Faith Freedom & Patriotism
Home
Contact Info
How To Receive Jesus
Believers Daily Declaration

Articles Below

 

What Is A Socialist, Fascist, or Communist?

By Anthony Coleman

So that we are on the same page with our terms; when I refer to socialism I am speaking of government ownership.  For instance, a social bending government has a tendency or desire to own things in the private sector.  The idea is that government is a better proprietor and therefore more trustworthy.  This begins as oversight then regulations ending in ownership.

If I use the term fascism I am referring to a method of acquiring a form of socialism.  This can be done through the rise of a political party, charismatic leader, or ethnocentrism.  The end result is a central power that may not own things in the private sector as much as control how it operates through regulations or force.

When I speak of communism I am speaking of the end game of socialism that has groomed a society into the belief that the state has somehow transformed into an infallible central distribution center where everyone is treated equally.  The fallacy is that all of its citizens collectively own everything and should have access to any and all resources needed.  In reality power is in the hands of a select few.

 

Which Political Party Is Overrun With Socialists?

By Anthony Coleman

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) says Democrats are "trying on every front to increase the role of government......"

This is quite different from What Ronald Reagan said in his inaugural address of 1981 when he said;

  "We are a nation that has a government - not the other way around.  And this makes us special among the nations of the earth.  Our government has no power except that granted to it by the people.  It is time to check and reverse the growth of government which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed."

As an observer and participant in my civil responsibilities over the past twenty-one years I have found a consistent yet unsettling trend in American politics.  One of our major parties has been ravaged by socialists. 

Barney Frank has been helpful by blatantly revealing the agenda of Democrats.  In every way possible he wants government intervention.  He is not alone.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently encouraged Pakistan leaders to expand government control.  Pakistan currently has a low tax rate.  She stated that, "We (the United States) tax everything that moves and doesn't move."

Her husband former President Bill Clinton said; "If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the constitution inhibit the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees."  (Aug 12, 1993)

Former US Attorney General Janet Reno referring to the second amendment allowing private citizens to own a gun said; "Waiting periods are only a step.  Registration is only a step.  The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." (Dec 1993)

Socialism has an intrinsic self-defeating nature.  As Margaret Thatcher once reminded us eventually you run out of the other person's money.

Many democrats who normally disdain using the bible to advocate government intervention will quote Acts 4:32.  Taken out of its context this would be a strong argument for socialism.  However, if the bible is used and in particular this passage, one must first assume that everyone involved has become a born again Christian. 

In addition, everyone is voluntarily responding to divine influence not a government mandate.  Also, everyone (including politicians) would sell their home and lands.  And finally, the church and its leadership (not the government) becomes the central distribution authority. 

With that understanding do you think Democrat leaders would still use Acts 4:32 to support socialism? Not a chance. 

When people choose to be generous givers we celebrate it as the result of a heartfelt response to the grace of God.  Arbitrarily taking what people have in order to artificially create our own Acts 4:32 society is simply another human attempt to achieve the kind of results that can only be found in fellowship with God.  In essence, the state attempts to become divine influence.  Its leaders are deceived with a kind of god complex.

The late Lutheran/Catholic minister, Richard John Neuhaus said it this way; "Socialism is the religion people get when they lose their religion."

Unfortunately people who trade off genuine faith for socialism are deceived into a false sense of security.  It seems that the demoralizing effects of socialism are understood only after it has take such a grip that radical changes must be made should one wish to become free from it. 

Well known economist, and social commentator Thomas Sowell is among the few older black educators who understands the tragic consequences socialism has imposed on ethnic groups.  He said;

"The assumption that spending more of the taxpayer's money will make things better has survived all kinds of evidence that it has made things worse.  The black family- which survived slavery, discrimination, poverty, wars and depression- began to come apart as the federal government moved in with its well-financed programs to "help."

Appreciating and protecting freedom demands your attention.  It requires you to think, something too many people don't want to use energy doing. Despots such as Hitler know this.  He said;

"What luck for the rulers that men do not think." 

So that I'm not accused of blindly dismissing the fascist aspects of Republicans; let me point out a significant difference. 

For instance, when Republican leaders act in way that increases the influence of government there are repercussions within the party itself.  It's as though consequences for it arise in upcoming elections. 

Democrats however seem to let such radicals hang around for decades.  They even put them in key leadership positions.  And this makes the average American who loves his or her freedom wonder how many Democrat voters think and believe as their leaders do.

Today there is a problem both Democrat and Republican leaders face.  Enough of the public has now become so accustomed to government intervention in the private sector that running for office now requires that a candidate live or die based on the number of programs he promises to implement.  A small government advocate who's campaigns slogan is, "Help yourself were downsizing" might only see his or her face time on a few SNL hits.

Few have acted on this point with such confidence as Reagan.  In 1975 Ronald Reagan stated; "Nations crumble from within when the citizenry asks of government those things which the citizenry might better provide for itself."

I would say that both parties slouch toward socialism.  The difference is that Republicans do it at impulse speed; while Democrats do it at warp 10.  Republicans do it as a concession but Democrats do it with hopeful anticipation.  

That means that Republicans who yield to socialistic governance usually do it because of a lack of courage; they cave under political pressure.  Democrats far too often are acting on what is truly in their heart.    

Because of this I conclude there is a difference between the two parties.  When a real constitutional patriot runs for office, the Republican not the Democratic Party is where they succeed.

America Stop Voting For Anti-liberty Leaders

By Anthony Coleman

Without doubt obsessing over Bush has impaired the sensibilities of too many Americans who voted for Obama.  During his campaign Obama told us what his agenda would be; now citizens are shocked when he attempts to implement them.  For instance, his foreign policy is signaling to world leaders that he would rather capitulate than defend this republic.  It’s disturbing in the worse sense.  Why would a freedom based society continue to vote for leaders who are expressly anti-liberty. 

It could be that generations living in the benefits of freedom, without first suffering the loss of it,  can’t really appreciate it enough to pay attention.  Human history has demonstrated fatal cycles of appreciation to apathy to loss and back to appreciation again.  We are certainly living in the consequences of apathy.  I only pray that appreciation takes hold once again.

Too many of our citizens are unaware of the value of freedom which places its protection in jeopardy from the slow erosion brought on by liberalism.   At its core is a God breathed unifying morality that John Adams spoke of when he said;

“Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty.”

"Freedom is indivisible - there is no "s" on the end of it.  You can erode freedom, diminish it, but you cannot divide it and choose to keep "some freedoms" while giving up others."
Ronald Reagan (5/3/1972)

When Christian Organizations Cease To Reflect Christianity

 By Anthony Coleman       It is occurring in major historical denominations, primarily in America, and seemingly oblivious to the biblical truths that are the bedrock of Christianity, organizations have decided to go in the direct opposite path of the basics of our faith.

                                                                                                 
The Episcopal Church along with the United Church of Christ who nullified what influence they had when it became their church policy to abdicate moral leadership and sanctify immorality, can now add to their ranks the Evangelical Lutheran Church; who, as of August 21, 2009 passed a resolution to embrace gay clergy, same sex couples, and no longer declare marriage as “the appropriate place” for sexual relations. 
                                                                                                                 
In its place ELCA uses secular psycho-babble the universalists like to hear such as referring to unwed sex as “associations” or “social trusts” that are “loving” and “committed.” 
                                                                                                                               
Ryan Schwarz; a leader of the Lutheran Coalition for Reform said it most clearly when he said, “The church should not be voting on whether or not to follow the teaching of the Bible.”  
                                                                                                          

According ELCA, any leader involved in same sex relations; as long as the relationship is “life-long and monogamous” can receive recognition and support.  Here again is how organizations attempt to sanitize language so that the obvious escapes you.  If there is virtue in a relationship being life-long and monogamous, wouldn’t it stand to reason that maintaining the historical tradition of a union defined as a man and woman also hold as much or equal virtue?  Normal thinking people would say yes.

If you enforce the life-long (means married to one person for life) and monogamous (means no adultery) position then turn upside down the sexual orientation (even dismissing its historical and traditional weight) who and what is truly being represented?  It certainly isn’t Christianity.After this historic shift, Catherine Ammlung, a member of the Delaware-Maryland Synod said; “What had been the teaching of my church has been reduced to personal opinion.”  And this is where I pose a question; What happens when a Christian organization ceases to reflect Christianity? 

                                                      
It might be instructional to pose another question prior to this one which is; what happens to a Christian organization that causes it to redefine itself?Over the years I have noticed something that researchers talk about.  Even though you lay a solid foundation, you give enough people access to hammers, over time and after enough blows, the foundation will suffer serious damage, even crumble. 
                                                                                                                                 
We have to ask ourselves; how and why were these people with hammers given access to the foundation?  Was it assumed that foundations don’t need to be protected?  Once a foundation has been jack-hammered and broken up, it’s virtually impossible to put it back together.  When they bust up old interstate highways have you noticed that new foundations are laid down?  The old broken pieces end up at a local lake or canal as dam material.    Every generation must be well trained in foundational Christianity.  When this is done we are better equipped to run off those who want to hammer away at our foundation.  If the foundation is safe then our future is safe.  Leaders who do nothing but stand by watching the work of God upended by self-serving hammer-holders must realize that they too will suffer when the foundations crumble underneath our society. 
                                                                                                                                  
When a Christian organization turns a corner and effectively erases its social moral influence in order to blend into the culture, this indicates that it has become saturated among its key decision makers with secular thought, belief and reasoning. Satan is empowered where biblical Spirit-led leadership is absent.  Incremental steps are taken that lull people following the organization into position or belief that the hammer-holders intended.  According to one ELCA hammer-holder, “The ELCA has always had gay ministers; now those and all ministers are free to claim who they are and to have the love and support of a lifelong partner, regardless of orientation or gender identity, which is all we ever asked.”
                                                                                                                     
This is most certainly why Jesus and his leaders taught about the effect of a little leaven (Gal 5:9, Luke 13:21); how it modifies the bread.  When we keep the leaven of pure doctrine operating we give the next generation a good foundation to build on.  However, if Christians are not vigilant about protecting the purity of the faith and defending it in the context of an organization its influence will be sadly but certainly forfeited.  As with the other organizations, ELCA has had over a million members leave the organization over what is viewed as the abandonment of the teachings of the founder Martin Luther.As a light ending to our teaching today, during the Wednesday vote on the policy regarding sex, a tornado struck the area around the convention center. It knocked the cross off the steeple of Central Lutheran Church, just across the street from the center.
                                                                                                                       
Washington Times reporter Julia Duin reported that during the storm ELCA President Mark Hanson read out loud Psalm 121 to calm those in the convention center."We trust the weather is not a commentary on our work," said the Rev. Steven Loy, author of the statement on sexuality, Duin reports.It’s ironic that at a meeting where the decision to disregard the bible is made, when the people feel in jeopardy they retreat to the same bible for solace and comfort.

Hmm.