Hi all,
This is an attempt to explain in part why American Christians and American politics are so closely linked, focusing on 3 main points. It will show what is happening here politically, and in several Western nations.
US Declaration of Independence, Constitution (and Bill of Rights) based on traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs
When our forefathers declared the United States independent from Great Britain on July 4, 1776, the first paragraph after the opening statement (preamble) of that Declaration states:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers by the consent of the governed.”
“We hold these truths to be self-evident” mean these truths are obvious to everyone. Like saying leaves turn green in summer or the sky is blue, it’s obvious to all.
“That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”
Because the context of the Declaration covers all men, women, and children in America, the word ‘men’ refers to mankind, to all concerned with the business of the Document. Only by pulling ‘men’ out of context can one twist the meaning to think it is only talking about the gender, man.
“..endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”
Unalienable means; ‘Cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred to another’. It says the Creator has given to all people rights and that is self-evident and cannot be taken away, denied or transferred by government (for He is God). To ‘secure these rights’ a government is formed.
The difference between Conservatives and Liberals: God gives rights, not government.
Up until July 4, 1776 no other nation had declared that it was founded upon the concept that God gives all people rights, and the role of government therefore is to help citizens secure those rights. Liberals by contrast, believe government gives and takes away rights.
This is the core of why the ‘Christian Patriot’ movement is rising. It is to counter the liberal belief that government gives rights rather than God, and their assault on those who believe in the traditional Documents as written of our founding.
About those rights and why Christian patriotism is growing
Below are the 3 main points I’m covering to explain why Christianity and traditional American culture are so closely aligned with our founding documents.
1. The Creator gives rights
2. Those rights are unalienable (cannot be denied, infringed upon, transferred to another)
3. 1 & 2 therefore establish that each person is responsible (to God) for their own life (how they handle those rights)
What we see happening now among liberals in the US and other nations:
A. The government gives rights
B. Those rights may be determined by the government according to how they wish
C. A & B establish that each person is responsible to the government
The natural consequences of believing government gives rights, is that if anyone doesn’t accept the government’s C, they are branded unpatriotic or treasonous. Christians in particular are singled out because of their refusal to leave the original 3 principles. Government wants all to be in unity on A, B, & C. Inclusion to them means the acceptance as long as they adhere to A-C. Christians cannot compromise on the original #1-3, which sets the stage for conflict.
Understand this: This is why the media attacks those who believe in the traditional family of married mom, dad, and children as ‘far right’ or ‘fascist’. Before you enact a totalitarian government you must destroy the family, because those whose first allegiance is to family will not automatically obey government mandates that go against the traditional values. Therefore adherents to the traditional American culture must be vilified, called all kinds of names (Nazi’s, fascists, traitors, unpatriotic, as we’ve seen in American politics and media, etc).
The Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights are written in the negative
That means they outline what cannot be done by government rather than outline ‘positive’ actions it or others must obey in terms of rights. For example: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It tells what government cannot do, not what it can do. It’s written in the negative.
President Ronald Reagan said in the early 1980’s: “I’ve read of other countries and how they are like ours in many ways, except for that one difference. Their Constitutions are documents in which the government tells the people what they can do. And ours is a Document that says the people are telling the government what it can do.”
Our Documents are written in the negative, describing what the government cannot do, thus empowering the citizens to tell it what they will allow their government to do. When in our times liberals have made the government rights-givers, seen for instance in the weaponizing the FBI and Department of Justice against conservatives*, people are rising up in the voting booths and by running for office to restore the core limits and role of government. From school boards to the Presidency, these are some core reasons we are seeing a Christian Patriot movement in the US.
*As of this writing, a Roman Catholic pro-life leader had his home raided by a SWAT team and arrested, for a shoving match more than a year earlier involving a man endangering his young son with him. The other man sued and a court dismissed his case and claims. But over a year later the DOJ and FBI resurrected the case and raided the man’s home, taking him away in chains in front of his wife and children. For a case dismissed in court about a shoving match proven to be in self-defense, maybe the authorities would talk to the man or his attorney if they wanted to further investigate, but never a SWAT team of more than a dozen heavily armed police.
Actions like these in the west are one reason why people are rising up to vote in conservative valued officials. Similar voting for conservative values have taken place in the leadership of European nations for similar reasons – the ‘populist’ movement is electing conservatives who do believe in traditional family, national identity and so on – and are called all sorts of names in the media.
I hope this first part has been interesting to learn the core differences in perspectives and what is happening in the US and so many western nations. Next week, how the liberals use the courts to enforce their way.
Until then, blessings,
John Fenn
