Term Limits, Faith, Healthcare, Fiscal Honesty, and Gun Rights
In the words of one of my political heroes of recent years, former Senator and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, “term limits will increase performance and prevent corruption.” Those two outcomes he stresses are truly needed in both houses of Congress – it’s as simple as that. I am proudly and without reservation signing a pledge for the organization US. Term Limits: “. . . that as a member of Congress I will cosponsor and vote for the U.S. Term Limits Amendment of three (3) House terms and two (2) Senate terms and no longer limit.”
Freedom to Unite Faith and Private Business
“The EEOC is optimistic that the corporate-wide remedial actions agreed to by Voss Lighting will put an end to the role religion plays in its decisions affecting applicants and employees. If not, we will be back in court again.”
These were the words of Barbara Seely, an attorney with the agency of the federal government known as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), regarding a 2013 lawsuit filed against Voss Lighting, a longstanding and successful Christian business. The suit was based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, where religion is listed as one of the five categories an employer with 15 or more employees cannot consider when making hiring decisions.
Voss Lighting is a business which seeks to “do all for the glory of God” and whose goal is to sell their lighting products so they can tell about “God’s soul-saving-life-transforming gospel message as Jesus instructed believers to do.” Voss has been around for 80 years and is a leader in the lighting industry with hubs in 15 cities across America. It is alleged by EEOC attorney Barbara Seely that Voss Lighting discriminates on the basis of religion when making hiring decisions.
My purpose for highlighting the words of Barbara Seely is not to determine whether or not Voss Lighting did or did not discriminate on the basis of religion in the particular situation involving the lawsuit but rather to ask a fundamental question that I believe needs to be asked and answered in our nation. The question is, should the federal government try to force a private employer such as Voss to “check its faith at the door” when making hiring decisions?
The fruits that have transpired in the past 57 years since the U.S. Congress made a law that would require a private employer to check his or her faith at the door when making hiring decisions is not the “Great Society” spoken of by President Lyndon B. Johnson or “freedom ringing” as so eloquently spoke of by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s in his “I Have a Dream” speech. Rather, we now have 30 trillion dollars in debt, a weakened workforce, and rampant moral degradation.
I believe that one of the underlying currents that explains the tragic decline of our nation is a change in the meaning of the word “discrimination.” Historically, the meaning of the word is to “differentiate between right and wrong.” The liberals have done a remarkable job of changing the meaning of the word to make it associated with “hatred or bigotry,” thus making it difficult to change the law. When a society allows “differentiating between right and wrong” to be seen as “hatred or bigotry,” you have a society that is on the path to destruction.
More to come…
Healthcare Reform: Take it Back to the States
When we talk of compassion and individual responsibility as they pertain to healthcare public policy, I believe they must be balanced. I do not want to be guilty of going too far to the extreme in either direction. We can err too much on the individual responsibility side. Some people have adverse health conditions they are born with, but we know that others have conditions that are a result of unhealthy choices they have made. In the case of the latter, it is easy to become callous, not remembering the words of Jesus, “to him who is without sin let him cast the first stone.” At the same time, in that same biblical narrative, Jesus also said, “now go and sin no more.” I personally believe that Jesus saw a broken and contrite heart in the woman caught in adultery. I do not think that the actions of Jesus would have been the same if he saw a defiant attitude. In accordance with what I call the “whole counsel of God,” I believe that there is a place for “tough love” to be administered and being “too compassionate” is not the most loving route in helping people learn to take responsibility for their decisions.
When applying this to public healthcare policy, I do not claim to know the perfect balance between compassion and individual responsibility. What I do believe, not just about public healthcare policy but a myriad of other issues, is the following: There are elected representatives in all fifty state legislatures that should be committed and tasked to calculate and maintain that balance for the people they represent. I will not quote the words of Jesus this time but the words of Thomas Jefferson which reflect my core political philosophy: “The government closest to the people governs best.” I will stand with like-minded Republicans and anyone else who desires the reduction of federal power to mandate and the increase of states’ rights and power to develop and implement healthcare policy. This translates into repealing the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. Being people of compassion is important to receiving the blessing of God for any nation; I just don’t believe it is the role of the federal government to define or mandate it.
Fiscal Honesty: A Call to Sacrifice for Future Generations of Americans
I totally agree with the Republican Platform (written for the 2016 election and upheld in 2020) regarding the importance of reducing the federal debt. I can’t say it any better than they do. And yet, as Republicans held the presidency and both chambers of Congress from 2016-18, deficit spending continued at a greater rate than during the Obama Administration. The Republican platform states, “A strong economy is one key to debt reduction, but spending restraint is a necessary component that must be vigorously pursued.” That spending restraint was never implemented.
Read More >>>
The Right to Keep in Check the Power of the Government
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Need I say more about where I stand on our right to bear arms? If anything, we need to try to enforce the laws that are already on the books in order to be responsible stewards of this foundational right. Some in the government seem to be hell-bent on systematically taking away our freedoms, including the one afforded us in the 2nd amendment. For reasons given to us by our founding fathers, we need to be very diligent about preserving our right to bear arms.
As I continue to develop this page, I welcome and value your comments, central concerns and your thoughts on my core issues. I want America to be the best possible place for all of us. It does not matter to me where you are in the political realm, everyone’s thoughts matter to me and will be considered.c