Never vote for what a politician says or promises. Always vote on the basis of what he/she has done and what he/she is committed to. The two 2020 party platforms should be all we need to know. Take a look.
Some lives matter more – or – “Black, brown & blue; red, yellow and white; we are all precious in His sight” (to use a revised children’s rime). In the current pandemic of sensationalism and raw emotion seeming to overpower rationality on a large scale, which will rule the future?
There is not a living responsible adult within the 50 states that is not aware of the massive powers at work within our nation attempting to rip us apart from the inside out. The loudest voices of ANTIFA and the Black Lives Matter movement, are only parts of the competing powers struggling to gain the upper hand into the future of America’s heart. It is that essence of America that drives and steers our political, judicial, cultural, and ethical structures. Commandeer that national spirit and the rest will topple.
How did the United States of America, the most successful, most uniquely governed, most diverse nation ever established in the history of the world, after the horror of civil war and the crucible of hard-fought civil rights, allow herself to be deceived and overrun by the second-most powerful racist ideologies since slavery and the Jim Crow South? How, after all of her struggles, reaching the apex of Martin Luther King Jr.’s leadership, has she sunk into an abyss of all thing anathema to him?
In a few words, it is the narcissism of tribalism, “Intersectionality”, and “Wokeness”. The vacuum created by King’s assassination was filled, and still is, by cunning weaponization of natural but base human impulses; class and racial envy, egoism over humility, melatonin over personhood, victimology over contribution, grudge-bearing over forgiveness, and anger over peace.
Anyone who watches and listens intentionally to news from any source at all or takes advantage of information from social media, will be able to understand the actions and words of progressivism and the Left. It does not matter if the sources are reporters, politicians, bureaucrats, college students or demonstrators on the street. For these folks, society gives justice its meaning and its power. The standards and application of justice are rooted in the power of their demands and change as the fabric of society yields to new and ever-shifting grievances and developing popular standards.
“Intersectional” justice determines the value of one’s grievance base on how many layers of disadvantage or felt victimhood a person can claim. The demands of justice for a successful straight white male, pale to near insignificance in comparison to that of a poor Black female member of the LGBTQIA community. “Woke” justice pre-determines blood-guilt [bearing in the sins of your ancestors] or innocence based on one’s genetic skin color and racial heritage. To deny white privilege is to declare one’s guilt, but if he or she confesses it, they gain only the responsibility of penance and the lifelong burden of their racial shame.
Those carry the very essence of establishing a new “systemic racism” and, I might add, a new systemic anti-authoritarianism. It all sounds so reasonable – (What’s next for Black advocacy in Holland) get into public schools, cut law enforcement budgets even in small peaceful cities such as Holland, Michigan by “5% to 10%”; equivocate “white…wealth” against inner city poverty; most egregious of all, pervert Martin Luther King’s highest ideal, “I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” (28 August in 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) into “If you don’t see my color, you don’t see me”.
The other side of the coin could not be more different. The justice system on which America was founded and is reflected in the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Federalist Papers, rests on the existence of standards outside of and superior to, the self-aggrandizements of tribalism, intersectionality, and wokeness or the fickleness of society. Without those anchors, a truly just society cannot survive.
Calvin Beisner has summed it up in his paper “Social Justice: How good Intentions Undermine Justice and Gospel”. To use Beisner’s words, “Justice requires impartiality, an equal application of all relevant rules to all people in all relevant situations”. In the eyes of Madame Justice, the application favored status, no matter one’s circumstances or the look of their shell is anathema. And, if such offences are discovered, that external standard is exactly what provides true justice.
Beisner also writes, “Justice requires proportionality, symmetry between the initial act…and the rewards or punishments”. To use a colloquialism, “if you didn’t do the crime, you don’t do the time”. Whiteness doesn’t create guilt any more than Blackness creates failure. Being a police officer does not create abuse any more than being a firefighter creates an arsonist.
It is amazing how many conservatives are absent from work until they are threatened with their personal well-being. Employers rely on the authority to withhold pay and benefits to retain workers. Unfortunately, the same principal seems to apply to conservatives in their responsibilities as citizens.
Holland, Michigan can now serve as the perfect pattern of what happens when only 13%, in Holland’s case, represent the sum total of voters, let alone less than that of conservatives, who care about their public responsibilities. Elections have consequences no matter at what level they occur; local, state, or national. Ironically, as a general rule, it is after-the-fact conservatives who are the best hand-wringers when their apathy suddenly comes home to roost after liberals and leftists whom they allowed into office become a threat.
What citizens in major Democrat-run cities and states are experiencing this summer – suffering from lockdowns, violence and destruction with little accountability, rebellion against law enforcement, and direct attacks on civil rights, are the spoiled fruit of a leave-me-alone-until-it-hurts mentality in the conservative community.
In Holland, three council members gained their seats via that pitiful 13% turnout after campaigning specifically on promises to push through a homosexual protection ordinance. Almost immediately after the election, LGBTQ activists and organizations demanded ordinance action. The new liberal majority eagerly obliged. Over the next six months, gay rights activists maintained a commanding presence at city hall while conservatives, save three or four individuals, stayed uniformed and, in the case of several conservative churches who were aware of the situation, uninterested in making even minimal efforts of involvement.
The council, led by the mayor, operated brilliantly against the malaise of the majority of this historically center-right city. The majority of the council studiously avoided any research or discussion regarding a total lack of actual discrimination, calls for recognition of the newest revolutionary 2020 social and legal changes, or most importantly, the possible consequences to the liberties of anyone disloyal to gay ideology who would be so bold and to be unsubmissive. The language for the proposed ordinance changes were never publicized.
In the end, the ordinance changes were adopted. The council refused to add this language:
Government. shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion, to include ownership or operations of public or private businesses or non-profits, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b)
(b) EXCEPTION Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person.
1. is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
2. is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
Just two members of the council offered amendments to protect conscience rights which were promptly rejected. Only one councilman had the courage and strength of conviction to vote no.
As hinted earlier, this long description of Holland’s fall, is actually a perfect cautionary tale for all the darkness that covers our state and nation. We supposedly operate under a representative government which gives the minority representation, but not inordinate power or influence. In the real world, it is the minority’s burden to justify its claims against the majority, not the other way around. If those claims cannot be demonstrated as accurate, those claims are illegitimate and potentially destructive to the rights and wellbeing of everyone.
Consequences always follow fluid standards of behaviors and law. Truth and reality become moving targets, ebbing and flowing, being tossed about with every wind of desire when such fluidity is peacefully ignored by ignorance, apathy, or license; as citizens continue to bend the knee by inaction until they are suddenly personally wounded and it is too late to recover.
The slothful conservative wakes up one morning to the world he or she has enabled. Religion is expected to evolve with the surf or be compartmentalized and naturalized so that it is only valued as a suggestion rather than being definitive in real lives, a matter of mere individual backwardness. Public Spiritual profiling and legalized spiritual apartheid rears its ugly head. Pressures in hiring in spite of qualifications and in spite of a business’s mission and convictions become realities. The same holds true for an employer’s right to terminate employees in spite of their performance.
There is only one way by which our system of a representative republic is turned on its head; that is when the only mechanism for securing freedom over tyranny is surrendered to malignant forces.
There are plenty of things for conservatives to be frustrated about these days. Lawlessness in large cities seems to be spreading without significant action from mayors and governors. The history of our great nation is openly being attacked on an almost daily basis. In the last few months, the most fundamental rights of faith and conscience have been weakened by our own Supreme Court. Yet, there has been no Tea Party-like uprising. Too much of the time, conservatives are their own worst enemies.
Now comes the fair city of Holland Michigan’s turn to participate in the conflict. Since the first of June, the city council has been grappling with the issue of protections, via ordinance, for publicly-expressed LGBTQIA lifestyles in housing, employment, and other forms of privately-owned venues.
This has hit the place people call home and it has been discouraging. Judging by attendance, local conservatives have been either in the dark or unwilling to sacrifice their Wednesday evenings. As of July 22nd, during both business sessions on the 1st and 3rd Wednesdays (6:30pm) and study sessions on 2nd and 4th Wednesdays (5:30pm), conservatives have been represented by only three or four of the same individuals with in-person remarks – no conservative pastors or church representatives or other voices of conservative convictions. At the same time, every week, there has been an orchestrated presence of the same gay activists, pro-gay mental health professionals and liberal pastors. Their attendance has been anywhere between two-to-four times that of those four conservatives.
First, some more facts before opinion. Take a look at the proposed provisions of the ordinance are on the city’s website:
Sec. 25-3. Prohibition of Discrimination – “No person or persons shall discriminate against any person or persons within the City regarding: (a) Employment; (b) The advertising, listing, showing, inspection, negotiation, purchase, sale, exchange, ownership, or financing an interest in real property or the leasing or occupancy of real property; (c) Public accommodations; or (d) Public services on the basis of age, race, national origin, color, disability, education, familial status, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, height, marital status, religion, source of income or weight.”
25-4. lists exemptions: (g)Any conduct lawfully protected by the Holland City Charter or by the Michigan Constitution or the United States Constitution. Section 25-9 is significant: Sec. 25-9. Interpretation. (b) Not be read to prohibit or interfere with a person’s, or a religious institution’s, free exercise of religion.
Notice the excerpt from 25-4 and 25-9. It references only the “exercise of religion” and “religious institutions”. From the liberal point of view, declared many times over the course of public comments, generic religion is fine as long as it stays at home, in the church, or in one’s head. This is what the ordinance protects. Nothing more.
Throughout the entirety of Holland’s city council deliberations, the majority has refused to address the elephants in the room:
*The fact that gay activists are not tolerant or gracious toward conservative “religion”. To deny this is to be either willfully ignorant of movement’s history, and stated intentions or, worse, is being disingenuous.
*The well-documented intention to conquer public speech, private businesses, athletics, and services.
* The vocal prejudice of LGBTQIA activists against conscience and faith dissent by conservatives.
* Claims of inhospitality, intolerance, and unenlightened group-think (ignorance) which cannot be objectively countered without context and observation.
* The purely ideological equivalence of homosexual rights with human rights.
*The refusal of the council’s majority to deal with the America and Holland of 2020 instead of 2011.
* Most destressing of all, the steadfast refusal by the council’s majority to publicly respond to challenges from conservative speakers.
The constant mantra of employment and housing abuses in Holland is a fable. We are not 2011. Any objective person should defy any council person or speaker to show, in this day and age, especially after the latest Supreme Court decisions, the existence of any employer or other public accommodation who would dare act against anyone of the gay community strictly because of their sexual status. In reality, employers and public accommodations cater to the LGBTQIA community knowing that there is a constant danger of social and legal consequences lurking over their shoulders.
Finally, the idea that the gay rights campaign has overwhelming support is ludicrous on its face. Because there has been a lack of objective, concerted, outreach to the community at-large by Holland’s city council – no voting, no forums, no polling, no published text of the proposed amendment – there can be no consensus. If it is accurate that 13% of Holland residents voted in council elections, how are we to believe that even 51% have any idea what has been proposed? This will impact the city as nothing else thus far? Maybe its time for honest investigation and 2020 integrity.
“Those who want to reap the benefits of this great nation must bear the fatigue of supporting it” (Thomas Paine). For those of us who still cherish this great nation – not one fractured into a confederation of tribes, but one that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of, one united people – these times are perilous and are indeed tiring.
Frankly, it did not have to come to this present condition, this domination of a movement bent on Taliban-style erasure of anything that does not meet its ideological standards. We should not have come to be led by men and women who cower before a movement energized and orchestrated by the likes of Black Live Matter (BLM) and Antifa; movements who boldly and publicly whip well-intentioned citizens of all stripes into fights, literal fights, over grievances based in absurd so-called history or supposed “systemic” sins that do not exist.
We have arrived at this pivotal point in our existence by allowing, over the last 50 or so years, sowers of discord to co-opt a civil rights movement of peace and unity. In its place, somehow, the nation became enthralled, because of past shames, with the completely irrational idea that the best way to fight racism and promote harmonious understanding is to create more racism through tribalization. You know, “unity through diversity” or “fairness” through racial entitlement. Once the lie was embraced that a fragmented people would yield wholeness, our current threats are an easy slide. All that was left for race peddlers and anarchists to do was grab the reins.
At this point in time, reality does not seem to have the impact it otherwise should. But facts should matter, whether you are a genuine victim or want to see justice and a better life for someone who is. A truly just society does not function on the barbarous notion of “blood guilt”, the belief that the offenses from one’s heritage follows him or her into the present, let alone into the person’s entire demographic group. Blood guilt is a weapon of totalitarians and anarchists. A nation that claims to preserve righteousness does not demonize, let alone prosecute, classes of citizens. If that were not the case, the entire Democratic Party would still be paying for their southern refusal to abolish slavery, Jim Crow laws, and segregation. If that were not the case, all of America would still demand reparations from Great Britain for infusing hundreds of thousands of Irish slaves (no not just “indentured servants) into the New World for an entire century (http://forums.canadiancontent.net/showthread.php?t=167827). The historical possibilities are endless.
Yet, here we are. A national movement built on deceptions about police racism and targeting of minorities when there is nothing except a few bad apples (https://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2019/the-truth-behind-racial-disparities-in-fatal-police-shootings/) and a total and complete fabrication of the facts about crimes against minorities (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43). Rage fueled fantasy: 10 white-on-black police shooting deaths in the entire nation in 2019, all involving convicted felons assaulting officers or resisting lawful arrest, eight of them FBI-justified, officers in the other two prosecuted and convicted (https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-is-america-being-torn-apart-by-a-total-complete-but-provable-lie).
Radicals of every color are effectively using a fully matured grievance/victim /tribal mentality to scream for justice on the basis of blood guilt. The mob is rioting and trying to destroy history on the basis of blood guilt. This stopped being about racism when BLM and Antifa arrived. Now it is about the imposition of power – tearing down our nation’s roots to create a Leftist authoritarian alternative. If this were still about “systemic racism”, there would be no Civil Rights Act. There would be no desegregation, or integrated law enforcement, government agencies, or businesses. There would be no hate crimes laws; no black President, Secretary of State, congressmen, senators, governors, mayors, city councils or leaders of any kind. There would no Star Parker, Jason Riley, Brandon Tatum, Alveda King, Candace Owens, Burgess Owens, or many more.
Sinful people do sinful things. As has become abundantly clear of late, we all live in a fallen world. The Left believes that individuals are made at the mercy of their environment and the only way to fix society is by force of law and entitlements from the top down. The Right, for the most part, believes that people are made from their hearts and minds. Society is improved by the reformation character – from home to nation.
The best way to confront the racism is not by shaming others for their genetic makeup, the conditions of their birth, or their use of the resources at their disposal to be successful. Those things are the stuff of every single American life. To claim to be above such things, or below them, is to deny the power of self-determination, human nature, and rational thought. Such is the weapon of the “social justice” movement which is not justice at all.
The best way to be heard is to be attractive, to have unity is to be a harmonizer, to be respected is to be respectful, to solve even the worst offenses is to attack the problem instead of the people. As Proverbs 15:1 notes, “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger”.
“We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The principles stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution set the parameters for the rest of the agreement established between the people of the United States and their government. Those principles apply to everyone, no matter what their role in life is or what social/political place they hold. In a time of national crisis, the call to unity and behavior that promotes the general welfare rather than hoarding one’s self-interests – whether personal, social, or political, is not only the true test of a nation but also of the character of every single one of its citizens.
We have seen the best and worst of the country since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Maybe it is time to take stock of ourselves and our leadership. Maybe it is time to learn from disruptive and selfish behaviors and emulate the unifying and selfless ones. In truth, unity is what unity does, not what it claims to be.
The story of what the Epoch Times accurately calls the Chinese Communist Party Virus (CCP virus) broke on December 31st . [ https://www.theepochtimes.com/giving-the-right-name-to-the-virus-causing-a-worldwide-pandemic-2_3277200.html ] The Chinese government had kept the situation secret for six weeks. During that time, they censured media reporting and arrested those that tried to get the warnings out. Even since the Wuhan outbreak was exposed, they have continued to be uncooperative to the point of repeatedly propagandizing false data.
Within six days of the news, the Trump administration’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued a travel notice for Wuhan. By the end of that week, with China still withholding vital data, the CDC issued a Level 1 travel advisory. Five days later, they began health entry screenings at airports in San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles. Four days later the CDC activated its emergency operations center. Still, the world was struggling to get data from the CCP. In spite of everything, including early and continuing misinformation and ridicule from American media, President Trump’s administration has taken at least 50 proportional measures as the pandemic has grown [ https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/timeline-of-trump-administration-actions-on-chinese-coronavirus-released-by-campaign/ ].
In three months time, Americans have also met the challenge as the threat has grown. We have seen innumerable acts of outreach on every level, from sacrificial service to neighborhood outreach to corporate donations and retooling. All of those things, from Washington D.C. to people walking across the street, should be a source of hope and pride.
Unfortunately, there are also too many examples of the flip side of the coin. It has been mind-boggling and painful, to witness panicked runs on stores and hoarding of every kind. The stories of citizens ignoring health advisories and directives, thereby possible helping to spread the CCP virus, are broadcast every day. Those activities are blatantly, selfish and irresponsible. They violate the essence what Americans are supposed to be in times of crisis.
Leadership also counts in all this. Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer has been a stellar negative example of the political side. In her declaration calling for self-quarantine, she had an opportunity to do the very thing she so hypocritically preaches – bringing Michiganders together. But a little over 3 ½ minutes into her address to the state, she used the opportunity to create more division by blaming the Trump administration and promoting an image of Michigan “on our own”. She furthered a blindness to the unprecedented actions of the Trump team [ https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-mozilla-102&hsimp=yhs-102&hspart=mozilla&p=video+of+gov+whitmer+%27s+stay+at+home+order#id=6&vid=9447dfa97b8bfdd935215b7ae3353975&action=click ]. The governor’s “townhall” on March 26th displayed the same tactics. She warned against assigning blame only minutes of doing exactly that. Whitmer was a stunning antithesis to New York governor Andrew Cuomo who truly set ideology and politics aside. He was and has continued to be, a brilliant example of a state’s unifier-in-chief.
Most maddening of all is the inconceivable ideological brinksmanship in the House of Representatives. Democrats and Republicans in the Senate came together and succeeded in forming a rescue bill for health interventions and economic stability, but not so the House. Apparently not wanting to miss an opportunity, led by Nancy Pelosi, their efforts centered, not on the country’s dire needs, but on voting rights, greenhouse emissions, Postal Service debt, citizenship status, broadband service, President Trump’s lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, “Obama phones” and much, much more [ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosis-coronavirus-stimulus-bill-includes-return-of-obamaphones-climate-change-wishlist ]. Those divisive, self-serving initiatives created disunity and delayed efforts to “promote the general welfare” for over a week.
Michiganders, Americans, we can “form a more perfect Union … promote the general Welfare” and “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”. All it takes is selflessness doing as selflessness does.
8“When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last group to the first.’ 9“When those hired about the eleventh hour came, each one received a denarius. 10“When those hired first came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. 11“When they received it, they grumbled at the landowner, 12saying, ‘These last men have worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the scorching heat of the day.’ 13“But he answered and said to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? 14‘Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. 15‘Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?’ 16“So the last shall be first, and the first last.” [Matthew 20:8-16 Jesus’ Parable of the Laborers]
“What’s fair is fair” – well, not necessarily. It should be glaringly obvious that, especially in matters of public policy and cultural norms, “fair” is a useful moving target, sometimes intentionally. [Matthew 20:8-16 Jesus’ parable of the laborers]
A good example of manipulating a just cause into a maladjusted fairness weapon is the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Act). Christopher Caldwell exposed the unintended consequences of the Act in a lecture at Hillsdale College recently (“The Roots of Our Partisan Divide”). His subject was not fairness, but his analysis exposed its abuse in different terms. Caldwell’s list of infamous consequences from the Act is a mirror reflection of violated civil rights championed by the aggrieved and imposed on the majority under the claims of fairness; racial quotas, illegal immigrant rights, and intersectionality – awarding the value of one’s opinion based on the length of their list of perceived abuses.
Oddly enough, even the concept of freedom has fallen prey to fairness doctrine. The contemporary idea of freedom is too often distorted into the idea that if a person’s claims or behaviors fit their picture of fairness, their actions or preferences, are justified, regardless of the consequences for someone else’s freedoms.
In his 1958 essay, “Two Concepts of Liberty”, Isaiah Berlin wrote about the idea of a negative liberty and positive one. He suggested, rightly, that believing liberty to be freedom from interference is a destructive, enslaving, negative liberty. As St. Augustine put it, “The good man, although he is a slave, is free; but the bad man, even if he reigns, is a slave, and that, not of one man, but…of as many masters as he has vices”.
That is what fairness doctrine can lead to, negative liberty. All one has to do according to that belief, is scream “unfair” like a petulant child and both the commoner and the mighty cower. That may win the day, but in the long run, the cultural and legal consequences result in a society increasingly indentured to an ever-increasing cadre of bureaucratic overlords and a voluminous body of restrictions both to public and private liberties.
Fairness is not necessarily equality. In modern culture, it is more like egalitarianism; the idea that the complainant deserves the same profits or position or rights as their target, no matter how they have managed their resources or educated and trained themselves or if the rights they are trying to claim are inappropriate to circumstances, unjustified by facts, or destructive of others’ natural rights.
Fair can be fair, but only if it is married to personal responsibility and not the product of self-centeredness or blind allegiance to sameness of outcomes. False fairness is the mantra of “the rich paying their fair share” or transgenders demanding equal access to all things of the opposite sex – “I feel like I am a—–, therefore it’s only fair.”
“Fairness” is also not necessarily righteousness. Fairness doctrine claims that fair makes right instead of the right defining what is fair. It is an important distinction. Righteousness is built on the idea that moral standards exist which are universally, if not at least culturally, recognized. Frankly, life in a fallen world is predictably unfair. Fairness doctrine claims its own moral superiority.
Without being bound to an outside standard of rights and wrongs, fairness reacts to personal prejudices, desires, hurts, or the shifting sands of culture. Morality degenerates into situational contradictions and chaos. Claims that the Electoral College unfairly put President Trump in office is the true basis behind the national liberal push to either abolish it or find ways to go around it. It is claimed that because a slight majority, proportionally speaking, voted one way but the Electoral College overwhelmingly went the other way, the election was unfair. But righteousness honors law. Genuine fairness would declare “good, the Constitution I love worked” and cheating didn’t deprive me of my voice.
“Fairness” is not always justice either. In many minds, for example, Chicago’s well-documented crime problem should be addressed fairly; when translated means the same amount of resources, time, and enforcement operations across the entire city. In that scenario, the idea of marshaling those things against a certain neighborhood or racially dominant gang area is anathema. Hands off!
Justice demands a different approach. It requires four things: impartiality of application, proportional response, conformity to an objective standard (e.g. law), and giving to the person or persons what they are properly due, not what they or anyone else believes is fair (“Social Justice: How Good Intentions Undermine Justice and Gospel”). Fairness rooted in justice would concentrate Chicago’s law enforcement efforts where the problems are the worst. If the arrests are substantially higher in the inner city or racially concentrated areas, the innocents in those areas will finally have justice. If the crime moves to affluent white areas, so does law enforcement.
The Bible addresses genuine fairness grounded in freedom, righteousness, and justice. Jesus did so through His parables of the laborers (Mt 20) and the ten virgins (Mt 25). For Him, applying the ultimate standards of the kingdom of Heaven itself was not about equal outcomes or some kind of distorted independent “fairness”, but fairness of justice and righteousness defined by Divine standards. He continued to speak through the apostles (Col 4:1) as He had throughout the Old Testament.
The next time you hear someone (Left or Right) whether a politician, activist, or even in the church, claim fairness as an ultimate justification, remember – it means nothing unless the claim takes a back seat to objective, verifiable justice and righteousness.
88 queries. 6 mb Memory usage. 0.278 seconds.