Some recent
comments (eg "The New Divide In American
Politics"; First Things (On Line); 23 May 2018)
have pointed out the growing divide in our Republic as perhaps based,
in part, on "Religion vs. Not-Religion".
I suggest that the cited division is also based on:
1. Constitutional Laws and "equal justice under law" vs. mob rule;
2. Supporters of the intent of the authors of the 1789 Constitution, The Bill Of Rights and of statutory law as the standard vs. those supporting judges "making and inflicting law and amending our Constitution from the bench";
3. Such Natural Law rights as allow innocent targets of violent criminal attack to immediately use deadly force to stop any "clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm" when civil authorities are not able (And sometimes unwilling to do so) to put immediate halt to such threats. [This right may demand the use of deadly force in protecting those who are unable to do so; And, by extension, the right to immediate access to those weapons as allow them to exercise that right and perform that duty (ie Modern, concealable and effective firearms) as so much opposed by the leadership of the Democratic (sic) Party which disorganization is on one side of the noted divide.];
4. Those who support the fullest exercise of "free speech: (ie The necessary, but not sufficient, basis of "Academic Freedom") as allows even the most provoking expression of ideas vs. those who would totally censor what they consider "hate speech"or, even, "disturbing", expressed, ideas.
I suggest that the cited division is also based on:
1. Constitutional Laws and "equal justice under law" vs. mob rule;
2. Supporters of the intent of the authors of the 1789 Constitution, The Bill Of Rights and of statutory law as the standard vs. those supporting judges "making and inflicting law and amending our Constitution from the bench";
3. Such Natural Law rights as allow innocent targets of violent criminal attack to immediately use deadly force to stop any "clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm" when civil authorities are not able (And sometimes unwilling to do so) to put immediate halt to such threats. [This right may demand the use of deadly force in protecting those who are unable to do so; And, by extension, the right to immediate access to those weapons as allow them to exercise that right and perform that duty (ie Modern, concealable and effective firearms) as so much opposed by the leadership of the Democratic (sic) Party which disorganization is on one side of the noted divide.];
4. Those who support the fullest exercise of "free speech: (ie The necessary, but not sufficient, basis of "Academic Freedom") as allows even the most provoking expression of ideas vs. those who would totally censor what they consider "hate speech"or, even, "disturbing", expressed, ideas.
Today's
divisions, in the USA, appear to be approaching those as were
existant in the 1770s and the 1850s as led to bloody war.
Those divisions have resulted in wars-between-states as in Central Europe's "Wars of Religion" and our own "War Between The States" as often putting contesting peoples in more-or-less distinct areas.
Our nation's first Revolutionary War, like Spain in the 1930s, was a "Civil War" with the various factions less clearly divided by geography---Especially in its early stages. In Spain the "left" did tend to group in-and-about Catalonia and the forces of Franco and his allies in other places. [The present divisions in the USA are nation wide, but with more weight to the left in our West Coast states and in a few other places as Illinois, New York State and Maryland along with a number of cities/counties ruled by Democrats. They, more generally follow the pattern set by Spain at the beginning of its civil war than the USA in 1860.]
At this time the State government of California is in such a "resistance" to Federal authority as was the case in the South in 1859-60 lacking only one, severe, violent act to make its officials guilty of "Treason" as defined by our Constitution and place California and any supporting jurisdictions in a "State Of Rebellion" as would warrant constitutional imposition of martial law along with suspension of Habeas Corpus, military removal of illegal aliens from the USA to to internment camps, use of volley-fire to suppress mobs, courts martial, and other means towards limiting the spread of rebellion to other strongholds of "the left" (As, otherwise, might yield a true "civil war").
Such a conflict might well result in "The Right" using its great advantage in the private possession of modern firearms to privately "liquidate" their opponents---Which may be basic to the Democrats' Jihad against a well armed citizenry.
Those divisions have resulted in wars-between-states as in Central Europe's "Wars of Religion" and our own "War Between The States" as often putting contesting peoples in more-or-less distinct areas.
Our nation's first Revolutionary War, like Spain in the 1930s, was a "Civil War" with the various factions less clearly divided by geography---Especially in its early stages. In Spain the "left" did tend to group in-and-about Catalonia and the forces of Franco and his allies in other places. [The present divisions in the USA are nation wide, but with more weight to the left in our West Coast states and in a few other places as Illinois, New York State and Maryland along with a number of cities/counties ruled by Democrats. They, more generally follow the pattern set by Spain at the beginning of its civil war than the USA in 1860.]
At this time the State government of California is in such a "resistance" to Federal authority as was the case in the South in 1859-60 lacking only one, severe, violent act to make its officials guilty of "Treason" as defined by our Constitution and place California and any supporting jurisdictions in a "State Of Rebellion" as would warrant constitutional imposition of martial law along with suspension of Habeas Corpus, military removal of illegal aliens from the USA to to internment camps, use of volley-fire to suppress mobs, courts martial, and other means towards limiting the spread of rebellion to other strongholds of "the left" (As, otherwise, might yield a true "civil war").
Such a conflict might well result in "The Right" using its great advantage in the private possession of modern firearms to privately "liquidate" their opponents---Which may be basic to the Democrats' Jihad against a well armed citizenry.
Here,
please note that the vast majority of modern (ie Police &
Military grade) firearms privately held in the USA are in the
possession of those "on the right".
Returning to the matter of "religion" v. "not-religion" it appears that: Removing the matrix of Christianity (As based on the teachings of the Jews) from its role of support in what was once Western Civilization in Western nations leaves a gap filled by a most arrogant Atheism as essentially against humane behavior (eg Abortion becoming infanticide) as the spread of the horrid commands of orthodox Islam. In this era, this is most exactly demonstrated by Sweden where both have rotted away real "Charitas", personal freedoms and self-determination in favor of obedience in the style described in the novel 1984. THAT "RELIGION OF ATHEISM" , AS OPPOSED TO THE BEST PRINCIPLES OF JEWS AND CHRISTIANS, IS NOW A CORE, IF HIDDEN, PART OF THE REAL PLATFORM OF THE USA's DEMOCRATIC-SOCIALIST PARTY.
Returning to the matter of "religion" v. "not-religion" it appears that: Removing the matrix of Christianity (As based on the teachings of the Jews) from its role of support in what was once Western Civilization in Western nations leaves a gap filled by a most arrogant Atheism as essentially against humane behavior (eg Abortion becoming infanticide) as the spread of the horrid commands of orthodox Islam. In this era, this is most exactly demonstrated by Sweden where both have rotted away real "Charitas", personal freedoms and self-determination in favor of obedience in the style described in the novel 1984. THAT "RELIGION OF ATHEISM" , AS OPPOSED TO THE BEST PRINCIPLES OF JEWS AND CHRISTIANS, IS NOW A CORE, IF HIDDEN, PART OF THE REAL PLATFORM OF THE USA's DEMOCRATIC-SOCIALIST PARTY.
No comments:
Post a Comment