|
CORRESPONDENCE: consciousness translated, pg. 2 |
Dr. Snoad wrote this article to a friend in discussion of the true motivations of US congressmen or any other type of collectivist. ************************************************************************************************************* All collectivists, socialists, statists, etc., are middlemen by profession and aspiring gods at heart. They may not be able to produce anything of tangible value but make up for that shortcoming by virtue of their elevated vision of equality. Their heightened social awareness and superior intellect enables them to quickly identify social inequities, the victims thereof and formulate programs designed to "even the playing field". Like their counterparts in the religious field who "get the call" to speak to God on behalf of the great unwashed, collectivists are sensitive to their calling to take on the mantle of social priesthood. With a zeal that would be the envy of the greatest of saints they gladly sacrifice their lives to the dictum, "the ends justify the means". With such a powerful higher moral imperative they truly take on the aura of a beneficent god when they intercede on behalf of the oppressed classes. The "haves" have no chance when these soldiers of justice wield their swords of retribution and redistribution. No sane rational argument can resist the emotional appeal of their promise to eradicate the evil of poverty. Greedy capitalists cringe at their relentless efforts to eliminate the profit motive’s strangle hold on the world. Children the world over cheer when they ride in on their great politically correct horses of caring compassion and free them from the tyrannical grip of their evil parents. Who could possibility object to living in equality with these brothers of mankind? Of course, the guardians of the "have nots" deserve some reward for this selfless work. No one should object to them getting a very handsome cut out of the flow of assets being forcibly transferred from the oppressors into the deserving hands of the victims. If they are lucky enough to rise to the upper level of social "sainthood" then their rewards should be commiserate with their good deeds. Happily, there is a greater reward available to them and they wisely confer it only upon themselves. In the hallowed halls of collectivism they are able to draw directly from the true nectar of their "god", the almighty one - POWER. Imagine the supreme rush these lofty beings must experience when they are able to control and direct the lives of millions of people. How glorious it must be to decide who lives and who must die in order to fulfill the grand and all knowing plans of these true champions of humanity. Their god is a vengeful god who must be fed millions of innocent lives to slake its insatiable appetite for blood and ensure it remains in control. After basking in the glow of such greatness, I feel so petty and small. I am foolishly tempted to keep the evil trappings of my affluent society. I know I should be ashamed that all the hard work necessary to better my life is not voluntarily turned over to those who do not feel like working for themselves. I wish I could somehow forget all of the moral lessons of self-responsibility my parents taught me and learn the much more practical method of being a perpetual victim in the care of the state. I am afraid I am not as selfless as the collectivist wants me to be. Nor am I able to understand why my earnest efforts to secure my life, liberty, and happiness should be ridiculed and forcibly taken from me. Perhaps that is why they are the exalted ones and I am just a pitiful white male with the misfortune of having been born and raised in America. My only hope is to abandon my apparently ignorant belief that a spiritual God is the true source of my freedom. In order to gain favor in the eyes of the elite I must draw closer to their white-hot god of power and bow down before their superior knowledge. Perhaps I will be given a small slice of the pie before it is all gone. What do middlemen do when the playing field is finally leveled for everyone? If we are all sitting around waiting for the state to hand out the pieces of pie, who will be left to make another? The middleman doesn’t know how to cook and sadly, he will no longer be able to get his cut of the action. How will their god help them then?
In order to consider the role of the US within the UN it is necessary to carefully study and compare the US constitution with the UN charter. These documents are the standard on which each respective government body bases its actions. The purpose of the US constitution was to establish a strictly limited government to protect and preserve the God-given rights of American citizens. It guarantees each person the freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness in any manner chosen. The result has been the creation of the freest and consequently, the most prosperous nation on earth.
Therefore the United States should have no role within the UN. Unless our constitution has been repealed, our representatives, sworn to preserve and protect our freedom and way of life, should be discussing our immediate withdrawal from the UN.
|
| letter to
letter to wildlands project Date: 7/10/2002
|
| letter to
grade school study of government in action It is nice to know you are studying government. It is a subject every freedom-loving person should study in great detail. I feel it is very important to know all about government because it effects a large part of our lives. In order to understand governments and the actions of its agents you must know one important fact. All governments, federal, state or local, share this common trait: they are coercive monopolies. In other words they use force or the threat of force to win obedience. To study government in action is to study how force is used to control your life. A lot of people believe it is necessary for government to impose rules and regulations to control people. However, our government was not formed to rule our lives. Its only mission is to protect our freedom, not take it from us. Allowing government to take control of our lives is an act of self-enslavement. Individual self-control is the only acceptable restraint freedom-loving people should support. In other words, if you want to be free, control yourself. Don't allow others to do it for you! So, Jennifer, while you are studying government and its representatives in action always keep that in mind. No matter what government subject they may discuss with you, ask these simple questions: 1. Who will be forced to pay for this, or 2. Who will be forced to do something, or 3. Who will be forcibly prevented from doing something As an example think of your own public education. The 3 levels of government all heavily regulate your education. As a tax payer I am forced to pay for your education even though I do not have any children nor do I approve of some of the things you are taught. I believe your education should be totally unregulated. Without government regulation the free market would supply a much greater variety of education. Your parents would be free to choose the education that reflects their values. I would not be forced to pay for your education, but, I would be free to support it if I chose. The ideas I express here will not be taught at any level of your education. Why is this so? The answer is simple. Government controls your education and will oppose any threat to its power. If you are taught to think for yourself and learn self-control you will no longer have any need of government. The thinking person is a government's greatest enemy. It is in government's greatest interest to keep you under control and not allow opposing views to be presented. If you would like to know more about the other side of government, I invite you to continue your correspondence with me. If, however, you feel my point of view is wrong I invite you to prove it to me. This brings me to my last point. Since 50% of my income is taken from me to support countless unconstitutional government programs I do not have any funds left to help with your project. (No response from Jennifer. Maybe I
overwhelmed her with such subversive talk or more likely she picked
someone less thought provoking.) |
| letter to
flag desecration amendment - letter to editor Date: 1/24/2001 The flag is a symbol of each individual American's birthright: freedom; a value so cherished that millions of Americans have given their lives to preserve the flag's promise of liberty and justice for all. However, what do you do when this promise is no longer fulfilled by the institution over which the flag flies? What do you do when old glory has been betrayed by those who claim to represent you, but in reality, have sold your vote to the highest bidder? Have all those precious lives been sacrificed so that we all can now live under unlimited obligation to our government? How ironic it is that your "representatives" want to prohibit the flag's desecration when it is they who have done far greater fundamental damage to the flag than mere flag burning could ever do. It is they who have shredded the flag and your freedoms with an endless litany of corruption. Your elected "representatives" no longer deserve your respect or the privilege of serving under the flag. If we truly love freedom and its banner, then its time to perform a long overdue duty. It is time to strike the colors flying over all federal institutions and only allow them to be displayed by private citizens or institutions. To allow the flag of freedom to continue to be displayed over the monster that is our government is to fly it in dishonor. Only when the government and its representatives return to their singular duty of protecting our freedom can the stars and stripes be honorable raised over the capital again. Will that time ever come again or will we continue to allow ourselves to be taken down the road of serfdom under the flag of tyranny?
Dr. Snoad wrote this letter in response to a media article about workers laboring at 2 jobs.
There is a reason there are a lot of frustrated people living in our state, earning so little they have to juggle more than one job. The first rung on the ladder to success would look a lot more promising if it were not for these 3 limiting factors:
Dr. Snoad wrote this letter in response to a local community supporter who laments the ineptness of local politicians. The supporter’s letter calls for a renewed integrity in the local political class. Its time to realize politicians cannot solve our problems; they can only create more or add to the ones they created in the first place. Only the individual has the power to solve his problems, and in so doing begins the process of relieving the general problems afflicting our society. A government bureaucracy, which knows nothing of our personal lives cannot offer personal solutions necessary to our individual growth. Its time to stop wringing our hands in concern over the ineptness of state politicians and realize it is our misguided support of them that continues our society’s problems. Would it not be better to concentrate on our personal responsibilities instead of relying on a politician to run our lives? They are doing a bad job because they do not have the detailed personal information required to provide equitable solutions to each individual. There is only one entity possessed of that depth of knowledge and power. Belief in the sovereignty of the individual is all that is needed to begin to solve problems. Dr. Snoad wrote this long essay in 2 parts to send to Libertarian political groups to urge them to be honest in their assessment of the current state of our government. Under what form of government does America labor now? What do you call a government that has abandoned its original charter and assumed the powers denied to it by its founding constitution? Most Americans continue to call our society the United States of America, the name chosen at its founding. Is it still proper to use this name when the government formed to unite and protect the people and their lands has usurped the rights of the individual and the states? There has been no formal disbanding or any kind of revolution to signify the passing of power from the people to the state, yet the fact of this transfer is quite evident. There has been no amendments to the constitution declaring our republic as dissolved nor any specific amendments to revoke any part of the bill of rights, yet the federal government routinely violates our inherent rights with impunity. In spite of these blatant breaches of contract the 3 branches of our government have not chosen to recognize the new form of government they have apparently decided to adopt, nor have they officially informed the American people of this historic change. If you accept these statements as true then you must feel there is something terribly amiss in our society. What would cause a society of free people to abandon the principals upon which liberty is built? Why would they allow their governmental charter to be altered without any resistance? Why do the elected politicians ignore their oath of office and their duty to protect the rights of the American people? What is the purpose of passing laws with hidden provisions, of gradually altering or bypassing constitutional restraints, if not to deceive the people? What sinister force could affect the American psyche enough to cause a significant number to ignore the changes taking place in their society’s very core values? Where is the hue and cry of universal outrage that should have been raised years ago, especially from our spiritual leaders? When any voices of alarm were raised why were they ignored? Why were the elected representatives responsible for this unauthorized change not charged with the crime of treason and removed from office? Perhaps the American people have changed their minds about the freedom won at such great cost. Part of the population seems to accept the argument that American prosperity was bought at the expense of raping the entire planet and all of its downtrodden poor. The government once considered to be desirable for securing our lives, liberty and happiness, is now viewed as unfair and should be replaced with the supposedly more equitable system of global socialism. Still others believe their group is due special privileges and use electoral politics to vote themselves favors at the expense of others. If our system of government has been reduced to that, why not proclaim it publicly and let the American people know what sort of government has replaced the old constitutional republic? The long held assumption that we are a free nation is not supported by the facts. What then should we call our government and what should we call ourselves if not free?If our government, which once was the envy of the entire world, is no longer relevant to the emerging global system then perhaps we should change its name to go along with its new goals. Our state is willing, even eager to control our lives from cradle to grave so the name should reflect this benevolent and apparently inevitable condition. How about "THE GRAVEYARD OF THE BRAVE AND THE PEN OF THE ENSLAVED". I know that is a little long and somewhat blatant for those who desire to hide their ruling aspirations, but it does have poetic appeal. Part II
The fire of freedom seems to have dimmed in the hearts of Americans. There is no longer any passionate defense of the constitution among the general populace because its purpose is no longer acknowledged. Everyone seems content to live at the expense of someone else and the desire to be self-sufficient is buried in the graves of long-forgotten patriots. Once precious freedoms are now routinely sacrificed for convenience, for the benefit of special classes of citizens or in the vain hope of obtaining security. Justice once depended upon to be administered according to constitutional guarantees can now only be obtained by buying someone trained to understand the endless labyrinth of unconstitutional laws. The tens of thousands of brave men who died in combat defending our hard-won freedoms are now dishonored by public officials who give away secret technology to acknowledged enemies in exchange for campaign money. Show me were voting for either party makes any difference any more, except as a validation of who gets to carve and divvy up the pie for special interest groups. Show me where principled protest of congressional corruption makes a difference, except to get you labeled as unpatriotic, investigated by government agencies, or even worse, in retaliation, audited by the IRS/Gestapo. Show me one congressman who swears an oath of office before God and believes in his moral duty to uphold the constitution above all else and you will see a man who quickly realizes he should resign his office after accepting it. For a principled person it is no longer possible to maintain any sort of moral integrity within the current system of government. Among the newly minted congressmen any naïve desire to reform the system from within is quickly smothered by their tenured comrades who are addicted to unbridled access to the unlimited power that is the US Government. Altruistic aspirations are soon converted into the all-consuming desire to secure and maintain their position of power at the expense of individual freedom. The mountain of detailed evidence of congressional, judicial and executive abuse, corruption and even treasonous acts might even rival the thick volumes of tax laws that strangle the nation. There will be no consolation for the millions of conscientious but clueless citizens who abdicate their responsibility to keep a close watch on the performance of their elected representatives. Nor will all the diligent letter writers produce any meaningful changes after firing off indignant complaints to their "representative" about the latest outrage or sellout. Yes, dear average citizen, most of you prefer to look the other way and take your handout at the expense of someone else. When you start relying on the state to run your lives it quite naturally takes on your abandoned responsibility. Now, the only consolation you have is the freedom to pick out who will hold your self-forged chains of slavery. Real freedom has been cleverly substituted with a pale reflection designed to appease you and ensure the continued growth of the beast that is your government and master. The poor patriots, the militias, the libertarians, and all those who have taken the time to notice the government’s illegal activities, are not yet aware they have already passed the point of no return on the road of totalitarianism. They keep talking about a slippery slope but that is all uphill from them now. They are looking at the world from inside the inescapable pit and telling each other there is still time to get out or to reverse the course of tyranny. Those who keep oiling their guns and hoarding ammo, etc. are prone to draw lines in the sand and proclaim they will not be pushed any further. Sadly, they don't realize that they are drawing lines in territory that has long been taken over by the federal government. The beast just outflanked them and smothered their earnest resistance with withering gradualism and clever reeducation of their children. While they jealously guard their stash of weapons their representatives are wielding the far more dangerous weapons of socialist ideology and social engineering with careful, calculated steps. To insure the new government remains in power in perpetuity America’s children are being thoroughly indoctrinated into socialist ideas by your benevolent representatives and entrenched education bureaucrats. Your children’s minds are now being turned to the beast’s rule, who carefully cultivates the faculty, not of independent thought, but of dependence on the socialist state. They are learning the virtue of freedom from thought encouraged by the state, rather than the undesirable freedom of thought that is the nemesis of statism. The new elite will own your children heart and mind and the constitution will become an out-dated and reviled document no longer worthy of reverence or study. In this New World order your children will have the "freedom" of having their lives planned from cradle to grave. They will be willing slaves to a vast all-knowing bureaucracy armed with frightening big-brother technology that can monitor their every move anywhere on the planet. The state will slowly drain their energy and souls for the benefit of those who control them. What little freedom that remains to them will be granted by the state as a token nod to the, what was that document called? If you still want proof of this fantastic betrayal then I say your ignorance and inaction is the proof of its success. Any intelligent person who can read the constitution and bill of rights and compare that with the current state of our government will know the dreaded truth. The time for ringing alarms, publishing diatribes and voting the bums out of office is over, has been over for many years. Those of you who refuse to acknowledge the truth have left your heads in the sand and your asses in the air for far too long. There's nothing in your heads but sand by now and the endless procession of predatory politicians have taken care of the part you so obliging left open for them. The time for polite, lawful resistance is past. If you still feel stirring up debate or criticizing the government will somehow make a difference, you will discover the Patriot Act was designed with you in mind. Ironically, those sworn to provide protection for your inherent rights will use this and other unconstitutional acts to punish your desire and efforts to protect your freedom. The time for polite resistance passed when the first federal officer kicked open an innocent family’s door in the middle of the night and killed or injured those who defended their homes and families. It passed when Randy Weaver’s wife was gunned down in her doorway. It passed when the Waco women and children were gassed and burned to death. It passed when Lincoln suspended the habeas corpus writ and issued worthless paper money. It passed when the fraudulent social security pyramid scheme was accepted as a legitimate retirement plan. It passed when American business was forced to collect withholding tax from the employed. It passed when presidents began making laws by decree without the consent of Congress. It passed when the federal reserve act was enacted allowing a private banking cartel to control the nation’s money. It passed when the first dollar in foreign aid was paid out to an enemy nation. It passed when President Truman signed the UN charter and sent troops to enforce an unconstitutional action. It passed when the federal government began to tell its citizens how to (list here the general violations to individual liberty) or what they can own, who they can associate with. On and on it goes, an endless litany of abuse of power, fraud, deception and betrayal that saps the lives and liberty of all. In all of these cases the American people refused to acknowledge the seriousness of the offence and demand effective action be taken to immediately remove from office those responsible for this betrayal of trust. In many cases they actually supported the malfeasance when it was to their benefit. Members of congress merely echoed this lack of moral integrity and took it as license to increase the powers of the federal government. There was no reason to resign their office since they received the support and approval of the electorate. There is a word for these unbelievable actions our government performs daily: TREASON! That’s right, go ahead and say it. It’s a description that fits your representative’s actions like a glove. Every last one of them is guilty of TREASON, even if they honestly believe their intent is good. Every last congressman has willingly accepted an office that works not to protect your rights but to violate them. It is TREASON to abandon their duty to the constitution in their crass efforts to maintain their positions of ill-gotten power or to promote their secret agenda of Marxist socialism. It will remain treason until they publicly amend the constitution to recognize the new order they have been promoting with measured deceit. Dare we call them all traitors when they hold the power to destroy us? Is our fear of criticizing the state not proof of these accusations? What’s to become of those of us who still believe in individual freedom and responsibility? How can we carry on when we realize the USA no longer exists as a constitutional republic? What can be done when the majority of Americans refuse to take up their responsibility? Since lawful resistance is becoming increasingly difficult, are we to just accept our fate and try to remain invisible to the beast as long as possible? How can we stand by and watch in horror and disbelief as America is inexorably herded into smaller and smaller pens? How long can we choke on our impotent rage or endure resigned depression? Our forefathers somehow summoned the courage of their convictions, but they did not have to face the same Goliath that we have allowed to emerge. They gave their lives to secure our freedoms but now we must fight again to convince others of what has been lost. How do you convince a people weaned on the state’s teat that there is more to freedom than cashing a government check? Will the battle for freedom again have to take place on a bloody field of revolution or can we restore our liberty by using the arena of ideas? Freedom so beloved balances on the brink, awaiting our decision. Will we once again embrace its sacred principal of individual self-responsibility or will we continue to abandon our birthright for slavery under the cold dead hand of an institution incapable of caring? Dr. Snoad wrote this letter of protest as a submission to a request for public comment on the infamous big brother banking proposal. The subject concerned the proposed regulation that would require banks to snoop on their customers with outrageous personal questions. All in the name of catching international money launderers. letter to big brother banking proposal I find it unbelievable that any American would even think of this Big Brother banking proposal, much less want to inflict it on innocent Americans. Why stop here? Why not just confiscate all of our assets upfront? Then you won't have to worry about any suspicious activity? Compared to your Orwellian nightmare, the criminal activity you think you will stop is a non-threat. Whomever proposed this legislation is no believer in the basic tenets of the constitution. It looks like Hitler and his gestapo goons have returned from hell with this hideous piece of totalitarian crap. Whomever promotes this freedom-destroying legislation is a far greater threat to America than the foulest of criminals. I have no respect for anyone who thinks this is a good idea, for they know nothing of what true freedom means, nor, apparently, do they even care. I strongly object to this assault on the constitution. I condemn this bank regulation with the blackest mark I can summon from my pen! Dr. Snoad wrote this letter after 9-11 to send in to the local print media in an effort to draw attention to the overlooked dereliction of duties. The misguided American citizens who are willing to give up hard won liberties in the hope of obtaining security need a refresher course on our constitutional republic. Perhaps they have forgotten all elected representatives have sworn to uphold the constitution and one of the prime constitutional mandates is to protect our freedom by ensuring our country is defended against enemies both foreign and local. Unfortunately the recent surge in patriotism was not accompanied by a correspondingly increased critical examination of our government’s security lapse. Our taxes provided congress with a multi-billion dollar defense budget but no quantity of money can make up for their lack of oversight or the loss of precious life. There was ample prior evidence from many sources that this country was vulnerable to terrorist attack and yet the warnings were ignored by the responsible agencies. Furthermore, our government authorized the transfer of money, weaponry and sophisticated technology to countries known to sympathize and support terrorist activity while eliminating basic security checks of their foreign immigrants. The net result has been to provide our enemies with the means to easily inflict great harm upon us. In the real world this sort of catastrophic failure of duty would have resulted in dismissals but we have allowed our government to place itself above accountability. In addition and in violation of the constitution, our government sent US troops abroad, not with the clear mission of defending against a direct threat to us, but put at the disadvantage of simultaneously fighting for and against a culture often openly hostile to our way of life. Instead of the government fulfilling its constitutional mandate its irresponsible actions only served to increase the anger and hate of a foe determined to destroy us. Was such ill-advised foreign policy only an unfortunate mistake or should we have held our leaders accountable for dereliction of duty and a betrayal of our faith in them? Now, instead of honoring their oath to the constitution, there is an alarming majority of congressmen who are actually suggesting we sacrifice more freedom and presumably more taxes in a vain attempt to stop terrorism. We must face the reality that the constitution has little meaning to today’s representatives, nor does the sacred lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans whom made the ultimate sacrifice while fighting for freedom in past foreign wars. Even more unbelievable is the number of Americans who seem to agree with the absurd notion that giving up freedom will somehow preserve it. It should be no surprise that our enemies look upon us as paper tigers that can be frightened into quickly giving up supposedly cherished values. Are they correct in assuming we are soft and easily panicked American lambs ready for the slaughter? Has the blood our brave fathers shed for the preservation of freedom been in vain? Will we meekly allow our birthright to be taken away by someone sworn to protect it or will we stand up and demand our representatives give us the protection we paid for? If we have not been intimidated by the terrorists then we certainly should not relinquish our freedom to anyone who has not taken care of their own responsibilities as our representatives. Dr. Snoad wrote this article in response to a submission to the local news media. Your letter indicates you feel government programs are responsible for the progress and any reduction in these assumed beneficial social services will lead to a continuation of the problems. It is regrettable that intelligent and well-intentioned people continue to make this erroneous assumption. Perhaps a clearer understanding of how government produces "equality of opportunity" would persuade you to change your opinion. To understand government is to know the meaning of the word, coercion, for that is the basic characteristic of all governments. All government programs, no matter how beneficial they may seem, use force as the means of producing a "level playing field". This aspect of government is easily overlooked for you are shielded from witnessing the negative effect on me and millions of other individuals who are forced to sacrifice over 50% of our income to support what we consider to be immoral programs. Ask yourself this question: would you personally be willing to come to my door and by threat of force take 50% of my income to support your favorite government programs? If your answer is yes, would you be willing to forcefully take possession of my assets or my home, over my indignant objection, just to pay for your so-called morally acceptable ideas? If your answer is no, do you feel it is morally acceptable for a government agency to forcefully take from me on your behalf? In other words, is it okay for the IRS to do your dirty work so you can turn your head the other way and not have to witness the destruction of my life in the name of the law? Further more, is it morally acceptable to your religious faith to support laws responsible for the use of force? It should be remembered, by voting, you endorse the political candidates responsible for the education, job training, health care and other government social services funded in part by the tax money taken from me without my consent. The use of government force has helped create the very division, disharmony and misunderstanding you deplore. Like an addictive elixir it has lured the same oppressed classes you wish to help into a life of dependence and has never promoted the self-responsibility necessary to securing their liberation from the "inequities of their birth circumstances". There is no "equality of opportunity" in giving those who desire to live off of the labor of others the unlimited power to satisfy whichever group has the necessary votes or influence. In contrast, peaceful voluntary cooperation would honor each individual’s unique perceptions and beliefs, no matter how diverse they may be, without forcing anyone to accept one point of view over another. Force can never legitimately encourage the spirit of cooperation for it is not based on love, nor does it recognize the underlying spiritual unity we all share. In fact, the use of force is a denial and violation of the religious principals you profess. I oppose the use of government/force to correct any problem you may view as socially unjust. From my point of view immoral means can never justify the ends and I will always resist and condemn any of your efforts to employ this method. However, I would be happy to support any non-violent private program or any loving, compassionate testament that encourages improved race relations through voluntary cooperation. Dr. Snoad wrote this article in response to the local media's call for discussion about "national service". Your editorial page creed is, "We will defend individual freedom, pursue truth, build understanding and nurture a marketplace of ideas". It is ironic you chose to present these questions about compulsory national service on the same page. However, it is also representative of the great depth of misunderstanding about the concept of freedom in this country. It is assumed that, in a nation founded on a constitutional republic, the answers to these questions would be obvious. The responses should range from light-hearted guffaws or quick waves of dismissal, to condescending lectures urging the editors to review the constitution and the bill of rights. However, the citizens of this country have exchanged their heritage of freedom for the control of a gigantic bureaucracy. What once prompted a historic call for revolution now has become just another topic designed to legitimatize the state's control. Therefore, if the editors are serious about defending individual freedom, they should point out that required or "officially encouraged" service to the state is a collectivist idea and has nothing to do with freely given voluntary service. If the editors are pursuing the truth they should instead turn their attention to the motives of the political advocates of these ludicrous forum questions. Since there is no mention in the constitution of enforced "national service", then any elected politician promoting such a scheme should be condemned for violating his oath of office. Finally, if the editors wish to build understanding they should produce a series of articles devoted to the concept of inherent freedom of the sovereign individual and the consequences of allowing the federal government to assume sovereignty over the individual. Then, the market place of individual ideas will discover truth for itself. Dr. Snoad wrote this article in response to a local newspaper article concerning the question - What government do we deserve? The author of the article had confused the principle of a limited constitutional government with democracy, 2 entirely different forms of government. The author used president F.D. Roosevelt's tenure as examples of the virtues of democracy in action. Your article published in the newspaper on May 3, What government do we deserve? You decide, indicates you are either confused about the purpose of governments and the concept of democracy, or you are purposely promoting an unconstitutional concept. If you are indeed confused about the meaning of freedom, self-responsibility and government’s role in your life, then it is conceivable you might want a political institution to govern the way you live, work and play. If on the other hand, you believe government’s true purpose is to control everyone’s life, then you are advocating a system that is totally incompatible with the freedoms guaranteed in the bill of rights. In a constitutional republic, the system originally adopted by our founding fathers, government was intended as a strictly limited institution with the sole purpose of protecting our freedom as individuals. I believe you will find this plainly stated in the constitution and the bill of rights. No where is there any mention of governing the way we live, work or play and quite naturally this freedom should extend to the local level. The temptation to gain unrestricted control of the coercive monopoly of government was one the greatest fears of the author of the constitution, James Madison. However, under a democratic system, as championed by President Roosevelt, the majority can and often does, use the power of government to impose their will on any minority that has the temerity to want to live their lives in a different manner. Therefore, a democracy is a not the most humane or advanced form of societies, but it is one that was more suited to Mr. Roosevelt’s political philosophy. He is responsible for instituting that grandest of all socialist schemes, social security, one of the greatest frauds in history. So what kind of government do we deserve? My decision is the same as all free individuals, I will not support nor participate in any government, local or national, that feels its has the right to meddle in my life. I denounce the labyrinth of taxes, rules and regulations that entangles my life and denies my right to live my life according to my own values.
|
Dr. Snoad wrote this in response to a collectivist's anti-gun rhetoric in the news media. Dear Ms. anti-gun advocate, How ironic that you, as a professed believer in the balance of power in the federal government, would pick out Mr. Ashcroft's stenographic errors, yet ignore the gross imbalance that already afflicts the entire federal government. Mr. Ashcroft is not the only unelected high official to apply his own interpretation to the constitution. He shares that trait with you and virtually every bureaucrat and elected representative in Washington who generally ignore the purpose of the constitution and bill of rights
|
|
Dr. Snoad wrote the following long essay from a
fictional Christian’s point of view, in an effort to establish
the basis for a discussion with other Christians. A copy was sent to
local Christian organizations in hopes of determining their attitude
about government and freedom.
It should be noted here that Dr. Snoad has a conventional Christian background but is no longer affiliated with any particular institution. Much of his writing concerning Christianity is an attempt to prompt Christians into reexamining their beliefs in relation to current events. For a fuller understanding of Dr. Snoad’s religious perspective read, THE TEMPLE OF THE HIDDEN DOMAIN. ************************************************************************************************ FORCE: --noun. 1. Strength or power exerted upon an object; physical coercion; 2. Violence offered of persons or things, as the use of force in breaking into a house. 3. Power to influence, affect, or control; power to convince. 4. Any body of persons combined for joint action: a police force.
In the course of human interaction and for the sake of beneficial cooperation, it is absolutely necessary to define the terms that relate to our behavior to avoid misunderstandings and to establish a basis for cooperative behavior between the wide diversity of people in our society. One of the most important terms to understand is the word force, for it is the basis of all governments in our current society. Force is the implied or explicit attribute of all governmental processes. There should be no misunderstanding of the word for the negative consequences of coercion permeates and affects almost every aspect of our Christian lives. In contrast, the basis of private interaction is the spontaneous order established by free, self-responsible individuals seeking voluntary cooperative agreements for mutual gain. Ideally, voluntary cooperation should be the natural outcome of all interaction between Christians for our faith is founded on, not force, but peace and love. If we are true Christians this puts us at odds with those in our society that believe government is the answer to all of our problems. As most sincere Christians will admit, it is a challenge to live a Christian life in the current social climate. It seems our moral convictions are being tested at an ever-greater rate and we are being besieged on all sides by a society and government determined to wear us down with relentless immorality. Like all Christians I draw strength from the love of God, yet at times I have succumbed to despair and hopelessness at my inability to stand firm against the tide of temptation. When these negative feelings threaten to overwhelm me I turn to prayer and bible study. From my devotions I have concluded that a problem of this magnitude will require a more determined personal effort if I am ever to overcome its depressing effects. I prayed daily for guidance in helping me understand the problem and perhaps devise an effective personal strategy of active response, I began to study the probable causes of our society’s ills. The answer was not long in presenting itself to me. I firmly believe that the Christian faith is no longer fulfilling one of its main missions in life. It is no longer providing the firm stabilizing effect on our society as a whole. I am just as guilty as the next when I say we have become too complacent in the midst of the superficial plenty of our age. We no longer set the strong example of unwavering morality that our society so desperately needs. Rather than true representatives of Christ, we have allowed ourselves to become weak watered down versions of Christianity, content to remain comfortable in our Sunday best. It’s easier to pay lip service to our beliefs rather than face the harsh reality of our growing hypocrisy. I feel I can no longer consider myself a true Christian and from my point of view all people formerly known as Christians, clergy included, would best be represented by the phrase, "friends of Christ". A close kin to the sunshine fan, a "friend of Christ" does not feel bound to live by all the teachings of Christ. In the new freer climate of our politically correct society we, as "friends of Christ", realize it is not always expedient to live strictly by the Christian moral code. To avoid any unpleasant confrontations with our conscience we have given ourselves permission to have our cake and eat it too. As "Friends of Christ" we feel free to pick and choose the commandments we wish to observe and still remain in good standing with our savior. As long as we keep up appearances by attending church and talking the good talk, we feel we have fulfilled our obligations to our religion and our God. It’s a great strategy, this live and let live, but there is a price to be paid. "Friends of Christ" must face that nasty criticism of hypocrisy and the inevitable fear we may be endangering our place in paradise. Even more damaging is the loss of legitimacy our non-Christian brothers perceive in us. I’m not happy with my "friend of Christ" status. It will take a lot of courage to reclaim my heritage as a free person and a Christian and I wonder if I will ever be able to reconcile my life with true Christianity. The actions necessary to achieve this reconciliation may have severe personal consequences but that is a choice I cannot put off if I wish to renounce my "friendship". I am beginning to realize what extraordinary courage it must have taken for the early Christians to resist the rule of the Romans. That is the depth of resolve I must summon to throw off the yoke of the modern day Rome and its soul-killing hold on my life. When I say hold I’m not referring to an external force applied against my will, but rather a condition caused by my own negligence. The most disturbing aspect of my neglect is the negative consequences that all Americans will suffer if we fail to make our lives an example of our convictions. I realize I cannot take on the burden of mankind but if I don’t begin reform with my own life, how can I hope to convince others to face their hypocrisy either? As an example of my neglect and willingness to compromise my principles, consider this serious concern shared by most members of the Christian faith: the predictions in Revelations about the coming of the beast or anti-Christ and the mark it will force all to wear in its service. I’m afraid we have not been concerned enough and this apathy has been our undoing. The beast is already in our midst and we have actively participated in its growth from our birth. We have unwittingly given a large part of our life to sustaining that which we were warned to avoid at all costs. Although we have been taught to think of it as necessary and beneficial, our federal government is the beast personified. Because the government did not ride in on a thundering horse and cruelly stamp us with its mark, we foolishly fell for it’s clever tactic of marking by proxy. Direct confrontation would be too easily noticed and resisted by even "friends of Christ", so the beast entered our gates of morality on the Trojan horse of government compassion. However, government can never utilize loving compassion for force is its only means of accomplishing a seemingly benign mission. Let me repeat the word, never, because it will always apply when attempting to equate the concept of Christian love with the institution of government. A careful look at any government program will reveal the unchristian force used to control our lives, but the most damaging program is the alleged "safety net" of the Social Security program. Although originally conceived as retirement insurance, or income redistribution if you prefer, it has become the beast’s primary tool for forceful control. The trivial fact that the social security number is not physically stamped on us is irrelevant. The beast already controls our lives because we have allowed its laws and soulless numbering to take precedence over the spiritual guidance of God. To the beast our lives are not sacred but rather mere numbers that represent assets it can manage for its continued immoral growth and benefit. Our survival is almost totally dependent on the conditions the social security number forces on us. Nowhere is this more evident than when we attempt to provide for our families basic physical needs. Without the beast’s number we are unable to obtain jobs, provide transportation (driver’s license), or conduct private business (open bank accounts, start up a business) without the beast’s permission. Instead of remaining free to devote our lives to the creative expression of God’s love, we have allowed our selves to be degraded by a soulless number. There can be no other way to look at it. The social security number marks us as slaves to the beast. Of course the beast promised the number would only be used for identifying participants in the social security program, but this was a ruse. Through the skillful manipulation of a largely insecure and naively trusting populace, the beast was able to popularize a "benefit" that has become one of the greatest frauds in history. So now we are not only under the control of the beast’s number but we are willing participants in the worst possible investment for our futures. Few are aware of the huge losses this program is inflicting on everyone. A cursory amount of mathematical calculation will reveal that placing money under a mattress will pay more than social security in old age. Yet we continue to blindly support an evil that is not only crippling our economic future, but is forcing us to violate our most cherished values. The beast is not content with our enslavement. It will also force us to pay for it as well. Let there be no mistake about it, government is anathema to Christians. Government exists by force; true Christians exist in and through the love of God. In examining the problem further we will have to acknowledge our trusted representatives have become unwitting agents of this out-of-control monster and wield the force necessary to insure we remain in servitude to our false master. The beast’s pawns, many of which claim to be Christian, have helped to create and maintain the beast’s version of "morality" with absurd and freedom destroying laws. The state is the perfect vehicle for those Christians who believe they can make a right by using wrong, or who mistakenly believe that it is acceptable to promote morality by using immoral means. Their intentions may have been good but in reality they have violated their fundamental Christian values. To show their "true" allegiance they are even willing to take a Christian oath to a constitution they cannot in good faith honor. We have our part in this false allegiance as well. Professing a life devoted to Christ does not alter the fact that, through "voluntary" taxation, acceptance of the beast’s aid and electoral politics, we, the electorate, participate in and support the countless immoral activities of this beast. We have, in effect, accepted the beast as our new "god". The beast cannot accept any authority higher than itself for that would mean acknowledging the freedom granted us by God. To insure its continued existence it must insist on being the highest authority and the source of freedom in our lives. It will force us to accept this fact unless we exercise our own inherent God-given freedom and refuse to give any further support. I believe this is the reason for the warning about the beast in Revelations. We, as free individuals in Christ, do not exist to serve governments. What greater sin can there be than to voluntarily renounce God’s supreme gift of freedom in order to serve the evil of the beast? What greater error than to place ourselves under tutelage to a master that survives by forcing us to abandon our faith? In spite of our seemingly complete surrender to the beast, it is and always will be a temporary condition. We are free to reclaim our birthright at any time and exercise the freedom that has always been God’s gift to us. To do this we must make the difficult choice of renouncing all ties with the state, especially the identification number the beast insists we use. We must refuse to accept any further state sponsored support, no matter how tempting it may be. This is the beast’s way of luring us into dependence on it rather than God. If any Christian is in need he only has to turn to God in prayer and guidance will come through our Creator’s loving hand. Any help you receive from the state comes through the use of force. Someone’s assets have been forcibly taken (taxation) in order that you may benefit. The beast supplies its false help in the name of compassion but it is given, not with voluntary kindness, but with forced compliance. In addition we must also discontinue any support we may have given in the past. This means participation in any phase of the electoral process must be halted. When you vote for agents of the beast you are encouraging them to continue their own defilement, and you are giving them license to continue your own enslavement. The allegiance we have mistakenly given to the state and the pride of patriotism are all conditions the beast has carefully fostered to ensure we remain oblivious to our true status as slaves. I do not advocate any violent overthrow of the state for that would merely be a validation of its own forceful means of maintaining control. Complete non-violent withdrawal of our support is the only acceptable action we can take if we wish to be true Christians. "Friends of Christ" will have to stop considering government as the lesser of two evils. This assumes there are only 2 choices of moral guidance in life, either the coercive monopoly of government or the greater evil of chaos and anarchy. However, this point of view completely ignores the omnipotent presence of God and even willfully denies that faith in His love would have any effect on our lives. To live life as a true Christian is an infinitely better choice than surrendering our God-given freedom to the evil of slavery under the beast. There can never be any evil in living as a self-responsible, loving Christian. Force, no matter what guise it assumes, is evil and should have no place in a Christian’s life. I firmly believe that, without Christianity’s moral support, the state will eventually wither up and evolve into a society based on the voluntary love of God. I would be more than proud to support and salute any society that flies that flag. We must not confuse our love of our fellow men and the society of freedom we strive to create with the corrupt government of the beast. They are not the same! The beast would claim the American flag as its own but our forefathers fought under it for a much different reason. The kingdom of God exists in our hearts as a fierce desire to live our lives in freedom so that we may express the love and grace of God. Just how did we arrive at this point? Where were the church leaders when this numbering was first proposed? Why did they not object to its use? Are they so complacent that they no longer care that we are numbered like cattle in the field? Do the standards of behavior taught by Christ no longer have any meaning to them? It appears that our church leaders have also become unwitting agents of the beast when they so willingly accept money from the beast, such as the so-called "faith-based" initiative proposed by the chief "friend of Christ". Accepting the beast’s support reinforces its corrupt system and perpetuates its control over us. It is a denial of our ability to care for our brothers and sisters on our own through the voluntary loving means inherent in the spirit of God. Have we not been taught that all things are possible through our faith in God? Now, the greatest test of our faith will be the strength of our desire to be more than just "friends of Christ". If we should decide to summon the courage of our convictions, where would we begin in our struggle? We have allowed this moral decay to thoroughly infect our society, which has given the beast time to erect formidable barriers to any resistance. We have given the beast the power to punish any criticism against its immoral actions (the U.S.A. Patriot Act, etc.) and any non-violent withdrawal of support may prompt it to make our participation in its evil mandatory. Even more alarming is the immorality the beast promotes through our children’s education, to the point of turning them against parental authority. The question is, do I have enough faith in the love of God to face possible persecution for my beliefs? Do I truly believe that all things will be added to me if I become more than a "friend of Christ"? The fact that the choice is mine is a testament to the miraculous gift of freedom God has given to all. We, as aspiring Christians, should honor that gift by rejecting the beast’s rule by force and insist on living our lives dedicated to the love and freedom given by God. The world and our own lives will reap the peaceful rewards of such a life-giving decision. I believe God holds a place in my heart and I long to bear witness to the love and freedom He so bountifully gives forever to all. (The responses to my letter were underwhelming. I guess Christians are tired of preaching, especially when it requires them to make an important decision. One thoughtful administrative individual replied by pointing me to a Christian website. Their position is a familiar one - work within the system to reform it. Would they consider going to hell and working to reform the devil? Is their faith strong enough to resist the devil's temptations on his own turf? My response to the "work within the system" will be included later.)
|
Dear concerned but misinformed Christians,
I read the article about your "Gifts for Guns" program and thought you might find another point of view interesting.
Your concern about violence in the world is laudable but the method you have chosen to alleviate the problem indicates you have not yet ascertained the root cause. As many intelligent observers of violence have pointed out, removing a particular technology, guns in this case, will prove to be a futile gesture.
Changing the minds and hearts of those prone to violence is the only way of bringing about peace. Merely buying the guns of conscientious citizens will not have any affect on criminals, except to make their victims an easier target. Beware, lest you become one of Mr. Lenin’s "useful idiots" and further the cause of the would-be tyrants in this country.
Ask yourself this question: Is it appropriate for a Christian to attempt to bribe a potentially violent person with $50 or would loving persuasion be more effective?
Perhaps using the $2500 to help those truly in need would prove to be a better investment in peace.
A concerned non-Christian and a friend of Thomas Paine
(No response from the Christians. This gun buy-back program had a lot more to do with control than compassion)
Dr. Snoad wrote this letter to send to local
Christian groups to offer them a different view point about the nature
of love and cooperation.
THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION
The spirit of cooperation is expressed by the language of love.
Underlying every field of human activity, no matter how diverse or obscure, lies the spirit of cooperation. Regardless of the consequences, whether they be considered good or evil, the all pervasive spirit of cooperation is the motivating force.
It is the essence of the universe to be creatively cooperative, even in the face of what appears to be chaos and emptiness. As the physicist, David Bohm has said, "the universe likes to happen together".
The emergence of cooperation can be explained as a consequence of individuals pursuing their own interests and in turn learning to love, create and cooperate with their fellow inhabitants.
A person will always act in his own self interest. The fact that each individual life does not exist independent of another means there is no one best method of coexistence, or life strategy or moral standard that can be successfully applied to all. Therefore the employment of a rigid central authority such as a government is not the best solution to regulating individual behavior or promoting cooperation among individuals.
Whatever method of coexistence is chosen, it cannot exist independent of another person’s chosen standard of behavior. Therefore voluntary cooperation and individual self-responsibility will always strive to emerge as the basis of human relationships, for it benefits all equally without violating individual beliefs or freedom.
Governments, although formed to regulate human interaction, are actually more of a hindrance to cooperative human behavior and routinely violate the freedoms they were formed to protect. Whenever governments or similar centrally organized institutions are established their rules of law are too limiting to the free flow of information between individuals. The spontaneous spirit of cooperation is distorted or obstructed by one size fits all rules and stifling bureaucracy of governments. They tend to impose the narrow views of the controlling authority onto the majority, forcing many to violate their personal standards of behavior in order to avoid being punished as criminals. When government intrudes in private interactions of citizens it interrupts the learning process provided by cooperative feedback and fosters hatred rather than love by favoring one group over another.
Whenever individuals, groups of individuals or governments deny coexistence to others, their actions are usually governed by a point of view that is based on ignorance of the true nature of life on earth. They are using the language of hate in a futile attempt to deny the spirit of cooperation between themselves and those they hate. Such a one-dimensional social view ignores the incredible variety and richness of life cooperating together on every conceivable level of consciousness to produce our daily experience together. Our planet’s existence and all life depend on this creative cooperation between each individual, unique consciousness.
The following letter was written to a local black minister in response to his support of the so-called faith-based funds.
Dear Reverend,
There is a reason the framers of the constitution insisted on strict separation of church and state. That reason will always remain valid because it is based on an immutable fact: government by its very nature is a coercive monopoly. It uses force to win obedience and such tactics should never be morally acceptable to a religious people. No amount of white washing or rationalization can ever change the fact that the money you are so willing to accept is taken from millions of hard working people by threat of force.
First of all, the income tax, from whence your faith-based funds are provided, is nothing more than legalized theft. It is an illegal tax that was never properly ratified by the states in 1913 and since then has become a 10,000+ page collection of intentionally vague, indecipherable rules with which no one can ever legally comply. Secondly, the Gestapo-like agency, which is used to collect the tax, has destroyed countless lives in its ruthless prosecution of illegal laws. There are numerous sources of information detailing the endless and shameful litany of abuses in the forced collection of your "faith-based" funds.
How can you justify accepting these funds when the institution supplying them is anathema to your basic principles of voluntary love and faith? What rational arguments can you offer to explain accepting money from a morally bankrupt government? Do you not owe your moral allegiance to the institutions created by God and dedicated to the service of love? Would Christ approve of your acceptance of monetary support that is involuntarily taken from millions of fellow Americans?
Ask yourself these simple questions: would you personally be willing to collect the tax from whence your faith-based funds come? Would you personally be willing to force a family to sell off their hard-earned assets in order to pay for your faith-based funds? If you are not willing to do these things, is it morally acceptable to allow someone else to do it for you? Is it not against the Christian ethic to encourage someone, i.e., the misguided but ruthless IRS collectors, into compromising their moral integrity, even though the action might be beneficial to you?
It would seem you have fallen into the socialist trap of believing the ends justifies the means. Your reasoning indicates you do not understand the true nature of government, or worse, you believe the government’s ability to solve mankind’s problems by the use of force is more effective than the method of love taught by Christ.
Should you decide to accept the federal funds you will be rubbing shoulders with a large number of other "faith-based" organizations that have magically sprung up over night to take advantage of all that "free" government money. To counteract that frenzy of feeding the government will have to create another labyrinth of regulations with which you will have to comply to continue to get your cut. At some point you will have to deal with a bureaucrat who will first supplement your 10 commandments with a few thousand of his own and then teach you the miracle of quantifying your faith in God through countless government forms.
Will you measure up? Will your faith prove acceptable to your new god of government, or will it judge your faith to be deficient and therefore not worthy of all those "free" faith-based funds we "voluntarily" supply to the IRS/Gestapo?
letter to
response to xtian's essay on Christianity
& government
(curator's notes: Dr. Snoad sent his Test of
Faith article to local Christian clerics and received a response from a
minister, defending Christians in government service. This letter
was in reply to that defense.)
Date: 9/20/2002
Author: Dr. Pall U. Snoad
Hi Gene,
Thanks for responding to my essay. It was sent to a variety of local Christian churches as a way of judging the current Christian opinion on the federal government. Although I am no longer a Christian I thought writing from that point of view would illicit insightful responses.
If I am reading you son's article correctly, he is making these basic assumptions: 1. All humans are inherently "sinful" or prone to doing evil deeds, 2. Civil government was instituted by God to control the evil of sin, 3. Humans are rational, volitional individuals who are responsible for the power they delegate to government, and 4. Since government is a legitimate sphere of Christian service, Christians are obliged to work within government structures to restore any disorder or correct injustice within society or government itself.
When your son gives examples of unacceptable political forms he is ironically describing the type of government Christians have allowed to evolve in this society. Plato's enlightened philosopher-kings have a direct counterpart in the intellectual elites who graduate from our largely socialist colleges, and who naturally believe the means of our government justifies their vision of the desirable ends.
Karl Marx's, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", is perfectly exemplified by the federal government's social security program. To justify the elite's perception of America's economic inequality, the program was conceived as a way of forcefully redistributing income from "greedy capitalists" to the needy.
If Christians are to render service and obedience to government, then it is logical they would use their God-given rationality and volition to ensure the government employs responsibly the sword of justice, order and war . To this end our founding fathers, all Christians, wisely wrote the constitution as the best means of achieving God's ordained government. It was precisely designed to limit any possible abuse of power by sinful humans and to ensure that the individual remained sovereign over the state.
Sadly, this noble document has passed into history for the government it was designed to limit has grown to unbelievable size and power. Christians who are active within government have abdicated their responsibility to limit the power of sin in their lives and in the government, and are in danger of becoming as irrelevant as the constitution. If it is Christians' responsibility to call political leaders back to their true tasks, then they have a lot of work to do. If government is the legitimate sphere of Christian service then all Christians who work in government should adhere to their oaths of office. If God is their witness then any true Christian taking this oath today is morally bound to immediately resign the office to which he just swore allegiance. He is assuming office in a system that no longer honors the constitution and if he participates in this fraudulent and illegitimate despotism he has violated his oath before God.
If you doubt my claims of the constitution's demise you need only read it and then study the massive amount of illegal legislation that has obliterated its meaning. The bill of rights is dead because all American citizens, Christians included, have allowed the state to usurp their God-given power. The state has literally redefined which rights may be enjoyed by whom, which, ironically, is the definition your son's article gave to totalitarian governments.
The whole point of my essay was to point out the immorality of using government/force to correct what you may perceive as a social injustice. The only morally acceptable means of righting a wrong is through voluntary peaceful cooperation, for what you may perceive as injustice may not be so from my point of view. For example, you may think it to be a wonderful idea to tax me and give the money to the needy, but from my point of view it is a total act of theft. I have not been given the opportunity to voluntarily donate my resources to those I consider needy. You are in effect using force to make me comply with rules that I may deem to be immoral. Is it Christian to force me to invalidate my own code of conduct or act against my own rational judgment?
If God is the ultimate source of my being then what is the point of giving me the power of free choice and action if I am not allowed to act on my beliefs? What am I to think when well meaning Christians in government write laws responsible for abusing my freedom in order that others may benefit?
response to muslim article
Date: 12/16/2002
Keywords: christians, muslims, terrorism
Author: Dr. Pall U. Snoad
Mr. A,
I wish to comment on your revealing column in today's paper, Targeting US Muslims is a form of ethnic cleansing.
Let me begin by stating I have no affiliation with any established institutional religion but I do, however, have a strong affection for the American freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness. Therefore l feel I am in a position to offer an unbiased opinion about your recent star article and the current "debate" between Christians, Muslims and Jews.
Christian, Muslim, Jew, what difference does it make? I address each religion collectively through this article to you. We are all stuck on this planet and cooperation is the only way we can survive in peace. Perhaps you believe your religion is different and somehow superior by virtue of your one true God. However, the devils, hate-mongers, and anti- (name your religion) you perceive in the other religions are nothing more than an extension of the spiritual ignorance in your own hearts. Your particular lists of past transgressions by other religions are irrelevant. History is littered with the millions who have suffered from religious intolerance and the resultant wars. The only thing that matters to me is what you, Mr. A, personally propose to do now.
It matters little to me who wrote the various so-called sacred (name your holy whatever) texts, for in the end they seem to be only misguided, ignorant opinions about God. Also, to me, from each religion's collective actions, it matters little what your sacred (name your holy whatever) prophet, messiah, etc. has said or taught, because all of you, from Christian to Muslim to Jew, seem to have missed the part about living in peace and harmony with your brothers and sisters.
Based on the quality of actions, or lack thereof, of the so-called devoted followers of God, Jehovah or Allah, I have no desire to associate with either sect or its God. Over the centuries, instead of promoting peace and love among mankind, these religions have done nothing but discredit themselves and any belief in a loving God. Instead of working towards peace many innocents have been forced to spend enormous amounts of energy and sacrifice countless lives, trying to avoid destruction at the hands of a bunch of ignorant, squabbling, religious, but oh so "peaceful", gangsters.
I am not an atheist, for I have a firm belief in a divine Creator but I am not interested in imposing my beliefs on anyone or murdering them because they do not believe in my God. However, I do believe it is the obligation of every freedom-loving, self-responsible American to publicly condemn any person or group who forcefully promotes a totalitarian religion or government, especially when it involves murder. Not to do so would put us in the same shameful position of all those "peaceful" Germans who stood silently by as Hitler slaughtered millions of Jews.
If you are a Muslim living in America you are facing a similar challenge. If you believe you are a peaceful and free member of American society and wish to promote that fact, then you must assume the responsibility of protecting that freedom. To defuse the image of Islam as a religion of war you must prominently display support for the way of life you share with your fellow Americans. You must prove to me and the rest of America you do not support the Muslim fanatics responsible for 9-11 or the vicious hatred the mid-eastern Muslim states have publicly shown towards Americans.
It is not enough to merely listen to moderate members of religions or government who fall over backwards to prove how tolerant they are. You must listen to your enemies, the ones you believe are pursuing an ethnic cleansing of Muslims. Their message is easy to understand. They believe you still give monetary and moral support to terrorist organizations and until you prove otherwise they will assume you have the same goals as the terrorists.
I believe you are a peaceful man and want nothing more than to live in cooperation with your fellow Americans, but don't make the mistake of the Christian Germans during WWII. Are you assured your voluntary contributions to your Islamic organizations are not going to support known terrorists groups? Are you going to stand silently by when the next Muslim terrorist murders an innocent American or will you step forward and show me for what you stand?
I await your answer as do many other Americans who are troubled by your silence and inaction.
The world needs a new set of gods, preferably ones that aren't interested in playing the cruel joke of creating a magnificent world full of wonders and then demanding that the inhabitants slaughter each other.
America’s Christian God came up way short on Sept. 11, when he stood by and watched 3,000+ of his very own snuffed in a matter of minutes. What sort of omnipotent God would allow such a horrible tragedy to befall his devout flock?
On the other side of the fence what sort of omnipotent Allah would "reward" his minions by telling them to commit suicide while taking other innocent people to their deaths? It makes you wonder if there is not some super conspiracy going on between God and Allah. It’s beginning to look like both Christians and Muslims are being used as expendable pawns in some vicious cosmic game of chess.
What is the purpose of this incredible conspiracy? Do the Gods need to thin out the population before we overrun the earth? Have we pissed them off in some unknown way? Are we supposed to learn some sick message from all of this killing and suicide? What is the point of life if killing and suicide is the way to get to heaven? Why can we not just skip the apparent misery of earth life and go straight to the reward?
I can think of a much more efficient way to ensure Muslims get to heaven. If the sacrificial slaughter of a Christian grants a first class ticket to heaven then Muslims should be more civilized about the whole procedure and draw up a contract with an acceptable Christian organization. A contract would give them legal access to a dependable source of Christian sheep suitable for ritual slaughter. This would eliminate destruction of valuable property and at the same time assure the rest of the Christian sheep that they would not be attacked at random.
Think of it as similar to the ancient cultures that used ritual sacrifice to appease their gods. It must have worked for them and allowed the rest of the population to go about their lives without fear of random, indiscriminate terrorist attacks. I would image the ancient’s societies were much more productive and peaceful.
So, all of you Muslims who are eager to kill a Christian on your way to heaven, what do you say? I know it will take away the thrill of the hunt if victims are supplied to you but hey, it’s a much more civilized world now and you have to do things the modern way. Allah shouldn’t be too concerned about how you acquire your victim as long as you do the actual dirty work of killing, right?
This solution also eases the Christians' concern that they are being groomed as sacrificial lambs. They can feel relief in the knowledge they will be rewarded for "turning the other cheek" to their enemies. Sacrificing their lives so that their fellow Christians may live in peace and security will surely guarantee them a mansion in heaven. Maybe that is what God and Allah had in mind all the time. The Christians can please their peacenik God by turning the other cheek and the Muslims can glorify their blood thirsty Allah by killing all the Christians they want. Everybody can then happily ascend his or her respective stairways to the appropriate heaven.
The Christian and Muslim heavens are separated, aren’t they? We wouldn’t want all those martyrs to arrive in the same heaven and have to start the whole bloody process all over again. There has to be an end to the insanity somewhere, doesn’t there? I can’t imagine God or Allah allowing rookie angels to mess up paradise with their ignorant squabbles. After all, if earth is actually God and Allah's designated killing ground, the combatants wouldn't want to spoil the God's cruel joke by learning to live in peaceful co-existence, or would they?
Do God and Allah really have an exclusive right to decide by what means we get to paradise? Doesn't it make more sense to stop jumping through their hoops of murder and slavery just to have a little peace? Wouldn't it be easier to set up our own heaven right here on earth and just cut the Gods out of their vicious heaven business?
What if we are the real Gods and the supposedly almighty ones are really only as all knowing and powerful as long as we believe they are! Move over Jehovah, I don’t need you any more. I don’t need to get on my knees and pray or beg for forgiveness when I can imbue myself with all the god-hood I need. Who is going to stop me? I have discovered the secret of the gods and boy is it a real eye opener!
BACK TO CORRESPONDENCE: CONSCIOUSNESS TRANSLATED