Christine Smith's Blog

The Virtue of Hope

“Hope” is a word frequently used in today’s society, but rather than using it in a spiritual sense, it is frequently cited in a secular sense and in relation to either a person, organization, or scientific discovery. Rarely does common usage find “hope” used in its true spiritual sense – in relation to God.

Hope is a virtue from God in which our desire for something is combined with an anticipation of receiving it due to our faith. It pertains to attainment of things in a manner which may even defy the pragmatic and rational path to obtainment assumed necessary in the world of man. Rather than relying on the mind, it taps into our soul’s knowing and its trust in Divine Order versus what only our eyes can see.

The Ascension of Jesus is most helpful to meditate upon (the Second Glorious Mystery) as it teaches hope and confirms it as no other event can ever come close to.

Hope emanates from true confession and receipt of God’s loving grace. Hope exist only in acceptance and joy in living the will of God.

One can “hope” when one believes that good (sometimes beyond our human comprehension and understanding) is coming to them, regardless of circumstances and appearances, because they are in God’s child.

Hope within the soul manifests in bold and courageous actions of faith, and inner peace. It occurs when one realizes your future is not dependent on the society around you.

Put not your hope in man, but in God (who may work through man), for He is the source of all good in our life. When darkness surrounds, the light is shown to you through prayer and supplication. Even as you see no apparent escape from the difficulties surrounding you, hope within your soul permits you to evince the strength you need for yourself and as a witness to others. In the decision to trust God is true hope. Putting hope in the societal enterprises the mind of man devises inevitably can lead to disappointment, pain, despair, and inevitably “hopelessness” because hope was placed into the (often) untrustworthiness of fellow human beings.

Hope is a virtue of our trust in God and his purpose for our life.

“National Emergency” Declarations

So Obama has declared a “national emergency” over the H1N1 “swine” flu.

The main threat I see is government…not flu.  But that’s the way it’s often been with “national emergencies.”

I view this latest “crisis” as yet another excuse for big government to come in and supposedly save the day.  Predictable, but nonetheless ominous, in my opinion. 

What would constitute a “national emergency” to you?  An armed military force invading our towns?  A deadly mystery virus that’s suddenly killing off thousands of Americans?  Certainly it would have to be something that poses a substantial risk to Americans, right?  Think again.  It appears that for U.S. presidents, it takes a whole lot less to circumvent Congress so that they can proceed with their agendas.

Bush sure had his “national emergencies,” take a look at them.  From excuses such as Cuba, Iran, weapons of mass destruction, and terrorism, he didn’t miss many opportunities to use those powers.

Now take a look at Obama’s “national emergencies,” from the “Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq,” to the recent (Oct. 16, 2009) “Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Significant Narcotics Traffickers Centered in Colombia,” Obama behaves no different than Bush.  He continues the “national emergency” regarding North Korea, the Western Balkans, the Congo, etc.

While you’re at it, take a look at the “national emergencies” declared between 1976-2001 (see page 16 of the CRS Report for Congress pdf).  See much threatening your security and safety?  Anything justifying the bypassing of the legislative branch of our government? 

Look at all the trade barriers erected by presidents, without congressional approval, solely by declaring a “national emergency.”  Use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by presidents results in restrictions on humanitarian aid, and freezing of assets…all because one man, whomever holds the office of presidency, decides to do so.  What a convenient way to wage war.  (Remember Clinton’s assault on Yugoslavia? It was done the same way using a declaration of “national emergency.”)

When I view Bush’s and Obama’s list of national emergencies, or the list from 1976 to present for that matter, I see little if anything at all that posed any real threat to Americans which couldn’t have been brought before Congress, but what I do see are numerous excuses to use our military might and economic sanctions against other nations and their peoples. 

As for Obama’s current declaration of another “national emergency,” do the “swine” deaths compare to anything else that kills Americans every day?  Is yet another flu strain something unforeseen?  About 36,000 people die annually in the United States from seasonal flu.  Ever had a “national emergency” declared for that?  About 37,000 people die annually (based on last 5 years statistics) in the United States from motor vehicle accidents.  Ever had a “national emergency” declared for that? Of course, not!

But, the “swine” flu has every element the federal government needs: a fear factor which is easily manipulated because it’s about something that sounds different…easily leading to panic…which in turn makes the people look for the government to “save” them.  How convenient for Obama.  Now he’ll come in with his federal flu government websites, public announcements, and discretionary emergency powers to “protect” everyone.  Take a look at the latest flu presentations especially for the children from this White House administration. 

Perhaps, and I only speculate,  this latest “crisis” will be used to soften everyone up to Obama’s “healthcare reform,” or facilitate “forced” vaccinations (forced meaning if you don’t get it, you’re quarantined for example) which could provide an excuse for martial law used domestically.  Restrictions on travel could be implemented. 

Or perhaps it’s just another convenient ploy to prop Obama up as a national “savior,” as it distracts Americans from the real national emergency: the loss of our constitutional republic and our liberties.

The Price of Freedom?

The Qualities of a Good Man

I recently came across the prose linked below and thought it was so sweet and so true.

I shared it with a friend of mine who told me her husband told her when they married, that she should never love him more than she loved God, that she should love her husband as #2, and God #1. I thought that was so wonderful. And, of course, that shows a man who will endeavor to put God and His will first in life.

The idea of a man who would respect a female, care about who she really is, and as the prose beautifully says, would encourage her in her walk of faith and most importantly a man who loves God first (more than his love for you) is the only kind of man a female who loves and trusts God would ever want in her life. It is why I choose to never compromise, even in the early stages of knowing someone, with ever beginning to think I could trust someone who doesn’t share the principles and beliefs which come from the spiritual faith and religion I have and practice. Integrity, a focus on truth, choosing to endeavor to live a life which is spiritually based upon God’s love and will…I value.

The qualities of a good man come from a strong faith…A good man is one who loves God and does his best to live every aspect of life according to the will of God and seeks to know His will.

I am very happy in my life, and am not someone who would ever “look” for anyone…but if God’s will is ever that a man enter my life whom I would join in the sacrament of marriage, I have a feeling this prose would describe him:

“Wait For The Man” by Adrienne Sadosky (published at the Pittsburgh Standard).

Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize

 Listening to numerous discussions on various talk radio shows across the nation about Obama’s receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, I was struck by the observation that not one caller or host I heard ever mentioned what is to me the single most important (and obvious) objection to it:  Obama is a warmonger.  He has blood on his hands.  The death toll his presidency is responsible for just keeps increasing. 

Rather than focus on the incongruity of awarding any prize with the term “peace” in it to such a person, those who disagreed with it simply repeated phrases such as “It’s too soon,” or “Not yet.”  Such comments imply there would be a time when it would be appropriate to consider giving Obama the prize, it’s just that “he hasn’t earned it yet.” 

There is no end in sight to the evil perpetrated by the U.S. government against people worldwide through its military bases, conflicts and occupations, with Obama’s actions certainly the antithesis of a peacemaker.  Iraq. Afghanistan. Pakistan.  And threats to impose strict sanctions against Iran.

It’s reminiscent of Orwell’s “war is peace.” 

Interestingly, reading the text of Nobel’s will, one finds a man who seems truly dedicated to recognizing great achievements in the worlds of literature, science, and peace.
I particularly appreciated his description of what would become the Nobel Peace Prize to be given, “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”

Reading that description, then thinking of Obama, makes me realize (again) the once esteemed prize has now become, in my opinion, meaningless and lacks all credibility. 

Past controversial American recipients have included, among others, Al Gore, Cordell Hull (FDR’s Secretary of State for 11 years), Henry Kissinger, Theodore Roosevelt, and Elihu Root (U.S. Secretary of War during the Philippine War).

If Obama was a man of peace, he could have done much to end the U.S. imperialism worldwide already, rather he escalates wars and the misery that comes as a result.
The Obama body count continues.

Back in January, I wrote a blog entitled “Welcome to Obama’s ‘New Era of Peace’ – 22 Pakistanis reported dead “  In it, I include a link to the excellent St. Pete for Peace website (which continues to be an excellent resource on this topic). 

I share that blog again with my readers, as it is as valid then as now…and sadly apparently will continue to be. Considering Obama’s receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, it made me think of what I had written then, contrasting his words and deeds, and what the future would hold as yet another warmonger would occupy the White House.  I invite you to read my blog from January 27, 2009. 

The Mistake of Compromise

Compromise has become the way of life for the majority of people.  From support of political candidates, parties and politicos to such personal aspects of life as dating and evaluating potential marriage partners, many people accept compromise of the values and positions they otherwise espouse and desire if adherence to said values might mean having to reject an association which promises immediate advantage.  And, often, even that “promise” of happiness or achievement of some goal will never be realized due to the very nature of the compromise. 

When I see someone make a conscious choice to violate one of their fundamental important principles in life, I lose much respect for them.  Realizing what is right, yet choosing to compromise anyway, betrays oneself (and others in the process). It is something I view as a deep emotional weakness caused by a lack of or an underdeveloped spiritual basis for one’s life.  Rather than choosing to be courageous in faith, one opts to analyze with their mind (prone to doubts, rationalization and confusion) matters which should remain with their heart or conscious.  In matters of principle, the mind should be a tool to implement what is within the heart.

Choosing compromise, one sells themselves short, and in doing so will hurt others (including not only those they involve themselves with in such a relationship, but often unknowingly they even hurt others who care about them).

All my life I’ve endeavored to remain true to the things I chose to believe.  To have my actions match my words is an instrumental part of who I am.  Thus, when it comes to my spiritual beliefs (which affect every other choice in my life from personal to the political), I will not compromise.

Recently, I’ve had several associations with others in which devotion to standing by my values has resulted in disillusionment, some hurt, and certainly the pain of disappointment.  I tend to attribute (call it giving another the benefit of doubt) more values to another who is voicing the same values as my own in the beginning…but fortunately, I also know the important necessity of giving all new associations with others the time to find out who they really are. 

To even begin to entertain the idea that one can closely be involved with another who does not believe as you do in matters of strength of character (even if they are a relatively good person) sets one up for disappointment to say the least, if not heartache or hurt to the degree one begin to think it may be possible.

In giving all new friendships plenty of time and experience to learn more fully about one another, fundamental differences can be discovered which preclude closer association. 

Those who choose not to compromise in important areas of their life must be strong to avoid joining closely with those who will compromise.  Recognizing such an emotional weakness in another is a warning sign that, under stress, that same person may be unfaithful to you in matters you have chosen to trust with them.
Love, like trust, (the two being inseparable actually) takes time.  Time reveals truth.  To jump into believing physical attraction, chemistry, and emotional comfort is “love” is dangerous.

The same applies to joining with organizations who state the cause you may believe in, but whose actions contradict it.  They may think compromise will achieve a desired outcome, but it will fail. 

Likewise,  jumping into believing some politico or candidate is libertarian because of some wonderfully expressed words you agree with is misguided and dangerous. 

Recently I’ve been in receipt of a number of inquiries asking my opinion of various people in the political spotlight who suddenly are voicing libertarian sounding words.  Without exception, each of the people I was asked about, were conservatives yet far from the core values of libertarianism.  Conservatives have long seen value in using the terminology of libertarian ideas and references to our founders and the U.S. Constitution and words such as freedom and liberty. This is nothing new, only particularly prevalent now since it taps into the current prevalent distrust of government. 

Conservatives are doing what serves them well: Saying the right words, while continuing to support anti-freedom legislation, laws and policies both domestically and abroad. Using libertarian terminology doesn’t make them libertarian, and neither does self-identifying with the libertarian label. 

To begin to think they are libertarian or enough so to warrant your support, without tangible proof and public reversal of previous anti-liberty positions on fundamental issues, is to compromise one’s own values in exchange for having some popular candidate or celebrity politico to identify with.  Every individual I was questioned about failed, in my view, even when considering just one issue – that of military interventionism, conquest, and empire building.  Their “fine” words about liberty and freedom mean nothing when they have no respect for the freedom of other sovereign nations nor respect for the principles upon which this nation was founded.

Fear of not having something one wants leads people to compromise.

Even good people, intelligent, ethical, high achievers, who are otherwise wise and with a well developed sense of right and wrong, can be tempted to compromise the values they hold due to a fear of not having or gaining something they desire.  They may rationalize it for awhile, but nonetheless behavior which dishonors the values deep within the heart, will have negative consequences in the long run. 

Fear of not achieving a political goal, for example, does not mean one should water it down to something “acceptable” to others who simply wish to achieve their political agenda with your support.  If you believe something should be abolished (as in unjust government programs), you shouldn’t settle for debating its reform.  You must devote the time to working toward achieving freedom not simply making tyranny more palatable.  Neither does one of principle settle for supporting one of the ‘lesser of two evils.’  And certainly, one’s political decisions and positions shouldn’t be governed by any power, gain, or advantage they might receive – yet this is how many choose what they support. Fear of having no candidate to support in a particular election, or fear that a good uncompromising liberty candidate can’t be elected, leads people to compromise and thereby become part of maintaining the problems. 

Likewise, when it comes to personal romantic relationships, one must never allow temporary gain (companionship, pleasure, etc.) to become more important than the deepest desires emanating from the core character values of honor, ethics, morality, and self-respect.  Yet, many who because of fear of being alone or perhaps fear of never being married, sadly settle for relationships with those of far less character, spiritual consciousness, and intellectual and emotional development than they.  Rather than adhere to their principles and beliefs about what constitutes a good, beautiful, fulfilling, wholesome loving relationship, they compromise in order to have something such as it is (losing faith that what is in their best good will come in time).  Some enter into such relationships because they want to have a home, a family, others look to the security a mate can provide, while others seek to have the natural desire for companionship fulfilled.  But none of those reasons justify compromise of one’s heart values.

Even in friendship, fear leads people to compromise.  Failing to express what is truthful (even if might result in disappointment in the other), often delaying or not saying at all things which should be frankly shared sooner rather than later, and avoidance of saying just what one feels or does not feel doesn’t build a friendship.  Once fear thoughts wedge into a friendship, honesty and openness end…artificial barriers are made, and the peace and happiness which otherwise could be shared if truth were honored and respected by all is not present.  One must be willing to risk loss of a relationship entirely by always adhering to truth and sharing honestly in order to gain and cultivate true friendships.  Kindness and tact have their place, but not at the expense of the truth.  True honest communication should never be compromised; if the recipient is incapable of receiving and appreciating it – so be it…there are those who will accept it, appreciate it, and cherish the blessing of the friendship offered. 

As a single woman, I’ve often met men who have tried unsuccessfully to impress me with what their money can buy, offering a lifestyle they think is conducive to achieving my favor, as if wealth would gain my affection.  And, I’ve had those who in the guise of altruism, attempt to enter my life for a stated political purpose (for example), but within weeks or months their true colors would show in terms of what they were really after.  Same with men who feigned the same religious beliefs, which within a short time it became so apparent they did not believe, even to the point of their ridicule of beliefs I do wholeheartedly accept.  And, as a previous political candidate, there were those who came offering substantial sums of monetary contributions if I would reverse myself on a stated issue. 

In their frustration in failing to obtain their agenda (whether it was personal or political) with me, some simply accepted it, while others, in their immaturity, became vindictive through slander and other means, with some even becoming vindictive toward others in the same cause simply because they knew they were in some way associated with me.

It is interesting to watch such people try repeatedly to get what they want, as they are so sure of (because of their previous successes) what their money, power, influence or personal traits can achieve.  With much confidence in their ability to manipulate outcomes, they ignore the very clear statement of principles I shared early on in their association with me (be it personal, spiritual, religious, ethical or political), and rather continue in their vain attempts.  I have laughed within that anyone would think such pathetic offers could cause me to compromise my principles – whether personally or politically.

I am only impressed by those who endeavor to live their lives in truth.  Mistakes, because we are human beings can be made, but at the core, a resolve to never compromise their beliefs and to correct mistakes when made, must be present.  Those of such integrity, rare as they are, inspire me.

Worthy goals, for yourself, as well as worthy goals for society, will never be achieved by compromise of your principles.  To join with anyone or any organization operating with a far different level of consciousness, understanding, and maturity than yourself is headed for heartache, strife, and pain. 

Looking to take or get anything else from another is a false premise to build a relationship upon. Often such compromise is achieved by lying to oneself, as if they are being altruistic and compassionate, when in actuality they are settling for something that is less than they desire and believe to be right.  Oftentimes, two people who both choose compromise come together to form relationships which are essentially based on a quid pro quo arrangement.  They call it “love,” though it is far from it.

Relationship, to be true, must be based on joyfully sharing because this other person is one whom you wish to be a part of helping them fulfill themselves and experience happiness.  It is based on shared fundamental important values.  Then all else becomes meaningful.

Without the courage found in a strong spiritual faith and trust, one’s mind begins to tell them that by accepting a certain compromise, one will gain or maintain whatever it is they desire – be it a relationship, money, prestige, career advancement, a political goal, etc.  Once compromise is allowed to enter, much behavior one would have otherwise rejected as wrong, becomes possible.

I live my life in faith.  If I’m asked my opinion of a topic or issue, I don’t evaluate whether to say something is “acceptable,” or whether it will gain approval, because doing so would compromise what I believe.  I believe speaking and working for the truth makes a tremendous difference, even if I cannot see it at the time. 

Similarly, if I find myself with an opportunity for a personal relationship with one who now (or recently) compromises important character values (whether seeking to do so with me or if I see that behavior recently with another), I reject it regardless of how attractive other aspects are.  If the other is capable and willing, I offer my friendship with a clear frank expression of its parameters. 

It is a mistake to think about having a close relationship with one whose beliefs and character in life is fundamentally different, for as the Bible, 2 Corinthians 6:14, says “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness?”  (KJV)

The yearning to join with another is natural to us.  But for true joy, it must a union between individuals of like character, morality, and beliefs. 

And, the yearning to join with others in common causes is also natural. 

But worthy goals, personally and politically, will only be achieved by the union of like-minded individuals who will not compromise their core principles.  There can be no union between an individual choosing “light,” as Corinthians says, with another individual or organization that chooses “darkness.” 

Identify your most important core values and principles upon which you have chosen to base your life.  Whenever an important life decision is to be made, evaluate and ponder each of those core values and principles as you consider what you will do.  Do not allow a want that is lesser than your fundamental principles to get your priorities out of order. 

Settling for less will not bring joy or fulfillment. 

Be strong.  Keep your faith and maintain your courage.  Good things you deeply desire do not come through shortcuts in which conscience is ignored (even if ever so briefly).  Good things manifest through a life of uncompromising principle, trusting that God will provide what you need.