The Deceit of Tremendous Wealth

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Not that there is anything wrong with being extremely wealthy. I wouldn’t mind trying it out for a day or two just to see how it fit. The problem arises when the accumulation of wealth and the power that grows with it become more important than the condition of one’s own soul. Or the condition of a nation’s soul.

“To “subdue” is also not to dominate–and all claims to the contrary be damned. The divine continually opposes the tyrant (as in Exodus 7-14) and warns against even seemingly benevolent kings (1 Samuel 8:10-18)…To subdue is, therefore, not to control and command but to put everything in its proper place–to give everything its subordinate value or due; to order everything, hierarchically, so the the priorities of attention and action can be established; and to place things to that the world is no longer mere potential or disorder.” — Jordan Peterson: We Who Wrestle with God, 2024, page 10

“Unwise societies (think Ninevah) take the fact of their traditions and accrued resources for granted. They live unconsciously on the wealth of the past, narcissistically and destructively consuming more than they earn; even irresponsibly destroying the very spirit whose activity gave rise to the wealth in question. We can regard the wealth offered to us by past and nature alike as our entitlement, even our earned due, and act far too casually and carelessly in consequence, despising our birthright and its source: privilege. — ibid, page 478

It is highly unlikely that Donald Trump has ever read Peterson’s book. It is unfortunate if he hasn’t.

Substitute America for Ninevah. It is accurate to say that America has been practicing exactly what Peterson describes–living on the wealth built up in the past, living as if we were the only ones, living far above our means, expecting everything to be given to us because we deserve it, careless of the consequences of our actions, thoroughly destroying the spirit which gave rise to the country. In short, we despise our privilege. We hold in contempt what we have been given. We exemplify the parable of the rich man in Luke 12: 15-21.

And He said to them,

“Take heed and beware of covetousness,
For one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.”

Then He spoke a parable to them, saying:

“The ground of a certain rich man yielded plentifully. .
And he thought within himself, saying,
‘What shall I do, since I have no room to store my crops?’
“So he said, ‘I will do this:
I will pull down my barns and build greater,
And there I will store all my crops and my goods.
And I will say to my soul,
“Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years;
Take your ease; eat, drink, and be merry.” ‘

But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul will be required of you;
Then whose will those things be which you have provided?”
So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.”

What shall I do since I have no room to keep the stuff which I have accumulated? Ah! I’ve got it! I will rent a larger storage unit, twice the size of the one I currently have, at the new complex just completed down the road and move my possessions into that where they can live until I have need for them. Sounds facetious, no? However, in my neck of the woods, one of the most active forms of construction is the building of storage units and it appears that there is no end to the demand for them. Is this because housing units are not providing sufficient space or is it because we have gone overboard with the consumer mentality of keeping up with the Joneses? Or both?

Regardless, the parable quoted above can refer just as easily to Donald Trump as it does to America, in that it seems that he can never be satisfied with what he has. More! More! More! And it also seems to be that he has no compunction (nor do millions of Americans) about aggressively destroying what we already have (or that other people have, more especially what other people have) for the sake of building bigger and better and making our own situation easier and more comfortable in the present.

Notice also, that this parable is intensely personal. I, I, I, my, my, I, my. Numerous times, this rich man drew attention to himself, his possessions, his accomplishments, his plans, much like Trump does today. “I made America great again. I restored America to its former glory. I am the only one who could do these things. I am the only limit to my conscience and actions. I ended umpteen wars in the first 30 days of my second administration which has been the greatest time in history since my first administration which was just as good. No one else can do the things I can.” And on, and on, and on, and on…

Yes! Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. Well, let’s worry about that tomorrow, shan’t we? In the meantime, there’s a war to win.

Bigger barns. Always bigger barns.

Drowning Swimmers or Deliberate Murder

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Ed. Note: First published on June 15, 2019 at another blog I wrote at the time, but is no longer available. Some slight changes have been made from the original.

In their article, “Compromising the Uncompromisable: A Private Property Rights Approach to Resolving the Abortion Controversy”[i],  Walter Block[ii] and Roy Whitehead[iii] make the following argument.


“However, just because aborting the fetus is abominable, it does not follow that it should be prohibited by law. Under a just e.g., libertarian law code,136 there are numerous despicable acts, which are not legally pro­scribed, since they do not constitute “invasions” or “border crossings.” Abortion falls into this category. It is a failure to come to the aid of or an unwillingness to become a “good Samaritan.” The woman who refuses to carry her fetus to term is in exactly the same position as a person who refuses to rescue a drowning swimmer. Abortion is not, in and of itself, an act invasive of other people or their property rights, even when fetuses are considered persons.”

My paraphrased version of this: Just because abortion is abominable, we should not prohibit it. After all, there are other despicable [abominable] acts which would not be proscribed under libertarian law.

I agree completely with this statement, as it is written. We should not prohibit abortion because it is abominable. Instead, we should prohibit it because it is the deliberate killing of an unborn human being, who has done nothing wrong, nothing deserving the punishment of execution. It is the murder of an unborn, personal, human being; therefore, it should be prohibited. It is a sad commentary on our modern way of life that it is not.

The numerous despicable acts (unnamed in the quote) are not legally proscribed because they do not constitute “invasions” or “border crossings.” Ah, yes, trespass again. In all the imagined acts, however, there is a common thread–all the parties involved MUST be willing participants. If there is even one unwilling participant in any one of these “despicable” acts, then someone’s borders have been crossed. Ask an unborn fetus if she is willing to have her space (the placental sac) invaded. I daresay that, from her point of view, abortion does not, absolutely does not fall into the “despicable action” category which will be allowed under Block and Whitehead’s “just” libertarian code of law.

The woman who refuses to carry her baby to term is NOT the same as someone who refuses to rescue a drowning swimmer. Refusal to act in order to save a person’s life is not equivalent to deliberate action in order to take a person’s life. Not at all, not even close. There may not be any criminal intent in refusing to save a drowning swimmer, e.g., overloaded lifeboats at the sinking of the Titanic, where taking on one more drowning swimmer would have sunk the lifeboat, killing them all. An action such as this could be considered self-defense. Emotionally excruciating, perhaps, but not criminal. Aborting a fetus, though, is not just morally repugnant, but a deliberate act of homicide.

A more appropriate analogy would have been to compare the woman who aborts her unborn fetus with someone who holds a swimmer’s head under water, refusing to allow him to breathe, thus drowning him. Comparing the fetus with a drowning swimmer is ludicrous. A drowning swimmer is in mortal danger, while there is nothing more alive than a healthy and growing fetus. Really now, if you wanted to see it like this, the fetus is swimming laps (no pun intended), preparing herself to become an Olympic champion and is in no danger at all except from the person who “owns the pool.”

Abortion IS, in and of itself, invasive of other people and their property rights, especially and particularly unborn children who are (or ought to be) considered persons with their own set of rights. It is plain to be seen that, in order to maintain the cohesiveness and integrity of the theory of property rights, “rights” MUST be more important than what IS right.

[i] Block, Walter E. and Roy Whitehead. 2005. “Compromising the Uncompromisable: A Private Property Rights Approach to Resolving the Abortion Controversy,” Appalachian Law Review, 4 (2) 1-45

[ii] Walter Block, an Austrian school economist and anarcho-libertarian philosopher, is Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Chair in Economics and Professor of Economics at Loyola University New Orleans and Senior Fellow with the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

[iii] Roy Whitehead, JD, LLM, Associate Professor of Business Law, University of Central Arkansas.

Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream: A Modern Parable

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

“These were the visions of my head while on my bed:

I was looking, and behold,
A tree in the midst of the earth,
And its height was great.
The tree grew and became strong;
Its height reached to the heavens,
And it could be seen to the ends of all the earth.
Its leaves were lovely,
Its fruit abundant,
And in it was food for all.
The beasts of the field found shade under it,
The birds of the heavens dwelt in its branches,
And all flesh was fed from it.”
(Daniel 4:10-12)

Sounds great, right? Such a nice dream to have. Peace, prosperity, and plenty for everyone. “Oh, beautiful, for spacious skies…” But, wait, as the TV commercials blare incessantly, there’s more.

“I saw in the visions of my head while on my bed, and there was a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven.
He cried aloud and said thus:

Chop down the tree and cut off its branches,
Strip off its leaves and scatter its fruits.
Let the beasts get out from under it,
and the birds from the branches.
Nevertheless leave the stump and roots in the earth,
Bound with a band of iron and bronze.”
(Daniel 4:13-15a)

Whoa! Wait a minute! What happened to the nice, pleasant picture I was seeing? This is ugly and I don’t like it.

“In the tender grass of the field,
Let it be wet with the dew of heaven,
And let him graze with the beasts
On the grass of the earth.
Let his heart be changed from that of a man,
Let him be given the heart of a beast,
And let seven times pass over him.”
(Daniel 4:15b-16)

Him? Who’s him? And what has he done to deserve this? Well, I’m glad you asked.

“All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar. At the end of the twelve months he was walking about the royal palace of Babylon. The king spoke, saying,

‘Is not this great Babylon,
That I have built for a royal dwelling by my mighty power
And for the honor of my majesty?‘”
(Daniel 4:28-30)

And, boom! Just like that, in fact, as the next verse says, “While the word was still in the king’s mouth…”,

The entire chapter tells the story. You’ll have to read it yourself to get the full report, but, in a nutshell, Nebuchadnezzar apparently went crazy insane and, within an hour, he was driven out of the palace, away from the city and civilization into the open fields where he spent the next seven years without any of the comforts of home, eating grass like an ox, completely senseless. The good part, however, is that after his ordeal, his right mind was restored, he gave credit where it was due, and he returned to his throne and picked up the affairs of the kingdom where he had left off seven years earlier.

“Now I, Nebuchadnezzar,
praise and extol and honor
the King of heaven, all of
whose works are truth, and
His ways justice. And those
who walk in pride He is
able to put down.”
(Daniel 4:37)

Now, I’m going to take this at face value. I see this as an historical account of an event that actually happened. I’ll leave it up to the scholars, historians, and argumentative skeptics to sort it out as to whether there’s more to the story than is recorded here. However, actual or imaginary, the lesson remains: proud, arrogant men (and women) can be taken down and humbled. This speaks volumes to the current phenomenon known as Donald John Trump, President of the United States, who, like Nebuchadnezzar, cannot resist bragging about himself and lifting himself higher and higher on the pedestal of his own vanity. I fear for him. If the story of Nebuchadnezzar is true and given to us as a lesson and a warning not to get too big for our britches, then The Don is skating on very thin ice.

When Nebuchadnezzar lost his mind, the world continued on as before with other leaders stepping in to fill his place. This would, of course, happen if Trump was taken out. The continuity of succession guarantees that JD Vance immediately becomes president and the system carries on. However, unfortunately for the rest of us, Americans and the rest of the world, Trump has access to weapons which Nebuchadnezzar could not have even dreamed about and may have the same mentality as Israel does with its Samson Option–if we’re going to lose, we do it bigly, no matter who or what we have to destroy. Suicidal madness is not restricted to “lone wolf” gunmen who shoot up schools, rock concerts, or nightclubs. It might be, just possibly might be, that Trump would resist the humbling process so strongly that nuclear weapons would be unleashed with devastating, world-wide consequences. All to avoid having to admit making a mistake and confessing to a sin of pride.

On the other hand, perhaps all this is the result of my own fevered imagination, by reading too much into the situation, and by taking too much Scripture on too much faith to mean that it means what it says. For instance:

“I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a native green tree. Yet he passed away, and behold, he was no more; indeed I sought him, but he could not be found.” (Psalm 37:35-36)

“God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” (James 4:6)1

“Try as much as I can, I am unable to call to mind anyone at present who does not spread himself more than Donald Trump. When it comes to calling attention to himself, he has no equal. In his world, there is only One and He knows it. Reminds me of Nebuchadnezzar, who was also compared to a tree and was cut down to size. See Daniel 4 for the story.”2

The war against Iran which Trump and Netanyahu have unleashed may well become the straw which finally breaks the camel’s back. We would be wise to contemplate the possibility. Selah. Pause. Consider.

  1. See also–Isaiah 14 and Genesis 11 for similar pronouncements ↩︎
  2. https://poorrogersalmanac.com/2025/07/10/officially-confirmed-epstein-didnt-kill-himself/ ↩︎

Bay of Pigs II?

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

I have written before (here and here) about Donald Trump’s penchant for blowing fishing boats in the Caribbean Sea out of the waters with Hellfire missiles, killing (or attempting to kill) all the men aboard. His #1 assistant in this diabolical practice has been Pete Hegseth, the current Secretary of War, who, on hearing that two of the men aboard one of the boats were still alive and clinging to the wreckage, gave an undisputed totally illegal order to shoot them until they were dead. Which order was dutifully obeyed because: “Just following orders! Sir!”. The rationale given to these extra-judicial killings was that the boats were smuggling drugs into the US and needed to be stopped for the safety of the country. It didn’t matter that there was no evidence of drug running nor any other justification for using lethal violence against the boats. We were just told to trust that Trump was doing the right thing.

“I say that the boats are running drugs. I say that hundreds of thousands of Americans are going to die if they succeed. I say that the only moral restraint on my behavior is myself. I say, kill them all. Let God sort them out. Who are you going to believe–me or your own damn lying eyes and ears?”

All’s fair in love and war. Right?

Which brings us to this. Apparently, a Florida-registered speedboat with ten men in it were intercepted barely a mile offshore of Cuba by a government patrol boat. According to the Cuban Embassy, the crew of the speedboat opened fire on the patrol boat, resulting in a firefight which left four Americans dead and the others wounded to some degree. See here for more information.

Now, I can’t say with 100% certainty that this actually happened and I am quite confident that, if it did happen, the story has been stretched, manipulated, and distorted to some extent. There are always at least two sides to every argument and no one has an absolute lock on truth. Nevertheless, I have to take it on face value that this event did occur more or less as reported and that the fallout is predictable. Namely, the US government will use it as justification to ramp up its already suffocating hold on Cuba and may trumpet the need for military “intervention” (read that assault) on the island to protect American citizens, even if they were stupid enough to put themselves in harm’s way. After all, consider this immediate response:

“The dictatorship in #Cuba has just attacked a boat from Florida & murdered those on board. This regime must be relegated to the dust bin of history!” — https://twitter.com/RepCarlos/status/2026737976907067395

My! How the tables have turned. As you give, you receive. When you blow up fishing boats in international waters without respect for due diligence, just cause, and human life, then you risk getting your own boats being fired upon. With due diligence and for good reason by the Cuban government, I might add, if the event happened as reported.

ZeroHedge raised an important question.

“What armed men aboard the Florida-registered speedboat were doing inside Cuban territorial waters remains a very open question at the moment.“

Well, yes. Exactly. Why did a boatload of armed men venture inside the territorial limits of Cuban water? What was their goal? What did they hope to accomplish? Did they realize the risk they were running? Did they care? Who were these men, anyway, and more importantly, who were they working for?

It is entirely possible, not likely, but possible, that the ten men on the boat were nothing more than Rambo-type, hot-headed hotshots who were stupid enough to try something like this and got more than they bargained for. After all, there are a lot of incredibly dumb people on this earth who act first out of emotion without ever rationally considering the possible consequences. This is not out of the question, but, as I said, not likely. The most plausible explanation is that they were on the payroll of an unnamed entity which was attempting to smuggle a heavily-armed crew into Cuba to stir up trouble in the hopes of further destabilizing the current government and potentially starting an uprising among the “campesinos nativos”. If that was the case, then it recalls the Bay of Pigs debacle, which became a black mark against the John Kennedy administration forever as an example of official incompetence.

This episode will probably be stonewalled and any involvement by the US government in it will be denied until the spokespersons are blue in the face from lack of breath, but it won’t put to rest the suspicions. As the saying goes, never believe anything the government tells you until it is explicitly denied. Vehemently explicitly denied. When Donald Trump says that the US absolutely had nothing to do with it and attacks someone else for asking questions, then we can be pretty sure that his fingerprints are all over it. On the other hand, being the type of person he is, he might just come out and admit that he ordered the project and, “What are you gonna’ do about it?”

Who knows? And who can comprehend what damage might ensue as a consequence? And who will be blamed while the dust is settling?

The answer to that last question is obvious and will be brought out immediately–“Not I. Look over there!”

Update to this story: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/foiled-armed-infiltration-cuba-kills-four-aboard-heavily-armed-us-linked-speedboat

Child Abuse Starts in the Womb

Roger Mitchell2 Comments

Originally published in 2019. Slightly out of date. Completely relevant.

The arrest of Jeffrey Epstein on charges of sexual abuse of young women and girls has been all over the news lately. If you are watching any media at all, you can’t miss it. This is big stuff.

Epstein, however, is not the only fish in the pond. Take a look at this article in Zero Hedge and you will see that there is a vast number of cases of child abuse around the world, some of which the legal authorities know about and are moving forward on. Unfortunately, the ones that are not known are probably orders of magnitude higher. What is certain is that the Roman Catholic Church and its priests are not the only known offenders anymore. They are legion.

I have these questions. When are we (collectively, as a society, culture, and world) going to come to the realization that abortion which kills unborn babies is the earliest form of child abuse? Why do we allow, tolerate, encourage, and subsidize one method of child abuse, but become outraged, horrified, and aghast at another? If it is perfectly fine to kill one’s child before she is born, then why isn’t it just as acceptable to kill her after she has reached the age of eleven years and you have just raped her? Why don’t we just look the other way and pretend that this sort of behavior isn’t really happening, or if it is, just make the excuse that it’s not really any of my business?

We have been taught for decades that the human species (mankind—and, no, I’m not afraid to say it) is just another variant of the animal kingdom. We have also been taught that there is no objective morality and that the ‘rightness’ of any situation is a subjective decision of the individual involved. Considering these two statements together, is it any wonder that grown men (and women) are acting like animals, brute beasts who are only concerned with what they desire and makes them feel good? This is the end result of a system which has lost its anchor in ethical and moral objectivity. Human trafficking is evil. Sexual abuse of children is evil. The deliberate killing of children in the womb is evil. It is not hard to imagine that all of these are connected in at least one other evil way—the callous, selfish disregard and contempt for human dignity, value, and life. Nothing will change for the better until we regain that concept.

When Johnny Goes Marching Off to War, Hurrah! Hurrah!

Roger Mitchell6 Comments

The title for this article is derived from the old song longing hopefully for the safe return of soldiers from the carnage of the American War between the States1 (1861-1865). What is usually not mentioned nor remembered is the fervor and celebration of just a few years earlier with which Johnny marched off to war and his family and friends, both North and South, cheered him on, gave parades in his honor, showered him with adulation, flowers, and kisses. “Hurrah! Hurrah! We’ll teach those scoundrels (Yankees, Rebs) something they won’t ever forget! Go get’m, Johnny! We’re behind you all the way.”

This, as I recall, was the atmosphere in America immediately after 9/11. It seemed that everyone couldn’t wait to go out and kick some a$$ for the destruction of the World Trade Center in 2001, and, to be perfectly honest, it didn’t really matter whether the actual perpetrators were brought to “justice” or not, as long as someone paid. The administration, George W. Bush presiding, took full advantage of the situation and launched two wars, Afghanistan and Iraq, which were only ended years later, without ever resolving the question of “whodunit?”. Not that it mattered too much, anyway. The American public is driven by emotion rather than common sense and Congress is repeatedly admonished to “Don’t just sit there, do something.”, with the unspoken implication that it is better to do anything, even if it is wrong, than to contemplate their actions, consider the consequences, and make good choices.

Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, the “day which will last in infamy”, was no different, except that there was no question about who had initiated the attack: Japan, the Rising Sun empire, and America lost no time in ramping up to a wartime footing in a massive spirit of revenge and retaliation, intent only on the destruction of those who dared to slap the face of Uncle Sam. Nothing was held back by the public, no sacrifice was too great, no cost was too much to bear for The Cause of total victory.

That was then, this is now.

Today, even as I write this, the tension in the Middle East is at a fever-pitch and rapidly escalating. The US may have already attacked Iran by the time you read this. Donald Trump is ramping up his threats and bullying tactics against Iran, demanding that the government undergo a regime change, that it Cease and Desist from any nuclear program, and that it immediately disarm by getting rid of its long range missiles. Basically, complete and abject surrender on Trump’s terms which, of course, the mullahs who lead Iran have rejected without any equivocation. What is Trump going to do if Iran doesn’t bow and scrape? Sign the order to attack? Or, TACO? We’ll know soon.

It seems to me (and polls regularly bear this out) that the mood of the country is against starting another war, especially one in the Middle East. People are genuinely tired of the “forever wars” and Trump capitalized on that sentiment when he was on the campaign trail, promising to end them. Political reality reigns supreme, however, as he conveniently forgot what he had promised to the voters only a short time earlier and started aggressively going after other countries, all smaller and weaker than the US. To date, in the first year of his second term, he has literally bombed ten countries, more than any of his predecessors. One of those was Iran at the end of the 12-day war with Israel last summer when he supposedly destroyed (obliterated was the word he used) Iran’s nuclear capabilities completely. I say supposedly, because, if that was the case, then why is there so much concern about Iran’s current nuclear program? Something doesn’t add up here and can be seen for what it is–a bald-faced lie.

Events like this which have occurred over the years wherein The Powers That Be have run roughshod over the interests of the common people do not build trust within society. Without that trust, institutions fail and when a society’s institutions fail, the society collapses. The ongoing Epstein scandal and the recent Covid scam have created an enormous (and growing) distrust among the populace which will not be reversed if Trump goes to war against Iran and gets the pants beaten off him. The only reason that trust and faith might be restored would be if he achieves complete and total victory immediately, without question, for the whole world to see and understand. Of course, once the victory laps, backslapping, and grandstanding were done, we’d be off to the next conquest, the next enemy which needed to be taken out as a matter of “national security”. Any guesses as to which one that would be? You get three and the first two don’t count, but I’ll give you a hint. It starts with an R, ends in A, and has six letters.

God help us!

If he is not immediately successful and Iran closes the strait of Hormuz to shipping, the price of oil will go through the roof, the financial Jenga tower known as derivatives will collapse, the Federal Reserve printing presses will be pushed to the limit resulting in hyper-inflation, and the world-wide system of fiat money will be scrapped in favor of a different one–the Great Reset, which we’ve all heard about. Probably something along this line of thinking will happen, that is, if Trump does not achieve complete and total victory with the first strike. Probably. It might happen if he does succeed. I’m only speculating.

Or, perhaps that has been the plan all along. Who knows?

In an article posted on Forum Geopolitica, Scott Ritter had this to say about the situation.

“A war on Iran will result in a disaster for all parties involved. There is no guarantee of success on the part of the United States and Israel, or failure on the part of Iran. There is a huge risk that this war will result in massive disruption of critical energy production capability in one of the most critical energy production regions in the world, triggering a massive energy security crisis that could collapse regional and global economies.

So, the key question is why Donald Trump, a man who ran on a platform of peace, willing to risk losing his political base on the eve of critical mid-term elections by betting on the successful execution of a short war with Iran that achieves the regime change outcome desired?

The simple answer is because he simply has no choice.”

Ritter goes on to explain why he thinks Trump has no choice and I can’t say that he’s wrong. The extremely high sunk costs of the military buildup almost guarantee that an action of some type will be taken, if for no other reason than to recoup some of the expense incurred. The greater reason, though, is that Trump’s ego, prestige, and reputation will take an enormous hit if he “chickens out” this time. Given the polling numbers on his sinking approval rating, it would likely lead to a loss by the Republican Party to the Democrats in November, virtually ensuring that impeachment hearings would be resurrected, this time with a fairly good chance of “throwing the rascal out”. Of course, if he does initiate the war and loses, the same scenario presents itself. In short, Trump is caught in a lose/lose situation. Heads I lose, tails you win, and there’s not much that he can do about it.

If Trump wins, he will be insufferable. If he loses, watch out. Either way, the American public will pay the price and my guess is that cheering Johnny as he marches off to war will become a highly unpopular act. As it should. Wars have a nasty habit of biting the hands which feed them.

  1. Technically speaking, not a civil war as the Confederate States were not trying to take over the existing government, but wanted to split from it and set up a separate one. It should more properly be called a secessionist movement which was put down by force. ↩︎

Without Question: The Beginning of Human Life

Roger Mitchell11 Comments

This is a reprint of an article I posted in 2019 on a blog which was dedicated exclusively to the abortion issue. It has been closed and is no longer available, although I have all the articles saved. I am considering restarting this as a Substack in its own right.

Within the abortion debate, one of the most pervasive tactics of the pro-abortion side has been to paint the unborn child in a dehumanizing manner. Consequently, the unborn child became a fetus [i], the embryo became a clump of cells, protoplasm, uterine content, etc. In addition, groups such as Planned Parenthood use the technology of ultrasound, not to show women a true picture of their unborn baby, but to deceive [ii] them into proceeding with a planned abortion. Deception and dissembling have been hallmarks of the abortion lobby from the very beginning. In fact, their tactics resemble those of a State or society which seeks to “dehumanize” its enemies [iii], i.e., especially in the time prior to and amid a war, political conflict, or social reconstruction [iv].

This has led to a considerable amount of confusion regarding the humanity of the unborn embryo or fetus. When does human life start? Is the fetus a human being? If not, when does it become one? These questions are all separate from the ones concerning person-hood, which is not the thrust of this article. In fact, the question of the beginning of human life and the time that life attains person-hood are two separate questions and must be addressed by different methods. Person-hood is a matter of belief, opinion, persuasion, subjectivity, etc., and is susceptible to a wide variety of influences—religious, philosophical, social, financial, etc.

There is only one qualified discipline which can state emphatically (and has hard evidence to back it up) when a new human life begins—embryonic science. This is strictly a scientific matter and science has clearly stated what so many believe or feel to be true.

“…scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization, the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte, usually referred to as an “ovum” or “egg”), which simply possess “human life”, to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.” –Dianne M. Irving, M.A., Ph.D [v]

In other words, what Dr. Irving has said is that when a sperm cell and an egg cell fuse (conception), a new, unique, individual human being has begun. The sperm and the egg were individual human cells before the fusion, after that, they are something completely different—a live human being which had never existed before. Of this, there can be no doubt. The life of every human begins at conception. This is unassailable, indisputable fact. [Ed. Note: The science is settled.]

Dr. Irving goes on to explain (and goes into intense detail) why a human being comes into existence at conception. She lists and destroys several myths which have been promoted over the years and decades concerning this issue and never equivocates from the main premise–that a human being comes to life at the moment of conception.

“The issue is not when does human life begin, but rather when does the life of every human being begin.”—Dianne M. Irving [vi]

From the moment of conception, a human being exists within the womb–zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus—right up to the point of the delivery as a newborn baby. At every stage of development, this is a live human being. Whether he is a person or not doesn’t matter. Whether she has rights or not is irrelevant. He is a human being. She is a human being. As such, abortion is a procedure which literally kills a human being. Abortion has probably killed hundreds of millions of human beings in the 20th century alone.

Every person who is alive today, every person who has ever lived, started out in exactly the same way—as a newly conceived zygote with all the genetic material necessary to become the persons we are today. We should be grateful that our mothers didn’t simply decide to throw us away.

[i] The term “fetus” generates a lot of heat on both sides of the aisle. The pro-abortionists use it almost exclusively and refuse to use the terms unborn baby or child for obvious reasons. The pro-lifers prefer “baby” or “child” and generally avoid using the term fetus, again for obvious reasons. Fetus, though, is simply a Latin word which can have many meanings, however, all of them are related to reproduction and refer to very young, immature offspring. It is medically correct and refers to the stage of human development in the womb from embryo (about 8 weeks) until birth. I do not generally make distinctions between fetus, baby, and child, but use the terms interchangeably.

[ii] https://www.liveaction.org/news/planned-parenthood-abortion-deceptive-ultrasound/

[iii] https://www.npr.org/2011/03/29/134956180/criminals-see-their-victims-as-less-than-human

[iv] Nazi Germany, for instance, successfully used this tactic against the Jews. Today, political parties attempt to divide the electorate into what are basically enemy camps.

[v] https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html  Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D (International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 1999, 19:3/4:22-36

[vi] Ibid. Section B, Fact 1.

Political Factions and the Impotence of Christianity

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

there is an old joke, best told by monty python, about revolutionary movements. everyone agrees on the enemy. everyone agrees on the objective. and yet the room is full of factions who despise one another far more than they fear the empire they claim to oppose. the people’s front, the popular front, the other front that split off last year after a disagreement about principles. the comedy works because it is painfully familiar. shared goals are easy. shared coordination is not. — Hugh Hendry1 https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/modern-money-only-works-cheating-if-youre-long-bitcoin-or-not-long-bitcoin-read

Sounds like modern-day politics in America, doesn’t it? Except that there is no revolutionary movement, no one agrees on the common enemy, they can’t agree on the objective nor how to reach it. They just know they can’t get along. America is full of factions who despise each other and fight with each other, almost always to the point that they forget about opposing the empire they claim they fear. The Republicans, the Democrats, the socialists, the libertarians, the progressives, the communists, the right-wingers, the blue-haired lesbian land whales with nose rings, the anarchists, the Covidians, the white, male, cis-gender Christian, et al. And, while shared goals are easy when the goal is to make money and everyone is in tune with that, the usual pattern of action is that a few make a lot of money, most make enough to get by, and some starve in the face of plenty. The difference is in which group has the power to make and enforce the rules. If the shared goals are to get what you want at somebody else’s expense, well…, that’s called politics, the law of the jungle, theft by majority rule, and the groups generally split along the same lines.

“The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — Thucydides2

Everyone, it seems, has their own favorite pet whipping boy which they can point to and condemn him for causing all the trouble we have today. And, yet, in the midst of all the uproar, the furor, and the confusion, very few of them pause to consider that they might be adding to the problem instead of contributing to the solution. This, however, is nothing new and it hearkens all the way back to The Beginning, the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve.

“Then the man said, ‘The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.’ And the Lord God said to the woman, ‘What is this you have done?’ The woman said, ‘The serpent deceived me, and I ate.'” — Genesis 3: 12-13

Whenever there is a problem between people, the initial temptation is to point the finger, exactly as Adam and Eve did. “This woman…” “That snake…” It is so easy to do that we often fall into it automatically, without ever thinking about it or acting contrary to our fallen human nature. C’mon, now, be honest. Isn’t this the tendency within the human soul? If I can get someone else to shoulder the blame and pay the price, then perhaps, just maybe, I won’t be liable for it at all. Or, if I am found guilty, my punishment might be reduced from the level it would have been if I was found responsible in the first place.

When it comes to doing and saying what is right, it is easier to align with those you most identify with than to stand alone. Yet, we are called to speak the truth even if it means that we must stand alone against the churning, moiling mob of dissent and chaos. We are called to speak the truth even it it means standing alone against the beliefs, preferences, and wishes of our own comrades and close associates.

This is one of the most difficult things in life to do as it runs the risk of alienation and separation from the society we are part of. The Covid farce, still in our very recent rear-view mirrors, brought this out in a real way and the stories are manifold of close, loving relationships being broken irreparably because someone dared to speak the truth and those who heard would not accept it, choosing instead to believe the lie. Believing a lie requires no effort or suffering, but breaking free from that is costly and painful.

The most modern lie of all (which is also the most ancient) is that power, for the sake of power, is the highest goal we can work for. Incidentally, this is also relevant to the Garden of Eden, in which the Serpent promised Eve that she could be like God if she wanted to be, determining what was good and what was evil.

“For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” — Genesis 3:5

If we, and the group we represent, can gain power over those others who are in opposition to us, then we can make things right. We can advance proper legislation and administer proper justice. We can usher in an era of peace, prosperity, and the pursuit of happiness. Utopia, in other words. Heaven on Earth can (and will) be accomplished if, but only if, our mode of thinking becomes the dominant force and all others are subjugated to it. Is this not an accurate description of modern (and ancient) political life? Hasn’t this line of thought been the guiding principle throughout human history, from the very first tribal battles all the way to the present day, resulting in death and destruction everywhere and always? Isn’t this desire, often spoken verbally, more often harbored silently, the reason why we cannot get along with those around us, our fellow man? We want power, they want power, our wants are at odds with their wants, therefore, we must go to war and kill or be killed.

And, in the process of wreaking havoc on our enemies, we bring it on ourselves!

“Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.” — Luke 6:38

This promise from the lips of Jesus is generally taken (at least in so-called Christian circles, IMO) to mean that the more money you contribute to “charity” or drop into the “offering plate” on Sunday morning, the greater your reward. ROI. Return on investment and, if we were entirely honest with ourselves, we would have to admit that this perception might very well be lurking in the back of our minds. However, context, context, context. The verse quoted is taken from a passage (Luke 6:20-42) which is not so much about money as it is with doing what is necessary to live and get along peacefully with our enemies.

  1. v. 27: “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.”
  2. v. 29: “To him who strikes you on one cheek, turn the other also.”
  3. v. 31: “And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.”3
  4. v. 36: “Be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful.”
  5. v. 37: Judge not…”

Judge not. Ahhhh! Now we’re getting somewhere. Isn’t it true that, in our interactions with others, we make judgments about them and attempt to correct the error of their ways, the way we perceive the error of their ways to be? And, isn’t it also true that the primary way we attempt to correct the error of their ways is to gain power over them politically, socially, and/or financially, usually through the democratic process known as voting to elect “our” representative to a seat in the halls of the government who will perform according to our wishes? Don’t like what is happening around you? Can’t exercise sufficient influence to change it on your own? Then, appoint a proxy to do it for you, who will also do it to you when it is convenient for him.

Ultimately, this boils down to one thing: pride, which begets arrogance. “I am. I am right. I am something to behold. My word is to be taken as truth. Listen to me, you knot-headed, hard-headed people, none of whom are as intelligent as I am! In other words, I am a substitute for God Himself.”

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations! For you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation, on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.'” — Isaiah 14:12-14

Allow me to be explicit here. If you refuse to live according to the pattern set in Luke 6, as shown above, then you are acting out the lie brought out in Isaiah. These two passages are diametrically opposed and, to the extent that you practice the one, you are not practicing the other. You can live after the manner of Jesus, humble, loving, seeking God’s will AND the greatest benefit to others, or you can live after the manner of the king of Babylon, proud, arrogant, condemning, judgmental, vindictive, hateful. There is a third way, of course, which is to ride the rail, straddle the fence between these two options, which works until someone like the prophet Elijah comes along. “How long halt ye between two opinions?”, which was immediately followed by calling down fire from heaven. Not good for the priests of Baal nor the fence sitters who refused to make up their minds.

Yes, as Hendry said in the beginning quote, the comedy works and it really would be comedic if it wasn’t so serious. The question is, however, would it continue to work if Christians everywhere, those who call themselves disciples of Jesus the Christ, quit playing The Game as it is currently framed and simply stopped fighting tooth and nail with those who have a different viewpoint? How long would this continual struggle for supremacy go on if you and I just abandoned the battle with each other and started living life as it was meant to be–to love God with all our hearts, souls, and minds, and to love our neighbors at least as much as we love ourselves?

I think I’m right. You got an issue with that???

  1. You can read the entire article by clicking the link above, however, it is quite long-winded and I think repetitive when it doesn’t need to be. Quite interesting, though, as Hendry summarizes an unassailable distinction between gold and Bitcoin. ↩︎
  2. Melian Dialogue ↩︎
  3. “Do unto them, except do it first. Before they act, show them how it’s done.” The world understands this, why can’t Christians? ↩︎

Turning Our Heads Away so We Don’t See

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

“How many times can a man turn his head and pretend that he just doesn’t see?”—Bob Dylan, “Blowin’ in the Wind”

I’m starting this blog post exactly the same way that John and Nisha Whitehead started theirs a few days ago because I wonder about the same thing which Bob Dylan did, and I simply cannot comprehend the amount of stretching of neck muscles and blinking of eyelids which must accompany that. But, then, this is nothing new. People see what they want to see and close their eyes to the rest.

We live in a time when moral boundaries have been distorted to the point of near-total erasure, recalled only when it is to one’s benefit to remember them. The Whitehead article focused on the hypocrisy of those who completely abhor the destruction of unborn children in the wombs of their mothers, but applaud and encourage the murder of those who have managed to live beyond the first nine months of life IF it is politically convenient. On the other hand, there are those who think nothing at all about destroying infants before they are born (and even call it empowering), yet are aghast that innocent children are blown apart by bombs because they live in the wrong part of the world.

Human life, if it is to be honored and held sacred, should be and must be equally recognized regardless of age and/or development and/or decline. To do otherwise is to play games with God which cannot be won. This phenomenon, this aspect of human nature, however, encompasses all of life. Evil is everywhere rampant today, yet how many are there who will call it out wherever it shows its face, regardless of its composition and character.

Let’s call a spade a spade, shall we? As Christians, believers in Jesus Christ as “…the way, the truth, and the life…” are required to “…be innocent of evil…” and many of us pride ourselves on keeping ourselves squeaky clean in that respect. “We don’t smoke, drink, or chew, and we don’t go out with girls that do.” Yet, as Bob Dylan wrote, we turn our heads away from rampant, vile evil and pretend that we see nothing at all.1 More importantly, if we do notice, we ignore it by pretending that it doesn’t exist, at least in our circles and neighborhoods. Furthermore, if it did occur close to home, we would find some reason, some excuse, to do nothing at all to counter it, usually, at least in Christian circles along the lines of, “It’s the end of the world. Jesus is coming to rescue us out of the mess we have created. Besides, Donald Trump is working on our behalf to set things right.” Kind of like financial “experts and leaders” kicking the can down the road hoping that the sure reckoning can be postponed at least until they are safely ensconced in a fat pension-supported retirement.

Shades of King Hezekiah!2

The thing is, we know that procrastination on fiscal matters will eventually come to an end, yet prefer to “turn our heads and pretend not to see.” We know that making threats of violence and war against other countries will eventually result in wars with disastrous consequences, yet we turn our heads. We know that continual decline of morality will eventually destroy our society from within, yet we pretend not to see. We know that killing unborn children is wrong, yet applaud when fishermen on small boats, who are doing nothing more than trying to provide for their families, are blown out of the water. We vigorously protest the slaughter of Gazan women and children as an abominable crime, yet celebrate when our political opponents are the ones led to the guillotine. We know, oh, yes, we know, but it is easier to pretend than it is to act on the information.

We are hypocrites. Shameful hypocrites. And we say nothing, nothing at all, as if the evil among us does not exist. As if, by keeping quiet, the evil will go away.

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak, not to act is to act.” — Dietrich Bonhoeffer

“The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.” — Albert Einstein

“The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.” –Dwight D. Eisenhower

“Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth” – Aldous Huxley

“It is an eternal truth that those who practice genuine faith in the presence of the cowardice and derisive fatalism of the mob will be persecuted for their temerity rather than merely ignored. This is part of the pattern of destruction of the ideal characteristic of the descendants of Cain. None of this excuses failure to stand up and be counted when the time comes.” — Jordan Peterson, We Who Wrestle With God, page 433. (Emphasis mine.)

  1. Remember the story of the Good Samaritan, in which the Pharisee who was squeaky clean with respect to The Law nevertheless went around the badly wounded man on the road and did not stop to help him so as to keep his clothes and hands untainted. It is also likely that he didn’t want to tarnish his reputation. ↩︎
  2. 2 Kings 20:19. “Well, that’s not so bad, really. At least it won’t happen in my lifetime.” ↩︎

Shout Louder! So He Can Hear You!!

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

“Then it happened, as He was coming near Jericho, that a certain blind man sat by the road begging. And hearing a multitude passing by, he asked what it meant. So they told him that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by. And he cried out, saying, ‘Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!’ Then those who went before warned him that he should be quiet; but he cried out all the more, ‘Son of David, have mercy on me!’ So Jesus stood still and commanded him to be brought to Him. And when he had come near, He asked him, saying, ‘What do you want Me to do for you?’ He said, ‘Lord that I may receive my sight.’ Then Jesus said to him, ‘Receive your sight; your faith has made you well.’ And immediately he received his sight, and followed Him, glorifying God. And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God.” — Luke 18: 35-41

There are a few things about this passage of Scripture which need to be mentioned.

  1. If you are blind, you cannot receive your sight unless you ask for it. If you aren’t willing to make the effort, you won’t get it. No one is going to make you see against your will.
  2. Sometimes, in order to get what you want, you have to be loud, louder than the crowd, and much, much louder than those around you who are trying to shut you up.

Obviously, this story is about one physically blind beggar man who refused to keep his voice down, an individual person who understood that something about his situation was wrong and took the necessary step to correct it. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work? Well, as long as the problem stays at the individual level and all of us are blind to the truth about it, that might be a good way to read it. However, America’s community is made up of individuals, many of them nothing more than dirt-poor beggars who are blind as bats and who couldn’t see the light of day if it shined directly into their eyes. And, to accompany them, there are multitudes of others who are well above the paygrade of dirt-poor beggary, but who are just as blind. In fact, this blindness extends to many, many people across all levels of society, most of whom don’t even realize that they can’t see farther than the end of their nose, that their vision isn’t worth a tinker’s damn. All of which means that the community they are a part of is also blind. Not physically blind, but spiritually, which is by far the worst of the two.

Now, just suppose that Jesus comes strolling into our neighborhood with the attendant bevy of noisy, jostling supporters, hangers-on, and groupies who are filling the air with an atmosphere of anticipation and expectation, at least according to their line of sight. What would happen if the blind beggars and the higher-ups who can’t see would suddenly hear the approaching din and begin to cry out, “Jesus, Son of God! Have mercy on us!” And, then again, louder and louder, in spite of all the remonstrances from the oh-so-righteous among us, OR the frenzied, shrieking of those ridden by demon-spirits, OR the rich, powerful elites who want to control everything. “Keep quiet, you’re embarrassing us.” “Shut up, you stupid dirt-ball, or we’ll put a sock in your mouth!” “Oh, you want to escape our clutches, do you? Well, how about a bag over your head, tied around your neck, so no one can hear you scream, and a two-by-four slapped across your noggin to reinforce the message?”

“You do get the message, don’t you? Just be quiet and be a good boy. It’s OK.”

And, so we do. Obey. Comply. Silence ourselves as we hear the procession moving further and further away, around the corner and over the next hill. Gone. Out of sight forever. But wait! No! No! NO! NO! NOOO! “Jesus, Son of God! Have mercy on us!” Louder. “Jesus! Son of God!! Have mercy on us!!!” Louder, yet. “JESUS!! SON OF GOD!!!! HAVE MERCY ON US!!!!!!” Until He stops and asks us what we want, at which point we ask to have our sight restored, the sight which our community needs, the sight which each and every one of us must have to be able to live, work, and worship together without trying to kill each other.

What would happen in America (and the rest of the world) if this happened? But, then, you might question why we should or what would be the reason for doing so. After all, we’re rich, live comfortable lives, get along with our neighbors (at least most of the time until they have something we want or say something we don’t like), celebrate with the Super Bowl winners even though we didn’t approve of the half-time show, and on and on and on and on. Like I said, blind. Spiritually blind. We have everything except what we need to be spiritually aware, awake, and seeing.

“If the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.” — Matthew 15:14

America, as community, is blind. Americans, as individuals, are blind. The situation doesn’t seem to be getter any better and will not ever be resolved as long as blind people are leading other blind people. Or, to put it another way, as long as blind people follow other blind people, nothing will change for the better. Both the leaders and the followers are blind, spiritually blind, and no one seems to know the way out of the situation, but desperate times call for desperate measures, such as, getting on our feet and calling out for help. Not to the government power brokers, the financial and “smart-set” elites, the so-called religious leaders, political parties, particular ideologies which advocate the use of force to gain their ends, or any others who claim to know it all. No, we need to be, as individuals and community, raising our voices, louder and louder, to Jesus the Christ, the only one among us who can set us free from the blindness which shackles and binds us in our misery.

An Abortion Argument: Does a Woman Own her Body?

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

[Note: I wrote this some years ago and published it on another blog which is no longer in service. I will be drawing articles from that occasionally and posting them here. R.M.]

One of the most widely used arguments to defend a woman’s “right” to kill her unborn child is that she owns her own body and can do what she wants with it. No one has any authority to impose restrictions on her behavior, so long as she is not harming any other person.

It is not my intention to discuss the personhood of an unborn fetus in this article. Rather, I want to explore the moral and philosophical question of the ownership of the human body—irrespective of sex. Male or female is irrelevant. To whom do I belong? That is the question everyone must answer.

“…how can we defend the mother’s right to kill the fetus?

Simple. She owns her own body, and the unwanted fetus growing within it is in effect a trespasser or parasite. This may sound harsh, but when the property rights in question are thoroughly analyzed, it is the only possible conclusion that may be reached.”[i]—Walter Block and Roy Whitehead

If I was asked (I wasn’t) to paraphrase and rewrite the above quote, this is the way it would turn out.

“We can defend a woman’s (mothers don’t act that way) right to kill her unborn child because she owns her body and the unwanted fetus is a trespasser and a parasite. Dastardly things, anyway! Besides, property rights are sacrosanct[ii] so we can reach no other conclusion.”

All I can say about this manner of thinking is that it is abominable and despicable. When “property rights” are the only thing in question, then the end justifies the means and any moral rectitude simply flies out the window.

Who am I? Why am I here? What will happen to me when I die? These are questions which have vexed and perplexed philosophers since people started thinking about things other than how to get and keep their next meal. There are probably just about as many answers as there are philosophers. We ought to also be asking one other question: To whom or to what do I belong? This is a valid question and there are only two possible answers: we belong to ourselves or we belong to someone/something outside of and beyond ourselves.

If we conclude that a woman belongs to herself, then she also owns herself, every part of herself, including her body and everything in it, over which she exercises full and complete control. No one and nothing can dictate to her what she may or may not do with her body. If a woman owns her body, then there should be no restraints placed on her, so long as she does not initiate aggression against other people who also own their bodies[iii]. If this is true, then the whole argument about abortion is moot, null, void, and utterly useless, deserving to be scrapped. It is a waste of time, energy, and resources–if this is true!

But, is it? Or is there another way of looking at the question? Michael Rozeff puts it this way[iv].

” 3. Property is what belongs to you. It’s circular to say that a person belongs to himself or owns himself. You only seem to become property when you become a slave, partly or wholly, and belong to someone else. Even in that case, they have property in your body, in the product of your labor, but not in YOU. In other words, to resolve this problem of definition and starting point philosophically or religiously, we need to specify what a human being or person IS. What IS this “I”? What is the BEING that “I” am, and that you are? That BEING exists outside the domain of human notions of property. That’s my unprovable assumption or postulate about life and existence.”

I brought this up to make the point that no one owns themselves. No one owns their own body. No man, no woman, no exceptions. With nothing more than pure logic, I can make my case using a common libertarian argument.

You and your family live in a nice house on a piece of land which you own. You borrowed money to pay for it, scrimped and saved, did without, and worked side jobs to pay the mortgage, eventually receiving the deed free and clear. It is yours. At least that’s what you think.

One day, while in a discussion with your friend, he points out that you really don’t own the property, you only rent it. He explains that if you don’t pay the taxes which the county determines you should, you will find out within the space of a few years who the real owner is. You will be looking for another place to live and all the effort you have put into this property will accrue to someone else’s benefit.

You will lose your property if you don’t pay the declared property tax, but the fact of the matter is, you can live in the house and control the property, even profit from it, without (much) interference from the county–so long as you pay the tax! Libertarians everywhere understand this argument immediately.

In the case of a woman’s (or man’s) body, however, there will come a time when your “property” will be taken away from you. There will be no grace period, no time to pay the back taxes, plus costs, plus interest. There will be no extension. Begging, refusing to consent, getting angry, making deals (Daniel Webster[v], where are you?) will not help. As the rock band Kansas[vi] put it, “…all your money won’t another minute buy.” When the Grim Reaper crooks his finger, you will go, with or without warning. Willing or unwilling, it doesn’t matter. Off you go. You are going to die.

If we grasp the point that we don’t own our real estate because it CAN be taken away from us, then why shouldn’t we also understand that we don’t own our bodies because they WILL be taken away. In fact, ownership of real property is a far more feasible concept than ownership of body because the rules concerning taxation can always be changed for the better. At least it’s theoretically possible to change them. People may someday live in a society in which there are no property taxes. About the end of life, however, there is nothing to do except to understand that it is coming and to prepare for it.

We are conceived, we live, we die. Everything that we accumulate in this world will belong to someone else after our death. “Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked I will leave this life.” (Job 1:21) “We didn’t bring anything into this world, and we won’t take anything with us when we leave.” (1 Timothy 6:7)

If immortality becomes practicable in this world, I will have to eat my words. Until then, they stand. This side of Heaven (or whatever you believe lies on the other side of death), everyone will die. That is an absolute certainty.

Since you are going to die and your body is going to be taken away from you, then you do not own it. If you do not own the body you live in, then it belongs to someone or something else: God, a higher power, the Great Spirit, cosmic truth, weird space aliens who seeded our planet, et al, any one of which might actually have something to say about the way that we are abusing, destroying, and killing those “properties” entrusted, but not belonging, to us.[vii]

Let’s bring Michael Rozeff[viii] back into the conversation.

“I contend that libertarian theory is too narrow. I make the following statements of where I stand.
1. Property is too narrow a basis to build an entire law and society on. The moral principle of no physical aggression is too narrow a basis. They are good as far as they go, but taken too far, they run into problems by ignoring the non-physical. Libertarianism has an impoverished social theory by this restriction to property and physical aggression. It gains by definiteness, but it loses by restrictiveness. In some cases, as in defamation, it leads to conclusions that go against thousands of years of law and history. “

Rozeff is correct. Libertarianism with a fixated view on property rights will not work. It needs to incorporate what he calls “the non-physical”, which I have no problem referring to as spiritual and moral. When spirituality (the understanding that we are more than just body) enters the picture, it brings with it a sense of morality: what is right and what is wrong. When right and wrong come into play, it becomes evident that a monstrous wrong has been perpetrated on the weakest, most vulnerable members of our society for a long, long time.

Women do NOT own their bodies and they certainly do not own the unborn children who are temporarily residing within them. Any law which allows a woman to kill her unborn child, based on her ownership claims, is simply building a house on shifting sand[ix]. Eventually it will crumble and collapse.

[i] Block, Walter E. and Roy Whitehead. 2005. “Compromising the Uncompromisable: A Private Property Rights Approach to Resolving the Abortion Controversy,” Appalachian Law Review, 4 (2) 1-45

[ii] It seems to me that, in some quarters, property rights have taken on the attributes of religion, complete with high priests, a “gospel” message, worship services, and dedicated followers who will die before they change their beliefs.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sacrosanct

[iii] Excluding unborn children, of course.

[iv] https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/harm-to-the-person/

[v] Just one of the stories I read a long, long time ago and have never forgotten. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil_and_Daniel_Webster

[vi] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH2w6Oxx0kQ

[vii] An example of this can be seen in the Holy Bible, Psalms, Chapter 2.

[viii] https://mises.org/profile/michael-s-rozeff

[ix] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Wise_and_the_Foolish_Builders

Target on my Back? In the Crosshairs? Perhaps.

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

A very odd thing happened on this blog in the last few days. Read on.

I started writing here in 2012 and have posted nearly 300 articles since then. There were a few years when I was going through some tough emotional times and didn’t publish much, but I stuck with it and the pace has been picking up recently. I don’t advertise this blog and don’t publish anywhere else–Facebook, X, Instagram, etc.–so my audience is quite small, generally less than 10 visitors in any given day, with a few of them reading more than one article in the same sitting. It is gradually growing, but nothing to write home about, let’s put it that way.

Nevertheless, on December 1, 2025, my stats recorded 100 visitors and 100 views, both numbers completely out of character. Not more, not less, but exactly 100. I laid this to a glitch at WordPress and didn’t pay it much attention. Yesterday, however, that same number popped up as the sum total for the day, but this time there were only 56 visitors, which means that some of them had read multiple pages which is good. Right? I would say so. Maybe my message is starting to pick up some momentum.

On closer examination, I found that there was one person in the United States and one person in Israel reading the same articles. On the same day. In sync. At random. There didn’t appear to be any system to the posts they chose to read, but between the two of them, US and Israel, they hit 23 pages, as if they were collaborating in the exercise. This happened again today, early in the morning, with 12 pages read in the same way. Between the two days, at least 35 posts. This seems to be a coordinated effort. I’m quite sure it’s not a coincidence.

I get a lot of hits from the US, as seems natural. The rest are spread around the world, but never concentrated in any one particular country, until yesterday when Israel showed up, which has got me wondering. Why was there so much attention on so many varied posts in such a short time between these two readers, whoever they might be? The questions are coming fast and furious. What the heck is going on? Am I under observation by the surveillance State? Why would Mossad and the CIA be looking at me? Am I seeing monsters where there aren’t any? Were there simply two private citizens, keenly interested in reading my work and sharing it with each other? Is it a completely innocent event or should I be concerned? And, if I should be concerned, what have I written which drew attention?

I’ll admit it. I’ve been hard on Trump (here and here), but then I didn’t cut Biden and Obama any slack either, and the revulsion I have for George W. Bush has oozed out of my quill pen on occasion. I hammered the Covid issue repeatedly and forcefully, especially the lack of courage shown by the Church. I haven’t written much about the issue of Israel in Gaza, but anytime it was mentioned was always negatively. I strongly opposed the forced sale of TikTok to a controlled consortium as a matter of “free speech” and condemned the extra-judicial murders of the Venezuelan fishermen. I dared to compare Renee Good to Vicki Weaver, which ought to have enraged both the Right and the Left if they were consistent in their hypocrisy. And, in the article just prior to this one, I noticed the similarity between Asimov’s Multivac and AI, our own modern version of digital control. Oh, and I called Anthony Fauci out as the Mouth of the Beast at a time when he was riding high in the saddle. I consider myself to be an equal-opportunity gadfly.

But, wait, as any good marketer would say, there’s more.

I also write about the slow, gradual, continual progression of my relationship with Jesus the Christ and the subsequent surrender to the leadings of the Holy Spirit. A few months back, I wrote about the spiritual turmoil I was experiencing in releasing the control of my life to God, understanding that complete trust would be required if I went down that path. Two weeks ago, I had a dream which seemed to confirm a definite shift in that direction. This raises the possibility that God, in His own inscrutable way, might be setting me up to see how far I will actually go in my faith. A real-world case, if you will, and I don’t intend to disappoint Him.

I am 67 years old. My sense of smell is completely gone. My hearing is quite bad and I have to rely on ear buds quite often to make out what others are saying. My eyesight, which used to be 99.9% perfect, now needs “cheaters” as a regular assistant, although, I still manage with only 1.5x. Slightly overweight, high blood pressure, beginning stages of prostate enlargement. You know, all the usual things which grow on an old man. I know that I am approaching the Grim Reaper, one day at a time, and there is nothing I can do about it. When that will happen is anyone’s guess.

In addition, I don’t have much piled up in the way of material possessions and have to rely on the piddling amount of Social Security I receive every month to keep body and soul together, along with any extra cash I can conjure up. I rent living quarters. My pickup is the most valuable piece of equipment I have. When I die, there won’t be much to move around and the executor will probably not even have to break a sweat to administer the estate.

This is brought out to say that my faith in God is the only real asset I possess which can be counted and relied on, and I intend to make it grow and prosper. Everything else is simply here until it’s gone, and then it’s gone.

With that said, let it be known that my work here will continue as it has been until I can no longer produce. Whether that cessation comes from death, physical or mental incapacity, or brute force visited on me is not important. What does matter is that the rest of my time on this Earth is spent, to the best of my ability, speaking His words after Him, speaking the truth, speaking out against the evil so pervasive in society, refusing to live in fear, making a difference for good whenever and wherever I can. I will not stop nor back down, no matter who is listening or watching.

“No man, having put his hand to the plow and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” — Luke 9:62

“Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might.” — Ecclesiastes 9:10

“There’s no stopping a man who knows he’s right and keeps a’coming.” — Louis L’Amour

“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.” — Jim Elliot

And the ultimate promise by Jesus Christ.

“Whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.” — Matthew 16:25, Mark 8:35, Luke 9:24

Damn straight! I’ve only just begun to live.

All the Troubles of the World 

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

“…somewhere those words were being whirled into the most complex structure ever conceived by man; that a trillion facts would blend and coordinate into a whole, and that from that whole, Multivac would abstract its best help.”

This statement comes from a short story, All the Troubles of the World1, by Isaac Asimov, first published in a magazine, Super Science Fiction, in 1958. Multivac is an immense computer, centralized in Washington, DC, with terminals, tendrils, and connections to anything and everywhere in the world. It had started, like everything else of human origin, as an idea which had grown from concept to actual reality, finally leading to Multivac which was tasked with taking in all the facts and information known to man, both collectively and individually, from which it would determine the best course of action for humanity. All humans were required to participate in the collection of knowledge, inputting even their most private thoughts into the system on a regular basis. Eventually, Multivac became competent enough to predict future crimes, enabling authorities to arrest those named before they had taken action to commit them. It was not even necessary to think about committing the crimes anymore as Multivac could apparently predict, with some certainty, what an individual would consider prior to the thought even entering his mind and take pre-emptive action to prevent it from happening. The movie, Minority Report, starring Tom Cruise, drew heavily on this concept.

In short, the ultimate electronic nanny. I hate them. I really do. They are everywhere, from nagging beeps to remind you to “buckle up”. Road signs which flash red warnings at you that you are driving too fast and order you to slow down. “Slow down!” “Slow down!” Increasingly, they are taking shape as health-related monitors which are synced with your ever-ready companion “smart” phone. How long will it be before we are told to gaze into a retina scanner in order to start our car or become unable to drive it because the reader in the dashboard has determined that an inappropriate level of alcohol on our breath has been detected?

Asimov, one of my childhood favorite authors, who was extremely prescient, died in 1992, well before the age of AI and the ubiquitous adoption of the program. My guess, understanding his bent toward individual freedom, is that he would not have welcomed its advent, even though he predicted it with clarity. I am constantly amazed at his ability to project events and developments many years into the future.

Let me rephrase this statement and bring it up to date.

“…somewhere those words were being whirled into the most complex structure ever conceived by man; that a trillion facts would blend and coordinate into a whole, and that from that whole, AI would abstract its best answer.“

Really, now. Isn’t this the way that technology is moving, spending gazillions of dollars on data centers, quantum computers, and communication devices, hoovering up any and all specks or truckloads of information it can. Legal or not doesn’t matter. Privacy be damned! You have it, we want it. Give it over. (BTW, make sure you read all the fine print in the Consumer Disclosure of the Terms of Service before you click the Agreement button, and we’ll make sure it’s so long and so complicated that you will just automatically click the button–so that you can experience the thrill and pleasure of our product without wading through all the legal terminology of your rights and responsibilities…and ours.) Applying for a job or a driver’s license? Have an appointment with a doctor, dentist, or shrink? Looking to buy beer at your local grocery store? Papers, please! Written anything and published it online or in print recently or within your lifetime? Know for sure that the entire world probably has access to it and whatever you said can and may will be used against you2…at some future time, even if you are long since dead and gone.

And on, and on, and on, scooping up the “facts” in an increasingly efficient manner and storing them somewhere, in an ethereal, amorphous, nebulous place which no one has ever seen but which has become an immense piggy bank for some few, well-connected persons and their governments. Asimov’s Multivac, which today we call The Cloud.

The man said, “Good afternoon, swearers and guests. I am Randolph T. Hoch, in charge of the Baltimore ceremonies this year. The swearers3 met me several times now during the progress of the physical and neurological portions of this examination. Most of the task is done, but the most important matter is left. The swearer himself, his personality, must go into Multivac’s records.”

“Each year, this requires some explanation to the young people reaching adulthood. Until now…you have not been adult, you have not been individuals in the eyes of Multivac, except where you were especially singled out as such by your parents or your government.”

“Until now, when the time for the yearly up-dating of information came, it was your parents who filled in the necessary data on you. Now the time has come for you to take over that duty yourself. It is a great honor, a great responsibility. Your parents have told us what schooling you’ve had, what diseases, what habits, a great many things. But now you must tell us a great deal more; your innermost thoughts, your most secret deeds.”

“This is hard to do the first time, embarrassing even, but it must be done. Once it is done, Multivac will have a complete analysis of all of you in files. It will understand your actions and reactions. It will even be able to guess with fair accuracy at your future actions and reactions.”

“In this way, Multivac will protect you. If you are in danger of accident, it will know. If someone plans harm to you, it will know. If you plan harm, it will know and you will be stopped in time so that it will not be necessary to punish you…for the good of all.” (Ibid. Bolded emphasis mine.)

It will know. It will know. It will know. The repetitious monotone sounds so machine-like that it brings back memories of an episode of Dr. Who, from a long time ago before the show went woke. At the very end of it, a portal opened in a wall and short, squat robots started pouring out, each one chanting over and over, “Exterminate. Exterminate. Exterminate.”

Will this be the logical end of AI? Can we look forward to a time when everything about us, our thoughts, our passions, our habits, our goals, dreams, and visions will be known to the Machine which is being built out? Will it pass the point of no return where Man no longer has control of it, but becomes subservient to its dictates? Will it develop, as some predict, into Skynet, declaring war on humanity wherever humanity can be found? Will it become, in effect, the all-seeing eye of Sauron?

As los Mexicanos say, ¿Quien sabes?

In the meantime, I will maintain and build my faith in Jesus, the Christ, Who owns the future. I’m not going to lose any sleep worrying about it.

  1. Doubleday, 1990, ©Nightfall, Inc. ↩︎
  2. The infamous Miranda warning which police are supposed to recite when arresting criminals. Unless they kill them first, as happened to Alex Pretti recently. Incidentally, one of my cousins was shot numerous times in the back and killed while walking away from the heavily armed goons. Suicide by cop, they called it. ↩︎
  3. Swearers were those young people who transferred from child status to adults at the age of 18. Every year, in every city, a ceremony was held to welcome them into the world of Multivac. ↩︎

Renee Good. Ashli Babbitt. Vicki Weaver. Alex Pretti.

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

Kent State. Ashli Babbitt. Renee Good. Waco. Alex Pretti. Vicki Weaver.

And more. Many, many more.

Bear in mind that the links provided here are only starting points, may be (probably are) biased1 and should not be taken as “gospel truth”. However, all the people referenced have one thing in common: they were killed while at odds with specific policies and practices of the presiding government of the land. They were killed, not because they were bad people or criminals who had been pronounced guilty in a legal setting, but because they got in the way of the System which held power and which acted against them.

There will be no blame against any of them coming from my direction. I will not take sides as to their politics, their motives, or their religions. Instead, I keep asking this question: They are all dead, killed violently, and, for why? Why? And the only answer I can come up with is the same as it ever was: power, power for the sake of power, power to control people and circumstances for the benefit of the System. And this is always the way of the world, as it has been from the very beginning2, when you can’t get what you want because someone else appears to be at fault or in your way, kill them3.

In today’s world, it does not matter what side of the aisle you live on, what political affiliation you hold to, what your social status is, whether you are completely innocent or a complicit participant, what you believe religiously, how much money you have (or don’t), IF you get caught in the path of the system of overpowering control, you stand a good chance of being mowed down without mercy.

Any one of us could be next.

Unfortunately, because people tend to take sides and associate only with those they agree with, this breaks down into a sort of tribal mentality–my side against your side–and the loss suffered by those we are opposed to is seen as a victory. Of course, the same is true for “them”, who celebrate any loss which is received by “our” side. In the end, we all suffer.

In stark contrast to this pattern, the gospel of Jesus Christ teaches a different way, a better way. Love your enemies. Do good to those who hate you. Forgive those who hurt you. Do not seek vengeance for yourself. As much as you can, live peaceably with everyone. Why? Is it not because the message of the gospel is to learn to live the way God intended for us? A life of unselfishness, one in which we seek the betterment of others, one in which our neighbor’s welfare becomes at least as important as our own. Incidentally, this is The Order from on High, whether we like it or not.

Generally speaking, however, people don’t want to hear this and usually produce excuses and rationale as to why they simply cannot or will not comply. Trumptards! Communists! Bidenistas! Pentecostals! Catholics! Jews! Muslims! Bigots! Racists! Homophobes! Transgenders! Rapists! Illegal immigrants! Terrorists! Drug runners! Do you have any idea what that person did to me? Do you have any idea what those people will do to us if we let them?

Predictably, out of all the chaos, churn, and dissension comes a forceful response by an organized entity, government, which relies on superior firepower and resources to shepherd everyone into line, supposedly to provide protection and sustenance to the population which tolerates its abusive behavior. Except that government inevitably accrues more and more power to itself, casting wider and wider nets, enmeshing more and more people and territory into its grasp, until eventually there is only one option left: Submit or die. And the abusive behavior becomes more and more personal, as all those mentioned at the beginning found out at the cost of their lives and, for which, there is not, nor will be, any particular form of accountability nor admission of wrong. Instead, it will go on and on, until the end of time when the system collapses and another form of violent coercion rises up to take its place.

James Nelson, a former Montana Supreme Court judge, has hit the nail on the head in a recent article in which he decried the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis by an armed member of ICE. His liberal bias shows through but, if you can overlook that, the truth of the matter is exposed for all to see. When the rights inherent in every human being are trampled on by government force without any regard for those rights and there is no accountability for those abuses, then all of us are in trouble and at risk.

In short, when government agents violate constitutional rights without consequence—when accountability is absent and misconduct is met with institutional silence or even tacit approval—public safety and the rule of law are placed in jeopardy. When those entrusted with authority operate beyond meaningful oversight, every one of us is at risk.

What few of us will risk speaking out, marching, or engaging in peaceful protest when doing so carries the possibility of being seriously harmed—or even killed—by an inadequately supervised government agent acting with undue aggression, and with little fear of facing consequences. The mere perception that such force may be used without accountability is enough to silence many who would otherwise exercise their constitutional rights.

This is a problem. What is the solution? Is there a solution? Well, yes, there is, but it’s one that most people don’t want to consider or practice: Stop. Just stop. The fact is that if you engage in any of the power-seeking, power-broking attitudes and actions that constitute today’s society, then you are part of the problem, even if you do nothing more than support and vote for any particular person who promises to give you what you want…at someone else’s expense. Someone you don’t even know and never hear about until their name shows up on the evening newscast.

The only way to win is to not play the game. Just stop.

  1. Technically speaking, there can never be an unbiased account of anything. All of us have our own little quirks and tweaks of belief and understanding which have been developed due to circumstances and training. However, this does not preclude fairly good and well-balanced interpretations of the “facts” on the ground. It just means they are flavored. ↩︎
  2. The story of Cain and Abel, Book of Genesis, chapter 4. ↩︎
  3. The greatest example of this currently is, of course, the Israeli slaughter and genocide of the Palestinian people. But, that’s another story. ↩︎

Not All Who Wander are Lost: Some Come Home

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

“We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.” — T.S. Eliot

The end of exploring, for the truly broken, born-again believer in the Christian realm, is to return to his roots and his (Father’s) home, in a spirit of humility because he has tried everything else and it has been found wanting. From that point, he begins again, but with a different attitude and understanding.

Such is the essence of the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32), who despised what his father could give him and knew, absolutely knew, that he could do better on his own, without the restraining influence of older wisdom. In the end, after wasting everything he had been given, there was nothing left but to admit he had been wrong, to confess his failings, to beg forgiveness, and to ask for nothing except the chance to start over again, this time from the very bottom.

When you’re in a hole, stop digging. If you hit bedrock before you quit, there’s only one direction to go–up. Well, I suppose you could go sideways to avoid climbing out. But that would be really stupid, now, wouldn’t it? Been there, done that.

“The most radical idea today is not rebellion but humility.” — Mark Keenan

Jordan Peterson addresses the flip side of this in his book, We Who Wrestle with God1, while discussing the issue of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4:

“Cain wishes most devoutly for God to take responsibility for the pain and disappointment attendant on human existence. God upbraids him in a manner precisely opposite to what he most longs to hear. Cain’s request is therefore not only rejected: God turns the tables on him. This makes Cain even more unhappy and vengeful. It is one terrible thing to have your sacrifices rejected, and to fail. A whole new level of existential misery emerges, however, when you are informed in some incontrovertible manner by exactly what or who your are accusing that your own conduct is fully and completely to blame for your failure and misery; that you have made everything much worse than it had to be by your refusal to do even what you know to be right. This is a very damning judgment…” (emphasis mine)

There are multitudes of people in this world who act like Cain, blaming anyone and everyone, except themselves, for their troubles and, because of their irresponsibility to own up to their failed actions, the situation only gets worse. The Prodigal Son, on the other hand, while foolish and irresponsible at first, eventually wised up, admitting that he was the only one who could be blamed for his predicament. He was the only one who had gotten himself into trouble. He willingly opened himself up to the judgment and potential penalty imposed, should his father decide to exact one, but because he honestly stated his sin in a humble and contrite manner to his father, forgiveness was granted and he was welcomed home with open arms and the best the house could provide.

My God! Why did it take so long? And where do I go from here? Well, for starters, I have to admit that I am the only one who can take the blame for the mess I’ve made of my life. When I die (not terribly far off now) and face God in His courtroom, I will be alone, totally alone, and there will be no excuses made, no blame cast, no attempts at escape. I daresay, however, if the parable of the Prodigal Son is true in its meaning, then God will simply say, “My boy! You’ve been away a long time. Come on in!”

And all of the past will be forgotten. Forever.

  1. Jordan Peterson, 2024, Penguin Random House, 3rd printing ↩︎

The Suicidal Nature of Abortion

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

January 22, 2026, fifty three years after the Supreme Court of the United States decided that a woman’s “right” to kill her unborn child (abortion) was a constitutional privilege and could not be denied her. For any reason. By anyone, including the father of the child. See Roe v. Wade.

I wrote this article in 20191, almost six years ago, and decided to repost it here as a memorial to all those who have been slaughtered for the sake of convenience and selfishness. You are not forgotten.

Abortion, as it is practiced today, is a suicide machine.2 No apologies to Bruce Springsteen. His politics speak for him.

We are told from the very beginning that humans are part of the animal kingdom, that there’s really no difference at all between humans and chimpanzees or cockroaches, for that matter. We are all a product of evolution, a result of nature constantly weeding out the weak, inefficient, and hapless. Oh, and there is one other matter which distinguishes us—humans know the difference between right and wrong, that is, we understand a moral code, while all the other animals operate from a position of instinct.

What’s really interesting about this is that other animals, operating instinctively, do not deliberately kill their unborn children. Women, on the other hand, who are supposed to have risen to the very top of the pyramid of knowledge and understanding, will and do. Animal mothers will do anything and everything they instinctively know how to do to perpetuate their lineage, yet human mothers will do anything and everything they can, legally or otherwise, to destroy their offspring.

If there is one difference between animals and humans, it is this. Animals struggle to continue their lineage, humans act to destroy theirs.

Evolution, it is said, is a process by which the best of the best pass on their genes and characteristics to ensuing generations, thereby ensuring that the strongest and the most fit of the species survives and prospers. The weaker, less fit ones die out. As a whole, the entire species becomes better and more adapted to its environment. Well, then, consider this.

If the above statement is true, then women who abort their unborn children are not passing on their characteristics to the future generations, instead they’re removing them from the gene pool. This is in contrast to those women who deliver children and raise them up to become productive members of the human race, including the reproduction of children of their own through untold generations.

From an evolutionary viewpoint, over the long run, it is evident that women who abort their children will eventually die out, while those who don’t will continue the species. This leads to the conclusion that women who abort are the weaker members of the species and, since we are only animals anyway, they should and will be weeded out. For the benefit of humanity as a whole, you understand. And you should also understand that this is a tongue-in-cheek comment and is not meant to degrade any woman at all.

Coupled with this is the moral understanding that human beings should not kill each other, that there are negative consequences of these acts, and that humanity suffers when lethal violence is perpetrated against one member of society by another. Any society which practices or condones the widespread killing of its citizens, born or unborn, is participating in the demise of its future, dooming it to extinction.

It appears then, that abortion proponents and women who practice abortions are actually committing suicide, genetically speaking. As time goes on, the proportion of women who choose to give life to their unborn children will grow in relation to those who choose to kill theirs. Eventually, the numbers will become so lopsided that even the politicians will take note of it. Whether the suicidal members of society do or not is a different story. If they are consistent in their evolution and their beliefs, they will remain so to the very end, until they are all gone, when there are no more members of the human race who are willing to destroy their own children for their own selfish ends and survival of the fittest will be proven correct once again.

On this issue, evolution and morals appear to have collaborated. Abortion is not only morally wrong and detrimental to human relations, but also immensely destructive to the survival of the human species. Those who practice it will be eliminated—one way or another. As an evolutionary practice, abortion leads to death (extinction). As a moral practice, abortion leads to death (extinction). Abortion, quite simply, is suicidal. It is not beneficial nor wise.

“All those who hate me [wisdom], love death.” (Proverbs 8:36)

 

  1. At the time, I was posting to a blog which was dedicated to the abortion issue, but when Covid hit in early 2020, I couldn’t keep up with everything and let this one expire. I have all the articles posted on it and may air them here from time to time. ↩︎
  2. A term used in Bruce Springsteen’s 1975 hit song, “Born to Run”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3t9SfrfDZM ↩︎

Eight Lane Highway to Hell: Exit Ahead

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

The following quote grabbed my attention as soon as I read it. It comes from an article on ZeroHedge which seeks to explain why the politically driven gender divide between men and women has been growing increasingly wider in the last two decades. It does not take any political stand, neither left nor right, liberal nor conservative, on the issues, but rather tries to unravel the reasons for the movement in a fairly rational and balanced manner.

“I think this is why you see so little defection. Not because the ideology is true, but because the psychological cost of leaving is higher than the cost of staying. Easier to double down. Easier to believe the problem is that society hasn’t changed enough yet.”

I tend to agree with the conclusion reached and believe this trend will probably continue until the entire modern culture is destroyed and something completely different with a fundamentally opposing attitude takes its place. It is not likely that the society world-wide is going to make a corrective course change voluntarily, instead, it will be driven by necessity and reality.

Now, without taking up with one side or the other, I found this to be revealing of a truth far, far older than the idiotic, senseless, lies which pass for solid bedrock today, namely,

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” — Matthew 7:13-14 (NKJV)

If, and I stress if, the argument in the article cited is accurate, then it correlates strongly with this passage of Scripture, because the paragraph cited lays it out quite plainly. It is harder to leave the dominant mode of thinking and change one’s way of life than it is to continue with the prevailing mindset. It is extremely difficult for someone who has believed a certain philosophy and lived with that as the guiding principle for a lifetime to admit they were wrong. It is less radical to blend in with the herd, to go with the flow, than to move against it.

It is easier to stay on the plantation than to escape from it.

Keep in mind that this fits regardless of the male/female distinction. In whatever societal circles men find themselves, the pressure to conform and fit in is just as strong and compelling as in the female side, but it takes a different form. The passage of Scripture, which is a direct quote from Jesus Christ, does not discriminate between men and women. There is no blame cast here, no finger pointing. Instead, this pattern should be seen as an admonition to everyone that “going along with the crowd” leads to disaster and destruction, sometimes in the short run, always in the long run.

It is interesting that the very next verse in Matthew warns about listening to voices which are false and misleading.

“Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.”

This is a succinct summary of the situation we find ourselves in today. Everywhere, at all levels of society, there are people who are deliberately trying to massage the message and sway the masses for a purpose, usually related to the accumulation of power and wealth. This phenomenon encompasses all strata of society but the result is the same: the masses of people, both men and women, are being swallowed up in a sinkhole of eternal consequence which has nothing at its base except lies, lies which are driven by a hatred of the truth.

  • He who dies with the most toys wins.
  • Do whatever feels good.
  • You can have it all.
  • Express your inner self and grab for your own desires.
  • Someone else is always at fault. You never are.
  • Someone else will correct your situation. You are not responsible.
  • The only one worth living for is yourself.
  • Don’t make waves. Blend in.
  • The end always justifies the means.

Etc., etc., etc., Forever and ever.

The destruction of the modern way of life is upon us and can be seen everywhere if you only care to look and are willing to face the facts. There is only one remedy and it cannot be imposed from without by slavish devotion to an algorithmic feed nor ideological training, but must spring from the personal admission of wrong (confession of sin) and a radical departure (repentance) from the predominant thought which grips entire cultures. This is a spiritual endeavor which, if genuine and heart-felt, will lead to the emancipation of your individual soul and spirit. It can only come from trusting in the wisdom which comes from above, which is love–love for God and love for your neighbor as if he were you, and placing your faith in Jesus the Christ, who shows us the way.

Few there be that find it.

America loves war. Just admit it.

Roger Mitchell2 Comments

“The Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war. Congress, representing the weakest of the three branches of government, has refused to follow its obligation since WWII. The Senate has shown a bit of backbone here, with the Democrats (and five Republicans) voting on a War Powers resolution to limit what Trump can do in Venezuela. Trump will undoubtedly veto it. Congress loves war as much as the people who keep voting them back in office do.” — https://donaldjeffries.substack.com/p/the-gangsters-of-manifest-destiny

Hoo, boy! Isn’t that the truth? But, just to make sure everyone understands the statement clearly, let me rephrase it.

The people who keep voting the politicians into office love war as much as Congress does!

Ahhhhh! Now we’re getting somewhere. And there is no better example of that assertion than the continual and long-standing re-election of uber-hawk Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, who has never seen heard about a war he didn’t love, especially those which wreak havoc, death, and destruction on people and societies which are, supposedly, the “enemies” of the self-righteous, so-called Christian community of the state he hails from and the “national interests of the US. Whatever that means.

Compassion for the poor, down-trodden, hungry masses of foreign peoples outside the “respectable” circles of the Pharisaical confines of the most-segregated community in America today, the Christian church1, is not considered. What is more important is the constant and constantly increasing flow of “blessings”, read dollars, to the industries and services which are a large part of the economy of South Carolina (and every other state as well), from the bellicose machine known as MICIMATT, of which the US Department of War is its very public face, and for which the president (Donald Trump being the latest example) is the main cheerleader.

Hip, hip, hooray! Let’s go kill some despicables today! Kill them over there so we don’t have to kill them over here! Yeah, you know, because we’re a Christian nation and they’re not, except for Venezuela, of course, which is also Christian, but just happens to be full of oil which it was selling to “our” adversary, China. Thank God that “our” modern-day Herculean hero, Mr. Donald John Trump, was given power to put a stop to that bullshit. If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank the President!

War is the health of the State, Randolph Bourne told us a century ago, and that is no less true today than it was when he penned the words.

“…the nation in war-time attains a uniformity of feeling, a hierarchy of values, culminated at the undisputed apex of the State ideal, which could not possibly be produced through any other agency than war. Other values such [as] artistic creation, knowledge, reason, beauty, the enhancement of life, are instantly and almost unanimously sacrificed and the significant classes who have constituted themselves the amateur agents of the State are engaged not only in sacrificing these values for themselves but in coercing all other persons into sacrificing them.” — https://www.panarchy.org/bourne/state.1918.html

Sadly, this prevailing attitude is directly opposed to the teachings of another famous person, who may or may have never written anything down for posterity to read, but who fundamentally changed the world–Jesus Christ.

  1. “But to you who are willing to listen, I say, love your enemies! Do good to those who hate you.” — Luke 6:27
  2. “Blessed are the peacemakers2, for they shall be called the sons of God.” — Matthew 5:9
  3. “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” — Matthew 26:52
  4. “Father, forgive them. They don’t know what they are doing.” — Luke 23:34

Etc., among many others, and there is also this order from the Ten Commandments, which bears repeating: “Thou shalt not steal.” — Exodus 20:15. Stealing, of course, is an involuntary taking of something, anything, from someone else which belongs to them, whether by force, fraud, or law. Taking the life of someone else would fall into this category.

Donald Trump, at the very least, is honest with his principles. He has stated that he is NOT a Christian, which can be seen in his actions,3 which he makes no excuses for, and which he does not try to hide. (Except for anything which might be exposed in the full and complete release of the Epstein files, if there’s anything there.) Not so for the millions upon millions of skin-deep Christians who claim to worship the Prince of Peace as the King of Kings, but who harbor a deep reverence and love toward the militant State which constantly practices deceit, theft, and murder on a world-wide scale.

“There is a moral order. Beware of unintended consequences when it it violated.”4

    1. Segregation of churches according to skin color is a prominent part of Christianity in the Christian church today, especially in the South. This is a dirty shame and may be a reason why the Church in America has no power today. ↩︎
    2. Peacekeepers, as commonly understood today, are not identical to peacemakers. Peacekeepers use the threat of violent force to maintain an artificial truce between warring factions while they discuss and negotiate the methods by which they might live in a state without overt war. On the other hand, peacemaking is the process by which war itself, is completely eliminated from the community of individuals/nations and is accomplished by voluntarily submitting to the will of the Prince of Peace Himself and loving your neighbor (enemy) as you love yourself. ↩︎
    3. “By their works you will know them.” — Matthew 7:16 ↩︎
    4. Jordan Peterson, We Who Wrestle with God, Penguin Random House, 2024, chapter 3.8. ↩︎

    Honesty, Finally. For the Whole World to See.

    Roger Mitchell2 Comments

    “…there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.” — Jesus Christ, Luke 10:26

    In a bitterly ironic way, Trump’s reckless arrogance is to be welcomed. Because he is inadvertently exposing the Western system for what it is – a criminal imperialist regime with absolutely no respect for international law, human life, and peaceful coexistence. He has discarded the Western mask of duplicity and pretense, which at least makes it clear what the Western system is all about. What we see is something barbaric and ugly, like the fascism of former times. — https://strategic-culture.su/news/2026/01/09/trump-turbo-charged-rogue-regime-exposes-pathetic-european-vassals/

    Donald Trump has spilled the beans, knowingly or not. America has finally gone rogue without any trappings of respectability or any effort made to preserve its so-called “sanctity” built up over the decades and centuries about democracy, the rule of law, justice, and liberty. No, that carefully constructed and long maintained edifice artifice has just been exposed for the whole world to see and “our” man in the White House has been very direct and open in proclaiming the message. Frank Zappa’s long-standing prediction has arrived.

    “The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”

    This is not entirely a bad thing. There are no longer any reasons for anyone to make excuses for his actions, just call them for what they are–naked, raw power manifestations. No one, except those who are willfully blind, can justify what is happening according to an ethical moral code unless they also share in Trump’s desire for power over others, for the power to determine what is right and wrong, for the power to create their own “values” and to say, with Trump, “We can do whatever we wish.” Jordan Peterson has addressed the motivation this way.

    “This is the elevation of narrow self-will to the highest conceivable place, in the guise of ultimate freedom. (“I can abide by whatever values I choose”–something that almost immediately deteriorates into “I can do whatever I want” or, more accurately, “Whatever impulse grips me rules.”) This is simultaneously the presumption of subjective omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence. (“I have the capacity to determine the very definition of right and wrong, valuable and contemptible, good and evil.”)1

    Trump has explicitly stated this before (see here), his sycophantic staff and advisors parrot the same line (see here), and the authority has even been expanded to the police who can now “do whatever the hell they want”. Somewhere, somehow, the man has gotten the idea that because he was elected selected to hold down the cushy chair in the Oval Office, there are no limits on his behavior and that no one can tell him to “stand down”. There are millions of Americans, many of them so-called Christians who ought to know better, who cheer him on and virtually worship him as, if not God Himself, then as representing God because they have themselves embraced a violent religion of power and control. They are subject to the idol they have raised up.

    Unfortunately, this attitude does not guarantee righteous success, but instead drives the already low moral status of the United States even lower. If the President can do anything he wants and get away with it, then, as one of his subjects, I can also act that way and, hopefully, escape any judgment and punishment myself. When Trump acts in an immoral manner as the representative of the people, it does not mean that he is immune to consequences, instead it shows that the moral character of the populace at large is degraded and rotten. These points (“I’m the President. I can do whatever I want.”) and (“If the president is free to act any way he wants, then so am I.”) are symbiotic and feed off each other, making excuses for all sorts of behavior, refusing to take responsibility, and blaming others for the fallout.

    What is to be done by the average person in the US who is appalled by the goings-on?

    1. Recognize that you cannot change Donald Trump nor the way he thinks. This is God’s prerogative, however, you can ask God to work a miracle.
    2. Recognize that you may have such tendencies within yourself and, if so, confess them, ask forgiveness, cleansing, and healing, then change the way you think and act.
    3. Recognize that you do not have the authority nor the power to determine what is right or wrong. That was fixed a long time ago and is immutable. It cannot be changed, adapted, amended, added to, or altered. It can only be obeyed and adhered to, or disobeyed and ignored at your own risk and those who follow after you.
    4. Make a difference for righteousness in your own sphere of influence, your family, church, neighborhood, community.2
    5. Refuse to support the evil which is pervasive throughout this society. Call it out whenever it appears, beginning within your own soul. Eliminate every evil! If this means you have to change your politics to fit your belief structure, then…well? Do I need to draw you a picture?3
    6. Prepare yourself for what is coming4. Other nations have been here before. Where are they now? Why should we expect to receive different treatment?

    As average, everyday Americans, we do not have much influence, hardly any at all, over the machinations of the powers-that-be who own and run the government. That does not let us off the hook. When the shit hits the fan full force, as it will, we are going to be held responsible for the part we played in the shaping of our society. It does no good to claim ignorance nor to say that we are blameless.

    “And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him will they ask the more.” — Luke 12: 47-48

    As the common saying in jurisprudence says, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” Whether we acted deliberately or ignorantly, we are going to be beaten. Truly, a day of reckoning is due America and, as the society which has been given more than any other in history, the stripes will be proportionate.

    Live not by lies! It may save your skin.

    1. Jordan B. Peterson, We Who Wrestle with God, Penguin Random House, 2024, chapter 2.5 ↩︎
    2. Glen Campbell put it this way. We need to take the message to heart. ↩︎
    3. One of my father’s favorite questions. ↩︎
    4. See Psalms 2. If you listen closely, you can almost hear God laughing uproariously. Or, maybe He has done and is wiping the tears out of His eyes. Either way, not good for our future. ↩︎

    Is Trump Trying to Start a War? Why Would He?

    Roger Mitchell3 Comments

    Remember the Epstein files? How much have you heard about them recently? Where are the millions of “recently discovered” documents which the government has always had in its possession, yet only now acknowledged. What is in them which has not been revealed? Will it be revealed or will we be treated to more of the same old, same old? “Move on. Nothing to see here.” And to make sure that nothing is seen, will they be redacted so heavily that there really is nothing of any importance shown?

    Donald Trump is like a zucchini plant in late summer–the gift which keeps on giving. Those who have experience with zucchinis, whether growing them or having neighbors who grow them, will understand. If you don’t, then I recommend you familiarize yourself and, perhaps, even try your hand at growing some yourself. They are an amazingly prolific vegetable which can outproduce the appetite anyone might have for them. Check out this website for a tip which I was not aware of but plan to implement this spring.

    But…back to Donald. The man is truly an intensely productive machine, a hyper-active over-achiever in many senses who excels at getting things done which he wants done. With respect to that, he has my respect.1 I trail far behind. However, he does so many things that I do not like nor approve of that I cannot keep up with all of them. They simply are ignored, overlooked, forgotten, or put on the back burner until later, which means that they are ignored, overlooked, and forgotten.

    Nevertheless, the big news gets my attention and the big news of the moment is that the US Coast Guard has recently boarded and commandeered an oil tanker in the North Sea between Iceland and England–far, far away from the coast of the US. Ummmm, isn’t the Coast Guard supposed to patrol the American coast and leave the “enforcement of US Law” on the internationally recognized, deep blue high seas to the Navy?

    This comes less than a week after the invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro and his wife in a lightening fast raid on Caracas on January 3, 2026. He has since been transported to a federal court in New York City and indicted on numerous charges, most of them totally ridiculous, but virtually all of which will be upheld, and by which he will be found guilty, flogged in the public square, thrown into prison with Manuel Noriega, tortured until he confesses his sins, and eventually executed by a bullet to the back of the head2, after which his body will be drawn and quartered, then burned to ashes which will be consigned to Davy Jones’ locker alongside the remains of Osama bin Laden, who was officially “buried at sea”, never to be heard from again. [For those who are gullible enough to believe everything they read, know that this prediction is pure sarcastic satire and is meant only to draw attention to the ridiculous claims which the State has made about these, and other, matters.]

    Not to mention that Trump is breathing heavy threats against the Danish “claim” that Greenland belongs to them and that it would be better for everyone all around if the US simply took it over (militarily, if necessary) and made it the 52nd, 53rd, or 54th state, depending on how you count. (Canada, of course, is the 51st.) Or, maybe, he will have compassion on the entire population there by giving them a cool million dollars each of your hard-earned, easily inflated money, so long as they agree to sell the land-locked iceberg to him.3

    It makes my head spin. As Lenin is supposed to have said, “There are decades where nothing happens and there are weeks when decades happen.” Or, if you prefer to beat up on Christopher Columbus as the spark which ignited all the wrongs visited on the New World,

    “There are centuries in which nothing happens and years in which centuries pass. Fourteen ninety-two is a year of centuries,”4

    Hoo, boy! What is next? Who the heck knows?

    The more important questions to ask, however, is these. Why is Trump doing all this now? Is he deliberately trying to start a “serious” war? And, probably most important of all, what is he trying to hide by distracting the populace with grandiose, Fourth of July style events? Would his efforts possibly have something to do with the fact that America, the Empire, is on its last legs? The fact that the country is financially broken beyond redemption? The fact that the rest of the world is moving in its own direction which does not coincide with his Israel America First vision? The fact that his poll numbers are plunging deeply and that many of his die-hard followers are starting to question his tactics, policies, promises, and maybe even his sanity? Or, perhaps most importantly, would it have to do with the “soon-to-be released” heavily-redacted files related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, which will not die a normal death, and, like the zucchini plant, just keeps on giving. And giving. And giving.

    What is Trump trying to hide and will we ever learn the truth about it?

    In times like these, there is only one place to go for reassurance–the Word of God, specifically Luke 10:26, in the words of Jesus Christ himself.

    “Therefore, do not fear them. For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.”

    We have a choice. See what is happening around us and be afraid because we cannot see what is going on behind the curtain OR to trust that the dark places, the hidden things, will have the light of truth shone upon them and will be exposed for what they are. This is about as plain as I can make it.

    “Therefore, do not fear them.” Words worth repeating.

    1. Credit where credit is due. Even Adolf Hitler loved his dog. BM, add this to your list. ↩︎
    2. Or given enough rope to hang himself in the manner of Jeffrey Epstein, who committed suicide in spite of guards sleeping next to his cell, video cameras which malfunctioned at the “most inopportune time”, and a slew of other fantastic coincidences which are almost too unbelievable to be believed, but that’s what we’ve been told to believe. [Note: I don’t watch much TV, but I did see this on the Internet, so I know that it’s true.] ↩︎
    3. In mentioning this, Trump has made it clear that he has no compassion for the heavily-burdened citizens of the United States. They are only a cash-cow to be milked for his benefit. ↩︎
    4. Attributed to Mexican poet Homero Aridjis. https://www.csmonitor.com/1991/1011/11101.html ↩︎

    Ok, Mr. Trump. What’s Next? Who’s Next?

    Roger MitchellLeave a comment

    It’s been a few days since the United States attacked Venezuela in the middle of the night and captured kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, packing them out, and sending them in handcuffs to New York City where they will be charged with, well, something which has a high probability of winning in a court packed with team players. You know, narco-terrorism, gang activity, gun-running, theft of American property, and perhaps even unauthorized intent to interfere in the 2028 presidential election, among others yet to be thought of. But, you know, “justice” has to be and will be served. Criminals simply cannot be allowed to run around loose like that, you know.

    “The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — Melian Dialogue

    I’ve read a lot of widely varying viewpoints on this affair and I still don’t know what is the truth. Probably never will for sure, but that isn’t going to stop me from forming my own opinion. Neither should it prevent you because we can only take what we know, including the obviously blatant lies and propaganda, and make the best decision we can with that information. Since we never have the complete truth, we have to make do with what we have. So, here’s mine.

    I’m increasingly convinced that the whole affair was a staged act of theater, designed to make it appear that America was back, riding high in the saddle after getting bucked off in Iraq and Afghanistan.1 Yeah, we can do whatever we want because we are the only country in the world who could do such a thing! Braggadocio! Bravado! Pump that fist to pump up the standing of those who are calling the shots and not doing really well at solving anything. Not to mention that this episode is a great distraction from the ongoing fracas known as Total Release of the Complete and Minimally Redacted Set of the Epstein Files. Yeah, how much have you heard about that in the last few days and when will it reassert itself as front-page news? If America gets bogged down in a Viet Nam-style war in Venezuela, will we ever hear anything more about it?

    Popular blogger, Simplicius, has fronted the possibility that Trump and Putin actually worked out a deal between them in which the US would agree to withdraw from Ukraine and Putin would look the other way on Venezuela. Whether this is accurate doesn’t matter as much as it adds to the suspicions that the whole thing is about large, muscular states overriding and destroying the sovereignty of smaller weaker ones without any qualms, without any concern as to who gets hurt in the process.

    “As the US was so concerned about the Monroe Doctrine and its own backyard, perhaps the US might also be concerned about developments in Russia’s backyard, as in Ukraine, making it very obvious that they were trying to set ip [sic] some kind of let’s just say: You stay out of Ukraine or you move out of Ukraine, and, you know, we’ll rethink where we are with Venezuela.” – Fiona Hill to Congress, October 14, 2019

    This seems to me to be a good case of strong arm bullying on the cheap without having to sink huge amounts of men, material, and money into the operation. If that is the case AND if it pans out well for Trump, then he has succeeded spectacularly. However, we cannot discount the idea that it will not play the way it was designed and that the aftermath might just be too much to bear. It is almost certain that the real reason for this was to regain control of the massive amounts of crude oil buried there, not to punish small time drug dealers or gang leaders. The question remains as to how the “campesinos” in Venezuela react to the taking of Maduro and the subsequent seizure of property which they might consider their own. If Trump attempts to impose a puppet government for the purpose of streamlining the transfer of that oil to large multinational companies against the popular will of the people, he may find that he has jumped from the frying pan into the fire.

    There are, of course, those niggling, nagging, little things called consequences, many of them as yet unseen.

    • 1. The “international rules-based order” so loudly trumpeted by the West as a defense of its policies and actions, and a denunciation of other nations which refused to “follow the rules”, is dead. Kaput. Rigor mortis setting in. There is no more system, only raw, naked power which is used by those who have the means to exercise it against those who cannot defend themselves.2 This applies as well to the much-vaunted “rule of law” proclaimed proudly as the basis of the supposed republic which Ben Franklin warned would have to be kept or it would disappear. Gone. Gone forever. It will never return in its previous form. From here on out, it is the law of the jungle–“Kill or be killed.”
    • The capture kidnapping and arrest of Nicolas Maduro on specious charges follows the same pattern as set by that in the case of Manuel Noriega in 1989, and will be argued according to the legal doctrine developed at that time. Since the US government never admits wrong-doing and will continue the practice whenever it wants, a precedent has been set which will probably be followed by other nations whenever they can, up to and including the assassination of high government officials, possibly likely even presidents.
    • The US and China have only recently “resolved” their differences over the production and distribution of rare earth elements (REE) which are required in the manufacture of many modern items which we can’t live without–smart phones, hi-tech missiles, data centers, satellites, etc. Will China respond to the loss of oil purchased from Venezuela by clamping down even harder on the REE issue?
    • Will China issue its own National Security Strategy declaring that the entire east coast of Asia is now to be considered as their sphere of influence and woe to the foreign power which might dare to meddle in the sovereign affairs of the nations within it? What if Xi Jin Ping decided one day to change the name of the Taiwan Strait to the China Strait and forbade adversarial powers to enter therein, all while making threatening noises about what would happen if they did?
    • Will foreign backed “terrorist”3 cells be activated within the US? Is that tactic to be reserved until Iran is attacked again? What is to be the defense against those?
    • And, of course, the rock-hard reality that we simply cannot afford another long, drawn-out war even if it is in our own backyard.

    And on, and on, and on…

    This whole thing may blow over with very little damage to show for it, but I have to admit the forebodings I experienced during the Noriega crisis are amplified today. For one thing, at that time, the USSR was on the cusp of collapsing, the vision of America as the only superpower was becoming reality, and the Panama Canal was still widely considered American property. Today? Well, the US is broke, deeply indebted, universally hated, arrogant beyond belief, and led by people who are trying to reclaim her former “glory”4 by repeating the mistakes of the past. There is also the fact that in 1989, the US still had some semblance of respectability around the world, while today it is in ragged tatters.

    At any rate, regardless what happens in the next few months or years, the probability that life, liberty, and happiness will be jeopardized for the average person in America and around the world has just been increased. Our situation is not getting better and this sort of Rambo-type machismo will not make it any better.

    Success breeds confidence which generates hubris which causes overreach which creates mistakes which have consequences which result in disaster which end in downfall.

    1. This brings back memory of the comment George H.W. Bush made after the First Iraq War which he engineered–“It’s a proud day for America. And, by God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.” ↩︎
    2. Boiled down to its most basic meaning, this is no different than the argument used by those who champion and practice abortion on demand. It is an aggression committed against the least powerful, most defenseless persons among us by those who refuse to act responsibly. ↩︎
    3. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. It all depends on your perspective. However, all terrorists operate according to one principle: the use of violence and force to attain a political end, which means every single government is a terrorist group. ↩︎
    4. I have encapsulated “glory” in quotation marks as a matter of ridicule and contempt. Glory belongs to God alone and He shares with no one. (Isaiah 42:8) Remember this the next time you hear the American flag referred to as “Old Glory”. ↩︎

    Donald Trump: Guilty on All Counts

    Roger Mitchell4 Comments

    The president of the United States is not above the law. He only thinks that he is.

    TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

    News has just broken that the United States has attacked Venezuela by bombing its capital, Caracas, and captured kidnapped both President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, and now have them in custody. This unconstitutional action follows the months-long killing spree on fishermen off the coast of Venezuela, among others, without any attempt made to interdict, board, and search the boats. It was just alleged that they were carrying drugs and, as such, were a threat to the “national interests” of the US.

    Whether or not Maduro was captured kidnapped remains to be seen, but it is quite evident that the actions of Donald Trump and his administration go against the clear meaning of the above-cited section of criminal law and could potentially open them up to prosecution should the Democrats gain control of the Congress in 2026. If the “war”1 is speedily concluded and Trump’s regime change gambit works as planned, then there is no danger of that, but if he has committed the country to another “forever” war which cannot be won, then all bets are off concerning the mid-term election.

    1. Whoever…willfully subjects… Can there be any question that Trump has not willfully acted? After all, he has boasted that, as president, he can do whatever he wants and has constantly said what he wanted to do with Venezuela and Maduro.
    2. …Any person… It is difficult to claim that this does not include even fishermen in small boats.
    3. …in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District…Ah, here we get into the legal mumbo-jumbo of the text. It can and will be claimed that Venezuela is NOT a state, territory, commonwealth, or district of the US and, therefore, this does not apply. However, it was only a few months ago that the White House released its National Security Strategy which openly declared that the entire western hemisphere was the second incarnation of the Monroe Doctrine which assumed sovereignty over the entire area of North, Central, and South America, to the exclusion of any foreign power. Interpreted this way, Venezuela IS a territory and possession of the US Government.
    4. …if bodily injury results… No question about this. See the afore-mentioned fishermen blown out of the water and deliberately murdered. [Update: Up to 40 people on the ground in Venezuela might have been killed. This number will probably fluctuate for some time and may settle at a higher number.]
    5. …if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire… Again, without doubt.
    6. …if death results from the acts committed… See Item #4 above.
    7. …if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap… Trump himself has stated that Nicolas Maduro and his wife were both captured kidnapped and are in the custody of the US.2
    8. …shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. This does not have to be explained.

    It used to be that presidents, while perhaps condoning or committing criminal acts in secret, would attempt to maintain a squeaky-clean, public image. Those days are also gone. Today, they are out in the open for the whole world to see, hear, and experience. I’m pretty hard on Trump, but I will give him credit for one thing–he says the quiet things out loud. This may be due to his propensity to open his mouth before engaging his brain, but it is a fact that he does not hesitate to proclaim his doings.

    Venezuela has been a major, big-league, supplier of oil to China. What will happen if, all at once, that supply is shut off and denied? The implications of this are almost too frightening to think about, but it is imperative that we (when I say we, I mean you) do think about them because they will have some sort of effect on all of us.

    It’s the end of the world as we know it. But, then, history shows that this is the way it’s always been and people have survived through it all. This time is no different, except for the fact that the “dogs of war” are coming closer and closer to home.

    God help us!

    1. Technically, this is NOT a war as the Congress is the only entity which has the constitutional authority to declare war. Since Congress has NOT declared war against Venezuela (Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, Iran, etc.), then military adventures of this type become merely “police work” to enforce the will of the president. In the current situation, Congress is, at least, as guilty as the administration because it failed to rein him in during a recent vote. ↩︎
    2. Together with the alleged Ukrainian attempt to assassinate Russian president, Vladimir Putin, this precedent could easily become a slippery slope which puts any single official, regardless of his or her office, at risk of becoming “collateral damage, terminated”. Years ago, protocol demanded that high government officials were not to be physically harmed, but those days are gone. ↩︎

    Looking Ahead to the New Year: Viva 2026!

    Roger Mitchell1 Comment

    Today is January 1, 2026, the beginning of a new year, and the possibility of any number of good things happening. After all, we just finished the season of wishing others a “Merry Christmas”, which connotes peace and good will toward others in a spirit of love, even toward our enemies. Or maybe, just not hating our enemies quite as much as we normally do.

    Or perhaps, even more likely, since Christmas is over for another year and we can put those warm, fuzzy feelings behind us, the next year will be one of Hell breaking out on Planet Earth. There is ample evidence for this extrapolation.

    1. The Ukraine/Russian war which is threatening to engulf all of Europe.
    2. The ongoing Israeli massacre of the Palestinians in Gaza and the destruction of the Middle East.
    3. The next chapter of the Israeli/Iranian war, which might destroy the Middle East.
    4. The potential of the US attacking Venezuela in an effort to force a regime change, so that “we” can get “our” oil back.
    5. The strong suspicion that China is about to assault Taiwan.
    6. The rise of BRICS in opposition to the “international rule of law” as interpreted by the West.
    7. Financial turmoil on a scale never seen before and the recent nearly vertical rise in the price of gold and silver.
    8. The increasing belief that the Day of the Dollar is just about over and that a new system, the Great Reset is imminent.
    9. CBDC’s, digital surveillance, and social conditioning are about to destroy any residual semblance of privacy and freedom, all with the assistance of AI controlled data centers which are going to suck up every last available bit of electricity and fresh water.
    10. COVID. Climate change. The whole Woke monstrosity.
    11. Etc., etc., etc.,…

    Oh, yes, there is good reason to believe that 2026 will not be all sugar, spice, and an extended vacation in a tropical paradise. Why, it’s almost enough to make me want to go to bed, cover my head with a pillow, and never come out again. And yet, and yet…

    “In the world, you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.” — John 16:33

    For those who have put their hope and faith in Jesus Christ, the Word, and His word, the troubles we face here can be met with courage and fearlessness because we understand that He is watching over His creation, His Church, with the ultimate intention being that it will reflect all the glory which is God’s alone. No matter what happens to us, it is done with His permission and/or blessing. There is nothing which can touch us unless He allows it and even the “bad things” are meant to steer us toward greater humility and trust.

    There are only three ways we can respond to the troubles around us:

    1. Returning evil for evil as the world does. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. What’s in it for me. I’m looking out for #1. Kill them all, let God sort them out. Money, money, money. He who dies with the most toys, wins. Eat, drink, and be merry, because tomorrow we die.
    2. Self-control. Love your neighbor as you love yourself, including your enemies. Do good to those who hate you. Do not retaliate, but forgive. Seek peace with all. Beat your swords into plowshares. Make a positive difference in your own world because you believe in the future.
    3. Disengage. Distance yourself completely from society. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, but especially do nothing to restrain evil. In essence, admit defeat and commit suicide. Because it’s hopeless.

    In his book, Man’s Search for Meaning, Viktor Frankl wrote these timeless words.

    “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms–to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way…The way in which a man accepts his fate and all the suffering it entails, the way in which he takes up his cross, gives him ample opportunity–even under the most difficult circumstances–to add a deeper meaning to his life. It may remain brave, dignified, and unselfish. Or in the bitter fight for self-preservation he may forget his human dignity and become no more than an animal. Here lies the chance for a man either to make use of or to forgo the opportunities of attaining the moral values that a difficult situation may afford him. And this decides whether he is worthy of his sufferings or not.”

    In everything we experience this next year, we have a choice. Go through it as a willing ambassador of Christ, knowing we are His, or go through it as an animal, forgetting or refusing to admit that we are made in His Image.

    “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. Therefore, do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord…” — 2 Timothy 1:7-8a

    As Christians, we have the power and ability to influence our world for the better. We ought not squander the opportunity. Be blessed as you go out and have a Happy New Year in His Name.

    The Source of Our Beliefs

    Roger Mitchell1 Comment

     “What he wished to believe, that is what each man believes” — Demosthenes

    On multiple occasions in the past, and always in response to some person stating that he (or she, usually a he) has no religion, no god, and is, therefore, fully and sovereignly in control of his life, I have said that everyone has a god, a religion, whether they acknowledge it or not. What is the one thing, the value, the idea which you hold in highest regard, which is most important to you, and which reigns supreme over everything else in your life? Regardless of its nature or being, that is your god and the pursuit of it is your religion. You place your faith and your belief in it and you worship it. No one is exempt. No one can rise above this fact nor escape its certainty.

    I have been vindicated. In his book, We Who Wrestle with God, Jordan Peterson, yes, that Jordan Peterson, writes this, barely a few pages into the foreword.

    “We elevate what we most highly regard to the utmost place of supremacy or sovereignty. We aim at the upward target we deem central, however momentarily. We bring our consciousness itself to bear on what we define as worthy of the expenditure of our attention and the efforts of our action. We begin our continual journey forward by positing a good–a good that is at least better than our point of departure. This is an act of faith as well as one of sacrifice: faith, because the good could be elsewhere; sacrifice, because in the pursuit of any particular good we determine to forgo all others.”1

    Nature abhors a vacuum, it is said, and those who state that there is no god and that religion is for fools literally create their own spiritual vacuum which must be filled with something. That something is usually themselves. “God does not exist, therefore, in the absence of God, I become God.” This is commonly known as atheistic humanism and its most basic tenet is that Man can determine truth for himself without any “help” from outside. The major problem with this line of thinking is that it is impossible to prove that God does or does not exist. Instead, the concept must be taken on faith, which is an aspect of a religious belief.

    Some “believers” in the non-existence of God become nihilists, believers in nothing, who work toward the destruction of anything good and positive so that something else can be built in its place, subsequently to be destroyed. (See here for a good description of nihilism.)

    “Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unsearchable and eternally creative source of all life–the passion for destruction is also a creative passion!” — Mikhael Bakunin

    This is perpetual, unending destruction for the sake of destruction, until Utopia is reached. Somehow, Utopia will be attained. The devil is in the details.

    “Deeper down, at the core of our dilemma, is a self-perpetuating crisis of thought. In a sense the difficulty is a very simple one, adequately captured in the story of Adam and Eve. Mankind, tired of dependency on its creator, seeks to strike out alone.” — John Waters

    Yes, mankind seeks to strike out alone, to chart his own course, to become his own arbiter of truth. This is exactly what happened in the Garden of Eden, metaphorically or literally, and mankind is still suffering from the action taken. Mankind also suffers from the actions taken today because we have never recovered from The Lie that we could be like God, equal with Him in the determination of what constitutes and defines good and evil. We see it everywhere throughout society. It is in the forefront of the news constantly, as evidenced currently by Israel’s ongoing slaughter of her weaker neighbors, countenanced by the assertion that this is, somehow, God’s desire and, therefore, to be supported without reservation.

    “The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — from the Melian Dialogue

    Yet, in spite of this, in the midst of all the chaos, din, and confusion, there is that still small voice which whispers quietly to us, which we cannot drown out or silence, no matter how hard we try: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”

    What is God? Who is God? Who shall declare himself as God? There is only one answer and it is seen in the immediate quote above. Even this, though, is subject to interpretation because if Man is God, then however Man loves his neighbor is right and proper, as in, “Do to your neighbor, but do it to him first”, which is pure aggression, or “Love your neighbor, but more especially his wife”, because in all probability, your neighbor is “loving” your wife, even as we speak.

    This whole conversation thus reverts back to the beginning: what is truth, and who will define it. Shall I submit to a higher authority and align my life with its (His) decrees or shall I make the vain attempt to go my own way and declare myself God, regardless of the cost?

    Does it really matter who or what we worship as God? Does it really matter whose word becomes law? The difference is stark. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”, and its total opposite, “I am the president. I can do whatever I want.”

    Well, yes, Mr. Trump, you can, but there are always consequences which follow.

    1. We Who Wrestle With God, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, Penguin Random House, 2024, page xxvii.
      ↩︎

    The End of Oppression: O Holy Night

    Roger Mitchell4 Comments

    December 25, 2025. Christmas Day.

    “Truly He taught us to love one another, His law is love and His gospel is peace. Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother and in His Name, all oppression shall cease…” — from the Christmas hymn, “O, Holy Night”

    One year ago, I posted an article here which began with these same words, except that the year is 2024. I considered reposting it again but then decided to write a new article building off the same base, following the same format, and taking the argument I made last year into a new direction.

    This song, O Holy Night, is without doubt, hands down, my absolute Christmas favorite and the main reason for that is the message it conveys. It is worth repeating.

    “Truly He taught us to love one another. His law is love and His Gospel is Peace. Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother and in His Name all oppression shall cease.”

    I cannot imagine a better way of describing the Gospel in three short sentences.

    Undoubtedly, the breaking of the chains which bind us begin with the spiritual freedom which comes as a result of confessing faith in Jesus Christ and submission to His Lordship over our lives, but this is only the first step. From there, it progresses to the liberation of the soul, our emotions and feelings, and can even spill over into physical healing regardless the condition. Moreover, as time goes on and I make progress in my relationship with God, the more I realize that since I am a person made in His Image, that I am no longer bound by the rule of Man, but am a sovereign being in my own right. The chain which seeks to bind me to the tyranny of others has been broken and cannot be used to subjugate me to their will. In Christ, I am truly free.

    Of course, this should not be read to say that I can do whatever I want, that I am completely independent of anyone and anything. I am, as one of His disciples, under His authority and rule, and as a consequence, must live the way I am commanded. The distinction between these two is that, while Man’s rule enslaves in a spirit of power-seeking for one’s own benefit, His law is love, which empties itself for the good and betterment of those it touches.

    “Chains shall He break…”

    He breaks the chains. All we have to do is to watch and then act in unison, cooperation, and gratefulness. The important thing is that we recognize that the chains have been broken and that we are now freed from the manacles, freed to walk out of the prison cell, freed to become what we were created to be.

    What is just as important is the promise this phrase makes, i.e., that the breaking of the chains is guaranteed and, while we may not see it as of yet, it will happen. This is where faith comes in. Our part is simply to believe and be patient, yet ready to move when the moment occurs.

    This is true liberation. Political liberation, as proclaimed so avidly by winners of elections and wars, cannot begin to compare.

    Christian Health Care–Courtesy of the State

    Roger Mitchell3 Comments

    Or, should it be Statist Health Care, Courtesy of the Church?

    “From the beginning of Christianity, love for one’s neighbor and the example of Jesus’ concern for the sick have compelled Christians to care for the ill and dying. As a result, the Catholic Church has been involved in health care for centuries. In the first hospitals, which were in monasteries, monks and nuns provided care for the sick and dying, especially the poor. The wealthy were taken care of at home.”

    https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/christianity-compels-us-provide-health-care-poor-politicians-must-do-their-part

    Thomas Reese, a Jesuit priest, published this article less than two weeks ago at National Catholic Reporter. I found it by chance and I thought the above paragraph consistent with history and Scripture. Unfortunately, it was thrown, as an orphaned poor step-sister, into his argument, which started out with this contradictory title: Christianity compels us to provide health care for the poor. Politicians must do their part.

    Yes, absolutely, even the non-Christian politicians and bureaucrats must be harnessed to the task. Separation of Church and State be damned!

    Reese made pretty short work of the concept that love for one’s neighbor and the example of Jesus should dictate how we approach the issue of health care for the poor among us. Instead, almost from the beginning, he pivoted to the idea that the State should be doing the heavy lifting:

    “A single-payer system would reduce administrative costs and give the government the power to negotiate lower prices with drug companies, doctors and hospitals. Hospitals and doctors could be required to post their fee schedules online to encourage competition.”

    “The government could also be more generous in forgiving student loans of doctors and nurses who serve the poor. It should also fund research and public health that reduce health care costs. Eliminating vaccines and fluoride, which some of our national health leaders seek to do, will simply raise health care costs as preventable illnesses and dental problems could increase.” 

    “As a nation, we need to move toward Medicare for All, a tax-funded health care system that includes all medically necessary care. We can start by allowing employers and individuals to buy into Medicare even if they are under 65. We should also start by providing Medicare for All to anyone under 18 years of age, including children in the womb.”

    This is about as political as it gets, but then he adds this gem.

    “Such programs will cost the government money, but the current system is both costly and wasteful.”

    About which, I ask, who built the current government run system and if it is costly and wasteful now, then why does he think that giving the government more power to manipulate, regulate, and control will make it any better?

    All this is beside the point, however, as Reese’s first mistake is to conflate the Church with the State. As individual Christians, we have an obligation to care for the sick and poor, therefore, the political system we live in and under MUST also care for the sick and poor in order to produce the results which are expected from the followers of Jesus. This is a false equation as there is a vast difference between the mission of the Church which is to heal and comfort out of a genuine love for those it ministers to, and the mission of government which is to gain power regardless of the harm it does to those it seeks to subjugate and use.

    There is no place in the Scriptures where it records that Jesus told His disciples to take over the political system so that the hungry could be fed and the bed-ridden raised up healthy. In fact, He constantly had to disabuse them of this notion. Instead, He encouraged them to voluntarily give of their own substance to those who were less fortunate and, as a result, the early Church developed a system of community in which they took care of their own and outsiders as they were able–all without the “assistance” of an external entity which operated on theft, force, and violence.

    How does Reese expect the government to afford what he proposes? There are only two ways that government can raise revenue: either by borrowing money which has to be repaid with interest out of the second method of revenue enhancement, which has many various versions but is known by one name–theft, e.g., taxes, inflation, outright confiscation, penalties, etc. Government does not own anything which it has not previously taken from someone else. If government spends more on healthcare tomorrow than it does today, it must run larger deficits (borrowing) or take more from productive society (theft). Both these versions are roundly condemned in the Scriptures as either unwise and/or criminal.

    Conversely, the Bible promises that the Church gains materially as it gives spiritually. As individual Christians become more like Christ, they are blessed by God and made richer (emotionally, spiritually, physically) for one purpose: that they will give even more to benefit more people. Note that we are not only considering material wealth here, but everything which we are blessed with. Since the Church (and every organization which has two or more persons in it) is made up of individual members, if the individuals, as individuals, become wealthier, the Church, as a collective, will also and this accumulated wealth can then be spread around to needy persons as seen fit by those who control the flow.

    One major distinction to make is that everything governmental involves force, sometimes brute, violent, and lethal force. People are made to submit and comply on pain of punishment if they don’t. The message of government can be summed up in just a few short words, “You will, dammit, or else.” The mandated position of the Church could not be further from this, as Jesus taught that anyone (everyone) could participate in His life-giving freedom if they wanted to, but that participation was completely voluntary and had to come from one’s heart without compulsion. There is nothing forced about salvation or true Christianity and for anyone, especially a recognized minister of the gospel, to claim that the gospel must be practiced by taking from those who have to give to those who don’t is a sacrilege and does dishonor to the message of Christ Himself.

    Reese begins to wind up his screed with this reminder.

    “As Christianity compels us, we need to put aside our arrogance and partisanship on health care and do what is best for the nation and its people.”

    Well, yes, we do, but arrogance and partisanship are integral parts of government and to expect those to be extirpated on behalf of the nation and its people is unrealistic and delusional. Besides, as a formally recognized leader in the Catholic Church, he ought to be the first to do so.

    Finally, in his last gasp at trying to force the issue, he writes:

    “And, if Congress is incapable of reforming the health care system, we should take away their generous health care plan and put them on Medicaid. That should wake them up.”

    In other words, to put it bluntly, repay evil with evil, a practice which is strictly forbidden by the Word of God.

    The fact is that Congress is incapable of reforming the system, partly because its individual members benefit greatly from the system itself, but also because most Americans, the vast majority of them, from the very top of the heap to the lowest dregs on a trash-ridden slum, demand that the government gives them what they want, at someone else’s expense, and Congress is only too happy to oblige them. They are all, all of them, part and parcel of an evil, unchristian way of life and the only way to change that is to change oneself. Changing the system for the better is not possible. Changing yourself is, provided that the Spirit of God is given permission to operate, no pun intended.

    “Vengeance is Mine, I Will Make You Pay”, says Donald Trump

    Roger MitchellLeave a comment

    “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. That way the whole world will be blind and toothless.” — Tevye, from Fiddler on the Roof

    “Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” — Romans 12:17-19 NKJV

    Contrast those sentiments with the words coming out of the mouth of the one who thinks he can do anything because he is the president of the United States.

    “They’ve [Venezuela] treated us badly. I guess now we’re not treating them so good.” — Donald Trump

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1999565449093169515, at about 51 seconds in.

    During the entire history of Christianity from the very beginning 2000 years ago, one of the points of the message has been that retaliatory vengeance, the repaying of evil with evil, is not to be tolerated. Instead, God claims vengeful authority for Himself alone, and any instance where Man is allowed to exercise power in that area of the realm is by designated permission which is constrained by clearly marked parameters and boundaries. In fact, the legal basis for restraining one from taking vengeance goes all the way back to the early days of the Hebrew nation, e.g., among others,

    • Deuteronomy 32:35 “Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.”
    • Leviticus 19:18 “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.”

    The amount of ink spilled onto paper concerning the so-called Christian roots of America is voluminous and even today there are those who call America a Christian nation (or at the very least, call for America to return to its Christian beginning). Yet, in all of this, where are the voices of prominent Christians who tell Donald Trump to change his course, to cool down his rhetoric, to take it easy where it concerns his belligerent words and actions?

    Chuck Baldwin comes readily to mind, but there are not a lot of others that I know of.

    I am not surprised by Trump. He is promoting his own religion, one of unilateral power, wealth-gathering, and self-importance which incorporates many aspects of religious worship but cannot rightly be called Christian. The ones I am constantly in amazement of are those who call themselves disciples of Jesus Christ, but who flock to Trump’s banner and idolize him as the modern, visible incarnation of the anointed messiah, despite the clear commands of Scripture. In many circles within American society today, criticizing the man about anything he might have said or done is swiftly met with vituperative condemnation.

    The questions before us are the same as those posed by the prophet Elijah to the people of Israel at Mount Carmel in his head-to-head confrontation with the prophets of Baal. Who is the god you will worship? Whose word is true? What are you going to believe? These, and others like them, have to be answered in the hearts and minds of all of us and it would be best to settle them, once and for all, before fire rains down from heaven…again. This time, it could be nuclear.

    Beating Swords into Plowshares, Montana Style

    Roger MitchellLeave a comment

    A few days ago, I posted a short article about a bill, HR 6508, introduced into the House of Representatives by Thomas Massie (R-KY), which if passed into law would require the White House to begin proceedings to remove the US from the organization known as NATO. A companion bill, S 2103 has been introduced into the Senate by Mike Lee, R-UT. In addition, the White House has released its National Security Strategy which basically calls for a moderated withdrawal from a hegemonic attempt to control the world into a more manageable position of ruling the Western Hemisphere with an iron fist. Conversely, it could be an admission that the US cannot rule the world due to the rise of significant resistance and must pull in its horns somewhat. It’s all relative, depending on your viewpoint.

    These events, even if they take twenty or thirty years to accomplish, can be seen as positive steps toward a better future for the world, like the first faint glimmer of light breaking through the darkness after a long, dark night. We should be aware, though, that nothing is guaranteed and that international tensions could continue to escalate as modern-day society breaks down into uncontrolled chaos, with the ever-present specter of full-blown nuclear war still only a heartbeat away.

    [Note: I wrote this at the request of an editor at Western Montana News who asked how it could relate to the local area in the case that events of this sort did unfold.]

    I am extremely skeptical about anything which comes out of Washington, regardless of its source (Thomas Massie, excepted) and understand that evil, like the multi-headed hydra of Greek literature, will not be easily dispatched. These things take time to mature and we should not expect to see an immediate end to hostilities even as we hope and believe that world-wide peace will be the eventual result.

    Putting aside our disbeliefs and assuming the best, let’s take a look at what might be long-term effects for Montana and the surrounding regions if, and I stress if, NATO is disbanded and the US does pull back from its long-standing policy of never-ending wars to fill the coffers of the military-industrial complex which Eisenhower warned about long ago. Keep in mind that this is only an exercise of hopeful possibility, not a prediction. Your guess is as good as mine.

    1. NATO is abandoned and disappears. The US and Russia come to an understanding of peaceful co-existence. The European Union, a supra-national organization, disintegrates and reverts once more into a continent of national states, each of which is beset with its own peculiar problems, none of which is capable of exercising massive power outside its borders. In such a scenario, it is possible that the number of nuclear warheads which the US and Russian states control and use as threats against each other might be negotiated down from an insane level to one where the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) policy does not cause nightmares in fearful people. If that were to happen, would the missile silos at Malmstrom Air Force Base eventually be decommissioned and filled with concrete? It is, according to the premise of this article, at least theoretically possible. If that was the only development which came out of this, it would be a good thing.
    2. Trillion dollar “defense” budgets would become a thing of the past. Without an existential threat constantly looming over our heads, there would be no need to break the bank any longer for the ostensible purpose of keeping the “barbarians” at bay, fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here. Instead of pouring that money into weapons systems to kill and destroy, some of it could be used to rebuild Montana’s deteriorating infrastructure–roads and bridges, schools, hospitals, e.g., among others.
    3. Peace is deflationary. Inflation is necessary to drive the financial engine which waging war requires. Without the “need” to destroy the dollar to protect “national interests”, the printing presses which lubricate the political machine in Washington could be wound down to a more moderate level at the very least. The wages which local Montanans earn would go further and purchase more, enabling a general rise in the standard of living.
    4. Massive numbers of young men and women would no longer be needed to fill the ranks of “cannon fodder” in wars which America has no business involving itself or occupying military bases in foreign countries where they are not needed. Instead, they could become highly productive citizens here, raising future generations in an era where soldiers dying in combat might be an anomaly instead of a fixture.

    I could go on but you get my point. Western Montana (and the world) has much to gain from the cessation of wars, especially those in which the threat of nuclear annihilation always looms just ahead.

    In conclusion, I point to Isaiah 2:4, which says,

    “He [Word of God] shall judge between the nations and rebuke many people; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.“

    If this prophecy is true, then it is inevitable that war will cease to exist. All of us should be working toward that goal whether it comes to pass in our lifetimes or not until far into the future.

    The bronze sculpture “Let Us Beat Our Swords into Ploughshares,” was created by Soviet artist Evgeny Vuchetich, and presented to the United Nations on 4 December 1959 by the Government of the USSR. The sculpture, depicting the figure of a man holding a hammer aloft in one hand and a sword in the other, which he is making into a ploughshare, is meant to symbolize man’s desire to put an end to war, and to convert the means of destruction into creative tools for the benefit of mankind. It is located in the North Garden of the United Nations Headquarters. 1/Oct/2001. UN Photo/Andrea Brizzi. http://www.unmultimedia.org/photo/

    The Narrative is Shifting: Foreign Policy Course Corrections Ahead

    Roger Mitchell3 Comments

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/regenerative-farming-just-went-mainstream-heres-why-it-matters

    Whether you are a “farmer” growing food or not is not important. The underlying message in this article is that significant changes which become known do not usually happen overnight but occur as a result of hard work over a long period of time by dedicated individuals. The author explains the process quite well.

    This can be favorably related to Thomas Massie’s (R-KY) recent bill introduced into the House to require the US to withdraw from NATO. A companion bill, S2152, by Mike Lee (R-UT) can also be seen in this light. Slow, gradual progress is the order of the day, eventually producing enough weight and momentum to push the idea forward to success.

    A society, large or small, rarely changes direction dramatically and sharply as a discontinuous event. Instead, like a supertanker or aircraft carrier, the change of course begins with the unseen turning of a rudder, overlooked by nearly everyone until the new direction becomes obvious.

    The very fact that these two bills, along with the recent release of the National Security Strategy (NSS) by the White House detailing foreign policy changes show that there is some significant movement underway which most people will not see nor recognize until it bursts onto the scene, perhaps in a cataclysmic manner, akin to a dam bursting and the subsequent release of a large amount of water resulting in the destruction of everything downstream caught in its path.

    The system we have lived with and under for decades is giving way and a new one is about to be implemented. It is important to keep in mind that neither of these above-referenced bills are guaranteed passage, however, both add to the weight and pressure building on the existing structure which is trying to maintain the status quo.

    Do not discount the significance of Massie’s bill.

    Taking the Next Step…and Terrified to Do It

    Roger Mitchell3 Comments

    This is a confession of sorts. I’m trying to sort something out.

    For weeks now, my wife has been binge watching the long-running TV series, The Waltons, which detail the life of a family in the mountains of western Virginia during the Depression years of the 20th century. Just before I started writing this post, I walked by and saw Jason tell his older sister, Mary Ellen, that he didn’t know whether he could ever kill another human being, even for his country. It is important to know that Jason voluntarily signed up (against the express wishes of his mother) to serve in the National Guard at the beginning of WW2 and had been having qualms about what he was being told and taught to do should he ever have to defend himself or his comrades.

    A number of years ago, I purchased a book by John Roth, “Choosing Against War”1, and have read through it numerous times, in fact, so many that it is beginning to fall apart. I recently finished reading it again and the message resonates as loudly now (probably louder) as it did the first time I read it. Like Jason Walton, I am questioning my response should I ever be in a situation which might require the use of violent force, even the killing of another human being, to save my life and/or that of those close to and around me, especially my wife.

    Roth teaches non-violent resistance to criminal aggression as a means of defending oneself and others, answering in detail many of the arguments raised by those who do not live in his “camp”. I find his position compelling and while I don’t agree with everything he writes, nevertheless, the issue is working on me quite persistently. I just cannot stop thinking about it.

    There are two things which have shouldered their way to the front of my mind:

    1. As a stated believer in the doctrine of Jesus Christ, the ultimate peacemaker, can I claim to be His disciple in all truth, yet still cling to the idea that someone else’s life is dispensable should I decide to pull the trigger? How do I love my neighbor (definition of neighbor notwithstanding) as Jesus commands if his life is at my disposal and I choose to end it?
    2. As a stated believer who claims to trust God to take care of me, regardless of the situation, would I be overstepping that boundary if I actually did pull the trigger? Can it be said that I have faith and trust in God’s protection, except for the times when that protection is not working out the way that I think it should?

    It seems to me that these two questions are inextricably linked with the first flowing from the second. Can I even love my neighbor as Christ orders without first placing my trust in God? Ultimately, at least it seems so to me, this boils down to one thing: in order to fully embrace the policy of non-violent living, I must first open myself up to the highly vulnerable position of trusting God to perform as He has promised. Ultimately, what it means is that I have to give up the “right” to decide for myself in everything I do and surrender completely to His will, whether it results in my good or to my detriment.

    I have not come to this place easily. I know all the arguments against such a position and have made many of them myself and, to further confess my sins, in my past have even entertained the thought of shooting someone simply to know what it felt like and to have the satisfaction of doing so. Of course, that has not happened and today, if the temptation pops up, I put it out of my mind as quickly as possible because I will not succumb to it in any way, shape, or form. So help me, God!

    This is my dilemma and speaking only for myself, it is a question of whose will is going to reign supreme in my life. Do I trust God enough to surrender that power in my pursuit of becoming like Christ, because there can be no doubt on this issue. If I do not trust God completely in this manner, then I will never give it up, but will always hold that as my prerogative. Do I trust God or do I act as my own man? In essence, the decision I have to make is equivalent (is that the right word?) to the decision Jesus made in the Garden of Gethsemane just before his arrest and crucifixion.

    “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not my will, but Yours, be done.” — Luke 22:42

    I do not want advice or argument. Rather, I ask only one thing from you, if you are on speaking terms with the Almighty, say a prayer on my behalf. And, since there is strength in numbers, repost this to anyone you think would be open to it.

    1. 2002, Goodbooks, Intercourse, PA, 17534 ↩︎