Recent Articles
Should Mrs. Hauser be prosecuted?
May 21, 2009 Governmental Reach Leave a comment
One of questions that has arisen in the case of the 13-year-old boy and his mom who are on the run after the government decided to start parenting is whether or not the mother should be prosecuted for a crime. Unfortunately for her, she knew what she was doing in fleeing and missing a court appearance she was required to make. We live in a land where it is expected that its citizens follow the law of it by participating in the justice system and accepting the decisions made there (certainly while appealing any decisions that we think are wrongly made). Therefore, I think government must prosecute her, upon finding her in this country, just like they would anyone else in that case.
That said, I think a strong case can be made in her defense that this was merely a case of self-defense. Was her or her son’s life put in danger by the decision of the court, which ultimately led her to flee? No. In her mind, however, that decision did put her and her son’s eternal soul in danger, and thus it was worth going to any length to preserve that.
These are the kinds of problems that arise when government sticks their collective noses into decisions they have no business being involved in. I still hold out hope that the family will change their minds, while there is time, and have the boy treated. I think the court system will be somewhat lenient with the mother if she returns. Still, I say this as someone who does not believe chemotherapy is intrinsically evil, and I hope most that this family follows their conscience while seeking Truth.
Where is the tipping point?
May 20, 2009 Five Non-Negotiable Issues, Governmental Reach, Obama Administration Leave a comment
By now, most everyone has heard the story of the 13-year-old from Sleepy Eye, Minnesota. Daniel Hauser’s parents claim that is against their religious beliefs to undergo a chemotherapy treatment for the disease that has a relatively successful treatment. Daniel backs up his parents’ claim, and says he wishes to forego that treatment. A court has since ruled that he should receive treatment and Daniel’s mom has taken him and fled their hometown, also missing a court appearance.
This is a terribly sad situation. First off, I want to state that if I were in the place of the Hauser parents (oh, God, please forbid) I would want treatment for my child. I think medicinal remedies are a gift from God when used in truthful and moral ways. The Hausers, though, do not believe in using anything that “attacks” the body. Now, due to their fear of having government and court decisions imposed upon them and their religion, there is a widening search for them as they have gone on the run.
From a Christian’s standpoint, this is a very troubling situation. As our nation has taken a turn for the worse under the Obama Administration in terms of life issues, I have had several discussions with friends and family about the very real possibility that Christians are going to have to, as obligated by what is most important to them – Christ, fight against government in order to preserve Truth. I think there is roughly one non-violent solution, and that is what is currently being employed: make a run for it. Upon the police or FBI showing up at your doorstep, though, what would you do? At what point would you be able justify an action under the umbrella of self-defense in order to prevent government from infringing on your religious beliefs?
Government no longer has any regard for religion, and there is only such a thing as a separation of church from state (the state feels no need to keep out of the business of church). Government has been slowly but steadily picking a fight with Christians and, while many Christians have simply given way to government and pop culture, there is a large contingent of Christians who simply will not give in. These are Christians who will even go to martyrdom in order to save their own souls. These are Christians who realize that giving in to government in this life could endanger their eternal life, the life that is truly important to them.
Here’s rooting for Daniel Hauser and his family. I pray for the healing hand of God to touch Daniel, and I pray that his family’s wishes are kept at the forefront of what is important. Government only lives in this finite, earthly world. Our souls live on forever.
Today’s Editorials
May 19, 2009 Obama Administration Leave a comment
A quick glance at RealClearPolitics.com and the list of newspaper editorials:
- Major Problems with U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposal – Financial Times
- ‘Cost-Control’ Means Rationing Health Care – Wall Street Journal
- Premature Optimism About the Economy – The Nation
- Despite Success, Obama & Dems Close School Choice Program – USA Today
Regardless of what Jesse Ventura thinks, this does not seem to indicate progress from our President and his administration.
Never get used to it
Apr 22, 2009 Five Non-Negotiable Issues Leave a comment
Roughly 1.5 million babies are murdered every day (that we know of) via abortion. NEVER get used to that number. That’s 150 incidents the size of the September 11th terror attacks…EVERY YEAR!
Are conservatives losing the polling war?
Mar 14, 2009 Governmental Reach 1 Comment
I was caught off guard this morning by a phone poll from an public education organization. I always hate to turn them down because there are politicians, like Obama, who value popularity greatly and develop policy around polls. I know it isn’t right, but it’s the way it is. My main goal with these polls is to say that:
- Public education is overfunded
- Public education is not providing the skills needed to succeed in this world
- We need a voucher system that allows for some incentive for schools to do better and attract students (or get out of the business)
- I’m disappointed that alternative lifestyles, for which there is significant evidence that they are hurting people and society overall, are presented in a way that is equal to those lifestyles that have been the foundation for good, working societies
At one point I was asked the following question:
Do you believe that public education is adequately funded, somewhat adequately funded, somewhat inadequately funded, or inadequately funded?
I proceeded to tell the person polling me (fortunately it wasn’t a machine) that I thought that public education was terribly overfunded and I wasn’t sure which of the four categories that fit in. I suppose I should have said it was adequately funded, though I didn’t want to give the idea that I was happy about the amount of tax dollars taken from me to achieve far less than private education was doing (on far fewer dollars). I think it was ultimately decided that my answer should be inadequately funded. Surely this will look, in the final numbers, like I was one of the people willing to give more money to “improve education for our children.” Of course, there were other answers that got to the crux of this, but public education advocates will surely use the better of the two numbers.
This led me to wonder: Are public polls skewed to give the impression that conservatives and libertarians sometimes agree with ultra-liberal views? Are the questions designed such that no answer would fit the conservative/libertarian mindset very well, and so we are left to choose one of the others, all of which can be spun to oppose our actual viewpoint on the issue?
I would appreciate your comments on this.
“Straw men” arguments
Feb 25, 2009 Obama Administration Leave a comment
Karl Rove’s recent article in the WSJ pin-points one of the major stumbling blocks for Americans in their desire to truly want to believe what Obama is feeding us: we don’t know who “they” are. It’s one of my pet peeves, and when I catch myself doing it I try to stop and spell out who I am talking about, but it does not further your argument to throw out a generic “they” when citing support for your side of an argument. It seems with Obama at the helm that Michael Steele, Rush, Hannity, and other conservative leaders are going to have to continually press Obama to tell us who “they” are, so that “they” can defend themselves. It is only when he either cites specific people or forgets that tactic and gets down to having some ideas of his own that we will either start to believe him, or finally determine that he is the fraud that many of us think he is. We know the media isn’t going to do the work, and instead will use terms like “general consensus” and “widely believed” to try to represent the collective American idea. Truth is, the current picture has Obama looking like the ultimate straw man.
Spurning the important tasks at hand
Feb 25, 2009 Governmental Reach Leave a comment
The incredibly expensive project to build “PolarNet” has failed. And, really, this isn’t a simple matter of bad timing, or even “readiness,” but rather something that should not even enter the minds of our elected officials. The government should only be concerned about core services — things EVERYONE needs — and even in those cases make sure that they really have their noses in the right business. Stick to filling pot-holes, and leave the rest to private entities, who provide all of these services more dependably, cheaper, and more efficiently. This applies even to times of economic boom, for projects like this are a sure way to hurt the economy that makes these projects possible, yet ill-advised.
Ignoring History
Feb 13, 2009 Blogging's Best Leave a comment
Dan McLaughlin points out a story about Boston College and crucifixes in the classroom, and a particularly ridiculous quote from one of its students:
But sophomore Alex LoVerde, 20, believes a crucifix “pushes the Catholic religion” and does not belong in a classroom. “I think the Jesuit tradition is more of openness and tolerance,” LoVerde said. “I think that an overt display of crucifixes is not what the Jesuits would have had in mind.”
Surely the Jesuit tradition is more about Jesus, for whom it is named, than about openness and tolerance. And surely the message of the Jesuit tradition is about openness and tolerance for Christ’s message above all other things. The harm done here is the person, like this sophomore, who are not open to that message. Surely there are other schools, with far less tradition, where a person like LoVerde would not even have to consider this idea. There are plenty of godless state schools to choose from, for instance. Besides, haven’t Jesuit schools historically (traditionally) had crucifixes in their classrooms?
They aren’t your ordinary Republicans
Feb 10, 2009 Governmental Reach, Obama Administration Leave a comment
There has been quite a bit of talk from disgusted conservatives over the votes of Senators Specter, Collins, and Snowe. I’m disgusted, too, but there are a few considerations to be made.
1. These aren’t your ordinary Republicans, and that might just be part of the territory, literally. Consider that both Snowe and Collins are from Maine and that this is likely the only form of “Republican” that can be elected in these areas, at least at this time. Specter has been around a while and for whatever reason keeps getting re-elected. Again, there is nothing to suggest we are going to go from him to an ultra-conservative replacement. Sometimes we get jipped in the deal, and this is one of those times.
2. We need these people on other issues. Regardless of what anyone says, a guy like Arlen Specter was likely to go along with this joke of a stimulus bill. I didn’t know tons about Collins or Snowe, but Specter has routinely pulled these kinds of stunts out of his hat at big moments. Perhaps it’s so that when running for election he can boast of “reaching across the aisle” (as if one’s true constituents really want to hear that — how about “doing what’s right and best” as an option?). Still, there are other things that come up including, yes, bigger things like Supreme Court nominations. Specter will soon “owe us one” when it comes to the (very likely) situation where we are going to have to filibuster some joker that Obama nominates for the highest court. You win some, you lose some, and pro-lifers and libertarians alike will see greater results from a less-damaging Supreme Court nomination than they will this joke of a stimulus bill. We are less than four years away from choosing a President who can get us out of this economic mess that is likely to get worse under Obama, but we would be, perhaps, 50 years or more from having recourse to a bad SCOTUS nominee.
3. These three people may have done the conservative/libertarian movement a service in a couple of different ways. First, they were elected (and with a name that generally represents conservatism). Second, they botched their chance at being such, and when this plan crumbles into little pieces in the coming years, they will be exposed and the search will be on to find a true conservative to fill the roles.
There are a lot of people who said that things needed to bottom out to get better. I disagree with the idea that I should help that kind of a thing happen — those who supported this notion have hurt the current situation for themselves and me, alike — but right now we are at a spot where we have nothing else to do but oppose this crazy socialism we are getting going on and root for it’s ultimate failure. As long as there isn’t a whole lot we can do but threaten our representatives with our vote (and some of us asked for this more than others), we might as well just hope this thing bottoms out as quickly as possible and leads to a swift change starting in 2010. I doubt I will ever see the wisdom in rooting for this before election day, but we simply have no choice after it.
When it comes time, be sure to call in the favor owed to you by Senators Specter, Collins, and Snowe. As much as they have hurt us, they can also help us in the future.
“Savior-based economy”
Feb 9, 2009 Blogging's Best, Governmental Reach, Obama Administration Leave a comment
South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford thinks that we are better off taking the band-aid off and letting our economy heal rather than lessening the pain (and prolonging it).
We’re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy,” Sanford also said Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.
The South Carolina Republican said such an economy is “what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power.”
It’s scary to think, but this is exactly the description that fits right now. For instance, the original stimulus package had some unreal amount of money for the D.C. sewer system. Are they the only ones with a sewer problem? I doubt it. But it’s close enough to home for a lot of the people spending our money, and so it goes.
This is precisely the problem with universal health care. I know it sounds nice and fuzzy in a perfect world, but wait until providers that are less-qualified start getting the good gigs because of political connections to high-ranking politicians.
