You can't hide broccoli in a glass of milk

  There is an innate difficulty in U.S. politics because of the Constitution.
This "all-knowing" document gives "free speech" to all those who are in its
borders.  Yet there is nothing to prevent amoralistic speech, as in order to
define morals, you must use one of two definition strategies.
  The first, of course, is to rely on the supreme power of a deity -- or, in
truth, God, to set a standard of morals for us -- acknowledging that only
God knows us completely, and therefore, only God can decide what the best
direction is for us.  Thus, morals -- being that which sets direction for a
society, should be implemented only by the One who can perfectly see both
the direction we should head and the place where we are.  He created us --
shouldn't He get to choose where we go?
     The difficulty in this philosophy is set in the fact that
     we have no current standard by which to judge whose 
     interpretation of God is correct -- and since every man 
     has his weak points where he may slant interpretations in
     his own directions, it can become very dangerous to let
     any one "system of beliefs" rule the country -- *because*
     of the absent standard.
  The second, currently used by the U.S., is to note that which causes harm
to society, and eradicate it from society by just punishment.  However,
there are three main subproblems to this solution.

A) In order to note that which causes harm to a society, one must not just
see the detrimental effects of an act in order to call it amoral -- but be
able to link the effects to the act itself.  And in a nation filled with
immorality, this becomes rather tedious and self-heart-rending, as even the
ones who do the studies find themselves convicted in their own
life-practices, and often refuse to disclose their findings to maintain
their present lifestyle.  Yet this happens only when correct linkages are
made between detrimental effects and their causes -- and in today's society,
we unfortunately must deal with the multitude of reports which *are*
slantedly written, simply because people are so anxious to get their own
opinions plastered on a billboard that they refuse to let them be reproved -
-thereby making them not only more true, but no more their idea alone.  They
lose the benefit of seeing their own work highlighted by society -- and
their standing of excellence (to feed their own feelings of inadequacy) and
must contend to look at who they see themselves as, or at least who their
own self-image base expresses them to be.
   In the first case, seeing ourselves as we think ourselves to be, we will
guaranteedly get a false sense of either superiority or inferiority as we
use our owmn imperfect methods to evaluate ourselves.  Only by judging
ourselves in perfect light can we get a true perspective of who we are.
   In the case of self-image bases -- a group of peers and other individuals
who we use to set a standard for our own self-image via their opinions of us
-- we are still limited by both our ability to understand what they are
saying (what their opinions actually are) and their ability to appraise us
properly. -- which shall be as imperfect as the conglomeration of ideas
between them requires.  Only with a true understanding of who we are --
neither inflated or constricted -- can we begin to realize (make happen)
what we can do in this world.  And there is only one way to do that.. and
that's through acknowledging what Jesus has been telling us all along:
Alone, we can do very little, but with Jesus as our guide, there is nothing
beyond our reach (Philippians 4:13).
   Thus, in this case of imperfect judgement of our own self-worth, we get
stuck in the presenting of information through soot-colored glasses, simply
in order to retain our own feelings of self-worth.  Yet as we as Christians
know, we have none.. apart from what God has given us.  And without accepting
our place in Him (one of that of a child and his/her Father -- not deserving
of love, but given love based solely upon His perfect heart) we will be
constatnly torn between the two above strategies of self-image construction.
  So where does this leave us?  In the case of monarchistic rule -- in the
hands of a single person, who is charged with the entire process of deciding
upon morals.  In the case of an oligarchistic rule, or even a democratic
one, this process is at the mercy of the ideas of all people involved in the
law-making process.  Yet Neither of these shall ever be perfect -- as no
group of people can see all things in a perfect light -- God being the only
one who can.  And in the U.S., with its own standard of anti-God
philosophies as read into The Constitution (allowing amoralistic speech and
other anti-society norms) as typified in the notion of "separation of church
and state (which is not the actual original text.  The original text, meant
to avert such disasters as the incredibly heretical attitude of the Catholic
church, was supposed to give each man the freedom to worship God as they
chose.  Yet due to the wording and the shortsightedness of the country's
forefathers, our nation has deteriorated to even call all sorts of
amoralistic practices "religions" in their own right -- thus allowing any
group of people with shared opinions and desires to gain immunity *under*
this clause.. to practice how they see fit; as politician after politician
strays from the truth of God, Himself, in order to reap the benefits of this
world -- at the cost of the suffering of the nation as it plunges further
into amoralistic corruption and on towards the road of judgement) this is
not going to happen -- unless by some miracle we *dare* to adopt our own
philosophy as written on every coin we mint, "in God we trust."

B) The second problem lies in the fact of how a country must try to
eradicate behavior which is not conducive to the country's growth as a
whole.  Again, in order to do this -- first, the country must establish just
which behaviors are not conducive to its growth.  Yet something is hiding
here.  Who is to say what growth is?  Politicians, almost without fault,
will point to two requirements for growth:

     1) Increased community
  
               and

     2) Increased productivity

  Unfortunately man politicans tend to lean more towards the second -- simply
because more productivity leads to increased wages for politicians -- i.e.
if we can make a buck, let's do it.  Yet really, the first is far more
important.  Without a sense of community in a nation (which Gandhi showed to
be quite a formidable force when set in motion) then we are a people divided
against ourselves.  And as a little known "Prophet" from the Bible once
said, "A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. (Ok, so Jesus is
actually more than a prophet -- but what He spoke *DID* come straight from
God, Himself (a requirement for a prophet, and what I'd assume, with His
being God's Son).  
  So.. if we truly want growth as a country, then we need to get ourselves
"one people" first.  Unfortunately, the only way to do this is to get a
standard of morals to go by.  Herein lies the quandry -- if man evolved, and
man is imperfect (unable to reconcile its own belief systems with one
another) it, being a kingdom on the planet, is doomed to destroy itself,
unless somehow it find outside help.  And I'm not looking for any aliens to
come along and fix our little culture of backwardsitude.  
  True growth as a nation is impossible without true unity.  And true unity
can only be found in one place:  God's hands.  It's only when we realize our
own imperfection, our own need for Jesus and His instruction, that we begin
to become a people as a whole.

   Now.  I'm  certain that  some of you  who read  this  will make  action to
   silence this  document  --  but all  your attempts  shall be in vain.  God
   has  opened the  eyes  of the  nations so that  they may  be convicted and
   turn  from their  wicked  -- self seeking  -- sinful ways, and be saved on
   the Day of  Judgement.  In other words,  Listen to  what's being said, and
   do as you must to save your own soul before it's too late.

Back to the business at hand.

  In order to eradicate behavior, we must first know what behaviors are bad,
and, as has been argued, it is impossible for man alone to do this.  We need
not only a perfect arbiter -- one who can see all sides of a situation in
order to give perfect advice, but also a perfect implementer -- so that we
can truly lose all behaviors which restrict growth.  All situations in life
are unique, and must be handled on an individual basis.  if they are not
individually handled, solutions can cause more problems than they solve.
And I don't know about you, but I only know of one person who can handle
this -- and right now He's building a City. :)

C) Now we're down to the last piece.  What exactly *is* just punishment?  Is
there a human way of knowing?  I really don't think we can very well.  God
is the only one who is truly just -- the only one whose standards are
without fault -- and thus, the only one perfect to lead us.  We, as humans,
can try to institute just punishments, but they will all be imperfect.  And
here are the two main reasons why:
     1) Man cannot see all things.  If he could, faith would be unnecessary,
        and growth seemingly limited (this is actually not the truth).  To
        say that you see all things is to show your own folly -- for only
        God can see all things.
     2) Man has a slight problem.  We're kinda missing somebody.  When Adam
        fell, he died spiritually (just as God said He would).  He lost
        union with God -- no more communion with Him and His perfect Heart.
        And on our own now, we have to contend with a single.. simple fact:
        We were meant to be with Him.  Our new nature -- now that we have
        fallen -- seeks not to be with God, but apart from Him.  Our hearts,
        blackened by our sin, pull us away every day (Romans 8:7).  Yet we
        are not without hope.  For by accepting Jesus' sacrifice on the
        Cross, we receive the crucial (Crosscial) cleansing by which we can
        be born into a new life -- again restored to union with God -- which
        leads (if we allow it to) to a union with others.  And it is only
        when we sense this union that we can truly see justice as it was
        intended to be -- with perfect mercy.

   So, what are we to do?  All nations, in order to grow, *must* acknowledge
their own need for God.  They must acknowledge their own inadequacy, and
God's supreme authority over them.  Yet what are nations made up of, but
individuals?  And individuals must come to a consensus before a nation ever
can.  And the only way this can occur is of two people join together in
union.. the most perfect union -- under God -- who sent HIS SON to die for
us, and calls us to live in His ways.. the ways of the Truth Himself.

Now, a warning:

   Often in this world, people accept the ideas of another as the truth
without investigating the ideas themselves.  This brings a certain peace as
we depend on others who have and do come through for us, and releases us
from the effort of seeking the truth ourselves. However, when we refuse to
investigate ideas, we set ourselves up for a twofold fall.
   The first one comes merely from our feeding our own sloth.  We enjoy
sitting back and letting others do the work.  But as the old addage goes, 
"as ye sow, so shall ye reap."  If you so laziness, you'll reap corruption.
Your whole existence will tumble before you, and everything you've been
holding will fall apart.  It's a known principle of physics that things end
up disordered if left alone -- it's the way the world is.  And if you refuse
to put effort into investing into your own life, *it* shall become disabled,
and eventually cascade to destruction.
   The second danger I'm sure you've seen running rampant in the nation.
This is when self-proclaimed experts stand up and say, "I have the answer."
However, often these "experts" are missing quite a few points in their
ideologies.  Yet this is the best case.  The cases degenerate when you add
money, power, and pleasure into the works.  Because of these three lures,
many (though by no means all) of these experts are simply trying to gain
fame, ease of lifestyle, and what have you, and may even *use* those who
flock to them to get what they want (David Koresh being a prime example).
People uplift themselves as messiahs unto this generation, yet all they
really have in their satchel is ear-tickling speech (telling you what you
want to hear) and al*lure*ing notions which they say will bring prosperity,
but may only entrap you by your own sinful heart.

     In conclusion, let me say that I have tasted of many of the evil fruits
of this world.  Yet God in His ******EXTREME****** mercy has loved me
anyway.  I still bear some of the marks of my iniquity in my soul, yet God
has used all the pain and all His love to show me something:  His ways *are*
like choice silver, and His love as pure gold.  Pleasures in His Kingdom are
far greater than *ANY* of this world, not to mention the one.. EXTREME
difference:  His have no hook.

Oh by the way:  Credit for the Good in this document goes to God who created
me.  I'll take credit for the mistakes.

John S. Chalice (a.k.a. crysaliq) - 1:14 pm Pacific time.. 5/22/96