Go to: => TOP Page; What's New? Page; ROAD MAP; Shopping Mall; Emmaus Ministries Page; Search Page
F. Earle Fox
[NOTE: I was told that because I rejected the kind of "death counseling" mandated in the ObamaCare package as being of the type that Hitler might propose, that I would be rejecting reasonable pastoral care for persons in (for example) my parish who were dying, that I would be the one in step with Hitler. I responded with the following.....]
Xxxx, some of your comments are contrary to common sense.
There is quite a difference between what a bureaucracy might do in death situation vs. a pastor or a local church community. But, yes, I would be in step with Hitler -- IF I were counseling someone to commit assisted suicide -- which is quite different from agreeing with a dying person asking for 'no more medical aid'.
Terry Shiavo was murdered by the government, in defiance of most of her intimate family. It was, quite literally, at gunpoint, with marshals around to "protect" her death from family intervention.
Pastors and churches do not do that.
The proposed govt. "let-us-help-you-die" program is mandatory, i.e., at gunpoint. You SHALL every five years have a consultation designed to invite you to commit suicide. For Christians, suicide is not an option. The alleged right to die will soon morphe into a duty to die -- because you will have lost your (bureaucracy-determined) "human value".
Pastors and churches do not do that.
A pastoral call by a minister or priest is decided by the person being called on or by the family. That is a totally different kind of situation from government nosing in. If you think the government (whose task is by nature coercive) can be your pastor, well, good luck. Anything which, like civil government, is coercive needs to be tied down with the chains of the Constitution (as one of our founding fathers said) to ensure that that power will be used under the law and grace of God for the benefit of the people, not for their enslavement. Obama and his evil-minded crew are loosing the chains which have tied down a tyranny. It is, I think, no accident.
Obama et al are in effect, uniting church and state in the most dangerous of ways, by stealing the roles of churches, families, and free enterprise medical services and putting them under coercive force. If that is not tyranny, what needs to be added to make it so? You could say we are voting on it. Yes, indeed. But you can vote yourself into a tyranny from which you cannot vote yourself out. See Nazi Germany.
Most Americans neither need nor want the government to be their pastor. "Hello! I'm from the government and I am here to help you!" Thanks, but no thanks.
Furthermore, there is no federal permission whatsoever, nothing in the Constitution, which puts welfare, education, or participation in commerce within the range of allowed federal activities, including providing insurance. The Constitution is black and white clear about that.
The Globalist crowd does not care what the Constitution says. They want power, not freedom for the people. And certainly not honest redistribution of wealth. They know how to skim the cream off the top. If one wants wealth redistributed, do it God's way -- start by contributing one's own.
Here is a good story to read:
http://www.theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/21PbAr/Pl/CrockettWlfr.htm on Davy Crockett and welfare.
Crockett understood the Constitution. And, significantly, when he offered to personally help pay for the welfare under consideration (rather than illegally vote tax monies for the project), and asked the other senators to pony up as well, not one did. That is typical of pseudo-liberals, who want to spend everyone else's money, but not their own. It is true today still. Conservative and religious persons are significantly more generous than "liberals" -- who apparently want the government to tax others to be generous for them.
Certain leadership in the federal govt. has been for several decades consistently trashing the constitution in a power grab. All those activities mentioned are forbidden, yes, forbidden, to the Fed Govt (see Article 10 of the Bill of Rights). The govt. is to be our referee, not a participant in the game. Conflict of interest, you know.
When outside its delegated authority, the government can only screw things up. And regularly does. Need I mention (again) Death by Government by RJ Rummel? ( http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/ ) Secular centralized government produced the most brutal century in human history -- our vaunted 20th. Is not that a bit of evidence worth considering -- about the nature of healthy and unhealthy government?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *