Recently, gay marriage became legal in California, and gays all over are getting a buzz from this “victory”. But of course, like with all addictions, this buzz will only be temporary and more ground will be fought for in the future.

When I say “buzz” and “addictions” I’m referring to what I describe in my book (The Plague Of Liberalism) as a psychological disease that liberal activists suffer from: “Freedom Addiction”. That is, they don’t feel free so, like with all addictions where a stronger dose is sought when ultimate satisfaction isn’t achieved, they keep pushing to break the legal barriers that restrict in any way.

Unfortunately they are using and severely hurting the American mainstream culture and natural maturing of young people in the process. And the other unfortunate part is that, like with all addictions, this psychodramatic charade will never give them the freedom that they crave. Only submitting their inner and outer lives to being in harmony with the observable, inherent designs in nature will. (And my many years of research and experimentation in many different approaches to lifestyle, problem solving, personal growth and truth, have concluded with being able to prove that the Bible contains an inerrant explanation of those designs.)

A key underlying question to this whole issue is: are gays born that way? According to the stand of the APA (American Psychiatric Association) before 1973, the answer is “No”. To see how the APA changed their position because of heavy intimidation and not science, that story is in my latest book, which you can get at www.ThePlagueOfLiberalism.com.

 

When thinking about liberal reaction to my book The Plague of Liberalism, my first thought was, “people don’t like it when sins are pointed out because they think that focus is too heavy and unloving. I mean, why don’t we all just take a live and let live approach?”

But then I thought, wait a minute, liberals have a sin-conscientiousness too (e.g. racist-sexist-homophobe, global warming, etc.), it’s just that what they consider to be sins are different than what I considered to be sins – that is, things that need to be improved.

Then I also thought about people I know who are conservative and say they are religious and felt that many of them too don’t like to hear about sin (at least some of the sins that I point out in my book). They don’t like things to be heavy. Yet even they too have things that they complain about in how some people approach life.

In the September 2, 1904, edition of Collier’s, Mark Twain wrote: “It will be conceded that a Christian’s first duty is to God. It then follows, as a matter of course, that it is his duty to carry his Christian code of morals to the polls and vote them. Whenever he shall do that, he will not find himself voting for an unclean man, a dishonest man. If Christians would vote their duty to God at the polls, they would carry every election, and do it with ease. Their prodigious power would be quickly realized and recognized, and afterward there would be no unclean candidates upon any ticket, and graft would cease. If the Christians of America could be persuaded to vote God and a clean ticket, it would bring about a moral revolution that would be incalculably beneficent. It would save the country.”

The purpose of The Plague Of Liberalism is to do that persuading. In this election year, in order to make wise voting choices, Christians (and all people for that matter) need to be made aware of which policies will lead to more suffering for people, and which ones will cause positive experiences. 

The Plague Of Liberalism does this by showing how the mainstream of America has increasingly become out of harmony with nature over the last six decades. And that is causing a lot of suffering for a lot of people. This is verified by the declines in social statistics over those decades, as well as the declines in the healthiness of the feelings in the entertainment of the day.

In The Plague Of Liberalism it is proven that the driving force behind that decline is a psychological disease called liberalism. And the essence of that disease is an addiction … an addiction to a feeling of freedom. This addiction is energized in people who really don’t feel free inside. And it is primarily manifesting in liberals and liberal activists. This addiction manifests as a compulsion to break down any barriers … even good barriers …that stand in the way of people being able to do anything they think of. The addict perceives any barrier as the reason why they don’t feel free, so they attack it and try to eliminate it. Unfortunately they use the mainstream and its media, entertainment industries, laws and education systems to carry out this psychodramatic attempt to feel free, and a lot of people suffer as a result … especially in marriages, raising children and inner peace.

But The Plague Of Liberalism also proves that the antidote to this disease is strict adherence to the designs that are inherent in nature as to how personal lives and societies should be conducted. And the author says that after 14 years of searching for those designs … a search that took him through 20 approaches to lifestyle, truth, personal growth and problem solving … he says that they could be found no better than in the Bible. And he’s been verifying this in the 26 years since he discovered that.

So now with this book he says that he expects no one to take his word for this, but rather he’s proven that this is true … even scientifically. He says that, “Good decisions shouldn’t be relegated to opinions by whoever can say them the loudest or dominate the culture. They should be based on what is objectively true, good and brings about the overall best results. Therefore, an educated voter needs to know what is objectively true. And the aim of this book is to help them discover that for every aspect of personal and social life.”

The contents of The Plague Of Liberalism can be seen at www.ThePlagueOfLiberalism.com. It also can be purchased there.  

Recently I’ve had discussions with atheists, homosexuals, uneducated Catholics, liberals, secularists and fundamentalist Christians and there were two things that they all had in common that hampered any discussion leading to truth (BTW, this isn’t to imply that everyone in the above named groups is guilty of the following):

(1)  They broke the rules of logic. They had placed defending their “position” above being guided by truth. That is, they were emotionally bent on defending their position in spite of reasoning. Opinion took precedence over provable fact and an open-minded spirit of discovery. And distortion of facts and slanted presentations were resorted to in order to make their point.

(2)  They broke a spirit of civility. They became emotional and even name calling in their defense of the position that they had come to identify with. And being that it wasn’t really a position that they discovered from scratch, but rather a position of some other person or organization that they identified with, they were weak in their defense and yet emotional in their attachment to that position.

Whether their steadfastness and emotional presentation of the position they identified with was born out of ignorance or insecurity, they nevertheless weren’t secure enough in their position to maintain peace or open-mindedness. If a person doesn’t display those two attributes, then whatever they say is discredited.

Regarding division in the Christian world, there should be a spirit of working towards unity, which was even a prayer of Jesus (in John 17:20-23), whom Christians are supposed to be following.

Being that I am a person who has evolved through many different organizations and approaches to lifestyle, truth, problem solving and personal growth over 40 years of searching and experimenting, I say that everyone needs to be open to the fact that there might be higher ways than the one that they are currently “attached” to. Truth and love should be the constants, and attachment should be the variable. That would indicate a REAL desire to find THE truth and the optimum ways to view and approach life. And one way that we can elevate our clarity and understanding is through friendly, open-minded discussions. And a skill that helps that is an ability to maintain an inner sensitivity to when we are being humble and open versus when we are either pushing an opinion (against that sensitivity) or blindly believing and then pushing that belief. 

Below is an email I received that I thought was telling. My add to it would be: if women can complain about a glass ceiling in the workplace, then Christians should start complaining about a cosmic ceiling in the mainstream. That is, religion should not be banned from public discourse … especially if its ways work better than secular ways in being able to solve personal and societal problems. And that is the case, which is why people who live by the Bible are frustrated to see problems continue that they know don’t have to continue, given the track record of the Bible’s effectiveness in fixing personal lives, as well as entire cultures (which I cite examples in my book The Plague Of Liberalism of when that has happened).

Catholic League president Bill Donohue urged Catholics to reject Sen. Barack Obama’s faith-based initiative: “If a customer walked into a New York deli and said, ‘Let me have a hot dog on a roll—hold the frankfurter’—he’d likely be thrown out. That’s what the public should do to Obama’s faith-based initiative: since he wants to gut the faith from his faith-based programs, he should be told to junk it.

“Any church or religious agency that agrees to take federal money on the condition that it must operate in a secular fashion—in hiring and in disseminating its values—is selling out. If Orthodox Jews running a day care center are not allowed to exclusively hire Orthodox Jews, there is nothing kosher about it. If a Catholic foster care program cannot place Catholic children with Catholic parents, it is doing a disservice to the children. If an evangelical drug rehab program can’t deliver a Christian message to its clients, it may as well close up shop. But that’s what Obama wants—he wants to secularize the religious workplace.

“No wonder Obama said yesterday that ‘I’m not saying that faith-based groups are an alternative to government or secular nonprofits, and I’m not saying that they’re somehow better at lifting people up.’ Indeed, if he really believes this then he might     as well withdraw his initiative.

“The whole purpose behind funding faith-based programs is that they are, in fact, superior to secular programs. And the reason they are has everything to do with the inculcation of religious values disseminated by people of faith. No matter, Obama wants to gut the religious values and bar religious agencies from hiring people who share their religion. Hence, his initiative is a fraud.”

Not that I like rap, but… 

Just a little bit of investigation
will show this was a Christian nation.
‘No religion’ was never the intention,
just not any one denomination.
          Rapper B. Cool
          From “Separation of Church and Insanity”

“And have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?…Without His concurring aid…we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages.”  (Which has happened)
              Benjamin Franklin, The Madison Papers (1840), Vol. II, p.985, June 28, 1787

“The propitious (favorable) smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.”
              George Washington, The Daily Advertiser (New York), p.2, May 1. 1789  

It’s amazing to me that some people don’t look at the fact that they didn’t cause themselves to be alive and that we’re on this tiny spinning ball that is a mere speck in a giant universe that humans obviously didn’t create. Therefore there obviously is something more than humans. Even though I scientifically prove in my books that God exists, that seems to be just a matter of common sense from observing reality.

Yet people are so caught up in their lives and pursuits of pleasure and blinded by the many things that go on in this world that they don’t fully acknowledge in every moment of their lives what I said above. And this nation now is increasingly creating and enforcing laws to keep people from acknowledging and remembering God in public institutions. That’s an amazing act of arrogance by beings who are going to die and whose eternal destiny and well-being now are in the power of their Creator. And it’s no wonder that young people are so unhappy (as is expressed in their music), as are most people (as is expressed in the entertainment these days).

But the real unfortunate thing here is that if people would just dwell on the realities of life and God, they would end up in the greatest possible experiential situation and relationship and purpose for their lives. I’ve made the transition to that awareness easier for people by writing Why Are We Here? and its accompanying Workbook. They can be seen at www.Why-Are-We-Here.org.

 

The title of this post is self-explanatory. I mean, when do we ever hear SPECIFIC spiritual utterances by either candidate? And yet, it is that kind of content that is needed to convince voters who take religion seriously. If I were a candidate for president, my main focus wouldn’t be on “the economy” or “the war”. My main focus would be on the happiness of the citizens of this nation. And that has been in great decline for many years, as is verified by the greatly declined social statistics (divorce rate, addiction rate, teen suicide rate, crime rate, STD rate, etc.) and also the great decline in the healthiness of the emotions in the entertainment industries. And trying to bring up children in this society and protect them from being exposed to the great amount of dysfunction/sin in the media is difficult. Yes, we do have to solve the economic problems of this country. And yes, the war is a big problem. But what should also be included in the mix is the general happiness of the nation. As I watch the candidates speak, I probably feel like many others do in that I’m hanging on every word hoping that even a morsel of wisdom or real solutions will be thrown my way so that I can feel good and even excited about the candidate. But as their heads go back and forth between left, center and right teleprompters (mostly with statements by speech writers), I hear only empty, typical rhetoric, like “we need change”. And I’m surprised by the big crowd reactions to what basically is “no content worthy of a rousing reaction”. I would prefer that the candidates just speak from their heart with clear visions of solutions to the problems this country faces. And because the best solutions to experiential problems exist in the Bible, I’d like to hear them spell those solutions out and how they are going to implement them. That is what would court the evangelical vote. Here is a writing that I did recently that shows what a spiritual statement might be like.

Global warming is what I call a “liberal smoke screen” to keep us from looking at the REAL sins that the liberals push.

(A couple of facts from my book The Plague Of Liberalism).

It would be good if a climate investigation over centuries would be known. Well, Science magazine gave the results of such a study that covered the last 3000 years. It showed that we now are under the mean temperature of the last 3000 years. It also showed that the widely fluctuating mean temperature (based on isotope ratios in the skeletons of marine organisms deposited in the Sargasso Sea) hit peaks five degrees higher than now around 900 B.C. and 400 B.C. and 3 degrees higher than around 100 A.D. There were also lows 2 degrees cooler than now around 100 A.D. and 1700 A.D. Since this last one, the temperature has been steadily rising (a scorching :-) 2 degrees in the last 300 years). 

But I think that some even newer data puts this issue to rest. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reported that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. An NOAA report shows that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to just 1.5 million square miles in October, are almost back to their original levels. And a Feb.18 report in the London Daily Express showed that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than usual. Also, the photo of the polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg, that was meant to tug at our hearts and which was offered as proof of the need to fight climate change and has been used by former Vice President Al Gore during his “Inconvenient Truth” lectures about mankind’s alleged impact on the global climate, was taken in August when melting is normal. And actually the polar bear population has soared in recent years. And the winter of 2007-2008 was one of the worst on record in many parts of the Earth, including in China, which saw its worst winter in 50 years and where many died as a result. 

Some of the most admired leaders in human history have seen themselves as servants (e.g. Jesus, Mother Teresa, the pope [who is called “the servant of the servants”]). And some of the most despised leaders have been self-centered and power hungry (e.g. Hitler, Satan, Stalin). Therefore, inherent in the human heart is an understanding of what the highest and best approach to life is. Jesus, even though he was the leader of the apostles, exemplified this by becoming a servant and washing the disciple’s feet. He did so to make the important point that if we all are servants of one another then that is how free will beings can live in harmony with each other. But Jesus was much more than just the leader of the apostles. The following Bible verse describes his approach. Philippians 2:3-8 “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross!”

So as we analyze the two candidates for president, who is more the servant? It is obviously John McCain. The stories that can be found on the internet about him and how even in prisoner camps in Viet Nam he risked his own safety to serve his fellow soldiers. He also exemplifies a selflessness in the fact that he has taken no “pork” for his district to make himself look good. Whereas Obama has taken plenty. Obama also has been the most liberal voter in Congress regarding one of the most insensitive, selfish acts in our society: abortion. He even voted against a bill to stop partial-birth abortion. Whereas McCain’s voting record on abortion has been consistently against it. The primary focus of liberalism is “freedom” (to do whatever), whereas the primary focus of conservatism is “responsibility”.

I’m going to support all that I’ve said here through a focus that I call “The Final And Ultimate Maturing”.