Voter issue guide (Part 1–Liberty vs bondage)
It tires me to have to do this, but I understand that in the United States there is a big election coming up. I do some of my best work in the United States because I find so little opposition. So to ensure continued smooth operations I will provide some voter guidance for all who wish to please me.
I’m not going to waste too much time expounding on my will for some voter issues for which my position should be self-evident. Abortion? Duh! But my servants should know more fundamentally how to look at issues and candidates.
In general, I am against liberty, against freedom of conscience, and against freedom of thought. And, in general, I am for bondage, for forced toleration of all views by the individual, and for enforced centralized thought control for all.
Today’s lesson: Liberty vs bondage
I support, and I ask my servants to support, candidates who work to limit individual liberty. Liberty is best destroyed at the individual level by making, or keeping, an individual dependent upon another’s largesse. Such dependency is best sold to the public as compassion; who could be against looking out for another’s welfare? And the welfare I support is compassion divorced from an individual’s free will, and placed into the hands of tax-funded central planners, most of whom love to do my bidding.
And here’s where I do my best work in the modern world: liberty is doubly destroyed when the dependency of one burdens another who unwillingly provides the dependent’s support with resources stolen by yet another. Stealing, you ask? Well, I’m being frank here; but, yes, taxation, taking personal property by force without consent from one to give to another (who, I must gloat, is ultimately enslaved by such gifts) is a form of theft. What’s the difference between a thief in the night taking property without consent and the governer/president/Congress doing the same? Nothing, really. And the fact that very few see this is one of my most striking achievements. Ha ha ha ha ha.
Yes, theft from one to enslave another. That is my will on earth. Support any candidate who agrees with this policy, and you will do my will on earth as it is in Hell.
October 2, 2010 at 10:38 pm
Yes, theft from one to enslave another. That is my will on earth. Support any candidate who agrees with this policy, and you will do my will on earth as it is in Hell.
Is a vote for “the lesser of two evils” a vote in favor of evil?
October 4, 2010 at 12:11 am
Spambot- maybe- but I do it anyway- The more I read of Chesterton, the more I like his economic ideas…We need to be on top of fake pro-life Republicans- and if one is really pro-life we need to have an economy in place where one is able to welcome kids into the world without a complete economic collapse
October 4, 2010 at 10:32 pm
a priest’s wife,
First off, I enjoy your new blog and it looks like it is off to a fine start. You made a very thoughtful comment over at CMR the other day about praying for the President and hoping that he will have a change of heart about abortion. I almost dropped you a note of thanks this morning, but was having connectivity issues for a few hours.
Regarding a vote for the lesser of two evils, I think the intent of the voter counts. If the voter wants better laws, but believes that incremental progress is the only progress possible, then I do not believe it is evil to vote for a candidate who is not perfect. Doing so, however, I think obligates the voter to speak out if the candidate ends up winning the election to let him or her know the extent of the voter’s support.
On a related note, I reject the notion that we must vote for one of the candidates of the two major parties. I think some voters use that as an excuse not to work toward having better candidates to choose from.