Voting Is Immoral

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare


DIGG THIS

Reconciling
Christian Principles with Present Day American Politics

During the
preparation for this piece, careful consideration was given to the
understanding that this stance is apt to be wildly unpopular. Without
a formal training in the field of human psychology, the writer has
been blessed (or maybe cursed) with an ability to discern man’s
motivations and expected actions.

Upon this realization,
it should be noted that most individuals will have one of three
predictable reactions to the following dilemma: the desperation
to cling to long and deeply held beliefs versus the consideration
of the validity of a new set of facts. First, what we can call the
ostrich response: to bury one’s head in the sand and pretend no
controversy exists. Second, the inconvenient justification, involving
staunch refusal to consider the facts laid out, despite their indisputable
nature, and seeking to justify actions to render said inconvenient
facts inapplicable. Finally, there is the old stand-by of killing
the messenger; if the individual attempting to demonstrate the truth
can be discredited, then one has no conundrum to reconcile. Perhaps
it is foolish, but it is the intention of this work to elicit an
entirely separate and distinct reaction from its readers. In the
book of 2 Samuel, when King David was confronted by Nathan, who
made his sin apparent, David immediately repented, saying "I
have sinned against the Lord" (2 Samuel 12: 1–13, New American
Standard). Carefully consider whether a similar reaction might be
appropriate in response to these facts.

First, it must
be acknowledged that the common denominator in this context is language.
This is imperative, as many of the words and phrases that are now
so commonplace in America’s political landscape have connotations
at odds with their intended meanings. In a variety of subtle ways,
conditioning exists such that as a people, we accept the illogical
notion that the essence of an entity can be altered by its title,
as well as by the user of said title. George Orwell’s Newspeak is
alive and well… Just as Shakespeare taught us that "a rose
by any other name would smell as sweet," let it be accepted
that evil, regardless of its appellation, is still foul.

As a primary
example, the word "freedom." In today’s America, "freedom"
means sending one’s children to public school, or teaching them
from home following the approved curriculum of the government. No
matter which means, the end is the same: "they" are the
deciders. Currently in America, "freedom" means that one
can paint his or her house any color desired, so long as the city
planner’s office approves. "Freedom" also means obtaining
the government’s permission to travel. The list is inexhaustible.
For those who do not converse in Newspeak, "freedom" retains
its former, and intended, definition: the ability to live life as
one pleases, so long as no injury is done to another.

Now let’s examine
the term "theft." Anyone who does not agree that the proceeds
of a man’s labor, and the purchases made with said proceeds, belong
irrevocably to that man, is a proponent of slavery. When did our
society decide that, as a group, we can steal — appropriate — levy
— half of what a man earns? Certainly there is a "word of art,"
a term specific to politics, that will extraordinarily transform
the essence of the act into something more palatable.

This brings
us to a word far too common, "taxation." In the current
political climate, "taxation" means paying one’s "fair
share." It is unconscionable that Americans have arrived in
a circumstance in which a man can be forced at gunpoint to surrender
half of what is rightly his. The claim then, is this: that he was
simply "discharging the debt he justly and honestly owed
as his portion," or, in other words, "paying his
fair share." Upon what justification does anyone owe this debt?
The only foundation upon which this claim can be made is the underlying
immoral selfishness of mankind.

Finally, the
cardinal theme of this work, "democracy." The romantic
notion that aided in fostering our view of "democracy"
as a benign form of self-governance is among the most dramatic examples
of mass hysteria in the world’s history. "We all have a right
to vote," is Americans’ arrogance again outreaching their intelligence.
America’s own founding fathers despised the idea of democracy and
saw it as little more than hooliganism run amok (see here,
here,
here,
here,
here,
and here).
Benjamin Franklin stated "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb
voting on what to have for dinner." This is one of Satan’s
most evil tricks, the idea that mankind can change the Laws of God
provided a majority of mankind reach an agreement on such a change.
This lie evicted Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (although
they outnumbered God two to one), and it will be as successful or
less so today.

Democratically
elected legislative bodies are merely window dressing, calculated
to provide justification for ignoring the Laws of God, and substituting
the laws of man. Ultimately designed to create an air of legitimacy
for the winning group of voters, the result is political rape of
the losing group of voters. Because such "legitimacy"
has become so entrenched as to no longer be questioned, the losers
have effectively been indoctrinated into learning to lie back and
enjoy it.

When one presumes
to force others to bend to his or her will, he or she is insinuating
an ego above God’s, committing the original sin. Christians can
wax eloquent for hours about the downsides of the endless list of
regulations the Bible’s Pharisees expected Jews to follow. These
same Christians understand easily that the Pharisees, by expanding
the Laws of God, were infringing upon territory justifiably only
belonging to God Himself. However, these same Christians can scarcely
wait to mass to the polling booth to force their will upon their
fellow citizens. And certainly now that their long-held beliefs
are being questioned, many of them will answer thus: "Everyone
of age has the right to vote; it was my responsibility to make my
voice heard." Not to mention, "it was the will of the
majority, the people have spoken." But what is the difference
between a lone tyrant enforcing his will upon his people or a mob
of citizens doing the same at the voting booth?

On November
4th, do not hesitate. Utilize the secret ballot polling
booth in order to vote in favor of stealing more of your neighbor’s
property, to keep your children in public indoctrination centers,
to give your elderly parents a raise in their Socialist Insecurity,
and to give yourself greater access to health care. Vote against
issues that might allow people to exercise their inalienable rights
as they wish, to spend their property in the manner they find befitting,
to prevent smoking or drinking in any restaurants, to provide more
handicapped parking spaces everywhere. Vote for the candidates that
promise (lie?) to remake the world through legislation, in the image
in your mind. Christians have again been duped by Satan, not only
into willing participation, but into the defense of such action,
in spite of what they know in their souls of evil.

The source
of that evil can be traced back to God’s conversation with Samuel.
God said to Samuel, "…they have not rejected you…they
have rejected Me from being king over them…they have forsaken
Me and served other gods…"
(emphasis mine). Today,
Americans have chosen not only to reject God as King and to serve
other gods, including the god of democracy (man-rule), but also
to replace His Laws in favor of man’s laws. Everyone who casts a
ballot partakes in the responsibility. Voters have been enticed
by Satan’s whisper, as were Adam and Eve, "you will be like
God."

In conclusion,
a humble suggestion: if you want to vote on November 4th,
instead of running to democracy’s altar, get on your knees before
your true King and repent of worshiping the false god of democracy.
Ask the one true God to reign in your heart. For those that would
like to see "CHANGE" in the world, let God be the bringer.
Imagine for a moment the difference that could be wrought if all
of those that claim His name would cease to scramble for the scraps
from their neighbor’s table; if they instead became true children
of the King by obedience to Him, and were thereby entitled to a
place at God’s feast.

November
1, 2008

Rick
Dunaway [send him mail]
is a private businessman, presently living in Ohio.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare