Freedom

We are blessed to live in the United States of America, where citizens have a lot of individual liberty; as compared to the rest of the world.  Whatever follows, please realize that I thank God that I am an American.

The founding fathers would not approve U.S. Constitution, until it included language that protected the rights of citizens.  These rights include, but are not limited to: freedom of speech, the press, assembly, religion, and the right to keep and bear arms.  Americans can travel or move anywhere they want to in the United States without asking the government for permission.  The Declaration of Independence says that we have a God given right to life, liberty and the pursuit happiness (property).

Listening to the broadcast news, it seems that a lot of people believe our freedom is under attack.  So, it may be a good idea to think through what freedom means to each of us.

QUESTION:  What does freedom mean to you?

A New You

SUMMARY: Again, no comments were received.  .

MY THOUGHTS:

Psychologists recognize that people defend by keeping their true self to themselves.  With others, we "put our best foot forward."  We only show more of our true selves to those with whom we are intimate; in the interpersonal sense and/or in the sexual sense.  If fact someone once defined intimacy as being able to be who we really are, without fear of rebuke or of being exploited.  Psychologists say that we adopt a Persona, like a mask, to show to other people, and we adjust it based on the reactions it produces in them (the looking glass self).  I think that much of the sense of loneliness modern people feel is due to their inability to be authentic, and to the fear that they will not be accepted by others if they reveal their "true colors."

Each person is unique, and their personality is distinctive.  However, we are also alike in many ways.  People sometimes search to find answers to the question, "Who am I."  We send our DNA off to strangers to learn what part of the world our ancestors came from.  We look to our parents, and how they raised us.  People say, "He is just like his dad."  It is said that we are products of our culture, or environment, or poverty.  We often identify with famous  people, and try to emulate them.  To some people their racial or ethnic identity is important to who they think they are.  On the bumpers of our cars we see that someone is the proud parent of a student at a certain school.  We say that we are Democrats, Republicans, or disaffected politically.  Men draw a lot of their identity from what they do for a living.  Some people see themselves as victims.  Others see themselves as "movers and shakers."  As we get older, we tend to see ourselves in terms of how we have met life's challenges, trials, and temptations.  The list could go on and on, if it hasn't already.  The good news is that the things that we believe are part of our identity do not have to be permanent; unless we think they do.  We can change, but often it takes the power of God to do it.

In Christ, you can become a new person.  The old passes away, and all things become new.  God has promised that anyone who believes in Jesus can be saved.  Are you sick of always settling for a life that you are ashamed of?  Would you like to live forever, starting today?  Turn away from the sinful things that are making you unhappy.  Humble yourself and surrender yourself to Jesus.  The Holy Spirit will live in you and give you the desire please God; to take up your cross and follow Him.

Pray for these things, and you will given the power to become a Child of the Living God.  You will never see yourself in the same way again.  Get a modern language version of the Bible, and read it starting with the New Testament.  I recommend the New International Version (NIV).  Then, find a Bible believing church.  (Stay away from cults that do not teach the fundamental doctrines that the Christian Church has always taught throughout history.)  Schedule a meeting with the pastor or start attending the Discipleship or New Believer's classes.  Share with them your experience, and ask for guidance.  Listen to the Holy Spirit calling you  The Grace of God is a free gift, all you have to do is receive it.

Who are we?

You may occasionally hear a person say something like, "I always try to be neighborly.  That's just who I am."  or, someone may say, "I don't like it when people show their dirty linen (quarrel) in public.  I just wasn't raised that way."  If a man is willing to be very brave and take chances, we say, "He is a real John Wayne."  These days, our identity can even get stolen.  Clearly, our identity is a part of what determines how we think, feel and act.

QUESTION:

What do you believe contributes to an individual's identity; that is what makes a person think they are who they are?

One Man's Opinion.

SUMMARY:  I'm told this takes time.  I am willing to invest the time.

MY COMMENTS:   I have observed a lot of Presidents, and none of them were saints; nor should they be.  They are public officials, and not monks.

Likewise, I understand the whole wisdom of God to be that we should not judge others, and that we should be merciful.  It says, however, that we may also know a tree by the kind of fruit that it bears.  Some people use that as an excuse for being judgmental.  I hope God will help me not to do that.  However, we need the best possible people in public office, since their decisions and actions impact our lives.

 When I worked in state and local government, the expectation was always that public servants were to avoid even the appearance of wrongdoing.  There have been times when I would have been disciplined or fired if a character failure had happened in my personal or professional life.  Shouldn't the President of the Unites States be held to the same standard that is expected of midlevel local or state officials?

Some people say that failures of character in the personal lives of public officials are their own business, and that we should separate that from their performance in office.  Isn't it true that their personal lives may, in some cases, have a bearing on their public lives?  Certainly bad judgment in one area may indicate a risk for bad judgment in the other.  Even if we focus only on the public life of public officials and candidates for office, the faith of the people in their government ... and in the fundamental fairness of governance ... may be undermined by the character failures of those who hold, or aspire to hold, positions of authority.

I was saved while watching a Billy Graham crusade on television, while I was still in high school.  I tried to "walk the walk" in my own strength, and I failed.  I was a carnal Christian most of my life; double minded, with one foot in the Kingdom and one foot in the world.  I tried to serve God off and on, but like Lot's wife, I looked back and was not fit to serve God.  Sooner or later, I found myself back in sin.  Then, God allowed an accident to happen that showed me what Hell was like.  He also let me experience what it was like to be totally out of fellowship with Him, and to be unable to call on Him when I was injured and in trouble.  He broke me to the point that I was finally willing to repent, and to take up my cross and to follow Jesus.  The Father was true to His promise, and he kept me from being snatched out of Jesus' hand.  Now, I am led and empowered by the Holy Spirit, and not my own will.  I still sin, but not deliberately or willfully in a way that tramples in His grace, and I trust that He will hear me when I ask for forgiveness.  I give glory and honor, and praise to God for anything I may be or may become. So, I am the last person who ought to condemn others for their shortcomings.  I hope that is not what I seem to be doing here.

We are blessed to live in a republic where we the people can be involved in the selection of our leaders.  I served in the U.S. Army to help keep us free; including the freedom to vote.  When we vote we choose between candidates, and we evaluate their relative suitability to serve.  I disagree with almost everything Barack Obama  says, but he was correct when he said that elections have consequences.

The character of those we select has a bearing on how they perform in office.  Richard Nixon won his second term by a landslide.  He did not need to condone a burglary, and then try to cover it up to be elected.  Even after he was forced to resign, he told David Frost in an interview that, "When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal." (http://www.brainyquote.com)  I was watching, and I heard him say it. He just never got it.  I remember the agony of the Watergate scandal, and the sense of relief when it was over.

An extramarital affair contributed to the events that led to Bill Clinton's impeachment for lying under oath.  Cheating on your spouse and lying are character failures.  The result was a deeply divided nation, and a crisis of the highest level.  Further, it made Americans cynical about the political process, and more lax in their expectations ... even of themselves. Character, or the lack of it, does not regard to party lines. We have a responsibility to the United States of America to try to select leaders that are worthy of her.  I am not going to endorse a candidate for President at this point.  I am only urging you to vote, and that you make good character one of your considerations when you choose who to vote for.

If we continue to follow the wrong people, and if we do and allow the wrong things, God will withdraw His protection from our nation.  We will be at the mercy of our enemies, and we will be brought to our knees.  It is already beginning to happen.

Does Character Matter?

Character is the collection of mental and emotional traits that define, in part, who we are as individuals, groups, and nations. (adapted from Webster's New Seventh Dictionary) Some of the attributes or features of character are: virtue (moral excellence), honesty, integrity, perseverance in the face of adversity,  temperament, loyalty, and devotion to another person or cause; or lack thereof.  We often say that someone is a person of good or bad character.

Prior to Bill Clinton's presidency, it was widely believed that the voters cared about the character of the president.  However, he remained a popular public figure despite character failures.  Opinion makers concluded that the voters were no longer as concerned about the character of the president, or presidential candidates,  as they once were.

QUESTION:  How do you feel about that?

Moving On

Summary:  I have been exploring ways to get a wider circulation of this forum for discussion.  Please advise me if you can.

My Thoughts:  I felt that President Obama spent too much time trying to justify his new executive orders on gun control.  Also, he hand picked his audience so that only those who agreed with him were present.  Do you do that if you are really trying to "bring both sides together," as Mr. Obama claimed?  A lot of politicians pick places to speak where they are most likely to have a "friendly" audience, but this was pretty blatant.

Most of his justifications were disputable, if not downright false.  It is disputable that a majority of Americans, or a majority of gun owners, favor or support his proposals.  Polls on the subject have had mixed results.  There are also polls that show that a majority of Americans are opposed to gun more stringent gun control. Americans are voting with their wallets by buying guns in record numbers.  At least twice in recent memory, there has not been enough available ammunition to meet the demand for it.

The NRA is a grassroots organization with five million members, not some evil entity that thwarts the will of the people. It is not just "the gun lobby." Yes, the NRA works with some gun manufacturers, but it is cooperation to support the Second Amendment.  Every law abiding citizen who wants one should buy a gun.  Every gun owner should belong to the NRA.

"The polls" may be manipulated statistically and are often lacking in scientific rigor. Regardless, the constitution provides for a House of Representatives and a Senate elected by the people and empowered to generate law; subject to presidential approval, veto, and override of the veto by congress.  This provision safeguards the rights of all citizens by preventing the government from being overly influenced by the whims of public opinion.  We, the people have the right to petition our government, and we do so in many ways including writing our elected representatives, circulating petitions, and hiring lobbyists.  It isn't perfect, but it is better than mob rule.  We are governed by our elected representatives, not pollsters, and our elected representatives have voted down President Obama's orders for background checks and licencing schemes, repeatedly.

People collect things like coins, stamps, antiques, and guns.  Occasionally, they sell the things they have collected.  Sometimes they make a profit.  The value of a gun usually appreciates over time.  If you hold on to one long enough, you are very likely to make a profit. Other people buy and sell guns on line or at gun shows.  You do not have to sell many to make a nice amount of money, if you buy low and sell high.  Most of those sales are subject to a background check through a Federal Firearms Licence (FFL) holder at some point, especially if they involve an interstate transfer of ownership.

The profit motive is, in general, a good thing that has provided the western world with a wonderful standard of living and is pulling the developing nations out of poverty. It is not wrong to sell a gun for a profit.  It is an excessive extension of executive authority for the president to usurp the authority of the legislative branch, creating new law regulating the sale or transfer of gun ownership and "encouraging" or "discouraging" the venues in which this may be done through regulation and taxation (licence fees).  This president has a pattern of illegally extending executive authority.

Please look at a couple of cases where these executive orders might adversely affect law abiding citizens:

A widow dies leaving everything she had to her only child, a daughter.  The widow has kept a 10 gun hand gun collection worth up to ten thousand dollars, that was left to her by her husband before the new regulations. Does the daughter have the ability to inherit the guns?  Will she have to pass a background check? Can the daughter sell the guns if she wants?  Will she have to obtain an FFL?  If she is a semi-invalid who is also being treated by medication for cyclothymia (mild depression), and if she has a representative payee for her Social Security Disability check because she can't get around well, will she fail the background check? Under the new executive orders some bureaucrat may say that she does not get her inheritance.  If so, will the guns go into probate? Who gets them then, the government?  If she does inherit the guns, will she have to get an FFL to sell them because she is making a profit on a multiple gun sale(s).  Will she have to sell them to a retailer at wholesale to avoid becoming a criminal?

If a man has a .410 gauge shotgun that does not meet his needs for goose hunting, and a friend at work wants to trade a 12 gauge shotgun for the .410 so that he can teach his son to shoot, can they do it?.  In most cases, the guy getting the 12 gauge is getting a better deal. Will they be criminals if they make the trade without obtaining an FFL and the ability to run a background check?  How far should ordinary citizens be empowered to go in investigating the background of other ordinary citizens?

The president has the authority to increase the staffing of agencies in the executive branch, if congress gives him the money to do it.  He has the authority to encourage or commission research to develop technological improvements that might prevent unauthorized persons from using guns, if congress gives him the money to do it.  There is disagreement about whether the president has the authority to impose use of the new technology without new law originated by the legislative branch.  If people are are required to implement this technology, it may involve considerable expense (with the exception of trigger locks, and the like).  Will this raise price new guns so high the average citizen can't buy them?  Is that Mr. Obama's hidden agenda? Will existing gun owners have to install the new technology, like finger print controlled lock boxes and grips, on all their guns?  By the way, that technology already exists.  What if they cannot afford it?  Will they have to sell their guns or turn them in to the government?

The law prevents the exchange of medical information, including mental health information, without first obtaining the written consent of the patient.  The legislative branch can change the law so that this information can be shared interstate and used  in background checks, but will it violate the right to privacy?  It is my opinion that the president does not have the legal authority to change law without first going through the congress.  Although I support the inclusion of mental illness in background checks, I believe that careful consideration should be given to how it is defined, existing law, and the constitutional rights of all Americans.  If a Social Security recipient or a disabled veteran has a representative payee, or if a person is taking prescribed psychotropic medication, who decides if they are mentally fit enough to legally own and use a gun?  Will they have the right to due process of law, since it involves a constitutional right?

Not one of the president's executive orders will prevent a single criminal from getting a gun if she or he wants one.  They will only make it more difficult and expensive for law abiding Americans to keep and bear arms.

Much of what the president is trying to do may be illegal.  Hopefully, the courts will see it that way.  It will most certainly cost Americans a lot of money for more staff, research and development, higher gun prices, litigation, and the cost of regulation.  Canada had to abandon a system for registering long guns because it was too expensive.  In the United Kingdom and Australia, increasing involvement by the government in regulating firearms eventually led to confiscation.  Is that what we want here?  President Obama said that he will not take our guns away.  That is only because he knows that he can't, before his term of office expires.  I think that he would if he could.  His passion gun control and tears for the children killed in Newtown and Chicago were genuine.  I wish he had tears for the 60 million children killed by abortion, since Roe vs Wade.

What to do? Vote, write your state and federal legislators, sign and circulate petitions, peacefully assemble, and peacefully demonstrate after obtaining the necessary permits. Prayer is not the "least you can do," it is the most you can do.  Obey the law as long as it does not contradict God's law or violate your constitutional rights.  If it is against God's law or violates your constitutional rights, talk to an attorney.  After that, if you are prepared to take the consequences of civil disobedience, refuse to obey the law and take the consequences.  Tell the news media what you are doing.

Build public support by hunting ethically.  Try to persuade others.  Know the law and defend yourself and others from death or serious bodily injury according to the law.  Recreate with firearms in safe and legal ways.  State your truth clearly and in ways that respect others, even if they do not. Trust God that current events are unfolding as part of His larger plan.

Executive Orders on Gun Control

Today, January 5, 2016, President Obama announced new executive orders that direct agencies of the executive branch to use more restrictive gun control regulations.  He also announced initiatives regarding sharing confidential mental health information, expanding regulatory agencies, and developing technology to thwart unauthorized use of firearms; to name a few.  This is your chance to have your say about it.  Be as critical or supportive as you choose, but responses containing profanity, disrespect of the office of the President, and demeaning remarks about other respondents; or the race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, etc. of individuals and groups of people will be deleted.

Question:  What did you think about the executive orders, initiatives, and the justifications Mr. Obama gave for them?