where religion and politics meet

Everybody has a worldview. A worldview is what you believe about life: what is true, what is false, what is right, what is wrong, what are the rules, are there any rules, what is the meaning of life, what is important, what is not.

If a worldview includes a god/God, it is called a religion. If a bunch of people have the same religion, they give it a name.

Nations have worldviews too, a prevailing way of looking at life that directs government policies and laws and that contributes significantly to the culture. Politics is the outworking of that worldview in public life.

We are being told today that the United States is and has always been a secular nation, which is practical atheism.

But our country could not have been founded as a secular nation, because a secular country could not guarantee freedom of religion. Secular values would be higher than religious ones, and they would supersede them when there was a conflict. Secularism sees religion only as your personal preferences, like your taste in food, music, or movies. It does not see religion, any religion, as being true.

But even more basic, our country was founded on the belief that God gave unalienable rights to human beings. But what God, and how did the Founders know that He had? Islam, for example, does not believe in unalienable rights. It was the God of the Bible that gave unalienable rights, and it was the Bible that informed the Founders of that. The courts would call that a religious opinion; the Founders would call that a fact.

Without Christianity, you don’t have unalienable rights, and without unalienable rights, you don’ have the United States of America.

A secular nation cannot give or even recognize unalienable rights, because there is no higher power in a secular nation than the government.

Unalienable rights are the basis for the American concept of freedom and liberty. Freedom and liberty require a high moral code that restrains bad behavior among its people; otherwise the government will need to make countless laws and spend increasingly larger amounts of money on law enforcement.

God, prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments were always important parts of our public life, including our public schools, until 1963, when the court called supreme ruled them unconstitutional, almost 200 years after our nation’s founding.

As a secular nation, the government now becomes responsible to take care of its people. It no longer talks about unalienable rights, because then they would have to talk about God, so it creates its own rights. Government-given rights are things that the government is required to provide for its people, which creates an enormous expense which is why our federal government is now $22 trillion in debt.

Our country also did not envision a multitude of different religions co-existing in one place, because the people, and the government, would then be divided on the basic questions of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Our Constitution, which we fought a war to be able to enact, states, among other things, that our government exists for us to form a more perfect union, ensure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. It could not do this unless it had a clear vision of what it considers to be true, a vision shared with the vast majority of the people in this country.

I want to engage the government, the culture, and the people who live here to see life again from a Christian perspective and to show how secularism is both inadequate and just plain wrong.

Because religion deals with things like God, much of its contents is not subject to the scientific method, though the reasons why one chooses to believe in God or a particular religion certainly demand serious investigation, critical thinking, and a hunger for what is true.

Science and education used to be valuable tools in the search for truth, but science has chosen to answer the foundational questions of life without accepting the possibility of any supernatural causes, and education generally no longer considers the search to be necessary, possible, or worthwhile.

poligion: 1) the proper synthesis of religion and politics 2) the realization, belief, or position that politics and religion cannot be separated or compartmentalized, that a person’s religion invariably affects one’s political decisions and that political decisions invariably stem from one’s worldview, which is what a religion is.

If you are new to this site, I would encourage you to browse through the older articles. They deal with a lot of the more basic issues. Many of the newer articles are shorter responses to particular problems.

Visit my other websites theimportanceofhealing blogspot.com where I talk about healing and my book of the same name and LarrysBibleStudies.blogspot.com where I am posting all my other Bible studies. Follow this link to my videos on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb-RztuRKdCEQzgbhp52dCw

If you want to contact me, email is best: lacraig1@sbcglobal.net

Thank you.

Larry Craig

Tuesday, April 21, 2020

Returning to Normal Part 3


When all this is over, there will be a lot of people, or should I say, a lot of people who have a public audience, who will be clamoring for major changes to our medical care/health insurance system.
The most common change they will want is guaranteed medical coverage with a government-run insurance plan, like Medicare is now for seniors. 

What could possibly go wrong with that? 

As noted in a previous article, private businesses have an incentive to keep costs down, government does not.  Our government is so far in debt, they have given up even trying to pay it down.  They just pay the interest on the debt, and they borrow money to do that.  Who does that?  You wouldn’t do that, but you give your money to someone else who spends your money like that, and then you want him to do more things where he will do more of the same?

And, of course, when they do that, everything costs more, because paying interest is like burning your money, and the value of your money decreases almost in proportion to that debt due to government-induced inflation.

But at least everybody is covered. 

That sounds noble and caring, but it destroys personal incentive and responsibility.  A while back, I was thinking about Bernie Sanders and his plan for free college.  Hey, I don’t have to pay for it.  Somebody else will.  So I don’t have to work at all. 

That’s what will happen nationwide.  I don’t need to worry about getting a better job, working harder, going back to school, the government will take care of this for me.  And when we say government, we mean other people. 

But if everybody has the mentality that other people will pay for it, then who will do the work that pays for it?  You can’t keep taxing the rich, because they’re the ones who work 80 hours a week to start the business, to run the business, who invest the money for that new project.  After a point, they will say it’s just not worth it.

I’ve seen it at work where people didn’t want to work overtime, because they say the government takes all their money.  We have a doctor shortage in our country now.  Why?  I can’t speak for everyone, but if you want people to spend that kind of time and money to go to school and then work those kinds of hours when they get out, then let them make all the money they can.  But when the government runs the insurance, that doesn’t happen, and doctors don’t think it’s worth it anymore.

Are there risks with private insurance?  Of course, there are risks.  Life has risks.  They want to remove all risks in life and have the government make it all nice. 

It’s the risks that cause us to go back to school, to work more hours, to try harder, to keep looking for work.  Starting a business is risky. 

There are basically two kinds of private medical insurance: individual and group. 

The best private insurance plans are group plans.  Individual plans are more expensive, though under Obamacare, a lot of people get subsidized insurance coverage.  Which means, other people pay for it.  Individual plans, actually all plans, cost more, because the government told the insurance companies to cover a lot of things they didn’t cover before.  But group plans will still give better coverage at a lower cost.  But let the company and the customer decide what they want covered.  That will lower the costs substantially.

Group plans are essentially the employer-based plans.  Some people don’t like that, because people lose their plans if they lose their jobs.  As it is now, they can keep that plan for about six months after they lose their jobs, if they pay the premium themselves, which most people can’t do.  They didn’t realize how much the company was paying for it on their behalf. 

I suggest that former employees of a company be allowed to keep their group policy.  Forever if need be.   What the insurance companies would have to do is to offer scaled-down plans in addition to the company plan.  Policy holders would be able to switch plans as their ability to pay improved or worsened.  Being part of a group would still give them better rates than if they had to buy it on their own.

But, but, but

Weren’t there still be people who might fall through the cracks? 

This is where our country used to run on that old-fashioned idea of people helping people.  Our country didn’t always have government programs to rescue people.  This used to be done locally with hundreds of organizations funded with voluntary contributions and usually volunteers, people helping people. 

Most of this was religion-based, and our politicians chose to use government instead.  I’m just saying the cost of doing that outweighs the benefits.  Enormously.