restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

In Pursuit of Health

Becky Lynn Black  

Many people these days are searching for health…familial, physical, and financial. A high divorce rate, domestic violence, and rebellious children are regular features in the news. In response, many Christian families have circled their wagons and developed ingrown, defensive postures that breed new forms of illness. With the economic downturn, the financial vulnerability of the average American family comes into sharp focus: debt, overspending, runaway charge cards. The number of financial “doctors” and seminars out there is astounding.  To have the American dream, families must get their house in order. And physical sickness is rampant in our society…cancer on every front, heart disease, obesity.  There are a million “cures”…this diet, that supplement, this exercise in meditation.  It has become an obsession!

Where does the pursuit of health fit into God’s design for His people?

I have pondered this issue much in the last weeks as I’ve processed my diagnosis. And this is the conclusion that I’ve come to: Wholeness, Health, Perfect-ness is not compatible with Sin. As long as there is sin in the world, there will be sickness….in families, in finances, in relationships, in bodies.

Only God knows the details of why and how Sin destroys Life. But it does! (I suspect that when we arrive in Heaven, where there is no sin, we will be absolutely amazed at the destruction under which we lived on Earth.)

As I look at Jesus’ life (which is my choice for a model for my own life), I notice what He said about financial health.  “The poor you have with you always.” “Don’t seek after food, clothes, shelter; your Father knows you need these things.” “It is more difficult for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a man who knows he’s rich to get into Heaven (ie. he has an attitude about his riches).”

What I see from these and other verses is this: Financial well-being should be a non-issue for the Christian. That is the Father’s business. Our business is to seek His Kingdom, His righteousness, His way. Our focus is not the American Dream with its big world of possessions and bank accounts and retirement funds. Our focus is beyond this life to the Life beyond, where no stock market destroys the balance sheet, no mold and rust destroy the possessions, and houses don’t need constant maintenance.

Again, looking at Jesus’ life as the model for family relationships, I notice that He repeatedly refused to buckle under to the demands of his own mother when His Father was appointing Him elsewhere. He marched to a drum different than general society, and different even than the “church” scene. He had close relationships with many different types of people, but they never dominated His life. Only the Father dominated His life. And He met regularly with that Father for communion, fellowship, instructions. He was independently dependent/connected to other human beings, but He was utterly dependent upon the Father.

What I see from this is that in our families, we must be very careful not to worship our blood lines. Spouses, children, grandchildren can be wonderful blessings; they also can be terrible distractions from the Father. The same is true of friendships. We must learn the art of being independently dependent/connected, relational without co-dependent, sharing without suffocating. In all things, even family, only the Father must have complete allegiance. 

This has very practical dimensions. Do we leave our estates to ungodly children, or to Kingdom ministries? Do we accommodate sinful behavior (like fornication, drunkenness, drug addiction, habitual anger) under our roofs? Do we accept an unwed partner of a child as we would a spouse of that child? Do we condone marriages with unbelievers?

These are tough situations, but if we are straight about who we serve, who we are REALLY connected to, then the choice is easier, even if it still has its pain. All is lost when we live in such a way that our allegiance to the Father does not reign supreme in our relationships, family or otherwise. All is lost because our light has gone out.

And how was Jesus about His health issues? We know that He was tired, hungry, hurting. We know He faced mental/psychological challenges. Instances of these situations are clearly described in the four Gospels. But there is no reference in any of the Gospels (that I can find) to His concern about diet, or bowel movements, or hygiene, or the effects of stress. We get the impression that He just flowed with Life as it came to Him. I’m fairly certain that IF He had taught much about diligence and particular-ness in these matters, it would have been recorded someplace in the four Gospels.

For myself, as I’ve pondered these things, I’ve asked the Lord “Show me how to think about pursuing physical health.”  And the conclusion I’ve come to is this:

1. Very few things are known with absolute certainty.  The human body is an amazingly intricate work of God.  With all our modern research, after millennia of time, we have barely begun to understand even surface things of how it operates.  So, to say “this is the cure” or “this is the absolute way to be healthy” with any degree of certainty is to fail to understand the deficiency of Man’s knowledge and the magnitude of His creative powers.

2. All approaches have their success stories.  Everyone seems to have a sister, or aunt, or neighbor who did this and this with resultant healing.  Not only with cancer, but with obesity, with heart disease, with any number of physical issues. The truth is that the apparent success had more factors involved than just that particular approach, and those factors are not easily acknowledged.

3. God Himself, as Creator and Sustainer of the Universe (including me), has the power and authority to over-rule His laws in order to accomplish His purposes in and thru me.  In an instant, He can give serious illness, and in an instant, He can heal from serious illness.  The Scriptures have many stories of both instances. Only He holds the keys to health, and He locks/unlocks according to His perfect wisdom.

4. Given all of these issues and the pervasive effect of Sin (both upon physical life and upon our understanding of that life), my focus should not be physical health, but stewardship of whatever health He allows me to have. Stewardship is defined as reasonable management of resources, according to the values and goals and desires of the Owner.  That’s a mouthful! It means that I make decisions, not on the basis of fear or greed or pride, but on the basis of my ultimate accountability to my Creator. It means that my focus is upon that meeting in eternity, when what I chose to do is compared with His purposes, His heartbeat, His values. Is His purpose for me to life in perfect health? No! Despite the “health and wealth” gospel message, God’s purpose is far higher than that!  His purpose is that I live in the reality of His strength, even in the midst of sickness and disease. In that way of living, His Name is glorified as His power is displayed in attitude, in joyfulness, in thankfulness, in sweetness of spirit, in calm trust in the One who cannot change.

5. The Evil One will use anything, even the pursuit of a good thing, to distract us from our ultimate purpose. Bringing Him glory, obeying Him implicitly, following Him wholeheartedly….this is our purpose. How can we fulfill that purpose and simultaneously pursue Health?  “No man can have 2 masters,” Jesus said. Even “good” things can become masters, if we sacrifice to serve them. It is my opinion that often the Evil One gains more advantage over Christians through “good” things than through “evil” things. We must watch out! We must remember that he seeks to destroy us! We must not let anything, any agenda, any person, any program, any goal, any pursuit control us. Only the Lord Jesus has the right to control us.  (How do we know when something is controlling us? Our emotional response at the thought of losing that something is the best gauge I know.  If we panic at the thought of losing our health, our family, our child, our financial base, our job, our whatever…then that thing has become a “god” to us.  It controls us, and we serve it.)

So, am I following a prescribed diet as if it were the Bible truth? No. Am I doing what seems reasonable, based upon what we know about chemotherapy effects and nutrition? Yes. 

And in all the “doings,” my emotions are detached from the doings. My trust, my hope, my peace comes not from my doings. My trust, my hope, my peace rests 100- upon my God, His character, His faithfulness, His sufficiency.

So in the coming days, as fatigue sets in, as nausea overwhelms me, as infections threaten, as my organs suffer “collateral damage” from the chemo, my heart and focus is set. I trust Him to supply what is needed, hour by hour, for the work of that hour. I will walk through the days and weeks and months ahead holding onto Him, and allowing Him to carry me in all my weakness. 

I do not pursue Health. I pursue Him. And I seek His commendation, “Well done, my good and faithful servant.”

September 16, 2009

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

In Praise of “Seabiscuit”

 David Alan Black

“God forbid that I should go to any heaven in which there are no horses.”  Robert Cunninghame-Graham in a letter to Teddy Roosevelt in 1917.

In the daily sandpaper of marriage, family, and work, bruises are inevitable. John Bunyan confessed, “Oh, it is hard continuing believing, continuing loving, continuing resisting all that opposeth.” Jonathan Edwards warned, “The degree of religion…is to be judged by the fixedness and strength of habit that is exercised in affliction.”

All of us carry burdens. But in a sense that’s the good news, because the raw materials for growth come to us in our troubles. Growth is nothing less than positive response to our difficulties. It’s learning to make lemonade out of our lemons, and its recipe includes the fact that lemons can taste really sour.

In the movie Seabiscuit you will find a fellow lemonade maker or two—one even comes in horse flesh—who are finding on their road the same lessons you find on yours. The movie reminded me of several lessons I’ve learned from my four-footed equine companions.

Mutual trust between horse and rider is essential. A horse is basically a lazy thing and will usually try to get his own way. If you show any degree of fear, the horse will eagerly take advantage of you. Thus, if you are nervous while you are working around a horse, he will be nervous. One of the biggest reasons why there is a lack of trust between horse and rider is that most people just do not ride their horses enough. For many, the horse is only a status symbol. When they finally do attempt to ride, they find themselves with a hooligan by the halter. I make it a habit to ride my horses regularly to keep them in the habit of obedience. If they spend too much time in the pasture, their responses get rusty and they are inclined to want to have their own way.

Success can be barriers to more learning. Seabiscuit’s owner may have been satisfied with his horse’s level of proficiency, but his trainer wasn’t. While an owner of this type has a lot to be proud of within his limited sphere, he will have to swallow his pride in order to improve his product. After all, if you’re winning, it hurts to admit that your horse might need some adjustments to improve his ability. But there’s always room for improvement, especially when the motivation is a match race with the nation’s most talented horse.

Every horse is an individual. Just watch Seabiscuit’s jockey as he rides him. He talks to—no, “with”—the horse constantly: words of assurance, encouragement, affection. It is this “bonding” between horse and rider, I think, that makes a rider face all the hard work needed to overcome whatever physical problems his horse may have and to undo the mistakes others have made with him.

Always read a horse. Few people know how to do this as well as Seabiscuit’s jockey and trainer do. Most of us are so used to a mechanical world that we can’t imagine a horse having ideas of his own. But anyone who is serious about becoming a good rider must learn to “read” a horse—to understand his language so that you can listen to him intelligently. I’ve ridden my horses so many times that listening and reacting have almost become reflex actions. A horse’s eyes can tell you a lot (as in the movie), though only on rare occasions should you ever look a horse directly in the eye. Watch their body movements, their tail and their feet. This is the one big secret of expert horsemanship—listening to what your horse says. If you don’t know what he is going to do, you can’t encourage or discourage it.

Never spoil your horse. Some people are too rough on their horses, while others are too easy. Both are horse spoilers. Like most of God’s creatures, horses have a pecking order. What you have to do is to establish that you are one notch above every horse you ride. This doesn’t mean that you have to beat a horse into submission. Horses must be handled firmly, with fair and consistent discipline (again, that’s why regular training is vital). Never let a horse discover that he’s bigger and stronger than you are. The goal is a partnership with your horse, in which you provide the brain power and he provides the motor power. Proof of success is a horse equally keen, disciplined, and attentive both indoors and out.

I’ve never felt sorry for people who didn’t have certain temporal possessions. But I must confess that I really do pity someone who has never known the pleasure of the unique partnership that exists between horse and rider. This is true especially when you’ve had the chance to train up a young horse yourself, when you take him out as you have “made” him, not as someone else, more of a horseman than you, has “fixed him up” for you.

The horse is a very special gift. How to properly handle this quick creature that outweighs you eight to ten times is a unique challenge in life. It always grieves me to hear of a person who mistreats his horse. That’s why I enjoyed Seabiscuit so much, for here’s a movie that shows what is possible when horse and rider are truly in sync.

The German equestrian expert Rudolph Binding once said: “Das Pferd ist dein Spiegel. Es spiegelt dein Temperament. Es spiegelt auch deine Schwankungen” (The horse is your mirror. It mirrors your temperament. It also mirrors your weaknesses). Smugness has never been the genuine horseman’s vice. The human rider, even when mediocre, has a mute companion on whom he relies to make up for his shortcomings. The fact is that my horses may have learned much from me, but I have learned so much more from them.

August 19, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The Importance of Mentoring

 David Alan Black  

The older we get, the more important it is for us to mentor younger Christians. Personal conversion is just the first step in a very long journey. There is a special joy and benefit when “two walk together,” and often one of the two will be a bit further down the road.

I recall my sojourn in Basel when I studied under Prof. Bo Reicke. I will never forget the encouragement it was to be able to meet with him and the example he provided of the wise Christian scholar at work. Paul wrote to his friends in Corinth, “Though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I have become your father in Christ through the Gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15). Where would I be today without my Doktorvater’s guidance and care? We all need a mentor, a “father” who is willing to give time to encourage a younger brother or sister.

Here’s the odd thing. I searched in vain on Google Images for a photo of Prof. Reicke. Though he was perhaps one of the leading New Testament scholars of his generation, his memory is all but forgotten today. When I mention his name to my students they often ask, “Who?” Yet in a very real sense they do know him. For he lives on in his students, and in his students’ students. Alas, in many seminaries and Bible schools, education is simply the dissemination of information, not the impartation of life. For Paul it was otherwise. “We were gentle among you,” he said, “like a nursing mother taking care of her children” (1 Thess. 2:7).

Younger Christians need help like that. And as I look back on my life of 54 years I can see the hand of God providing mentors for me at every stage, whether in Hawaii, California, or Switzerland. In Matthew 28:20 we see Jesus assuring His disciples that He would be with them until the end of time. They could always claim His presence. Jesus’ “incarnational ministry” did not end at the ascension. He still lives on, “fleshed out” in the lives of His people. And so, not surprisingly, the early disciples were keen on developing Christ-like men who in turn would develop Christ-like men, and on and on (2 Tim. 2:2).

How about us? Are people more valuable than programs in our ministry? Our evangelism? Our churches? Our classrooms? Can you think of a young student who today needs the care of an older and wiser saint? “I’m too busy,” you say. “I’ve got publishers’ deadlines to meet.” Jesus never wrote a book as far as we know, but even if He were a prolific author I doubt that He would have put deadlines before people. He was not afraid to stoop, to serve, to be touched, or to touch the untouchable or love the unlovable. And today He wants His work to continue through the lives of men and women who follow Him. Being in His family means building one another up (1 Cor. 14), encouraging one another (Heb. 10:24-25), and equipping one another (Eph. 4:11-16) so that we may be team members and not dead wood.

This may not be the academy’s philosophy, but it is His way.

February 2, 2007

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Immigration Madness: Not Limited to Switzerland!

 David Alan Black 

In many respects, Switzerland has become a staggering old man in the Continent’s family of nations. And it now looks like the Swiss will pay a heavy price for their insane immigration policies in the 60s and 70s.

By the time I arrived in Basel as a doctoral student in 1980, immigration laws had been tightened up considerably, but the strain on the social welfare system had already begun. Today, with a jobless rate of four percent, the damage appears irreparable. Little wonder that in the recent elections the Swiss People’s Party gained ground. The People’s Party is nationalist and isolationist and opposes membership in the European Union. It bitterly opposed Swiss membership in the United Nations last year. According to the Party’s website, illegal immigration remains a major problem in a country in which every fifth resident is a foreigner:

Die Schweiz ist auf Grund ihrer Grösse und ihrer Bevölkerungsdichte kein Einwanderungsland. Dennoch wurde sie in den letzten Jahren zum Ziel vieler Scheinflüchtlinge und illegaler Einwanderer. Der Bundesrat steht dieser Entwicklung konzeptlos und überfordert gegenüber. Wegen der laschen Politik der anderen Parteien hat die Schweiz heute einen der höchsten Ausländer­anteile Europas. In unserem Land ist jeder Fünfte ein Ausländer. Bundesrat und Parlament versuchen, mit massiven Erleichterungen der Einbürgerung die Statistiken zu beschönigen. Die SVP tritt dieser Verschleuderung des Bürgerrechts entgegen. Sie fordert eine Migrationspolitik, mit welcher der Ausländeranteil nicht nur auf dem Papier, sondern tatsächlich gesenkt wird.

My guess is that all of this is a foretaste of things to come in the United States in light of our own immigration follies. An example has been documented by nationally syndicated columnist Phyllis Schlafly in her essay, Rising Costs of Tolerating Illegal Aliens. “While Americans without health insurance struggle with the problem of how to pay for medical care, Mexicans don’t have that problem,” says Schlafly. “They just ride in a Mexican ambulance across the border … and get free medical treatment.”

According to Schlafly, a study conducted by the U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition shows that U.S. hospitals in the border states of Arizona, New Mexico, California, and Texas are spending at least $200 million a year for emergency care to illegal aliens. “In the four border states, 77 hospitals now face a medical emergency,” she wrote. In Arizona, the Cochise County Health Department is spending 30 percent of its annual budget to pay for immigrant care; the Copper Queen Hospital in Bisbee, Arizona, spends two-thirds of its net operating income for such costs; the University Medical Center in Tucson spent $10 million; and the list goes on and on. Many medical facilities are on the verge of bankruptcy. The eventual outcome seems clear: without some kind of reprieve, many border-area medical-care facilities will have to shut their doors.

Next week President Bush is scheduled to meet with Mexico’s President Fox at the Summit of the Americas in Monterrey, Mexico. Mexican officials have complained that the Bush administration has been preoccupied with border security and combating drug trafficking and has neglected immigration policy. In response, Bush is proposing to let foreign workers who have U.S. jobs waiting for them enter America—a move clearly designed to capture Hispanic voters in this year’s election.

No one can deny that illegal immigration is a colossal problem in the United States, with nine to eleven million illegal aliens currently estimated to be in the country. Keep in mind that John Lee Malvo, one of two men convicted in the Washington-area sniper shootings, was a Jamaican who was in the country illegally and was once detained by authorities and released. Efforts to end illegal immigration cannot succeed without eliminating the incentives for it. At the very least we need to stop granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens; withhold work authorization to those with pending asylum claims; establish a system for checking welfare and work eligibility; and, most importantly, end all public benefits for illegal aliens.

If we don’t, the lesson of the Swiss will be lost on us, and it will be too late to put a stop to our immigration madness.

January 7, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Immigration as Class Warfare

Darrell Dow

One issue seldom discussed in polite society is the role current immigration policy plays in exacerbating class cleavages.  There is a clear academic consensus that while immigration plays a surprisingly small role in creating prosperity, it does dramatically redistribute wealth from workers to employers and users of immigrant services.

The unbridled insanity of America’s immigration “debate” is dissected in a recent book, Heaven’s Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy, by Harvard economist George Borjas.  Borjas is widely recognized as academia’s leading scholar on the economics of immigration.  Moreover, he is an immigrant himself, having arrived here from Cuba penniless in 1962.

Nonetheless, as a scholar he is deeply troubled by the consequences of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act and the progeny it has spawned.  Before 1965, immigration was shaped by the national origins quota system, which granted visas primarily based on an immigrant’s country of birth.  As a result, 70- of visas went to three countries–Great Britain, Ireland, and Germany.  However, modifications to the 1965 law established family reunification, and to a lesser extent employment preferences, as the new criteria for admission.

The resulting demographic shifts and subsequent economic costs are summarized by Borjas who exposes the puerile pabulum, senseless clichés, and economic illiteracy underpinning the arguments of immigration enthusiasts.

One myth Borjas explodes is that immigration adds substantial wealth to the American economy.  In fact, as Borjas says:  “All the available estimates suggest that the annual net gain is astoundingly small, less than .1- of GDP.”  In real terms, that translates into approximately $10 billion dollars added to the overall economy, just $30 per person.  It has also been estimated that between $6-$10 billion dollars is remitted to Mexico by immigrants working in the U.S.

But that’s not the end of the story.  The relative skills and economic performance of successive waves of immigrants has continued to decline.  Immigrants arriving on American shores in 1960 had more education and earned more money than natives.  By 1998, the newest arrivals earned 23- less than natives.  They also had acquired two fewer years of education than natives.

As low-skill immigrants have flooded the labor market, opportunities for the least skilled among us have markedly decreased and the most vulnerable Americans have seen their wages decline as a result.  Indeed, Borjas estimates that immigration is responsible for half the decrease observed in the wages of high-school dropouts.

The obvious implication of these facts is that immigration policy as currently constituted has become little more than a wealth redistribution program, shifting resources from the poor to the wealthy without creating aggregate economic growth.  The primary beneficiaries are social, economic, and political elites who manage to reap the benefits of mass immigration while insulating themselves and their families from the consequences.  America’s verbal elite is essentially importing a servant class at no cost to themselves in terms of increased competition.  The lawyers, politicians, business executives, journalists, and editorialists who drive the immigration debate don’t have their livelihoods, not to mention their children’s education, threatened by mass immigration, but they do acquire the cheapest pool guys, house-keepers, and roofers in the Western world.

Support for the current policy encompasses both “competing” ideological camps and spokespersons from virtually every elite institution.  Even leftist political constituencies, who regularly mouth mindless bromides to the god of egalitarianism, have come down on the side of continued mass immigration despite overwhelming evidence that it primarily harms the poor.

For example, the AFL-CIO recently embraced a proposal to grant amnesty to an estimated 6 million illegal aliens, thereby shepherding scores of unskilled workers into the labor market to compete with the most vulnerable Americans.  Doug Dority, head of the United Food and Commercial Worker International Union, said, “We don’t care about green cards, we care about union cards.”  Apparently Mr. Dority is not terribly concerned about the wages of his membership, either.

Black Americans, another prominent part of the Democratic Party’s coalition, have long been the most prominent casualties of open immigration.  For generations, they have been passed over by countless immigrant streams striving to reach the American Dream.  Hence a long line of black statesmen and intellectuals from George Washington Carver and W. E. B. Dubois to A. Philip Randolph have been immigration restrictionists.  Yet today there is a conspiracy of silence among African-American leaders who have sold out the black working class because more immigration insures additional fodder for the identity politics and multiculturalism propagated by the black elite.

Even local elites are in on the act.  My local paper, the Louisville Courier-Journal, rhapsodized in a September 7, 2000 editorial that “immigrants do a lot of jobs that most native-born Americans don’t want to do” and “are enriching everything from our cuisine to our school curriculum.”  Evidently the editor’s primary concern is having a plethora of ethnic eateries that they can frequent along Bardstown Road, our local hot spot.

Among political conservatives and libertarians the debate is nearly as sterile.  The Wall Street Journal, mouthpiece of America’s business establishment, has consistently editorialized on behalf of open borders, a policy supported by its corporate patrons.  No need to worry though; after all, the average bloke thrown into dog-eat-dog competition with cheap immigrant labor probably is not a subscriber to the Journal, anyway.

George Bush’s original labor secretary-designate Linda Chavez, another right-wing ideologue who had to step aside after it was revealed she had housed an illegal alien in contravention of the law and “misled” the FBI in the process, wrote last April that, “Next time you’re wondering whom to thank for this booming economy, thank an immigrant.”  Ms. Chavez’s preposterous and cartoonish depiction of recent economic history would be laughable were it not so infuriating.  She has nary a word of praise for the entrepreneurial class or the amazingly productive American worker.  Like so many members of the American elite, Ms. Chavez enthusiastically endorses mass immigration as a ready remedy for her servant problem.  Hey, why should she be expected to clean her palatial Bethesda home?

President Bush himself was asked repeatedly about immigration during the Republican primaries and responded wistfully and solemnly that “family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande River.”  Unfortunately the “education president” did not see fit to expound further on his brilliant formulation of public policy. 

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has also endorsed mass immigration as a “safety valve” to keep inflation (wages?) at a “manageable” level.  Greenspan seems to have forgotten Milton Friedman’s maxim that inflation is “everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon.”  In other words, if St. Alan sees inflation in the economy he need look no further than his bathroom mirror to finger the culprit and should cease scapegoating native Americans for his policy failures.

America is indeed a generous country with a remarkable ability to absorb and assimilate new immigrants.  But there are limits, and those limits necessitate tough choices.  During the 1990s, ten million immigrants came to the United States legally.  That doesn’t even take into account the millions more that arrived illegally, flagrantly violating American law and sovereignty.  Reducing that number by half, or even three-fourths, where historic levels of immigration have been, while putting a premium on attracting highly-skilled immigrants would still make the U.S. the largest recipient of immigrants and would represent a return to a sane and moral policy.

July 23, 2004

Darrell Dow writes from Jeffersonville, Indiana where he works as a statistician.  A misanthropic Paleoconservative, Darrell is the husband of Kathy, and the father of Joshua and Andrew.  To see pictures of the boys and get a small glimpse into the Dow house, visit the family website.  Darrell also maintains a website and a new blog.  Darrell can be contacted here.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

If Only Bush Had the Moral Courage of the Pope!

 David Alan Black

The enormous amount of press given to George W. Bush’s recent statements on gay marriage surprised me. It’s really no big deal.

Professional politicians operate on the following premise: Give and take on principle, but hold on to offices. The Christian or anybody else who gets into politics must understand that the name of the game is to win.

That’s why Republican leaders can verbalize pro-family positions and at the very same time abandon the moral high ground. If Bush or anyone in his cabinet really believed that homosexuality was evil, the result would be a mighty, relentless wave of justice and virtue. They would not stop until there was a complete restoration of the time-honored values of this nation, the complete fall of liberalism, and God’s blessings once again upon the land.

The Log Cabin Republicans—the nation’s largest gay Republican organization—certainly doesn’t seem to feel threatened by Bush’s statements. The LCR recently praised the selection of Republican National Committee Chairman Gov. Marc Racicot as chairman of the Bush-Cheney re-election committee.

“Marc Racicot has been one of the most successful chairmen in the history of the Republican National Committee. The election results under his watch demonstrate that the GOP has made great strides under Governor Racicot’s tenure,” said Log Cabin Republican Executive Director Patrick Guerriero.

Translation: It’s all about election results.

“Governor Racicot and President George Bush understand that when the GOP is committed to tolerance, inclusion and a big tent for our party, we win. And win big. We look forward to working with them both to assure the Republican Party stays the majority party in America,” continued Guerriero.

Translation: It’s all about winning big.

Log Cabin Republicans also are pleased with the selection of Ed Gillespie as the new RNC chairman and Maria Cino as deputy chairman. Miss Cino received the “Spirit of Lincoln” award in 2001 from the Log Cabin Republicans. The “Spirit of Lincoln” award is the highest honor LCR bestows on individuals who work to make tolerance and inclusion a permanent part of the Republican Party

“Both Ed and Maria understand that you build a party by addition not subtraction. They are smart and effective political strategists. Their leadership of the Republican National Committee bodes well for all Republicans,” said Mark Mead, political director of Log Cabin Republicans and former deputy regional political director for the Republican National Committee.

Alas, if only the president had the courage of the Pope. Yesterday the Vatican vigorously condemned same-sex marriage and urged lawmakers around the world, whether Catholic and non-Catholic alike, to defend the “common good” of society by fighting the legalization of such unions.

In a 12-page set of guidelines signed by Pope John Paul II, the Vatican said that gay relationships are immoral and deviant, and that only traditional marriages can fulfill God’s plan for human reproduction. It also said that Catholic politicians are “obliged by moral duty” to vote against bills that grant status to gay unions, and to lobby publicly against such legislation. All political leaders, regardless of their religion, who are “committed to promoting and defending the common good of society” should follow suit, it said. Failing to block such laws, politicians must work to have them repealed.

“There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family,” the document said. “Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law.” The document also opposed adoptions by gay couples, saying children raised in such households are deprived of mother and father.

Translation: To fight against legitimizing homosexuality is the moral duty of anyone who is fully committed to God’s Word.

I don’t understand why it’s so great to have a president who mouths pro-family platitudes but who compromises his beliefs in order to “win.”

What’s even more puzzling to me is why the American people allow Republicans to gorge themselves at the banquet table just because they’ve been willing to buy conservatives off with a few scraps of concessions.

August 1, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

If Liberty Mattered, We Wouldn’t Even Be Talking About School Vouchers

 David Alan Black 

School vouchers are back in the news, now that a Senate committee voted 17-12 on September 4 for an amendment to permit D.C. to inaugurate a voucher program for low-income families.

Compassionate conservatives are exuberant in their support of yet another attempt to “fix” the public education fiasco in America. While I’m not surprised that the idea of school vouchers has the backing of Big Government Bush and his cohorts, who eagerly latch on to every conceivable government solution to problems like lousy classroom instruction, I think my conservative friends are making a big mistake to go with big government on this issue just because it’s politically expedient.

The philosophical problem of big government is not a side show in the circus we call the federal bureaucracy; it’s the main event. If you as a parent feel your child is trapped in an under-performing government school, I can guarantee you that a government-sponsored voucher system will only add to your woes. Never forget Black’s first rule of government: Every dollar of federal funding has a sizeable string attached to it, and, with vouchers, the strands that are affixed are more subtle than with the typical government-sponsored “solution.” Nevertheless, though it may take longer than with most federal programs, once the government’s fingers touch the dough, it can and will insist that its own “standards”—as interpreted by its own educational bureaucrats—be followed.

To put it another way, federal money for education means federal control of education. Is it so hard to see this? If you still don’t believe me, may I ask you to go to The Alliance for the Separation of School and State website run by Marshall Fritz? Fritz shows clearly that school vouchers will only serve to change the culture of private schools to be public school look-alikes. Eventually, he argues, it will be impossible to send your children to religion-based schools at all. Are tax credits, then, the solution? Again, Marshall Fritz has the answer: “Some think tax-credits are better than vouchers, but ultimately they are only camouflaged vouchers. Charter schools are just public schools on a longer leash. A dog on a leash is still a dog on a leash.”

As always in American politics, the real issue boils down to this matter of freedom. To me, the puzzler in all this discussion about vouchers is why conservative Christian leaders are celebrating government coercion when they should be pointing to the wisdom of Fritz’s position. Conservatives must see that good education will never be based on government taking taxes paid by hard working people and giving it to poor parents who will thus be enabled to leave public schools they weren’t paying for in the first place. 

I also want to know this: When will evangelical conservative Christian parents realize that the best and easiest way to avoid the tyranny of government education is by removing their children from the public schools altogether?

September 8, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

If John Kerry Was President

John Notgrass

In the 2004 election, American voters face a scary situation. Just think what might happen if John Kerry is elected President…

If John Kerry was President, he might allow abortion to continue with government endorsement and funding.

If John Kerry was President, he might appoint pro-sodomy and pro-abortion people to high government positions.

If John Kerry was President, he might corrupt American schools by sending them more Federal funds and regulations.

If John Kerry was President, he might station your sons and daughters around the world to fight someone else’s sons and daughters.

If John Kerry was President, he might increase federal police powers in the name of national security.

If John Kerry was President, he might approve campaign finance “reform” that gives extra advantages to incumbents.

If John Kerry was President, he might favor giving amnesty to illegal aliens.

If John Kerry was President, he might encourage Congress to send more of your money to other countries in the form of foreign aid.

What makes it even scarier is that George Bush has already done all of these things! But many “conservatives” only seem to care about these things when “liberals” do them. If a “conservative” President ignores the Constitution and disregards God’s moral instructions, his “conservative” supporters generally grin and bear it. Please don’t vote for John Kerry, but please don’t vote for George Bush!

Thank God we don’t have to vote for the lesser evil. The Constitution Party is running candidates who believe that life is precious and who believe that government powers should be limited. We need representatives who are bound to principle rather than party. We need leaders who will work to protect and restore the valuable provisions of our Constitution. If John Kerry was President, I’d probably be disappointed with his leadership. George Bush is President, and I am disappointed. That’s why I support Michael Peroutka for President.

May 11, 2004

John Notgrass lives in Tennessee and is currently a student in the University of Life. He works with his parents in their family business, The Notgrass Company. He is a regular columnist for Home School Digest and writes and performs perform music. He may be reached for comment here.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

If I Ever Accept an Invitation to the White House, You Can Throw My Columns in the Trash!

 David Alan Black 

“These ought ye to have done, and not leave the other undone” (Matthew 23:23).

The will of God is never done perfectly here on earth as it is in heaven. We shall not realize faultless performance this side of Paradise but we must not wait until we get to heaven to begin such experience of it as we can have here.

One day Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, who were very zealous in observing lesser religious matters such as tithing but were neglecting the greater matters of judgment, mercy, and faith. They were experts in majoring on the minors and He was exhorting them to put first things first without neglecting the secondary. He knew just how easy it is for the good to become the enemy of the best.

This is a common failing of Christians. We settle for a good meeting at church, a nice service that costs little and therefore amounts to little. We may not engage in bad things but we become so entangled in a multitude of little compromises for the sake of expediency that we lose our effectiveness in the kingdom. It is infinitely harder to compel believers out of this state than to arouse sinners from their evil condition!

The other day eight prominent “pro-life” evangelicals met with President Bush in the Oval Office following the partial-birth abortion ban signing ceremony. One of them wrote, “In this meeting, President Bush gallantly declared that his administration would put all of its resources behind the partial-birth abortion ban in the courtroom…. After having a wonderful time of fellowship with President Bush, the president asked if we could all join hands and pray that God will bless our efforts to preserve life in our land.” The pastor concluded, “What an astounding moment this was for me personally. Standing there in the Oval Office I felt suddenly humbled to be in the presence of a man — our president — who takes his faith very seriously and who seeks the prayers of his friends as he leads our nation.”

Unfortunately the president cannot so easily pass the buck, as though the Sixth Commandment were broken only when evil men commit murder through partial-birth abortion. The Word of God thunders at the vain use of His name in religious pretense perhaps more than at other forms of this iniquity. One would think that these eight men would have been filled with fear and trepidation and would have cried out to God in repentance of behalf of so-called “pro-life” politicians who have done nothing in 30 years to overturn Roe v. Wade! The “legalized” murder of 4,000 innocent children every day screams out the obscenity of our nation. If God did not allow Pharaoh, Herod, or Hitler to escape judgment for murdering innocent children, how much more will He hold accountable the leaders of a country who had the power to stop this atrocity but failed to do so!

Between January 30, 1933 and May 8, 1945, six million Jews perished under Nazi tyranny for no other reason than the fact that they were Jews. Between 1973 and 2002, 43 million unborn children perished under American tyranny for no other reason than the fact they were unwanted by their parents. This is no time to celebrate pyrrhic victories in our nation’s capital. It is time to break up fallow ground. It is time to replace our lullaby crooners in the pulpits of our land with prophets in the watchtowers who are not afraid to tell the whole truth: that what we call abortion is nothing less than the utter repudiation of God’s holy law for the law of sin and death.

John Piper once asked, “What do you think disqualifies a person from holding public office? I believe that the endorsement of the right to kill unborn children disqualifies a person from any position of public office. It’s simply the same as saying that the endorsement of racism, fraud, or bribery would disqualify him—except that child-killing is more serious than those.” Then he concluded, “These reflections have confirmed my conviction never to vote for a person who endorses such an evil—even if he could balance the budget tomorrow and end all taxation.”

My friends, devotion to Christ means loyalty at any cost and intolerance of anything that smacks of unfaithfulness. I believe Satan has scored a greater victory with the strategy of compromise than with outright hostility. How easy it is to be engaged in a multitude of lesser religious activities and yet fail to observe the greater matters of God’s program and purpose and pattern!

Frankly, I’m glad to be someone who has absolutely no clout with the power-brokers in Washington. In fact, if I’m ever invited to the White House—and accept—you’ll know it’s time to throw my columns in the trash!

November 11, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is currently finishing his latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

If At First You Don’t Secede…

Matthew R. Gamel   

If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.

George W. Bush

Many have asked for my opinion regarding the restoration of liberty throughout the United States. My typical response is that it is nearly impossible to remedy our corrupted, corporate/special-interest-driven, godless, secular, globalist federal leviathan located in Babylon on the Potomac, DC.  Our government is so centralized and so large that any attempt to conform it and our leaders (both Republicans and Democrats) to the United States Constitution is doubtful at best.

It is arguable that constitutional law died in April of 1865 at Appomattox with the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia. Shortly after the surrender, General Robert E. Lee correctly foreshadowed how this nation would proceed longitudinally.  In response to a letter that Lord Acton wrote to him on November 4, 1866, Mr. Lee wrote:

I can only say that while I have considered the preservation of the constitutional power of the General Government to be the foundation of our peace and safety at home and abroad, I yet believe that the maintenance of the rights and authority reserved to the states and to the people, not only essential to the adjustment and balance of the general system, but the safeguard to the continuance of a free government. I consider it as the chief source of stability to our political system, whereas the consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.

Mr. Lee accurately gave a description of our current foreign policy, which is nothing more than massive political and military imperialism to expand the godless Empire and preserve the New World Order. Likewise, our current domestic policy daily strips law-abiding citizens of their constitutional rights in the name of “security” and almost always tends to favor special and corporate interest. There are absolutely no morals in our corrupted leaders and consequently, our laws have been maligned and perverted in the name of diversity, pluralism, and multiculturalism.

Although I am apt to conclude that the situation will not improve, I certainly do not believe it is impossible for God to change the hearts of many here in America. Yet I’m not too confident that He plans on doing this anytime soon for the simple reason that, according to the Scriptures, He has already given countless individuals over to a reprobate mind to do those things which are not “fitting,” as the King James Version puts it. Christians today are often concerned about God’s coming judgment yet few seem to ponder the judgment that is already here. The fact that our Creator has given the minds of this once great nation over to perversion, corruption, and greed is a sign that we are being judged now. The people have desired not to worship the one true living God and have replaced that with Yankee materialism, pragmatism, the satanic Do as Thou Wilt philosophy of Alistair Crowley, and secular humanism. Because of this, our God has sovereignly left individuals to their own destruction.

Because liberty can never exist when there is no responsibility and morality among the people, it is doubtful that we will ever, as a whole, see liberty in this nation again. Charles Spurgeon referred to the act of a church embracing the modernist philosophy of his day as entering what he called the “down-grade” and commented that once a church embarked on such a path, it is doubtful that it will again return to healthy doctrine. I believe that this same principle might be applied to our government as well; ironically, most of our churches today have embarked on the “down grade” by embracing erroneous teachings and worldly philosophies. Consequently, there is no one in the church holding our government accountable and preaching the truth about current events from the pulpits, and so our government naturally tends to move in that same direction. 

Thomas DiLorenzo argues (and I believe rightly) that America began to slip down this “point-of-no-return” during the War of Northern Aggression, which is evidenced when one observes that the blatant usurpations of the Empire continue to worsen as the years go by. This unconstitutional war was merely a symptom of what was occurring; the Radical Republicans and Lincoln with his Whig ideology never intended to constrain themselves to the Constitution. Lincoln simply set a precedent that has never been reversed. In fact, our would-be dictators continue to stretch the limits of the already unconstitutional power they continue to usurp.

Question: what is worse than a godless despotic Empire similar to the one we have here? Well, quite frankly, a godless despotic Empire whose citizenry has been propagandized into believing that they are actually free. To call whatever it is we have here “freedom” is to make a mockery of law and order, our Constitution, our founding principles, and the men who risked their lives to secure true liberty, not some totalitarian Empire. 

So what is the solution to the problem?

I believe that the only remaining solution is for a confederation of likeminded states to withdraw their consent from the Empire and to peacefully secede. The best place to start concerning the restoration of the Republic that I long to see again is to completely reform the republic among a new confederation of states that sovereignly consent to cede to this new confederation (which would imply secession should the new confederation turn sour).  I am aware that this is a dirty word in the minds of many but am confident that this word will be appearing more and more in the near future. There are already movements that span the political spectrum in Alaska, Hawaii, Vermont, South Carolina (and just about every state the League of the South has a presence in), and New Hampshire, just to name a few. I have even come across several liberals who have suggested similar measures as well.

While I don’t intend to discuss the legality of secession as it relates to the Jeffersonian theory of politics (this is an entire doctorial dissertation in itself), I will quickly pose a serious question to those who might not be convinced that such is or should be a viable option. The Empire will obviously contend that such an act is illegal and will paradoxically mutter that such an act is in violation of the Constitution (while at the same time failing to give any convincing legal argument, just like Lincoln and his goonies). Yet, how can one trust an institution concerning matters of legality relating to constitutional law when such an institution operates illegally daily and fails to constrain itself to its own Constitution? I suppose this situation might be likened to a student who has flunked out of medical school giving advice to a world-renowned physician. To take the advice of the student over the physician would be ludicrous. Likewise, it’s absolutely ludicrous that the Empire should dictate what is constitutional and what is not when it clearly violates the plain text of the constitution daily, contending that it is a “living, breathing document.” This essentially means that the document is dead because it is arbitrary, for the Empire can read whatever it wants to into the plain text of the Constitution.

One might then ask: how would secession ever be brought about? I submit that the answer lies in two phases: cultural secession, and political secession. Cultural secession is nothing more than withdrawing one’s self from this narcissistic Yankee garbage culture that festers itself all over the fruited plain. Mr. Daniel New of the Texas League of the South refers to this as “abjuring the realm.” This can be accomplished by withdrawing one’s consent from every form of dependence on the Empire. Allow me to suggest the following:

Take your television out to the shooting range.  This is quite symbolic of the refusal to further let the establishment elites tell you what to think while at the same time facilitating a perfect means to sharpen your accuracy with your pistol/rifle of choice.

Pull your children from the government propaganda mills guised as “public schools.” Public education is a communist goal and has served two basic purposes ever since their proliferation in Prussia in the mid-1700s: political indoctrination, and social engineering. Home schooling is preferential but just about anything is preferential to these government whorehouses masquerading as institutions of learning.

Support only local and community owned businesses. Withdraw your consent from the Yankee mega-corporations and only give them your patronage if there is absolutely no other alternative. Do your research here – be careful not to give your business to any corporation that gives portions of profit to special interest groups (good luck finding such a company). A good example would be the Home Depot, as it donates portions of profit to gay and lesbian organizations. The only drawback is that these mega-corporations usually drive out the little man by offering better prices. However, these are the same corporations that control everything; by giving them your business you are demonstrating that you are dependent upon them and, as stated, the goal here is independence. It is better to pay a little more and support your local businesses that are more apt to be owned and operated by common folk like you and me than it is to give your business to these corporate conglomerates who control our government, exploit their workers, exploit free trade by usurping American jobs, and exploit the perversities of global “capitalism.” Besides, if independence is the goal, it is better to keep money in the local community than to give it to these Yankee mega-corporations who take their profits back to New York City and away from our rural areas and small towns.

If possible, get at least 50 acres of land. This serves several purposes. One, it prevents these mega-corporations from expanding their corporate empires into our rural areas; basically, it keeps our rural areas rural. Second, it gives individuals an opportunity to grow their own food and to do things that cannot normally be done in these Yankee urban wastelands, which in turn makes us less dependent on the Empire. Third, it gives families a commodity. Land is something that typically does not depreciate in value, and I anticipate that land prices will continue to rise in the future.

Although this is difficult and not something I have been able to do just yet, try to remove your dependence from the Federal Reserve Note as much as possible. Our monetary and economic system facilitates the moral chaos of our day because it is dishonest, serves only to benefit the elite, and keeps us dependent on the Empire and its corporate conglomerates. Remember that the name “Federal Reserve” is a double paradox; it is neither a federal institution, nor is it any kind of reserve. Rather, it is a private corporation that is operated solely for profit. Try using honest alternatives such as the Liberty Dollar, which is 100- backed and redeemable in gold or silver. Moreover, try to give your patronage to those businesses that accept alternatives such as the Liberty Dollar.

If you are in debt, make it your first priority to get out of it. This is one of the ways I have become dependent on the Empire (those darned teenage years and days as an undergraduate). Never, and I repeat NEVER use credit. Credit is dishonest and is the direct cause of inflation because credit is inflation; you have to realize that with credit, you are paying off a debt with a hierarchy of more debt. Credit assumes the nonexistent value of the Federal Reserve Note by culminating nonexistent arbitrary amounts of Federal Reserve Notes in one’s name. It is purely a philosophical abstraction – wealth is not something that is psychological or philosophical; it is physical.

Avoid giving any kind of business to federal agencies. For example, if you must ship a package, do not do so through the Imperial post office. Instead of sending a written letter, make a phone call or, even better, send an email. Check out and consider joining the League of the South or the John Birch Society.

Most important, realize that you or I cannot do anything without Christ Jesus. It is He who is our strength, and if independence is ever achieved it will be He who graciously grants it to us.

This is merely a sampling of suggestions, and I am not pretending that any of this will by any means be either trivial or easy. I am still working through many of the basic ones I listed, and some obviously don’t apply to me yet because I don’t have children. But if the second phase is ever to occur, we must demonstrate that we are capable of willingly withdrawing ourselves from the current system.

The second phase is that of political secession and is brought about by the people of a state through statewide and local elections. The people elect constitutionalists and God-fearing men into office who vow to uphold and keep the federal and state constitution and to be servants of the people who elected them into office. Secession is not an edict of any one person – rather it is to be enacted by the people with cooperation from the governor and state legislature.

Contrary to popular opinion, secession does not involve the use of violent force and is not any type of overthrowing of the federal government. I am against the violent overthrow of any government (ironically though, the Empire thinks it can violently overthrow any regime that the UN and it does not approve). It is simply withdrawing from the already existing federal government through the existing political means of a state. Some consider secession rebellion, but we must remember that rebellion can only occur against lawful authority. Resistance to tyranny cannot be rebellion because there is usually no lawful authority to rebel against!

I believe that a legal case can be easily made for secession, but even if this were not the case we as Christians are never to submit to a law or edict that directly contradicts the Law of God. Just about everything the Empire does, has done, and will continue to do is dishonest, wicked, and almost always unbiblical. As John Weaver puts it, we have been so brainwashed that we don’t realize that civil rulers can rebel against the rule of law as well. Also, it might help to remember that the first century church was not persecuted because they blindly submitted to every edict that came from the mouth of Caesar.

The important thing to keep in mind here is that we cannot have political secession without cultural secession. I suppose it could occur pragmatically but I do not believe that it would have the desired effect. It would be analogous to jumping into an incredibly cold pool without first gradually entering into the water one step at a time. We must begin to withdraw our families and ourselves from this evil culture that pervades us. In fact, Biblically we are called not to be of this world, and it would be an awesome demonstration to the unbelieving world if Christians would simply refuse to consent to this Yankee materialism and this garbage culture. All it takes is for the people of God to draw a line in the sand.

We are not called to be Christian pacifists; as I mentioned, the first century church was not persecuted because they casually sat around. They were persecuted because they refused to consent to the unlawful and unbiblical rulings of an unjust Empire. In fact, in the first War for Independence in 1776, it was the preachers that the British hated more than the common soldier because they were the ones who were the most vocal about the war and were in favor of it. We have lost this mentality and, unfortunately, the church seems to believe that our only role to the civil government is undying, blind submission.

Fortunately for us, there is still time to change this, but we ought to stop sitting around saying that it doesn’t matter because it does.  God is ultimately in control but He always works through His people. David defeated Goliath against all odds not because David said, “Well, I have no chance of winning and God will send lightning from heaven to smite Goliath if He desires.” I must, however, concede that there are times when pragmatism can offer some new insights. What to do if at first we don’t secede? Well, my friends, we must try, try again.

Endnote

I believe that the “Bushism” quoted at the beginning of this essay is probably one of the most truthful things to come out of the President’s mouth. He said this when he signed HR 4613 into law. A transcript may be found at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040805-3.html

August 30, 2004

Matt Gamel is a graduate student at Texas A&M and eventually desires to go to seminary to study to be a biblical scholar. He may be reached for comment here.

Back to daveblackonline