Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I believe Christianity has also been used to defend both those institutions as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Yes, Christianity, as you say, has been USED to defend both institutions. Which is why fundamentals, foundations, principles, especially original ones, must be adhered to, otherwise religions and governments will be "USED" to achieve ends which oppose the original intentions and subvert those original foundations and principles into the very thing that destroys them from within.
This is what progressives, similar to those who bastardized Christianity, have done to the constitution. They have illegitimately "interpreted" it and USED the bastard version to fundamentally transform a federal system of sovereign States beholden to sovereign individuals who agreed to "a more perfect union" with one another for mutual protection and a common commercial market and consented to a limited central government to bind that union and wrote a Constitution that laid out the foundations and principles by which that central government would be constrained against violating the unalienable rights of the people . . . have illegitimately "interpreted" that Constitution so that individual rights are no longer unalienable, but exist only as granted by government. They have transformed the fundamental relation between the government and the people. The government is now sovereign and basically unconstrained. The people are limited by government regulation and consent to less and less of that regulation. The people are divided into conflicting classes that require government to define what must be consented to.
Hybrid Mode
