You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus ~ Mark Twain
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Christians: Obey your Masters(?)
Remember that every apostle of Christ (except John) was killed by hostile civil authorities opposed to their endeavors. Christians throughout church history were imprisoned, tortured, or killed by civil authorities of all stripes for refusing to submit to their various laws and prohibitions. Did all of these Christian martyrs violate God's principle of submission to authority?
So, even the great prophets, apostles, and writers of the Bible (including the writer of Romans Chapter 13) understood that human authority--even civil authority--is limited.
Beyond that, we in the United States of America do not live under a monarchy. We have no king. There is no single governing official in this country. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with any man or any group of men. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with the President, the Congress, or even the Supreme Court. In America, the U.S. Constitution is the "supreme Law of the Land." Under our laws, every governing official publicly promises to submit to the Constitution of the United States. Do readers understand the significance of this distinction? I hope so.
This means that in America the "higher powers" are not the men who occupy elected office, they are the tenets and principles set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Under our laws and form of government, it is the duty of every citizen, including our elected officials, to obey the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, this is how Romans Chapter 13 reads to Americans:
"Let every soul be subject unto the [U.S. Constitution.] For there is no [Constitution] but of God: the [Constitution] that be [is] ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the [Constitution], resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For [the Constitution is] not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the [Constitution]? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For [the Constitution] is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for [the Constitution] beareth not the sword in vain: for [the Constitution] is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for [the Constitution is] God's minister, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor."
Read more...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Poor leadership representing an incompetent voting body. Leadership follows the people in this country. The change should start with the source- the common voter. Bad leadership will always develop when uneducated, uncaring voters with little to no values generate our representatives. The early years of this nation saw a much stronger concentration of citizens who held values and morals above money and politics. If the voter upheld his/her responsibility to vote values, there would be no need to disapprove of our leaders constantly and witness their fumblings and shortcomings as they attempt to do what is right.
Very true. Well, that and an honest voting system.
Also, while it is sad that a man was taken into custody in a harsh way, he messed up twice. 1) Border control can stop any and every car if they wanted to and it is legal. 2) When a law enforcement dog "marks" your car in any way, the best thing to do is to show the guards that there is in fact no drugs or illegal aliens in your trunk. They are proven wrong and you go on your way.
In high school, an 18 year old kid's car was marked by a drug dog. The kid said they had no right to search his truck, but he was wrong (and hiding a large amount of drugs). He made the problem worse by refusing a justified search.
This is a similar case. The guards don't want to look in some random guy's trunk for kicks. They should be allowed to do their job. If the pastor had realized this and worked with those protecting the border, he might not have needed to go through so much trouble without need. Sad story.
You must have been watching a different video. This guy didn't mess up. The agents had already been proven wrong, and the only thing they could do about it was beat him up and hold him without charges for as long as they could get away with it. "Legal" does not equal "lawful". Put the case of the agents' "legal" actions in front of a "lawful" jury of his peers and see what happens. Cops and feds get convicted in court for breaking the law all the time, and so would these MFers. But NOOOOOO, the only border agents that have been sent to prison for anything were Ramos and Compean for shooting at an illegal that drew on them while smuggling a shipment.
It also doesn't matter how the gov. secretly declares area within 100 miles of the border to be a "Constitution-free zone". That may be legal, but it's not lawful, and citizens have every right to completely ignore that rule, no matter what the little SS-wannabes say. They say they have a "legal" right to confiscate your phone and computer at the border, make you wait while they search everything on it, and keep it if they decide they want to. If it weren't such a danger it would almost be comical, these pricks declaring a different set of rules in zones that they determine, kind of like "free speech zones" LOL. They can stick that crap.
Not everyone bends over for traitors to the Constitution. Yes, traitors. When you swear an oath on the Bible to defend and uphold the Constitution, and then turn around and wipe your ass with it, you are a traitor. All of these cops and their bosses and the ones who made the policies should be in prison.
I'm not saying the patrol didn't act outside of policy, just that it is definitely not one-sided.
It's just a joke that the excuse for this behavior is 9/11 and terrorists, when peaceful citizens are the ones being abused.
9/11 was in 2001.
Aug. 31, 1997 "Grand Jury Refuses to Charge Killer Marines on Border"
Jun 14, 1990 "Police Brutality on US Mexico Border"
Apr 18, 1995 "Bad Badges Border Patrol Should Be Reined in and Complaints Monitored"
Jun 3, 1992 "Brutality at the Border"
May 14, 1993 "Review of Border Patrol Abuse is Inadiquate, Group Says"
Feb 4, 1976 "Border Patrol allegedly Search Without Probable Cause"
Nov 29, 1973 "Warrantless Automobile Search by Roving Patrol 25 Miles North of Mexican Border: U.S. v. Bowman"
Sep 27, 1971 "U.S. v. Almeida-Sanchez (search without probable cause)
May 11, 1973 "State v. Gagnon (search without warrant)"
U.S. v. Escalante
U.s. v. Kidd
On and on and on. None of this should be blamed on 9/11. This is a separate issue all together. Laws concerning police and border patrol have been broken since long before we were alive and laws concerning U.S. and non-U.S. citizens have been broken long before as well. A simple news archive search yields endless cases worse than this pastor's case (dating even before 1960).
That's true. I was just pointing out that every time justification is given for such actions recently, the answer always boils down to "protecting the Homeland from another 9/11." But its just incrementalism with periodic episodes of mass hysteria to manipulate public perception. Nothing really new about it.
You say that “every time justification is given for such actions recently… [it is] protecting the Homeland from another 9/11.” I just gave other examples of actions like this and worse. The justification given by select law enforcement who seek a short answer changes over time, but the actions do not. It doesn’t really matter what the justifications given are whether it be in 1960 or yesterday. The root of the action needs to be remedied. People’s unintelligent justifications are of no consequence. Actions affect people- justifications are useless if they are not logical or are misplaced. These cases happen because at times enforcement officers don’t consider their courses of actions wisely and at times those subject to enforcement officers pick their fights unwisely and without reason. Sometimes these two happen at the same time.
Post a Comment