The Nature of Man

By
Charles R. Fuqua, J.D.

Many years ago I went to the Muslim Student Union at the University of Indiana at Terra Haute, Indiana. I was amazed that many of the Muslim students were ardent Socialist and even Marxist. It seemed strange to me that people who believe in God would favor an ideology that rejects belief in God. I have also found it strange that many Muslim nations embrace Socialism. Another thing I have noticed is that American liberals seem to be more in tune with Muslims than with Christians or Conservatives. I have a Muslim acquaintance, and one day we were discussing the differences between the Christian and Muslim religions. He said ,"you Christians believe in the depravity of man. We Muslims reject that doctrine." As I thought on this statement I came to understand the fundamental ideological war in the world today.

The fundamental ideological war in the world today is over the nature of man. Some argue that man is basically good. They argue that children are born pure and innocent and only become selfish and corrupted by contact with the evils of the world around them. The interesting question is, if we are all born pure and good, how did the first selfish and corrupt person get that way. The Christian religion teaches that man is born selfish, self centered, and greedy. Anyone who has ever raised a child knows that children are born selfish, and self centered. The bases for the belief that man is basically selfish is found in the Bible. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23. "There is none righteous, no not one" Romans 3:10. "There is nothing more desperately wicked then the heart of man" Jeremiah 17:9. "Man's inclination is continually to do evil" Genesis 6:5. There is no other religion that teaches that man has a sin nature. The largest religion in the world, the Muslim religion, rejects the doctrine of the inherent sinfulness of man. The Ideologies of progressivism, socialism, fascism, and communism all reject the doctrine of the inherent sin nature of man.

The founding fathers of the United States accepted the doctrine of the sin nature of man because they were Christians. All Christians accept the doctrine of the sin nature of man. It is the central and most fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion. The Christian religion teaches that all of mankind need a savior to save them from their sins. If we can gain salvation through our own good acts, then we do not need a savior, and the death of Christ on the cross was a farce.

Because the drafters of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution believed that all men have a sin nature, they created a system of government that prevents any one person from gaining too much power. They divided the government into three branches, executive, legislative and judicial. Then they gave the most powerful branch of government, the legislature, two separate houses and divided that power between many members in each of the two houses. They further dissipated power by creating levels of government. The highest level of government, the Federal government, was established as a government of limited (enumerated) powers. The Constitution list the powers given to the Federal government and then reserves to the States, or the people any powers not given to the Federal government. The founding fathers of the United States understood that government is a necessary evil. It is important that both aspects of that statement are understood. Government is necessary. We cannot live without it. Without it chaos reigns. However since government is composed of people cooperating together, and since all people have a sin nature, government is evil. Throughout history more human oppression, suffering and death have been caused by government that any other human institution. Like fire, government can be a useful tool for mankind. If fire is contained within a stove it is useful. The Constitution is like a stove. It contains government and limits it to a useful purpose. However, if fire gets out of the stove, or if government exceeds its Constitutional limits, it consumes and destroys all.

There are those who criticize the Constitution and refer to it as consisting of negative rights. This is because the Bill of Rights is a list of "thou shall nots" to government. Those who criticize the Constitution in this manner do not believe that the government should have limits on its power, because they believe that government is a force for good. Especially if they are the ones in charge of it. They believe this because they reject the doctrine of the sin mature of man.

Today we are faced with a choice. We will accept the Christian doctrine of the inherent wickedness of man, or we reject that doctrine, and accept the teachings and beliefs of Mohammedanism, progressivism, fascism, socialism, and communism. The choice will determine the future of our nation. Either we will limit government power and promote individual freedom and responsibility or we will allow unlimited government power and control.

Allowing the ownership of privet property and a free and competitive market is the best way to limit government power and promote individual rights and responsibility. It is important to understand that these are the battle lines. If you have ever wondered why the Socialist and all other isms hate Christianity and always seek to destroy it? It is because Christianity is the only limit on absolute government power. God gave the commandment, "thou shall not steal." This commandment recognizes the right to ownership of property. The commandment did not establish the right of property ownership. It simply recognized natural law. When a cave man used his time, effort, and talent, to make a flint knife, he know that the knife was his, and he would use it, if necessary, to defend his ownership right. A free and competitive marketplace rewards those who provide goods and services that others want. Competition makes a free market self-regulating, and provides the most goods and services, to the greatest number of people, at the lowest price. Those who desire monopolistic control of a market want to use government as a means of eliminating competition and amassing control and power. A free marketplace ensures freedom in every aspect of a society because it dissipates power. That is why those who want to amass power prefer government regulation to a competitive market. A free enterprise system creates millions of millionaires. Those who want all power in their hands cannot tolerate such a system.

What are your thoughts on this article? Leave your feedback by clicking the word comments below.

Fall of the Republic

What are your thoughts on this video? Leave your feedback by clicking the word comments below.

Meltup

Are we at the beginning of a major currency crisis and hyper-inflationary environment in the United States?  Watch this video documentary from National Inflation Association and decide for yourself.





What are your thoughts on this video? Leave your feedback by clicking the word comments below at www.voiceofbatesville.com.

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas

US President Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag.... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

What are your thoughts on this article? Leave your feedback by clicking the word comments below.

An Imperial Presidency in the Making?

By Chuck Baldwin
March 31, 2010


Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal carried a story entitled "Obama Steps Up Confrontation." It said in part, "On Thursday, the president challenged Republicans who planned to campaign on repealing his health-care bill with, 'Go for it.' Two days later, he made 15 senior appointments without Senate consent, including a union lawyer whose nomination had been blocked by a filibuster.

"At a bill-signing event Tuesday, he is set to laud passage of higher-education legislation that was approved despite Republican objections through a parliamentary maneuver that neutralized the party's filibuster threat."

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) called Obama's decision to federalize most student loans "really brazen" and "the most underreported, biggest Washington takeover in history."

See the WSJ report at:

http://tinyurl.com/wsj-obama-confronts

If history teaches us anything, it teaches us that power always craves more power. And there are only 2 ways to check power: internally, through self-discipline and humility; or externally, through equally determined and equipped counterforces.

Americans should thank God that George Washington was our first President, because no one exemplified self-discipline and humility more than he did.
After having led the colonies to perhaps the most miraculous revolution in world history, Washington was universally adored and even idolized. There were many that even attempted to make Washington America's king. He flatly refused this proposal, of course. (Compare Washington's character and humility to former President G.W. Bush, who, on this subject, said, "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.")

The concept of an American monarch may seem foreign to us today, but remember that a monarchy was the only form of government the colonists had ever known. And there can be no doubt that a monarchy (or some form of it) has been the single most popular form of central government that the nations of the world have utilized. But remember, too, the theme of America's War for Independence was "No King But Jesus." And no one believed that more than General George Washington did.

Like most of America's founders, Washington distrusted government in general and despised big government in particular--even though people were willing to make him government's imperial ruler. Listen to the Father of our
Country:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Unfortunately, there hasn't been a man of George Washington's caliber in the White House for many a moon. Instead of distrusting and limiting the central government, the vast majority of modern Presidents have completely ignored the constitutional role of the Presidency, and have sought to expand the authority of the executive branch of the federal government to proportions never allowed in the Constitution or envisioned by its creators. And Barack Obama is following the example of his predecessors by continuing this malevolent model (with increased rapidity, I might add). The above-mentioned stories are just the latest examples of what is fast becoming an imperial Presidency. It seems that every day another example of executive arrogance and usurpation of power takes place.

Given the lack of genuine humility and character of America's President--and the unwillingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to restrain his unconstitutional propensities--it is left to the states and the People to hold this would-be king in check.

And here is another reason to be thankful for America's founders: they recognized the ultimate role of the states in safeguarding and protecting liberty. As James Madison said in Federalist 45, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined.
Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."

In Federalist 39 Madison said, "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution."
(Emphasis in the original.)

If America's founders desired that a national--or monarchal--government be established in the United States, what was the purpose of the original 13 colonies retaining individual statehood? Why would each State retain its authority as "a sovereign body," if not to serve as a vanguard against the encroachment upon liberty by the central government?

And never has liberty been more vulnerable to oppression and tyranny than right now! Why? Because ever since 9/11, both political parties in Washington, D.C., have placed America in a state of perpetual war. This fact alone puts the federal government in a position to become America's oppressor.

In the first place, the Congress of the United States (then controlled by
Republicans) abdicated its constitutional obligation to be the sole determiner regarding America's entrance into war by providing then-President Bush with virtually unlimited and unchecked ability to determine and wage war clearly outside the perimeter of constitutional authority. And since taking over the federal government last year, Democrats in Washington, D.C., have followed suit.

But listen to Madison: "The executive [President] has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war."

Furthermore, the condition of unending, perpetual war only serves the purpose of lessening liberty. To quote Madison again: "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." Madison also declared, "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." And one more from Madison: "The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home."

One needs to only look around to observe that Madison's warnings are quickly becoming a reality in these United States.

What all this means is that the American people cannot rely on Washington, D.C., to control itself. We cannot trust Washington politicians and bureaucrats to have the character and self-discipline to honor the Constitution and defend our liberties. If we are to preserve our freedom in this country, it will be up to the body politic in each State to do it. If the Congress and Court in Washington, D.C., will not rein in this burgeoning monarchy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, then the states and People must.

At this point, I do not believe there is any way to avoid it: a showdown between freedom-loving states and the federal government is inevitable. But not only is it inevitable, it is absolutely necessary! The central government in Washington, D.C., is quickly morphing into a monarchy--or at the very least an oligarchy. And neither the Donkeys nor the Elephants inside the Beltway are willing to do anything to stop it. Either the states determine to defend the rights and liberties of the American people now, or we are destined to be governed by DC's despots. Furthermore, we cannot cede to the US Supreme Court--or to any other federal authority--our independence, and most certainly, those fundamental elements necessary to our very survival. Only the states and the People, respectively, can maintain these bulwarks.

The question is, Will my State raise the "Don't Tread On Me" flag and sincerely defend my liberties? And the follow-up question is, If my State will not do it, which states will, and what will I do? We have little choice. Either we join with a State that will fight for our liberties and help procure freedom for our posterity, or we follow radical unionists (and
globalists) into a modern-day monarchy that is marching America toward oppression and servitude.

What are your thoughts on this article from Chuck Baldwin? Leave your feedback by clicking the word comments below.