Monday, July 28, 2008

The idea of secession is something I written about on this forum a number of times. It is not something that I was planning on writing about again, but in the last few days the subject has come up on Christian Forums and on a couple of my favourite blogs. So I want to make just a few brief comments on the subject.

I would like to know what my anti-secessionists friends thought of the secession movements that were supported in Eastern Europe in the last few decades?

Was it wrong for Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, Byelorussia, Georgia, etc... to seceded from the Soviet Union?

If so why did the U.S. support these acts of secession.

We also supported many areas of Yugoslavia in their bids to break with that country. Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia all seceded from Yugoslavia and we supported them. We even sent troops to help them do so.

Our governments latest support for secession was when Kosovo broke with Serbia just last February.

Would we support a Canadian war on Quebec if the people there voted to break with Canada?

What about the Scots. What if they were to seceded from the U.K.?

Both of these peoples have strong secession movements and secesssion for either or both lands is very possible. The right to secession is an important aspect of liberty. I am for liberty and freedom. I do believe secession is a big and very serious deal and should not be something that we do over minor issues, but if it is off the table we are not truly a FREE people.

You can read about my views on secession and our own U.S. Constitution at the two following links:
Secession Discussion

The Constitution and Secession

Deo Vindice,

Ps. Here is part of a post I recently wrote on Christian Forums, "Now back to the point. Was secession legal? Yes. Was it just for the North to make war on the South for opting for independence from the USA as in then existed. I say NO. It was an unlawful war. It was a war of aggression by the North and a war of defence by the Southern states.

"If Quebec were to seceded from Canada would it be lawful for Canada to force Quebec to re-join by invasion and war?

"What if the Scots were to opt to leave the UK. Should England make them stay in the union by killing several hundred thousand Scottish defenders?I think the Southern understanding of the Constitution and States Rights is what was accomplished by ratifying the Constitution in 1788. The War brought an end to the Federation that was formed by the Constitution We no longer say, 'These United States are' and now say 'The United States is.' That is a radical/revolutionary change in our form of Government. It was accomplished by Lincoln and 600,000 men killed and the South laid waste for 80 years.

"God has determined this to be, just as he determined that Babylon should destroy sinful Judah. The winner is not necessarily the more just, though it is part of God's righteous judgement. The South did practice an unbiblical form of race based slavery. The Lord ended that system in a horrific way. That is as it is.

"Does this mean that Southern secession was therefore wrong? No. Southern secession was lawful and that is a very different discussion than the discussion of slavery."

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Some years ago I got into an email debate with a Baptist friend about Christians drinking alcohol. It was an interesting discussion, but it was also an eye opener for me. My friend is a conservative, independent Baptist but in our debate he resorted to arguments that are more in line with liberalism.

I believe that the Bible (Old and New Testament) clearly allows for the people of God to drink wine and "strong drink."

My Baptist friend, who believes that the Bible is the Word of God, used very twisted logic to try and argue that wine in the Bible, when used by God’s people, was only grape juice and not an alcoholic beverage.

When pressed about his position with Scripture, my friend switched his argument from "the Bible" to “social” reasons for Christians not to use alcohol. He argued that it was a “bad witness” to drink a beer or wine in front of a non-believer or an alcoholic.

I have found that many of my conservative, Protestant Christian, brethren that hold to “abstinence only” often use liberal "like" reasoning and make “social” arguments when defending their position that Christians should not drink alcohol.

In this discussion with my friend it became clear that his “biblical” arguments could not and did not hold water; neither did his “social” argument, so he soon bowed out of the discussion, saying that we would have to agree to disagree.

I was disappointed by the way the discussion turned out, but I was not surprised. It had happened before, when I’ve discussed this issue with conservative Christians who are opposed to wine, beer, etc... Sadly, most conservative Protestants don’t know what the Bible actually says on this subject. They also don’t know anything about their own Protestant history.

Let's look at this issue in American history:

Q: Why did the Pilgrims settle at Plymouth?
A: They were running low on beer, and other food, but “especially our beer.”

Here is a quote from Pilgrim leader, William Bradford, "So, in the morning, after we had called on GOD for direction, we came to this resolution, To go presently ashore again; and to take a better view of two places which we thought most fitting for us. For we could not now take time for further search or consideration: our victuals being much spent, especially our beer; and it being now the 20th of December."

Beer is an important part of America’s history, even the history of conservative, Protestant, Americans.

I had a few cold beers today after mowing the lawn. God is so good to give us such wonderful gifts like beer and wine.

Coram Deo,