 From 1974 and until he passed away in June of 2005, Frank Caw devoted a considerable amount of time to research and study in Bible prophecy and related philosophical and theological issues. This website is dedicated by his family to his memory and work and is as he presented it at the time of his death. The family of Frank Caw, Jr. would like to thank Tim McHyde of EscapeAllTheseThings.com for hosting his website.
While always insisting on a plain, literal and sensible approach to scriptural exegesis,
he has pieced together many new scriptural insights on a number of extraordinary
prophetic developments that are poised to be fulfilled in our immediate
future!
Thus, it is safe to say that things are not going to happen the way many people think
they will happen.
But, this book will give you the scriptural keys for truly understanding what God has
preordained will happen, and how you can survive the incredible scenario of prophetic
events about to unfold! |
This ministry is dedicated to the loving memory of my
late wife, Debbie, who went to be in the presence of God on October 23, 1997, and who was
so instrumental in helping me to prepare for my ministry during those many long, difficult
years.
|
|
|
Why Liberals Should Not
Impose
Their Values On Others
An Ipsos poll says that 25 percent of adults believe it is at least somewhat likely that Jesus Christ will return to Earth in 2007 2008. Of white evangelical Christian adults it's 66%. Want to know why Jesus won't come in 2007 2008, before most find out in Jan 1, 2008 2009? »» Read Featured Article
If liberals truly want political unity and harmony and pluralism in this country as they profess, they should
quit trying to impose their secular, socialist world view and value system on everyone else through the
legal force of government.
Instead, they should allow everyone, including Bible-believing Christians, the freedom to live their lives
peacefully according to the dictates of their conscience and their religious-philosophical world view —
especially in matters pertaining to the rearing and education of their
children.
To quote Thomas Jefferson in his First Inaugural Address: "A wise and frugal government, which
shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own
pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.
This is the sum of good government..."
In other words, the primary function of government is simply to restrain people from injuring one another,
but otherwise leaving them free to regulate their own pursuits in life.
In like manner, James Madison concurred with Thomas Jefferson when he made the following
statements in The Federalist Papers, No. 45:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and
defined.
"Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and
indefinite.
"The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign
commerce...
"The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of
affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and
prosperity of the State."
Likewise, the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows: "The enumeration in the
Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the
people."
In other words, we, the people, retain every single right that has not been expressly restricted or taken
away by the Constitution even though some of those retained rights were enumerated
specifically.
Accordingly, retained rights include things such as the right to privacy, self-defense, free speech, gun
ownership, freedom of religious expression, freedom of association, property rights, and many other
rights too numerous to mention.
Furthermore, the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows: "The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States respectively, or to the people."
In other words, the government has no authority to engage in any activity that is not specifically and directly
authorized and permitted by the Constitution.
So, the Federal Government originally was granted a constitutional mandate to exercise only a very
few, limited, and carefully-defined powers divided among the three branches of government; all other
power was reserved to the state governments and individuals.
Thus, the sovereignty and freedom of the individual was maximized as much as possible, while the
power and sovereignty of government was minimized as much as possible to the extent deemed
necessary for the safety and security of people.
That is how a very limited, constitutional, republic form of government should operate in a pluralistic
society.
A truly free society where individuals are "free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement"
in a peaceful and honest and voluntary manner, thereby releasing their creative energies in a free market
system unhampered by countless numbers of counterproductive laws and regulations and confiscatory levels of excessive
taxation.
One thing is obvious. You can be certain that the Founding Fathers never envisioned the creation of
the gigantic, invasive, bureaucratic, socialistic government we have today in Washington D.C., a very
intrusive and centralized form of government that is the very epitome of what they hated and feared so
much.
Accordingly, one of the most important issues facing our society today is the collective decision regarding
the extent to which society and government should impose their collective will on everyone through the
passage of laws, regulations and taxes.
Although most people never would dream of going to their neighbor’s house to rob them of their property
or to dictate the details of their social and economic affairs, it somehow seems proper (despite the
logical inconsistency) for people to band together in the voting booth and democratically authorize the
government to do so for almost any reason conceivable.
The end-result of this attitude, however, is an increasingly fragmented and envy-oriented society in which
everyone legally plunders and tyrannizes
everyone else.
However, it is my contention that in a pluralistic society, all social and economic relationships should be
peaceful and honest and voluntary in nature, and that each person should be left alone and free to do
whatever he or she pleases so long as that person does not harm others, or threaten to harm others,
through the use of force or fraud or theft.
Moreover, to be consistent, the prohibition against forceful and fraudulent aggressions should not only
prohibit all forms of physical aggression, including things such as pollution, dangerously defective products,
etc., but it should also prohibit all forms of mental aggression as well.
What I mean by this is that whether or not you accept the validity of the Christian Bible and its teachings
concerning the moral qualities and spiritual identity of man, it can not be denied that man has always
been observed as having moral motions of the conscience by which he has judged the actions of others
if not always his own.
Although moral standards have varied from culture to culture, certain things generally have been viewed
as wrong in theory if not always in practice. Among these are non-physical violations such as libel,
slander, blackmail, verbal abuse, vulgar language, and pornography.
Accordingly, when I say that psychological aggressions should be prohibited, what I mean by this is that
people should not be subjected to such things against their will, nor should such things even be allowed
to exist at all to the extent it can reasonably be demonstrated that harm to other people inevitably results
as a direct consequence.
Thus, what I am advocating for our pluralistic society is a more-consistent application of the neutral
principle of non-aggression in every area of life with exceptions to this rule reserved for extreme
situations only.
Therefore, in summary, the ideal government in a highly diverse, pluralistic society such as ours is one which
does not perpetrate aggression (via laws, regulations and taxes) except to the extent absolutely necessary
for compliance with higher moral
values involving public decency and the protection and preservation of innocent life, freedom and
property rights.
So, liberals, please do not use the legal force of government to impose your ethic on me against my
will; please do not try constantly to regulate my life even though you believe you know best about how
everyone in our society should manage their personal and social and economic
affairs.
In other words, we should live and let live. I will not try to impose my opinions and value-system on
you, nor should you try to impose your opinions and value-system on me through the legal force of
government.
NOTE: This article is based on material adapted from Chapter 3, Section 1 in my book.
Copyright © 1996-2005
Frank L. Caw, Jr.
All Rights
Reserved.
The Ultimate Deception
http://www.frankcaw.com
Send e-Mail
|
|
|
