national morality

  excerpt from chapter 17 - A Call to Action

   The civil rights movement was characterized by social and political issues being discussed inside the church walls.  This resulted in an 80 to 90 percent black vote that supports, or did support, the Democratic Party across America.  Do we really believe that this happened without the church leaders mentioning the names of candidates or without instructions being given to the members of the churches on how to vote and who to vote for?  Do we really believe that the preaching inside many of these churches did not encourage the congregations to vote for certain political candidates and/or along party lines?  Of course we don’t.  We were willing to turn a blind eye to this political activity occurring within these churches because the majority of Americans agreed with the sentiments that were expressed from these churches and these citizens. 

     Such a method of resolving social issues is not an establishment of religion by government that is prohibited by our constitution.  It is the improvement of government by the people, for the people and of the people.  It is the proper exercise of religious freedom for the benefit of the people and the benefit of the government. 

     The Reverend Martin Luther King dreamed of a day when our children would not be judged by the color of their skin, but rather, by the content of their character.  I also long for such a day.  Yet, many people in America today insist that a person’s sexual behavior has nothing to do with their character at all.  How can that be?  Where did such an idea come from?  Who is fostering this idea?  By what authority are they fostering this idea?  How can we judge a person based on the content of their character if we will no longer be allowed by our own government to judge people based on their bad sexual behavior? 

     A lack of character is most certainly what one clearly is experiencing when they behave poorly, sexually speaking.  What right does government have to say that we cannot make such judgments?  Where did they get that right?  Who gave them that right?  How can it be that the sexual behavior of our citizens has nothing to do with their character?

     I submit that government has overstepped its bounds by saying that we are not allowed to make such judgments about character based on sexual behavior.  Such a position by our government stinks of political cronyism.  It shows a lack of good sense by our political leadership.  It is the result of the influence of money and power. 

     When has money and power ever been a reliable barometer of good morals? 

     Do we really believe that the Reverend Martin Luther King would support such a movement if he were alive today?  If he were alive today, would he believe, as many others do, that the civil rights movement is in danger of being hijacked by immoral forces in an attempt to legitimize sexual immorality?  I believe that he would.  To those others in our society who agree with this sentiment, are we going to allow this to stand unchallenged? 

     If we do allow this movement to continue unchallenged, are we not also allowing those immoral forces to besmirch the noble and honorable memory of this great African American leader?  Reverend King was not a perfect man.  But truly he was a great man.  Do not be deceived, his greatness can be attributed to his stand for righteousness and to nothing else.  There is nothing righteous in the stand which people are taking today in America in regard to the legitimization, protection and promotion of sexual immorality.