Double Standards, Intellectual Honesty, And More – On Foundations Of Freedom: Should any administration’s objective be to uphold justice? If churches influence public policy, should they be tax exempt? Could a new government be established at a Convention of States? Since slavery is included in America’s past, is that proof she was not founded on Biblical principles? Tune in to learn the answers to these questions as we discuss intellectual honesty and more!

Air Date: 05/28/2020

On-air Personalities: David Barton, Rick Green, and Tim Barton

Listen:

Download: Click Here

Transcription note:  As a courtesy for our listeners’ enjoyment, we are providing a transcription of this podcast. Transcription will be released shortly. However, as this is transcribed from a live talk show, words and sentence structure were not altered to fit grammatical, written norms in order to preserve the integrity of the actual dialogue between the speakers. Additionally, names may be misspelled or we might use an asterisk to indicate a missing word because of the difficulty in understanding the speaker at times. We apologize in advance.

Faith and the Culture

Thomas Jefferson said, “The Constitution of most of our States and of the United States assert that all power is inherent in the people that they may exercise it by themselves. That is their right and duty to be at all times armed, that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property and freedom of press.”

Rick:

Welcome to the intersection of faith and the culture. It’s WallBuilders Live where we’re talking about today’s hottest topics on policy and faith and the culture, always from a biblical, historical and constitutional perspective. Here we are still in the COVID crackdowns and so Foundations of Freedom Thursdays are even more important than ever. We are literally, not only educating on the Constitution, we’re literally fighting for the life of the Constitution. It is so important for us to be diving into these foundational principles and we appreciate your questions. Send them into [email protected], that’s [email protected].

It was, of course, a privilege to stand with the Romanian pastors and their Romanian church there in Chicago where the mayor has been trying to shut them down, just harassing them. And I got to speak there this last Sunday and to see the sweet people fighting for their constitutional rights and still standing up and exercising their freedom of religion, was phenomenal.

And I just think all of us need to take a moment and be thankful that we live in a nation that has a Constitution to fight for and that we have all of the means that our fingertips to save that Constitution. But we’ve got to be involved. You got to know your rights and you got to know how to defend and assert them. Be sure and visit constitutioncoach.com today and begin learning about those rights and how you can help others. You can be the catalyst for restoring the biblical and constitutional principles that made our nation great.

Also visit wallbuilderslive.com, that’s where you can actually go into the archives and listen to programs for the last few weeks and also check out which stations we’re on across the country and that’s where you can make that contribution, one-time or monthly, we appreciate you coming alongside us at this critical time in our nation’s history.

Time for Questions

Alright, David, Tim, we’ve got a ton of questions that have come in over the last few weeks, we’re going to get to as many as we can today. Folks, who want to send in more of those questions, [email protected], that’s [email protected]. Here’s the first one for you guys. It is out of Virginia. Adam in Virginia said, “Are there any examples in American history where a new presidential administration went after a person or persons from the last administration for illegal activities?

Great and obvious example would be the Trump administration going after Hillary for all the illegal things that she did. It just seems like justice is rarely done retroactively by a new administration and I wonder why. Thanks in advance for your answer. I hope you’re doing very well. Best regards, Adam in Virginia.” Adam, thanks for sending that in.

David, Tim, of course, Nixon comes to mind, but I don’t know that was a pardon, so I don’t even know if you can include that one, right?

David:

Well, but to go back to this question, it’s rarely done by new administration’s, I wonder why. And the reason is because the Justice Department is supposed to be pledge to uphold the Constitution, that’s their oath. And the Constitution does not change from one administration to another. So, if your objective is to ensure justice, to uphold the laws of the land under the Constitution, that doesn’t change.

Which is why, Rick, as you mentioned, you have Richard Nixon who’s a Republican with a Republican administration, yet the Justice Department goes after guys in his administration. Or you have Bill Clinton with the Democrat administration who gets impeached under that administration. So, the Justice Department wasn’t about who’s in office and who’s not in office, it’s just about what’s constitutional and what does the law say.

Tim:

Now, I will point out with even the Bill Clinton though, there might be some nuance in this, because he was impeached by a Republican Senate and the Justice Department did not really do much against him. And so it would seem that certainly, we know there are some political, I mean, really what we’ve seen the last year or two coming to light with all the stuff with Trump, with the previous Justice Department, there still are humans involved and humans will have their own inclinations and oftentimes there’re political leanings.

The Need for Biblical Standards

And we would like to think that people have enough integrity and enough character, that they’re going to put their personal preference aside to uphold the law. We just know that reality is that’s not really where we are, that certainly defies a lot of human nature. And we would argue without the biblical standards and probably without a relationship with God that helps you have, we would argue that better character, you’re probably not going to be able to do this well, as far as kind of leave your personal opinion aside, uphold just the standard and the character of the law in this case.

So, I don’t know that we’ve seen, even the clamp examples of Bill Clinton, I don’t know that the Justice Department necessarily was working to uphold a strict standard of justice or there might have been a little more than just him losing his law license so to speak.

But it’s an interesting question, because you do see a shift, sometimes even in the Justice Department for what is politically expedient for them. If they’re opposed to a certain administration, then they might stay a little more underground. They don’t let their political leanings be as visible, which certainly again, I mean, Trump has helped expose so many things in so many areas, so many agencies, so many bureaucracies, that what we are realizing is there’s a lot more swamp than just those that have been elected officials and those that specifically work in the Capitol. So, it’s interesting question.

David:

Well, a lot of the swamp too is now generated by the fact that, Tim, as you pointed out in previous programs, we’re more about which side wins than what’s right and wrong. And that goes to a cultural problem where that polling shows that right now, two out of three Americans think there is no absolute right or wrong.

There’s no moral right and wrong: morals are whatever I want it to be. And if you can do that and if the Constitution “becomes a thing of wax”, that’s Jefferson’s quote, “becomes a thing of wax”, that people can twist and shape in any mold they please, if that’s the case, then you’re going to have persecution of one administration by the next and back and forth and back and forth, so the rule of law goes out the door.

The Pilgrims and Puritans

And looking at that, I was reminded of what the Pilgrims and Puritans and others faced at the time they came to America and set up a new justice system here. You had the High Commissioner of Courts, Admiralty Courts, the Star Chamber courts. And as I read through the characteristics, that reminded me of where we are today, because back then the same individual could serve as Judge, as prosecutor and Jury, there was no checks and balances. You got to make all the decisions. Prosecute who you want to, go after who you want to, convict who you want to.

An individual charged with the crime was always assumed to be guilty of the crime, there was no innocent until proven guilty. And you could be charged with the crime without the accuser ever been known, you didn’t get to know who your accuser were. All the records were secret and they were kept hidden and you didn’t get access to them. And hearsay evidence was accepted as fact that is gossip and rumor.

And it’s all the stuff we’re seeing now in recent years. It’s like we’re going back to the 1500s. And I mean, modern technology is what it is, we’re not in the 1500s, but the behavior is what it was back there. And so, without some kind of Tim, as you said, a biblical basis of character, respect for the Constitution is the ultimate authority.

If you think that morality is determined by what I think and what I want and by which side wins, then we’re going to have trouble. And really, we were better than previous generations than we are now, which is why you saw less of this in previous generations. So, what you see right now, which is the back and forth, tit for tat: you got me, I’m going to get you

Rick:

Alright, guys, next question coming up after the break. Stay with us, folks, you’re listening to WallBuilders Live.

The Greatest Political Privilege

President Calvin Coolidge said, “The more I study the Constitution, the more I realized that no other document devised by the hand of man has brought so much progress and happiness to humanity. To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.”

Many of you out there are under stay-at-home orders by your governor or your local health officials and maybe you’re looking for something to do during this time. One of the most important things you can do as a citizen is to make sure that you know your rights, you know when they’ve been violated and you’re the better prepared to defend and assert them. To do that, you’ve got to study the Constitution and the history behind it.

Constitution Alive with David Barton and Rick Green does exactly that. We take you into the WallBuilders library, we bring all those resources to life. And then we go out to Philadelphia, the Independence Hall and right there in the room where the Constitution and the Declaration were put together, we bring it to life, we relive it and we make sure that we as citizens know what our part is in preserving these freedoms for future generations.

Constitution Alive!

At this time in our nation, it is so important to know the proper role of government and what we as citizens should be doing at this time. If you haven’t done Constitution Alive, check it out at wallbuilders.com. You can get the DVD set there, we’ll get it out in the mail to you as soon as we can. And you can study it at home or you can go to constitutioncoach.com and become a Constitution coach today. We’ve got a free license for you right now where you can sign up as a Constitution host and be the catalyst in your community to bring back these biblical and historical and constitutional values.

And what you do is you sign up as a host and then you get your friends and family together on Zoom. We coach you on how to do it and you’re To create community and also study the Constitution at the same time. Do this and we will be able to pick up the pieces on the other side of this crisis and rebuild our nation even stronger than it was before. Check it out today at constitutioncoach.com.

A Moment From American History

This is David Barton with another moment from America’s history. As election time again approaches America’s many problems are highlighted by numerous candidates who then offer their own various and diverse solutions to those problems.

However, for the Founding Fathers, much more than just good policies were needed to secure America’s prosperity. As Patrick Henry succinctly declared, “Righteousness alone can exalt America as a nation. Whoever thou art, remember this; and in thy sphere practice virtue thyself, and encourage it in others. The great pillars of all government and of social life are virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone, that renders us invincible.”

As you participate in this year’s elections, remember that righteousness is the key. Therefore, be careful to vote for leaders who will promote righteousness at every level of government. For more information on God’s hand in American history, contact WallBuilders at 1808REBUILD.

Thomas Jefferson said, “In questions of power, then let no more be heard of confidence in man that bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

Send In Your Questions

Rick:

We’re back on WallBuilders Live, it’s Foundations of Freedom Thursday. You can send your question in to [email protected], that’s [email protected]. And also, there are archives of these Thursday programs at our radio site, which is wallbuilderslive.com, which means you can dive into a lot of great foundational questions. What can we do under the Constitution? What’s the proper role of government? The influence of the Bible on these things? There’s so much there. Go check it out at wallbuilderslive.com.

Alright, David, Tim, next question is going to come out of New York. And Sebastian from Brooklyn, New York said, “What are some very strong arguments I can use in response to someone who would argue with me that if the church could influence policy specifically, as it concerns gay marriage, they should no longer be tax exempt, especially when a church in America would invest money on campaigns that fight for the undoing of the 2015 Supreme Court decisions that made same sex marriage legal across the United States.” So, a great question, guys. So, how do we respond to people that would say, alright, if you’re trying to influence public policy, you’re not a nonprofit and shouldn’t be tax exempt?

Should Non-Profits Be Allowed to Lobby

David:

Well, justice is that everyone is treated exactly the same. And so, taking this question the way it’s presented, obviously, the person who is challenging here is someone who is supportive of LGBTQ issues. They do not think that 2015 Supreme Court decision should be overturned. My question then becomes, okay, when the 2015 Supreme Court decision overturned Bauer versus Hardwick and Wade v. Baker, which had been made 20 years earlier, was your side lobbying for those cases to be overturned so that gay marriage could become legal?

Because your side, LGBTQ groups are also nonprofit groups. So, should they lose their right to be nonprofit because they advocated that laws that said homosexuality was wrong, that they should be overturned at the decisions of the Supreme Court? No, clearly not. So, this is they’re picking their side to win. And since your side opposes my side, your side shouldn’t get tax exemptions. No, just go back to…

And by the way, if you’re going to say that you shouldn’t lobby to overturn Supreme Court decision, I’m going to pull a straw man out here or people will say it’s a straw man. But Dred Scott, so if I’m a church, I shouldn’t lobby to overturn Dred Scott back in the day with abolitionists and Charles Finney and all those guys who are abolitionists, we should not let? No, this is nonsense to ask that kind of question.

The other thing I would point out is, okay, if you’re saying that nonprofit groups shouldn’t be able to lobby, so are you willing to hold that standard for teachers’ groups and for unions? And are you willing to hold that standard for political parties, both Republican and Democrat parties are nonprofit? Look at all the other nonprofit groups that lobby, I mean, this is crazy.

Tim:

Yeah, I think that’s the best point. Is I would start off asking the question and saying, do you think all nonprofits should be barred from lobbying? And let’s start there, right? Let’s find out where the bias is. Because I presume what you’re going to discover is you’re going to say, well, yes, you’re going to say, oh, so then teachers unions and right whatever kind of unions there might be and Planned Parenthood, all these groups should not be allowed to lobby for positions anymore. Oh, well not them. Well, wait a second, I thought we just said nonprofits.

Determine the Standard

And so, you go through this and what you will find is that most people are not intellectually honest, meaning they’re not going to be intellectually consistent with their position. They are targeting one specific group that they don’t like the position that group is taking and therefore they’re going to use the arbitrary standard of 501(c)(3) is the reason they cannot argue, because 501(c)(3) taxed that they can’t argue?

Now wait a second, is it just because they’re arguing against this position or because they’re a 501(c)(3)? Let’s determine what the standard is. And what you will see is it really is just as arbitrary standard, which is based on a bias that they don’t like the position that this religious organization is taking and therefore they why that is wrong.

And this is again, just intellectual inconsistency. If you said, well, are you offended when Christians say that homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to have a legal married union? Or are you upset when Muslims say they shouldn’t have that union? Well, Christians are ones that say it. Well, you might recognize Christian saying it more. But Christians are not the only ones that say it.

And if you look around the world, there’s a lot of Muslim groups that not only are saying that homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to get married. There’s places in the world where homosexuals are executed for being homosexual. So, in this regard, Christians might oppose a position, but they’re pretty tolerant and their behavior.

Now, that doesn’t mean that all Christians, right, I’m putting some caveats, it doesn’t mean all Christians are responding in love where the notion of that you kind of you hate the sin, you love the sinner. Well, certainly, we want to be gracious and we want to be loving and we want to help people see there’s a better way that you can live your life and enjoy more God’s blessings in your life. And this isn’t just homosexuality, right? It’s any sex outside of the marriage, union between one man and one woman.

So, for a man and woman that are living together that are not married, that’s wrong. For people having affairs with people, not their spouse, having sex with another spouse. That’s wrong. All sexual activity outside of a marriage union between a man and woman is wrong. That’s the official biblical position.

Biblical Christianity

And this is where, certainly as Christians, we want to stand for biblical Christianity. But this notion that we’re going to say, well, we’re against Christians being against the homosexual movement agenda. Well, it’s not really because they’re a 501(c)(3), it’s because when this is, again, what I suspect is that they’re going to be in the pro LGBT community and so, they’re just offended by somebody being against that movement, even if it is for religious reasons. A

nd we could have a much longer conversation related to this, but I would start off trying to pinpoint them on what is your actual position? Are you against nonprofits that are lobbying or are you against them lobbying for certain things? Or are you just against churches? Because what I think is you will find they’re intellectually inconsistent and dishonest that they’re not against nonprofits or lobbying, they’re just against churches lobbying for specific positions.

Rick:

And that really gets to the to the heart of the matter and usually, that is exactly what the objection is. This next one comes out of Irving, Texas. Sumi said, “Could the current national government be rejected and a new one started at a Convention of States? So, broad question here, guys. I mean, basically saying, would we actually just start over?

Tim:

Alright, the answer is no.

David:

There you go. Now, I was going to be a little more sarcastic, not towards Sumi, but toward this, because this is a claim we hear very, very often. And so, Jesus said, I would answer a question with a question. And my question would be, is Arizona going to have a 14-inch blizzard on the 4th of July this year? The likely answer should be no, but you could always say well…

Convention of States

Tim:

I mean, if you remember angels in the outfield, the answer was, hey, it could happen.

David:

It could happen. So, from the standpoint of Convention of States, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which is what authorizes the Convention of States, says that the Convention of States can only and this is quoting from the Constitution, “Propose amendments to this Constitution.” It can’t write a new one, it can only propose amendments to this Constitution. See, what would be the breakdown, it’s not the Convention of States, it’s if the people themselves decide they don’t want the Constitution anymore.

I’m not afraid of the Convention of States, they can propose amendments to this constitution. But we keep hearing that, oh, if they get together, they can write a brand new Constitution. Well, they can’t do that unless the people want that and it’s more likely to snow on the 4th of July in Arizona than that.

Tim:

Yeah, and let’s say that, in some weird world, there was a new Constitution written, that doesn’t mean we automatically start following, it has to be approved by 38 states and in those states, it has to be approved by both houses of the legislative body, unless it’s Nebraska, which only has one. But outside of Nebraska, it has to be approved in both the House and the Senate side. Which when you look at the states, first of all, 38 States don’t agree on really anything. And more times than not, you have States that are going to be divided between the House and Senate on something like this.

So, the notion that we’re going to have a new Constitution, is going to change the old one, it’s going to throw it out, this is the idea of a runaway Convention where we get a new Constitution and it’s just so illogical, dad, it’s like the point you’re making that it’s going to snow on the 4th of July in Arizona, that’s just not very logical. I mean, it could happen but it’s one to the, you know, whatever, billion degrees…

It Could Happen…

David:

And by the way, I know there are tall mountains in Arizona with snow, so let me say snow in Phoenix on the 4th of July.

Tim:

Yeah, that’s right. Somebody from Arizona is like, no, we have snow. It’s great. Okay, that’s right. Yeah, Phoenix, wherever it’s really hot desert somewhere

David:

Tucson Mojave Desert border, you know…

Tim:

Yeah. Let’s go to the desert, that’s what we’re talking about and not the mountains in the desert. Okay, I get it, right, there’s an exception. But the point is, it’s so unlikely that any of this would happen, a fear is very, very illogical. And we live in a culture where there’s a lot of illogical fears, but this one is something that certainly we should not be concerned about. At this point, people are still only discussing the notion of having Article 5 Conventions and it’s not just one State that has to have it. You have to have multiple States and have it and multiple States have to come to agreement…

David:

38 different States have to call forward.

Tim:

Yeah. And not just call for it, do it. Right? Yeah. Anyway, there’s so many details to this, so there’s really no fear of a new Constitution coming out.

David:

And by the way, I said 38 states call forward, is 34 states call forward, 38 states have to ratify what’s done by those 34 if they can get to that level.

Irrational Fear

Tim:

Yeah. So, all of this seems like an irrational fear, something not to worry about. Yeah, it’s something that a lot of people are using fear as the reason not to have this honest conversation. Even with honest conversation, I don’t really see it going anywhere, I don’t see States that are really hungry to make a move in that direction. But to answer the question, simply no, there’s not a fear of a new Constitution coming out of the Convention of States movement.

Rick:

Alright quick break, guys. We got time for one more question, it’s on the Trail of Tears. Stay with us, you’re listening to WallBuilders Live.

Thomas Jefferson said, “The Constitution of most of our States and of the United States assert that all power is inherent in the people that they may exercise it by themselves. That is their right and duty to be at all times armed, that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property and freedom of press.”

One-Room Schoolhouse

Hey friends, this Rick Green from WallBuilders Live and I have had so many requests about, what in the world could we be studying at home right now you know I got the kids at home, they’re normally in school? Or if you homeschool, you’re looking for additional material. One-Room Schoolhouse. It is a great new series WallBuilders is putting out where you literally get a tour of the WallBuilders library as Tim Barton and Jonathan Ritchie bring history to life. There’s a couple of resources on this.

You go to YouTube and search for WallBuilders and look for a One-Room Schoolhouse. You can go to our Facebook page and get it right there on Facebook as we do it live each Monday and sometimes additional days from there. And then you can also just go to wallbuilders.com, scroll down to the bottom and we’ll be posting the videos as they come out.

This is such a great way to learn and a great way for you to share with others. Gather the family around, watch the One-Room Schoolhouse and learn some great history. It’ll be vitally important to restoring our nation and bringing back these principles that made America great in the first place. Check it out [email protected].

President Thomas Jefferson said, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. And if we think they’re not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

Founded on Christian Principles?

Rick:

Welcome back to WallBuilders Live. It’s Foundations of Freedom Thursday today. And our last question of the day is from Renee. The question is, “I love all the information about our country’s founding. And I’m wondering, with our nation being founded on Christian principles, how do we reconcile that fact with the reality of certain events such as the Trail of Tears, Acceptance of Slavery and other things in our history like that?” Renee, thanks for your question.

So, guys, really comes down to this. If we’re a nation founded on Christian principles, how is it that we’ve done bad things? Or some people have done bad things? I guess all of us have probably done, oh, wait, we’re all sinners, aren’t we?

David:

Well, that’s the answer. The answer is people were involved. That’s why bad things happen. We were a nation founded, I would say not on Christian principles, so much as biblical principles. And when you get away from biblical principles, even as a Christian, you will do the wrong thing. And so, I do not know of a Christian who has not done wrong things. Now, how long they last, how long does things last? I mean, clearly with slavery there were some preachers in the south who began to preach for, even some preachers in the north.

But I will point out that slavery came to an end because of Christians who stood against it. There were Christians who did it wrong. The same with the Trail of Tears. There were a lot of Christians who oppose that. But you had leadership at the time that said, well, this is what we’re going to do. And so, that does not mean that because we’re a Christian nation, we have no flaws, we just have more good than we have bad and that’s the point with all this. These are all blemishes on who we are.

All Christians Don’t Act Biblically

Just as King David had blemishes on who he was and what he did, he’s still considered the best king in Israel in the Bible, but he had lots of blemishes, whether it’s with his family or whether it’s with his marriage or actually affairs outside of marriage. You know, whatever it is, just because you’re Christian doesn’t mean you’re biblical. And I would argue that David had a heart after God, but he still did not obey what the Bible said to do on many occasions. And that’s American history as well.

Tim:

And to give clarification and the distinction of Christianity and biblical, dad, I mean, you mentioned king David just because, you know, he loved God, doesn’t mean he’s biblical. What we mean is always biblical, because the undergirding principles have remained and those undergirding principles are what helped correct course when people got off course. And the notion of America being founded on Christian principles doesn’t mean that people didn’t do bad things. And sometimes people, even in the name of Christianity have done bad things over the years.

Now, in America, you don’t see as many examples of that. But absolutely, there were some really bad terrible things that happened in America, people that did really evil, messed up dark things in America. And just like anywhere else in the world, these kind of things happen because people are involved. And just like the apostle Paul wrote in Romans that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. But that does not change the fact that there were biblical Christian principles and it was those principles that help restore order and balance when America got off course.

How Is America Defined?

And dad, as you mentioned, it was Christians that were helping lead the abolition movement, it was Christians that were opposing a lot of the Indian Removal Act. There were Christians involved in the process that were saying these things are wrong. And more times than not when America corrected course, it was Christians at the helm saying, we’re not doing what the Bible says and we have to do the Bible says again. Which is why in America, you don’t see the same level of atrocities that you see in many nations around the world.

David:

And I would add, just as a personal note, if someone came to you and said, I heard you lie, you’re a liar. He said, hey, I know, I made a mistake on that. I’ve told the truth 500 other times. You don’t want to be remembered by what you did wrong. Now, acknowledge what you did wrong.

But what happens today is they’re trying really hard to make America to be defined by what she did wrong rather than what she did right. So, when you can point out things that are wrong, turn around and point out 10 things that are right. Remember that we’ve done so many beneficial things.

Double Standards, Intellectual Honesty, And More – On Foundations Of Freedom

We’ve elevated the world in so many areas, in so many ways. We brought liberty to the world faster than other nations did. We have elevated so many types of people. We’ve elevated equality of rights. We have so many concepts we brought in. So, don’t let America be defined by the examples they can pull out of when we did something wrong. Be quick to point out when we also do something right and how the whole world has benefited as a result.

Rick:

We are out of time for today folks, thanks for joining us on this Foundations of Freedom Thursday. You can get more at our website, wallbuilderslive.com. And don’t forget to go to constitutioncoach.com today as well, start getting educated on the Constitution and helping others to do the same, become a part of the solution and become a force multiplier. Thanks for listening to WallBuilders Live.

—-

Abraham Lincoln said, “We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts; not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”