Florida Judge Ruled Correctly That Islamic Law Must Be Used

/in /by

Just this past week there was a media frenzy sparking fear across the nation with headlines like, “Florida Judge Orders Use of Sharia Law!”  The case in question involves former trustees of a local Tampa mosque, the Islamic Education Center of Tampa, who are suing because they claim they were unfairly removed as trustees.  The Judge stated in his order, “This case will proceed under Ecclesiastical Islamic Law…pursuant to the Qur’an…”

The enemies of Liberty know the power of fear, otherwise the warning attributed to Benjamin Franklin, “Those who trade Liberty for security deserve neither Liberty nor security” would have very little meaning.  But I fear, that is exactly what we are about to do as a nation, ignore the warnings of our Founding Fathers and trade Liberty for security based upon fear.

In order to properly understand what happened in that Florida courtroom this week, we must make a distinction.  There is a difference between First Amendment religious liberty and criminal acts unconstitutionally sanctioned under the guise of religious liberty.  Our Founders, moved home and family, sacrificed honor and fortune, bled and died for religious liberty.  It was so important to our Founders that when proposing the ratification of the Constitution, several states, including Virginia, refused to ratify if there were not greater protections for religious liberty.  The Virginia Baptist General Convention made the statement:

 “Whether the new Federal Constitution, which had now lately made its appearance in public, made sufficient provision for the secure enjoyment of religious liberty; on which it was agreed unanimously that, in the opinion of the General Committee, it did not.”

They understood that every man has to give an account for himself to God one day, therefore every man should be free to serve God according to the dictates of his own conscience; that it is repugnant to the spirit of the gospel for the government to proceed in matters of religion.  They believed that God needed no such compulsive measures from the government and for government to engage in the regulation of church activity would be the destruction of religious liberty.  In a Letter from a Federal Farmer  IV the author, looking forward to a day when our nation would grow into a great country said:

“It is true, we are not disposed to differ much, at present, about religion; but when we are making a constitution, it is to be hoped, for ages and millions yet unborn, why not establish the free exercise of religion, as a part of the national compact.”

As if there were any question as to the Founders’ intent regarding true religious liberty, John Leland, arguably the founder of our First Amendment, stated that “all should be equally free [in religious matters], Jews, Turks, Pagans and Christians.”

Our Founders believed that government regulating the affairs of the churches would be the death of religious liberty for all and they were willing to forgo the entire Constitutional experiment without proper protection from it.  Our courts have adopted that principle in the legal doctrine of “judicial abstinence”.

According to the well-founded legal doctrine of judicial abstention, “matters of calling a pastor, excluding members from a church, electing church officers and the conduct of other routine church business is purely ecclesiastical, that the jurisdiction of the church as to such matters is final and that the civil courts have consistently declined to assume jurisdiction of them.” Epperson v. Myers, 58 So.2d 150, 151 (Fla. 1952).

Our courts are obliged by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to defer to internal church decisions in matters of church government.  The Supreme Court of the United States recognizes that “[e]xcessive entanglement with religion occurs when the courts begin to review and interpret a church’s constitution, laws, and regulations.”  Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602 (1971).

We should commend Judge Richard Nielsen for his courage to stand up for this TRUE AND PROPER application of separation of church and state in a time when he had to know it would bring great fear and controversy.  He was acting as a true constitutional conservative and patriot, supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida.

Judge Nielson had to understand that for the court to become involved in the ecclesiastical affairs church government would open a precedent that has thus far never existed.  It would eliminate EVERY church’s ability to govern itself according to the dictates of its religious beliefs.  What would that mean for Christians?  It would mean that churches could no longer discriminate on the basis of doctrinal beliefs; the acceptance of homosexuality even if against religious beliefs, the requirement of non discrimination for pastoral positions even if against religious beliefs, the compulsion of teaching even if against religious beliefs…the list is endless.

A very important decision was written in 1871 by the Supreme Court of the United States in Watson v. Jones, 80 US (13 Wall), 679, 727 (1871):

“The law knows no heresy, and committed to the support of no dogma, the establishment of no sect.  The right to organize voluntary religious associations to assist in the expression and dissemination of any religious doctrine, and to create tribunals for the decision of controverted questions of faith within the association, and for the ecclesiastical government of all the individual members, congregations, and officers within the general association, is unquestioned.  All who united themselves to such a body do so with the implied consent to this government, and are bound to submit to it.  But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if any one aggrieved by one of their decisions could appeal to the secular courts and have them reversed.”

So before we react in fear that will ultimately end the religious liberty that we ALL enjoy, we must become steeped in history and fact.  History teaches that “all should be equally free, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Christians” and when government engages in the ecclesiastical affairs of an assembly, religious liberty for all is dead.  The fact is this legal dispute was over a decision by the mosque leaders regarding issues of church governance, a purely ecclesiastical matter.

Judge Neilson’s court ruling is NOT a permission in the law to stone your children, beat your wife, or murder your daughter because she is marrying outside the faith.  These are afforded no more affording constitutional protection than someone bombing an abortion clinic in the name of Christ.  These are CRIMINAL acts and NOT ecclesiastical governance.  If this distinction is not made, then a disingenuous lawyer or an activist judge could unconstitutionally use this ruling to allow a criminal act, as the court did in New Jersey in applying Sharia Law to allow a man to rape his wife.  Fortunately, the New Jersey ruling was overturned, and our Constitution ruled the day.  We need to be watchful so that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.  We must be steeped in history and in fact so that we don’t undo the very document by which we are protected.

I am not willing to trade liberty for any fear.  I am not willing to trade the ability for my church to govern according to the dictates of my conscience due to a fear of foreign Islamic invasion.  If we allow fear to dictate, the enemies of Liberty have succeeded and tyranny is already established.

Obama’s Attack on the Church – The Mark of a Tyrant

/in /by

An understanding of history is the only thing that can illuminate our understanding of religious liberty. Our ignorance of history (not to mention a dangerous level of apathy) is allowing a tyrant to erode the liberty that people of faith have enjoyed for over two centuries. We believe that we have moved beyond the days of kings and serfs, yet here we are, repeating the very history our forefathers attempted to prevent us from repeating. It is exactly the same show that was played out again and again throughout the English history that gave us our founding documents, just different characters. The current tyrannical King of America is forcing the church to succumb to the rule of the sovereign in opposition to the dictates of conscience. Repeating what occurred in 1066, in 1213, in 1628, in 1641, and in 1689. Journey with me, as we roll back the clock and watch the parallels unfold.

In 1066 England, William I takes the throne and begins forcing his rule over the people of England. A people, who because of the agreement of 1041 had become accustomed to participation in their government and had established a common law they felt was fair and just for their time. William I, however had different ideas. He and his sons continued to fundamentally transform England, up until Henry I took the throne. Henry is the signer of the 1100 Charter of Liberties in which he promised to end the tyranny of his father and brother. He made a charter with the people to end all evil and oppressive practices as carried out by the crown. Interestingly enough, what the people of 1100 England felt was evil and oppressive, we might find alarmingly familiar.

Besides promising to end the evil inheritance taxes, and ensuring that lawmakers were subject to the laws they made, Henry promised to abandon the practice of requiring the ecclesiastical leaders of the Church of England to do the government’s bidding. Henry made a promise to the people, that first and foremost, he would declare the church free of government interference:

“Know that by the mercy of God and the common counsel of the barons of the whole kingdom of England I have been crowned king of said kingdom; and because the kingdom had been oppressed by unjust exactions, I, through fear of God and the love which I have toward you all, in the first place make the holy church of God free, … And I take away all the bad customs by which the kingdom of England was unjustly oppressed;”

But that would not end the reign of tyranny forever, because tyrants hates Liberty and “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.” T. Jefferson

In 1213, John is the King of England and his hatred for the church quickly becomes apparent. Tyrants do not like to share power, and throughout history they came to recognize the great force within the church, after all, if God be for us, who can be against us? John is called the most evil King England has ever known. The English have said that “hell was fouled by the presence of John”. It was John’s ruthless behavior toward the English people who would not submit to his tyrannical rule that gained John’s infamy. But, it was John’s refusal to grant the people the right to choose an Arch Bishop that threw the people into rebellion. John wanted power over the church as well the treasury; after all it was his Divine Right. The Barons, Lords and the chosen Arch Bishop, Stephen Langton, in an attempt to avoid bloodshed drew up a charter to force the King to keep the promise issued by the crown in the 1100 Charter of Liberties. This edict gave specific directions to John on what tyrannical acts were to be halted and is called the Magna Carta.

“In the first place we have granted to God, and by this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever that the English Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and her liberties inviolate;… Wherefore we will and firmly order that the English Church be free, and that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly, fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid.”

The King promised once again, through the Magna Carta, to honor the sovereignty of the Church and the right of the people to maintain their religious Liberty. But under tyrants who have no regard for the Rule of Law and see themselves as the ultimate authority, religious liberty cannot survive without a fight.

This time it was Charles I who had to be put in his place. Charles was accused of devising “a wicked design to erect and uphold in himself an unlimited and tyrannical power to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the Rights and Liberties of the People”. To do this he had “traitorously and maliciously levied war against the present Parliament and the people therein represented.” What was among Charles’ atrocities? You guessed it, offenses against religious liberty, 11 counts to be exact and all were listed in the Grand Remonstrance of 1641. His tyranny was summarized as follows:

“For depriving the Bishops of their votes in Parliament, and abridging their immoderate power usurped over the Clergy, and other your good subjects, which they have perniciously abused to the hazard of religion, and great prejudice and oppression to the laws of the kingdom, and just liberty of your people-”

The people rebelled against Charles’ unjust laws and against his oppression of the church. Charles was found guilty of tyranny and oppression, and he was sentenced to death. Liberty once again succeeded with new protections obtained by the resolve of the people.

Just 60 years later the people found themselves once again in the hands of a tyrant, this time his name was James II and he was also attempting to control the church. James was attempting to tax the people through the church and he was attempting to control the method and mode of worship instead of allowing the people to worship according to their beliefs. In order to enforce these laws, he was placing agents of the crown in the church and establishing arbitrary regulations and courts to bring government action against the leaders of the church. The people of England charged James with attempting to completely destroy Liberty.

“Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him, did endeavour to [overturn] and [completely destroy] the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom; By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament; By committing and prosecuting [various] worthy [ministers] for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power; By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes;

The people stood against James, causing him to flee the throne. They lost a tyrant and retained their Liberty in this new document, The Bill of Rights of 1689.

In our own nation many preachers, particularly of the Baptist faith, were prosecuted, tarred and feathered, whipped, jailed, and executed because they would not submit to a license under the state religion. The blood shed on our own shores in the name of religion is the very thing that brought us the first amendment and led to the eventual dissolution of all test acts and state churches. This is the history of our founding fathers and mothers. This is the wisdom they brought to the table when drafting our government. These tyrants of the past are the reason our founders gave us the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to “secure the blessings of Liberty for our posterity”. They knew that a tyrant would come along sooner or later. They knew that this tyrant would hate liberty as much as those in the past. But they also knew that tyranny has a limited bag of tricks, so they did their best to give us the protections gained from over 700 years of battle for Liberty. This is precisely why we have a 1st Amendment, to secure the right of the people to worship according to the dictates of their conscience and to keep the government out of the business of the church. After all, THIS is the REAL meaning of separation of church and state.

It is no surprise that tyranny would rematerialize in the very same way it has for centuries. Once again, the government attempts to govern the church, to impose its rule over the conscience of the people. Healthcare mandates against the church have nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with tyranny over the people. Kings do not concern themselves with the good of the people as much as they do with the will of the King. If this tyranny is allowed to stand, a door will be opened that will allow the Kings troops to march even greater oppression against the church; history guarantees it. These troops, undoubtedly in the form of regulation and law, will once again “deny the church their voice in government”causing a great “hazard to religious liberty” bring forward the “prosecution of various ministers” in arbitrary “courts of ecclesiastical causes” which will surely bring about the “complete destruction of liberty”. What we must learn from history, what we must understand today is that if religious liberty is allowed to fall, all other liberties will quickly follow. The battle for all liberty is rooted in the battle for religious liberty and the ability to speak, print, assemble, and air our grievances according to the dictates of our conscience. It is no coincidence that it is the FIRST Amendment. The question is what are we going to do about the tyranny that is fundamentally transforming America into an utter wasteland of ruined liberties?

Can We Legislate Morality?

/in /by

“Can we legislate morality?”  This is a very relevant question that deserves a serious answer.  But what is really meant by this question?  The idea of “legislating morality” often gives people the impression that we can create a moral society through the creation of laws.  Fact is – we cannot.  As a prosecutor I became acutely aware of the apparently widely held view that the criminal justice system will “reform” people.  We could save ourselves a lot of heartache and a lot of money if we just accepted the reality that the criminal justice system, our jails, our prisons, are not designed to reform people, they are designed to punish people for doing bad things.  The punishment is what is supposed to make people change their mind about committing future crimes.  More laws and more prisons will not magically create a moral society.

We cannot deny, however, that all laws are based upon shared moral values.  When a society loses that morality, we find ourselves in a situation where we are tempted to compensate by creating more laws.  This is what causes people to put the cart before the horse and believe morality can be, or should be legislated.  We have become a society that treats symptoms instead of diseases.  This situation is no different.  The symptom is an ever increasing lawless society; the disease is an ever decreasing moral society.  If we want the government to stop “legislating morality”, we must become, once again a society of individuals that upholds our shared moral values.  We may not be able to legislate morality, but as our founders warned, we cannot afford to lose it.

John Adams stated in an address to Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts in 1798: Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

Adams believed that America’s unique moral character provided security for the future:

While our country remains untainted with the principles and manners which are now producing desolation in so many parts of the world; while she continues sincere, and incapable of insidious and impious policy, we shall have the strongest reason to rejoice in the local destination assigned us by Providence.

He then issued this warning:

But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation while it is practicing iniquity and extravagance, and displays in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the world; because we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.

Adams was attempting to impress upon these military men that the power wielded by an immoral society could not be restrained by the best Constitution and could be lethal to Liberty itself.

Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.

Some of the shared moral values, such as respect for life and charity toward the helpless, are contained in the great faith systems of the world.  For our founders it was the Judeo-Christian foundation that guided their value system, and it is interwoven into their writings and our founding documents. A shared morality is not the same thing as government-enforced religion, but historically a shared morality has been rooted in a shared sense of higher purpose and an acknowledgement of a higher power, or at least some awareness of a spiritual aspect to our daily lives.  But according to Many Say ‘So what?’ to Religion, Atheism published in USA Today, a growing number of people simply do not care about matters of faith and morality.  I believe this is not just a problem for the religious community, but this has grave implications for the future of our nation.  If we eliminate or disregard the basis for our common values, we begin to slide further and further into lawlessness.

The article in USA Today implies that America is becoming a nation free of religion; people simply don’t think of God and don’t find religion necessary to maintain their “happiness”.   Barry Komsin, director of the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society for Trinity College states in this article:  But a lot of these people are concerned more with the tangible, the real stuff like mortgages or their favorite football team or the everyday world,” Kosmin says.  The bottom line for these folks is “as long as I have my stuff, I am happy and do not need a religion or God.”

I believe this focus, solely on material things, is what is having a devastating effect on Liberty.  The reality is that a vast majority of our citizens would have an easier time naming all the judges on American Idol than those on the Supreme Court of the United States.  Meanwhile our Liberties are being eroded, degraded, and destroyed right under our noses and most don’t care because they got a flat screen TV for Christmas and more channels than they could possibly watch in a lifetime. While we should be trying to stop this whale of an administration from tearing the nets of Liberty in America, we are tweeting the latest escapades of the Kardashians or informing our Facebook friends of our location and menu choices.  We are completely ignorant of our obligations as Americans to require our government to protect Liberty and of our responsibility to maintain that Liberty. Few have a sense of anything greater than “right here, right now.”   Two testimonials from this article reflect this mentality:

When Ben Helton signed up for an online dating service, under “religion” he called himself “spiritually apathetic.”  Sunday mornings, when Bill Dohm turns his eyes toward heaven, he’s just checking the weather so he can fly his 1946 Aeronca Champ two-seater plane. Helton, 28, and Dohm, 54, aren’t atheists, either. They simply shrug off God, religion, heaven or the ever-trendy search-for-meaning and/or purpose.

Founders like Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, didn’t think shrugging off God was a good idea for our nation:  Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?  That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?

Jefferson contemplated the consequences to this nation if we ever forgot that valuable lesson: Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice can not (sic) sleep forever

Ben Franklin reminded his fellow countrymen when Liberty was in peril: In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor…and have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance?

Franklin knew that without God, Liberty would be short lived.

I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?”

The USA Today article continues with Rev. Ema Drouillard, who specializes in San Francisco-area non-denominational ceremonies.  Ms. Drouillard “said in 2001 about 30 percent of her clients refused any reference to religion at their weddings.  A decade later, 80 percent of her clients choose her carefully God-free ceremony. The only faith they pledge is in each other.”  Maybe that is why we can look to a man for “hope and change” and find that our country crumbles when we place our faith in man.  But the Ms. Drouillard continues, “A lot of people just aren’t on any spiritual path. They say, ‘We are just focusing on the party.’

That focus is the very thing that drives this disease.  As this article seems to point out, we have become a nation void of any responsibility to God.  Our founders would ask, “How then do we think that we can maintain the gift of Liberty that He has given?”  “How can we give no consideration to the consequences for ignoring that gift?”  I believe they would say that “we have been come self-sufficient, self-made men building an empire of stuff and never once giving thought to the principles of Liberty that makes these things possible. We have forgotten, to whom much is given, much is required.  We have become pacified by our prosperity, lazy in our luxury and have forgotten the dear price that has been paid for this Liberty and the price required to maintain it.”

Our Constitution is dedicated to the promises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  If we want to maintain this Republic and its promises of Liberty, as Daniel Webster said, we must “hold onto to the Constitution”.  In holding on to the Constitution, we must understand that Liberty is its end and morality is a vital bond that secures its survival.  Our Liberty stands in peril because we have abandoned our moral foundation.  Freedom AND morality are BOTH necessary to maintain Liberty.  The sole pursuit of stuff and satisfaction of self creates a moral vacuum – we must reconnect with a higher purpose.  We must be dedicated to fighting for ALL of the principles of Liberty that make this nation so great!  Because some things remain true:  sparrows still fall, whales break nets, and Liberty cannot last without morality.

Show Arrest Rosa

We the People Must Inform Ourselves

/in /by

(The speech that got me fired.)

I would like to speak to you today on the subject of INFORMING OURSELVES.

Thomas Jefferson warned;

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”

We have enjoyed the benefits left to us by previous generations. America has had the greatest medical system, the greatest technologies, the strongest military, the greatest economy. However, as our nation has prospered we have become distracted by our luxuries, busied by our labors and lazy toward our liberties. We have allowed the enemies of freedom to worm their way into positions of power and influence.

The Heritage Foundation says it like this,

“There is widespread ignorance of American history… We face an education system that upholds mediocrity in the name of relativism; an ever-expanding and centralized government, unmoored from constitutional limits; judges openly making laws and shaping society based on pop-philosophy rather than serious jurisprudence…At the root of all these problems is a pervasive ignorance about the core principles that define America and ought to inform our politics and policy.”

Unfortunately, I would agree with them. That’s why the tea-party movement is so important and so encouraging. I am actually encouraged that the Tea-Party is not a party at all; it is We the People. We the People founded this nation and I believe – We the People will take it back!

But We the People must Inform Ourselves if we wish to take back our nation for ourselves and our children. Notice I did not say that we need to be informed, rather we need to inform OURSELVES. Truth is Power and it is up to us to search out and secure the Truth. The Bible says, “…ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” If we arm ourselves with truth and act on that truth we can be free from the bondage that ideological tyrants would desire to enslave us with.

Patrick Henry said in his famous speech from St. Johns Church in 1775.

“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.“

Patrick Henry’s experience with a heavy handed government illuminated his understanding of the future… And if American Liberty is to continue, we must inform ourselves and arm ourselves with the collective experience of those that have come before. I want to mention four things as briefly as I can on the subject of Informing Ourselves.

First, We the People must inform ourselves on our Core Principles. A principle can be defined as a standard based upon truth and experience, and which serves as a foundation upon which thought and action are built. A primary principle upon which this nation rests is Constitutionalism – which is an understanding that the operation of our government and the security of our liberty are to be guided by our founding documents, interpreted according to the framer’s intent.

The Declaration and the Constitution have been relentlessly attacked in modern times. Our own President has implied that our Constitution’s ideas are flawed. The professors in our law schools deride its relevance. Progressives would have it be as malleable as silly putty. But We the People recognize that the Declaration and Constitution have served as the bedrock of our freedom for hundreds of years. The genius with which our founding fathers laid down the principles in these precious documents, I believe, can only be attributed to the providence of God. And we have a solemn duty to ourselves and our posterity to become informed in the Core principles contained in our founding documents.

Get a copy of the Declaration and Constitution; study them. Research the history of how they came to be. Acquaint yourselves with men like John Leland and the Baptist Union of Virginia, without whom there would be no Bill of Rights. Read the wisdom of George Washington in his farewell address and be grounded by the experience of one our nation greatest heroes.

–We the People must Know our core principles- Become not only grounded in them, but become their champions. For, freedom of speech has no voice of its own, but it waits in silence for you to plead its case. The right to assemble will sit alone until you, its champions, gather in the face of despotism. Our forefathers cry out through the pages of history, but unheard until you give the written word – voice and life. When our history is lost either through revision or apathy, then our liberty is lost as well.

–We the People must Know our Core principles and stand for them without wavering…for they are our liberty.

The words of Patrick Henry still ring true 235 years later, “Why stand we here idle?,” he said, “What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Secondly, We the People must not only inform ourselves on our Core Principles, must inform ourselves about Contrary Principles. If our core principles serve to secure and maintain the liberty we wish to enjoy, then it stands to reason that there are contrary principles that threaten that same liberty, and we must be able to identify these enemies of our liberty.

Sun Tzu says in his Art of War, “Know thine enemy as thyself.” We must always remember that our enemies are not people or parties, but the freedom-destroying principles that they espouse. We must inform ourselves on the principles of progressivism, socialism, communism; and the mechanisms these philosophies use such as redistribution of wealth, centralization of power, progressive taxation, and restrictions on free speech. Once we are informed on these principles we will then recognize them. And we must oppose them regardless of the party or personality attempting to employ them.

I say again, We must not give a free pass because of personality or party affiliation. It is ironic that Teddy Roosevelt is heralded as a great hero of the Republican Party, when in fact history testifies that he was the leader of the anti-constitutional progressives in 1912. It was also under the Republican Party that the refundable tax credit was enacted, allowing progressives to engage in redistribution of wealth and enslave citizens with the tax refund.

Am I anti-Republican? No; but these enemies of our liberty entered in because we put party over principle. The president recently suggested that his program of socialized medicine was okay because Republican Mitt Romney proposed the same program. It is not wrong because of who proposed it; it’s wrong because it is based on principles that are contrary to Liberty.

You would not allow anyone to feed your child rat poison whether the giver was Satan or Santa Claus. Progressivism, however, does not come in a bottle with skull and crossbones. It shows up as something or someone who wants to “help” and it will have a cute little name like acorn. It will talk about fairness and recovery; aide and stimulus; always sounding positive, but underneath – a deadly poison. Again we must be grounded in our Core principles, but we must also be guarded against these Contrary principles which poison our freedom and destroy our future.

We the People must not only inform ourselves about Contrary Principles, but we must also inform ourselves about Candidates. We should now realize that a charismatic personality, eloquent speechmaking, and catchy slogans do not a leader make. We must identify candidates who hold true to the right principles and who will not sacrifice those principles for politics or power. Some would say you must compromise if you hope to accomplish anything. Surely, cooperation and negotiation are essential in government, but a principle by its very definition is a foundational and guiding rule, and so compromising a principle damages the very foundation.

If sound principles cause me to be opposed to a proposal, then an offer of money or jobs for my state should not change my position. Let’s inform ourselves about candidates and issues and make an informed vote.

Lastly, and I close, We the People must inform ourselves about Current Events. It’s encouraging to see the awakening going on around the country, but the cynic in me says this – “only someone who was sleeping needs an awakening.”

Thomas Jefferson said,

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”

We cannot take time off. We cannot stick our head in the sand. We cannot slumber even for a moment.

The Tea-Party movement can’t simply be an awakening. Once we have reclaimed our nation from the forces that would steer us away from our Core principles, we must establish a lifestyle of vigilance. We must stay informed and stay involved.

First step – the 2010 elections; Next step – the 2012 elections; THEN we reach The Beginning…The beginning of a revitalized and reconnected CITIZEN government.

Our cry must be this

“We the People have awakened. We the People have informed ourselves; and We the People will never sleep again!!!”

Thank you and God bless you.

Criminals vs Contitutionalists

/in /by

In Lakeland, Florida an officer of the law, pulls over a young woman for a broken taillight. In the process discovers her license had been suspended (which is not a criminal offense in Florida).  The officer has her empty her pockets and twice tells her to pull of her shirts, pull her undergarments away from her body and has her shake her body to see if she is in possession of drugs. Then at the end of the ordeal tells the young lady, “I’m done scaring you and now you can go home!” What happened to his officer  you ask? Unbelieveably he was suspended for 4 days and now he’s  back on the job. Now compare this with Sheriff Finch who refused to charge someone for carrying a concealed a firearm without a permit because he believed it was not constitutional. He stood up for the Constitution in the exercise of his duty and he was arrested by Governor Rick Scott. Now compare that to the Lakeland, Florida the officer who for all intent and purposes sexually assaulted a woman who gets suspended for four days without pay. Are you kidding me?

Liberty First with KrisAnne Hall | Unselfish Defense of Liberty

/in /by

I don’t care who you are. I don’t care if you’re a politician, a bricklayer, a hairdresser, or what! If you are aware of the fact that our liberties are under attack by a tyrannical Federal government and if you are aware that the NSA, the NDAA, the TSA, Eric Holder and the rest would like nothing more than to control every minute of your day and couldn’t give a popcorn fart about our liberties and you choose to be passive, then you are selfish! you don’t care that you’re leaving your children with a 17 trillion debt as long as you have your cell phone, video games, etc and you are leaving your children vulnerable to serving this tyrannical government as a future slave. Do you want that? You certainly wouldn’t stand by passively and watch someone hurt your child, but you can stand by passively and watch a federal government that every day takes more and more of your liberties. There is no difference! Be unselfish and stand for liberty! Protect your children from becoming a future slave because they can’t on their own.

Defending Liberty with Eternal Vigilance

/in /by

Sometimes you might feel like taking a breath. Sometimes you might feel like you need a break but when it comes to the defense of liberty and especially given a tyrannical government that has an insatiable thirst  for power and control we must be forever vigilant. We must be very careful to let our guard down. All you have to do is look around! Look around and you’ll see that we are surrounded not just by scandals such as IRS profiling, or Fast and Furious, or Benghazi as these are not scandals but they are criminal acts! And where is Congress? What have they done? Nothing and as nothing  gets done and more of these criminal acts just get swept under the carpet or give way to the next scandal the ones that will ultimately pay the price with their liberty will be you and me and all freedom loving, liberty loving patriots: This is why defending liberty required eternal vigilance.

Alternatively you can listen to this edition of the KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

Collectivists Insanity

/in /by

In my opinion (and I have no problem saying this), our glorious leader, King Barry (aka Barack Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Sotero) hates liberty and hates Christians who love liberty even more so!  In a speech King Barry made in Northern Ireland at a recent G8 summit he attacked religious freedom when he said;

“If towns remain divided, if Catholics have their schools and buildings and protestants have theirs if we can’t see ourselves in one another and fear or resentments are allowed to harden that too encourage division and discourages cooperation”.

This collectivist mentality is insane. Why wouldn’t he talk about Islamic schools, but in a speech in Northern Ireland he has to single out Catholics and Protestants. Liberty in the eyes of King Barry is an impediment to collectivism which is his rel religion and I think this is absolutely crazy.

Liberty Defenders vs. Pretenders

/in /by

Who are the real defenders of Liberty? It’s not Allen West, it’s not Michele Bachmann and it’s not Congress. Recently our government gave a number of Saudi’s a free pass to come to our country on Visas and the decision as to if these people might be a terror threat was delegated to the Saudi government. Thank you very much Janet Napolitano and thank you Congress for being silently guilty, not saying anything and letting the government get away with this insanity. This is just one example of how those who are supposed to be the defenders of liberty are only shallow pretenders.

Alternatively you can listen to “Liberty Defenders vs. Pretenders” by KrisAnne Hall On YouTube

Shame on Justice Scalia

/in /by

Any application that makes the Federal Government supreme over the states is an error in judgement and makes the Federal Government supreme over their creator. In this edition of the KrisAnne Hall show breaks down a serious misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Federalist Papers by Supreme Court Justice Scalia that in effect says that the states are submissive to the Federal Government in matters pertaining to elections.