Category Archives: Government

FDR’s Four Freedoms

Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941 said, that there are four fundamental freedoms that people everywhere in the world ought to enjoy: Freedom of speech, Freedom of worship, Freedom from want, and Freedom from fear. Was he right?

The first two are fundamental freedoms that everyone, everywhere in the world, ought to enjoy just as Roosevelt said. However, the last two are not fundamental freedoms, rather they are entitlements that people want at the expense of others. Before we go on we have to define freedom. Freedom is a state of being exempt from the power or control of another. Every person is endowed by God with certain unalienable rights. The definition of rights is a legal immunity (protection) from other people or from the state. Freedom allows us to exercise these rights as we choose.

The freedom of speech allows us to communicate ideas and beliefs without interference from the government or anyone and without punitive action. We can express our ideas and beliefs in person, with a pen and paper, a film, an audio recording, and so on. All of these ways are protected under the freedom of speech. These are a few of the reasons why the freedom of speech is a fundamental freedom.


The freedom of worship allows everyone to worship God as they believe is right. If we did not have this freedom all of our God-given rights and freedoms would be in jeopardy from the First Amendment all the way to the Tenth Amendment. John Adams said,”Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  Samuel Adams said,”Religion and good morals are the only solid foundation of public liberty and happiness.” They both knew that liberty is impossible without a moral and religious people. The Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Worship depend on each other. If you do not have one you do not have the other.

Freedom from want or the right to an adequate standard of living is not a freedom nor a right. Sure, this sounds like a moral principle, but it’s not. Rights are very limited on what they do. This pseudo freedom allows the government to take wealth and property from the rich to give to the poor, thus infringing on someone else’s freedoms.  This action is totally opposite to the definition of freedom. Don’t get me wrong I am not opposed to charity. I encourage it, but what the government is doing is plunder, plain and simple. It decreases charity and productivity and in the end no one is better off.  This is the danger of this pseudo freedom or right. 


Lastly but not least is the freedom from fear. The same thing applies to this fake freedom as it did for the freedom from want. President Roosevelt said the following in his Four Freedoms speech concerning the “freedom” from fear. “The fourth is freedom from fear–which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor–anywhere in the world.” First, the problem with this statement is that it contradicts our Second Amendment. Secondly, this will not stop wars nor will it make a world void of fear. For example, alliances can be made with other nations to overpower weaker ones, thus starting wars.


Laws are only obeyed by law abiding citizens. When laws are passed to reduce the amount of guns law-abiding citizens can own the end result will not be a nation without fear. Crime and fear will increase because the criminals know that there are fewer citizens armed to defend themselves. Remember, gun reduction laws do not disarm criminals. They only disarm the law-abiding citizens.


Freedom is very valuable but if it is tainted with so-called freedoms it can become worthless and meaningless.


State Subsidizes are Unconstitutional

Our First Amendment reads as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

With this in mind let’s see if there is a difference between state-subsidized churches and state-subsidized schools.

First, state-subsidized churches are unconstitutional as mentioned in the First Amendment Congress is making a law respecting an establishment of religion when it gives money to a church or denomination. It is also morally wrong, because it involves the politics of plunder. For example, congress taxes all Americans and gives a portion of that money to a certain denomination. Americans would be outraged if such a thing happened.

When it comes to state-subsidized schools most Americans believe that this is fine and that it doesn’t violate our First Amendment. Are they right? Sadly they are not. Our public schools all teach evolution which is a religion. Religion is a particular system of belief. Evolutionists must have faith that what they believe is true. They do not know what happened millions or billions of years ago. The evolutionists  have to take all this on faith. Why then is evolution taught in state-subsidized schools. This is a violation of our First Amendment. Many Americans do not believe in evolution but they are forced to support it through their taxes. This is unconstitutional and morally wrong. If the evolutionists were forced to pay creationist ministries through taxes they would say that it is a violation of the First Amendment.

We now see that there are no differences between state-subsidized schools and state-subsidized churches. Both are unconstitutional and immoral. Americans should put a stop to this. The longer we continue in this act of disregard of the constitution the sooner we will lose our regard to our constitution.

The Decline of Personal Responsibility

The welfare state condemns personal responsibility which causes great moral degradation. The welfare state causes this moral degradation because everything about the welfare state is immoral. It takes from some to give to others in other words the state steals. It make the recipients depend on the government. It makes the hard-working people slack off, because they know that the money they are working for will be taken away and given to someone who did not work for it. Under the welfare state no one is allowed to keep the fruits of their labor. The Definition of responsibility is,

: a duty or task that you are required or expected to do

: something that you should do because it is morally right, legally required, etc.


The responsibility (duty) to take care of ourselves falls on us and not the state or government. The free market on the other hand does promote greater personal responsibility, because you are not dependent on the government. As a result you work hard to support yourself because you know the government will not. You are responsible for the food you eat, the clothes on your back, and the roof over your head. Under the free market you are allowed to keep the fruits of your labor, which results in greater personal responsibility and wealth.

The Source of Our Rights

English: This is a high-resolution image of th...

English: This is a high-resolution image of the United States Declaration of Independence (article (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When you ask people who or what the source of human rights is you will get two answers. One is that God the Creator is the source of our rights. The other is that the state or government is the source of our rights. One is wrong. Our country was founded on the belief that God our Creator is the source of our human rights. Our Declaration of Independence states,”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness(Property).” The Founding Fathers knew that no government has the authority to tell its citizens how to live. They wrote that our rights come from our Creator and that these truths are self-evident.” Self-evident means Requiring no proof or explanation. Why did the Founding Fathers state that the source of our rights is so obvious that it requires no proof? It was so obvious because back then everyone knew that in order to be the source of human rights you have to be the Creator of those rights. The majority of the colonists believed that they were created by God and therefore God is the source of human rights. Governments cannot create life. They are not the source of human rights. We therefore must come to the conclusion that the state is not the source of rights and the our Creator is.

Criminal Justice

In today’s society victims of crime get no restitution. The Bible, in the book of Exodus 22:1-15 tells us that if someone steals or damages your property he should make a restitution to you. Sending criminals who steal and/or damage property to jail is wrong and unwise. In jail most of the criminals learn how to be better thieves and not how to reform. On top of this the victims of the crime have to pay to support these jails. Instead of receiving restitution, they are giving money to the state through taxes to feed and house these criminals. This is not good for society. Criminals should pay restitution to their victims as the Bible says. However if a person kills another person he does not pay restitution to the victim’s family. His sentence is death. The Bible in the book of Leviticus 24:17 reads,”And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.” This is the way it should be, it makes criminals think twice before committing a crime. This is the way the family of the victim receives restitution.

Feet to the Fire

The Freedom Index Thomas Jefferson said,”The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”. If we want to keep our country free and independent we have to be vigilant. Vigilant of what our legislators vote on. We have to hold our legislators accountable for their actions. Monitor their votes. If they vote for any piece of legislation contrary to the United States Constitution, they have broken their oath of office and should be held accountable. We can remove them from office by recruiting someone who stands for the Constitution of the United States to run against the legislator who violated his oath. A good resource towards assessing a Congressman’s or U.S. Senator’s voting record is The Freedom Index published twice a year by The New American magazine. It grades our congressman and senators from 0-100%, 100% being constitutionally right. Be ever vigilant. Our Future, our children’s future and their children’s futures are at stake. Do not say to your self, someones else will be vigilant, most likely they won’t. If we lose our freedoms, because we did nothing, we only have to look at a mirror to see who was responsible. Edmund Burke said,“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Oath Keepers

Constitution of the United States, page 1

Constitution of the United States, page 1 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Police take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of their state. We as Americans have the Bill of Rights (Bills of limitations on the government) to protect our God given rights. The First Amendment includes freedom of religion, speech, and the press. For example the police should never obey and enforce a politician’s verbal restrictions against making a video of him at a public meeting. This would violate our freedom of the press. Legislative bodies, state or federal, are the only branches of government that can make laws. Of the laws they can make they all have to follow the Constitution of the Unites States. The politician has no authority to tell a police officer to violate our first amendment rights. Police personnel should never follow an unconstitutional command. It’s against the law to follow any unconstitutional command. Police should keep their oath of office, they should never ever break it.