Monthly Archives: May 2022

EDITORIAL

A Bigger Problem Than Guns And School Shootings

6 Comments

I was about to address my thoughts concerning the recent school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, but I realized that there is a bigger problem than guns and school shootings. You ask what could be a bigger problem than the death of so many innocent children? Well, if you will give me just a few minutes of your day, I’ll explain it to you.

The problem that I consider bigger than the death of these children is the death of Truth. Yes, I realize that, just by writing these words, I am illustrating the problem I am trying to explain. However, I wonder how many of those who read this will understand what the problem is at this point in my blog post. I suspect the answer will be, ‘very few.’

When I said that Truth is dead, I capitalized ‘Truth’ for a reason. Today, it is common to hear people saying things such as, “What’s true for you may not be true for me,” or, “Your truth is not my truth.” Surprisingly, these statements are correct, but the key to understanding the problem on which I am focusing lies in understanding why I say these statements are correct. You see, these statements use the word, ‘truth,’ but they do not mean ‘Truth,’ they mean ‘belief,‘ and the two ‘truths‘ are not the same. Confused? OK, let me try to clear things up for you.

In the statements, “What’s true for you may not be true for me,” or, “Your truth is not my truth,” the word, ‘truth,’ is being used in place of ‘belief.’ Allow me to see if I can explain it this way:

“Your truth — that red is the best of all colors — is not my truth, because yellow is clearly the best of all colors.”

In this case, the statement is correct: your ‘truth‘ is not my ‘truth.’ In my illustration, your ‘truth‘ holds red to be the best of all colors whereas, my ‘truth‘ contends that yellow is the best of all colors. In this case, the statement is true: your ‘truth‘ is not my ‘truth.’

However, this is not the way I am using the word, ‘truth,’ when I write ‘Truth.’ When I write, ‘Truth,’ I mean ‘objective reality,’ meaning: that with which we cannot disagree and still claim to be rational. What do the two different meanings for the word, ‘truth,’ have to do with a bigger problem than gun control and school shootings? Simple: our society no longer sees or accepts the difference between these two meanings. Today, our society believes ‘truth‘ and ‘Truth‘ are the same things.

If you still do not see the problem, or you see it and you do not agree that it is a bigger issue than guns and school shootings, let me try to drive home my point by using the words of a famous Enlightenment philosopher:

Here is the point: ‘truth’ and ‘Truth’ are not equal, but using them as though they are equal — or worse — demanding they be accepted as equal is not only a fallacy, it is a contradiction. In logic, a contradiction is called an ‘absurdity,’ and it is said that, from an absurdity, “All things follow!” You see, Voltaire was merely putting a foundational principle of logic into colloquial terms (e.g., he stated a logical rule in common language).

This is why I say we have a bigger problem than guns and school shootings: because a large number of people in our society have been convinced of an absurdity. For these people, their ‘truth‘ is that contradictions can be and are acceptable as ‘Truth.’ To put this in logical terms, these people believe who believe in this absurdity are ‘irrational.‘ However, if the belief is strong enough, then the medical term for them would be, ‘delusional,’ which also explains why they cannot be reached by objective fact or sound reason. Unfortunately, this is still not the true problem I am seeing.

It is quite obvious that a large part of our society is delusional; they clearly embrace absurdities (such as we can choose or biological sex as opposed to our sexual orientation). No, the real problem is that the rest of our society has accepted these delusional people among us as ‘normal‘ when they clearly are not. This is a problem because it is also an absurdity, which means the majority of those people who think they are ‘normal‘ are just as delusional as those who have accepted the claim that ‘truth‘ and ‘Truth‘ are equal. Doing the math on this one means that the majority of our modern society is delusional, and the logical extension of this conclusion is:

Those who convinced us to embrace our delusions can now make us commit great atrocities…

In my calculus, my dear friends, that is a far greater problem than guns and school shootings because it means we are one manipulative nut case away from making NAZI Germany look like Mother Teresa’s convent, and — unfortunately — our world is filled with nut-jobs fighting for the right to push us over that edge.

EDITORIAL

I Was Told To Put Up Or Shut Up, So…

5 Comments

I haven’t been writing much lately. I have plenty to say, I just wasn’t sure whether it would be helpful or not — so I kept my big mouth (keyboard) closed. In truth, I have been wondering whether I should just stop blogging all together. Long-term readers are probably tired of this theme by now. However, this time, I took it to YHWH in prayer. I asked Him for a clear sign as to whether or not I should keep blogging and, if so, how best to use what He has given me to serve Him by helping others find Truth. Well, I got the sign I wanted. It was just short of a figurative 4 X 4 to the back of my head.

Some of you may know that, for a while, I was a monthly guest on a local talk radio show in Valdosta, Georgia. Well, the host of that show was fired for speaking the truth and, instead of just giving up, he started his own video cast. It’s called, ‘Freedom with Steve Nichols,’ and he is usually live Monday — Friday from 6 – 9 EST. It seems that Steve was not content with just doing his own Facebook show. He is in the process of building a media network similar to that of Blaze TV. His goal is to eventually have an entire line of different types of video and blogging content for those who are seeking news and commentary outside of the controlled media most of us watch now.

Anyway, a day or two after I asked YHWH for a sign about what He wants me to do with this blog, Steve called and offered me a slot on his new network. I accepted. Steve has promised me free reign as to the content of my show (which is the only way I would have accepted his offer, and I think he knows that 😉 ). I am currently in the process of trying to work out a format for my show right now. It will be called, ‘The Road To Concord,’ and I will be the host. At first, it will probably only be 2 or 3 1-hour video blogs a week, but I am going to try to work up to a 3-hour live show with callers. I will not get ‘preachy,’ but I can guarantee that the Scriptures will find their way into the content of my show. Most likely, I’ll follow the example of our Founding Fathers and just quote them without citing the chapter and verse. However, I am considering an hour a week, or even a full show every week where I discuss the Biblical principles upon which our nation and the Western World were founded. Like I said, I’m still working things out.

This is where you come in, and why I am writing. I no longer do any of this for myself. I do it for whoever finds value in it. So, I am asking for reader feedback. What would you like to see me add to my show content? I have already had one reader tell me she likes the idea of ‘Headline Fridays,’ where I read and comment on selected stories from the previous week. Rush Limbaugh and G Gordon Liddy both used to do this early in their careers, and I found it to be one of my favorite parts of their shows. I was also thinking of doing a semi-regular series on ‘The Principles of Natural Law,’ ‘Logic,’ ‘Applied Logic,’ and others. Still, I would like to hear your opinions. I hope you’ll take a moment to offer your thoughts and comments below. I look forward to reading them.

I will update you again as soon as I have solid information as to when the video blog starts. Also, you will see some major changes to this blog when this all happens. My show and this blog will be tied together and mutually supportive, so, things are going to have to change. I’d be happy to hear suggestions about how I might improve the blog, as well.

Thanks for reading and stay safe out there,

B3A

Abortion, THE CONSTITUTION, THE FOUNDING IDEALS

There Is Not Now, Nor Has There EVER Been A ‘Right’ To Murder An Unborn Child — AND I CAN PROVE IT!

With the recent SCOTUS ruling ending Roe vs Wade and sending the issue of abortion back to the States, I think it is time that we understand this simple fact:

There Is Not Now, Nor Has There EVER Been A ‘Right’ To Murder An Unborn Child!

This is 100% fact, and every lawyer who has bothered to study the Founders knows this. I will now prove it. Stay with me, this will not take long.

“Before the formation of this Constitution, it had been affirmed as a self-evident truth, in the declaration of Independence, very deliberately made by the Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that, “all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” This declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union and has never been disannulled. May we not from hence conclude, that the doctrine of Liberty and Equality is an article in the political creed of the United States.”

– Samuel Adams, United States Founding Father, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, “Father of the American Revolution”, Governor of Massachusetts, “The Writings of Samuel Adams”, Harry Alonzo Cushing, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), Vol. IV, p. 357, to the Legislature of Massachusetts on January 17, 1794.

Why does this matter? Because a key player in the creation of this nation, the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution said that the Declaration is our founding document, not the Constitution. What’s more, according to Sam Adams, if the Declaration has not been disannulled (and it hasn’t, it’s only been severed from the Constitution), then it is still in force. Which means this clause is law, and even a first grader can understand what it means:

“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,…”

FULL STOP! Right there, in our founding document, we see that we are created with the Right to life — period! Creation is the moment of conception, therefore, this ends the debate. But I will go one further, to provide a second witness:

“Human life from its commencement to its close is protected by the common law. In the contemplations of law life begins when the infant is fist able to stir in the womb by the law is protected.”

— James Wilson, signer of the Declaration and Constitution

There you go: abortion would have been considered murder by our Founders. But wait! You say this allows abortion up to the point where the child first starts to move? Wrong! The reason this is the point stated by the Founders is because — in their time — this was the earliest you could be sure you were pregnant. You see, they did not have early pregnancy tests back then. So, they set the point where it was clear that a woman was with child: the quickening.

There you go: a proof so simple a child can understand it.

The Declaration of Independence is our founding document and it carries the weight of law.

The Declaration states that Rights are granted by God, and that the Right to life begins at the moment of conception (creation).

Common law recognizes the unborn as a person and protects the child’s life while still in the womb.

Now, please, stop trying to justify murder! And stop saying that you have a right over your own body: the unborn child is not your body. If you cannot be responsible for your actions, then do not have sex!

Otherwise, accept it: you want to be allowed to murder an innocent child, and you do not want to be judged for your irresponsible behaviors, but you also want others to tell you you are the victim and to even pay for your evil acts. NO! I will do none of that!

Now, STOP THIS LAWLESSNESS!

Either abstain from sex, or accept the responsibility for your actions. Just don’t claim you have a right to murder an innocent person.

[NOTE: YES! I am saying that all the lawyers who disagree with this post are wrong! NO! I do not need a law degree to say so! The Supreme Court knows this is all true, and if they don’t, then they are not qualified to hold their seat. The Court is not stupid; they just don’t care. The truth is simple: there are so few people left in our legal system who actually know what a fact is — let alone how to find them; and so few people who know what an oath is — let alone bother to keep theirs — that it is seen as an act of subversion when a principled officer of the law states facts and defends the law. So many of our ‘debates’ could be ended if we were to just read the Founders’ words and stop with what they said. But then, this would not allow the tyrants among us any room to subvert and destroy this nation, so we can’t have anything like that — not so long as they have power…]