The Thirst for Freedom

I’m sure you’ve been listening to the debate about “Death Panels.” Our President has called them a Myth.

I believe Sarah Palin coined the phrase here: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=113851103434

When Barack Obama tries to stop this “deception” he does so by saying it is an outright lie, there is no “death panel” in any current legislation.

I think he is missing the point. Palin is addressing the mentality behind the bills and the implications of the bills as well. She clearly shows this in a subsequent note here: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=116471698434

Here is a quote from that article:

“Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those ‘who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens….An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.’ Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which ‘produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.’” [Read More]

I just read an article that seems to show these implications coming true in the U.K. I don’t mean to attack the U.K. health system. I have never lived there. Perhaps some of my friends in the U.K. can explain. The point is not to attack a nation, but to try and really see if we can observe the “death panel” type consequences really coming true in a state health care system, whether or not that is the intent of such a system.

You can read that article at JewishWorldReview.com:

“Remember the whole controversy over ‘death panels’—the idea, as President Obama dismissively put it, that greater government control over medicine would cause bureaucrats to ‘pull the plug on grandma’?

Well, for weeks now Britain’s newspapers have been filled with articles about the National Health Service pulling the plug on grandma.” [Read More]

The story has a number of links to articles from U.K. sources about various stories where the “death panel” kind of thing is allegedly taking place.

The United States is in a Worldview War primarily between the ideas of Secular Humanism and the ideas of Christianity. (Sometimes the “Christian” ideas are even pushed by people who are not necessarily “Christian.” They just embrace some of the values.) The rest of the world is in this war as well.

I don’t think we’re at a place where a law could openly say “let those who aren’t productive die;” but it is a clear implication of contemporary worldview to let this happen. Our culture actually considers it a legitimate debate whether or not the wholesale slaughter of the unborn going on through abortion should be illegal. This is not a culture that can be trusted to force a health care plan upon us. If our culture tolerates the murder of innocent unborn children, what will end up being tolerated in the name of saving health care costs? I would suggest we avoid any expansion of government, especially in the current climate.

Just some thoughts.

I read an article today arguing that the Bible should not be used in defense of public policy views. The author makes some good points.

I am also in the midst of a discussion on this very blog. One commenter suggested that we be very careful about wanting to make our laws based on the Bible.

Here is my response as I posted it there:

God Himself led a people out of slavery and formed a nation in ancient Israel. We have no other case in history where he has done this in such an authoritative manner. We would not be wise to discount the reasonings of the only civil government ever founded directly by Supernatural Intervention from God Himself.

I do not propose such a shallow reading of the scriptures that would result in outlawing clothing made of multiple materials. However, we as humans are free to each read the Bible for ourselves and then come together to form our forms of Civil Government. Including the revolutionary Freedom Ideas from God Himself in His Law would be a good idea.

Unfortunately, not everyone accepts the Story of History as told by God in the Holy Scriptures. It would be best for those of us who do accept them to seek understanding of the reasonings behind God’s Laws, then apply those reasonings to our quest to form good law, and then present them to the world.

We can also work to persuade the world of the benefits that have resulted from Christian Civilization.

Most importantly of all we can work to invite and persuade the world to embrace Jesus and be filled with the Holy Spirit. A bunch of people filled with God can still disagree, but at least we would be pursuing the same goal – the Character of the Kingdom of God manifest right here on earth while we await Jesus’ imminent return.

“The true test is, whether the object be of a local character, and local use; or, whether it be of general benefit to the states. If it be purely local, congress cannot constitutionally appropriate money for the object. But, if the benefit be general, it matters not, whether in point of locality it be in one state, or several; whether it be of large, or of small extent.”

– Joseph Story (Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833)

Where did I find this quote? – PatriotPost.us