Tag: Loss of Freedom


The gloves are off now. No longer do we argue the point about politics with any measure of civility or honesty; no longer are news reporters reporting news or educators merely educating, and no longer do we intellectually or intelligently jostle and contend for the moral high ground of truth. Instead lies, slander, hate, intrigue and unashamed scheming are the weapons of choice in a mad, rabid attempt to bring down a duly elected President. Those who once claimed to be tolerant are out of the closet and swinging, bare knuckled.

So what’s just around the corner for America, and so for the world? It the haters win, there can be no other outcome but the total loss of free speech, the triumph of those who hate what America stands for, and the triumph of elites determined to rule over the rest of us using our money and our hard labor. The enemies of America and what was once Europe will be free to swamp the West. Sounds almost apocalyptic, doesn’t it?


Just a few years ago it seemed impossible and unthinkable that we would legalize gay marriage and accept is as “normal”, and facilitate the adoption of children by homosexuals. In the same way it may only be a very short time before another “unthinkable” becomes reality: America bowing to the religion being passed onto it.

Don’t believe me? I only have to look at my country of origin, the United Kingdom, and how-although few admit or even realize -it has already submitted to the point that it would take a miracle to stop the slide. Bear in mind that the goal of Islam is to bring the entire world into submission, then realize that the nation Churchill helped save from Nazi Germany  now has Sharia law courts. Mosques have replaced  many churches, people have been fired from their jobs or even arrested for expressing alarm, the media kowtows to the movement without question,and the majority of people have for some time been of the opinion that the only enemies of world peace are the United States and Israel. I’ve heard it myself from the lips of many of my former countrymen.

Americans have for so long lived in smug dominance that they are oblivious to the fact that their way of life could be “fundamentally” changed from within, as it surely is being. Couple that with the mainstream media’s blanket and unquestioning support for the current administration and politically correct ideology, and it seems that the slide into amorality could soon be followed by a slide into submission to the religion which plans to take over the world by fair means and foul.

At present there remains a measure of freedom to express and think outside of the PC box, but that freedom is shrinking, and has disappeared in some circles. The self-proclaimed standard bearer of Freedom, the US, is in serious danger of having its torch snuffed out from within.



There’s a big effort going on to remove any public reference to Christianity and the Christian God from Western culture, and Western governments are now determined to be leaders in this movement. The established church has largely acquiesced to the will of the politicians (it always did I suppose). Instead of looking for a man of godly character and wisdom, most people vote for the one who looks good, who can lie most convincingly, whose party can raise the most campaigning funds, and who gets the thinly veiled or open approval of our news media and entertainment industry which shares his agenda. If you listen hard, you can hear Marx cheering from his grave, because Government has become our god, just as government became god for the communists under Stalin and Mao.

Don’t believe me? Then consider that government claims to fulfill all the attributes and duties of the “old “ God, except, I would argue, its demands are far less pleasant than the Biblical God’s demands:

Your new god watches everything you do and say, and is endeavoring to control what you think. It records and catalogues all your movements from cradle to grave. It promises to provide for you from cradle to grave. It controls your actions and your business, or even whether you should have any business. It extracts from you what it wishes.

Government dictates its own views of morality, and decides what truth is: what is right and what is wrong. It controls what you and your children believe and has established and enforced the state religion of evolution. It indoctrinates you in its enforced education system, then prevents you from getting the qualifications you need to work if you do not bow to its secularized view of the world.  It gives you pills to keep you happy. It punishes and disciplines you. It decides whether you should be born, and it will soon decide when you should die. It takes your children away from you when it sees fit, and takes your children to fight its wars. It’s beginning to control what you eat and how much you eat, how much water you use, and what you do with the air around you. It demands your allegiance. It’s everywhere.12017878-birkenau

By the way, what’s the difference between democracy and bathos?

Answer: bathos is funny.

(In case you didn’t guess, that joke is one of my own creations).

Even democracy itself is negated when the government, elected by money, image and media bias, makes decisions based on its own desires and views without needing or wanting to consult the people. Yes, congressmen, senators and members of parliament take part in the passing of law, but if they aren’t listening, or if they themselves are duped, cajoled or bribed, the will of the people is ignored. Add to that the lethargy of the people, preoccupied and hypnotized as they are by entertainment and their own immediate concerns, and you have a government on the loose.

Plato said that democracy will always tend towards tyranny (Plato’s “Republic”). Why so? Because government feeds itself richly from the hard work of the citizens it claims to protect, so that it grows without limit, and gains more and more control, like a cancer. Human nature ensures that many people who want to be our governors think that they know better than their fellow citizens, and eventually some come along who demand absolute authority so that they can impose their solutions to all our problems – the problems which government created in the first place.democracy-2

Human government is alright (in human terms) as long as you agree with it. But what happens when it enacts something you do not agree with, something that you think is clearly wrong? Is it wrong for government to do that? How can it be wrong, since you  have rejected God, the only one who is True, and have thereby given human government license to decide what’s right and what’s wrong? As in the theory of evolution, there is no absolute right or wrong – life is all about survival of the fittest. If the people with the most money or the most power succeed in their wishes, you have no right to complain, if you have bought into that way of thinking. And, true to Marxist theology, your own wishes must be subservient to the will of the government:

“At no time and in no circumstances should a communist place his personal interests first: he should subordinate them to the interests of the nation and of the masses” From “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” (October 1938) Selected Works, Vol.II p. 198.

No, I am not an anarchist. Neither do I condone any kind of illegal or violent activity. I agree with the Bible when it says that government should be obeyed, so long as it doesn’t conflict with the will of God, and that it is used (not created) by God to maintain order and justice. I’m just saying that human government alone does not and cannot work. And if we continue to entrust ourselves to human government only, we are setting ourselves up for tyranny and some terrible times. We’re handing over our lives – body, mind and soul – to government. We get the leaders we deserve, because we turn our backs on the only true source of freedom: God.


By rejecting the idea of willingly keeping a check on our own behavior out of a love and a fear of God, and the sense that some things are objectively good and some bad, we are making necessary a mountain of lawmaking to try to control people. We have to pay enormous sums in taxes to try to catch people, when they think that they have only done something wrong if they get discovered and are subsequently convicted in court. If they only have to avoid capture, and need feel no guilt or conscience or fear of judgment, they will try harder to do so. Man against man offers far better odds than man against God.  You could boil down the entire predicament to just these few words:

“Less God equals more law”.

The secularist will complain that religion takes away freedom and that theocracies are oppressive. I totally agree. However, the form of Biblical government given in the Old Testament, in which God sets the standards, (and not human institutions of religion) seems to me a much fairer system than is any human system I’ve heard of. Needless to say, the people of that day failed to enact the system, the greedy took over, and before long the people chose to hand over their freedom to a monarchy.

So we must either stop whining about our government, or we must hope and confess that there is a God in heaven. Why? Because if there is no God, then our “survival of the fittest” mentality forces us to surrender to the unpredictable control of government, or to fight it. If God created us, there is a hard and fast system of truth which would cause us to thrive as individuals and as a society if we lived by it: “for best results, follow the maker’s instructions”. Without those instructions, society is like a ship on the ocean with no objective means of navigation: the crew must argue about who might know the best direction to travel in, all assuming that they agree on what the destination should be.


No I’m not saying that we must just blindly believe that there’s a God in order to have a fixed point of reference: there’s abundant evidence in nature that there is a God, and that He is a God of order. The problem is that we have been hoodwinked into believing that everything was created by fantastic chance and that we can therefore make up our rules for ourselves. No, the laws of nature didn’t just happen, and this incredible, beautiful world didn’t just form itself: they were made by a being who knows how things work.

We’re taught to not even seek God, but rather to accept the notion that we crawled out of slime, and that we must create or find our own truth. But there is a God, and there is a separate and an objective Truth which gives us the sense that some things are objectively right and some are wrong. There is a God who has a good idea of how government should operate.  There is a God to appeal to for help. There is a God who will ultimately judge us all, including those in government – all the way to the top – and He will judge by His standards of right and wrong, not by the standards of some committee, president or government. God isn’t interested in majority views: He’s already made up His mind.


220px-Lucas_Cranach_the_Elder-Adam_and_Eve_1533UNITY AND DIVISION

While the majority of us are preoccupied with the one-eyed Cyclops, being nightly indoctrinated and brainwashed with lies and deception, and being desensitized to all kinds of evil such as violence and the destruction of the family unit, others out there are busy changing our world for the worse just as rapidly as they can.  It seems that as long as people have at least two hundred channels to watch they’re satiated, as though it were Grade “A” Soma. Governments know this very well, and they know that most people care or even know little about decisions being made which will change their world, until television directs their minds to care.

The West has been betrayed, and is being betrayed, by media people and politicians of both persuasions. Government has been growing rapidly and spending more and more of our money to make more and more rules and regulations. Globalization has robbed our countries of millions of jobs.  In place of a natural culture of voluntary semi-unity, we have political correctness, which claims that we can and must have unity by developing and enforcing diversity. Well where is it? The answer is that the proponents of political correctness are working to force their views onto the rest of us and then make us, by law, all go along. This is their idea of unity.

We may have the immense privilege (irony) of all those channels to watch, and computers coming out of our ears, and new cars in the driveway, but what’s happened to our community and our will to live in one? Where people could once have had a chat with their neighbors over the garden fence, they now find that the neighbors speak a different language, follow a different religion, move out twice a year, live a new government-protected lifestyle, or think of themselves as being too “cool” or better-than-you to talk to just anybody, and want nothing to do with their neighbors. Many people don’t even know the names of those who live next door.

The traditional and extended family is almost gone, the community is almost gone, nationhood and patriotism are almost gone, and unity is almost gone. Winston Churchill must be turning over in his grave, and to be frank (though my name is really Nick), not many people even care what Winston Churchill would think anyway.

What once gave the West its unity and prosperity was Christian thought, Christian lifestyles, Christian families, Christian morals, and Christian principles and ethics. The fact that many gasp in disgust at such a statement shows just how far we have gone down the road of division and godlessness. No matter that a large number of people in that Christian world were not believers, and that some were as crooked as human nature sometimes is-at least they had, for the most part, a shared understanding of how to behave and how to get along, without forcing others to agree. Why should we be wondering what’s happening to our world, when the facts are plain to see? We have rejected the God of the Bible, and we’ve invited in everything that is opposed to Him, everything which replaces unity with division, and a political correctness which wants to grab by the throat all who would stop it.


Anyone heard of the old “divide and conquer” tactic?  Who’s been doing the dividing and the conquering?

The first man and the first woman existed in total freedom, for a time. They were created in perfection, and in perfect beauty. They had the entire world to themselves. There was no-one to make them afraid, and no-one to make them work. They were naked and unashamed, and were created to be “one flesh”. They were in perfect union.

Before long, the Divider entered the scene.

Humanity had been blessed with conscience and a free will: the dignity to choose between right and wrong. Relishing his chance at gaining power over the pinnacle of God’s creation, the Serpent immediately got to work making his first convert, convincing her that God was really just a killjoy and a liar – he wasn’t to be trusted. She could find her own spirituality, without that Liar controlling her.  The Serpent knew that her man would follow like a little puppy, and choose to obey her and not God.

Humans had begun to think their own way, and not God’s way.  Division had entered the world, most significantly between God and man, but also between people, and here we all are, trying to patch it all together our own way, and it isn’t working, and neither will it.

What makes us think we can have a unified and free society without our Creator? The only “unity” without Him will come (and is already coming) by force of law. And man cannot exist for long without God any more than we can exist without air.


To those of you expecting a punch line, I apologize for the disappointment: there isn’t one. There’s nothing funny about this, because there really are people who can’t see any difference between hatred and having an opinion…


If you express your opinion that their lifestyle is wrong and ungodly, they will accuse you of hating them. If you question their religion, they say you are being hateful. They even want to be able to call your opinion “hate speech” and make it a “hate crime”. They want to take you to court for expressing an opinion which they disagree with. Are they not being hateful themselves?

Is it even good logic to accuse you of being hateful? To me, it’s about as logical as a boy accusing his parents of being hateful if they say he’s wrong to act in a certain way.  We can discuss whether a certain action is really right or wrong: that’s healthy, but to blast away any debate by accusing your opponent of being “hateful” is rude, childish, selfish and arrogant.

If I tell you that I can love you as much as I can love anyone else, but disagree strongly with your life-style or your religion, and you still insist that I am being “hateful”, are you not accusing me of being a liar as well as accusing me of being hateful? Where then is your love for me? Are you not strongly disagreeing with me? So how is it that you are being “loving” when you strongly disagree with me, but I am being “hateful” when I strongly disagree with you?

Whatever happened to free speech? The same people who have pushed and shoved for free speech and for freedom from moral constraints are wanting to take away my free speech. More than that, they want, by law, to “educate” (a euphemism for “indoctrinate”) all people into their way of thinking, and thereby (they hope) to wipe out any opinion contrary to theirs.

I’m not here condoning bullying or violence., because that’s  always wrong – but there are already laws against that kind of thing: are some people more equal than others?

It’s interesting that some people will say I have no right to say that their kind of love is wrong. I agree that love is not wrong. But I’m not talking about love.  Is love sex? Are “love” and “sex” synonyms, as in the 1960s hippy definition? Is it not possible to love someone without having sex with them? If I decide that I love my neighbor’s wife, is it then alright for me to have sex with her, or should there perhaps be at least some consideration over whether having sex with her would be right or wrong? Would it be hateful for you to express the opinion that it would be wrong of me to have sex with her? Should I trash your opinion and accuse you of being hateful? Should I take you to court on a charge of “hate-speech’?

In the concepts of “hate crime” and “hate speech” are we not talking about “thought crime” – George Orwell’s frightening term for any expressed or perceived disagreement with the politically correct view of things? There are a growing number of viewpoints which are being defined as hateful, because they don’t align with political correctness. Certain religions, for example, are above scrutiny and are being given government protection from criticism (but not Christianity). The West, in its enthusiasm to become open, inclusive  and fair, is surrendering its own right to question, to assess, to analyze and to criticize. It’s giving away its own freedom to think. It’s inviting tyranny.

I have a t-shirt which reads:

“THINK…it’s not illegal yet”.

I’m going to have to throw it away soon.

You cannot make a free society by legislating freedom away. Make your argument if you must, but don’t attempt to enforce your lifestyle or your religion and push it on the rest of us with the weight of the law, and hypocritically call that “freedom”, and don’t accuse me of being hateful just because I refuse to agree with you.

And by the way, feel free to disagree with me…. I can take it.