It’s been quite a month for Washington State liberty activists, hasn’t it? We’ve seen the RLCWA faced with an easy decision. We saw the bulk of that body stand on the wrong side of history, and then we witnessed as the organization began to tear itself apart. Through it all, a dedicated group of new journalists have been there to document and report on it. Kit Lange at the Victory Girls Blog (see here, here, here, and here) Doug Parris and Roberta from the Reagan Wing (see the last 20-plus posts on the site) and Michelle McIntyre from Life of the Party (see here) have all been instrumental in spreading the truth about this group. I’ve even waded into the pool at the Reagan Wing and here on Red State (see here, here, and here). We tell the truth. That’s it. And we’re called “divisive.”
It’s worth noting that no one has made the assertion that anything that we’ve said is wrong or factually incorrect; instead, we’re told that we’re dividing the (liberty) movement.
Are we, though? Are a few people the cause of division? Or is the movement divided and a few people have the courage to point it out? I would argue that the latter is true. The movement for liberty in this State (and in fact, our Nation) is divided. It is necessarily divided. There are people committed to real liberty, and those who are not.
Liberty is so much more than the ability to engage in whatever behavior one wishes to. There’s a different word for that: Anarchy. No, liberty is so much more. “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17 (KJV). The Apostle Paul tell us this, and we know that it is true. The implication is that only with God as the head of our lives, our state, our Republic, or even our movement, and God’s law as our law, honored and kept by us, we cannot experience liberty. It’s simply not possible. The majority of our Founders understood this to be true. John Adams even went so far as to say “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The Constitution, of course, being the owner’s manual; the “how” of preserving liberty. Like it or not, the Constitution is largely Biblically based, using Mosaic Law as the foundation of our society. Do you imagine that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson envisioned a nation where there are no boundaries? Where anything would be allowed? Did our Founding Fathers sacrifice their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to ensure that a woman would be allowed to legal murder her child? Did they fight so that you today would have the legal right to pay a prostitute (most of whom are forced into slavery) to satisfy your own deviant sexual desires? Did they dream of a people so blind that they would seek to silence those who believe in and stand for Biblical principles and force them to work against their own conscience? I should say not.
Liberty can only exist under a certain set of circumstances; where our government is limited and the people believe in, trust in and follow God and the small parameters that are placed around us for our protection. Many in the liberty movement claim to want to return to the principles of our founding, but they don’t really. To return to the principles of our founding is to return to the principles of Christianity and the Bible, where liberty can truly be found.
The Abolitionist Society of Oklahoma framed our position perfectly when they said:
“We seek to contrast two visions of reality and morality and demonstrate how one vision, the Christian view, centered on God, leads to the humane and dignified treatment of human beings, while the other view, centered on man, leads to the inhumane and undignified treatment of human beings…
…We fully realize that our views are not going to be popular with everyone, and we embrace the fact that they will be rejected and scorned by those who fear and disdain a Christ-centered view of reality.
But we are not concerned with fitting in, but sticking out. We desire to shine as lights in this present darkness and make ourselves visible in the word [sic] as we live in it, but not of it. For, we are against the world, for the world; and though we live in the world, we do not orient our lives around its principles.”
Do we seek to divide? No. We seek to display these pre-existing divisions and to force each and every one of you to make a choice. Are we the cause of division? We just want the divisions already present in the movement (and our Republican Party, the church and our culture) exposed to the light of day, so that all can see and choose. Which side are you on? Will you continue in your silence, and thus, your acceptance of the values of this world? Or will you stand up for liberty? You have a decision to make.