If the U.S. Constitution is the highest law of the land, but George W. Bush doesn't have to abide by it, then neither does anyone else.
Nancy Pelosi and her supporters and John Conyers, her yes man, are allowing George W. Bush to get away with murder, literally.
Now, as I've written on this site time and time again, I'm not for punishing George W. Bush. I'm for removing him as chief shepherd of the nation. That's Christian no matter how one slices it. He's been told privately that he's not being a good shepherd. He's been told before witnesses. He's been told before the whole world too. In each step of the process, he refused to repent. Now he is a heathen man, as Jesus says, and to be treated as such.
Now Nancy Pelosi is asking for everyone to simply wait until George's supposed four-year-term expires. Doing that sets a precedent of not holding the officeholder to account. It is not holding George W. Bush responsible. That is a terrible signal to send to the youth of the nation. It is a terrible example Nancy Pelosi is setting. Her example is not what I want to see for the youth. I don't want children growing up to emulate Nancy Pelosi. She's done the people a terrible disservice. Her very first order of business should have been to impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. She could have refused to assume the office of president if that was her worry. It shouldn't have been though.
Bush is in the position of chief shepherd at least on the secular level — level of the prince of darkness of this materialistic world.
Since the people in the secular legislature will not move to remove George W. Bush even though they are duty bound to do so, the people must stop supporting George W. Bush and those legislators.
Of course, the whole secular system is loaded with error. The very system is fatally flawed and will fall and fall hard if the people don't make the transformation the smart way. Unfortunately, the signs haven't been good.
In reading the times, I must say that this is the darkest time in my years on this plane. The dishonesty in soul searching is astonishing. Where are the people who will admit the truth when it's right in front of their faces?
People read and hear the truth, but turn around and act as if it hasn't been written or said. They just go right on thinking that if they ignore the words or don't bother to dig to discover how to comprehend the words that by thus failing they will be better off somehow. It's just incredible.
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)