Moral Decay: Unchristian Christians and anti-Judaism Jews

21 Jan

The GOP presidential primary has revealed two inconvenient truths, namely, there are Christians who oppose the Golden Rule, ignore other fundamental principles of their faith and claim to be steadfast for “family values” as they support Newt Gingrich, and there are Jews who claim to be “conservatives,” i.e., advocates of limited government but support unequivocally big government overseas, while embracing most big government policies at home as well.

As I was watching the FOX GOP presidential debate earlier in the week where Rep. Ron Paul stated that our foreign policy could use a little dose of the Golden Rule, some (many?) South Carolinians booed his answer, because it was not sufficiently a blood thirsty response to our military interventions in the Middle East.  Without knowing who booed and their religious affiliation, it is safe to surmise that virtually all the members of the audience were Christians.  Thus, when it comes to U.S. foreign policy, the Christians in the audience embrace one approach, which Newt Gingrich articulated succinctly and received huge applause, “kill them.”

If Gingrich is the GOP nominee, a 2012 version of John McCain, he will be crushed in the general election, because a majority of the American people do not want more U.S. involvement in the Middle East and realize the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.  And after ten years in Afghanistan, the no closer to stabilizing the political situation there.

So how about using diplomacy to end disputes overseas , especially given the heighten tensions with Iran?  Nah, that’s for “appeasers.”  Withdrawal from the Middle East?  Nah, that would be admitting defeat and a retreat of our superpower status.  So by booing the Golden Rule South Carolina Christians reveal they have only hate in their hearts for Middle Eastern Muslims, who do not want to be dominated by any superpower or other nations.

But the followers of Jesus have turned their back on another fundamental moral principle, namely, that war is nothing more than state sanctioned mass murder, and that only a “just” war is tolerable, not preemptive war.

In addition, Tom Woods argues that Catholics should support Ron Paul because of the important principle of subsidiarity instead of Rick Santorum, who never forgets to remind us of his Italian-Catholic roots.

As for some of my fellow Jews, Ron Paul is unacceptable as the GOP presidential nominee apparently because he is not sufficiently “pro-Israel.”  I do not know what being “pro-Israel” means.

Israelis a sovereign nation with an elected government, a strong military and a fairly vibrant economy.  The fact that Israel has disputes with Palestinians and its indigenous Arab citizens must be resolved by the Israeli government.  Ron Paul has always argued that Israel should have its own foreign policies based on its interests and not be dependent on U.S. foreign aid.  Rep. Paul wants to end all foreign aid, not just toIsrael.

Moreover, American Jews are not a monolith.  There are Jews who vote exclusively for Democrats, and those who vote exclusively for Republicans.  There are Jews who oppose American intervention in the Middle East and there are Jews who are the biggest neoconservatives in America, and want American global hegemony to continue.    And there are Jews who embrace the welfare state, the redistribution of income and other big government policies. But Jews who claim to be limited government supporters should be in Ron Paul’s corner.  Why?

More than forty years ago, I was watching a Sunday morning television program about Passover and a rabbi said that the essence of Judaism is the sovereignty of the individual.  I have never forgotten those words.  The rabbi’s statement is in effect the essence of the liberty message that Ron Paul has been articulating throughout his political career.

Both Christians and Jews, therefore, if they are true to their faiths, should rally around Ron Paul’s candidacy so they can elect someone to presidency who will embrace the Golden Rule, family values, the just war principle, and individual liberty. In other words, the American people have the opportunity to elect an unequivocal proponent Judeo-Christian values.  Isn’t that what all faithful Christians and Jews should want in their president?

  1. gcdugas

    January 23, 2012 at 12:49 am

    John King was bamboozled with sheer brazenness and bullying bluster of a raving sociopath. Startled by Gingrich’s in-your-face nastiness, he never regained his composure enough to think clearly and then “agree” with Newt that such tawdry stuff should not be a focal point and then put the screws to Gingrich by demanding an on-the-spot apology for the way he treated Clinton.

    Step #1)
    We should make a internet petition go viral (and plant it on several left-wing sites as well) demanding that Newt issue a public apology. Even make a simple YouTube of Newt in the 90’s blovating piously about Clinton’s peccadilloes and then lace in some clips when Newt was dressing down John King. MUST MAKE this idea as viral as possible.

    Step #2)
    Anticipating silence from the official Gingrich camp, Dr. Paul should immediately make reliability and consistency an issue by saying…. “the American people deserve to know where a candidate stands on things. If Mr. Gingrich has changed his mind on the matter, the people deserve to know… Do you want to take the time right now to offer Bill Clinton an apology for the way you treated him?”

    And Dr. Paul should refuse to go any further until he had secured that apology from the Newtster on-the-spot. Newt would have no choice but to offer that apology or admit guilt to prima-facia hypocrisy and lying.

    This what we need to do… Start everything we can do to bombard every corner of social media and the blogosphere with the online petition and somehow get through to the RP campaign and have Doug Wead drop this same bomb when he is interviewed live on the morning shows. We MUST NOT relent until Newt cries “uncle” in public humiliation.