My Answers To A University Student

I often receive inquiries from college and university students. Contrary
to the thinking of most older adults, I find a sizable
number of today`s youth much more constitutionally aware
than are their parents. I`ve traveled all over America
and spoken to thousands of high school and college age
young people. My observation is this: the youth of
America have not rejected the message of liberty and
constitutional government; they haven`t HEARD the
message of liberty and constitutional government. When
they do hear it, as often as not, they embrace the
message enthusiastically. If the



Ron Paul Revolution of 2008

proved anything, it proved that!

Recently, a student from a prestigious university wrote me with a short
list of questions for a thesis he is writing, which is
entitled,
"The Effect of the
Evangelical Movement on the 2008 Presidential Election."

He reads my columns and was motivated to ask me to
contribute to his report. I am using today`s column to
answer his questions.



Question:

"What, in your
opinion, is the best way for the government and
religious organizations to interact?"



Answer:

The best way for government and religious institutions
to interact is the same way that government and
virtually all institutions should interact: by the
government staying the heck out of their business!

Unfortunately, government at every level has grown into a monstrous



Nanny State

that intimidates, coerces, and almost controls
practically every institution and organization (public
and private) in America. The number of government
bureaucracies and enforcement agencies at the local,
State, and federal levels is so gargantuan that it is
impossible to accurately keep track of them all. And it
seems each agency and department`s sole job is to
justify its own existence by harassing, intimidating,
and manipulating individuals and institutions. Nothing
is different regarding religious institutions. In order
to stay on the smiley side of government (especially the
IRS), religious institutions have largely become the
sheepish slaves of the state.



Question:

"How do you think
the government keeps religious organizations from
affecting policy?"



Answer:

I KNOW how the government keeps religious organizations
from affecting policy:



through the IRS 501(c)(3) non-profit corporate
tax-exempt status

that practically every church in America submits to.

The now infamous 501(c)(3) section of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC)
goes back to 1936 (the seeds of this Venus Fly Trap date
back to 1872). But then-
Senator
Lyndon Johnson
was the Dr. Frankenstein who, in 1954, unleashed
this monster upon America. His motivation was: he did
not like the way pastors and churches were opposing his
liberal agenda, and he wanted to use the power of law to
silence them. He, therefore, introduced verbiage to the
IRC that churches were prohibited from influencing
political legislation and supporting political
campaigns, or risk losing their tax-exempt status.

Over time, fear of offending the 501(c)(3) criteria of the IRC has been
used to intimidate pastors and church leaders to the
point that, for all intents and purposes, they are
"scared silly"
to try and affect meaningful change to government
policy. The result: 300,000 evangelical churches are
almost totally impotent to impact or change American
culture, societal conditions, or the political
landscape.



Question:

"Do you think an
evangelical Christian organization should have a
political extension (i.e. lobbyists) of itself on
Capitol Hill?"



Answer:

There are numerous organizations associated with the
"Religious Right" that have political lobbyists on Capitol Hill.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with this. The
problem comes when the organization and lobbyists
themselves become part of the
"good old boy"
network that seems to be intricately associated with
cavorting with the power elite. What normally happens
is, in order to maintain the organization`s
"seat at the
table,"
it quickly compromises the principles that
originally created it. And pretty soon, instead of
influencing Capitol Hill, the organization finds itself
influenced and manipulated by Capitol Hill. In essence,
that is the sordid story of how the Religious Right,
which was so powerful back in the 1980s, has become the
impotent entity that we see today.



Question:

"How do you think
Christians use their faith to make political decisions?"



Answer:

Most Christians would have you believe that their faith
is very instrumental in making their political
decisions. However, just the opposite is true: the
average Christian`s politics is void of any genuine
Christian faith. It seems, therefore, most Christians
base their political decisions on the principles of
"pragmatism,"
choosing the
"lesser of two evils,"
or based wholly on political
partisanship. The last two Presidential elections are
prime examples of this unfortunate reality.

Evangelical Christians overwhelmingly supported George W. Bush in his
reelection bid in 2004, despite Bush`s egregious
departure from conservative, constitutionalist
principles throughout his first administration. They,
then, continued to blindly support Bush throughout his
second administration as he continued to promote
globalist, big government policies and agendas.

During the election of 2008, Christians supported big government CFR
candidate John McCain, even though McCain has a career
track record of betrayal to true conservative
principles. Notable Christian leaders such as Focus on
the Family`s James Dobson supported McCain, even after
publicly promising to
"never"
support him.

Over and over, election after election, Christians prove that they will
not let their Christianity get in the way of their
politics.



Question:

"How did
evangelicals and conservatives have an effect on the
2008 presidential election?"



Answer:

As noted above, Christian conservatives, on the whole,
supported John McCain, even though they knew he would
never be faithful to conservative principles. However,
in spite of the support of evangelical leaders, many
grassroots conservatives and constitutionalists could
not vote for McCain in good conscience. For example,
many Ron Paul conservatives voted for third party
candidates such as Bob Barr or myself, or didn`t vote at
all. And this was true of many conservative
independents, as well. As a result, Barack Obama won
handily.



Question:

"Why do
evangelicals typically align themselves with the
Republican Party?"



Answer:

I was the Executive Director of the Florida Moral
Majority back in the 1980s, and I witnessed the marriage
between the GOP and Christian conservatives up close.
Without a doubt, the two terms of President Ronald
Reagan is the single biggest reason why Christian
conservatives are so enamored with the Republican Party
today. Before Reagan, the GOP was seen (properly) as a
political extension of Big Business. The Democrat Party
was seen (properly) as a political extension of Big
Labor. Christians were critical of both parties and
approached each candidate on a more individual and
objective basis. Example: without a doubt, Christian
conservatives elected Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976.
Ronald Reagan changed all that. He obtained almost
god-like status in the thinking of many evangelicals.
Therefore, ever since Reagan, GOP stands for
"God`s Own Party" in the minds of many evangelicals. As a result, no
matter how liberal, socialist, or globalist a Republican
Presidential nominee might be now, most evangelicals
will support him or her, simply because there is an
"R" behind
the name. Mark it down: if the GOP nominates the big
government globalist chameleon and serial adulterer Newt
Gingrich as its Presidential candidate in 2012, most
evangelicals will support him.



Question:

"In your opinion,
do you think it`s wrong for clergy to endorse
politicians from the pulpit, or in another leading
function within the congregation?"



Answer:

Absolutely not! A clergyman did not lose his American
citizenship when he was ordained to the ministry. Again,
this goes back to Johnson`s 501(c)(3) monstrosity.
Pastors have been duped and intimidated into believing
that they have no right to express their personal
opinions or convictions from the pulpit. This is
historical and constitutional balderdash!

Can one imagine colonial preachers John Leland, Jonas Clark, or John
Witherspoon being told by any State official what he
could or could not say, or what his church could or
could not do, or whom he could or could not support?
What a joke! These men explained, extolled,
extrapolated, and engrained the Biblical Natural Law
principles of liberty so deeply into the minds and
hearts of their congregants, that when the time came,
those Christian patriots stood on Lexington Green and
Concord Bridge and fired that shot heard `round the
world.



Question:

"Is there a way
that a church can become both a spiritual and political
organization? If so, which path do you think is best?"



Answer:

Churches are not political institutions; they should
never desire to be. However, they are promoters of
truth. And truth is truth, whether it finds itself in
the political arena or any other arena. Pastors and
churches are obligated to be faithful to the truth, and
let the chips fall where they may! The problem is, many
pastors and churches have purposely avoided truth when
it butts up against politics. Their fear of the IRS, or
of being considered
"politically incorrect," or of, perhaps, offending church members
has made cowards out of many of them. And as a result,
our country is in the calamitous condition that we see
today.

Dr. Chuck Baldwin recently left the Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola,
Florida to move to Montana. He hosts a


weekly radio show
. His
website is


here
.