Most Hated Word #2: Pacifism

The Second Huge Mistake made by the Founders was to take up arms against the Empire in a violent revolution.

If you're not allowed to resist an Evil Empire (see "revolution," above), you're not allowed to resist lesser enemies. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commanded, "Resist not evil." He also said "Blessed are the Peacemakers." Most people have never really considered the implications of Christ's injunction to "go the second mile." The implications are staggering for those who pooh-pooh "pacifists."

The word "pacifism" comes from the Latin word for "peace," as in "Prince of Peace." Pacifism is clearly at the heart of being a Christian Peacemaker.

In the dictionary, "pacifism" is defined as:

1. opposition to war or violence of any kind.
2. refusal to engage in military activity because of one's principles or beliefs.
3. the principle or policy that all differences among nations should be adjusted without recourse to war.

Most Christians do not apply a consistent Biblical worldview when they consider America's many wars.

• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have taken up arms against Christians from Britain in the "War for Independence."
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have taken up arms to kill over 700,000 people, mostly Christian, to move blacks from nominally-Christian plantations into atheistic federal housing projects.
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have taken up arms against Christians from Germany in World War I.
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have taken up arms against Christians from Germany in World War II in order to save "Uncle" Joe Stalin the trouble.
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have funded violent protesters to topple the Iranian government in 1953 and set up a dictatorship for the benefit of British Petroleum.
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have taken a paycheck from the CIA to participate in the overthrow of the government of Guatemala for the benefit of the agricultural monopoly of the United Fruit Company (UFC), the American multinational corporation that owned 42 per cent of the arable land of Guatemala.
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have destroyed Vietnamese villages in order to prevent them from "going communist."
• A consistent worldview-Christian would not have killed non-combatant civilians in Iraq in order to overthrow a secular government that allowed freedom for Christians to evangelize Muslims and replace that government with an Islamic theocracy under Sharia Law.

So go ahead. Call me a "pacifist."

Pacifism is a critical issue in our day.

We spend a trillion dollars a year on armed lethal "national defense," an un-Christian goal. The source of your "National Security" is your god. The cost of the war on Iraq was $10,000 for every man, woman and small child in America.

Millions of Americans get their paychecks for helping kill millions of foreigners.

And those with a vested economic interest in militarism and imperialism are quick to mis-portray those who stand with Jesus and oppose war.

"Pacifists" are often criticized for being willing to stand by and do nothing while their wife or daughter is raped.

This is slanderous, a violation of the Ninth Commandment.

Pacifists continually meet objections like those of Samuel Bacchiocchi, who said:

It would be morally irresponsible to turn over one's wife to a rapist just to "keep peace."

This is a "straw man." Such critics cannot name a single pacifist who would do nothing to try to prevent or stop a rape. I've never met a pacifist (and I've met hundreds and lived with several) who would say to a rapist, "Here she is. Go for it. And peace to you." A pacifist believes in the existence of evil, and believes violence is evil. A pacifist opposes violence because violence is evil, and a pacifist wants to eliminate or prevent evil. A pacifist would take prudent steps to stop evil, avoid evil, catch evil off guard, and evangelize evil, but would not -- as many non-pacifists seem to advocate -- start out immediately with lethal force. Many 2nd Amendment zealots would pull out their gun at the drop of the hat. At least that's the way they talk. Probably they are a bit more rational. Like Bacchiocchi.

Here's a simple question that will prove you are a pacifist.

Imagine you are "Star Trek" Captain Kirk of the U.S.S. Enterprise. You are walking down the street of a planet in the Deltoid Galaxy with one of your never-ending stream of beautiful women at your arm, when a large burly alien with the tattoo "I AM A RAPIST" across his forehead jumps out from a dark alley, grabs your female companion and says "I'm going to rape this woman!" You pull out your Phazer™ gun and . . . here's the question:

Do you set the Phazer to "stun" and quickly put the rapist to sleep and call the proper authorities, or do you set your Phazer to "maximum molecular disruption" and utterly obliterate the rapist, ending his life?

When given such a choice, only a sociopath would choose annihilation or lethal force. Everyone else is a "pacifist." It's that simple.

What happens if you're consistent with this innate, conscientious pacifism?

Answer: you will begin to change the world.

In many ways the most violent world in recorded history.

Christ is the Prince of Peace. His vassal-subjects must be committed to Peace. The Prince of Peace commanded us to love our enemies. True Christians are willing to follow Christ to the cross (Matthew 16:25; 1 Peter 2:21).

But the religion of Secular Humanism (America's State religion) teaches vengeance. Modern Man believes it's better to make someone else die for you than to give your life for another. Entire populations are organized on the principle of institutionalized vengeance.

Most people don't want to be called a "pacifist," but more and more people are adopting a social philosophy which is very close: the "Non-Aggression Principle" or "Zero-Aggression Principle."

This principle is at the heart of modern defenses of true laissez-faire capitalism. "Capitalism" means many things to many people, especially those who oppose it. Most mainstream voices, even "conservative" voices (e.g., Fox News) would not call themselves defenders of "capitalism," much less "laissez-faire capitalism." Most of those who openly call themselves defenders of "capitalism" rely on the Non-Aggression Principle.

The most consistent adherents of the Zero-Aggression Principle call themselves "anarcho-capitalists." More about both Capitalism and Anarchism below.

If you complete the year-long Samuel Adams Coaching Program, and read five of the most important works in the history of Western Civilization, and answer our paradigm-jarring questions, you will become a "pacifist."

Or your money back.

If Obama asked for your guns, would you give them to him?
"I Would Give Obama My Guns If He Asks"

Continue to the next hated word.