By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
November 30, 2007

Please consider this scenario. Several youngsters are drowning in a neighborhood lake. They are thrashing the water and crying out for help. There is a large, heavy raft nearby that could be used to rescue the drowning youths, but it would take several people to haul it into the water and then row it out to the victims.

Now, as it happens, there are more than enough people standing around the lake whose combined efforts would be more than adequate to rescue the drowning young people. Instead of grabbing the life raft and heading out to save the victims, however, they all start making speeches.

One by one, the would-be rescuers holler out that they believe in life; they believe in saving the lives of the drowning young people. They are all "pro-life." The only problem is, none of them grabs the raft and actually attempts to save the victims. So, here is the sixty-four million dollar question: are these people really "pro-life"? Do they really want to save the victims, or are they simply pro-life pretenders who only want to talk about saving lives but not actually do anything about it?

There is no one reading this column who would accept the pro-life rhetoric of the people around the lake as justification for not grabbing the life raft and actually saving the lives of those who were drowning. Then, why do "pro-life" conservatives accept the rhetoric of Republican politicians when there is no action to back it up?

If Mitt Romney, John McCain, Fred Thompson, and Mike Huckabee are truly "pro-life," they need to do more than just talk. They need to put up or shut up!

Ladies and gentlemen, it doesn't take some magical Supreme Court appointment to overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion-on-demand. If all the Republicans who keep telling us that they are "pro-life" (including President George W. Bush) were really pro-life, then why, in spite of having had ample time and opportunity to end the abortion holocaust, have they not done so?

In fact, the GOP has controlled the U.S. Supreme Court since the infamous Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion-on-demand was handed down in 1973. That means GOP appointments have dominated the Court for over thirty years, and yet abortion-on-demand is still the law of the land.

Beyond that, for six years (2000-2006), "pro-life" Republicans controlled the entire federal government. And, for six years, millions of unborn babies cried their silent screams as the abortionists' scalpels ripped their little bodies apart in abortuaries throughout America. And to use my opening analogy, all these "pro-life" Republicans did was stand by the side of the lake and talk "pro-life," while the youngsters drowned in front of their eyes. During all this time, the life raft sat unused on the shore.

Dear reader, the life raft for the millions of unborn babies victimized by abortion-on-demand is the U.S. Constitution. However, we have a bunch of arrogant and conceited imbeciles in Washington, D.C., who have neither the smarts nor guts to use this wonderful life raft. It seems that the vast majority of them have absolutely no knowledge of the Constitution--even though each and every one of them takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend it.

The only presidential candidate who has a commitment to saving the lives of unborn babies and who understands the constitutional authority of Congress to end abortion-on-demand is Texas Congressman Ron Paul (with the exception of Alan Keyes, who recently announced his candidacy). You read it right. At this point, John McCain is all talk; Mitt Romney is all talk; Fred Thompson is all talk. And even Mike Huckabee is all talk.

Huckabee says that when he was Governor of Arkansas he required parental notification for abortions, required a woman give informed consent before having an abortion, and required a woman be told that her baby would experience pain and be given the option of anesthesia for her baby. (Source: Mike Huckabee's website) While this is commendable, none of Huckabee's actions did anything to actually end abortion-on-demand.

When it comes to ending abortion-on-demand and overturning Roe v. Wade, the only thing Mike Huckabee (and the rest of the Republican presidential candidates, save Ron Paul and Alan Keyes) will say is that they will appoint the right judges, as if they have no power as President to do anything else. (Good grief! Even Rudy Giuliani says as much.) My friends, these "pro-life" Republicans are either woefully ignorant themselves or they are pulling the proverbial wool over our eyes.

Ron Paul seems to be the only presidential candidate who understands that under Article. III. Section. 2., the Constitution gives to the Congress of the United States the power to hold rogue courts in check and to overturn outlandish rulings such as Roe v. Wade.

Accordingly, Ron Paul has introduced and reintroduced the Sanctity of Life Act (including in the current Congress). If passed, this Bill would recognize the personhood of all unborn babies by declaring that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception." The Bill also recognizes the authority of each State to protect the lives of unborn children. In addition, this Bill would remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the Court, thereby nullifying the Roe v. Wade decision. The Bill would also deny funding for abortion providers. In plain language, the Bill would overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion-on-demand.

Is it not more than interesting that "pro-life" President George W. Bush, along with the "pro-life" Republican Party leadership of both houses of Congress, refused--and continues to refuse--to support Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act? In addition, not a single "pro-life" presidential candidate outside of Ron Paul has even bothered to mention the Sanctity of Life Act, much less aggressively call for its implementation with a promise that, if elected President, he would sign it into law. Not Huckabee; not McCain; not Thompson; not Romney; none of them!

Why did John McCain not introduce Dr. Paul's Sanctity of Life bill in the U.S. Senate? Why have Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson not committed to use the power of the bully pulpit of the White House to push Congress to implement this Act? Again, either these men are ignorant of their constitutional duties and responsibilities (in which case, they are unqualified for the office of President) or they are not truly serious about overturning Roe v. Wade and ending abortion-on-demand (in which case, they are conservative phonies and frauds).

I say again, it is time for "pro-life" Republicans to put up or shut up!

Beyond that, it is time for Christian conservatives to stop being so gullible. We need to start looking beyond eloquent rhetoric and campaign clichés. We need to begin demanding results.

Every four years, Republicans trot out a conservative façade during an election season for the purpose of obtaining the votes of susceptible Christians. And every four years, conservative Christians--like starving catfish--take the bait: hook, line, and sinker.

"Save us from the monster," seems to be the cry of well-meaning--but easily manipulated--conservatives. The "monster" is whoever the Democrats nominate, of course. But, ladies and gentlemen, the Republican Party has done absolutely nothing to change the course of the country. Nothing! In fact, it has only gotten worse with Republicans in charge.

Ron Paul is the only candidate running against the status quo. He is the only candidate who takes his oath to the Constitution seriously. He is the only candidate who, if elected, would actually turn the country around. A Ron Paul victory would launch a new American revolution: a revolution of freedom and independence such as we have not seen since 1776. Furthermore, among the major Republican presidential contenders, Ron Paul is the only candidate whose pro-life commitment extends beyond rhetoric.

(c) Chuck Baldwin

PS. One further note regarding Mike Huckabee. He will not win the GOP nomination, but what he will do is wind up endorsing (or perhaps even being selected as the Vice Presidential candidate) whichever Republican candidate wins the nomination--even if he is a pro-abortion candidate. Thus, he will fulfill his role in this election: to bring Christian conservatives into the Republican fold, even without a commitment to the life issue by their standard-bearer. In other words, Huckabee is the establishment's guy to make sure that the Christian conservatives stay "in line."

© 2007 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved


Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, "Chuck Baldwin Live" This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

I posted that last post without proof reading and left a note to the reader to explain. I got home this evening from "Church" and began proof reading it. It near made me cry. Many times Winkie would tell me that for God to really use me, a purification by fire would be needed. The greater the calling, the greater the heat. Now I'm not claiming to be anyone great, so don't send me emails telling me I need to be more humble, just read what I wrote and not between the lines please.

And so I look back. I see how God, just as people were telling me in the midst of the darkest of times, that God will use these circumstance to turn me into a "wounded healer". It's even hard for me to type this, because as I express in words, and speak out loud as I type, as I do, the mirror is slowly becoming less dim. It's not that I never understood this in the midst of the pain, it was that I just didn't want the pain. Recently I have had a ministry tell outright completely fabricated lies about me. And Winkie just said, "you mean like they did to Jesus?". It's not all that comforting to hear at the time, but it is the truth.

Which brings me to "Church". I never feel more alone, further from God, than in a "Church" service. I keep putting the word in inverted commas consciously. Tonight I walked out of our meeting during worship. I have nothing against my fellowship, and I know some of them read my blog, including the Pastor, so don't freak out at me ok :) This is not aimed at you, it's aimed at, well, all of us.

So why did I walk out? I never feel more alone, more isolated, than I do during a "Church" service. To my spirit, it is just the most foreign thing in the world. I am going to what some would call a post-modern Church. So exactly what is a post-modern Church? The number one word used in these circles would be "relevant". I tend to see the post-modern Church differently. To me, the post-modern Church is nothing more than a different color paint job on the same old rusting car. It looks new and shiny and people stare at it as it drives past. Inside though it's the same old bomb of a car. Nothing really has changed. We have a new language, a post-modern religion-free language, or so we think. Because it's not religion-free at all. In all eras, the language of religion has progressed, changed, morphed, and that is all that is happening here. It's change masquerading as change. Make sense?

So what does the perfect Church look like to me? It doesn't look like anything. I don't believe in a perfect expression of Church. What I crave is just pure authenticity. Community. Fellowship. Whatever happened to the model of the early Church? We know what it is, we talk about it often, but why then aren't we doing it? I am talking about the simple expression of meeting together in one another's houses. Sharing meals together. Breaking bread and sharing the cup together, what communion, or the eucharist is really about. Not pasteurized grape juice and a wafer. When are we going to just all sit in a circle a few people deep, and just share our lives with others. The eucharist teaches us to be broken and poured out for one another. When. When does this happen? I want to hear about my brother's pain. I have suffered, I know a little of this pain of life, and I know others are going through pain too, and I want to be there with them. I want to embrace, unconditionally, to love on them, to be there for them, to be Jesus to them. Our current Church structure is not an environment that encourages this. We are anti-community. We come to "Church", we sit, we stand we sit again, we probably stand again, then we smile at someone when inside we're hurting and wanting to cry out for help, but we can't. We just follow the program and come back next week for a slightly altered version of the same. Fresh paint, same car. Meanwhile my brother is hurting, and I want to be there for him, and he for me, but we never ever find ourselves in a place of security and intimacy where we can be vulnerable enough to say, hey, I need help.

It's right about now the pragmatist will put his hand up and protest. We have prayer cards where you can write needs down and a pastor will call you and pray with you. We have cell groups you can plug into. We have program xyz that meets your specific needs. And though people's motivations are surely sincere when they are creating such things, they just don't realize how they are simply exacerbating the very problem. The "Church" has had to resort to programs that foster community simply because the very model everything sits on, is not community. The attempt is artificial and doesn't work. The massive turnover of Church attendees is simple empirical evidence of this. We have resorted to tempting new people with coffee vouchers. There's just not a lot to compel them to stay. In fact, recently I looked through the online photo albums of a Church I used to attend about 2 years ago. I struggled to find a picture of anyone I even recognized let alone actually knew. In 2 years, a near 100% turnover. It's unfortunately becoming more typical.

Ok, some will say we need to stop looking at the negatives and focus on the positives. Well we can do that with Hitler and his 3rd Reich too, but it doesn't serve much purpose. To fix a problem, we need to know what they are. I can't have an operation to save my life if the Doctor does not first find out what is wrong with me and share with me the bad news. So tomorrow we'll look at some suggestions for surgery. Stay tuned.


UPDATE
After posting the above, I received an email. I am posting it here with their permission. May it encourage more conversation, send in your own experiences, and I will keep them anon if you wish. Email me, servant@ this domain, or use the comment link just below to the right.

I don't know what I would put on a blog if I had one. You are really willing to put yourself out there!

I have long been feeling exasperated with the church I attend. It is absolutely nothing like the one you are at. It's not at all modern. We are using the same hymnal from 1950 or something. And there are people attending who have been there for 40 years or better and it is very very small. But I don't think people really know each other that well. Or maybe people put you in a box, because they have made up their minds what you are like and that's it.

In my Sunday school the teacher often asks me to read because I am not afraid to pronounce the names. I feel like that is the extent of my being appreciated, and that maybe not even either, it may be resented.

There is a small group of people who gets together to eat after church and evidently at other times. I mostly have not been included in this group of several families. When I was included a few times I didn't really enjoy it.

I don't have any friends. Lately that has been bothering me very keenly. I have been crying constantly. Even in church. Does anyone ask me what's the matter? No. But, what if they did? I feel pretty pathetic. I wonder if it is my lot in life to spend my life alone most of the time? It's because something is wrong with me, I'm not good enough... I think somewhere out there is a place where someone would care... but maybe I am not being fair, do I care?

These are the thoughts that have been running through my mind lately.

The past year, 2007, has without any doubt been the hardest of my life. And in the truest sense of irony, the previous year was unquestionably the very best year of my life. I have learnt many lessons. I began by responding to certain circumstances in the most Godly way, only to lower myself and begin responding in a manner not worthy of my calling. To my friends I offer my apologies for that. Life's lessons never cease.

I recall Joyce Meyer once asking God why she was going through so much crap in her life when she believed God had shown her big amazing things for her life. God answered like this. Joyce, you asked for a lot, its going to cost you something, do you want it or not? Sometimes I feel way to familiar with that. In looking at the lives of so many people that have made a difference in their world, the price has usually been very very high. Greatness does not come without first going through the lowest of places and finding humility and selflessness. Only then, can God raise a man to great heights. And even then, it is His prerogative alone to do so. And He may not, but we can't allow that to hold us back us from a worthy obedience.

In the last few weeks, things have been seriously looking up. I met a person that God has given the same unique missions-vision as I have. This was exciting and inspiring. I have since taken the time to explain this unique concept in a flow chart diagram. If you're involved in missions or would be interested in helping to fund something very unique and very effective, ask me to send this to you.

I feel a lot lighter than I have in recent months. My prayer life that had seriously suffered, is again something I look forward to. The pain and the sorrow was all too real, yet it has taught me much. Much about the love of Christ for us. Much about Grace. About finding God in the midst of real pain. About how very few people are really your friends when it comes to the crunch. About how we in the ministry so often just pass those that are hurting over to some program or course instead of offering them what they really need, love, acceptance, belonging. And then in the most bitter reversal of the Gospel, it is God's own people, not the world, that rejects the love of our Lord and shuns and rejects, causing all the more pain and hurt. This, I have experienced first hand. It makes me embarrassed to say I am a Christian. Embarrassed about Jesus. oh no! Never. Embarrassed of others who call themselves, His.

If you have not read what I recently put on the front page of this site, let me paste it here for you.

I am not a Christian, I am simply one who has discovered there is a God that loves me and sent His Son Yeshua, Jesus, to this earth to teach us how we should live and give us hope for a future lived in harmony with Him through His perfect sacrifice. I find most who call themselves Christians to be the most horrible unconscionable people I meet. For the last several years I have associated almost exclusively with people in the "Church", and it has nearly killed me. In the last few months, I have associated almost exclusively with non-Christians, and it has truly been a revelatory experience. It has been a real eye opener. Indeed, I have found most non-believers to be walking through life in a closer image of how Jesus told us to love one another than many many believers I have met. Of course, there always exceptions.

I believe that.

I like your Christ.
I don’t like your Christians.
They are so unlike your Christ.
Ghandi

OK, this post is not turning into a Western Christian bashing post. Just read Tozer, Keith Green or others for that. I do feel though that I understand Ghandi's perspective in a new, real, first-hand way. If I shared my pain with a Christian, the response was usually something like, "You know God has a perfect plan for your life. Can I pray for you?" From non-believers I would usually get something like, "man, that's crap. Do you want to hang out on Wednesday? You know if you ever need anything..." And so I don't want this label anymore. "Christian". I want to be free from the labels. I AM free from the labels. I want to lean against the Lord as Peter did at Passover and just relax in the depth of that security. That's where it's found. Not in prayers, not in the Bible, not in Theology, but in Jesus. In Him. In Him. Its so simple, yet all my life, I have tried to understand this and failed, until now.

More later, I need to go...

Now this is what I have been waiting for. A Ron Paul Video Podcast. Subscribe for free and it will download very good Ron Paul videos to iTunes, which means they will then sync to your iPod and iPhone and even a SONY PSP. Cool hu!

www.RonPaulVideoPodcast.com

At the start of our Summer DTS, I got the guys together to create a pledge to the girls in our DTS. YWAM Denver has strict rules on starting a romantic relationship during your DTS, and I wanted us to all honor those rules by getting our hearts together and writing our own pledge to the girls. The girls never knew we were doing this, but every night we would get together for prayer and repeat this out-loud. We all wrote some bits of this, but Eric Davis did such a fantastic job of his, that about 85% of the iPledge was his writing.

Fell free to use this for your own DTS altering ts as you see fit. It would give me a HUGE buzz to know someone else is using this, so send me an email and let me know if you do.


iPledge

We the men of the YWAM Denver Summer DTS pledge this before God and each other.

We pledge to honor all of you as our sisters in Christ and show our desire to be unified with you in one spirit, under the Lordship of Christ.

We pledge to respect you and not make inappropriate or sexist jokes that demean you.

As your brothers, we also desire to protect you - whether it be protecting your hearts or protecting you physically wherever we go.

We will pray for you continually, interceding for you all before our Father.

In addition, we promise to to be pure in thoughts, motives and actions toward each and every one of you and promise that we will not enter into a romantic relationship until the appropriate time at the end of DTS and then only at the Lord's leading.

We also desire to be strong leaders, leading by example and in humility in all that we do.

Moreover, we want to serve and encourage you all as Godly women, spurring you on to love and good deeds and making use of the unique gifts and abilities God has blessed you with.

Most importantly, we want to love each one of you in everything we do because of the love Christ first showed us.

This is our pledge. Amen.

As a technology geek, this got my attention. Many people in the media slam Ron Paul and his fans as being crackpots. So what's with this? When you make a donation to any candidate's campaign, you must list your employer. So which employer is coming up tops in Ron Paul's campaign as the biggest donors? None other than Google! Google! No doubt, Google and Apple have the smartest people on the planet working there. Smart people, REALLY SMART people are donating to get Ron Paul elected president. This is VERY telling!

You too can be a VERY SMART person and donate to Ron Paul. Go to www.RonPaul2008.com.

Ok, now WAIT, it gets so much better.

Who do you think would be the number 2 and 3 employers of Ron Paul's largest donors? Would you believe this, number 2 is the US Army, and number 3 is the US Navy. Now if that does not tell you that Ron Paul has the most unbelievable level of real authentic support out there, I'm not sure what will. In 6th place it's the US Air Force!

But wait, who's number 4? MICROSOFT! That stunned me. Smart SMART people vote for Ron Paul!! not hill billy dope smokers!

We have the smartest people on the planet, and the protectors of this nation, the troops, showing themselves to be the people putting their money where their mouth is and supporting Ron Paul.

So in order, the biggest supporters of Ron Paul are: Google, US Army, US Navy, Microsoft.

Oh, but WAIT. Who are the biggest 4 supporters of the so-called front runners? Oh my, big banks and investment firms and the like, look at this:
Hillary: DLA Piper, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup Inc.
Obama: Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, National Amusements Inc, JP Morgan Chase.
Jilly Anny the cross dressing war monger: Ernst & Young, Elliot Management, Credit Suisse Group, Merril Lynch.
Romney the Mormon pro-abortion baby killer: Goldman Sachs, Merril Lynch, Marriot International, Bain Capital.

AMERICA!!! We need to wake up. We have a Thomas Jefferson waiting to revive all the things that made America, America. If you have never voted before, NOW is the time. Register Republican and vote in your primaries. We need to make Ron Paul the Republican nominee in order to win the Presidency. Forget your party affiliations, look to the man! Let's do it!!

Source.

An Open Letter to the Protestant Community in Behalf of Ron Paul
by Laurence M. Vance

Member of Congress and Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul is the premier advocate for political and religious liberty in politics today. He is the most pro-life, pro-family, pro-property, pro-Constitution politician in history. If it is possible to be more Jeffersonian than Jefferson, then Ron Paul is the man.

On issues that are dear to the vast majority of Protestant Christians, Ron Paul stands head and shoulders above the other candidates. Consider just a few.

The Issues

Abortion: Ron Paul is a physician who has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He not only opposes federal funding of embryonic stem cell research and partial-birth abortion, he is against abortion itself. As he himself has said:

In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called "population control." Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.

Religion: Ron Paul has issued a statement of his personal faith that should satisfy Protestant Christians of any persuasion:

I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.

The reason we do not find very many references to religion in his writings and speeches is because, unlike President Bush, Dr. Paul does not cloak his political proposals with religious rhetoric in hopes of beguiling Christians.

Family values: Ron Paul lives his family values. Unlike Christian "leaders" like prophecy guru Hal Lindsey, who is on his fourth wife, and adulterous Republican politicians like the thrice-married Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani, Dr. Paul has been married to the same woman for fifty years, and has five children and seventeen grandchildren. He also opposes same-sex marriage, and has voted to prohibit federal funding for the joint adoption of a child between individuals who are not related by blood or marriage.

Gun control: Ron Paul is the gun owners’ best friend. Not only has he consistently opposed the expansion of federal gun control laws, he has introduced in Congress the Second Amendment Protection Act to repeal unconstitutional federal laws that allow bureaucrats to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners. Dr. Paul opposes waiting periods, instant background checks, and government databases of gun owners.

Illegal immigration: Ron Paul is opposed to "open borders." He believes that the U.S. government should fight terrorism by first securing its own borders. Because he believes that true citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States, he favors an end to birthright citizenship. And because he believes that it insults legal immigrants, he does not favor amnesty for illegal immigrants in any form. But Dr. Paul is not anti-immigrant in any sense of the word. He believes that the immigration problem fundamentally is a welfare state problem. He joins the vast majority of Americans who welcome immigrants who want to come here, work hard, and build a better life. He opposes welfare state subsidies for illegal immigrants that alienate taxpayers and breed suspicion of immigrants. Dr. Paul also believes that all federal government business should be conducted in English.

American Sovereignty: Ron Paul is against any form of a world government or a new world order. Because he believes that the United Nations is a corrupt organization that was designed to undermine sovereignty and representative government, he has introduced legislation to withdraw the United States from the UN. Dr. Paul likewise opposes the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SSP), the NAFTA Super Highway, and any form of a North American Union. He believes that these plans are the result of an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and government officials. Rather than resulting from the demands of the free market, they are an extension of government-managed trade schemes that benefit politically-connected interests. Dr. Paul also opposes foreign aid since it is generally nothing more than U.S. taxpayer dollars given away to corrupt foreign governments.

The Questions

So what gives? Why aren’t Protestant Christians lining up in droves behind Ron Paul?

It turns out that because Ron Paul opposes constitutional amendments banning abortion, same-sex marriage, and flag burning, some Protestants have been led to believe that he is not a real Republican. Some Christians think it inconsistent that Dr. Paul can oppose abortion but also oppose a constitutional amendment banning abortion, oppose same-sex marriage but also oppose a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman, and oppose flag burning but also oppose a constitutional amendment outlawing flag burning.

Because Ron Paul ran for president in 1988 as a libertarian and opposes the war on drugs, foreign aid to Israel, and the war in Iraq, other Protestants have come to the conclusion that he is not a genuine conservative. They assert:

Ron Paul is a libertarian so he must be a libertine, or at least an advocate of alternative lifestyles.
Ron Paul opposes the war on drugs so he must support drug use.
Ron Paul opposes giving foreign aid to Israel so he must be either pro-Palestinian or anti-Semitic.
Ron Paul opposes the Iraq war so he must not support the troops.
These are false assertions.

The Answers

But if anyone is a real Republican and a genuine conservative it is Ron Paul. He has been elected to Congress ten times as a Republican. He is the former honorary chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He consistently scores a perfect 100 on the conservative New American magazine’s "Freedom Index."

Unlike many in Congress who call themselves Republicans or conservatives, Ron Paul actually believes in strictly following the Constitution. Representative Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution – even if it means courageously casting the lone "no" vote. He has consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending, and regulation. He has actively promoted the return of government to its proper constitutional levels. He is recognized as the leading spokesman in Washington for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He has also received many awards and honors during his career in Congress from organizations such as the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, Council for a Competitive Economy, and Young Americans for Freedom.

It is because Ron Paul adheres to the Constitution that he opposes the Patriot Act, domestic surveillance programs, warrantless searches, restrictions on freedom of speech, national ID cards, federal information databases, and what he calls the Homeland Security monstrosity. His congressional website lists "The Ron Paul Freedom Principles":

Rights belong to individuals, not groups.
Property should be owned by people, not government.
All voluntary associations should be permissible – economic and social.
The government’s monetary role is to maintain the integrity of the monetary unit, not participate in fraud.
Government exists to protect liberty, not to redistribute wealth or to grant special privileges.
The lives and actions of people are their own responsibility, not the government’s.
Ron Paul believes that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided because abortion is simply not a constitutional issue. He doesn’t think there is any serious argument based on the text of the Constitution that there exists a federal "right to abortion." He maintains that the federalization of abortion law is not based on constitutional principles, but on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Supreme Court. Since the federal government has no authority to involve itself in the abortion issue, a federal law banning abortion in the states would be just as wrong as Roe v. Wade.

Ron Paul believes that marriage is first and foremost a religious matter, not a government matter. He does not think social problems can be solved by constitutional amendments or government edicts. Taken to its logical conclusion, the turning of regulation of domestic family relations over to the federal government means that presumably anything can be federalized. Because the federal government has only been granted limited, enumerated powers by the Constitution, Dr. Paul maintains that it has no role whatsoever regarding marriage law. Although the states should enforce marriage contracts and settle divorces, they too should otherwise stay out of the marriage business. It should also be pointed out that Representative Paul was a cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, which would have removed challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. The Defense of Marriage Act (PL 104-99) was passed to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same-sex marriage, even if the said marriage occurred in another state. Although Dr. Paul was not in Congress at the time the Defense of Marriage Act was passed, he has stated that he would have voted for it.

Like all patriotic Americans, Ron Paul despises flag burning. He believes that the offensive conduct of a few does not justify making an exception to the First Amendment protections of political speech that the majority considers to be offensive. Because he believes that freedom of speech and freedom of expression depend on property, Dr. Paul considers making flag burning a federal crime to be an attack on private property. However, he does support overriding the Supreme Court case that overturned State laws prohibiting flag burning.

Ron Paul is against constitutional amendments banning abortion, same-sex marriage, and flag burning precisely because he is following the Constitution he swore allegiance to. Another reason he opposes these amendments is because he is an advocate of that forgotten constitutional principle of federalism. He considers the division of power between the federal government and the states to be one of the virtues of the American political system. To alter this balance would endanger self-government and individual liberty. Dr. Paul is in favor of letting state legislatures decide social policy because federalism was established to allow decentralized, local decision-making. Following the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, he favors all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remaining with state legislatures.

Although some Protestant Christians think that because Ron Paul holds to many libertarian ideals that he is also a libertine, nothing could be further from the truth. The essence of libertarianism is that it is wrong to threaten or initiate violence against a person or his property. Force is justified only in self-defense. Libertarianism, as explained by Murray Rothbard, the twentieth century’s greatest proponent of it, is a political philosophy that

holds that the only proper role of violence is to defend person and property against violence, that any use of violence that goes beyond such just defense is itself aggressive, unjust, and criminal. Libertarianism, therefore, is a theory which states that everyone should be free of violent invasion, should be free to do as he sees fit except invade the person or property of another.

Libertinism is a way of life that might be considered hedonistic or sympathetic to "alternative lifestyles." A libertine might be a libertarian, a liberal, a conservative, a socialist, a progressive, or an anarchist. He might be a member of the Libertarian Party, the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, some lesser-known third party, or no political party. One does not have to be a Christian to oppose libertinism, as Walter Block has superbly shown. Conservative Republicans are not immune from libertine behavior, as we can see from the recent scandals in Congress.

Other Christians falsely believe that since Ron Paul opposes the war on drugs that he supports drug use. As a physician, Dr. Paul knows firsthand the harmful effects of mind-altering narcotics. He believes that drug addiction is a social problem, not a crime. He has pointed out that for the first 140 years of our country’s history we had no federal drug war yet far fewer problems with drug addiction and crime. Dr. Paul opposes the drug war because it encourages violence, has led to the unnecessary prison overpopulation, has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money, has been used as an excuse to attack our civil liberties and personal privacy, has been an excuse to undermine our financial privacy, has promoted illegal searches and seizures resulting in innocent people losing their lives and property, criminalizes the actions of legitimate physicians who act in good faith when prescribing pain relief drugs, threatens the effective treatment of chronic pain, and corrupts our police, the military, border guards and the judicial system.

Some Protestants who consider themselves evangelicals have wrongly concluded that since Ron Paul opposes giving foreign aid to Israel he is pro-Palestinian or anti-Semitic. Congressman Paul is opposed to giving foreign aid to Israel for the simple reason that he opposes giving foreign aid to any country. Foreign aid is, after all, money that has been taken from American taxpayers – money that most of them would not voluntarily send overseas if they had a choice. Any individual American who desires to assist someone in another country is perfectly free to do so. Dr. Paul’s perspective is that of the Founding Fathers: America should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations. He believes that our meddling in the Middle East has only intensified strife, conflict, and violence. Both sides have more military weapons as a result of our foolish and unconstitutional foreign aid. Some of our foreign aid even winds up in the hands of terrorists. For more on Ron Paul and the question of foreign aid to Israel, see Walter Block’s "An Open Letter to the Jewish Community in Behalf of Ron Paul."

Ron Paul opposes the Iraq war precisely because he supports the troops. He is a patriot in every sense of the word. He opposes federal court jurisdiction over the question of whether the phrase "under God" should be included in the pledge of allegiance. And unlike many in the Bush administration who avoided military service, he served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the Vietnam conflict. Because Dr. Paul loves this country and all of its people, he is opposed to endangering the life of U.S. soldiers in unnecessary foreign wars that only enrich federal contractors. He is therefore pro-life in an absolute sense. He believes that the best way we can support the troops is to bring them home, not just from Iraq, but from all of the countries in which the United States has troops stationed. Then Americans can proudly serve in the military knowing that they are engaged in real national defense.

It is conservative Republicans who support pre-emptive war, bloated defense and intelligence budgets, secret military tribunals, torture of "enemy combatants," extraordinary renditions, an increasingly militarized society, the violation of basic civil liberties, undue government secrecy, and domestic spying programs who are neither real nor genuine.

The Answer

Protestant Christians who love liberty, respect the Constitution, and believe in the freedom to live their live and practice their religion without the heavy hand of government hanging over their heads should be drawn to Ron Paul like a magnet.

As a Baptist myself, I realize that some Baptists don’t consider themselves Protestants. In this article I am using the term Protestant in its broadest sense. Therefore, this open letter is addressed to them as well. But religion or no religion, if your creed is liberty, then Ron Paul is the man.

November 14, 2007

Laurence M. Vance writes from Pensacola, FL. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State. His latest publication is War, Foreign Policy, and the Church. Visit his website.

On Thursday I spent 6 hours with a Prophetic Intercessor going through incredible ministry and being set free from the bondage's of my family and past. Less than 48 hours later, I discovered something I never thought I ever would. Another brother. Not a metaphorical one, not a "brother in the Lord", but a full-blood brother that our mother has kept secret our entire lives. His name is Steve, and for his sanity and privacy, I won't reveal more about him for now. Last night I randomly decided to Google my mother. I found nothing, and so I Googled her maiden name. What I found shocked me. There was a man, claiming to be the son of my mother. He knew my name, and my sister's name. He knew other things too. He knew too much for it to be a hoax, and a little digging showed that he had been posting online for 7 years looking for us.

Well, Steve got the shock of his life when I sent a txt message to his phone telling him that I was his brother. An hour later, I called my sister and Steve, and we had a 3-way conference call. Coincidentally, today is my mother's, our mother's, birthday. She is yet to learn that we know about her 8th child, the one given up for adoption at birth. That's about to change in a few minutes. Needless to say, this is a situation that creates feelings never before experienced and rather difficult to describe. Our mother has never told us about this 2nd son of hers. I am her first. It is all the more weird because I always longed to have been given up for adoption at birth too. A read of my still uncompleted testimony will explain why.

So many of the things in the ministry time I went through on Thursday focussed on the family and on the fact that I do not even know the name of my father. Yet the information Steve has seems to show that we have the same father, and he has his name. Together, we will find our father. For me, there is no coincidence here. The ministry time was a quiet, but powerful time. The lady I met with first sat me down and told me the process God took me through when He changed my name to Israel, and she had NO IDEA I had changed my name. She was so spot on it was chilling. That got my attention to begin with. But now this. There is no coincidence that this ministry time has everything to do with discovering my brother.

To be sure, my mother is going to be none too happy that I have discovered Steve. I am shocked, but very happy.

Please pray for all of us during this very emotional time.

An appeal to my fellow pastors

Chuck Baldwin

Recently, Iowa pastors gathered to hear my presentation in Des Moines on behalf of Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul. After listening to me, they then heard ten-term Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul himself.

Consider how Congressman Paul's message impacted Pastor Jim Hartman of the Assembly of God church in Conrad, Iowa. "I've been supporting Mike Huckabee, but I would say I'm leaning real strong toward Ron Paul." Hartman supported President Bush four years ago and explained, "Up until the last six months I had not allowed myself to imagine that we'd been let down by Bush." As for Iraq, he said, "I don't think we were prepared to understand that culture and to work with that culture." He said he now feels "humble and I feel kind of bad that I haven't done a better job of being faithful to Ron Paul's kind of integrity." [Source: MSNBC, Oct. 30, 2007]

Integrity: that is the issue drawing millions to Ron Paul, including young people. The night before I spoke, nearly 700 students gathered at Iowa State University in Ames to hear Dr. Paul. One of those students wrote me recently. His name is Nathan Rockman. He wrote, "As a columnist for the Iowa State Daily here on campus, I have seen first hand what can be described as Ron Paul fever. Since Dr. Paul visited this past Friday, his message of freedom and liberty has been spreading through campus like wildfire . . ."

Ron Paul doesn't recruit artisan spin writers and bloggers to wear down those who might question his past dealings. He doesn't need to. There are no missing hard-drives, ethics violations, and taxpayer funds used for personal use that need to be spun away. He still refuses to participate in the lucrative Congressional pension fund and returns a portion of his Congressional office budget back to the U.S. Treasury each year.

This kind of integrity moved Pastor Hartman, the students at Iowa State University, and many more like them.

Ron Paul has been fighting for the right to life from the beginning of his public career. Dr. Paul is rock-solid on pro-life. After all, he has helped over 4,000 women deliver their babies into the world in his obstetrics practice in Lake Jackson, Texas. He proposed the "Sanctity of Life Act of 2005" (and 2007), which would require that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency." Has he recently discovered these pro-life convictions? Not at all. Congressman Paul introduced the Human Life Amendment in Congress in his very first term of Congress, a couple of years after Roe v. Wade was first handed down.

Is Ron Paul a libertarian, as some use in a throw-away line, often intended to move the listener to discard him without thought? Yes, on areas of fiscal, economic and judicial liberty, he is. But, he is also a social conservative and a Constitutionalist.

Ron Paul's priorities are right with marriage. He and his wife, Carol, have been married for more than fifty years. He believes marriage should be between a man and a woman and defends that principle with his vote, where and when he has the Constitutional authority to do so. For example, Dr. Paul strongly supports the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Candidly, though, Ron Paul does not believe (and neither do I) that the U.S. Government needs to be defining that which God has already defined in His Word.

Where pastors often become confused about Ron Paul is that when he is resisting the unconstitutional centralization of our federal government, he is often perceived as being anti-family. Many in these pro-family movements themselves have been co-opted into believing that the solutions to our family problems come in the form of more unconstitutional federal legislation and programs. And when one does not agree with these unconstitutional remedies, they conclude that he or she is "anti-family." Such people mean well but are confused.

America would be much better off if we Christian pastors taught the need for Christ-honoring resistance — at the local level — to anti-family federal intrusions. We should call on our congregations to vote out of office any judge who passes rulings designed to pervert the Biblical family. That doesn't take a Constitutional amendment. It just takes courageous pastors and people who understand that judges, too, must respect the Constitution and our Christian heritage.

In fact, adherence to the Constitution protects our freedom of speech and assembly; our freedom of worship; our right to keep and bear arms; our right to a trial by jury; the right to be secure in our own homes against police overreach; our right to witness for Christ in public, as a Christian; the right to own property; the right to not be deprived of life or property without due process of law; the right to face our accusers, and the right to keep government local and limited.

Keeping government local and limited is the cornerstone doctrine of American government. Ron Paul understands this more than any other candidate running today.

Most of the problems that we are now dealing with socially, culturally, financially, etc., stem from America abandoning the basic founding principle that "the government that governs least governs best."

Accordingly, America's commitment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has been (and is being) systematically stripped from us — not by State legislatures, but mostly by agencies of the federal government.

Consider how it has been federal courts that have banned prayer in school, and legalized abortion and homosexual marriage. Even in the liberal State of Massachusetts it was the courts (along with a compliant liberal governor, Mitt Romney), that forced acceptance of homosexual marriage upon the people.

The solutions to these problems do not reside in more federal legislation. All that does is strengthen the scope and power of the federal judiciary.

The only ones who have anything to fear from Ron Paul are those who believe in Big Government.

You see, Ron Paul is actually calling on us pastors and Christians to stop seeing the federal government as one "in whom we live and move and have our being." Jesus Christ is our Savior and Lord, not the federal government. Have we not, in a material way, set up the federal government as our functional Lord and Savior? When we look to the federal government to solve our moral and spiritual problems, that is exactly what we are doing.

When it comes to the war in Iraq, I firmly believe that Christian conservatives have been duped by the neocons. Dr. Paul — an Air Force veteran and proponent of a strong national defense — opposed the unprovoked and pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, and rightly so. Time has certainly vindicated Dr. Paul's principled position. There was a much better way to deal with al-Qaeda.

Soon after 9/11, Congressman Paul introduced H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. According to Paul, "A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage war against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation."

This is precisely what President Thomas Jefferson did when America's ships were confronted with Barbary pirates on the high seas.

If the United States government had listened to Ron Paul, we would not have lost nearly 4,000 American soldiers and Marines, spent over $1 trillion, and gotten bogged down in an endless civil war from which there is no equitable extraction. Furthermore, had we listened to Dr. Paul, Osama bin Laden would no doubt be dead, as would most of his al-Qaeda operatives, and we would be less vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, instead of being more vulnerable, which is the case today.

One thing that Pastor Hartman brought up in our meeting in Iowa was the sentiment of many Christians and pastors to defend Israel. Dr. Paul stated that he did not believe that we do Israel any favors and we actually weaken Israel by our constant meddling and intervention. I agree.

Ron Paul is not Israel's enemy. And neither is he the enemy to Christian liberty and constitutional government.

Ron Paul's non-interventionist and constitutional foreign policy approach would help, not hurt, Israel to resolve tensions with their neighbors. Remember, Israel has more nuclear missiles to defend themselves than all of the Middle East nations combined. Believe me, Israel knows how to defend itself. And know this: America's constant meddling curses Israel more than it blesses.

Also consider this: according to published reports such as this one in the Houston Chronicle http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5223477.html , Ron Paul is receiving more donations from military personnel than any other Presidential candidate in either party. Think seriously about this. Our active duty and retired military personnel clearly endorse with their own contributions Ron Paul's non-interventionist position above all others.

In the end, if the candidate is a sincere Christian, he will all the more readily obey his or her oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. After all, does not our Lord tell us that our yea is to be yea and our nay is to be nay? In other words, genuine believers are to be true to their word. How, then, could a true Christian make a promise before God and the American people to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution and then turn around and ignore that promise?

Ron Paul lives his Christian faith and takes his oath to the Constitution seriously. What more could we ask for in a Presidential candidate?

Every Christian pastor should seriously consider Congressman Ron Paul. Here is his website: http://ronpaul2008.com

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985, the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

While he originally planned on a career in law enforcement, Chuck "answered the divine call to Gospel ministry" and decided instead to attend Bible school. He ultimately earned his Bachelor's and Master's degrees in theology, and was later awarded two honorary doctorates in the field.

He is the host of Chuck Baldwin Live, a daily, two hour long radio call-in show on the events of the day. In addition to writing two books of theology — "Subjects Seldom Spoken On" and "This Is The Life" — he has edited and produced "The Freedom Documents," a collection of fifty of the greatest documents of American history.

In 2004, Chuck was the vice presidential nominee for the Constitution Party. Chuck and his wife Connie are the parents of three children and grandparents of six.

© Copyright 2007 by Chuck Baldwin
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/071106

Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’

Intro by Joe D’Aleo, Icecap, CCM
I was privileged to work with John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel in the year before it became a reality and then for the first of the 6 years I was fortunate to be the Director of Meteorology. No one worked harder than John to make The Weather Channel a reality and to make sure the staffing, the information and technology was the very best possible at that time. John currently works with KUSI in San Diego. He posts regularly. I am very pleased to present his latest insightful post.


By John Coleman

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmentally conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.

I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway. I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend. See John’s full blog story here.

Amazing! I have to admit being floored by the $4.2 million dollars you raised yesterday for this campaign. And unlike the fatcat operations of the opposition, the average contribution from our 36,672 donors was $103.

I say "you raised," because this historic event was created, organized, and run by volunteers. This is the spirit that has protected American freedom in our past; this is the spirit that is doing so again.

Some of the mainstream media have sat up and taken notice. Others have pooh-poohed our record online fundraising. But the day is coming--far faster than they know--when they will not be able to ignore our freedom revolution.

We are working hard, with you, to spread our message far and wide-in New Hampshire, in South Carolina, in Iowa, and in every other state with a primary. And people are listening.

As you and I know, there is hope for America-in liberty and peace, and the prosperity they bring. There is hope for America--in a sound dollar, the rule of law, and the Constitution. There is hope for America--in a people's revolution that brings us all together, of whatever race and age and background.

What momentum we have! Please help me keep it up. As you and I know, and our opponents are only suspecting, we have Success on our minds, and in our hearts.

Freedom! Surely it is worth all our hard work. Please help me continue to do that work, with your continuing support: https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate

Without your help, this campaign would be dead in the water. Help us keep steaming towards victory.

Sincerely,

Ron

I was honored to speak before the National Committee of the Constitution Party on Thursday, October 25, 2007 in Council Bluffs, Iowa. Today's column is a condensed version of that address.

Daniel Webster is regarded as perhaps America's most notable jurist. Webster said, "Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster, and what has happened once in 6000 years may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world."

He also said, "The hand that destroys the Constitution rends our Union asunder forever."

Please remember that this is the same Daniel Webster who said: "If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instruction and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity."

You see how Daniel Webster (like most of America's founders) was a man with deeply-held Christian convictions. He believed the Bible. He was a devout believer. And he found no contradictions between the Bible and the Constitution. In fact, he believed (as do I) that the Constitution is the best safeguard for Christian liberty that we have.

When any constitutionally-elected officeholder assumes office, he or she promises to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. They don't promise to represent "conservative principles" or to be "loyal to a political party," etc. The Constitution is the contract between "We the people" and our civil magistrates.

When you or I hire an electrician or plumber to do work for us, we sign a contract for specific work to be done. And at the end of the day, I really don't care whether he claims to be a Christian or where he goes to church or how religious he claims to be. When the work is finished, I want my lights to turn on and my toilet to flush. In other words, I expect him to live up to his contract.

When we elect people to public office, we should expect only one thing: that they uphold their contract to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

You see, adherence to the Constitution protects our freedom of speech and assembly; our freedom of worship; our right to keep and bear arms; our right to a trial by jury; the right to be secure in our own homes against police overreach; our right to witness for Christ in public, as a Christian; the right to own property; the right to not be deprived of life or property without due process of law; the right to face our accusers, and the right to keep government local and limited.

In fact, keeping government local and limited is the cornerstone doctrine of American government. In most nations, the federal government holds power over virtually every area of the lives of its people. Not so in America — at least, not in the America that was originally crafted.

Most of the problems that we are now dealing with socially, culturally, financially, etc., stem from America abandoning the basic founding principle that "the government that governs least governs best."

Accordingly, America's commitment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has been (and is being) systematically stripped from us — not by State legislatures, but mostly by agencies of the federal government.

Consider how it has been federal courts that have banned prayer in school, and legalized abortion and homosexual marriage. Even in the liberal State of Massachusetts it was the courts (along with a compliant liberal governor, Mitt Romney), that forced acceptance of homosexual marriage upon the people.

Today, we have federal departments and agencies almost without number. We have the Department of Education, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Justice, the Department of Labor, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of the Interior, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

Each and every federal department and agency, in its own way and for its own purposes, to one degree or another, ignores or violates constitutional government. And as a result, they contravene and strip away the rights and freedoms of States collectively and of the people individually.

The result of this gargantuan federal monstrosity includes back-breaking taxation and over-regulation, which fuel inflation, stymie productivity, and invite foreign influence.

One only has to observe how President Bush is now appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of an illegal Mexican alien who raped and murdered two Houston, Texas teenagers, arguing that his death sentence should be overturned and that he should be given a new trial. Bush's reason? Illegal aliens should be under the authority of a UN "world court" instead of the State of Texas' authority.

Observe how Bush is pushing for amnesty for illegal aliens. See how he has merged these United States into a regional government by signing onto the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement with Canada and Mexico. See how he is pushing for a NAFTA superhighway. Observe how he and other globalists are planning to replace the U.S. dollar with a regional, multinational currency called the Amero.

Furthermore, virtually every administration for the last fifty years has engaged in an aggressive nation-building foreign policy. (Can anyone say, "Iraq"?) In addition, in contradiction to the stated warnings of our nation's founders, they have actively pursued entangling alliances with unfriendly governments. The past three administrations in particular have deliberately steered our country down a path of multiculturalism, globalism, and elitism.

Pastors, especially, should fight for constitutional government! Do you preachers really think that there will be any room for the old-time Gospel when the globalists and elitists in the federal government have finished with their diabolical schemes?

Already, President Bush repeatedly tells us that Christians and Muslims — and all other religions — worship the same God. How long will you preachers be able to preach the narrow message of salvation, that Christ is the only way to Heaven, when Bush's doctrine of Universalism is the accepted religion? And make no mistake about it: Universalism is the national religion of the United Nations, the European Union, and the emerging North American Union.

The Department of Homeland Security is already holding seminars for pastors, instructing them how they should ask their congregants to turn in their firearms in the event that the President declares a national emergency. How many of you pastors are prepared to become an instrument of gun confiscation for global government?

This is what happens when we abandon constitutional government.

It is not enough that a candidate says he is a Christian. Every politician I know, or have ever known, says they are a Christian — at least every four years. It is not enough that a candidate carries a giant-print Bible to church. It is not enough that he says he prays or says that "faith is important."

The truth is, if the candidate is a sincere Christian, he or she will all the more readily obey his or her oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. After all, does not our Lord tell us that our yea is to be yea and our nay is to be nay? In other words, genuine believers are to be true to their word. How, then, could a true Christian make a promise before God and the American people to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution and then turn around and ignore that promise? He couldn't.

Therefore, a professing believer who is elected to public office and then ignores his or her promise to the Constitution proves that he or she is not a true Christian but a phony who only uses a religious testimony to dupe Christians.

Take the issue of abortion, for example. Ron Paul proposed the "Sanctity of Life Act of 2005" (and 2007), which would require that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency"

The bill also provides that "the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect unborn children..." And that "the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review ...the performance of abortions; or the provision of public expenses of funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for the performance of abortions."

In other words, Dr. Paul understands that Article. III. Section. 2. of the U.S. Constitution gives to Congress the authority to rein in an abusive judiciary and take the issue of abortion (or homosexual marriage or fill in the blank) out from under the jurisdiction of the Court. This means that should Congressman Paul's bill become law, abortion on demand ends and Roe v Wade is overturned.

So, please tell me why, after having control of both houses of Congress and the White House for six years, did these "pro-life" Republicans in Congress and a "pro-life" President not pass Dr. Paul's bill? Why? Because they really do not give a hoot about abortion, but only use pro-life rhetoric to dupe conservative voters.

In addition, those conservatives who have followed President Bush's preemptive war doctrine are the ones who have abandoned historical conservative principles. Before G.W. Bush changed the landscape, conservatives — especially Christian conservatives — mostly subscribed to Augustine's "just war" theory regarding accepted protocols for the conduct of war. Today, however, many professing conservatives have foolishly followed Bush's "preemptive war" theory, which, before now, was practiced mostly by pagan emperors. As Christians, however, we should still subscribe to "just war."

In concert with "just war" philosophy (not to mention American history), Christians should agree with Ron Paul's approach to dealing with terrorists. He authored H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. According to Paul, "A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage war against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation."

This is precisely what President Thomas Jefferson did when America's ships were confronted with Barbary pirates on the high seas.

If the United States government had listened to Ron Paul, we would not have lost nearly 4,000 American soldiers and Marines, spent over $1 trillion, and gotten bogged down in an endless civil war from which there is no equitable extraction. Furthermore, had we listened to Dr. Paul, Osama bin Laden would no doubt be dead, as would most of his al-Qaeda operatives, and we would be less vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, instead of being more vulnerable, which is the case today.

How can anyone say with a straight face that they are fighting a war on terrorism while at the same time doing absolutely nothing to secure our borders and ports?!

I submit that every true American, especially conservative Christians, should enthusiastically support constitutional government. I further believe that a President who would take his oath to the Constitution seriously would bring a new birth of freedom to America the likes of which has not been seen since 1776. May God give us such a man!

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985, the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

While he originally planned on a career in law enforcement, Chuck "answered the divine call to Gospel ministry" and decided instead to attend Bible school. He ultimately earned his Bachelor's and Master's degrees in theology, and was later awarded two honorary doctorates in the field.

He is the host of Chuck Baldwin Live, a daily, two hour long radio call-in show on the events of the day. In addition to writing two books of theology — "Subjects Seldom Spoken On" and "This Is The Life" — he has edited and produced "The Freedom Documents," a collection of fifty of the greatest documents of American history.

In 2004, Chuck was the vice presidential nominee for the Constitution Party. Chuck and his wife Connie are the parents of three children and grandparents of six.

© Copyright 2007 by Chuck Baldwin
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/071030