Thursday, July 21, 2016

Should Ted Cruz have Kept that Pledge?


Should Ted Cruz have Kept that Pledge?
By
James Scott Trimm


Ted Cruz had pledged to support (not endorse) Trump.  (Never mind the fact that back in March Trump renunced his own pledge and said he released Cruz from his). 

After Ted Cruz made this pledge, Donald trump made disparaging remarks about Ted Cruz's father, suggesting that his father might have been involved in the Kennedy assassination.  Ted Cruz would have dishonored his father to endorse a man who had said such terrible things. Should Ted Cruz have kept a pledge that would dishonor his father?

Here is what Yeshua (Jesus) teaches:

4 Is it not written in your law from the mouth of God, Honor your father and your mother?(Ex. 20:12; Deut. 5:16) And moreover written, And he that curses his father and his mother will surely die? (Ex. 21:17; Lev. 20:9)
5 But you say, Whoever says to father and mother, It is all an offering–[KORBAN] whatever of mine might benefit you,
6 And he honors not his father and his mother. Thus have you made void the commandments of God, on account of your judgments.
7 You hypocrites! Isaiah did well indeed to prophesy concerning you, saying,
8 This people honors Me with their mouth and with their lips, but have removed their heart far from Me.
9 And their fear of Me, is a commandment learned of men.(Isa. 29:13)
(Matt. 15:4-9)


The question is which commandment is weightier: the commandment to keep all of your vows (Num. 30:3(2)) or the commandment to honor your mother and father (Ex. 20:12; Deut. 5:16).  What happens when there is a conflict between these two commandments and one must break one to keep the other?  Here we are clearly told that honoring our parents overrides any obligation to keep any vows (much less pledges) we have made.  Although a pledge is less than a vow, that only makes the point stronger.

So biblically speaking, Cruz was absolutely right to honor his father rather than keep a pledge that would dishonor his father.

Ted Cruz spoke some very wise words when he said:

"We deserve leaders who stand for principle. Unite us all behind shared values. Cast aside anger for love. That is the standard we should expect, from everybody.

And to those listening, please, don't stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution."




Lets all go do just that on November 8th!



Sunday, July 3, 2016

Independence Day and Texas Rights






Independence Day and Texas Rights
By
James Scott Trimm


Tomorrow is Independence Day, the day we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776.  But many do not understand the beauty of this profound document, written by Thomas Jefferson, and inspired by the political philosophy of John Locke.  Let us examine the opening words and see the amazingly profound ideas packed into this single document.  The first paragraph reads:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.



We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness….

(Declaration of Independence; Opening)

Here the document declares that the right of a people to “dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another” is one to which they are entitled by “The Laws of Nature” and of “Nature’s God” and is an “unalienable right”.  This is a reference to the philosophical concept of Natural Law (which I wrote about n a recent blog, click here to read).  

John Locke, whose political philosophy inspired the founders said that if a ruler went against natural law and failed to protect "life, liberty, and property," people could justifiably overthrow the existing state and create a new one:


But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our’s. Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.

The Declaration declares a form of Social Contract theory, that Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, to secure form them the inalienable  rights with which they were endowed by their Creator, including the rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. 

In other words anarchy is so undesirable that men have set up governments to protect their rights. 

The Declaration then says that  whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of its intended purpose, o protect the rights of the people, the people have a right “to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

Now lets look at how these words inspired key language in the Texas State Constitution.  When Texas rejoined the Union after the Civil War, Texas had the ability to fight on on its own without the rest of the Confederacy.  However Texas agreed to rejoin the Union provisionally and so these words were added to our new State Constitution:

FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE.  Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.

(Article 1 Section 1)



INHERENT  POLITICAL  POWER;  REPUBLICAN  FORM  OF GOVERNMENT.  All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit.  The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.

(Article 1 Section 2)

Notice that the reentry of Texas into the union was of limited “perpetuity” and depended entirely on “the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.” 

Notice the words “All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit…. they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.”

There can be no question but that these words are drawing from the language and ideas of the Declaration of Independence and that they declare that the perpetuity of Texas union with the United States of America is dependence upon our continued right to local self government (including, but not limited to the respect of the 10th Amendment), that the government exists solely for the benefit of the people who have an “inalienable right inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish” it “in such manner as they may think expedient.”

The State of Texas rejoined the union provisionally.  The provision was that the State of Texas has the right to end that union at any time that we determine that our right to self government has been impaired by that union.  This is an inalienable right with which we were endowed by our Creator and which we cannot give up or lose. 

This Independence Day is a time for my fellow Texans to meditate upon the wise words of the Declaration of Independence, and of our Texas State constitution and ask ourselves “Has our union with the United States of America impaired our inalienable right to govern Texas?” 

Do we not have the inalienable right to govern Texas?  Do we not have an inalienable right to protect the Right to Life and outlaw abortion?  Do not we have the right to regulate (or not regulate) medical providers in our own state?   Do we not have a right to uphold the definition of marriage in our own State Constitution?  Does Texas not have a right to regulate (or not regulate) its own healthcare system without having Obamacare forced upon us?

If the answer to these questions is “yes” then the perpetuity of our union with the United States has met its limits and we have an “inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish” it “in such manner as [we] may think expedient.”

It is time for Texans to invoke our inalienable rights!