Fair taxes and balanced budgets

Taxes are necessary for the maintenance of infrastructures, our military, and for the pay of government employees. Our tax code, however, requires a virtual Ph.D. to understand and apply correctly and there is plenty of discussion about how to both simplify the tax code and ensure that everyone pays their fair share for the welfare of our nation.  There is also the matter of an ever-growing 14 trillion dollar debt we owe as a nation, primarily to China, and how to get out from underneath such a load while maintaining a balanced budget.  Here are my suggestions.

1) Implement a flat tax rate based strictly on income.

A flat tax rate of 15% for all persons of legal voting age is fair and reasonable. It ensures that no one bears too great an economic burden but that all participate to the best of their ability. 

2) Eliminate all deductions and tax credits.

Deductions and tax credits complicate the tax code unnecessarily and create special protections for special interest groups. 

3) Eliminate all welfare and entitlement programs.

Tax money should never be used to fund charity programs of any kind. Using tax money to fund charities is like forcing a man at gun point to give his money to someone else. Not only does it breed resentment, but it also lends to distrust.  People are more likely to give when they are not forced to do so, and to give more generously when they give voluntarily. Let those who are concerned about those in need roll up their sleeves and do something about it personally or get together with other like-minded individuals and  work together to do something about the problem. 

All those who have paid into Social Security should be given a lump-sum refund along with 1% interest for each year the money was kept from them, and no more than that. Retiring for reasons other than your physical or mental incapability of working is something that should be discouraged, not endorsed. For those seniors who have reached a state where they are no longer capable physically or mentally of working, let them be cared for first by their families, then by their Church or other organization they belonged to, and then by those in the community.  

4) Where possible, replace paid government employees with volunteers.

If Americans are committed to these things, if they believe they are worth keeping, let them demonstrate their care and commitment by service and not by forcible taxation.

5) Establish a national language, and only print documents in that language.

Printing costs money, and printing in multiple languages is a huge waste of time and resources. Establish a national language (I do not care if you pick Spanish, English, Latin, or some derivative thereof, but pick one) and then only print things in that language.  Catering to those who refuse to learn the national language does not help anyone and creates an atmosphere of distrust and disunity.

Executive Order: National Defense Resources Preparedness

On March 16, 2012 President Barack Obama published a new executive order with the rather benign sounding title of National Defense Resources Preparedness.  Many worried that this order was paving the road for Obama to declare martial law.  Martial law means that all voting privileges are suspended and the rule of the people is done by police or military force.  This power is usually reserved for times of war, or times of extreme emergency when normal government operations are simply not possible.

There were some in the media who assured readers that this executive order was nothing to concern the average citizen.  Several similar executive orders have been signed in the past, and at least one media outlet claimed that there were virtually no changes between those executive orders and this one.  That media outlet either jumped the gun in reporting the facts, did not clearly understand what they read, or is in league with the President.  A close reading of the contents of this particular executive order should be enough to chill the bones of any freedom loving American.

The first point of concern comes in Part II - Priorities and Allocations under Sec. 201 (6) (b) where it states that "The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions. This is a concern because, if read correctly, this seems to mean that the authorities being granted by the president to the various agencies under control of the executive branch have the president's permission to apply every rule in this executive order not only during times of emergency but also during times of peace.

In previous similar Executive Orders, there were provisions made to limit the scope of the powers that the order granted. There is no such provision in this executive order, if anything it seems to be a broadening of the reach of the powers granted.

The second major point of concern is in Sec. 201 (6) (e) Where it grants the Secretary of the resource department the authority to "control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market".  This means that not only can the government come in and tell any business owner what to provide and to whom, but it isn't just limited to material goods.  It includes services, which means that this gives the government permission to dictate what labor someone must perform and for whom they must perform it.

The third major point of concern reinforces concerns raised in Sec. 201 (6) (e) and is found in Sec. 502 under the title Consultants.  The wording that is particularly troublesome is this, "The head of each agency....is delegated the authority of the President...to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation..."  In other words, the President has just signed an order that allows him to not only confiscate goods belonging to ordinary citizens but to enslave them, and there does not need to be an emergency for him to do this.

Welcome to the United Slave States of America.

Separating Church and State is Impossible

First, let me define the terms I am using.  Church is any body of people who share a common faith and practice a common religion.  Faith is any system of belief about how the universe came into being, how it operates, and the purpose of humanity within that universe.  Religion is the framework in which you live out your faith.  For example, Catholics believe that the universe was created by God, operates according to laws which are understandable and discoverable by humanity through scientific investigation and divine revelation, and that human beings were created by God for the purpose of loving and being loved by God.  We believe that human life begins at conception and has value because God values it and not because of anything we might or might not do. We believe that all human beings are endowed by their creator with free will. Our religion is that because our lives have the purpose of loving and being loved by God, we are happiest and healthiest when we live our lives in accordance with His will as handed down to us through Sacred Scripture, the Magisterium, and the Pope.  We defend life from conception through natural death. Even though we understand that genetics and environment may play a role in making it more difficult for someone to choose the right behaviors, we still hold people accountable for bad behavior because to do otherwise would be to treat them like animals, as animals cannot rise above these things but human beings can.

Every true Catholic brings our religion into the public square, and we cannot help but do so. It is our measuring stick by which we determine for whom to vote; what causes to support with our time, talent, and treasure; what subjects ought – or ought not – to be taught in a public school; and where our tax money should be spent.  A politician or judge who is truly Catholic will act and judge accordingly.  Those who do not act in accordance with the Catholic faith and religion do not belong to the Catholic Church.

Atheism is also a Church, although very different from the Catholic Church. Atheists believe that the universe came into being spontaneously, operates according to laws which are understandable and discoverable by humanity only through scientific investigation, and that human beings are a byproduct of the universe’s operations and therefore have no purpose at all. Most, though not all, atheists believe that human life begins outside of the womb and only gains value when it can prove itself valuable to others.  Their religion, as such, is that since their lives have no purpose it is up to each individual to determine what to do with their lives and that each individual is entitled to live as the individual sees fit provided that the individual does not substantially interfere in the right of everyone else to live the same way.   

Every atheist brings their religion into the public square.  They cannot help but do so.  It is the measuring stick by which they determine for whom to vote; what causes to support with their time, talent, and treasure; what subjects ought – or ought not – to be taught in a public school; and where their tax money should be spent. A politician or judge who is an atheist will act accordingly and judge accordingly. Any politician or person who says that their beliefs will not influence their judgment, the way they vote, or the laws they attempt to enact is a liar and should not be trusted.

Civil Disobedience and Freedom

As it becomes increasingly clear that Obama's administration intends to strip American business owners of their right to refrain from providing their employees with health insurance that includes birth control, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs, I am forced to make a decision.  I am forced to decide whether I will stand with Christ, and defend the sanctity of all human life by refusing to participate even though I know what the cost will be to me personally, or whether I will seek to save my life and my comfort and thus lose my place in eternity.  You might not be surprised to hear me say this, but I've already decided.  I am choosing to disobey Obama's mandate so that I might obey the more important mandates given to me by Christ. This means that I will not only  not be providing my employees with health insurance, but I will not be purchasing it for myself or my family either.  We will trust in God's providence for our health care, and we will deal with the consequences.

Since it is still a year before Obama's administration intends to force the issue, I will take the time now to remind people of the reason that freedom is spoken of as an inalienable right in the Declaration of Independence written and published by our forefathers in the late 1700's.  Freedom cannot ever be taken from you, and guns do not change that fact.  Someone wielding a gun does have the power to limit your choices - they can reduce the choices you have to "obey and live as a slave" or "disobey and die free".

Some might say it is crazy to trade your life for a principle or belief, but I will point out to  you that it is crazy to place your faith in someone who is so morally corrupted that they view threatening your life as an appropriate motivational tool.  If you obey the person who has the gun, you are placing your faith in their willingness to honor their promises and to do as they have told you they will do, a highly questionable thing to do given their demonstrated lack of morality. The truth is, you have no reason to believe them when they say they will let you live if you do what they tell you to do.  It is better to die doing what you believe is right than to compromise your own values in the vain hope that such a person will honor their word.

I leave you with the lyrics of a song I wrote almost two years ago, entitled Freedom. I hope that you keep these words in your heart and in your mind, and remind yourself of them no matter how dark the days may grow.

Refrain

Your freedom doesn’t end

Where the barrel of a gun begins

It’s still up to you

What are you going to do?

====================

Don’t believe the words they say

Don’t let them take your freedom away

Hold your head up high

Don’t give in to the lie

===================

They can limit your choices

They can silence your voices

But in spite of all the pain

The Truth still remains

==================

If you do what they say

They might kill you anyway

Better to choose what’s right

Than to go down without a fight

====================

Freedom takes courage

And courage takes heart

Love is the fountain

Gives courage its’ start

==============

Restoring Economic Freedom

It all started with the passing of the abomination of a bill known as Obamacare.  This law was supposed to care for the poor, making sure that no one went without health care services.  In reality, all it did was take away the freedom of Americans to decide when, where, and whether to purchase health insurance.  Next, the Obama Administration approved a mandate by the Secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services which would require all employers, including religious organizations who served or employed people outside of their own faith, to purchase health insurance that would include free birth control, free abortion-inducing drugs, and free sterilizations to their employees. In response to the immediate and fervent uproar that arose from religious leaders of all faiths, the Obama Administration said that they would no longer require employers to provide the free birth control, abortion-inducing drugs, and sterilizations to their employees.  The caveat, of course, was that the Administration has now mandated that all insurance carriers provide these things to those they insure.

This is not merely an issue of religious freedom, as many are calling it, but an issue of economic freedom. Will we allow this administration to tell us what we have to buy? Are we going to stand by while business owners are forced to provide services or carry products that they have no desire to provide?  Will we let the government dictate to retailers what items they must stock on their shelves? If they can force insurance carriers to provide these things, will they then force companies that carry pharmaceuticals to carry condoms, birth control pills, and abortion-inducing drugs?  Will they force doctors to write prescriptions for birth control pills and abortion-inducing drugs? Force them to perform sterilizations?  Does the government have the right to dictate to a business what products to carry or to tell an individual what services they must purchase?

When the government can dictate to you what products you must carry and what services you must offer, it stops being your business and starts being an arm of the government.  I am a small business owner.  I am firmly against birth control, sterilization, and abortion.  I do not wish to purchase health insurance that pays for those things as I know that any money I give to such a company is contributing to the problem.  I will not give my money to those companies.  I will go to jail first. I would rather lose ever possession I own than be responsible for the death of an innocent human being.  This isn't just an issue of religious freedom.  It's an issue of economic freedom, too, the right to dictate where and when and if I spend the money that I earn - and I'm not going to stand by and allow the government to take that freedom from me.  

Language Matters

This topic doesn't come up very often anymore in politics. After all, the economy and other issues that are important are taking up the stage right now.  So why do I feel that language is important enough a subject to bring up? Because, as the title says, language matters.

The greatest crisis the United States faces right now is one of identity.  We can't agree on who we are, what we believe, or even what direction we think the country should go.  We are divided, and because we are divided we are vulnerable to anyone who wants to use our divisions to pick us off.  If you want an illustration of how effective this tactic is, think of a wolf pack and how it hunts down the giant caribou.  It does not take on the entire herd at once. The wolf pack knows that to do so would end up in defeat, if not death.  No, the wolves scope out the weak ones first and then work to separate the weak from the strong.  It's worked since the dawn of time for them, and believe me when I tell you that it will work on us as well.

Language may seem like a small thing, but it's huge.  Ideas and information can only flow freely when all parties understand one another.  An illustration of the kind of damage that can be done just by blocking the flow of communication can be found in the Bible in Genesis, where it talks about the Tower of Babel.  Here we had a group of human beings working together, communicating in the same language, and doing great - if dangerous - things.  All God had to do to destroy their unity and dismantle their ability to accomplish much of anything was to change their languages.  If America is to survive, she must adopt a single language and make it law that all men, women, and children who are citizens of this country learn that language.

It doesn't have to be English. It would be easier on me if it were, but maybe English isn't the best route to go.  Maybe we need to come up with a language completely our own - representative of our people and our heritage - a conglomeration, if you will, of the best of each.  I don't know what this new language would be like, but I do know one thing: America cannot continue to stand divided, and she will not be united until all can speak together as one.

A Cure for the Economy

There is a simple cure for our world's economic problems.  It's simple, but it won't be easy.  It will take courage and sacrifice, hard work, and lots of changes.  It will mean taking a gigantic leap of faith.  However, it is a cure that has already proven to work time and time again. What, you might ask, is this simple but overlooked cure that can save the world and solve the economic crisis?

Babies. Babies are the cure for what ails the world. Throw out the contraception, cancel the abortions, and have more babies.  I can hear it already. "Won't that just cause more problems? How can people who are already broke and out of work afford to have another baby?"  I'm glad you asked. Please allow me to explain.

You see, when a woman believes she might be pregnant, she heads to the store.  She makes a purchase of a home pregnancy test.  If she is pregnant, her next expenditure is a doctor's fee.  She begins spending money on that new life right away.  She buys some prenatal vitamins, and possibly some iron pills.  She isn't the only one who will be spending money, either. The father, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, friends of the family, and co-workers will all be spending money on this new baby.  The purchases they make will help pay the wages of workers, support businesses both local and national, and with all of the buying going on, I guarantee the economy will begin to right itself.

Furthermore, the money that gets spent on that child doesn't end when it is born. Pregnancy is just the beginning of the boost to the economy.  A child is a gift that keeps on giving when it comes to the goods and services that will be consumed over its lifetime.  And the more children that are born, the more families that open themselves to life, the healthier the economy will become.  So, if you really want the economy to grow and stop dying off, I highly recommend babies.  They really do bring new life to the world.

Abortion: It's not just an issue. It's THE issue

Pop quiz: There is a fundamental human right that the framers of the Constitution deemed inalienable - meaning it was not something that anyone had the right to take from another - and without which, there is no other right possible.  Which human right would that be?

If you guessed that it's the right to privacy, you guessed wrong. If you guessed that it's the right to bear arms, you are equally wrong.  If you guessed that it's the right to pursue happiness, wrong again. Here's a hint: it's not mentioned in the Constitution at all, but is the first of the "inalienable" rights mentioned by the Declaration of Independence.  That inalienable right is the right to life.

If you think that Thomas Jefferson, who wrote that Declaration, just happened to place life at the forefront of the rights which all human beings have been "endowed by their Creator", I would contend you are sadly mistaken. You see, the right to life is the one right upon which all other rights hinge.

If you remove the right to life, then does it matter if the law has granted you liberty? If you remove the right to life, can a man pursue happiness? If you do not have life, does it matter if there is free health insurance? If you do not have life, can you speak up against or for going to war with this nation or that? If you do not have life, does race matter? If you do not have life, can you speak for the poor? All other issues matter ONLY if a human being has life! This is why abortion matters, and why it is so fundamental to the very underpinnings of our society and its destiny. This is what makes abortion not just AN issue, but THE defining issue of our times. When the government feels that it can strip one group of human beings of so fundamental a right as the right to life, there is no limit to the rights it will feel it can strip from all human beings.

There have been arguments given to permit abortion in cases of rape or incest. I ask you: does the nature of a human being change simply because of the method of its conception? No, of course not. Therefore, no child should have to suffer death for the crimes of its father. Is rape and incest a tragedy? Most certainly. However, you cannot fix one tragedy by causing another. Encouraging a woman to murder her own child will not bring healing to the heart of one who is suffering already from the psychological damage caused by rape and incest. She should be supported, helped, encouraged, sheltered, protected, and given every opportunity necessary to make the most of her life - but to help her in killing her unborn child will not free her from the damage done by that man's transgressions.  Furthermore, in killing the child you destroy the evidence which might secure a conviction against the one who has perpetrated this crime against her, and ensure that the rapist or the one who commits incest is left free to continue engaging in his criminal activities. The only one who is "helped" by providing an abortion to the incest or rape victim is the criminal, certainly not the woman.

And what shall we do in cases where the mother's health is endangered by her pregnancy? Work to save both lives! This is the only humane answer possible.  Although it may not be possible to get every person out of a burning building, we know it is only right that every effort is made to save all parties, and the same is true of a pregnancy. If we have made the effort to save them both, but one dies, we cannot do anything about that but at least we walk with a clear conscience. However, any nation who can support sacrificing the weak in order to save the strong is a nation who has lost the basic concepts inherent to decent civilization.

I do want to be clear.  I am pro-choice. I am for a woman's right to choose which man she marries, or if she wishes to marry at all.  I am for a woman's right to choose whether or not she wishes to pursue a career, and which career she pursues.  I am for a woman's right to choose when, where, and whether or not to have sex with someone.  I am for a woman's right to choose whether or not to keep a child she conceives, and I grieve for her when she feels that she cannot handle the job she's been entrusted with and I applaud her courage when she instead gives that child into the arms of another to raise.  However, let me be clear on this matter: no woman has the right to choose to end her child's life.  Her right to choose ends where the body of that child begins.