|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Ten Commandments, Two Versions Pat Boone One set of judicial decisions created the foundation and framework for humane society. Another set, much more recent, has negated much of the first and laid out a program that has the appearance of George Orwell's "1984." One set was composed of 10 directives, formulated by the creator and judge of the universe, and intended to promote healthy, considerate, and moral relationships between people, and between human beings and their God. The other set of 10 judicial decisions is designed to stifle free expression, erase any standards of moral behavior, and absolutely forbid any public acknowledgement of the very existence of "a God." One served as the inspiration and basis for the notion of "inalienable rights," as an "endowment" from a creator who made all men equal, and intended them to have "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The other, more "progressive" set forms a blueprint for a society ruled by a legal oligarchy which dictates what citizens can say and write, where and under what conditions they can express their faith in their God, and which is determined to abolish the ridiculous concept of "one nation under God." You think I'm exaggerating the contrast? Let's look at the first set. We call it the Ten Commandments—written, the Bible says, by the finger of God on two stone tablets and given to the prophet and leader of the people of Israel. I. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. II. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven images. III. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. IV. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Story Continues Below
V. Honor thy father and thy mother. VI. Thou shalt not kill. VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery. VIII. Thou shalt not steal. IX. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. X. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife nor manservant, nor his cattle nor anything that is thy neighbor's. This set of directives and regulations has been generally accepted for 4,000 years as the best basis for a free and healthy society ever devised. Granted, it has seemed restrictive to some because it does impose limits on what one person can do that might harm another, and it presupposes a society that wants relationship and blessing and protection from the Giver of the blueprint. But long history has proved that anywhere these rules have been observed by a nation, the nation has prospered and thrived and produced blessing for its citizens, and even for other nations as well. The other set, devised and prosecuted through our courts, sometimes even the Supreme Court — the ACLU always seeming an institutionalized part of the process — is almost the diametrical opposite of the first set. Consider: I. Thou shalt not pray in public schools, even if students and faculty desire to. II. Thou shalt not allow Nativity scenes on public property. III. Thou shalt not display the Ten Commandments, in public, anywhere. IV. Thou shalt not pray at graduation ceremonies, sport events, or in mixed company, anywhere. V. Thou shalt not permit teachers to have even their personal Bibles in class, or students to mention a Bible verse in an essay or speech. VI. Thou shalt not allow Boy Scouts, who promote religious and moral values, the use of public property. VII. Thou shalt not dare to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. VIII. Thou shalt not allow crosses in war memorials. IX. Thou shalt not say the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. X. Thou shalt not teach creation or intelligent design or any understanding of human origin except evolution. Get the picture? Does a pattern begin to form, revealing a trend toward a different kind of society? And the ACLU, which actually dares to describe itself as the defender of civil liberties, has won court battles on all these issues, increasingly imposing its atheistic, humanistic, amoral views on America. And blatantly robbing the majority of their civil liberties! Which set of commandments appeals to you? Do you favor the "progressive" form of life in our country, in which all public expressions of faith are illegal? Or do you still kind of like the way it's been in the United States for over 200 years now? Does it matter any more what the framers of the Constitution intended? John Adams said "The general principles upon which our founders achieved independence . . . were the principles of Christianity." Andrew Jackson proclaimed "The Bible is the rock upon which our republic rests." And James Madison, considered the father of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, although an opponent of theocracy, still declared "Religion is the basis and foundation of government." Marx declared and Lenin recited, "Religion is the opiate of the people." And the ACLU, now with the agreement of certain Democrat leaders in Congress, wants to pass legislation that will actually define parts of the Bible as "hate speech," because these parts condemn and forbid activities they want to condone and promote. H.R.1592, the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007," is the latest pending suitcase bomb against free speech, courtesy of ultra-liberal Representative John Conyers, D-Mich., and carried by Ted Kennedy in the Senate. And the ACLU is betting that you don't care; they can reach over your shoulder and take things away that are precious to you, and you won't do anything about it. Heck, you may not even know it happened. They've already succeeded spectacularly, and if it weren't for conservative organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund (www.alliancedefensefund.org)and the American Center for Law and Justice (http:// www.aclj.org), they might well achieve all their objectives. And those objectives include removing every last vestige of scripture-derived moral values. The question is, will they succeed, and transform America into a totally secular, humanistic, relativistic state, devoid of any responsibility to a higher power? Or will an aroused citizenry stir itself, reclaim its God-given rights, powers, and freedoms . . . and tell the corrupt legalist organization to go start its own country, somewhere else? It's high time, past time, for us to choose one set over the other —while we still have the choice!
Editor's note:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2008 NewsMax.Com |