Is The State more important than your religious beliefs? --- if your religious beliefs go against our law you must modify your beliefs or find another place to live.
On Feb 22, 7:07 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > "Is The State more important than your religious beliefs? ...more binding > than your marriage? You can divorce both -- give either a Dear John letter, > if you please. But you cannot break up with The State."February 19, 2013You > Should Be Able to "Dear John" The StateBy Jim Babka > Thomas Jefferson said that it was immoral to compel a man to furnish the > funds for that which he abhors. The State does exactly this on countless > issues. Can we ever grow beyond this? > The history of religious liberty teaches crucial lessons. > For example, a man named Tyndale was burned at the stake for distributing an > English language Bible. His goal to let the plough-boy read the scriptures > threatened the establishment’s monopoly control of information. > Another lesson is that most colonies had established church denominations, > paid for with tax dollars. Even "dissenters," were required to fund The State > Church. This colonial practice continued even AFTER we defeated the British. > Without those taxes the other side imagined anarchy and chaos."Why, if > there's no established church," they asked,"how shall we ensure the > development of moral character?" They claimed the decision to end state > support for churches was anti-religion and would lead to their demise. The > superabundance of houses of worship in virtually every city and village in > our country today illustrates that the opposite happened. The absence of the > tax made these churches more entrepreneurial and responsive to change. But > the absence of a tax for the state denomination was a very real fear at the > time, even to guys like Patrick Henry. > Does conscience only matter when it comes to religion, or should freedom of > conscience extend to all peaceful life choices? Is there some part of > Jefferson's vision that we've yet to fulfill?Are we as barbarous as our > ancestors?Meet Ray. We'll call Ray a conscientious objector, because he acts > out of conscience. People confine this term to those who object to military > service. But why do those persons object? It’s a question of conscience. > Therefore, a conscientious objector is, quite literally, someone who obeys > their conscience rather than State edicts.Today's conscientious objector is > yesterday's dissenter.A conscientious objector is someone who wants the right > to divorce a service provider or institution. He is disgusted by what is done > in his name under the rubric of democracy, appalled at what is done with the > money extracted from him in taxes. He wants to terminate his support. > You may think Ray is noble until I tell you to what he objected: State > schooling, otherwise known as "public schools." > Ray loathed The State schooling service. Ray's specific objections aren't > relevant. The subject we must keep in sight is...Ray's conscience.The only > humane way to address the conscience of another is persuasion.Feel free to > talk someone out of their position. Ray would've welcomed such a > conversation. He could've given you his side of the story. > Ray's objection was deeply rooted, so he did something extraordinary. On the > basis that state schools violated his beliefs, he stopped paying property > taxes. Ray even wrote a Dear John letter to the school board. > A Dear John letter terminates a relationship. It's a divorce, a secession, a > break-up. Ray explained his desire to split from this scheme and live in > peace. > Remember, from theprevious installmentthatThe State is a bully. Ray began > receiving ominous letters about his bill. He responded with more Dear John > letters sharing his concerns. But it didn't matter. Eventually, he was, at > great personal expense, hauled into court. > At this point, Ray made a very American claim. He quoted Jefferson that it > was immoral to compel a man to furnish the funds for that which he abhors. > But the judge came down hard becauseThe State is a cartel. The judge accused > Ray ofinstigatingtrouble. It was Ray's fault, he claimed, that courts were > now involved. He claimed "shock" at Ray’s "unrepentant callousness." He piled > additional fines on top of Ray's bloated tax bill. > Ray was in turmoil. He was trying to do the right thing -- to obey his > conscience. > A principle is a principle. So Ray didn't turn over his money. I think you > know what happened next, for (as we covered in the previous installment) The > State is abusive. Armed men and women showed up to repossess Ray's house. > Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Watch them unravel...Pursuit of > happinessmeans the ability to pursue your dreams, including home ownership. > Armed men and women came to steal that. > Ray told them he wouldn't budge. They threatened to take his liberty, to > arrest him. > Ray pulled out a 20 gauge shotgun. It was more symbolic than deterring -- > hardly enough to win a confrontation. He waited. When the armed men and women > kicked down his door, they saw Ray with the shotgun, and they killed him. > Theystole his lifeall so that their bosses could teach boys to read, or > failing that, at least how to put on a condom. > Ray was a"captive customer." The cartel (the monopoly we described in the > previous installment) said so. Ray never harmed anyone. Yet the judge blamed > him, and he was murdered. > Keep in mind. You too, almost certainly, object to something The State does > in your name. You resent having to pay for it.Should YOU -- should any of us > -- be coerced, by bribe or by threats, backed by actual violence to fund a > service we loathe, particularly if that service violates your > conscience?Should Ray have been treated like Tyndale? > Should each of us, Ray included, be relieved of the Bullying, the Abuse, and > the captive nature ofthe Cartel-- left to live by our own conscience? > Is The State more important than your religious beliefs? ...more binding than > your marriage? You can divorce both -- give either a Dear John letter, if you > please. But you cannot break up with The State. > Human progress lies in continuing to move in the direction of conscience > instead of coercion. We learned the lesson of Tyndale. Can we learn from > Ray?http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/you-should-be-able-to-dear-john-the-state -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
