslim Brotherhood. He sees nothing wrong with murdering babies in the womb so their mothers will not be “penalized” by their decisions. And now, he stands before us telling the world we should accept and recognize the perversion that destroyed Soddom and Gomorrah.

The version of Christianity he picked up from Jeremiah Wright, who taught, instead of God’s love, hatred for his country and fellow countrymen, certainly does not come from the Bible. In the case of today’s announcement, it is not just a live and let live approach to homosexual activity, but one that places it in a position of recognition and honor.

But what does our instruction book from our Creator tell us. “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22 (ESV). The same verse in Good News Translation is even easier to understand, “No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that.” To those who would tell us that this is just an Old Testament concept, I would suggest I Corinthians 6:9-10 (ESV) where we are told “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

That is pretty plain about behaviors that are not acceptable, and homosexuals are right there in the middle of the pack. Now, it would not be right to throw them from tall buildings as Muslims do under sharia law, and we have no call to physically or verbally abuse them. We, as a society have no right to invade their bedrooms and punish behavior we do not approve of. That, we are not responsible for. What we are responsible for is that which we approve of and honor.

Our country is in enough trouble already, we can ill afford to allow our leaders to, one more time, stick their thumb in the eye of our Creator. As one friend of mine put it so well, God has a much bigger thumb. With our precarious position, doing one more thing that would cause God to remove his protective hand from our land is pure foolishness.

And what of the people who, because of the official sanction of their activities, find their way to eternal condemnation… we are doing them no favors by silently letting them go without a fight.

How then, should we deal with this latest affront to common sense. Today’s announcement, while catering to one of Obama’s constituent groups, almost needs to be looked at as a distraction from his destructive work on our nation’s economy. This acceptance of abominable behavior is our reason to replace him, but when people are out of work or afraid of losing their jobs or homes, we cannot let this become our primary campaign issue. Barack Hussein Obama, because of his godless, socialistic policies is destroying the American economy, wanting people to believe that the government shall supply all their needs. He is wrong about that and he is wrong about homosexual marriage. We cannot permit him four more years to complete the destruction and desecration of our country.

Can/Should we do the Lord’s work through our political involvement?

If the person holding the position of authority operates in obedience to God’s Word, he or she will make decisions which God will honor whether or not those decision were made of own volition based upon their personal relationship with God’s son, Jesus Christ or because of Godly advice received from an adviser who garnered his advice from study with God’s word as his counsel.

John 14:13. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Such a person will not poll you to see whether or not you agree. Because all too often in our society, we apply the WAM concept that asks the question: What About Me — a selfish interest.

We concern ourselves with our category: middle class, ethnic or racial group, prior circumstances, friendships and relationships and political Party identifications. These issues may replace God’s principles, and cause us to deviate from his will.

14. Another pitfall of political involvement is that priority is transferred from God to the government.

A point comes when the people believe that it is man (or “a man”) rather than God who provides for their needs, (especially through Government).

Government cannot replace/supersede God; however, government is allowed by and is

representative of God as it represents order.

15. What we should concern ourselves with, then, when we determine for whom we will vote is the how near one purports to be obedient to the dictates of God’s Word, and whether or not we can find instances when what is professed has been demonstrated. In other words, we should test candidates by reviewing both their professions and their results because people cannot separate their actions from their beliefs for an extended period of time.

The truth will find them out and we will be able to identify them for who they really are.

16. How, then, should we conduct this test?

Simply put, we must rely on our understanding of God’s truth as he has chosen to reveal it to us either through our study of the Bible either independently or, perhaps, in a class presented by others whom we know to be indwelled of the Holy Spirit.

One note of caution here is that we should not become judgmental and assume that only we know what is absolute. As God told Miriam and Aaron when they questioned Moses’ authority, Numbers 12:6-8. And he [the Lord] said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?

17. How then do we get knowledgeable about our candidates and gain a measure of discernment upon which to evaluate their sincerity? Proverbs 1:7. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

To me, no other verse ties down our responsibility to carry our civic duties consistent with our Christian beliefs so tightly as does this verse.

Without reverence for God and his revelation to us of who he is and of his character, we cannot understand how he would have us act.

There are those who treat the Holy Scripture as though it were magic or as though it were a casual reading of words — its only purpose being to allow them to gain knowledge of it based upon common definitions and current usage.

This is not true. God inspired the writing of the Bible.

It is his Holy word.

And only He can reveal it to us.

18. The fact that God has provided us criteria against which to evaluate those seeking positions of authority dictates that only those who know Jesus as personal Saviour will qualify.

19. The question becomes, can the world see Jesus in those who seek office by the way they act when involved with politics? Or,

Are they seen as having what’s so appropriately known as “situational ethics” where they do not vote consistently on the “side of right.” when it means they may lose votes come time for reelection? (Does not imply that the same question always will yield an identical answer.)

Compromise, however, is not the way when core values are concerned.

God did not abdicate his leadership merely because he allowed the people to “have a king.”

He still is in charge.

Only those who are obedient to Him in His strength can meet the qualifications he has laid out.

I conclude, therefore, that it not only is good and proper for Christians to be involved in politics, but that it is our duty to do so.

If not us, then who?

Mankind will seek its own level of comfort and will widen the way.

We, as Christians however, know that the gate is narrow and only a few are chosen.

And, as we move toward Tuesday, November 7, we have a major responsibility ahead of us.

This responsibility is not to elect Republicans, Democrats or others to various and sundry offices.

Rather, it is to discern to the best of our ability whom it is that will best Govern under God’s guidance.

When we fail to do what God would have us to do, God will allow unrighteous rulers to rise and, as Samuel admonished the people in I Samuel 8:10-18, this was bad . . . And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day. (v. 18)

You see, when we are confounded as to why Christians are the only group within the United States that it is politically correct to be against, and why laws that fly in the face of God’s Word (same-sex partners and abortion rights, for example) not only are placed into law but become the foundation of one or more political parties, we must ask ourselves: Whose fault is it?

The answer is obvious. It is our fault!

We can’t blame it on those “churches which have “left their first love,” or where a heretical gospel is being taught.

Though most probably true, it transfers the responsibility for actions in our own control to others who do not have the same goals as do we.

Henceforth, there should never be an election in which we do not participate.

Neither should there be a time when we do not raise up Godly men and women to seek positions of leadership and actively and aggressively support their efforts to be elected.

Each of us must apply God’s principles and vote on November 7 for the candidates we believe most nearly represent our understanding of God’s will.

In summary, we must understand and, where applicable, do the following:

· A Christian must know who he or she is before he can evaluate who to support as a candidate

· A Christian needs a foundation upon which to base his or her vote. That foundation is Jesus Christ.

· A Christian must understand that only through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can he or she receive God’s revelation to us through His Holy word.

· A Christian cannot determine absolutes without having received wisdom from God, and must actively seek such wisdom through prayer and study.

· A Christian must vote and must vote as a Christian — for that is WHO he or she is, and we cannot be separated from ourselves.

· A Christian must decide not whether, but when, how, to what extent and with whom he or she will be involved politically.

· A Christian must either support a qualified candidate seeking elected office or become a candidate seeking elected office or appointment to a position that grants him or her access and influence in the name of the Lord to the officeholder.

Can/Should we do the Lord’s work through our political involvement?

1. By Christian, I refer to a person who has accepted Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior and who, in so in so doing, has committed to a life of worship and obedience of Him.

Such a person is one who is “saved” from an eternity in hell (a real place designed for the devil and his angels where both the body and soul of those who have not accepted Jesus will burn forever (Mt. 10:28) in an inexhaustible fire).

Such a person is one who will understand that he or she is “saved” by God’s grace through faith and not by works lest he or she should boast.

Such a person is one who believes in Christ’s deity (He is God), his virgin birth, his sinless life while here on earth, his death on the cross for the sins of all mankind, his resurrection from the grave, his ascension into heaven where he resides today at the right hand of God the Father and intercedes for those who have accepted him, and his future return like a thief in the night to claim those who were given to him by God the Father and who never can be taken from him.

Such a person, in his obedience, will be known by his works (for faith without works is dead).

However, such a person will not be one who will “hide his light under a bushel basket.” Rather, such a person will be one who will allow his light to shine and illuminate the world so others may be drawn to the source of his light — that source being Jesus Christ as pointed to by God’s Holy Spirit.

2. By politics, I refer to the “art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs.” (source: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition)

Additionally, I refer to the “activities or affairs engaged in by a government, politician, or

political party; and the methods or tactics involved in managing a state or government.” (source: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition)

To me, however, politics is about power and is the quest for and implementation of power received.

3. The foundation upon which it can be said that Christians must become involved in politics is found in Exodus 20, verse three — the First Commandment, and in the evidence of nature which surrounds us and shows God to be a God of order and structure.

Exodus 20:3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (First Commandment)

4. Following creation, God directly was the head of the earthly government of those whom He had chosen as his people – Israel. Life centered on worship of Him and he prescribed specific rules and regulations to govern each and every aspect of daily life. Man accessed him through an intercessor, the priest, who was a member of the Levite tribe. Such government is known as a theocracy.

However, because God gave mankind the ability to allow pride to surface in his heart and theright to choose to disobey Him, some priests and some in other positions of authority over the people did not communicate with God through prayer as they were expected to do prior to their taking action.

This resulted in failure and the people suffered as a result. They then asked to have a king so they could be like other nations.

I Samuel 8:4-5. Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, And said unto him, Behold, thou are old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us to judge us like all the nations. [God granted them their desire over the objection of his High Priest, Samuel.]

I Samuel 8:7. And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

5. Because the First Commandment was neither overturned nor changed, rulers and governments remain subject to God as all other men and women.

I Timothy 2:1-4. I [Paul] exhort therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of truth.

Consider this: Is prayer for secular leaders involvement in politics?

6. Three Old Testament examples show how God honors those who know Him and who, through his blessing, are elevated to positions of leadership, access and influence.

Joseph. After being sold into slavery, rose to a position or authority second only to that of Pharaoh “in the throne.” (Genesis 41:40)

Daniel. Taken into captivity because of his talent and skill, he too rose to a position of “ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief of the governors over all the wise men of Babylon.” (Daniel 2:48)

Esther. Because she found favor with the king and became his queen she was offered her desire unto half the kingdom at the wedding banquet. She requested punishment for one who, though he did not know of her lineage, had plotted against the Jews. She was granted her request because of the love of the king, thereby saving the Jews. (Esther 2:17 and 7:1-10)

7. Paul, in the New Testament, showed our relationship to secular government when he claimed the right of being a Roman citizen following being falsely accused and while being before the judge. (Acts 25:11)

[This act shows that if we are willing to accept the benefits of the secular government, then we most definitely should accept responsibility toward that same government.]

8. Jesus, when confronted by the Pharisees in an attempt to ensnare him, was asked whether or not it was “lawful to give tribute unto Caesar.” He answered:

Matthew 22:21 … Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.

We, therefore, are reminded of our dual role here on earth: being in the world, but not of it. In other words, we are not to follow the disobedience of those who do not know Christ as Lord and Saviour. But we are to be involved as citizens; realizing that it is only through us that God’s hand of wrath is stayed against those who sin against him and are unsaved.

9. God tells us in 2 Chronicles that for him to heal our land, the first order of business must be forthose who are called by His name to humble themselves and pray. (2 Chronicles 7:14)

He emphasized this in the New Testament when he told us to “Pray without ceasing.” (1 Thessalonians 5:17)

This, I believe, is more a state of being centered around our continuous reverence for God

more than an overt, cognitive, activity. As we fellowship with Him, neither His love, His sacrifice nor His commandments are far from our minds and hearts.

10. There are two distinct, but not exclusive ways Christians can become involved in politics: vote and run for elected office/seek appointment to a level of responsibility.

11. Voting is the act of drawing upon the wisdom God has given us and choosing which, if any candidate, most closely reflects our beliefs and demonstrates that he or she will rule righteously.

12. There are those who will attempt to separate your decisions on earth from who you are as a result of knowing Jesus. They will claim that you should not use your “religion” to determine for whom you will vote. This is totally false.

Proverbs 29:12. If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.

Do you desire government that is offensive to God?

If actions by those in authority are offensive to God, should they not be offensive to you, as well?

13. God identified how Christians in positions of authority and responsibility appoint others to help them to lead and the latitude they should be given:

Exodus 18:21-22. In speaking to God’s prophet, Moses, his father-in-law, Jethro, said: Moreover, thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: And let them judge the people at all seasons; and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee.

This shows that God wants those in positions of authority and responsibility to have a foundation upon which to evaluate their appointees, and that he also wants us to apply it to all levels of government. Those elected must understand the seriousness of the positions they hold.

Likewise with regard to elections, it is critical to note that the characteristics identified above are for both the appointer and the appointee; however, regardless of who is making the appointments, it is paramount that Christians work extremely hard to ensure that to the greatest extent possible either they or someone else who exhibits God’s character through his son, Jesus by the Holy Spirit is appointed to critical advisor and/or leadership positions.

Exodus 18:21-22 often times is misinterpreted to mean that we are not supposed to evaluate candidates exclusively on whether or not they have such characteristics. If we can find one who does, and he or she otherwise is qualified and not confused in his or her Christian walk, then of course we should support him or her. However, we most likely will not find one such as Moses who was directly called by God and who understudied under Him for 40 years so as to be able to complete his assigned task while relying on God’s power and not his own.

Result? When we vote for a person seeking elected office, if none truly has and exhibits the characteristics above, we must use other (albeit lesser) criteria to decide for whom to vote with the important caveat that we should not waste or vote on vendetta nor should we forsake our vote by not voting or by only voting and not aggressively supporting the candidate with whom we most most agree.

This implies prior study and prior alignment on our part with those who are most consistent with our world view – though they may not be perfect. Such action in no way will compromises our core beliefs unless the candidate advocates positions that are illegal, immoral or unethical and not just positions that are not the alternative we would have chosen had we been in position to make the decision.

Finally, remember that office holder’s appointees not only advise the office holder, but also, to one degree or another are either to be making or be involved in the making decisions that are within their level or authority and responsibility (delegated management).

Additionally they are obligated to pass on to the appointing authority decisions which are (to use a military colloquialism) “above their pay grade.”

[Tomorrow we will see the conclusion of Christians And Politics.]

Ronald Reagan restored honor to our country and to the presidency. He understood the dignity of each individual… and the God given rights and responsibilities that were ours simply because we walk the earth. He also understood that these rights were universal, not just for those fortunate enough to be born in the United States. Yet he did not seek to impose them on those without this knowledge around the world, but he spoke up for the downtrodden and stood up to the evil empire which eventually came tumbling down of its own corrupt weight.

During his time in office our country regained respect as he knew despots throughout the world had little use for concepts of right and wrong, but they could comprehend strength. He restored a military gutted by the previous administration as they sought to entangle more Americans in the web of entitlement dependency.

What was the source of his values that benefited our nation so greatly. It was his belief in a higher power. It was not an aloof, nebulous power, but a loving God who looked after each one of us and ruled and overruled in the affairs of men. He was not so concerned that God blessed America, but that our country was on the side of the Creator where we could be blessed.

The Reagan administration was not a theocracy. It was an administration run pretty much by the principles our founders honored in their lives and their writings. Ronald Reagan sometimes stood alone when his advisers tried to tell him to tone down his rhetoric. Yet his belief in an almighty God who honors those who honestly seek Him helped the President keep his focus and keep our country on the right track.

It’s almost as if Rudyard Kipling’s poem, ‘If‘ were written about our 40th President. It begins:

IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;

Some say his time is past, that we live in a new era where we have moved beyond his type of simplistic right and wrong thinking. His memory is an embarrassment to many in party leadership who have been seduced by the progressive big government thinking. They want us to forget his accomplishments and look to members of the political class who are, at best, mere shadows of the great man. If we remember him and what we had, we will realize the choices they give us pale by comparison.

What was the secret to Ronald Reagan’s success as a President and as a man? Watch this video and see how his faith in God shaped his understanding of his and mankind’s place in the world.