11. July 2011 by admin.

In John Stuart Mill’s most influential and widely read work, On Liberty, he defended what he considered to be one of the most important pillars of any successful society, liberty of thought, and consequently of speech.  And it is plain from reading On Liberty that Americans have taken his suggestions quite seriously, not only supporting legislation to protect speech from governmental prohibition, but also instituting laws which protect against the so-called tyranny of private opinion.  But has this endeavor actually promoted discussion and rationality, or has it actually suppressed both? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, multiculturalism, worldview, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 3 Comments »

25. June 2011 by admin.

It has been said, by persons such as Abraham Lincoln, that the cause of tyranny can oftentimes be mistaken for and promoted as the cause of liberty.  If this is the case, then Americans must concern themselves most seriously with understanding what liberty is, and also what it is not.

John Stuart Mill, in what is perhaps his most famous and influential work, On Liberty, helped build the foundation for a modern understanding of freedom, one which an overwhelming number of Americans support.  In doing so, he argued that for a society to be properly liberated, its citizens must be guaranteed freedom of thought and speech, liberty of tastes and pursuits, and freedom of association.   Yet, expressly recognizing in the first chapter of On Liberty that these liberties were too radical without certain restrictions, he sought the boundaries within which they should exist.  And by setting those particular boundaries, like so many of his followers on both the left and right do today he unwittingly destroyed the foundation for the liberty he sought in the first place. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, natural law and rights, worldview, philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

1. June 2011 by admin.

Earlier in the month of February, The Telegraph reported that an English high court judge barred a man from having sex, due to that man’s incredibly low IQ and an inability to properly assess circumstances.  At first, the action seemed bizarre, and brought to mind eugenics programs of the Nazi Party.  But if one looks closely at the matter, this judge ruled far more closely according to the philosophy of John Locke than Adolf Hitler. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 4 Comments »

28. May 2011 by admin.

In recent years, it has been increasingly claimed by the left that the American national media, in its coverage of murder mysteries, ignores the plight of missing black women because of prejudice.  But in their condemnation of what they perceive to be a great racial injustice, leftists oftentimes forget not only about empathy’s selective nature, but also about the reasons why people oppose racial prejudice in the first place. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 2 Comments »

20. May 2011 by admin.

An overwhelming number of conservatives proclaim support for the constitution, and even liberals rally behind the rights they believe the Constitution protects. But is it possible for either side to truly be interested in constitutionalism?

If one considers that our bill of rights guarantees freedom of speech in very broad terms, it is only fair to ask what speech is. To list just a few examples, speech includes giving away military secrets and weapons blueprints, lying under oath, sexually harassing female coworkers (without hands, of course), phoning a bomb threat, engaging in insider trading, threatening to kill one’s neighbors, and conspiring to assassinate people. None of these, at the current moment, are legal, and common sense requires that many of them remain so. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, natural law and rights, Islam, philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

16. May 2011 by admin.

It is not uncommon, these days, to see those interested in a liberal cause use the suffering of poster boys to soften the public heart. Oftentimes, these poster boys are kind faced, hard working, law abiding flag wavers, who claim they bear similarity to the majority of Americans, though coming from circumstances far less fortunate or socially acceptable. But regardless of whether a refusal to grant relief would harm such people, such claims are not a legitimate moral platform from which to launch a movement. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in cultural/racial | Print | No Comments »

8. May 2011 by admin.

My mother was born to a single mom in Honduras, a nation embattled by the forces of communism. Her mother, a secretary for a prominent state intelligence official, did the best she could to raise my mom well. But as a single mother, what you can do is never enough, so my mother was raised between her father’s loving extended family and her mother, alternating between stability and poverty. The rest, she knew even as a child, was under her Heavenly Father’s control. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Personal | Print | 1 Comment »

2. April 2011 by admin.

Of the many controversial stances I have taken, few have resulted in more opposition than my declaration that God’s Law is eternally applicable to human society.  As such, in the interest of sparing time, I’ve created this primer to explain the necessity of a Biblical foundation for law, and to address the most common objections against one.

Before addressing these objections, it must be known that the greatest reason for promoting Biblical principles within a Christian society is that God has established these principles in the creation of Israel.  As such, it is reasonable to conclude that since He is God, He is righteous, and Israel is His, He would not have dispensed a poorly crafted or quasi-moral legal system.  Rather, it is only sensible to accept that these are the highest legal and moral principles ever drafted, and that we can neither improve nor reject them if we are to live righteously and function optimally. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, Theology | Print | 3 Comments »

27. March 2011 by admin.

Of the many difficult questions a person can ask about the rights of man, one of the toughest is whether the people of a country are ever their own supreme authority. To err toward an absolute “yes” or “no” seems to lend credibility to a variety of atrocities, and trying to strike a balance between the two extremes can plunge the answer into useless subjectivity. But a good answer is readily available for those who concern themselves with sound principles. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in foreign policy, natural law and rights, worldview, philosophy, politics | Print | 4 Comments »

15. March 2011 by admin.

Most people in the West agree that a human should not be subject to cruel and unusual punishment, as maintained by our eighth amendment and supported by an overwhelming number of Americans. But is it possible that the process of defining “cruel and unusual” has done Americans more harm than good? To understand whether or not this is the case, it is imperative to consider the concept of war, the purpose of law, and then eventually examine the unalienable rights which all human beings possess.

John Locke once described man’s natural rights as being the right to work for his food, to enjoy the products of his labor, and to live within the positive laws of Scripture (Second Treatise, sects 135 and 136). But since man cannot survive without the right to property and to secure the benefits of his labor, an assault on these rights is an assault on survival, an act Locke recognized as a declaration of war. He wrote of the matter, Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, worldview, philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | 2 Comments »

7. March 2011 by admin.

The other day, I greatly offended an Arabic associate of mine.  During a conversation about the social contract, I tried to use an example of a group forming themselves into a nation, and I had begun the example with the statement, “suppose that a group of people like you were to get together, and decide to build your own country, with your own laws.”

His objection to my statement was that Christians and conservatives oftentimes enjoy separating themselves from everyone else, that we believe that people like him are not part of our group, that we in essence discriminate. In this particular instance, I referred to him as people like you, leading toward an idea and an effect which I had not intended. Why, he asked, could we not just all be considered human, and on the same team? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Islam, natural law and rights, multiculturalism, worldview, immigration, politics, philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

14. February 2011 by admin.

People oftentimes make the case that the God of the Bible, Yahweh, doesn’t act according to His own moral principles.  And I suppose that from an atheist’s perspective, in which Yahweh is actually a figment of the Jewish imagination, they would be correct: in two specific circumstances, one concerning the genocide of the Canaanites, and the other a pardoning of an adultress, He does seem to contradict His laws.  But ironically, this very argument against the Jewish God’s lawful nature further proves His existence. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

9. February 2011 by admin.

Few can resist the emotional appeal of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech.  Somewhere, deep within the human soul, we long for a time when true equality can be found in human interaction, the day in which people will be judged by one another solely according to character.  And oftentimes, at least in the West, those pursuing this ideal attempt to enforce it through what they define as perfect legal equality.

But if total equality under law were truly sought–meaning that no man would have a governmental privilege or power that another lacked–, what would become of those who administrate law?  Would we strip the policeman of his license to necessary and lawful force?  Would we give our war strategies to every member of the population, instead of only our military officials?  Would the authority to enforce law be taken from the judge?  The right to create law taken from the congressman? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics | Print | 20 Comments »

30. January 2011 by admin.

The other morning, as I was reading articles in my computer room, I heard a woman scream.   Immediately, my attention was wrested away from my writing, I sat up straight, and waited in silence, listening for any clues that someone was in danger.  My heart began to race. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

30. January 2011 by admin.

I can still vividly remember walking through run-down Neapolitan suburbs (or, the closest they could get to them, anyway) as a seventeen-year old, firmly within the grasp of an LSD trip.  As I walked through the tall, unkempt grass and weeds, they brushed against my knees as though greeting me with a handshake.  The summer sun was looking down upon me, and the rays felt as though they were shining into my body, as though I was illuminated, and radiating life back into the universe.  Though I usually noticed the garbage on the messy Italian streets, that day it seemed less prominent, if not unnoticeable, and nature’s technicolor vibrance jumped from objects which would have been previously considered not only ordinary, but drab.  I was, at least I felt, as though totally connected with reality, as though something that I had lost along the way had suddenly been found, and I was home. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

23. January 2011 by admin.

Last year, I learned that the CIA had directly participated in a scheme against Osama Bin Laden, involving the use of fabricated video evidence. Their fake video, consisting of a campfire drinking session, was intended to destroy Bin Laden’s credibility with devout Muslims, by making it appear as though he had been breaking Sharia Law.  And if the drinking wasn’t enough to turn Osama’s followers against him, “Osama” spent his time in the video bragging about homosexual conquests. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

4. January 2011 by admin.

Must an increase in empathy signal a decrease in law?

Let us consider, for a moment, that someone has wronged you by stealing your car.  When the person is caught by police, you have the option to press charges, but then discover that your neighbor–whose wife is dying from cancer, after they both lost their jobs–stole your car out of desperation to rush to meet her in the hospital, since he thought she was about to die.  Begging your forgiveness with tears in his eyes, the man sinks to his knees in court, clasps his hands together, and looks at you directly.  At this moment, moved with compassion, in an act of mercy you allow the man to walk free.

Compassion, then, is our friend.  A placing of ourselves in the shoes of others, imagining their hardship and deciding–in some particular instance, to side with them, to recognize that had you been in their position, you would have been desperate as well.  And this empathy, in many cases, is noble. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, multiculturalism, worldview, philosophy, Theology, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

1. January 2011 by admin.

It’s not uncommon, these days, to see misinformed Christians parading around in favor of pacifism, as though Christianity demands that Christians can’t defend their families, as though we as a society must abandon moral stances, capital punishment, self-defense, and our right to bear arms. Going even further, some ignorant Christians even seek establishment of hate speech legislation, believing that dangerous ideologies shouldn’t be morally challenged or honestly discussed in public.  As a Christian, few beliefs irk me more than these.

Fortunately, if we take a close look at Jesus’ teachings, quite the opposite can be proven about His commandments.  For instance, one of the most widely-bungled teachings of Christ concerns the concept of forgiveness and non-retaliation, as most clearly stated in Matthew 5:38-42: Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, Theology | Print | 4 Comments »

28. December 2010 by admin.

Imagine, for a moment, that your boss has been treating you poorly (for many of you, this may not be very difficult).  After weeks of abuse, you finally become so frustrated, that you start to wonder whether you should finally quit your job and join the ranks of the unemployed.  Perhaps this might lead to something better, perhaps not.  But there is one thing that you know, and it is that remaining where you are is simply unacceptable.

This freedom to abandon your employer is oftentimes taken for granted, oftentimes forgotten in our modern world of anti-corporate rhetoric.  But while many leftists decry the abuses of the business-owner, they oftentimes forget that the governmental remedy can be more dangerous than the poison. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, natural law and rights, philosophy, politics | Print | 3 Comments »

19. December 2010 by admin.

As a Christian who enjoys explaining the historicity and scientific legitimacy of Christianity, sometimes Christians ask me: at which point do we not need factual evidence to believe the story of Jesus Christ? How much science and history can ever convince us that Jesus the Jewish Messiah created the world, is God, and saves us from our sin, and that we’re going to heaven? My answer is none. There’s simply no way that you can solidly prove any of those statements with purely physical fact. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 3 Comments »

13. December 2010 by admin.

The other day, I came across a feminist blog about the movie “Tangled,” a movie I know almost nothing about, other than that it’s racist, sexist, and evil. Girl With Pen writes: “The bad news is that it re-hashes the same old story – that as a woman you can either be a princess awaiting her prince or an evil stepmother/witch, that if you are male, you get all the action (in many senses of the word) and that beauty equals white, blonde, thin, and young.”  Let us all grab our pitchforks.

The first reason we should be at arms is because of the racism.  You see, when we apply positive affirmations of beauty to white people, it logically implies that all the other races cannot possess these traits, and are in fact less beautiful than white people.  Consider also that the princess, in Tangled’s case, is white, blonde, and young.  Solely because of movies such as Tangled, it is entirely likely that an entire generation of American boys will find young blondes to be sexually attractive.  I, as one tragic example, have fallen prey to this most odious of ploys. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, philosophy, cultural/racial | Print | No Comments »

28. November 2010 by admin.

Is there a moral balance between liberty and security, or are the two mutually exclusive?

Can the rich ever become so rich, that they strangle the poor?  And what qualifies as “strangling”?

Must a capitalist globalization lead toward an impoverishment of the American working class?

Should the poor have a safety net, and if they do, how much of a net should they have?

Do the rich have an obligation to bolster the wealth of society, aside from providing jobs and infrastructure?

Since the dawn of civilization, man has sought timeless principles to address the concepts of wealth and poverty, justice and equality.  Karl Marx was one of these people. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial, economy | Print | 4 Comments »

15. November 2010 by admin.

In these troublesome times, as the costs of occupation take their toll on both this generation and our children’s children, and as the repercussions of foreign involvement threaten our global standing and security, an increasing constituency of both the left and right are beginning to wonder whether America was ever intended to be an internationally-active force.  Citing numerous embarrassments in Middle-Eastern policy, exportation of jobs resulting from a botched free trade, and the flagrant disregard of our trading partners’ injustices, these isolationists, while not incorrect about the problems of foreign involvement, forget that our Founding Fathers never intended us for autarky or isolationism. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in foreign policy, immigration, politics, economy | Print | 1 Comment »

11. November 2010 by admin.

With the release of President Bush’s memoirs, a lot of discussion is going to be taking place about his most controversial endeavor: the invasion of Iraq.  What I’d like to do with this essay is to provide my readers with a short list of facts they can use to combat the “Bush lied, kids died” non-argument, and I’d like to do so by drawing attention to some UN Security Council resolutions which not only take the blame from President Bush, but also firmly show that the rest of the world had already legitimized the second invasion of Iraq. With that in mind, remember these three steps.

1) Invasion!  UN Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in politics | Print | 1 Comment »

5. November 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this article is dedicated to my first non-familial fan, Esky.

Why do we belong together?

This should not be an offensive question, yet it cannot seriously be asked in our modern political climate–particularly by conservatives–without expecting angry retribution.  But when John Jay wrote Federalist Paper #2, he did so out of the need to convince the American people that they must cede some of their natural rights for the sake of unity; that, although the states had distinct governments and oftentimes different interests, they would need to sacrifice some of these interests for a greater good.  Jay reasoned that this unity always comes at a price, but he was also able to guarantee that the overwhelming majority of identity and of morality would be preserved despite the institution of an American union.  Indeed, this small price for unity was one of his key arguments in favor of the US Constitution. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

29. October 2010 by admin.

Is it fair to say that communism is only alive in Cuba and colleges?  Recently, with Castro’s decision to publicly deride communism as a failed system, many are starting to believe that communism has finally kicked the bucket.  But consider these principles from The Communist Manifesto, and how a large portion of Americans–maybe more than half–not only strongly support them, but enforce their belief through governmental intervention.  And then ask yourself: is communism really dead?

Nationhood:  “The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality.  The working men have no country.  We cannot take from them what they have not got.  Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

28. October 2010 by admin.

One of the most entertaining videos I’ve ever seen about the principles of capitalism.  Very uncommon wisdom, worth sharing!

Posted in philosophy, economy | Print | No Comments »

6. October 2010 by admin.

The TEA Party has got establishment Republicans’ panties in a major twist.  While most party insiders argue that fiscal conservatism is the uniting factor which will bring Americans out of a socialist abyss, TEA Partiers (despite some obvious ideological diversity within their ranks) aren’t so sure that fiscal conservatism alone is the answer, bringing a serious brand of social conservatism into the mix.  Supposedly this foray into “archaic” and “unwinnable” social issues could cost Republicans the elections, but what could Republicans lose without social conservatism? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, natural law and rights, sex, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »

26. September 2010 by admin.

One of the major insults the Left enjoys throwing at conservatives is that we’re xenophobic.  Every time the question of amnesty, border control, assimilation, and immigration is raised, it seems the Democrats (and even some high-ranking Republicans) go for the throat, loudly proclaiming that our only reason for serious immigration reform is a deeply-rooted racism, a fear and hatred of other cultures–especially brown and black ones–and a selfishness which keeps us from embracing the poor.  Unfortunately, this packs quite an emotional punch: much of the active American public are quick to take action against conservatives solely based upon this concept.

But before addressing the concept of conservative xenophobia, we need to have a clear understanding of Leftism.  According to Dictionary.com, Leftism is “A descriptive term for liberal, radical, or revolutionary political views, particularly the view that there are unacceptable social inequalities in the present order of society.  Communists and socialists, as well as moderate liberals, come under the term left-wing.”  In totality, and especially in regard to the issue of massive and illegal immigration, Leftists are concerned that the welfare of non-citizens is sub-par, and so Leftists want to allow them access to the wealth and political power of our United States.  It is this redistributionary stance regarding wealth and power that makes the Leftist a Leftist, and differs sharply from a conservative viewpoint on immigration, which values the immigrant solely based upon their contribution to the American dream by becoming a true-blooded American. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in multiculturalism, immigration, philosophy, politics | Print | No Comments »

25. September 2010 by admin.

I’ve got some confessing to do.  I’ve woken up this morning with a broken heart, and I can’t shake it because I’m not supposed to.

I am a selfish, lazy man.   I know the world is a big place, and that technological advances in communication make us aware of all kinds of problems local and global, and I know that I can’t fix everything, and I know that because of this, some form of emotional callousness should be expected and allowable.  I can’t exactly afford an emotional breakdown every time an earthquake happens in Haiti (sounds bad, I know, but Haiti is still a disaster after all the money we sent), and I can’t go wearing a green ribbon every time some Iranian gets bulldozed by their government.   There’s just too much going on, too much to do, people are too far away, and the world’s got too much to complain about. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | 1 Comment »