Category Archives: Biblical Worldview

Marriage and Family, Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Life Issues, Biblical Worldview

More Information On Gardasil

Way back in 2007 the Institute For Principled Policy Led the fight to oppose mandatory Gardasil vaccinations for girls as young as 10. Gardasil is a vaccination created to immunize against a limited number of strains of the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). It was being touted as a cervical cancer prevention method. We cited a complete lack of information on vital statistics regarding length of anti-viral activity, adverse immunological effects, possible adverse reactions (Guillain-Barre Syndrome, etc), actual statistical analysis regarding reduction of cancer, etc. For a complete list of the questions we were asking in the Spring of 2007 you can read our main article HERE.

Now, 3 years later, the bloom is off the “miracle vaccination” rose. It is becoming clear that the objections we raised were more than justified. Merck & Co. the pharmaceutical giant that developed this vaccine and has spent millions trying to guarantee itself indemnity from lawsuit via a little known section of the PATRIOT Act that makes mandatory vaccinations immune from damage lawsuits. That’s what was going on in Ohio in 2007 and we at the Institute For Principled Policy exposed it early, thus killing the bill (HB 81) that would have made the vaccine mandatory.

Since that time there have been nearly 9000 adverse reaction reports, including deaths, paralysis, mysterious pain, immunological impacts, reports of passing out, etc. Now Merck & Co. are trying to get boys in the act, claiming the vaccine will work in them, as well.

Here is a video that gives an interesting overview of the situation including a CBS Evening News report on Gardasil adverse reactions-

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJsEEXDGAsk[/youtube]

There is also a very well done video response to the first video that looks at the problem from a more scientific perspective. It targets both the medical journals and marketing of the vaccine-

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ32gAb1o-E[/youtube]

As the second video makes clear, there are many questions that MUST be answered about Gardasil primarily but also many other vaccinations. Vaccinations can be wonderful things (polio), but there is an immunological price to pay for their use. The extent of that price is not yet fully known. As consumers we need to be given considerably more information on that price than we now have.

Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Life Issues, Biblical Worldview, Executive Usurpation, Public Policy Radar

Observations on the Healthcare Summit

By Dr. Mark Hamilton

Due to my own medical issues I load up my teaching on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday with a Tuesday night class. This keeps Thursdays free for medical appointments. This meant that I was fortunately (or maybe unfortunately?) able to take in the televised spectacle of the health care summit with President Obama entertaining the leaders from the Senate and House of Representatives in mortal verbal combat last week. This short expose’ will be my personal reflective thoughts on the day. Be reminded that due to my own illness, I read and reflected on the entire bill last summer and have been judiciously following the debates and discussions. Regarding this recent summit, I have been careful not to listen to many “post-game” pundits so that I can attempt to give my own untainted response to the nefarious activities of that day.

First, the sessions, especially the morning one was a good introduction to the health care debate. The primary issues were revealed and the ground clearly staked out by each side. The Democratic position was first laid out by the President followed by a clear eloquent Republican response by Lamar Alexander and Tom Coburn. After hearing their reply anyone who says the Republicans do not have a proposal for health care is badly mistaken. These men put forward specific Republican plans.

Second, the morning session, while accomplishing nothing in terms of resolution was a great educational time. My wife who understands many of the issues but who has not studied the bill in depth like I have was very attentive to much of the morning session because of the striking philosophical differences revealed.

Third, obviously President Obama was trying to find common points of agreement. Each time a Republican point would be made he would try to restate the discussion and frame it in a way that minimized the differences and magnified the agreement. I now know what Mr. Obama’s real calling is, a professional facilitator. For those of you who have been to professional planning sessions you know what I mean. These are people who are blind to disagreement and violate the law of non-contradiction by seeing all sides as part of the same side. I suspect his plan is to use this grasp at common ground as fodder to attempt to push through his bill while publicly saying the Republicans agree with much of its content.

Fourth, if the summit accomplished one great deed it was revealing the obvious differences in the sides. The Democrats want government to oversee the health care industry and to regulate it wherever possible while the Republicans want more freedom and less government control. Because there are some points of agreement, some will be persuaded to think the two sides are not far apart. They are completely polarized because they have different world views.

Fifth, the Republicans at the summit were much more eloquent and succinct in their points than the Democrats were. Senators Alexander and Coburn, and Representatives Ryan and Cantor were all very eloquent and persuasive; none of the Republicans looked confused or uncertain. I was very impressed at how fluent and philosophically consistent these Republicans were. In the past decade I have been quite critical of many of the leading Republican because of their pragmatic unprincipled approach to governing. That was not observable on Thursday. Democratic Senator Reid looked like a weasel as he denied the concept of reconciliation while networks were showing recordings of him and other Democrats mentioning the idea over the past few months. His denial of reconciliation made him look like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar saying to his mother that he was not going to eat any cookies. Speaker of the House Pelosi spoke as she always does, irrationally and haphazardly. If I ever hear of another liberal calling Palin dumb while supporting the mindless idiocy of Pelosi, I will pull my hair out. The Democrats must have used twice the time as the Republicans to say less than half of the content.

Sixth, Obama himself tried to be conciliatory and at times it worked. But his disdain for the Republicans obviously manifested itself in his rebukes of McCain and Cantor and the way he wanted to respond to each Republican directly after they spoke. Mr. Obama is the most defensive president I’ve ever seen. I’m sure he lectured and cajoled the Republicans for more time during the summit than all the combined speeches of all the Republicans.

Seven, finally it became obvious that the central issue is one of statism. The Democrats believe in it and hold fast to its tenets. Though some Republicans have been statists, like the Bushes and McCain, the emerging Republican leaders who were spokesmen at the summit are moving away from this outdated, idolatrous position. Healthcare is drawing the line in the sand and the summit painted this line in florescence green.

Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Economics, Biblical Worldview

Climate Change is a Theological Issue

Reprinted from Liberty Nation with permission

The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.

Psalm 24:1

The definition of “sacred” is that which we will not question, even though it cannot be proven.  Christians hold sacred the beliefs in the divine inspiration of Scripture and the deity of Christ, even though these cannot be proven.  This is the essence of faith – the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1).  On the other hand, Newtonian physics is not venerated since it has been proven using the scientific method.  No faith is required to believe in gravity.  However, what happens when a scientific theory is treated as sacred doctrine, even when the empirical evidence is totally contradictory?  Enter the chaotic world of CLIMATE CHANGE.

As with any religion, there are two groups of people in the global warming movement (or climate change, or whatever we’re calling it this week): the shepherds and the sheep.  The sheep do not have critical thinking skills, lack a proper worldview, and they are looking for meaning in their lives.  This a dangerous combination, and it makes them easy prey for the trappings of a false religion – and the shepherds know this all too well. While some of the shepherds may actually believe the hype around climate change, many are knowingly propagating misleading data to manipulate people into a pre-determined agenda.  This has been demonstrated by the recent “Climate Gate” scandal.

The problem is that the word “science” is used as a sledgehammer to bludgeon anyone who questions climate change.  However, climate change is not based on science.  Instead, it is based on scientism – which is accepting a scientific theory as absolute truth in the absence of true scientific evidence.  Climate change is a false religion, and it has every mark of such:

Deity

Preachers

Choir

Evangelists

Religious Symbols

Holy Books

Holy Days

Martyrs

Demons

Seminaries

Tithes and Offerings

Redemption for Sin

Dire Warnings of Armageddon

And Finally, A Saviour For The Earth.

Private Property, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Economics, Biblical Worldview, Crime and Punishment, Public Policy Radar

Private Property Rights- A Canary In A Coalmine

No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law… (emphasis added) Amendment 5 US Constitution

That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety… (emphasis added) Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776

A story in the Detroit News, when read carefully, is an excellent indicator of the state of liberty at least in the state of Michigan. And as go the states so goes the Federal government. In the article we learn that local police departments are using virtually any excuse imaginable to impound privately owned automobiles. Pick a colleague up from a street who has dared to make “eye contact” with passers-by and you could lose your car- literally. No exaggeration necessary. According to the article…

State law allows police to take property, usually vehicles, for any reason, even in the absence of criminal activity

While it is difficult to imagine that any state law is this broad the article does further state…

…that vehicles sometimes are seized even when police admit no crime took place…

A quick search of Michigan’s Constitution reveals a bill of rights which states rather clearly that…

The person, houses, papers and possessions of every person shall be secure from
unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place or to seize any person or
things shall issue without describing them, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or
affirmation

In light of the crystal clear language of the highest law of the land in Michigan, its constitution, it s almost impossible to imagine that any law enforcement official could be so jaded or corrupt as to describe any of the situations chronicled in the articles as “probable cause.”  And yet here we stand asking the question “what constitutes a “reasonable” seizure?”

It is difficult not to draw the conclusion that the real focus of Wayne County (Detroit) law enforcement’s  efforts have been directed not in protecting the rights and property of the citizens despite their oaths but in making sure they don’t illegally seize the property of people with the mindset and resources to bring suit on constitutional grounds against the law enforcement officers and agencies in question. Why should law enforcement go to the trouble, if this proposed line of thinking is true? Follow the money.

Once vehicles are “seized” (or if the Michigan Constitution is to be believed- stolen) victims are  required to pay $900 on top of towing and storage fees to get their often illegally seized property returned. This would be a tremendous boost to any county’s or municipality’s “ailing” budget.  Seize 100 cars on dubious grounds (say winking at an undercover cop working as a faux prostitute or perhaps demonstrating that you think law enforcement is “number one” with an inappropriate finger in the air) and VOILA! Ninety thousand dollars suddenly appears in the ailing government entities coffers.The current economic situation in many places is grim, no thanks to the frugality of  public servants, and the current attitude of government representatives and public safety servants has, in many cases, morphed from an attitude of servanthood to an attitude of the divine right of rulers in a remarkably short time. This is no idle speculation. The article contains a quote from Walter Epps, a candidate for Wayne County Sheriff. He said…

“Under the current ordinance, there doesn’t have to be a crime proven in order to seize someone’s vehicle,” said Walter Epps, a former Wayne County sheriff’s lieutenant who ran the department’s Morality Squad for more than four years. “But I feel if we’re going to take someone’s car, the least we should do is to charge them with the crime or issue them a ticket.”

The problem with this man’s statement is subtle. Did you catch it? It’s the sequence. Seize the car then to justify it charge the driver with a crime or issue a ticket. This, of course, is a clear indicator of the phenomena noted above. It is a tacit admission that law enforcement is ready , willing and able to make vehicle seizure appear to be justified by creating a charge or issuing a ticket as justification. But ask yourself a couple of questions. What ticketable offense justifies the seizure of personal property with the value of an automobile? How will this candidate’s solution fix the problem of illegal property seizure? Answer- It won’t. Putting a pig in a tuxedo doesn’t do anything except annoy the pig and ruin the tuxedo. But “public servants” will point to the “vast improvement” in the situation when it’s time for the re-election campaign and the media will dutifully report that the problem has been completely fixed, when in fact the situation is now worse. Not only will the poor former auto owner be stripped of his car but he will now be before a court on what may very well be a trumped up charge.

Within this framework it is easy to postulate that the practice of seizing personal property with little or no legal grounds has been a policy both developed and implemented by elected representatives with the understanding that the personal property of constitutional attorneys, state representatives or other prominent citizens who might have the clout to knock the gravy train off the rails would not be seized unless the case was blatant absolutely air tight. This is a clear indicator that the trend in government is to pretend that private property is actually a feudal holding. The true owner of all property, both real and personal, is the feudal baron (the state, county, city) while the citizen is a fief bound to the land and liable to will and whim of the baron. This is easily seen by examining the current reliance of counties and municipalities on the property tax. Under the current model of property ownership in most areas of the country ownership merely buys the right to pay rent to the local baron. If you think this is exaggerated then you can prove it to yourself by not paying your property taxes for a couple of years. An entity which can confiscate property for non-payment of any fee is the true owner of the property.

The only entity more powerful than the barons in a feudal society was the king, to whom all barons owed their loyalty as the one who granted all land holdings. The king was the original owner of all property, real or personal. In our analogy, the king is the Federal government and while it doesn’t have a role in this particular case (where is the Michigan ACLU screaming at the top of its lungs about the clear violation of the 4th and 5th amendments to the US Constitution in these seizure cases? The world wonders) it is not without “bloody hands” in the situation. The Federal government routinely steals personal property by “arresting” it and holding it often without charge or trial of the property’s owner, sometimes for decades. Occasionally, it secretly files for “forfeiture” and auctions or destroys the property without recourse to any legitimate criminal or civil action.

Until public servants are disabused of their recently acquired notions of being our rulers rather that our representatives and servants we will continue to suffer outrages like those chronicled here. There is only one way open to the Christian constitutionalist to disabuse them of this notion . Can you think what that might be?

Biblical Worldview, Uncategorized, General, Education, Events, The Vote

Changing the Culture through Winning Campaigns

Can you answer “yes” to any of the following questions:

1.  Are you frustrated with the absence of principled leadership in politics?

2. Are you fed up with elected officials who talk the talk, but refuse to walk their talk?

3. Have you grown weary of being handed candidates by political parties who are “electable” instead of principled?

4. Would you like to have elected officials who adhere to our country’s founding philosophy (ie: who adhere to the Constitution)?

5. Are you willing to stand up and run for office yourself or become someone who can effectively “hold up the arms” of someone who will?


If you answered “yes” to any of these, then the training school that is being put on by Citizens for Community Values in Cincinnati on January 14 and 15 is something you just can’t afford to miss.

This candidate training school will be held at the Courtyard Marriott hotel at the Greater Cincinnati airport on Thursday, January 14 and Friday, January 15.  Nationally recognized trainers will be putting on this intense campaign training, and it is being provided for free!

This training is not just for candidates and their campaign staff members, but as well as for potential candidates, leaders in politics and the culture, and for grassroots activists and volunteers who want to begin the process of bringing real hope and change to our country.

Check here for more information and for how to register, but be quick, registrations received before January 8th will receive a special “Campaign Jumpstart Toolkit” with materials that will help potential candidates to create a winning edge.  Some of the board of the Institute for Principled Policy will be attending, and we hope to see many of you there as well.

Commentary, The Church, Biblical Worldview

I-Pod Christianity?

Cross iPOD

The Christianity of today has certainly fallen from the orthodoxy that defined it in times past.  It has simply become just another “religion” in the mix, along with all other spiritual belief systems.

This article from the Columbus Dispatch of December 13, 2009 has some interesting insights but a comment in the closing part of the article caught my attention when the author writes, “ the way we personalize our iPhones, we also personalize our religious lives”.

When will those who profess Christ realize the truth of his words when He said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life and NO MAN come to the Father but by Me”.  The orthodox Christian faith is one which believes and adheres to what is taught in the Scripture, not just whatever you want to make it.  Any thoughts?

Biblical Worldview, Uncategorized, General, Education, Events, Commentary, Fun

Happy Thanksgiving from the Institute for Principled Policy

784px-the_first_thanksgiving_jean_louis_gerome_ferrisMay you and yours have a blessed Thanksgiving celebration, from the Board and staff of the Institute for Principled Policy!

THE FIRST THANKSGIVING

PROCLAMATION

JUNE 20, 1676

“The Holy God having by a long and Continual Series of his Afflictive dispensations in and by the present Warr with the Heathen Natives of this land, written and brought to pass bitter things against his own Covenant people in this wilderness, yet so that we evidently discern that in the midst of his judgements he hath remembered mercy, having remembered his Footstool in the day of his sore displeasure against us for our sins, with many singular Intimations of his Fatherly Compassion, and regard; reserving many of our Towns from Desolation Threatened, and attempted by the Enemy, and giving us especially of late with many of our Confederates many signal Advantages against them, without such Disadvantage to ourselves as formerly we have been sensible of, if it be the Lord’s mercy that we are not consumed,

It certainly bespeaks our positive Thankfulness, when our Enemies are in any measure disappointed or destroyed; and fearing the Lord should take notice under so many Intimations of his returning mercy, we should be found an Insensible people, as not standing before Him with Thanksgiving, as well as lading him with our Complaints in the time of pressing Afflictions:

The Council has thought meet to appoint and set apart the 29th day of this instant June, as a day of Solemn Thanksgiving and praise to God for such his Goodness and Favour, many Particulars of which mercy might be Instanced, but we doubt not those who are sensible of God’s Afflictions, have been as diligent to espy him returning to us; and that the Lord may behold us as a People offering Praise and thereby glorifying Him; the Council doth commend it to the Respective Ministers, Elders and people of this Jurisdiction; Solemnly and seriously to keep the same Beseeching that being perswaded by the mercies of God we may all, even this whole people offer up our bodies and soulds as a living and acceptable Service unto God by Jesus Christ.”

The First Thanksgiving Proclamation (June 20, 1676)

On June 20, 1676, the governing council of Charlestown, Massachusetts, held a meeting to determine how best to express thanks for the good fortune that had seen their community securely established. By unamimous vote they instructed Edward Rawson, the clerk, to proclaim June 29 as a day of thanksgiving, our first. That proclamation is reproduced here in the same language and spelling as the original.

Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net – aa300) Distributed by the Cybercasting Services Division of the National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN).

Private Property, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Economics, Biblical Worldview, Education, Public Policy Radar

Random Thoughts on Socialism

TFT1One of the effects of the downturn in the economy is the decrease in divorces.  From 2007-2008 there were 300 fewer divorces in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland).  It’s also been hypothesized that this occurs because the financial challenges presented to families force them to converse more and possibly helps them to restore communication and trust.  Should we look to see the divorce rate rise as the economy rebounds?  If so, does this mean that we should pray for a greater economic recession and failure so that families might be saved?  Oh well, never mind.  I suspect that Congress will remove this option from us.  I’ve just heard that they are proposing a bill that would bail out the divorce lawyers who are suffering the loss of business, so that couples who want a divorce but who cannot economically afford one can get the needed divorce.  After all, we all know that there is a right to divorce.  Pardon my sarcasm.

I want to commend my Democratic congressman, John Boccieri.  He voted his conscience, not the party line in voting against the “Pelosi” Health Care Bill.  Afterwards, his public comment was that it was too expensive to support.  I agree, though there are many more problems than that, including the fact that philosophically it moves the United States closer and closer to a socialist and authoritarian governmental structure.  The question this expense rationale presents, however, for Congressman Boccieri is this:  How can the Health Care Bill be considered too costly or too expensive when you voted for the Cap and Trade Bill?  Why wasn’t the Cap and Trade Bill also considered too expensive for you?

I blame the educational system of America for the current crisis in the health care debate.  The American people cannot recognize socialism when they see it.  Prior to the 2008 election I wrote that Obama is a socialist, but with his support for the banking bailout McCain proved himself to lean in that direction as well.  More and more I hear people regurgitating the theme that capitalism is the cause of the economic problems.  If people knew history, they would know that this is an echo of Karl Marx.  Educated people know that socialism is absolutely devastating to a culture.

The other night I was lecturing to a class about postmodernism and the class was reading Os Guinness’ book Time for Truth.  The book has on its cover the unforgettable picture of the young man boldly confronting the row of military tanks in Tiananmen Square.  As I was pointing out the picture one of the young men in my college class said to me, “I was born on that day.”  And it immediately struck me how important it is to teach our young people an accurate understanding of history.  They don’t know what happened in Tiananmen Square, they don’t know Viet Nam, and many of us have forgotten how tens of millions were murdered, executed and destroyed by the Socialist regimes of Mao, the Soviets especially under Stalin, and the Nazis.  Socialism inevitably leads to conformity, intolerance, and totalitarianism.  History unquestioningly confirms this.

Speaking of freedom, this week we celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the dismantling of the Berlin Wall separating Germans, Berliners, and families from one another.  It’s still hard to fathom and I’ve walked through Checkpoint Charlie.  Ask the young people you know whether they know why the Wall was constructed and see what they say.   In most cases they do not.  They have not been taught that it was built not to keep people out, but to keep people in, to keep people from freedom, to keep them from escaping to freedom.  This is socialism.  This will be the consequence of the health care bill and is the same philosophy which says that those who do not have health insurance will be arrested and either jailed or fined as the already passed congressional health bill proposes

Crime and Punishment, Gambling, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, The Vote, Economics, Biblical Worldview, General

The Biggest Winners and Losers from Ohio’s Election

1 Comment
This entry is part 4 of 4 in the series 2009 Election Issues

Voting MachineWith this now completed election it is time to reflect on who the biggest winners and biggest losers in Ohio were.  By this we do not want you to rant and rave but to put forth a reasoned perspective on who you believe gained the most and who lost the most on November 3.  Try to remain focused on Ohio issues and politicians, including your own local issues, and away from national politics in this discussion.  Don’t just regurgitate the talking heads who are proclaiming the Republicans won and Obama lost.  For example, let me proceed first with my opinions.

I believe the biggest winner in Ohio was Dan Gilbert and his associates.  Gilbert, who amassed a fortune through his quick loans operation and who owns the Cleveland Cavaliers professional basketball team, fronted the Ohio Casino initiative which narrowly won.  Gilbert and his associates will now have a legally constituted monopoly on casino gambling in Ohio.  The fact that the citizens of Ohio endorsed this idea of granting a few people control over this industry boggles my mind.  My reaction has nothing to do with the morality or immorality with gaming but with the control, opportunity, and money granted by Ohioans to a select few through a constitutional amendment.  This is outrageous and deplorable.  Quite obviously the biggest winner in Ohio was Dan Gilbert, the billionaire who will now along with his associates be able to reap additional billions each year from the willing naïve sacrificial citizens of Ohio.

But who lost the most?  There were many losers:  the public school systems, the governor of Ohio, those opposing state issues 2 or 3, but who lost the most?  Many lost opportunities; many lost money; and some even lost their seats of power.  But did anyone lose more than any of these?  Let me put forward my opinion and we want to hear yours.

I have always been a supporter of law enforcement.  I address police officers as “sir” and taught my children to do so as well.  When law enforcement supporters have called or written for donations or were selling tickets for fund-raisers, I willingly forked forth the bucks realizing I could never do enough or support them enough.  To me law enforcement officials have been the least appreciated and the most under-respected servants in society.  But no more!  From my vantage point the biggest loser in Ohio was the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police).  They lost their integrity and my respect.  Time after time I was bombarded on the TV by Tipton’s endorsement of the state amendment for legalized casinos.  How much money did the FOP pay for this plethora of commercials?  What are they receiving in return?  The law enforcement agencies are receiving a great deal of money from the profits of the gaming industry and this appears like a pay-off to me.

More disappointing to me than the passage of issue 3 and the amending of the Ohio Constitution to permit a legal monopoly on casinos is the support of this monopoly by a law enforcement agency that should understand the value of the Constitution, the seriousness of a Constitutional Amendment, and the essential philosophical danger of endorsing a monopoly.  The one virtue that those in law must possess is impartiality.  The support of this amendment by the FOP demonstrates partiality to me. Formal support of this amendment by the FOP seemingly places the gambling industry and the law enforcement agencies into the same bed together.  Does this disturb any of you?

As close as the vote was on Issue 3, it is quite possible that the endorsement by the FOP and the extent of the publicity generated by the FOP was just enough to get this amendment passed.  This will make it difficult for me to ever address an officer of the law as “sir” and to teach my grandchildren that they should respect these officers since I now know the truth…they can be bought off like anyone else.  The FOP won, but from my vantage point they lost their soul and their integrity and what loss could be greater?

IPP invites you to enter into this discussion on Ohio’s biggest winners and biggest losers.  If you are not registered, then please do so by registering and commenting in our Forum.

Uncategorized, Public Policy Radar, Gambling, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, The Vote, Economics, Biblical Worldview

NO on Issue 3

This entry is part 3 of 4 in the series 2009 Election Issues

Voting MachineUnlike many others who are discussing the pros and cons of the language of Issue 3, the Institute for Principled Policy believes there are larger underlying reasons for advocating a NO vote on this Ohio ballot initiative.  We have shared these concerns before as a general position on the question of gambling expansion, but they are just as relevant in the current debate as in any other debate over gambling, state sponsored or privately owned.

“Does the Bible specifically speak to gambling as being not only a sin but something which the civil authority, bearing the sword under Romans 13 authority, can make a determination upon relative to the legality of such activity?

First, there must be some clarity in the choices of words we are using. Gambling, as defined by Webster’s 1828 dictionary, is as follows: “Gaming for money.” Let’s assume that this definition is agreed upon for purposes of usage of the word. Please notice that this definition would exclude the gathering of friends coming together to play a card game without money changing hands, but would not exclude organized gambling (casinos, lotteries, bingo parlors, monte carlo nights, etc.)

Given that gambling, defined correctly as “gaming for money”, is a clear violation of the 10th Commandment (thou shalt not covet) in that it is desiring something of value which you have not been given by God nor earned by your labor, then we need to look at how the Bible describes coveting or covetousness.

Colossians 3:5-6–”Mortify therefore your members which are on the earth, fornication, uncleanness, the inordinant affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness which is idolatry. For the which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience.” (1599 Geneva)
Ephesians 5:5–”For this ye know, that no whoremonger, neither unclean person, nor covetous person, which is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ, and of God.” (1599 Geneva)

Covetousness is the root of evil before the act. Given that the Bible equates coveting with idolatry, and that gambling is the act of gaming for money as a result of coveting more than you have been given or earned from your labor, it is a violation of the command against coveting, then bythe clear testimony of Scripture  and logical inference , it is also a violation against creating a idol (2nd Commandment).

Additionally, engaging in gambling involves relying on “chance”, “luck” or other metaphysical crutches (rabbit’s feet, lucky charms, lucky numbers, etc), thus denying the sovereignty of God and His Law-Word. This is a violation of the First Commandment against having other gods. Matthew 6:24 is clear that one cannot serve both God and mammon (”No man can serve two masters: for either he shall hate the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, anddespise the other. Ye cannot serve God and riches.”) Only one God can be served, and engaging in gambling is worship of a false god.

As for the 8th Commandment against theft, the first person violated is God Himself. God has a first ownership claim over all resources, and requires it be used in specific ways (tithe, legitimate tax, gifts, provide for own and own home, church, provide for widows and orphans, etc). We have a stewardship responsibility of all God provides, and failure of that disqualifies a man from oversight of the church (Titus 1:5-8) and the state (Exodus 18:21).

Additionally, we are complicit in the theft of resources from others through the legalization of gambling (and there is no such thing as a purely “private” gambling operation; just legal and illegal–government has some part to play in any operation through enabling legislation, tax policy, police and safety efforts, etc). Redistribution of wealth under any circumstances, whether through confiscatory taxation or through state-endorsed gambling is theft.

Overall, as mentioned, supporting gambling is supporting multiple violations of God’s Law, whether or not man has said it is legal.”

In light of the above, the Institute for Principled Policy requests that you vote “NO” on Ohio State Issue 3 on the November 3rd ballot.