The Political Landscape In America

Roger Anghis

Some say that politics are the same today as they were two hundred years ago. The basics may be but the purpose has changed drastically. When our nation was founded there was a genuine interest to make the nation succeed and not just for the sake of the nation but for the sake of the people.

Our Founders believed that each person was responsible for themselves and their families. There was no government aid. Those elected were genuinely concerned with the economic environment to make it easy to be able to do business and provide for your family. Were there those that sought to take unfair advantage of others for personal gain. Yes, but these people were dealt with swiftly when they were found out.

People, during the early years of our nation, put a lot of stock into a person’s character because a man’s reputation was his greatest asset. Most people lived by biblical values, unlike today when Christian principles are shunned and even mocked. America’s Christian principles created the most powerful, most prosperous and most respected nation this world has ever seen. As the world ekes its way towards a one-world government, the pressure to be part of that may become too great to stay separated. If that government was the same type of government our Founders established, that would be one thing, but what we are seeing is a socialistic government which demands to be a person’s source from cradle to the grave, false religion stupidity that will bring mankind to its knees. The only government that has proven, for longer than any other government, to be successful is what was laid out in the Declaration of Independence and in the United States Constitution. It has no rivals. All others have failed. The principles set out in the Constitution are unmatched on any continent in any period of time. It is simply the best government ever devised by man. Even then the foundation of it was derived from Scripture which is why it has been so successful.

From the 1600’s the principles that were set out in the Constitution had been preached from the pulpit. The principles of property ownership were preached from the pulpit. The idea of the people limiting government and having a government of the people, by the people, and for the people was preached from the pulpit. All of the grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence were preached from the pulpit as factions of a society that was detrimental to society. [1]

Why do we see such a shift from a society that prided itself in personal responsibility and living in accordance with the principles laid out in scripture to a society that shuns Christianity and embraces an ideology that removes all freedoms that we have enjoyed for the last 243 years? I believe the problem lies solely at the feet of the pastors. There have been so many changes in our society that the pastors never resisted. These changes didn’t come all at once but one small change here and another here until we now have a church that is hard to recognize as a church that supposedly represents Jesus Christ. No true church of Jesus Christ embraces homosexuality, nor does it embrace living together outside of marriage. The pastors of the Founding Era were men of strong character. The pastors were the primary leaders of towns and villages. The church was the center of activity. Education was attained and taught in churches and the Bible was the center of it all. All this history has been removed from our history books and ignored. We are in danger of forgetting who we are. This is being done in a calculated move to make the founding of America no better than any other nation. [2]

The pastors have allowed the strength of the Gospel to be diluted by ignoring the humanism that has crept into society. In all towns leading up to and after our fight for independence, businesses would close down on Sunday and most people would attend church. This practice has not been seen in my lifetime. The people that were placed into positions of authority were well known by the people and had a reputation of good character and living by biblical principles.

Judges, in particular, were required to have biblical knowledge. James Kent, though not a Founder, was instrumental in establishing our law system. He is referred to as the Father of American Jurisprudence. In a case in 1811 that involved blasphemy against Jesus Christ, People vs Ruggles, a case that would never see the inside of a courtroom today, he sentenced a man to three months in jail and fined $500.00 for derogatory comments concerning Jesus and His mother Mary. He stated: Such words uttered with such a disposition were an offense at common law. In the Taylor’s case the defendant was convicted upon information of speaking similar words, and the Court. . . said that Christianity was parcel of the law, and to cast contumelious [rude] reproaches upon it, tended to weaken the foundation of moral obligation, and the efficacy of oaths.

Whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to the dissolution of civil government. . . the authorities show that blasphemy against God and. . . profane ridicule of Christ or the Holy Scriptures (which are equally treated as blasphemy), are offenses punishable at common law, whether uttered by words or writings. . . because it tends to corrupt the morals of the people and to destroy good order. [3]

Today our judges show little regard to biblical principles nor do they regard the Constitution even though they are sworn to uphold our Constitution when adjudicating a case. Justice Ginsburg is not shy about making her case in public speeches, and she did just that at an Ohio State symposium honoring her 15 years on the bench. Ginsburg argued that the Supreme Court is losing its relevance in the international community in failing to use international law as persuasive authority. She went on that the Canadian Supreme Court is probably cited more often than the U.S. Supreme Court because “you will not be listened to if you don’t listen to others.”

“Why shouldn’t we look to the wisdom of a judge from abroad with at least as much ease as we would read a law review article from a professor,” asks Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She went on, “I frankly don’t understand all the brouhaha lately from Congress and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law.”

At his confirmation hearing, Justice Roberts disagreed with Ginsburg’s position. “If we’re relying on a decision from a German judge about what our Constitution means, no president accountable to the people appointed that judge and no Senate accountable to the people confirmed that judge…And yet he’s playing a role in shaping the law that binds the people in this country.”

Justice Scalia’s dissent in Texas v. Johnson goes even further. He calls the discussion of international law “meaningless” and “dangerous” because the opinion’s author (Justice Stevens) quoted only international law that supported his position and because the court “should not impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.” ⁴

Our nation was made great by following God’s principles and our government is based on scripture. We’ve had many people in office from both parties but their governing principles were basically the same but today we have most politicians look at what is best for the world totally disregarding the consequences or the costs to the American people as well as ignoring the principles that made our nation the greatest nation the world had ever seen.

In the beginning, you had to be a consistent church attendee, today you are considered not qualified if you have strong Christian beliefs.

E-Mail Roger Anghis: roger@buildingthetruth.org

Foot Notes

Defining America’s Exceptionalism, Roger Anghis (Westbow Press, Bloomington, IN) pp. 15-16
Defining America’s Exceptionalism, Roger Anghis (Westbow Press, Bloomington, IN) p. 16
Defining America’s Exceptionalism, Roger Anghis (Westbow Press, Bloomington, IN) p. 192
Justice Ginsburg defends using foreign courts as persuasive authority