Book Review -- Faith Seeking Freedom: Libertarian Christian Answers to Tough Questions

BOOK REVIEW — Faith Seeking Freedom: Libertarian Christian Answers to Tough Questions

129 pages, by Dr. Norman Horn, Doug Stuart, Kerry Baldwin, and Dick Clark

FULL DISCLOSURES:

• Kerry Baldwin has been a Facebook friend for several years now.
  
  
• I don't profess to be a Christian of any denomination or sect or whatever. Organized religion and I simply don't do well together.

With those out of the way . . . .

Faith Seeking Freedom is easy reading, in that the authors don't try to cram you chock-full of data and information and jargon, such that you would feel overwhelmed by it all.

When the authors cite Biblical content, they put the citation right there in the same paragraph as the point that they're making, so you don't have to keep flipping back and forth to the end of the chapter or the end of the book. This is probably for the best where electronic versions are concerned. Also, for those inclined to have a Bible nearby to check on the authors, it's right there where you can compare and contrast the authors' points against the Bible verse(s) itself.

The authors don't attempt to take sides where the big divisions of libertarian thought occur, such as the minarchy vs. anarchy debate, or whether or not to be involved in the LP, with the exception of the abortion issue.

SPECIFIC POINTS —

[Page numbers cited here are what listed is on the particular page. The actual pages on the PDF version that I used for this review will be that number, plus 10 pages.]

Chapter 2 (The Libertarian Basics, pp. 23-34) gives the reader a decent summary of the Non-Aggression Principle and how it applies to everyday life.

p. 26, part of the answer to Question #13 (How do libertarian Christians account for people who violate the non-aggression principle (NAP)?) takes on the minarchy vs. anarchy question rather well — the authors explain both sides without explicitly favoring one side or the other. (Disclosure: I personally lean towards the anarcho-capitalist side.)

p.39, Question #25 (Do libertarians believe any and every government is illegitimate?) also tackles the minarchy vs. anarchy adroitly, explaining both sides without favoring one or the other.

pp. 67-68 give a succinct and principled response to the "What about roads?" shibboleth.

OK, enough spoilers.

Do me a favor Do yourself a favor — Go and get a copy and read it for yourself.

SUMMARY —

Faith Seeking Freedom is an easy-to-read, principled guide for Christians who are seeking to understand libertarianism, on par with Inclined to Liberty by Louis Carabini, The Law by Frederic Bastiat, or Down With Power by L. Neil Smith.

Go get a copy, read it, then tell your friends and family.

---

NOTES

1. Reposted —
   
   
   1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs — Diaspora* / Facebook page / Flote / Gab / Goodreads / Gorf Social / Liberty.me / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely page / Twitter / VK / Wimkin page / Wordpress / YouMe Social
      
      
   2. Albuquerque Liberty Forum — Facebook page / Spreely page
      
      
   3. KCUF Media — Facebook page / Spreely page
      
      
   4. New Mexico Libertarians — Facebook group / Facebook page / Minds group / Spreely group / Spreely page / Wimkin group / Wimkin page
      
      
   5. The Old Drunken Old Irrvelivents — Facebook page / Spreely page
      
      
   6. The Weekly Sedition — Facebook page / Spreely page / Twitter / Wimkin page / Wordpress

---

Copyright © 2020 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepadqq and Notepad++.

My gotoquiz Political Ideology Test Results

Take the test yourself – What is your political ideology?

---

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Tumblr / Twitter / Wordpress / Xanga

---

Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

One Reason Why I Will NEVER Convert to Baha'ism

Here are the gory details, straight from the Bahais themselves.

Abstract:

Whether Baha'is may practice self-defense in times of danger, and whether American Baha'is should purchase firearms.

From the texts you already have available it is clear that Bahá'u'lláh has stated that it is preferable to be killed in the path of God's service than to kill, and that organized religious attack against Bahá'ís should never turn into any kind of warfare, as this is strictly prohibited in our Writings.

So a Bahá'í is expected to "take one for the team" in the name of the faith? If a group of whacko Islamofascists were to set upon a Bahá'í temple with physical violence in mind, the Bahá'ís are supposed to simply stand by and let it happen?

A hitherto untranslated Tablet from 'Abdu'l-Bahá, however, points out that in the case of attack by robbers and highwaymen, a Bahá'í should not surrender himself, but should try, as far as circumstances permit, to defend himself, and later on lodge a complaint with the government authorities. In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian, he also indicates that in an emergency when there is no legal force at hand to appeal to, a Bahá'í is justified in defending his life. In another letter the Guardian has further point out that the assault of an irresponsible assailant upon a Bahá'í should be resisted by the Bahá'í, who would be justified, under such circumstances, in protecting his life.

How exactly is a Bahá'í (or anyone else, for that matter) to tell if the assailant is a responsible one versus an irresponsible one?

If the assailant is a responsible attacker, is then the Bahá'í adherent supposed to refrain from resisting?

What if the Bahá'í deems the attacker to be irresponsible, and later it's determined that the thug was indeed a responsible thug?

The House of Justice does not wish at the present time to go beyond the guidelines given in the above-mentioned statements. The question is basically a matter of conscience, and in each case the Bahá'í involved must use his judgment in determining when to stop in self-defense lest his action deteriorate into retaliation.

Oh no, the horrors of retaliation!

Of course the above principles apply also in cases when a Bahá'í finds himself involved in situations of civil disorder. We have, however, advised the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States that under the present circumstances in that country it is preferable that Bahá'ís do not buy nor own arms for their protection or the protection of their families.

Here we have it – an explicit proclamation from Bahá'í officialdom that firearms ownership is discouraged.

With that, I can safely say that I am not joining and will not join the Bahá'í faith.

---

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

1. Self-Defense, Guidance on by Universal House of Justice, first written or published 1969-05-26

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal blogs, micro-blogs, etc. – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / Wordpress / Xanga
      
      
   2. The Weekly Sedition – Facebook / Twitter / Wordpress / Yahoo!
      
      
   3. Tea Party Nation

---

Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

A Question about Abortion and Homosexuality

If the biotech and medical fields were to devise some sort of prenatal test, accurate to 99 percent, that could determine whether the baby-to-be was going to be heterosexual or homosexual, would it then be acceptable to abort that baby if it turned out to be homosexual?

This of course assumes that sexual orientation is a genetically-determined trait – something that has yet to be scientifically proven.

== ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ == ++ ==

Comments posted to the original article on Xanga

• Even before reading this, my mind went there when I read your title, bcause pro-abortion folks have said it's okay to abort due to possible birth defects or illnesses, or even because the "fetus" (read baby) is not the biological sex of male or female that they would prefer. Swear to any higher power you want, I have been meaning to post this very question.
  4/5/2013 3:30 AM lonelywanderer2
  
  
• I would also ask the reverse question. What if you wanted your child to be homosexual? Would it be acceptable to abort a heterosexual fetus?
  4/5/2013 3:32 AM lonelywanderer2
  
  
• Would it be a hate crime to abort a fetus that will grow up to be gay?
  4/5/2013 5:40 AM wordwarrior39
  
  
• This entire gay hoax is about Democrat Party power. So asking "intelligent" questions and trying to get the terminally stupid to see the light is a waste of time.
  
  And just as the Democrat Party couldn't care less about the sick, the downtrodden, the elderly, the poor, the children, the environment, they couldn't give a rat's rear end about gays.
  
  All the Democrat Party wants from gays is their votes and their campaign cash.
  4/5/2013 6:31 AM ImNotUglyIJustNeedLove
  
  
• The real question is not, "Isn't homosexuality genetically/hormonally determined?" The proper question, from the sceintific perspective is, "How much is genetic, how much is hormonal, how much is intrauterine, how much is extrauterine, how much is other factors?" Biology cannot determine complex human interactions, environment, family/social environment, and many more factors. Your question is biase inducing, and is impossible to answer. you'll simply have to frame the question to one which science can answer.
  4/5/2013 6:36 AM  Such_are_you
  
  
• It's legal to abort a baby simply because it's inconvenient.
  4/5/2013 8:10 AM blonde_apocalypse
  
  
• sure. i'm pro-choice, no exception. a woman has a right to abort for whatever reason.
  4/5/2013 10:03 AM flapper_femme_fatale
  
  
• It would seem to me that the mentallity that accepts aborting a fetus because of it's sexual preferance would also think it was fine to terminate an adults life based upon the same judgement of it's sexual perferance.
  4/6/2013 7:45 AM SacredChao
  
  
• I think that a woman's right to control what does and does not go on inside her body should not be infringed for any reason, although I frown on late-term abortion.
  4/7/2013 10:39 AM Facetiouseloquence
  
  
• Hmm – No idea here
  4/9/2013 1:54 PM BoulderChristina
  
  
• That’s a great question!! I am anti abortion and also anti homosexuality; since I will not by force cause homosexuals to give up that life style, I will not force women to give up their choice. I heard a comedian say one day, the Republicans want to stop abortions and not give free contraceptives and then resist paying for all the children that are born undesired. The entire system is broke; one can never stop a dandelion by removing just the flower. It will prevent passer bys from seeing them, but they are still there.
  4/17/2013 10:44 AM Lewis1122

---

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Wordpress / Xanga

---

Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack