What We Obtain too Cheap, We Esteem too Lightly

Cultural Mormons

2008-08-23T17:11:00.000-07:00

Just the other day my wife brought something to my attention that has built upon previous observations that I’ve made in the past few years. She came across a website devoted to “Homosexual Latter-day Saints”; specifically, this website was devoted to either current or excommunicated members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to find support and strength amidst a religious environment of “homosexual hatred”. I couldn’t help but laugh, initially, at the audacity of this website, but as I thought upon the premise of this organization I noticed a disturbing trend amongst the entirety of what you could call Mormondom. What I am speaking about is the ever-growing number of Cultural Mormons who are quickly filling the ranks amongst Latter-day Saints all around the world, but the center of this moment has found ample root within the soil of Utah.

Now, I’m sure there are many who, after reading the previous paragraph, are going to immediately state that I’m an apostate. Quite contrary, for my faith is an integral portion of my life and without it there would be no reason for my existence upon this earth. Having said this, I know how essential the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are to my life and the lives of all people, whether they directly realize it or not, so it is not my intention to break down the very structure that gives unto my life so much stability. Rather I seek to pinpoint effectual termites within the woodwork of our Gospel Culture, or the very center of our doctrines of salvation (i.e. The Plan of Salvation), who are eating away at the true meaning of what it is to be a Latter-day Saint and creating a new, culturally-savvy environment for a world-view of progressive thinking and living. This being said, the integrity of our Gospel is to not bend or give way to the philosophies or actions of the world around us. We are the beacon, the ensign on the hill, for all other nations and people to look up to and find direction in the world’s confusing maelstrom of shifting values.

So, what does this have to do with a concept of what I call Cultural Mormons? You may not initially see or comprehend, but every Latter-day Saint has seen or associated with a Cultural Mormon. These are individuals who hold onto the cultural patterns of our faith rather than the foundational doctrines established through the Restoration. Now, there are many, many cultural patterns within the Latter-day Saint faith, none of which have any bearing on the doctrines of salvation. The cultural patterns of the Latter-day Saints give unto parishioners a way in which to personalize their faith or to make it more ‘real’. Let us look at the concept of missionary work amongst the Latter-day Saints for an example of Cultural Mormons. Take a moment to imagine what comes to your mind when you think of a missionary. Do you envision a nervous but excited young man giving a farewell speech at his home Ward? Do you envision a grand homecoming of a young man returning from a foreign land, stumbling to remember his native tongue, and being smothered with balloons, banners, and hugs from his adoring family? Or do you envision an eager missionary tearing into a care package containing goodies and treats from home? Can you envision these things? If you can, then you’ve been thinking about everything that is in the culture of our missionary work. None of these things, not one, has anything to do with the doctrines of salvation. Take away the farewell speech, the grand homecomings, and the care packages. Will the world be missing an essential portion of the Gospel without these events? The answer is a resounding NO. These are all events that Latter-day Saints have created in order to personalize the concept and practice of missionary work, events which have become quite popular amongst all Latter-day Saints.

Now, upon the same lines of missionary work, let us examine this through the lens of Gospel Culture. If we were to view missionary work in this manner, we would have central to our thought the Plan of Salvation. We would envision our young men teaching the Gospel in people’s homes throughout the world. We would envision missionaries baptizing grateful and happy families, helping them in their initial steps towards The House of the Lord. We would envision missionaries earnestly fasting and praying together for the Spirit to guide their work. All of these things, amongst other actions and responsibilities, are doctrinally necessary for our missionaries. Our Gospel Culture is composed of such events, as it is the true living of our doctrines and principles; living a truly Christ-centered life in order to return and live with our Heavenly Father.

Does this mean that having culture amongst the Latter-day Saints is a bad thing? Far from it, for culture is needed to create identity, but the balance and concern comes from the living of culture. As in the example of homosexual Mormons, could we say that these individuals are living within the parameters of a Gospel Culture or Church Culture (Cultural Mormons)? These individuals have no care for the doctrines of the Church, which they believe equates to “homosexual hatred”, but they do not want to give up the cultural aspects of their faith. If Latter-day Saints do not find this troubling, then I do not know what can trouble you. It is not merely homosexual Mormons who are twisting the Church to fit their lifestyles and belief structures, but there are many Latter-day Saints who defy the Gospel Culture while holding a banner of Mormon Culture. There are many Latter-day Saints who view the Church as another platform in life for success, as callings and responsibilities are not viewed as service but rather resume builders for the future. Individuals along this paradigm will similarly view General Authorities not as servants of our Lord, but rather celebrities, seeking to elevate their status to something greater than a life of selfless service to God’s Kingdom. Additionally, never before in my life had I seen such a grand scale of hysteria than what I saw in an Orem Costco when Elder Jeffrey R. Holland entered to buy some necessary household supplies. He was surrounded by a group of Latter-day Saints, many asking for autographs, while he was attempting to do some shopping. Contrary to popular belief, even General Authorities need toilet paper because they are human.

Also while living in Utah I noticed a disturbing but growing trend amongst young Latter-day Saints (specifically from ages 21 to the mid-40s) who would aptly called themselves “savvy Mormons.” These “savvy Mormons” would attend Church every Sunday, held callings in their respective Wards/Branches, and from the outside appeared to be wholesome Latter-day Saints. However, what their true intentions carried was nothing but pure poison, as the only allegiance they had to the Church was strictly for cultural reasons. In their minds, they didn’t readily agree nor believe in the Book of Mormon, but Mormonism was the best thing they had found. For these individuals they would live the lifestyle of their choice during the week, but during Sunday it was back to being the ‘ideal image’ Mormon. Some would call these individuals the ‘party all week, repent on Sunday’ Mormons, but there isn’t a level of repentance here. If we truly believe that we can delve into sinful activity week-after-week and then magically ‘repent’ of our sins every Sunday and be presented a clean slate for our favorite sins, then we truly have a cultural view of repentance.

Now I will tread on delicate territory when I say that a good number of Cultural Mormons are finding root in the halls of academia at Brigham Young University. Straightaway I will say that the mission and philosophy of Brigham Young University is amazing: they seek to teach the secular in a spiritual environment, for the Spirit of God is the true source of Light and Intelligence in this world. The level of learning and education that can be obtained at Brigham Young University is limitless due to the mission of this school, but there are many who seek to make this school into just another university. During my tenure at this school, I was appalled at the growing number of feminist students and professors who, though Latter-day Saints, openly spoke out against the Church and its teachings. Some would say that the Church was ‘male-dominant’, where women had no voice, while others would say that the Priesthood was oppressive to the rights of feminists. Additionally, another reason that I look up to Brigham Young University is the existence of an Honor Code. This Honor Code, or more simply a code of conduct, is set for every student and professor at the university, and if this code is broken then the duration of one’s stay could be cut short. Along with this Honor Code is a strict code of dress and grooming standards, which, to say the least, is laughably not honored at this school. There are numerous students who teeter dangerously on the edge of the Honor Code, especially when engaging those of the opposite sex. Go around the Provo Temple grounds (which is most sickening) or Squaw Peak at night, and you’ll see car-loads of BYU students openly laughing at the Honor Code. Many students at this university do not honor or obey the dress and grooming standards, as men’s hair becomes longer and women’s clothing becomes progressively shorter and more revealing. Some might say “who cares, it is just clothing and hair”, but some would realize that deviance always starts off small. As the old Arabic proverb states: an egg thief will become a camel thief. In other words, if you allow students to break the dress and grooming standards openly, then they will seek to break other aspects of the Honor Code. Also I would like to touch upon the subject of athletic at Brigham Young University, as this portion of the school carries along with it a large tradition. I can’t even begin to name all of the traditions around just BYU football for there are so many, but let us conjecture that another scandal hits the BYU football team that was present a few years back (i.e. a couple football players rape a young woman), and the Church Board of Education decides to suspend BYU football indefinitely. Their reasoning would be simple, as the Church cannot afford to have such news to sully the name and mission of Brigham Young University, but what would be the ramifications of such action? Could you imagine the outrage of those so engrained to BYU athletics, especially BYU football? There are some who so identify with BYU football that if missing they would no longer have identity within the Church. Some might say that’s a stretch, but we can all think of some person we know that loves BYU football so much that they would be outraged and angry at the General Authorities for suspending something they love so much. This is but only an example of how our cultural allegiances could outweigh and blind our obligations to Gospel Culture.

In closing, I would like to appeal back to the sacred nature and reality of our Gospel Culture. We have been given such great knowledge in this Restoration of the Fullness of Times and I’m proud to be living at this time. However, I can’t help but be worried when I see many Latter-day Saints so obviously and poignantly placing their cultural ambitions and actions over the beautiful Gospel Culture given to us by living prophets. To be a Latter-day Saint is an honor and a privilege, but it is more of an obligation and journey than anything else. What matters most is our adherence to those teachings, principles, and doctrines that will lead us on to that straight and narrow path that leads to eternal life. We may have differing opinions, socially or politically, that may tempt us to go astray from what the Gospel teaches, but within the arms of the Gospel Culture is found warmth, safety, and assurance of an eternal life with our Heavenly Father. No other obligation, allegiance, political stance, objective, action, or belief is more important than this, and I think all Latter-day Saints would greatly benefit from examining their everyday lives to see if our allegiance is fully within our Gospel Culture.

Hyphenated Americans

2008-08-06T11:43:00.000-07:00

Today I was thinking back to some of my undergraduate studies and remembered an interesting quote I ran across during my research for a capstone paper in American Studies. Teddy Roosevelt, one of our more adventurous presidents, stated this lengthy quote which I think was, in and of itself, extremely prophetic. It goes as follows:

“There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts "native" before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as any one [sic] else.

The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

For an American citizen to vote as a German-American, an Irish-American, or an English-American, is to be a traitor to American institutions; and those hyphenated Americans who terrorize American politicians by threats of the foreign vote are engaged in treason to the American Republic.”

In order to grasp the depth and breadth of this entire quote it has to be read quite a few times, section by section. Initially, President Roosevelt presents us with an interesting term: Hyphenated Americanism. Quite simple to understand what this would mean, essentially - American. So what are you? I would be German-American, French-American, English-American, and Native-American. President Roosevelt explains that he does not feel that those born outside of the United States are inferior to those born within, but rather that “some of the very best Americans” he has ever met in his life were “born abroad.” However, he makes the clear distinction that those who will put their nationality before America, the true sense of a hyphenated American, are those we have to be leery of.

Now, this is where our minds could run a little wild. We hear every day of people saying “I’m an African-American” or “I’m Mexican-American”, and so on. Does this mean that these people are inherently bad since they consider their identity with their ethnicity? Not necessarily. I agree full-heartedly with President Roosevelt’s term of “squabbling nationalities”, insomuch that individuals will hold fast to the lands of their fathers but trample upon the name of America. How many people have you met that have nothing good to say about America, a land in which they garner so many freedoms and opportunities, but will identify with the land of their father’s (or even great, great, great, great grandfather’s) birth? This, to me, is ultimately frustrating to a degree not able to communicate into words. We could simply say as President Roosevelt said of individuals who held these sentiments: if you don’t like it then go home, but some may consider this a tad too harsh. Yet what drives me crazy (that part that can’t be explained in words) is the essential, sacred, and fragile existence and nature of our National sovereignty. I personally believe that the very existence of so many hyphenated Americans in our society is slowly tearing our sovereignty into pieces. You may disagree, but Roosevelt was correct in stating that such individuals were a direct threat to the body politic. What is the body politic? It’s you, me, and every other person who has the great blessing of being bestowed the title American. We are a solid body of individuals from a variety of different backgrounds, beliefs, cultures, and nations, brought together for the promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is why we use the phrase “E Pluribus Unum”, or “Out of Many, One”, as the very seal of our nation. Now, let us throw into the cycle an individual that is born here in America, has never visited the land of his fathers, but decides he doesn’t like America. So rather than calling himself an American, he will call himself a Mexican-American, French-American, or African-American. This individual longs for a nation like that of his fathers and will educate and teach his children about the joys of the land of their fathers, but will simultaneously teach discord and disgust for the nation of their birth. When these individuals go to vote, they will choose politicians who hold similar views, those of disgust and distain for the nation that provides the freedoms they so selfishly and erroneously enjoy from day-to-day. Thus continues a terrible cycle, where hyphenated Americans teach their children distrust and hate for the nation of their birth and politicians, sworn to uphold the Constitution, being voted in by such individuals grow in number and power, presenting a real threat to the longevity of the United States.

Far fetched? Part of the ‘rightwing noise machine’? I’ve heard it all, so go ahead and pound away at your keyboard, because every day we are being presented with examples of how dangerous hyphenated Americans are to the prosperity of our Nation. Whenever I go to classes for graduate school there are American students, born to Mexican parents, who so loudly and obnoxiously slam America and its founding principles, all the while maintaining how amazing and wonderful Mexico is. I, similarly, will not keep quiet and ask these individuals “if your country is so amazing, why are people leaving it in droves? Why can’t your government stop the ever increasing amount of drugs created and shipped in and out of your country? Why does your government continue to pass laws taking away freedoms from the people so politicians can gain more power?” Yet they are not swayed, telling me I’m “indoctrinated” in the lies of America. Actually, what I see is a direct counterculture built up for the very purpose of destroying the foundation of this Nation so people can make it to whatever they want it to be.

Now, those who are following the president race right now might find a similarity in the last sentence and the campaign foundation of one candidate, Senator Obama. I do consider Obama to be a hyphenated America, as his language, actions, and associations are divisive. Listen to Obama’s speeches and you will not hear about the greatness of American and the principles it was founded upon, but rather upon how this Nation as we know it needs a complete overhaul. How complete? That’s the mystery that so many people want to know, and unfortunately (and frightening all in one package) people want to give him the power to see what he will do. In addition to this, any person who would consider their mentor and life-long advisor to be Reverend Jeremiah Wright is someone who, without a doubt, questions their allegiance to America. Wright doesn’t see himself as an American, as his church is built upon the beliefs of Black Liberation Theology and educating the black community about their Mother Country (Africa). His rhetoric was vehemently anti-American, racist, and divisive on numerous levels, all the while Obama learned not only allegiance to Africa but also distain for America. He can stand in front of a camera, smile really big, and tell people that he has disenfranchised himself from Wright and his teachings all he wants, but no one can turn away cold turkey from such indoctrination. His teachings continue to show in his divisive comments about the white community, calling his grandmother a “typical white person”, and stating that the ‘Right’ will try to tell everyone that he doesn’t look like the other presidents on our currency. I could care less about the politics of fear and race, both of which Obama use heavily; what I care about is your allegiance to America and the founding principles that make this the greatest and most prosperous Nation in the world. However, Obama’s comments continue to create gaps and barriers to the very seal (E Pluribus Unum) and long sought after reality of unity.

In conclusion, if you live in America and are an American citizen, act like it. You can disagree with your government, but your allegiance should always side with the continued support and ideals this Nation was built upon. We, the People, are the true balance of powers, as we are the individuals who elect our politicians into office. Therein is the problem within Americans who have no allegiance or support for their country, as they will seek to usurp the structure and foundation of our Nation in order to change it into something they want. America will never be Mexico. America will never be Africa. America will never be Germany. America will always be America. If you adore the country of your fathers and loathe America, then I suggest you visit Africa, Mexico, Germany, or wherever your ancestry may hail from and see how truly blessed you are to be an American.

Oooooobama...give the credit to Burns already...

2008-07-14T19:09:00.000-07:00

What a firestorm The New Yorker has sparked today! Who has seen the cover of the Muslim-garbed Barack smashing fists with his AK-47 wielding, radical wife within the Oval Office. Oh, but this is not all! A proud portrait of Usama Bin Laden hangs elegantly over the hearth of a glowing fireplace, an American flag as the tinder. At first thought, I only had to laugh. Think about it people, here is a pictorial description of what so many in the extreme-right have been preaching ever since Obama took the lead in the Democratic Party. Obama the closet Muslim terrorist! Obama the Muslim educated fiend! Obama and his America-hating wife want to turn the White House into a mosque!

Now, this being said, if you immediately looked at this cover or heard the story and proclaimed "there goes the right-wing noise machine at it again" then you need to pull your head out of your butt. The New Yorker is notoriously loud, angry, sarcastic, and very Liberal on viewpoint. The reactions from so many Americans to say that this cover "shows that Americans are not ready to have an African-American in the presidency" or "shows that racism is alive and well in America" are fools. These types of people think they can look at the cover of a book and, from merely peering at it, immediately know the entire subject matter within the covers. If all of these individuals would only peer inside of the cover and see what the author and artist of this cover said, it might open their blind eyes:

"The July 21 cover, titled 'The Politics of Fear,' is intended to be a parody, an attempt to show how 'scare tactics and misinformation' are being used to try to derail Barack Obama’s campaign, says cover artist Barry Blitt."

How amazing. The New Yorker wasn't trying to bash Obama or say that he's a radical Muslim in hiding, but rather they are making a satire of what extremists on the right-end political spectrum have been attempting to label him. It is this single event that, once again, shows me why I could never support Barack Obama for president: his followers so blindly label everyone that speaks poorly of him as racists, fear-mongers, or full of hate. No other politician could pull such an amazing stunt, and some might see this as Obama's amazing ability to 'understand' people. I, on the other hand, do not see understanding but rather persuasion and something called Burns' Transformational Leadership Theory.

We all know that Barack is an educated man, and I honestly believe he stumbled upon Burns' writings, which gave him the exact foundation he needed to grasp the White House. Even as politically inexperienced and naive as he is, he is murdering everyone in the political world and showing that no one can get in his way without being labeled negatively. As you shall shortly see, Burns laid this out very clearly all the way back in 1978 while at Harvard University.

In Burns' own words, transformational leadership is "a process where leaders and followers engage in a mutual process of raising one another to higher levels of morality and motivation." Can you hear the echoes of 'YES WE CAN' in the distance? Leaders that engage in this type of theory will raise the bar by appealing to higher ideals and values of followers (e.g. 'change' in the current political world; making the government a personal, kind entity). In doing so, they may model the values themselves and use charismatic methods to attract people to the values and to the leader. I really don't know what could be more charismatic than handing someone a huge sign that says "CHANGE"; but Obama appeals to these values so well that every "change"-toting follower truly believes there is change to believe in! Also under this theory, leaders and followers raise each other's motivation and sense of higher achievement or purpose. We all know that when Barack takes the stage he always states that 'WE will make the change'. Though 99% of these people, and I'm sure even Barack, doesn't understand or comprehend what this change could be, the mere mention of this word will cause any Obama supporter to puff out their chest in pride and say "we want change!"

Finally, the transformational leadership theory boils down to four distinct values, all of which are so blatantly visible in Obama's campaign that he really should send Burns a tray of cookies:

Idealized Influence: Also known as charisma (who hasn't said that Obama is an amazing, charismatic speaker?). The leader is an embodiment of moral and ethical conduct with a great vision and mission. Such types of leaders are deeply respected by their followers, who wish to emulate their leader. Now, tell me what Obama supporter won't pounce on the throat of any person who even disagrees with a proposal or policy within the campaign? As stated earlier, The New Yorker, not giving into politics of fear but merely poking fun at the ridiculous nature of it, was viciously attacked by both the campaign and followers alike. The respect runs so deep that any attack, no matter true or false, real or satirical, results in immediate retribution on part of the true followers.
Inspirational Motivation: Based on the leaders ability to communicate his expectations to his followers. These leaders inspire their followers through motivation to become committed to a shared vision. Anyone can see that Barack can communicate, though many (including myself) will see much of his rhetoric as ambiguous and wishy-washy (i.e. 'change' and not substance). There is no doubt whatsoever that Barack has motivated his followers to commit to the shared vision of change, change at the hands of Barack. Yet ask any follower what this 'change' means and you will immediately receive the 'deer in the headlights' look. These followers are so inspired and so committed to Barack that they are literally repeating everything he says, and since he gives no substance and only 'change' in his speeches, that is what is repeated. In my opinion, this is the ultimate display of brainless discipleship that any human being could ever engage in.
Intellectual Stimulation: The degree to which the leaders provide their followers with interesting and challenging ways of dealing with tasks and help them solves problems their way. What easier way to 'solve' the problems of the Nation and world than to embrace CHANGE? Every person, no matter who you speak to, wishes they could change something either about their life or the world around them. Change is the perfect slogan and standard for the Obama camp, because every person can individualize what this 'change' actually is. The challenge that Barack has presented, that of 'changing' the Nation, is definitely a monumental task, but anyone who actually looks past the rhetoric should be concerned. Who's definition of 'change' are we going to use in order to 'change' things?
Individualized Consideration: A situation where the leader acts as a coach and advisor to his followers. He listens and devotes his time to issues and concerns of his followers. There is no doubt that Barack is concerned about the issues that face his followers. He states that poverty, individuals with disabilities, hunger, high gas prices, polar bears, global warming, political corruption, etc etc etc are of concern to him. However, I found this quote that shows how much Barack seeks to make himself a 'man of the people', a person that truly cares about every single person:

"If there is a child on the South Side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there’s a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandparent. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It is that fundamental belief, I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper that makes this country work."

I guess I should mention that this leadership style is very effective, that is why it is widely used in fanatical cults (Branch Davidians, Jim Jones, etc). Can we then say that Obama's campaign is in all actuality the Cult of Obama? Is there enough evidence to point x-to-y? I say let the individual be the judge. Walk into a room of Obama supporters and ask them "can we change America" and see how they respond. Ask an Obama supporter what change the campaign seeks to instill within America and see if they know the blueprint or specific details. Attempt to engage in a fair, open-minded debate about Obama's qualifications and political record and see if you are not called racist, hateful, or a member of the right-wing noise machine. Do I need to listen to the extreme right spew forth lies and distorted truths about Obama's past and present? Absolutely not. All I have to do is simply look at his followers and I get an exact mirror into Barack's soul. You can keep your change.

The Rule of Law

2008-07-09T16:24:00.001-07:00

If you could not tell by now, one of the most inspirational people in my life has been Thomas Paine. What I have titled my blog is quite possibly one of his most inspirational and, in other words, obvious statements ever uttered by human lips: "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly." You can go through your own individual lives and find a moment in time when you took something for granted or something that you wish you could undo, all of which could have been undone if you had not taken the moment so lightly. It is a wonderful, beautiful way to live out your mortal days: to see every day, minute, and second of this existence as the greatest gift given unto you.

Now, to the subject at hand. I am regularly perplexed by everyday issues that arise in our societies that should not be problems but continue to plague us. We hear of individuals of great fame, power, and wealth receiving little or no sentence for crimes committed. We see thousands illegally enter this country weekly who commit crimes, steal resources from our country, and demand the benefits of citizenship without any regard towards the laws which they flagrantly trample beneath them. Yet when the People demand from their government justice, they turn a cold shoulder. Frustrating is the least of words that can describe such madness, but I fall back onto an ancient concept predicated in the birthing foundation of democratic societies: Rule of Law.

For those of you not familiar with the concept and reality of Rule of Law, you should probably be very ashamed of yourselves. Honestly. This is the most fundamental and basic doctrine of democracy, where without this there would be lawlessness where there should be order, corruption where there should be prosperity. As Thomas Paine so plainly explained in his pamphlet Common Sense:

"For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."

Once again, very simple and easy to understand. America, being built upon the foundations of a truly free society (having the King of England as a basis for all that is contrary to the foundation of our society) will have law as king. There will be no single individual, no royal pomp and circumstance to dictate the wills of the People. Rather, elected officials will gauge the will and desire of the People and therein provide laws and ordinances creating barriers and openings to further expand the freedoms and liberties of the People. That is a beautiful and precious reality that our Founding Fathers understood very well. It is far easier for a single individual to become corrupted by the pleasures of power than it is for an entire People to become corrupted by the enticings of authority (People, in general, tend to shrink away from extensive responsibilities and duties).

However, we find ourselves reverting back to our old roots (i.e. Pre-1776, King of England times). There are many, many people in our society today that are seemingly immune to the effects and standards of the Law, both the Supreme Law of our Land (The Constitution) and domestic laws set forth by our States. Is it perhaps that some elected leaders have forgotten their duty to, as I stated before, gauge the will and desires of those who elected them into such an honorable position of authority? Or could it be that the People have become progressively lazy, forgetting the power given unto them to elect honorable and righteous individuals into positions of power that will dictate our laws and the direction of our society? The blame is two fold, but the greater part of the blame falls directly upon the heads of the People. A very special document in our Nation's history begins with "We the People", not "We the Republic", "We the Special Elected Few", "We the White Landed Gentry", "We the Special Interests Groups", and so on. It is the People, from every shade of skin color to every level of wealth and poverty. It is the People who are to be actively engaged in their societies and communities, to ensure life and the pursuit of happiness is within grasp. An integral part of this duty is to, in return, elect officials that will reflect the wishes of their hearts and keep in mind the laws that sustain the life-giving freedoms established by our Founding Fathers. The People have lost touch with themselves, thinking that the direction of the country and the affairs of our governance is not within their grasp. Far too often do I find people who say "what am I suppose to do about corruption on Capitol Hill?" as if some grand hand had strategically placed corrupt officials in positions of power. Is it any surprise that many Americans have never voted and that more Americans watch the Super Bowl than vote in a National Election? Some might find that humorous. I find it absolutely disgusting. The People have failed to realize that the government is theirs, not the other way around! Personal responsibility, coupled with a realization and action with political issues, could quickly undo a bulk of the ills plaguing our government. If the People would only understand the significance of We the People and rise up to their given command, we would see a very different America.

But what about those elected officials? Though the People have a bulk of the blame, our politicians are certainly not free from criticism. Far too often politicians will rise to the occasion of civic duty not for the continuation of civil liberties and defense of God-given freedoms, but rather as a resume-builder or a search for extended powers. Listen to any talk given by 'leaders' of political parties when they talk about "regaining power" in the White House, Congress, or any legislative body. Most notorious within my mind is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when, as she addressed the Nation as the first female Speaker of the House, could only comment on how Congress has changed power and that new powers would come to unite America for the better. Power? Isn't your position to reflect the will of the People? What audacity to think that your little political party has supreme power in a land and government that is dictated by the People. Therein is the problem with America, that being political parties who vie so viciously for power and position that they are literally polarizing the People. Republicans view Democrats as Godless heretics. Democrats view Republicans as simple-minded bigots. While those left in the middle are pulled at every whim and will to take sides. The continued polarization of our Nation can only lead to one simple conclusion, as we saw in both the Revolutionary War and Civil War. If politicians truly seek unity, they will show it in word and deed. Yet as with any political party, strategies have been created, war plans crafted, and boundary lines drawn. And within the fray and struggle for increased numbers to satisfy the ever-growing appetite for power, parties will give way to special interest groups that seek to put under them laws that they find offensive or troublesome to their ambitions. Whenever a politician will give way to a special interest group, they are immediately telling the People that their opinion does not matter. Special interest is exactly that: a special interest. It is not a 'collective-interest group' or 'foundations-of-democracy interest group', it is a special interest. Homosexual marriage is frowned upon by an overwhelming majority of the People, but special interest groups use their numbers (though they are small) in order to place their allegiance to a political party that will push their desires into law. The same can be said in a number of issues, ranging from illegal immigration, billion-dollar corporations, environmental groups, and the list goes on and on. All wish to subject laws in order to gain power, all while pushing the desires of the People aside.

So, if we were truly to understand and apply the Rule of Law in our society, we could look at these 'special' interest groups and corrupt politicians and say "if your will doesn't reflect the will of the People, you're out of luck." And anything that runs contrary to established laws would not be overrun, no matter how much money, mindless rhetoric, and groups of dissent were thrown at it. If the law had a need for change, the People must rise to the occasion, become educated, and weigh their opinion in the matter. We would not see celebrities flaunting lawless and criminal behavior in the faces of law-abiding citizens, only to receive 'slap-on-the-wrist' sentences because of their 'elevation in our society'. They would be treated like criminals, like any person arranged on DUI charges, theft, drug possession, or other crimes that are so common in our society. We would not see millions of illegal aliens marching down the streets of our metropolitan areas proudly showing off their lawless existence in our Nation, demanding the rights and benefits of citizenship without putting forth the effort and desire for citizenship. Such would be taken out of our country, regardless of popular rhetoric (i.e. you are separating families) and political campaigns (i.e. La Raza), and told to come back the right way and the benefits and freedoms extended to rightful citizens would be theirs if they would only put forth the effort. No individual or group would ever subvert the law and 'get away with it' due to political position or social status. Every person would be responsible under the Law.

So what can we do? A good and simple start would to become active in our government and Nation. Go out and vote, volunteer, and become educated about the Founding of this great and amazing Nation. A little education will go a long way when an individual understands the roots and history of our government. Also, every individual under the People must speak out when those who seek power tell us to be silent. We must never, ever, subject ourselves to the voluntary slavery of passivity and believe that we are powerless. We are the People, We are the Law, and We are the future of this great Nation.

Ground Zero

2008-07-08T17:13:00.000-07:00

Hello everyone:

Welcome to a 360-view of my brain. You should probably be very afraid, but I have made this blog in order to muse about in the political, social, and economic worlds. I invite anyone to comment on my comments, only if you do so in a non-profane manner. Dropping profanities here will land you straight in the naughty-bin (a.k.a banned). I'm a middle-of-the-road kind of guy that likes to look at both sides of the issue then talk through them using life experiences, moral guidance, and knowledge. Now, fasten your safety belts because you'll need 'em!