God's Blueprints for Political Victories

Forum (Articles)

Offer

Partners

Rules

Tips

FAQ

Begin!

Donate

     This article was started by Dave Leach R-IA Bible Lover-musician-grandpa (talk) 01:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC) To help finish it:

---

(1) click "edit" in the left sidebar to see the codes used in this article. (2) type four dashes (to create a horizontal line) after the point with which you will interact. Hit "enter" to start a new line. (3) Type four tildes to "sign" your name. (4) Comment, criticize, clarify, amplify, like, rate, argue, write a poem, etc. To vote, change your previous coment, add a section with a heading that appears in the Table of Contents, start a new article, use colors, write in Greek, post a picture, etc. find suggestions and codes at Begin! (5) Use "enter" to double space between paragraphs. When finished, type another four dashes on the next line down, then scroll down and click "show preview", and if that looks good, "save changes".

---

INTRODUCTION

This vision of God's blueprints for political success was inspired by a letter from Richard A. Viguerie, owner of American Target Avertising Inc., which boasts "4.7 billion postal letters mailed * $7.6 billion dollars raised * 86 million donations acquired". Wow! But the bigger "wow" is what Viguerie asked for in his letter. Not money! He didn't ask for a dime! But he asked for wisdom. Ideas. Solutions.

My answer took me two weeks. I sent copies to a few other leading political consultants. I urge you, also, to consider the solution I explore in the Pages of God.

I make no pretense that this is "the" political solution from God. But it has to be closer than strategies which censor God, treating His comments about our positions as "irrelevant" and fatal to the "credibility" of anyone foolish enough to talk about them in those forums where voters decide whether to pattern our laws after the principles of Heaven or of Hell.

Can it be that God doesn't care about government? All the "examples of faith" listed in Hebrews 11 were either political leaders themselves or got in the Bible through their interaction with political leaders. Won't you please join me in consulting God's Word as we review our political experience, for clues about how we can best help heal America?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

You just did what will save America. You asked for wisdom.

You just did what will save America. You asked for wisdom. For solutions to Republican losses.

The solution I see is simple, but change is hated. “Long experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer wrong, than to right those wrongs to which they have become accustomed.” The solution I see, laid out in the Word of God, makes more sense the more I meditate on just how God says to do it, and the more I compare that with how churches and activists do it.

What I read God calling us to do, you have just done much of. Done by more and more nonprofits, consultants, activists, and churches, America will survive. Thank you; I pray you will have started a movement.

You didn’t ask for money – not that asking money is wrong, per se. You asked for wisdom. ‟Your thoughts, advice, and recommendations are not only appreciated and welcomed,”, you wrote, “but helpful and needed. Please email them to _____@americantarget.com.”

The Pilgrims created a way people could contribute wisdom. They went a step farther, enabling all contributors to interact with each other, not just with a moderator individually. They called their forums “Sabbath Afternoon Prophesying Services”, taking the term “prophesy” from 1 Corinthians 14, after which their forums were modeled. The freedom of speech and the voice for all, spelled out in their Catechism with much support from the Bible, spread across America’s legislatures but died out of America’s churches. The freedom of all lawmakers to contribute wisdom to their body, and the freedom of citizens to contribute wisdom to lawmakers, is a major key to America’s greatness.

Of course time greatly restricts how much wisdom lawmakers can listen to. Solutions are longer than a page, but several lawmakers have told me a page is how much they will read. (Unless I am a lobbyist who contributes to their campaigns.)

Where is any forum in America today where a “multitude of counsellors” can process solutions to government-fueled problems that are longer than a page? Where is the “think tank” that is set up to process wisdom from outside its paid staff? What church will do that? What activist group? What political party?

Because you know any real solution has to be longer than a page. Even when a paragraph is enough to outline a solution, it still has to respond somehow to the millions of pages of objections to it. And you know any real solution will have attracted millions of pages of objections, because lovers of Darkness are very alert to any threat to their true love, and they own many presses and servers.

John 3:19 ...The Light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness rather than the Light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

I am sensitive to this lack because I have invested decades of research into solutions to problems that oppress millions. Who takes the time for more than a page? Maybe to make an app work. Or make your car start. Or watch a football game. But for mere Freedom?!

Am I the only one with ideas? In 2015 I talked to 16 of the 18 presidential candidates in Iowa. It takes 2-4 hours to get 1-2 minutes. After the event you wait in long lines. Nearly everyone wants a picture or an autograph. I talked about solutions that the candidates did not already understand or think about. Surely I am not the only American who has researched solutions. But, a minute of talk, a hurried response, hand him information which he may not look at again. No more time for solutions. More pictures and autographs grow impatient.

In the course of running for office seven times, publishing the Prayer and Action News 25 years, hosting The Uncle Ed. Show on cable TV 15 years, bothering customers of our music store for over 35 years, and discussing the Bible with hundreds of pastors and more laymen, I have met people with a lot of needs tangled up with bad government, and to try to help them, have researched a lot of solutions.

For example:

Mask mandates.

Cure for censorship.

Abortion. (Old articles, new articles since Dobbs v. Jackson, book.)

Immigration. (Newest articles. Wordpress articles.)

False child abuse charges.

Divorce courts.

Sodomy.

Grandparent’s visitation rights.

The obstacle common to solving all these is the lack of any forum where a “multitude of counsellors” can process solutions, either in churches, activist groups, nonprofits, or political parties.

From one of my multiple choice surveys:

“Proverbs 15:22 Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established.”

This means: (which one do you think is correct?)

a. Lots of lawyers make us succeed.

b. Lots of therapists are God’s key to success. Therapy is what will save America.

c. A forum where many people can submit their opinions/advice/counsel is basically what America is, through our elections, our Freedom of Speech to tell lawmakers what we think in safety, and our legislatures whose members can all contribute wisdom to the body. Such forums were reconstructed from Bible study by the Pilgrims 400 years ago: their “Sabbath Afternoon Prophesying Services” were open forums for political as well as spiritual matters that not only fulfilled the pattern and purposes of 1 Corinthians 14 but became laboratories of relationship skills that developed the Biblical goals of Freedom of Speech and Religion and a Vote for All.

Partial implementation of this Biblical principle in America’s political systems explains America’s success. The gradual decline of openness to wisdom from all congregants explains the decline of America’s churches.

How your invitation to wisdom is different

Several other direct mailings solicit a grain of wisdom in the form of surveys with multiple choice questions. Like “Should crooks run government?” “a. Yes, but they should have term limits. b. No; crooks should be in jail, and jails shouldn’t have term limits. c. Not sure. What are ‛term limits’?”

They start off, “Your opinion matters!” I can’t help it: I tear open the envelope, still hoping there will be a space to write in my opinion – typically a 20-page solution. There never is. Nor am I shown how to contact a real human. So I scribble in the margins and pray. But not with strong faith: I can’t shake the nagging doubt that where submitting original ideas is impossible, the expected “right answers” might as well have flashing direction signs pointing to them, and are followed by robust appeals for money, that the only desired response, that any human will view, is money. Of which I have little, because I have devoted my life not to making money, but to prayerful research for solutions.

I suppose another purpose of those surveys is to cull mailing lists to get money later. And I suppose to sway the “undecideds”. But the door is locked and bolted against brainpower.

President Trump put out the first surveys I’ve noticed that added several blank spaces labeled “other” with his surveys, encouraging the hope that he actually wanted ideas, and that he had arranged for real humans to actually read them, process them, and forward to him those which seemed to have merit.

That hope faded as I toiled over those blank spaces in survey after survey with advice I believe he needed to hear, only to never hear back from anybody. I began to doubt that humans ever see them. Is it indeed just a more effective way of implying that he really cares what people think, in order to get them to empty their wallets wider?

But you didn’t ask for money! Not a word about money! And you, unlike the others, explicitly asked for solutions. For wisdom. Not just our priorities in matters already widely understood, but our brainpower. Not after a letter about how you have all the answers so all you really need is our money to implement them, but after a letter featuring unanswered questions and unsolved problems. Not just rhetorical questions, either, but real questions to which we all seek answers.

What your invitation implies that you will do

Trump’s “other” blanks, along with your invitation for wisdom, imply that a real human will see responses and digest/process/vet them. Your invitation much more strongly implies it. I still don’t know if anyone looks at Trump’s survey responses. Maybe if a lot of short answers are similar they are noted. Your invitation more clearly implies, but still only implies, that a human will process your responses, and that he/they will weigh not just short 1-10 word issue headings but actual original solutions.

Even solutions that exceed one page. That’s what your letter implies.

If you have in place a team prepared to process a flood of information, maybe it would encourage more responses if you would explain how you will process ideas. I presume that even before your current invitation, more people have submitted ideas/solutions to you than you felt you had the time to process, and a few of them were many, many pages long. I myself have written to you before, and did not hear back. God’s answers to our prayers usually come gift-wrapped in Hard Work, Years of Study, and Patient Reasoning with people who disagree.

The Bible has blueprints for such a team. I have three proposals designed to implement God’s tips in a way that minimizes human resistance. They are: a “Multitude of Counsellors Project”, for activists; “Saltshaker Papers”, for small groups within churches; and [www.SaveTheWorld.Saltshaker.US www.SaveTheWorld.Saltshaker.US], a wiki website whose goal is more interaction, online, than I have found elsewhere.

3 proposals | designed to implement God’s tips | in a way that minimizes human resistance

& a fourth proposal by Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA sequence, for displacing/bypassing unaccountable bureaucracy

1. “Multitude of Counsellors” Multitude_Of_Counsellors_Project (for political activists) 2. Saltshaker Papers (for small groups within churches) Proposed practical rules for groups to function as “saltshakers” within their churches. 3. Wiki Website: www.SaveTheWorld/ Saltshaker.US. Join the “Save The World” Club, which is a fair way to describe God’s ignored blueprint for “Church”. I have worked to create an online forum as much like 1 Corinthians 14 fellowship as I can imagine.

1. “Multitude of Counsellors” Project (for political activists)

As time and money allows I hope to compile an email and snail list of all the Iowa Republican candidates who lost in primaries and in the general this year and offer them this solution – how to build a “think tank” by inviting the people who like to talk longer than campaign managers want their candidates to spend, that they met while campaigning. These talkers might care enough about the assaults of Darkness to come to meetings about shining Light. I believe this holds the potential for making election “losers” more influential than “winners”. It will certainly make “losers” bright beacons of Light in America’s Darkness.

I would like to send to every candidate in every state; if you catch the vision you can help with that. I barely have the resources to contact just the losers in Iowa. I expect losers to be more open to God’s ideas than winners, since traditional political formulas seems to have worked for winners so far; they may think it too risky to divert attention from them to what God says to "try".

Not that there should be any pressure on any participant to believe God or the Bible. Their voices should not be censored, or subject to rules from which more agreeable voices are exempt. Robert’s Rules of Order, followed by legislatures, are actually close to the forums modeled in 1 Corinthians 14. Except that in today’s legislatures, the one voice is censored which must never be censored: God’s. Of all the voices to censor, it must not be God’s! All should be free to cite for their authority the highest principles they know – even Christians. Christians must stop self-censoring the one Authority which is the main reason they are even in politics!

Dumb, dumb, dumb!

How well I know the resistance to such groups that welcome the brainpower of all, especially of God, among politicos! But I have constructed this way of implementing God’s principles with that resistance in mind, explaining the benefits both to candidates and to others who join, both to minimize the resistance from “the way we have always done it” inertia and to just plain overwhelm that resistance as such groups become America’s dominant political influencers, no more held back by resistance than paper holds back a tornado.

2. Saltshaker Papers (for small groups within churches)

Proposed practical rules for groups to function as “saltshakers” within their churches. Also includes a brief history of the Fall of Freedom of Religious Expression in America, a Bible Study on “Salt”, and a Mission statement.

How well I know the resistance to any “Salt” or “Light” (Matthew 5:13-16) escaping churches! My latest, most succinct Bible study aimed at that resistance is How God's Blueprints for Christian Meetings Gave America its Freedoms in the 1620's - Why they Offer "eye hath not seen" Freedoms in the 2020's (See Wiki Article.) This study shows how church meetings organized as God desires will be the very action-focused “think tanks” that any Christian activist with a little political experience can immediately see will save America.

Most who so see it, though, are afraid to even think it, knowing the resistance of modern Noninvolvement Theologies. But quoting God for very long has a way of breaking down anti-Bible theologies. I know it doesn’t seem possible that mere Truth could have such power, not over American churches today, but Truth turned the whole evil Roman Empire around. Truth has always been underrated. I have faith that it can, and will, heal America’s churches. At least some of them.

My impressions are formed from the responses to four mailings I did to every Iowa church, and two mailings to every Des Moines church, 30 recorded hour-long interviews with pastors in a State Representative district where I was running, conversations with hundreds of pastors and laymen over the years who came into our music store, and many years of attendance at churches that seemed the most open to the vision I saw, with as much discussion of the Scriptures as was allowed.

It isn’t that hard to find important, powerful Christian leaders presenting powerful evidence that the Noninvolvement theologies I challenge are not Biblical. I list those who have inspired me in the Appendix at How God's Blueprints for Christian Meetings Gave America its Freedoms in the 1620's -Why they Offer “eye hath not seen” Freedoms in the 2020's.

My articles about God’s blueprints would fill books. But here is a 120 word summary:

Wiki Website: www.SaveTheWorld/Saltshaker.US (this website)

Join the “Save The World” Club, which is a fair way to describe God’s ignored blueprint for “Church”. I have worked to create an online forum as much like 1 Corinthians 14 fellowship as I can imagine. You can’t build much fellowship with someone who won’t even tell you who they are, so to post, you have to give your real name, your state, and your political party. Optionally, you can sign with a bit more about your beliefs, and/or some contact information.

Once you do that, you can not only post comments after the articles of others, but you can interact with points you want to respond to, right where they are in the article. Just like in Wikipedia, contributing to the article itself instead of a separate “comment stream”, but with your name next to your contribution. And you can contribute your own research, analysis, or opinion, unlike Wikipedia where you can only report what some "mainstream" [liberal, typically] media has claimed.

Face to face meetings, I believe, are still the very best way for humans to communicate about important issues that require consensus and group action. One limitation is that they are unavailable to people from different states. Online forums like Zoom help with that problem. I created an online wiki in an attempt to come as close as one can online, to the consensus building that is possible in person, and in a way that organizes and preserves the consensus achieved.

Dr. Robert Malone

inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology1 (the original platform, not to be confused with the current mRNA COVID shots):

how to Displace/bypass unaccountable bureaucracy

From an interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola.

Transcript <> Summary, from which this report is excerpted.

“I really try not to complain or whine. One of my core messages is, yep, none of this is fair. None of this is right. None of this is ethical, and you have to get over it. You have to just recognize that this is the nature of the situation we're in, and it's not really personal.... it helps to not take it personally, although it can be a little painful from time to time....

“The answer lies in the creation of self-sustainable decentralized systems and self-governance....

“[We face] willingness of our government to suspend the Bill of Rights and fundamental ways, and the willingness of our government to disregard the norms of bioethics that have been established for generations...

“The answer is best captured in one of the final chapters [of my book, The Lies My Government Told Me] from a group in Italy … IppocrateOrg. They, like the World Council for Health under Tess Lori have been very committed to a vision of decentralization and intentional communities. The physicians in Italy were censored at least as bad as the docs here in the states. Hundreds have lost their license, ability to practice, for the sin of providing early treatment and saving lives.

“They've come together and formed this organization, and they're now starting their own medical school, Ippocrate, and they've done very novel things, like assembled local community groups in cities and towns throughout Italy that are engaging in training. This includes setting up training programs for physicians to despecialize.

“So, doctors that had been hospitalists, that had been focused in very narrow specialties, are learning and have set up mentorship with primary care physicians to learn the tools of the trade to allow them to go back to old-school medicine, to treating patients, which is where so much of the joy comes from.”

Dr. Mercola, the interviewer, adds: “The playing field is by no means even. But we can still overcome [globalist] plans, for the simple reason that ‛average people’ outnumber the globalist cabal by millions to one. They need our cooperation, or their new enslavement system won't work. We saw this with vaccine mandates.

“No one, at least not in the U.S., was ever held down and injected at gun point. They used every conceivable and inconceivable method of coercion, yes, but they couldn't use physical force.

“One reason for that is because there's too many of us. They need us to enter their system by choice, even if it's a coerced choice. So, our greatest weapon is simply refusal, to say no, even if it costs us in the short-term, and to instead enter into and support emerging parallel alternative systems.”

I will add at this point, that a significant reason our numerical advantage of “millions to one” hasn’t stopped the globalist advance is because we have disobeyed God’s vision of information and action forums as the model for Christian meetings. Most Christians attend churches where information about the deepest Darkness (that Darkness which is entwined with government) is censored, and do not follow the information flowing from activists, while a much smaller number of Christians are activists, but their information censors God.

Christians mostly leave the management of their information up to Hell, and then blame Hell for its unfair “slant”, rather than simply obey God.

It should be obvious that the Christian addiction to globalist indoctrination that Dr. Mercola envisions can only occur to the extent that Christians displace Hell’s media with God’s.

Mercola goes on to talk about alternative media, but remember that Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter began as alternative media which freed Americans from the communist-leaning “Mainstream Media” of TV networks and newspapers. Now we call it “Big Tech” but the problem was that each of them were owned by a single human or a very small group of humans. What one or a few own, can be corrupted as the owners are tempted, or sold to corrupt humans when the owners retire or die. But there is no way any tyrant can “own” the information flow God wants for Christian meetings which is produced by all members through discussion, reasoning, study, and sharing what God “reveals”, 1 Corinthians 14.

Mercola continues, introducing his next excerpt from his interview with Malone about how we need information that bypasses not only Big Tech, Mainstream Media, and government bureaucracy, but the internet itself, which is operated by ICANN which controls domain names and may not always be this free. Of course the need will be met by obeying God’s instructions for Christian meetings. Mercola continues: “Coming right up is the planned implementation of an international vaccine passport. The World Health Organization is also seeking to attain the sole authority to dictate the global response to declared pandemics. Can a decentralized model be successful in the face of the global cabal continuing their efforts to eliminate our freedoms? Malone responds:

“I’m being hit with multiple requests for press commentary about this new position that the G20 has taken in favor of personal ID health certificates to restrict global travel. I fear that things have progressed to such a point that we may not be able to overcome the momentum that confronts us.

“The modification of the international health regulations is proposed to be backed by the World Trade Organization as the enforcement arm for the World Health Organization, so that they'll be able to impose sanctions on noncompliant countries.

“Had we had a major red wave [in the midterm] elections, I would've been more optimistic. But I fear that this will get pushed through under this administration this summer … I'm of the opinion that to a significant extent, they will have their way with us. So, what do you do in the face of that? What do you do in the face of this profound evil? …

“I've just come back from a three-day meeting in Mexico City with a group of very intelligent folks that are very active in business and investment, and many of them are establishing their own local intentional communities. My sense is that there is a reasonable chance that we will see these local consortium collections of intentional communities pop up all over the world.

“The opportunity is to create some way for them to come together and form their own network, their own matrix. My concern is that right now we're so dependent on an internet that is subject to arbitrary and capricious modification from the ICANN [the Internet governance] committee or others. There are some fundamental problems we have to solve, but I think there are ways that we can approach this.

“The solution cannot be imposed or created by any one person or even a small group of people, because then we'll end up falling into exactly the same trap. I think that it has to emerge organically, from many different groups from all over the world, interacting with each other.

“But I think what we can do is envision a process to enable it. I think that process starts by defining what the need is. What it is that we as a community of independent thinkers and networks need?

“I think we can envision a process where key people come together, representing their communities, and define what it is that we want to see in a decentralized world, and what the problems are in getting there. Once we define what those are, then we can start working on coming up with solutions to that problem set.”

It is amazing that what Malone describes next is fulfilled by God’s vision of a network of Christian meetings in which each group studies and acts on solutions by itself, and also networks with other Christian groups, although Malone attributes the concept to Irving Janis' book Victims of Groupthink:

“...you have independent solutions coming from a diverse array of different people from different cultures and nation states," he says. "Then, [we] come together and see if we can find common ground among those. I think that's a process that could work. But I'm very wary of anybody who thinks they have the answer right now.

“I think I might be able to help facilitate [such] a process, so, what I'm trying to focus on is, how could we get there? Not saying, ‛Oh, I know the answer, we need to do this or do that.’ [and, “Just send me money so I can fix everything.”]

“There are a lot of classic traps that the medical freedom movement is starting to find itself in, and one of those is the trap of cults of personality. It's easy to get caught up in the fame and adulation, but I think we really have to fight that and come together in a way that does not set up any one person to be the leader, but rather enables all of us to be leaders.”

Exactly God’s goals for Christian meetings. Let’s together acknowledge that God thought of them first, and let’s together study and follow God’s Tips for Groups, which are the antidote for the prophesied Antichrist. Antichrist will indeed come, and dominate the whole world, God tells us, but let’s be the people Antichrist has to fight, Revelation 13:7. Let’s delay, if not diminish, Antichrist’s victory.

In fact, for any Christian reader who thinks sitting on your hands is God’s job for you now that Antichrist is prophesied and resistance is futile, “Second Chances in the Last Days” lists seven Bible reasons to get off your butt and get busy harvesting, in hope:

1. God’s people will “do exploits”. Daniel 11:32.

2. Righteousness increases too! Daniel 12:10, Proverbs 4:18, Job 17:9.

3. God promises victory HERE! (several verses)

4. The Bible says many nations will fight Antichrist: we can influence our nation to be among them! Daniel 11:32-45, Revelation 13:7.

5. Prophecies that may be interpreted as describing America, which may also indicate that America will not fall under Antichrichrist!

6. A review of Jeremiah, detailing 12 times God gave His people another chance to avoid further judgment.

7. Two movements are described in Revelation – one economic, and the other political – of which the United States is the unquestioned leader and even personification: capitalism, and freedom. The future for capitalism is rocky but survivable. The future for Freedom is overwhelming victory!

Appendices:

1. Comments about your analysis

2. Root problems: you will probably agree but think it foolish to say so publicly

3. The Tragic Cold War between Christian Activists and Christian Churches

4. My experience of the resistance of Christian political activists to acknowledging God.

5. Censoring God in order to give God’s positions more “credibility” is like refusing to wear clothes because they will make you naked.

Appendix 1. Comments about your analysis

Your interesting financial stats say liberal nonprofits raised $21+ billion, seven times more than the $3-4 billion raised by conservative nonprofits, from seven times more donors, counting donors of $1,000 average ; baby killers have raised 10 times more than prolifers and have 10 times more donors.

Your solution on page 4: “some of the things conservatives need to do...20 million grassroots donors...dozens of mega donors investing billions of dollars into the conservative movement.” You don’t say how to get there from here, which is a clue to the sincerity of your request for wisdom.

Just for fun, at the end of this letter I have some more fence-shaking stats about the problem, showing how much more people spend on their pets than on politics, and even than they donate to missions. Also how much more is spent on Christmas than on Christ.

Your description of Republican consultants as “content-free” is fascinating. You don’t define the term and I have never heard it, but I will guess you might include expensive literature containing no more information than you can grasp in 10 seconds since people estimate that the life span of political literature averages 10 seconds before it is recycled. (That’s what I was told years ago in a “campaign school”.) Maybe you are also thinking of 10 second TV ads and longer ads that have whatever terrible thing you can say about your opponent in 10 words.

The apathy of viewers that makes consultants afraid to say more than 10 words is one of those “fundamental problems” I mentioned. Voters aren’t equipped to vote intelligently by 10-second messages, but I well know the resistance, much of it theological, to voting intelligently! In all the pleas I have heard to vote in my 77 years, I don’t recall anyone daring to append the adverb “intelligently”.

Message: you characterize the marketing gizmo of Democrats as a “tune to whistle”. Interesting. You compare “Democracy is on the ballot” and “God made babies to be murdered” with “Inflation/crime/high gas prices” and find the latter less whistelable.

It is hard to grasp how much dumber I would have to become to believe a vote for election fraud is a vote for “democracy”.

I wonder why you didn’t mention voter fraud? Just lack of space, or don’t you think there was any? I know there are a lot of Republicans who join in chanting “election deniers”, but millions of us have seen the videos of barriers being put up so vote counting couldn’t be observed, along with the testimonies of poll watchers. Senator Grassley (Iowa) said he didn’t block certification 4 years ago because none of the court filings alleged the fraud was sufficient to reverse the result, (that earned Grassley a primary challenger, who dropped back when Trump endorsed Grassley anyway), but how can there be doubt that there was enough mischief to leave the honest result uncertain? Enough doubt to support Trump-supported secretaries of state and to watch a LOT more carefully in the future? And to fuel exasperation with "Fraud Deniers"?

I disagree that the Democrat message was more persuasive, at least to people smart enough to find their voting location. (OK, I know, Democrats don’t use their voting locations.)

10-20 times more liberal nonprofits than conservative. Fascinating.

Fortunately there is not a direct relationship between money spent and ballot results! Despite being outspent and outorganized 10-1, Republicans scored important progress November 8. This fact raises the question how sure we can be that political success is a matter of more money or more nonprofits. Could it be that ten times more mail, TV ads, and robo calls is counter-productive?

Regarding more nonprofits, it seems to me that what matters is the reach of nonprofits, not their number. And regarding money, what is it spent on? On bombarding the apathetic in order to overcome their willful ignorance so they will vote. Not intelligently, judging from the simplistic content of most campaign literature and ads, but fortunately it doesn’t take a ton of intelligence to pick “R” over “D”.

What would it be like to have voters so well informed that they educate their candidates en masse? What would it be like if a statehouse candidate held an event once a week and had as many people show up as show up for a football game? It wouldn’t take much money to run a campaign if Americans cared as much about Freedom as they care about football. Candidates used to stand on the back of a train and crowds gathered. They didn’t have to even leave the train. All it cost to hold a huge event was a train ticket. I know that because I saw it in a movie.

Now, it takes more money than intelligence. A LOT more money. Then, it took a lot more intelligence. Candidates were scrutinized by well informed people who cared about Freedom.

Appendix 2. Root problems: you will probably agree but think it foolish to say so publicly

Surely you share my frustration with such apathy among voters that it takes billions of dollars of media bombardment to overcome it enough that free government can kind of function.

But how do you talk about that publicly? People don’t like to be labeled “apathetic” or “irresponsible” or “selfish lovers of their own pleasures too busy to lift a finger to save babies from being slaughtered, children from being sexually mutilated, or Christians from being tortured by tyrants who are sustained by U.S. trade”.

Yet Noninvolvement Theologies, that keep Christians from being politically informed and active, are overwhelming.

These theologies strangle help not only from churches but from Christian activists. You may not like what I say about activists, so I will put that off and pick on churches first.

Church Resistance to Permitting their Light to go “outside” into the Darkness.

What is “Darker”:

• putting wine instead of grape juice in tiny communion cups, or murdering your very own baby?

• scheduling church services on the wrong day of the week, or doing nothing to stop men from going in your daughters’ bathrooms?

• getting the “transubstantiation v. consubstantiation” Catholic/Protestant battle wrong, or butchering children to turn boys into pretend girls and girls into pretend boys?

In other words,

• the theological battles that occupy sermons and divide churches about which Bible believers can disagree, or the Bible-defined abominations about which Bible believers cannot credibly disagree but will not talk about because they are fed by government, making them “politics”, which, being “controversial”, would be “divisive”. (1 Controversies 11:28-30)

I think anyone with modest political experience understands the irony that the natural constituency of Republican conservatives is Christians, since conservative positions are assumed by many Christians to be based on the Bible, and Christians gather in huge numbers in churches, where they hear occasional sermons identifying from Scripture what God calls ‟abominations”; and yet when congregants hear those sermons and want to ‟put feet to them”, sharing with other congregants ways to get that Matthew 5 ‟Light” out into that ‟Darkness”, they are censored from sharing any of that information on church premises. Because most of that Darkness is fed by government, which makes it ‟politics” to shine Light into it, and ‟Jesus never got involved in politics” etc etc.

So we have David Barton’s Wallbuilders, and David Lane’s American Renewal Project, complaining that only half of Christians (the natural constituency of the Republican party) are registered to vote, and only half of them vote. Which leaves us activists scrambling for votes of people who don’t so much share Republican values but who vote.

Yes, I know about liberal churches, whose sermons openly support the Democrat platform, and whose members are mostly Democrats who vote. Yet the differences in ideology are not as smothering as the restrictions on individual input that they share. In both, there is generally a low tolerance for pastors’ activism, and much lower tolerance for church members’ activism. In both liberal and conservative churches it is feared that discussion and strategizing of “politics” by members would be “controversial” because in both kinds of churches there are many who disagree with the pastor so letting them say so would be “divisive”. If there were forums in churches where those who disagree about important matters could reason with each other respectfully, in the spirit of love which obeying the Bible enables in all relationships, all Christians would become better informed, putting liberalism at a great disadvantage.

EXAMPLES:

When Pat Robertson ran for president in 1987 and came in second in Iowa, he did well because Steve Scheffler got Christians to give him copies of church membership directories to create a database. Robertson needed to connect with Christians, because his positions were Christian, making Christians his natural constituency. How tragic that churches would not give him that information, so he had to get it from Christians who did not fully grasp their church’s opposition to any of their Light escaping into the Darkness, and when he did, at least some church leaders were furious and took steps to keep their directories less available in the future. When Scheffler leafleted cars in the First Assembly parking lot because it was legal to do that while the church would allow no information inside, a pastor saw that, and came out to personally remove the literature.

How does that square with Matthew 5:13-16?

Later that same pastor ran for school board, but I don’t think he ever caught on that information about how to get Light out into the Darkness belongs in church.

A few churches allow their pastors to occasionally preach about Bible-identified abominations which are tangled up with government, so that talking about them is labeled “politics”. More often, “dirty politics”. After David Shedlock left his Assembly of God church in Creston, Iowa, to head Operation Rescue’s Des Moines chapter, he told me he had been allowed to preach rare sermons about murdering babies, but if he got up to two or three sermons a year on that topic, the board would come him and tell him not to be so obsessed with the subject.

What I have not found in Des Moines is a church where information isn’t limited to just what the pastor knows, but where anyone can contribute important information (that requires a page or more). A church operating on more than 1% BP (BrainPower).

In order to find the openness I did, my search began with hour long recorded interviews with the 30 pastors of the churches in house district where I first ran as a Republican, to learn the Biblical reasons they resisted sharing information about my Bible- and sermon-inspired candidacy. My response to their reasons was my first book: “The Gift of ‛Governments’ – an Assault on the Noninvolvement Theologies that are Paralyzing the Armies of God”. The cover cites “1 Corinthians 12:28”, which lists “governments” as a Holy Spirit “Gift”. “Church administrator”, I am often told is what that Holy Spirit “gift” is all about. But I point out no “church administrator” is described in the Bible, while every Bible hero in the Hebrews 11 “Hall of Faith”, of examples of faith for us, was either a political leader himself, or got in the Bible through their interaction with political leaders. The Greek word is “kubernesis”, from whence we get our word “gubernatorial”, our label for elections of governors. The dictionary definition is “steersman of a ship”. Our Founders referred to politics by the same Biblical metaphor: “the ship of state”.

Caveats:

There are a few churches which let their pastors talk about political things. What is rare enough that I have not found it in Des Moines is that kind of freedom for others besides the pastor to share ‟political” information with fellow worshipers through church communication channels and/or on church premises. Sure, there are ‟Sunday Schools” where digressions from the established topic are tolerated for a minute or two; what is lacking is opportunity for serious brainstorming, group research, strategizing, and action. Churches are places of talk, not action, contrary to Titus 3:8-9, and the talk is dominated, in ‟worship services”, by the thinking of a single person who gives his uninterruptible sermon and preapproves anyone else’s contributions, contrary to 1 Corinthians 14 in which ‟all” are called to contribute verbally in Christian meetings.

Exceptions:

I found a church once which allowed me to put up a bulletin board, but that didn’t generate any responses. Another church allowed me to talk to a Sunday School for about two minutes about meetings to be held off church premises at another time during the week. Three people came only once – I was unable to persuade them that the Scriptures I cite outline a solution worthy of their time. Another pastor allowed me to make a 10 minute presentation to the board from the Scriptures, but the board voted against allowing the plan I saw in Scripture, so the pastor accepted their vote as final.

There was a Korean church that let me even give a 15 minute presentation from the pulpit. That led to a series of meetings where half a dozen people joined me in a weeknight to discuss issues on camera, aired later on cable TV. At that time I was following the 1 Corinthians 14 vision of a forum open to all and open to subjects proposed by participants, so we had discussion for its own sake; I had not yet noticed Scriptures calling for discussion to be focused on action such as Titus 3:8-9. That lasted two or three months. After that the pastor told me that such discussion was actually the model followed in the seminary that he supported on the Chinese border to train North Koreans, but that the people here in Des Moines wouldn’t allow him to do that here. He literally cried that I was asking his support for what he thought impossible. In disbelief that a pastor would accommodate the people rather than stick to Scripture, I left his church, and shortly after he left the ministry and the building was sold. I now regret leaving him.

Not, “think of the consequences”. Think of the Potential! (A line from the movie “Spirited”)

I think anyone with modest political experience can appreciate how much potential for healing the Darkness there would be, but for that censorship, but most Christian political activists don’t dare let themselves even think of it, because the censorship is sustained by Noninvolvement Theologies so intractible that any challenge to them will guarantee the church version of instant ‟deplatforming”, rendering a candidate politically useless.

I take it for obvious to anyone with just a little political experience, and with the courage to dream about what it would be like for churches to allow politically aware members to meet, discuss, and strategize with each other and to make brief reports upon which they agree to the rest of the congregation through church communications (website, bulletin board, pulpit announcements) that:

• Christians in large numbers would become well informed and ready and willing to vote intelligently, without the infusion of more activist money

• where discussion is respectful and does not exclude anyone willing to listen, reason, and be honest, conservatism would win over communism

• the information flow, through a few well informed members and allowed by the rest, would neutralize media lies and bypass big tech censorship

• were churches to allow a free flow of Light-Into-Darkness information, that information flow, reaching interested members of several churches, could support news reporters who could displace liberal God-defying local newspapers.

• The readers of a news source targeting Christians, and open to contributions from Christians, would be relatively honest and action-focused, producing not so much “click bait” surviving on personal attacks to entertain us with accusations of “the other guy”, but information with enough depth for action – for shining Light in Darkness – for healing evil and rescuing its innocent victims.

I actually set up The Partnership Machine, Inc. in 1986 with that vision. Under it, I published its Prayer & Action News for 25 years, and tried to negotiate between single issue activists like prolifers and homeschoolers to team up. I did not anticipate the depth of the resistance. It wasn’t just churches, or pastors, or church members. The Noninvolvement Theologies stratified activists also. I could not overcome:

• the spirit of division in which Christians certify their holiness by separating themselves from those who mildly disagree (see 2 Denominations 3:16) about something rather than by reasoning with each other (1 Peter 3:15) – both over theology and over public issues;

• the “Spectator Spirit” in both churches and politics, in which big audiences will pay to watch famous people think and talk, for entertainment, but will not use that information to help the helpless themselves. Jeremiah 5:31 The prophets ·speak lies [L prophesy falsely; Deut. 18:14–22], and the priests ·take power [rule] ·into their own hands [or by their hand/control], and my people love it this way. (EXB)

I didn’t stop publishing for financial reasons – it never made a profit anyway. I stopped because my hope had been that people would use the information to help interact with lawmakers to solve problems, but I reached the conclusion that people were using the information only to entertain themselves, which seemed to me a waste of time better spent on contacting lawmakers myself.

Appendix 3: The Tragic Cold War between Christian Activists and Christian Churches

There is a tragic sense in which most activists and pastors don’t want anything to do with each other.

Christian churches generally don’t want any mention of Shining Light in government-fueled Darkness (which Matthew 5:13-16 commands but which Noninvolvement Theologies denigrate as “politics”, which is “dirty”) on church premises, or through church communication channels. So churches rarely help activists even a little. “Political” information given by pastors is rarely welcome; more rarely is information welcomed from individual members. Some pastors preach explicitly against even voting, and most churches will not even suggest to people that they should vote.

Christian activists generally don’t want any of their candidates publicly mentioning the Bible verses that inspired their positions, because quoting the Bible or talking about Jesus, in those forums where voters decide whether to pattern our laws after the principles of Heaven or of Hell, takes away a candidate’s “credibility”. So activists rarely promote churches even a little. Since only a quarter of the Republican party’s natural constituency – Christians – votes, activists have to get votes from nonChristians, which activists suppose will be made more difficult by endorsing churches.

God is censored equally, in that manner, by both churches and activists. Christian activists, driven from their churches to “put feet to” their pastors’ occasional abomination-identifying sermons, leave their “swords” back in their pews. Christian activists censor God. Your letter, for example, never mentioned God.

Scripture is the only reason there is a Republican party; almost all our issues were inspired by pastors’ sermons. Yet we won’t tell the public the Scriptures that are often the real reason we care so much about our issues. Instead we give the public weaker substitute reasons based on human logic, telling ourselves logic has more “credibility” than the Word of God, even when we ourselves did not make our positions non-negotiable because of what we say, but because of what God says.

Church sermons often report what God says about Darkness (the deepest Darkness is usually that which government fuels) but churches won’t let congregants strategize together how to get their own pastor’s Light out into the Darkness. Christian activists strategize how to go out into the Darkness and shine a little, but only with their own tiny spark; they won’t say what God says about Darkness.

Not just churches and activists. “You can’t mix politics and religion” anywhere.

MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS. I am a member of the Iowa Society of Mayflower Descendants. Through that, and through on-camera interviews with authors and executives of the international organization in 2008 at their triennial convention in Plimoth, (original spelling, and the spelling of their museum), Massachussets, I learned that the Pilgrims had the kind of forums I proclaim every “sabbath” afternoon. I made the interviews into a documentary at www.1620.US. This led me to read, in the 1,000 pages of The Works of John Robinson, their pastor, the Biblical arguments for their freedom of speech and religion and a vote for all.

(Not just church members but even atheists! Not just free men but servants. Not just rich property owners but the poor. Not just men but women! My 12th generation grandmother was Elizabeth Warren. When her husband Richard, a passenger of the Mayflower in 1620, died in 1627, she was allowed to vote, as Head of Household over seven children. The first woman to vote in America! Because of Pilgrim Bible study!

Deuteronomy 4:7 For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for? 8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

Psalm 150:6 Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord. Praise ye the Lord.)

I was so inspired, as I am still, by that that I made a parade float, a 1/6 replica of the Mayflower built on a car, whose sides shout “They got freedom of speech and religion, and a vote for all, from the Bible”. The front sail says “www.1620.us / Freedom Reborn” while the rear sail says “Mayflower”.

But our Iowa meetings never mention Scripture. They never talk about the freedom our ancestors created. Instead we talk about genealogy challenges, what kind of clothes they wore, how they made everyone bring their rifles to church, whatever is the most frivolous thing they can think of. And the national website has nothing about their Bible studies, even though everyone knows their allegiance to the Bible is the ONLY reason they even came here. Indeed, one of the reenactors I interviewed in 2008 was Buddy Tripp, who told me he is not a Christian; later he was made the head of Plimoth Plantation, the museum in Plymouth, Massachussetts.

The website for the international society, MayflowerSociety.org, has nothing about the Bible studies that I can find. No mention of Sabbath Afternoon Prophesying Services. No mention of their Catechism. A search for “Bible” and for “scripture” turns up nothing. (Double checked December, 2022.)

DAR. I thought, “What is that as stupid as? That is as stupid as if descendants of George Washington gave no glory to God for the Revolutionary War miracles Washington wrote about that made their victory possible, or the time several Indian sharpshooters took aim at just Washington for several minutes, and later he wrote about bullets in his clothes, but he was not harmed. Just his clothes. Or if they had no interest in the Scriptures that inspired their ancestors to care so much for Freedom, that shaped their discussions of government, and that persuaded George Washington to decline, as Jesus did, the office of King. (John 6:14-15)

But then I thought, “my wife goes to Daughters of the American Revolution, and they don’t talk about the faith of their ancestors either!” Strange, to turn genealogy into a high society admission, and to not care about the very Faith that made them ancestors worth associating with! The website for the national website is www.dar.org.

AMERICAN LEGION. I only played in the Air Force Band in San Antonio from 1968 to 1970. Not much “action” there. I go to American Legion meetings where they talk about past battles for freedom. But they censor any discussion of current battles in these public forums of ours where voters decide whether to pattern our laws after the principles of Heaven or of Hell.

How can they think the war for freedom is over? It is never over. They claim their nonprofit status doesn’t let them talk about “politics”, which is a “lie from the pit of Hell”, as anyone knows who understands the term “nonpartisan education”. Their national magazine has articles about issues, starting in each issue with a statement on a position by a Republican and Democrat congressman. But the local posts say go away and take that talk with you?

In 2015 I approached Des Moines’ Hispanic post about inviting presidential candidates to speak. There were about 18 Republican presidential candidates at one time. I know that candidates were showing up for smaller crowds than the post has, so I expect at least some candidates would show up for the post. Such events are kept “nonpartisan” by extending the invitation to every Republican and Democrat candidate to speak. They can come all together or separately. I asked the Hispanic post because it grieved me that Republican candidates were filling the airwaves with such hostile and ignorant statements about immigration; I still believe a meeting with a crowd very well informed about immigration reality would have lowered the national temperature.

At first, a meeting between post officials and a Republican party representative showed mutual interest. But as the talk continued, the post representatives decided all the Republicans could be allowed to do would be to rent the hall for several hundred dollars; the meeting would not be treated by the post as a post activity where members would be likely to show up!

Appendix 4. Resistance of Christian activists to acknowledging God I experienced

Belief that the Bible is the Word of God never left me from since I was old enough to read it. Obedience to it has consistently been my goal to the extent I could make sense of it, although my faith was too often weak that what was plainly written made more sense than my culture, and I too seldom met my goal.

VIETNAM.

For example, I voted Democrat from age 21 to 42. The main thing that attracted me to the party was its belief that war could better be prevented by diplomacy than by going to war. I first voted in 1968. I had a college degree, had taught a year, and had just been drafted and was playing trumpet in the Lackland Air Force Band in San Antonio.

So there I was. 21. Drafted. My culture said war was wrong, and my Bible reading seemed to confirm that the wars of Israel endorsed by God were defensive wars, unlike the Vietnam war. No one had pointed out to me that Proverbs 24:10-12 logically applies to Vietnam where the threat to the U.S. was not direct but the brutal slaughter and torture of South Vietnamese cried out for help. Our media reported the corruption of South Vietnam’s government, but not the atrocities of the Communists. No one pointed out to me that Joshua 10 is a precedent for fighting to protect another population. (Although 2 Chronicles 35:22 is a warning to not do so when God says “no”.)

I am giving highlights from my past experience, not presenting comprehensive position statements. I am not saying the U.S, military should get involved defending every underdog population under attack. Another relevant principle is 2 Thessalonians 3:10, “...if any would not work, neither should he eat.” It is futile to defend a population which has not avoided provoking its neighbors to war, and which will not fight to defend itself, or to maintain peace and freedom once it has military victory. Balancing these principles is a judgment call which must evaluate facts, and we do not have media we can trust to give us the facts. God designed Church to be a place where facts can be established, so church censorship of information deemed “political” makes America’s ability to wisely decide when to help and when to just watch very challenging.

There was no information flow allowed in church because that was “politics” and “you can’t mix politics and religion.” So even though playing in the air force band, which consumed only about four hours of most days, was the absolute dream job of any aspiring musician and author, my heart was not in my military service. I believed I was in an evil position, being part of an evil war machine. And I voted Democrat.

THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION.

Voting Democrat over one issue opened my mind to Democrat rationalizations in other issues. The anti-war movement had combined with what was then called the “sexual revolution”. Few knew, then, and few know now, the role educators played in fomenting that “sexual revolution”. Alfred Kinsey wrote a book about his “research” on perversions like sodomy and hourly masturbation in 1948.

Wikipedia frankly acknowledges that “The Kinsey Reports, which led to a storm of controversy, are regarded by many as a precursor to the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.” He produced pornography disguised as “research”. As Wikipedia admits, “Kinsey's research went beyond theory and interview to include observation of and participation in sexual activity, sometimes involving co-workers. Kinsey justified this sexual experimentation as being necessary to gain the confidence of his research subjects. He encouraged his staff to do likewise, and to engage in a wide range of sexual activity, to the extent that they felt comfortable; he argued that this would help his interviewers understand the participants' responses.”

Yet he was not arrested, but instead became very popular. And within ten years, states started repealing their laws against adultery and sodomy.

SIECUS was formed in 1964 by a baby killer to spread sex education throughout America’s schools; their first teachers’ manual came out two years later.

By that time I had read the Bible all the way through two or three times and was using Strong’s Concordance a lot to look up the definitions of Greek words. But I had heard virtually no Bible study applying Scripture to my culture or to politics, leaving me a “ship without a rudder” in the storm of American values.

I couldn’t figure it out alone.

Many times I have heard people justify censorship of “politics” in church with “just give them Jesus, and then they will know what to do.” Well, Jesus was very precious to me, but I didn’t know what to do. I could quote a fair amount of the Bible. When I was 10 or 11 my grandmother offered me $5 – the equivalent of about $200 today – to memorize all 48 verses of Matthew 5. I did. But the application of verses to public issues did not often just naturally occur to me before someone pointed it out.

Our everyday experience, that the range of words and deeds for which we are responsible stretches from matters so basic that everyone can intuitively grasp them to matters which virtually no one can grasp without human instruction, is reflected in the Bible. On the one hand, Romans 10:14 explains why it is so important for us to teach others, because “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”

The need for teachers/mentors doesn’t just apply to getting your “ticket to Heaven”. It applies to choosing spouses, making marriages work, holding churches together, raising kids, inspiring your community, so more than just you can get their “ticket”.

On the other hand, anyone who doesn’t acknowledge God has to ignore lots of clues: Romans 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations....

See also Romans 2 which describes people who have never heard of the Bible yet who live by it because that is their “nature”: 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men [cf. 1 Corinthians 4:5] by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

I fall somewhere between the two extremes. Had Light been allowed into my culture's Darkness by either churches or activists, I think I would have been better equipped to have dodged a lot of mistakes. I don’t think I am the only one.

For example who, reading “rescue those being led away to slaughter”, Proverbs 24:10-12, would instantly realize “Oh, that is talking about aborting innocent babies”? Not me!

Who, reading in the King James Version, in the King James Version,Isaiah 65:11 “But ye are they that forsake the Lord, that forget my holy mountain, that prepare a table for that troop, and that furnish the drink offering unto that number”, would automatically think “Oh of course! That describes gamblers sitting around a table drinking and concentrating on mathematical formulas relating to cards, dice or whatever, with which they hope to take money from each other without the trouble of earning it by serving each other!”

I attended church faithfully, but there were no sermons addressing the ignorance smothering my soul and brain. Sunday school topics were well described by in the King James Version,Hebrews 6:1, “...laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God...” Most of the “discussions” were not even over real questions that we couldn’t already answer, but were rhetorical questions to make sure we were paying attention. There was no “welcome mat” for topics troubling and confusing us; when our discussion veered that way, they were addressed only briefly because they were treated as digressions; we needed to quickly dispose of them and get back to “The Subject”.

They assumed that Christians don’t need any more information. It was assumed that since I believed the church “doctrines” which explained why my denomination was right and the neighboring church was wrong, that I was going to Heaven, and that is all that mattered.

My dad took me to conservative political meetings. The most conservative issue I remember was the “Liberty Amendment”, a proposed amendment to the Constitution whose goal was elimination of most of the federal government – welfare, social security, expansion of the “commerce clause” – to get our total government downsized to its size under the Constitution. (Recently I read John Stossel say that was about 5% of GDP for all governments; now it’s 40%.) Our dream presidential candidate in 1964 was Senator Barry Goldwater from Arizona.

But there was no Scripture at those meetings. There was economics, logic, and morals. Yet even with discussion of morals, it was “traditional” morality vs. “the new morality”. No authority was given to settle which was right. It was vaguely assumed that “traditional” morality was of God, but no Bibles were opened to double check, or to prove to young dummies like me that, for example, Kinsey, whose ravings I had read through school assignments which treated him as a scholar, was a pervert who should have been in jail, not teaching college students.

Nor, in those meetings, was there open discussion where burning questions could be thoroughly satisfied. It was assumed that since I was at the meeting with my dad, I was fully equipped to resist the indoctrination I was receiving in public school and later in college. I remember no brainstorming, no strategizing, no “multitude of counsellors” as Proverbs 15:22 describes it, where the brainpower of all was plugged in to the party resources. Only famous speakers who gave lectures, and where they articulated what most of us wanted, we clapped.

Neutralizing Bullets with Love Balloons. Like the Beatles’ “Yellow Submarine”, where the video showed blue meanies turned into friends by love bubbles, Democrats thought that by kind thoughts they could even get along with communists and thus prevent war. Only years later did I notice they can’t even get along with Republicans. Kind thoughts for Republicans escape them. Today they can’t even get along with non-progressive Democrats.

When the ultra-liberal Senator George McGovern ran against Richard Nixon, I wrote a long letter to him praising him and actually suggesting to him how to handle media. He wrote back, a letter which I am sure was not a form letter, since who else would write about such a thing? I wonder if I can still find his letter?

I defended a pervert.

After my honorable discharge in 1970 which I didn’t deserve, I got a few Letters to the Editor published in the Des Moines Register.

In one, I defended State Representative Al Sturgeon who was caught having oral sex with a naked go-go dancer on a tavern stage. As the Chicago Tribune reported, “By Chicago standards, the political scandal rocking Iowa seems like penny-ante stuff. Two dozen state representatives showed up at a bachelor party thrown by some lobbyists; a go-go dancer took off her clothes; some sexual misconduct was alleged; and everyone went home....The Mingo Stag Party, as the affair has come to be called, was held April 17 [1986] in the Back Forty tavern in the tiny farming town of Mingo, about 30 miles east of Des Moines. [It] began as a bachelor party for local Democratic legislator Edward Parker ”

I had just read two Will Rogers books. I often notice how my writing style is influenced by what I have just read. So although I was personally disgusted with the activity, I used Will Rogers-style humor to defend Sturgeon. The “holier than thou” attacks on him seemed to have room for criticism. To this day I find personal attacks that don’t acknowledge our own flaws worthy of rebuke. After all, “judgment must begin at the house of God”. 1 Peter 4:17.,/span> Also Matthew 7:1-5 and Romans 2:1-5. Then, I also saw that he was the underdog. My mind went to how Rogers would defend underdogs, and I wanted to be “a writer”, so out came ideas.

My letter had a more powerful effect in preserving his senate seat for him than I anticipated, and when I saw him at an event for Democrat candidates, when I became one, he recognized me and warmly thanked me for what I had come to regret. I am afraid my pen dragged my state a little closer to Hell, by nudging up tolerance for so despicable an act of an elected leader that he could not only remain in office but go on to win another election.

Sturgeon’s April 17, 1986 stunt was when I was 40, in a 6-candidate Democrat primary June 2 of that year. My letter, and that candidate reception, was between Sturgeon’s stunt and that election. I came in last with just over 200 votes, but the district was so heavily stacked against Republicans that I had more votes than the leading Republican in their 2-way primary race. My greatest achievement, I think, was getting my parents to vote Democrat.

During that campaign I also served on the Polk County Platform Committee of the Democratic party. While there I was in a 20-person group that included Jill June, CEO of Planned Barrenhood. When some plank about murdering babies came up, I objected that babies are people. Democrats could say that back then and still survive. She answered that we can’t know that for sure, so the right of a woman to murder her baby trumps rights whose existence we can’t document. Not her exact words.

Why I switched to Republican.

The next year, 1987, Pat Robertson came to Iowa as an overtly Christian candidate for President. That was just two exciting. I had to switch to Republican so I could get in on the excitement. I had always trusted the Bible as the Word of God despite my personal failings and general ignorance, and to have someone actually publicly affirming faith was so refreshing. I mention above a couple of experiences I had during that campaign. Steve Scheffler was Robertson’s campaign manager for Iowa, and to this day he is Iowa’s Committee Man representing Iowa in the national party planning, and has been vigilant to keep Iowa’s caucuses the first presidential contests in the nation. He has also, all the years since, organized candidate score cards all over Iowa.

Why I became Prolife: the “voice” of God.

I was not prolife then, because I had read in books by Edgar Cayce, a channeler, that souls don’t enter bodies until about birth. I had not noticed the contradiction between that and the Bible. I was attracted to the prolife movement in 1987 because of the passion of prolifers, but still they had not shown me the relevant Scriptures, so my interest followed their convictions, not my own. A couple of years later Operation Rescue came to Des Moines. They, for the first time, pointed out the relevant Scriptures. And their masthead featured Proverbs 24:10-12 which calls us to “rescue those being led away to slaughter”. Already a Bible believer, I became a prolifer by my own convictions.

Part of the OR training was basics about how to handle ourselves in court, since pro bono attorneys were scarce and ineffective. Not that defending ourselves was any more effective. We were not told we would win, but we were given some ideas about how to witness. At the least, the training forced us to decide if we were really going to obey Proverbs 24:10-12.

We were shown what police did to prolifers. Not nice. I was given a video of Portland police brutally dragging away a small woman, by that woman. I met Regina Dinwiddie, who died in November, 2022, who suffered back injury for her last 35 years since Atlanta baby killers dropped a concrete barricade on her back.

Prolifers Divided.

But the arrests divided us from “mainstream prolifers”, who publicly renounced our “lawbreaking”, which consisted of sitting in front of baby killer doors so moms couldn’t go in to murder their own babies. Mainstream prolifers were trying to reason with lawmakers. News reporters wouldn’t let them remain neutral. They thought they needed to disassociate themselves from lawbreakers, if their mission was to reach lawmakers. They didn’t figure lawmakers would be sympathetic to lawbreakers.

Whether that reasoning is sound is debatable. Lawmakers often back off laws which are challenged by mass movements of people acting on principle. But the greater issue was obedience to God. “Rescuers” quoted Scripture about babies being real people. “Mainstreamers” quoted Romans 13:1 which they interpreted to mean obedience to authorities even when authorities support murder. They also supported their opposition to Rescuers with “sayings” like “two wrongs don’t make a right”, which is not a principle found in the Bible and in fact would seem to contradict Genesis 9:6 which calls for executions of murderers, along with Proverbs 24:10-12 which tells us to intervene to protect babies about to be slain. I don’t believe it is a “wrong” to obey God.

Witnessing in Court.

It was about 1992 when I handled my own court case. I appealed it thru SCOTUS. Through that experience I read just about every state supreme court decision on the subject. By that time there had been about 60,000 arrests, according to Operation Rescue, and in just about every trial, the “Necessity Defense” was raised: it was “necessary” to break a minor trespassing law, to save life. But every appellate court said Roe made it irrelevant whether babies are people, which would have made abortion legally recognizable as murder. Roe, the lower courts said, made babies un-people “as a matter of law”, not as a “matter of fact”, so that the fact that babies are people and killing them is murder is irrelevant!

Wow! What reasoning! If a law says you aren’t a real person, then whether you are in fact a real person, you can be enslaved, tortured to death, whatever, legally! Your murderer has a constitutional right to murder you!

I refute this nonsense thoroughly in my book, “How states can outlaw abortion in a way that survives courts”. It uses arguments which I used in court for appeals I wrote for three other people. The book also explains why courts were able to get away with such gaslighting because almost everyone wanted courts to get rid of us any way they could; even mainstream prolifers were embarrassed at having to share their “prolife” label with us. The book explains why cases brought by states will be harder for courts to dismiss, but in 50 years, no state whose case was heard by SCOTUS ever made the humanity of babies part of their defense. Until Dobbs v. Jackson last year. In which Roe was repealed, but still the fact that babies are real people was sidestepped by SCOTUS. Had they acknowledged that fact, affirmed by every court-recognized fact finder that has taken a position, that would have made abortion legally recognizable as murder, which no state could have been allowed to continue.

Our Critics Ignored out Bible Studies and our Legal Arguments.

Why did I go to all that trouble? Because my reading of the Bible told me I should. The condemnation of mainstream prolifers was not Bible-based. That is, it cited hardly any Scripture, and what it cited was interpreted in a way that contradicted other Scripture. For example, interpreting Romans 13:1 to mean we must obey every single law of the most evil tyrants conflicts with Acts 5:29 where the apostles refused to obey the Sanhedrin because “we ought to obey God rather than man”. Then there was Proverbs 24:10-12.

What Started the Shootings.

(I think the count after about 40 years was seven abortionists shot.) So FACE was enacted in 1993. Less violent ways of saving lives being foreclosed, the first shooting of an abortionist was shortly afterward. Michael Griffin shot a Pensacola, Florida baby killer. Ironically my cousin, Burton Strubhar, was public defender in Pensacola. Immediately afterward, Paul Hill published a 9-page Bible study supporting Griffin’s action. He challenged the media, pastors, prolifers, anyone, to correct him if he was wrong. No one would, so far as I could determine. For a year, before he followed the conclusion of his study and shot the baby killer who replaced the one Griffin shot.

Paul Hill’s Bible Study.

When Hill first put out his Bible study featuring the story of Phinehas in Numbers 25, he also asked prolife leaders to sign his “Defensive Action Statement”. It said basically that babies are as human as adults, with which all prolifers agreed. So then any measure taken to stop a mass shooter of adults would be justified to stop a mass killer of babies. Which made mainstream prolifers start to squirm. So therefore Michael Griffin was justified in killing a man whose job was murdering about 30 babies a day. Which made mainstream prolifers scream, “He’s not one of us!”

But how do you refute the logic? In all the years since, I saw many articles smearing the statement, but not one addressed the logic. Most didn’t even report it; those that did, gaslighted it as if its flaws were so self evident that refuting it was unnecessary. To accept the conclusion which logic demands if you believe the verses about babies are the Word of God, is the dangerous raving of a "fanatic".

I reported on the trial of Shelley Shannon in Wichita. There I met Paul Hil. He later asked me to sign his “Defensive Action Statement”, right after Griffin’s shooting, which was a year before his own. I could not foresee the details of the cost to myself, but I felt an instant dread just at being asked. Because I understand that some positions are so unthinkable that it becomes irrelevant whether they are true and Biblical. I knew it would be costly, but I also saw that it was true, and I dreaded the far greater cost of denying the truth.

So I signed. I could never have guessed that so few prolife leaders would sign! There were only about 20 of us! I could not have foreseen how “newsworthy” that would make us. I became an instant statewide villain.

The Necessity Defense.

Those willing to block doors were a minority of all prolifers, and those willing to publicly defend Michael Griffin, and later Paul Hill, for killing abortionists, was a small minority of “Rescuers”. I was of that number; the Necessity Defense was not made inapplicable by the effect of FACE in moving the least possible way to stop baby killing from trespassing to shooting. Especially not in Florida, which still has a version of the Necessity Defense spelled out in state law called “Justifiable Homicide”.

One clarification we tried to impress upon media as we parsed legal defenses as applied to our actions: we did not justify our actions as punishment for past crimes, the way courts mete out penalties for crimes. Our goal was to prevent future murders, which is precisely the role of the Necessity Defense. It was a more careful distinction than news reporters were interested in.

During that time I was also reporting, in my Prayer & Action News, the legal arguments I was using in my court case. About that time I was in a Rescue in Iowa City where about 140 of us blocked a door, and the judge allowed the jury to hear our Necessity Defense; so the jury, seeing that of course babies are people and we were saving lives, acquitted. In my own case, however, in Des Moines, the judge censored our defense from the jury hearing it. So when reporters would come after me, I would explain all these legal arguments, and the Scriptures. But reporters would never report that my reasoning consists of analyzing American law, for use in courts, and Scripture. All they would say is “Dave Leach supports murdering doctors.”

Unrefuted. Unaddressed.

The point of all this history? I was as obedient as I knew how, to Scripture. I feared God, if I ran from the truth, more than man, if I declared it. The conclusions I reached were based on Scripture; only about two or three people tested that claim as they debated me: everyone else ignored the Word of God. But my support from Scripture is hardly a plus, since activists dread the very public airing of Scripture as much as they shudder at the particular conclusions I reached.

Many times I begged my critics to show me where I am wrong. I offered them free unedited space in my Prayer & Action News, since they called my magazine such a threat, that it was the reason, they said, that federal marshalls were posted outside Banned Parenthood for nearly a year!

What I almost never saw was searching the Scriptures together between both sides. I began publishing the Prayer & Action News in 1989, through which I debated a few who were willing to engage with me. Debate was pretty rare. I think it was 1993 when Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) act, which made the penalty for sitting in front of an abortion door twice about the same as for shooting the baby killer. So guess what happened? Duh.

My legal arguments challenged the ridiculous mantra that SCOTUS made the actual humanity of babies irrelevant, which SCOTUS never said. My articles simply explained the Necessity Defense, a defense as essential to law as self defense and Freedom of Speech. No lawyer ever, in response to either my articles or my court filings, challenged my grasp of the defense I urged.

My Biblical arguments challenged the complacency of doing nothing while millions of babies were being murdered. No theologian ever addressed my reliance on several verses to show that babies are fully human, or my reliance on Proverbs 24:10-12 to show God’s call for us to do whatever we can to save their lives.

For as long as no one will refute what seems obvious, that God calls us to do something about, I am likely to continue thinking what seems obvious is real, and to continue being afraid of God if I shrink from what God calls me to do.

“Stop talking about Jesus!”

I’m not sure which has caused me more notoriety over the decades: what I conclude from Scripture, or that I publicly quote Scripture.

I will mention exceptions in a minute, but generally, Christian activists and lawmakers resist public mention of God, Jesus, and the Bible among their ranks.

Political consultants have unanimously told me over the years, during my futile seven runs for statehouse, that I need to be very careful about publicly mentioning the name of Jesus, or quoting Him, if I want any “credibility” as a candidate. And my Bible studies in support of Republican positions is just over the top.

Over the decades I have been alert to acknowledgment of God in the speeches of people who were successfully elected. I haven’t kept a record of the references, but just going from general memory, my impression is that at an event where several speak, no more than one of them will dare to mention the name of God. Some of those mentions will quote a Bible verse. Less commonly the audience will be told that it is a Bible verse, and a reference will be given. The distance between current practice and acknowledging the Biblical roots of our positions is illustrated by the fact that President Bush closed with “God Bless You”, which at the time seemed to his Christian crowds a startling new exciting whisper of Revival.

It is hard for me to remember anyone who managed to get elected explain the verses that are the basis for his political positions. But today there was an email from Mike Pompeo’s cavpac, citing Psalm 139:13-16 as the reason he gave for being prolife. A welcome exception. \ Still, though, far short of a comprehensive Bible study on Life which can’t exclude Exodus 21:22, the only verse cited in Roe v. Wade (in a footnote), which some have interpreted as saying there is no penalty for causing a miscarriage. Any Bible study whose purpose is to support a public position has to be thorough enough to not only show support but address all competing interpretations.

I just couldn’t do that to God.

I especially remember in 2012 when I ran for state senate against Iowa’s openly “gay” lawmaker. Matt McCoy. A famous female consultant from Texas came to Iowa and gave a day-long workshop for a dozen or two Republican candidates. (I can’t remember her name.) Through the course of the day enough was said to reveal to her my conviction that relevant Scripture belongs in those public forums where voters decide whether to pattern our laws after the principles of Heaven or of Hell. Somewhere I have notes I took on the conversation afterwards when she came to me during a break and made a personal appeal, but I will have to dig for them.

I just remember that she made her case, respectfully and emotionally in the sense that it was clear she really wanted me to have an effective campaign. It really mattered to her.

The manner of my response was also respectful, and appreciative for her coming to Iowa, and for her individual concern for me. She listened patiently to my reasons, which included my acknowledgment that I understood she might be right that acknowledging God might be a fatal negative in my campaign if other factors weren’t, so that I might have a real path to victory if I would censor God. But I just could not do that to God.

I can’t remember the words, but I can still remember the expression on her face. Sadness. I think she would have done anything she could to rescue me from the certain, self-inflicted failure that she foresaw.

I feel a deep sadness that many who are most effective by today’s political wisdom will look with disgust at my judgment that censoring what God says about our issues is a huge mistake that is the reason Republicans aren’t doing better. My fear is supported by all my experience with political leaders and consultants, and by the absence of any mention of God, Jesus, or the Bible in your letter inviting solutions to America’s political mess. I so clearly visualize the practical effectiveness of God’s recommendations, yet those most fervently dedicated to nurturing the very freedoms God introduced in the Bible, can’t believe God’s system for achieving God’s goals can work.

Nevertheless, in the hope that you or someone you designate is still reading this, who is in a “Berean” mood, Acts 17:11, I will defend God’s relevance to Republican success in a way which should be self evident to any “Berean” not blinded by rage at a challenge to what “everyone knows will never work”.

Appendix 5. Censoring God in order to give God’s positions more “credibility” is like refusing to wear clothes because they will make you naked.

No Bible, no Republicans.

Where did Republican positions come from? Where did Republicans get the idea that “all men are created equal”, even old people? Poor people? Black people? Jews? Unborn babies? Women? Children? Who therefore should be equally protected by law? “Law”, as defined by “Lex Rex” by Rutherford, as restrictions equally binding on all, even lawmakers, and as enacted by the consent of the majority of the governed?

Those ideas spread across America from Pilgrim Bible studies, not from Mohammed, Marx, or Confucius. Not from the Enlightenment or from Athens where 10% of the people – the men who were not slaves – voted for about a dozen of their leaders 600 years before Jesus, but from Israel where all the people voted for about 78,000 of their leaders, 1200 years before Jesus. (Deuteronomy 1:13)

===Pure logic doesn’t explain Freedom===. Does pure logic force the conclusion that there is no “master race” which will lift mankind higher than the Tower of Babble once “inferior races” are exterminated? Does logic alone reject the theory that dictators can better manage us than we can ourselves?

Does raw logic require that all should have Freedom to Speech to state what they sincerely believe is true, and should never be censored but correction should be made through reasoning?

The Bible is why most Republican positions exist.

Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, a vote for all. Staples of the Bible. Not found in any competing religion or philosophy. Also, small government (Ezekiel 45:1-16, 1 Samuel 8:11-20), sequestered witnesses (Judith), evidence beyond reasonable doubt (Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15, Matthew 18:16, 2 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19, Hebrews 10:28), equal protection of the laws (Exodus 12:49), restitution as a penalty for theft, (Exodus 22:1), sanitation (Deuteronomy 23:13, plus all the passages on unclean meats), a distinction between first degree (premeditated) murder and accidental manslaughter (Numbers 35), negligence lawsuits (Exodus 21:33, Deuteronomy 22:8), and really just about every other category of American law.

Most Republicans believe Republican positions because they believe the Bible. Not because Christians understand everything the Bible says. But because where we don’t understand, we trust. We aren’t prolife because we can comprehend the full humanity of a single impregnated cell, but we push ourselves to grasp that reality because many of us heard God talk about it.

If we trust God to tell us what principles best guide us, how can we not only doubt but outright reject the way God says to implement these principles? There are very clear things God tells us to do to succeed, which Christians and activists won’t do today because they will lose their credibility” and will “never get elected”.

Remember what the Disciples did when they were told to stop talking about Jesus? “We ought to obey God rather than man.” Acts 5:29. “How stupid”, I can hear political activists thinking. “How did they ever succeed?” Indeed, how did their work lead to conversion of the entire Roman Empire in less than 300 years, and to making the Bible the most read book of all human history? Or, “how foolish to imagine that just because obeying God during one of the most tyrannical systems in history ended up toppling that system, that obeying God could work today in a largely Christian nation! Such a theory has no ‛credibility’!”

The Bible gave us our positions. Logic didn’t.

It is Bible belief that makes the Republican party possible. How can we believe the Bible’s positions are the most beneficial for us and our nation, and be afraid to believe the Bible’s strategies will give us the power to succeed?

I understand that the Republican party contains, and welcomes, and needs, many people who have no love for God or His Word. But now you must understand that those people are not the bedrock of the party platform. They are relative “floaters”. As the culture changes, they flow with it. Generally, that is. But the bedrock of the party is those who hold party positions as non-negotiables. They are often forced to retreat, but their goalposts don’t move. They note their distance from them, and many lose sight of them through the cultural fog. But they are a Rock ever calling, knocking on our hearts’ doors, and every so often a few people rise in courage and make a dash for the end zone, and Freedom is saved for another generation.

By the way, even that tolerance of "unbelievers" is a Christian value, that readiness to listen to them and reason with them, is a basic Bible principle, for example 1 Corinthians 14:25-26, 1 Peter 3:15, which I don't think you can find in any other religion or philosophy uninfluenced by Christianity.

God is more “credible” than Republicans.

How can we be committed to God’s platform planks and yet imagine ourselves more credible if we don’t publicly tell anyone the verses where we got them, so people will think the ideas are ours? How are human ideas more “credible” than God’s ideas? John 5: 42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

It is imagined that it is useless to quote the Bible because the people we need to persuade don’t believe the Bible. So we should be dishonest and give people every other reason for our positions, than the one that persuaded us. We imagine no one else will be converted by hearing from God; we were, but no one else. Nothing in the Bible has been disproved, yet many who refuse to review the evidence for it claim they don’t believe it. This is not an intellectual approach, so the people who scream at a Bible quote will scream at any breath of reality. Willful ignorance is “offended” by reality. Yet their resistance is more likely to be broken down by reality than by humoring their pretended alternate reality.

“America is not a theocracy”? Yes it is! Well, actually “theocracy” is a rather subjective term. Supposedly it means a government ruled by God, according to laws given by God, but there has never been such a government that is different than American government by any objective measure. In both U.S. and Moses’ governments, day-to-day decisions are delegated to humans, whose faithfulness to God’s principles varies from person to person and generation to generation. 1 Samuel 8:7 says God rules through the government of elected representatives instituted by Moses; in other words, whatever the majority wants, it is God’s will for them to have it. Indeed, for the next two chapters, it was explicitly God’s will for the people to have the leaders they demanded, even when the leaders they demanded were bad.

Without the Bible, to whom would it occur that people are made in the image of God, with any “rights” at all? What other religion claims such a thing? What logic demands such a conclusion? “Equal protection of the laws”, 14th Amendment; “all men are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness....” Certainly Islam recognizes no rights for “all men”, and don’t even talk about wo-men! Hindu’s B’hagavad Gita says we should have no preference of truth over lies, success over failure, comfort over pain, etc. (B’hagavad Gita Chapter 14, Verses 22-25.)

Christian conservatives care about their political principles because they assume their principles are consistent with the Bible, if not inspired directly by the Bible. Without the Bible, to whom would it occur that even an unborn baby is a real person? Or that there can be anything wrong with sodomy?

Freedom of speech and religion, and a vote for all, was developed by the Pilgrims 400 years ago as they followed their Bible studies. Their catechism tells us the very Scriptures that inspired them.

See my study, The verses that launched Freedom. Also see my documentary at www.1620.us. To this day nations which most suppress the Bible experience the least freedom. The relationship is very direct.

How ironic, tragic, and stupid for a party whose agenda springs from Scripture to publicly hide those Scriptures, which not only provide the wisdom to create an agenda that is practical, but also the power to overcome resistance, the power to stop mouths, and the power of God!

People who hate God scream. So what? They never stop screaming anyway. Let them scream. But let’s not let them succeed.

Our culture has sunk so far from God that we are no longer sure that freedom of speech is a good thing! Let’s remind people of God’s favor upon those who tell the truth even when truth is persecuted. Let’s show from the Bible that truth even exists – a view not available in other religions uninfluenced by the Bible.

In the ‛50’s our battle was keeping laws against adultery and sodomy on the books. By the ‛70’s politicians no longer even talked about adultery; now the battle was automatic “no fault” divorce, and murdering unborn babies. By the ‛90’s politicians no longer talked about adultery or divorce; now it was civil rights for sodomites. When sodomites demanded marriage licenses, we stopped talking about their civil rights. When they got marriage licenses and demanded access to girls’ bathrooms we stopped talking about marriage licenses. Now they have access to girls’ bathrooms and demand sexual mutilation of children and legalization of child sex, so that’s what we talk about, as our objections to “mere” access to girls’ bathrooms is fading.

Human morality is a floating target. It has earned the Republican party the reputation of simply sliding to Hell a little slower. God’s morality is no moving target. Quoting God holds up a standard which heals all the evil we and our ancestors have allowed. It makes people scream who love immorality, but so what? They scream anyway. As soon as Republicans give them everything they ask, they scream because republicans haven’t already given them what they have just now thought of to ask.

But quoting God makes them scream silently. It “stops their mouths”, as the Bible puts it. (Titus 1:11, Romans 3:19) Democrats can easily shame and out-reason Republicans who are defending their positions with human logic because Democrats swing around the rules of evidence and logic like a matador his red cape.

But there is no gaslighting God. Quoting God, perhaps with an invitation to go over together the evidence that the Bible was written by God, ends foolish conversation with fools who think reality is subjective and God is irrelevant.

It’s easy to prove the noninvolvement theologies are wrong; but we have to say they are. We have to know it, and say it. Lovers of tradition will scream, but they can’t refute it.

Not that participants in our forums have to believe the Scriptures calling for them, or even believe the Bible is the Word of God. But to the extent those who know it are afraid to say it, commitment to God-inspired forums will be sketchy. Churches enjoy regular attendance from many because of the belief that their familiar rituals – sermons, talk sans action, severely limited input from members – is in the Bible somewhere. Regular participation in God-inspired forums will surely require showing people the Scriptures that inspire them.

Dream with me.

I have a dream...that we are not as limited and helpless as we are told by our school teachers, culture, entertainers, politicians, pastors and our own families, not to mention our own logic and experience.

I have a dream...that God means it. That He wasn’t even exaggerating. It’s really true. Nothing really is impossible.

I have a dream...that people who love God will see if God has any Rules for Success that most of us are overlooking, given that God’s promises seem a bit more dramatic than most of us notice being fulfilled in America’s churches.

I have a dream...that this will interest you in joining me and others as we study God’s rules.

The Key to Freedom: the Cross

How can we provoke “My people, who are called by My name” (2 Chronicles 7:14) to “turn from their wicked” resistance to shining the Light of what God says about Darkness into the Darkness?

We who identify as Christians (“who are called by My name”) allow the Darkness of Hell to swirl around us, opposed only by our own power and words, safe from being confronted by the Power and Words of God out in public.

We let Hell into our hearts and the hearts of our families. We patronize colleges, public schools, psychiatrists, newspapers, and social media which teach the ways of Hell and attack Hell’s opponents, rather than develop Scripture-bathed information sources. We fuel the deception of ourselves and our families.

Our churches strangle development of such information by censoring any sharing of “controversial” information on their premises, citing their Noninvolvement Theologies which deny that shining Light into government-entangled Darkness is a legitimate mission of “church”.

Christian activists, driven from their churches to oppose Darkness, leave their Light back in “church”. They don’t build their political agendas on public Bible study, just as Scripture-quoting churches don’t apply their “light” against the government-supported darkness poisoning their families.

The repentance of 2 Chronicles 7:14 may require many things, but since “healing of the land” is the promised reward, adamant church opposition to even consider “healing the land” a mission of church has to top the list. The adamant political activist opposition to publicly basing their agendas on the healing Words of God has to be a close second.

Record of activists to whom this has been sent

Steve Kirsch

December 11, 2022, I posted this comment after Kirsch's question, Why can't we talk about it?

His complete question: "How are we supposed to resolve our differences if every vaccine advocate in the world refuses to have a civil discussion about it?"

There were 1330 comments, and the most recent comment was 3 days ago, so will my comment be seen? Anyway, my response:

"Very powerful point. But the root problem is a lot closer to home. There is a solution, but "long experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer wrongs, than to right those wrongs to which they have become accustomed."

"Why are we surprised that pagans won't let us discuss evidence with them, when Christian meetings censor discussion of facts and solutions, calling that "politics"? The Bible, alone of the world's religions and philosophies, even thinks there is such a thing as "Truth" that we can discuss, much less that we should always be ready to discuss it, 1 Peter 3:15, or that it is worth dying for, Luke 12:4-5. When believers in the religion which most supports discussion of facts and solutions won't allow discussion of facts and solutions in their primary meetings, calling it "dirty" and "worldy", can we expect more support for discussion elsewhere?

"The Christian resistance to discussion - to an information flow, isn't just in churches. Activists don't have time, or a system, for processing solutions longer than half a page, and you know any real solution has to be long enough to somehow address the thousands of pages of objections to it.

"My belief that God cares has led me to search for God's solution. See http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/God's_Blueprints_for_Political_Victories."

I had to register to leave a comment. The bio I submitted: "Christian 75 years, musician 70 years, Christian political activist 40 years, publisher of the Prayer & Action News 25 years."

Mike Pompeo, Cavpac

December 11 Email from Mike Pompeo: "I really relied on God when I was teaching those fifth-grade boys. One of my jobs was to keep the boys in their seats. It was the best preparation for international diplomacy you can imagine! I still miss those simpler days teaching Sunday school but remain active in my church. I’ve found that there is no more profound joy than being involved in a church. So, I’d like to know: how have you been involved in your church, Dave?"

Webform question: How have you been involved in your church?

My response:

"I much appreciate your readiness to insert more reference to Christian faith in your mailings than political consultants have told me any candidate can insert and still win. I appreciate that you trust God more than political consultants.

"How refreshing would be interaction with you about our experiences and Scripture.

"Fascinating invitation to submit information with the implication that a human will read it, without even an appeal for money, at least not yet. Richard Viguerie recently snailed me asking for solutions to our poor showing at the polls, and not a word about money was in the letter. Amazing. He must have really wanted wisdom. The Bible study through the filter of my political experience that I sent him, after 2 weeks' toil, is posted at http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/God's_Blueprints_for_Political_Victories.

"You ask about my experience of church. I've had hundreds of lengthy discussions with pastors and others about the greater vision for Christian meetings than current tradition allows. My Bible study about that is posted at http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/How_God's_Blueprints_for_Christian_Meetings_Gave_America_its_Freedoms_in_the_1620's_-_Why_they_Offer_"eye_hath_not_seen"_Freedoms_in_the_2020's

"May God bless your review of these solutions.

Steve Scheffler

On December 10 I emailed Scheffler an attachment of this article. The body of the email had the first page or so of the attachment, with this introduction:

"Let me share my response to RIchard Viguere, a long time national political consultant who actually asked for, not money, but ideas. I mentioned to him the impact of your influence in the growth of my vision:"

David Lane, American Renewal Project

On December 10 I emailed Lane an attachment of this article. The body of the email had the first page or so of the article, with this introduction: "Let me share my response to RIchard Viguere, a long time national political consultant who actually asked for, not money, but ideas. I talked a little about you. I urge you to consider the solution I explore in the Pages of God. "

Richard Viguerie

I emailed him this article