The U.S. government is talking about American extremists advocating violence against the government, regardless of whether or not that government may be illegitimate. Many people are hinting around about violent revolution if it comes to that. Many people are calling for civil disobedience and tax resistance.
Violence though is wrong no matter against whom. It is not justified against the government. It is hypocrisy to complain about the U.S. Empire's violence against others and then be a violent revolutionary.
Tax resistance runs diametrically against the teaching of Jesus to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. The government has organized the system of unrighteous money and, even more so unethical, allow the evil-hearted private bankers to monopolize it. The money doesn't belong to the people. The money is Caesar's. The people are enslaved under it. Don't refuse to pay taxes if you take the money in wages or salary or for goods sold or services rendered. It is hypocrisy.
Civil disobedience fast becomes counter-productive when it undermines the efforts of people engaged in more effective methods of persuasion. You will note that Jesus never did anything whereby he was found to have broken the law. Not even cleansing the temple was illegal. When they hauled him to the Roman governor, they didn't do it on a charge of cleansing the temple and Pontius Pilate found that Jesus had done nothing illegal.
People engaged in civil disobedience in the U.S. do break legitimate laws. Of course, there others who are doing the greater sin against which those engaging in civil disobedience are protesting to draw attention and to get action and a redress of grievances. However, perfection is perfection.
Jesus's Were Also Mundanely Legal
When they told Jesus to shut up, he refused, because it would have been wrong to shut up and because they had no legal authority to censor him concerning what he was saying.
He did not truly engage in civil disobedience. The distinction is fine but needs to be made. Civil disobedience is harmful to someone's legitimate concerns. Jesus never harmed anyone's legitimate concerns. When people decide where to take a stand, they need to think it through in light of what Jesus did and didn't do.
Problem With the Mundane Law
Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up
The U.S. Constitution is fatally flawed. It is top-down all the way. That's why Bush/Cheney have gotten away with so much for so long. Christianity though is top-down and bottom-up.
...we know the president was planning instead, at least six months before 9/11, to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq; we know of a National Security Council memorandum dated Feb. 3, 2001, concerning the "capture of new and existing oil and gas fields" in Iraq; we have acquired with a lawsuit the maps of Iraqi oil fields Vice President Cheney's "Energy Task Force" was studying a month later; we have learned how the privatized structure of Iraq's postwar oil industry was designed by the Bush administration a year before the war began; we know the administration was negotiating pipeline rights-of-way with the Taliban, unsuccessfully, until five weeks before 9/11; we know the final threat to them was a "carpet of bombs"; we are aware of President Bush twice refusing offers from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden, before and after the carpet of bombs was unleashed; we've read of the five "megabases" in Iraq to house 100,000 troops for as long as 50 years; we've learned the U.S. Embassy compound under construction in Baghdad will be ten times larger than any other in the world; and we know Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, and British Petroleum/Amoco are poised to claim immense profits from 81 percent of Iraq's undeveloped oil fields.
Are these the activities and outcomes of a "War on Terror?"
We also know President Bush, a month before 9/11 in August of 2001, notified the governments of Pakistan and India he would launch a military mission into Afghanistan "before the end of October."
Between the dates of the president's announcement and his order to attack, the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were struck by the hijacked airliners. Seizing in a heartbeat this spectacular opportunity to disguise and launch the preplanned invasions, the Bush administration concocted the megalie, and the "War on Terror" was born.
The "War on Terror" is a conscious and ingenious masquerade for the geostrategic pursuit and control of Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. The facts place this beyond dispute.
"It's Treason: Dems Stay Silent on Bush White House Crimes," by Richard W. Behan. AlterNet. November 16, 2007.
Partial Truth: 9/11 Inside Job
The above is partially true. 9/11 was known about long before it happened. Entities of the U.S. government with the full authorization of the White House were involved in bringing 9/11 to evil fruition. The details have been suppressed and covered over by the George W. Bush administration.
Real Law Breakers
Here and around the world, Bush/Cheney break all sorts of laws. They murder people, torture them, imprison them, deny them rights, spy on them, and on and on and on, all for oil and Greater Israel for the Anglo-American-Israeli Empire and the oligarchs and plutocrats. The money people are behind it all.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)