All posts by Richard

Is Ron Paul a Christian?

He most certainly is. In his own words …

I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do.

Some evangelicals get a little bit annoyed because I’m not always preaching and saying, “I’m this, I’m this, and this.” I think my obligation is to reflect my beliefs in my life. I like the … part in the bible about not showing off … we’re instructed to pray quietly … [and] not to play big fanfare. I’m trying to strike something in between there; where I’m not bashful and ashamed of it, at the same time I don’t want to look like others who …look to get votes because they were willing to say and do something in public. … You don’t do it out on the streets and brag about it and say, “Look how holy I am.” If a person has true beliefs and is truly born again, it will be reflected in their life. … I’d rather my views and my convictions and my faith be shown by my actions rather than [by] what I say …

Growing up, my family was very much involved in religious teaching and interested in religious faith and actually encouraged all five of us to become ministers. Two became ministers and I decided I could minister through medicine…. People have asked me what influenced me most in my family and upbringing and it was the work ethic and church. It was faith-based. We spent a lot of time at our church and that was part of our routine.

I didn’t have much choice about the Lutheran church because I was born that way. It was very conservative and we spent a couple years in catechism and that was when I made my commitment to Christ and joined the church. And then when my wife and I got married it was sort of an accident because there wasn’t a Lutheran church handy and there was an Episcopal church handy and we enjoyed the older traditions of the old prayer book and at that time it was a much more conservative religion. As the years went on both of us became more annoyed with the liberalization of the Episcopal church and it didn’t fit us. None of our children stayed in the church…. we drifted away from it. We now go to a Baptist church.


The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation … biased against Christianity. …

I think it’s systemic … in court cases that say you can’t say a prayer at a football game. Where is it in the Constitution that said that somebody can prohibit prayer? The First Amendment says the federal government shouldn’t write any laws regarding freedom of speech and prayer. And if it becomes offensive … then the local people have to deal with it. … it should be the school board or somebody. But there can’t ever be under the First Amendment a prohibition. The Founders never thought that to be the case … It’s systemic, especially the aggressive atheists who are always going to courts, to say that their attitude because they’re atheists means a prohibition against expression of Christianity and that of course didn’t happen 30 or 40 or 50 years ago. It’s much more so today because there are some people aggressively trying to undermine Christianity.

A lot of times [secular liberals] love to have an ally and broaden their base … then all of a sudden, they’ll be a few [secular anti-war liberals] who will come off and break off and say, “Do you know who your ally is? He’s somebody in prayer, we have to attack them! He’s not even for the welfare state!” And they say, “He can be our friend, but not too friendly,” and then some of them will start attacking me.

I get to my God through Christ. … I pray for wisdom and grace.

Ron Paul. Christian. Libertarian.

Is Ron Paul a libertarian?

Apparently, there’s some doubt.

Peter Cresswell gives seven reasons why Ron Paul is not a libertarian.

Short summary? Ron Paul is not a libertarian. He

  • rejects the Jeffersonian principle of a “wall of separation” between religion and government;
  • is anti-immigration (“to the right of most Republicans” says Vodka Pundit Steve Green);
  • is anti-abortion (Paul describes “the rights of unborn people” [sic] as “the greatest moral issue of our time,” and “abortion on demand” as “the ultimate State tyranny”);
  • “plays footsie” with racists and kooks;
  • is a hypocritical supporter of pork-barrel earmarks for his own congressional district;
  • is opposed to free-trade agreements (like NAFTA); and
  • is appallingly “blame-America-first” on foreign policy.

Let’s take these one by one. (The only way to exit is going piece by piece.)

(1) Libertarians insist on the separation of church and state. If Ron Paul rejects the separation of church and state, he is not a libertarian. But what does separation of church and state entail? It comes down to freedom of religion (and freedom from religion, if you’re that way inclined). Ron Paul is not opposed to the separation of church and state. He’s opposed to the War on Religion.

(2) Libertarianism is a view on how a government should treat its citizens. Its own citizens. Libertarians can be anti-immigration.

(3) Libertarianism holds that men are endowed

with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men

Ron Paul believes that fetuses are Men, too. Thus, it is the role of government to secure one’s right to life both after and before birth. Abortion is not a moral issue. It is a metaphysical issue. Libertarians can be anti-abortion.

(4) So Ron Paul “plays footsie” with racists, 9/11 Truthers and Objectivists. What of it? Libertarians insist on the right to freedom of association. Ron Paul exercises that right.

(5) Pork barrel politics is anathema to libertarianism. Or is it? Ron Paul’s argument for pork barrel projects in his own district is that, “if they take it, we should ask for it back.” Seems reasonable to me.

(6) Ron Paul says, “I’m for free trade.” Ron Paul is opposed to NAFTA. He says, “This is regulated, managed trade for the benefit of special interests. That is why I oppose it.”

(7) Foreigners in foreign places tend to resent American government intervention in their lives, in much the same way that U.S. libertarians resent American government intervention in their lives. It is not unlibertarian to point this out. Blowback? If it’s America’s fault then blame America.

Of seven purported reasons why Ron Paul is not a libertarian, none is any good.

Ron Paul. Libertarian.

Ron Paul. Libertarian.

Hot lesbians

Mulholland Drive is back! Mulholland Drive is …

Politics, Art and Faith from a Kiwi in the Heart of Texas

… and Fox News foxes.

Back in the day, Blair Mulholland was NZ’s best pro-freedom blogger. Not only that, of course, but Mulholland Drive used to feature pictures of Naomi Watts and Laura Harring from the David Lynch movie of the same name.

But the real reason I like Blair’s blog is political not pictorial. It’s that his views almost always align with my own. In other words, he’s almost always right. Take, for example, his views on Peter Dunne.

I am not remotely jealous of Mr Dunne … I would rather spend three years in parliament, achieve sweeping reform, then lose, than do nothing but warm a seat for nearly thirty years. Give me a career like David Garrett’s any day over Dunne’s. He has no principles or morals, and I have plenty of both. I win, he loses.

Actually, Ohariu and New Zealand lose more. Dunne represents everything that is wrong with the current state of New Zealand politics. No risk-taking, no innovation, no principles, no love of freedom. Just a desire for more control and a pompous, sneering contempt for the average New Zealander.

I couldn’t put it any better than that.

Death penalty for dealing P?

Kiwis and Aussies are the world’s biggest stoners. But we already knew that. “Experts are not surprised by new research showing New Zealand and Australia share the highest rates of cannabis and methamphetamine use in the world,” says the NZ Herald.

Here’s something I didn’t know. I clicked on the Herald’s handy related links and discovered that intelligent children are more likely than their less intelligent peers to use illegal drugs in later life, according to a study which has found a link between high IQ scores and drug use. Well, who’d’ve thought? I must be a genius!

Will de Cleene has an informative post showing where (else) in the world to find the stoners, the coke heads, the smack heads, the ravers, the speed freaks, the smokers and the drunks. Check it out.

After serving the standard sound-bites from the executive director of the New Zealand Drug Foundation, Ross Bell, the Herald reports some remarks from former police officer and managing director of “methamphetamine eduction company” MethCon, Dale Kirk.

“We’ve treated cannabis as a soft drug and we’ve ignored the risk of methamphetamine use, and unfortunately we’re playing catch-up.

“We’re now seeing initiatives from the Government aimed at the supply end, which are having some effect, I believe, yet it’s a little bit too late.”

Mr Kirk said the right way to tackle the drug problem was a mixed approach, including punitive measures like harsher sentences, more education, and more resources to treat addicts.

Harsher sentences? What can Kirk possibly be proposing? The maximum sentence for the sale, manufacture or importation of methamphetamine is already life imprisonment. How do you get harsher than that? The death penalty?

Methamphetamine had a devastating effect on families and communities, he said.

“I’m speaking to people all the time in the community who have family members who are affected by methamphetamine, and it is a consistent theme that you hear – it’s a downward spiral in their life, everything else takes secondary interest to the drugs.

“They lose families, they lose jobs, they lose money – and obviously ultimately they can lose their lives.”

Ultimately, yes, if we ever allow drug fascists like Kirk to have their way. Unfortunately, Kirk’s predecessor, Mike Sabin, is now in government as the MP for Northland.

In the picture above, sourced from Sabin’s own website, Sabin gives the thumbs up to alcohol, a drug responsible for more social ills than P and all illegal drugs combined.

Sabin is an enemy of freedom and sane drug policy. Watch this space.

Without Judgement

Guilty until proven innocent
We condemn your soul and fate
Never mind the possibilities
Too busy for logic or to calculate

Take part in a diminishing breed
Where complex turns to simplicity
When pain is acknowledged
Frivolous calculations will be abolished

Without judgement what would we do?
We would be forced to look
At ourselves emerged in lost time
Assuming what may be
Without judgement
Perception would increase a million times

Distracted by imagination
That experiments with ease
If you could taste it, it might be addictive
Where life will crush those who defy

Take part in a diminishing breed
Where complex turns to simplicity
When pain is acknowledged
Frivolous calculations will be abolished

Judge not, that ye be not judged. (KJV)

Whose side are you on?

When Joshua was near the town of Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with sword in hand. Joshua went up to him and demanded, “Are you friend or foe?”

“Neither one,” he replied. “I am the commander of the Lord’s army.”

At this, Joshua fell with his face to the ground in reverence. “I am at your command,” Joshua said. “What do you want your servant to do?”

Joshua 5:13-14 (NLT)