Monthly Archives: November 2012

God wanted Obama to be President

During the Presidential campaign there was all kinds of talk among Christians about the candidates. Most evangelicals said that a real Christian couldn’t vote for a man like Obama. They would say, “How could anyone call them self a Christian and vote for a person who is for same-sex marriage and abortion?” Others would say, “Obama is a Christian and Romney is a Mormon, he doesn’t believe in the same God as us. How could any Christian vote for a Mormon?” Still others would say, “God is still in control, He will put the President He wants in office.”
A version of this last one became the more common theme after the election. The ones that voted for Obama would say that God wanted Obama in office. Those that voted for Romney would say God is still in control. I guess it was God’s will for us to have Obama.
For the most part these really are pretty trite remarks. I really wonder if people understand what they are saying? Is every leader that is placed in office there because God wanted them there? Was Ronald Reagan God’s man? How about Kennedy? FDR? Stalin? Hitler? Idi Amin? Nero? Some of these people were truly evil, they killed thousands of people; often focusing on God’s people. How does that make any sense to say that God is in control and at the same time He puts evil people in control?
Christians say these things and seem to be OK with the apparent contradiction. So what is the answer? What does the Bible say?
First off we know that God is all knowing, nothing happens without His knowledge. But just because God knows does not mean that He approves. God knew that Adam and Eve were going to sin, but that doesn’t mean that He was OK with it. He allowed it, but it wasn’t according to His will. Often this is called God’s permissive will. That is when he allows something to happen but it doesn’t mean it is His will or desire. He would prefer that something much different would happen. I really don’t like the term “God’s permissive will.” This implies that God gives His permission and in a sense He does. But it is not “per-“ God’s “mission”. It might be better to call it God’s “tolerant will” or God’s “patient will” or better yet the way the King James Version would have put it “God’s longsuffering will”. All of the evil that we experience in the world falls into this area of God’s longsuffering will.
All this discussion does little to answer the question “Did God want Obama to be President”. We have clarified that God could have tolerated Mr. Obama as President without really wanting him as President, but that still doesn’t answer the question. To answer this we will need to explore scripture more deeply.
In America one of our key political philosophies is, “by the consent of the governed”. That is, we believe that a people should agree to have a particular person rule over them. To put it the other way they should not be required to accept a tyrant, a ruler who is not of their choice and forces his will upon the people. This is the primary principle that established us as a democratic-republic.
Is this philosophy consistent with scripture? I would have to say that it is, with some explanation. In every government structure that God established in Israel the people were ruled by the consent of the governed.
Tribal System
In the early tribal system there were tribal elders who ruled by a general consensus that they were experienced, wise men that would represent the best interests of the people.
Moses was appointed by God to lead the people of Israel out of captivity and into the Promised Land, but this was not a simple appointment, Moses and Aaron met with the tribal leaders. Once they had heard, understood and accepted that God had appointed Moses, then Moses went before Pharaoh as a representative of God and the people. (See Exodus 4:29-31).
Judges under Moses
Exodus 18:13-27 give an account of Moses establishing a lower, appellate, and supreme court system. (The system actually has five levels). In this system Moses appoints judges that are trusted, honest and lovers of the truth. It does not say that the people participated in the choice, but I don’t know how Moses could have known the character of so many individuals. The recommendations must have come from the bottom up.
Joshua was appointed by God the same as Moses, but the people also committed themselves to follow Joshua. (See Joshua 1:16-18)
The Judges
The next rulers were called the Judges. Typically these were military leaders that were called or inspired by God to lead the Children of Israel in a battle to throw off oppressive foreign rule, after which they were looked upon to judge disputes among the people. Their method of establishing an army was to send out a call-to-arms. If the people believed that the person calling them was God’s man and a legitimate leader then they would follow. If not the call-to-arms would fall on deaf ears. The same was true for them as judges. If people trusted their judgment to be fair and just, then they would take their cases before them. In both cases it was clearly by the consent of the governed.
The Kings
The Kings are a very interesting case. The account begins in 1 Samuel 8 where the Children of Israel demand a king like the other nations. Read the account, they no longer want to follow a God that they cannot see, they want a man that they can see. God sees this as a clear rejection of Him, but in spite of that God gives them the king that they want. Saul matches all of the outward qualities that the Children of Israel could want in a king. He is tall, good looking, and a powerful warrior. The major requirement was to lead them in war like the kings of the other nations. Saul was a success in battle but a failure before God. At every point he sought to look good in the eyes of the people rather than the eyes of God. This is where the famous passage that says, “Man looks on the outward appearance but God looks at the heart.”
God had a different king in mind. It was David, a man after God’s own heart. David was anointed to be king after one of Saul’s first failures, but God let Saul’s rule run its course. It took about twenty years before David would become king. By that time God’s choice had also become the people’s choice.
Later under the Kings there is a son of Solomon, Rehoboam, who is set to be king, but he is determined to be a harsh king demanding even more taxes and service from the people than Solomon did. The result is that ten of the tribes rebel and select their own king. This rebellion is predicted earlier as a discipline against Solomon for his worshiping of other god’s (1 Kings 11:31-33). Again God exercises overarching control of the situation and still allows the people to select their own king, even when it is to their detriment.
There were other rulers over Israel from time to time. These were conquering kings that God used to discipline His people. Throughout the history of Israel God would raise up foreign rulers that either oppressed the people or conquering kings that actually ruled over Israel. The biggest example was when the Children of Israel were taken into Babylonian captivity. Even in this the Bible says that Nebuchadnezzar was raised up by God for the purpose of punishing Israel for their rebellion. Nebuchadnezzar himself acknowledges this fact.
Daniel 4:34-37
And at the end of the time I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted up my eyes to heaven, and my understanding returned to me; and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who lives forever:
For His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
And His kingdom is from generation to generation.
All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing;
He does according to His will in the army of heaven
and among the inhabitants of the earth.
No one can restrain His hand
Or say to Him, “What have You done?”
At the same time my reason returned to me, and for the glory of my kingdom, my honor and splendor returned to me. My counselors and nobles restored to me, I was restored to my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added to me. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all of whose works are truth, and His ways justice. And those who walk in pride He is able to put down.
Conquest seems to be the only time that God forces a ruler upon His people, but even that is not completely the case. Before conquest comes, God always sends prophets to wane His people. God gives them a clear choice, ‘return to me and avoid judgment or continue to rebel and experience the oppression of a ruler that I will choose to discipline you.’ Even in this they chose their ruler, by choosing to follow God or rebelling against Him.
Note: that even though Babylon is raised up to punish Israel, later Babylon is subject to God’s discipline for their violence against Israel.
So the question still stands. Did God want Obama to be president of the United States of America? The answer is YES, at least in an overarching sense. Did God allow us to select the President of our own choosing? The answer is YES.
The remaining question is, “Is the Presidency of Obama God’s choice to bless America, or is it an indication of God’s displeasure with us and His judgment upon us?” That is a much harder question. Either way we are called to honor our leaders and even to serve them, working toward their success, as David served Saul and Daniel served Nebuchadnezzar.
Note: I must note here that we do not have a king, we have a president and they are two very different things. The United States of America was designed to have the bulk of power in the hands of Congress not the President. So the President is not the single source of power and decision making. Also, under a monarchy the people are the subjects of the king. In America we have a President and the President is a servant of the people. It is quite a different structure.
But we are still called to honor and obey our rulers (Romans 13:1-7). We are to repent where repentance is called for. We are to show honor and cooperation to our leaders wherever we can. We are not to work for their failure but for their success. We are to follow God in all things and to use His word and our guide. When appropriate we are to counsel and encourage our leaders to follow God also and to use His word as their guide.

Virginia Plantation or Plymouth Colony

This Thanksgiving ask the people gathered around your table these questions.
What was the first permanent English settlement in North America? The answer is the Virginia Colony.
If the Virginia Colony was the first permanent English settlement then why do we focus so much on the Pilgrims and the Plymouth Colony as the beginning of our country?
Let the guests discuss this for a while. You may want to talk about the differences between the two settlements. The Virginia Colony at Jamestown was a commercial venture. It was established for the purpose of developing the natural resources of the New World and exporting them back to England. Tobacco quickly became the main product of Jamestown. The colony quickly developed and thrived.
For the Pilgrims at Plymouth it was quite a different story. The Pilgrims didn’t come for financial gain. They came to establish a Bible Commonwealth. That is they were conducting an experiment. They were trying to see what would happen if a small group of highly committed Christians established a settlement based on values found in the Bible. They wanted to establish a society where everyone sought to follow God with their whole heart. They would govern themselves under God’s guidance. But for them it was never really an experiment. There was never any doubt that God would aid, protect and bless those that belong to Him.
So why do we focus on Plymouth rather than Jamestown? The answer is simple. Long ago we looked at the values represented by the two colonies. Jamestown was motivated by money and personal gain. Plymouth was motivated by devotion to God and personal sacrifice. We decided that the Pilgrim’s values expressed the value on which to build a great nation. The Pilgrims understood that they were just the beginning. They were willing to sacrifice everything to live together in a community that could freely worship God. They entered into great personal sacrifice to lay a foundation on which their children could build. They understood that a life worth living was a life of faith, totally dependent on God and grateful to Him for His provision. Their security was not in their money or possessions; their security was in their Lord.
Today we could be celebrating Jamestown Day, but we don’t. We celebrate Thanksgiving. We celebrate a group of people who committed themselves to be fully devoted followers of Christ. We give thanks to God for His many provisions. We thank Him for providing such a firm foundation for our country through this small group of settlers.
Oddly enough we choose our heritage. Most of us are not direct descendants of the Pilgrims but we choose to acknowledge them as our heritage. We choose them because they had the values on which we want to build our lives.
Not everyone identifies with the Pilgrims; some want to identify with the Indians. They want to paint the Pilgrims as some kind of European oppression that forcibly took the land of the Indians and exploited them to enrich themselves. Some want a heritage of victimization. Others see themselves more like the Virginia Colony; large, proud and self-sufficient. Life is all about what you can make and the prosperity you can create.
You choose your own heritage. What values will you adopt? As for me, I will seek to live a life of faith; fully devoted to Christ. I will follow the example of the Plymouth Colony.

The Gospel of Love

I hear Christians all of the time that talk about God’s love, forgiveness and salvation. They say, “God is love. He loves everyone, even the worst of sinners.” “God meets people where they are.” “We shouldn’t judge others we should just love them like God does.” “Jesus loves you just the way you are.” “God loves unconditionally.”

The message that is preached goes something like this. God loves you unconditionally. He wants you to be part of His family. He paid the penalty for your sin. There is nothing you can do to earn God’s love and forgiveness. He freely forgives all of your sins, past present and future. Just accept Jesus and become part of His forever family.

For most Christians that grew up during (or after) the Jesus People movement of the late 60s this is a very familiar gospel message. I call it “The Gospel of Love”. Every statement in that message is accurate. The problem is that it’s not the message that Jesus preached. The gospel of Matthew records Jesus’ message.

Matthew 4:17
From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven has come near”.

The message of Jesus was the exact same message that John the Baptist preached. It was a call to REPENTANCE. It is a call to totally turn away from your old life of sin and head in the other direction; the direction of Jesus. This is symbolized in Baptism; there are two symbols in Baptism. One is the symbol of cleansing we are washing away the dirt and sin of the old life and beginning a new one. The second symbol is that of death. We are being buried with Christ, our old life is gone and then we are raised to new life in Christ. Notice that there is one more subtle image; it is the image of a life that has been turned around. We enter the water heading in one direction and we leave the water heading in the opposite direction.

Somehow, in The Gospel of Love the message of repentance is missing or it is whispered so softly that it is often missed altogether.

With Jesus and all other prophets the message was repentance. In the Old Testament it would often sound like this, ‘God has this against you, you have turned away from God, you have gone after other gods, you have done wickedness and violence, you have abused the strangers, the widows and the orphans. Repent or God will judge you with sudden destruction. You will experience the fury and wrath of God.’

For many people that doesn’t sound much like good news. It sounds like a very authoritarian God that is going to beat us into submission. It’s my way or the highway approach. To a certain extent that is true; it is God’s way or else. But that is not so much a threat as it is a warning. It is a message from a loving God telling us that we are headed for destruction. If we don’t turn around it will end very badly for us.

In Ezekiel, God puts it this way

Ezekiel 18:30-33 (NKJV)
30 “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways,” says the Lord God. “Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin. 31 Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. For why should you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies,” says the Lord God. “Therefore turn and live!”

There is good news. First there is hope. It doesn’t need to end badly. We can turn around. Better yet there is a savior that is ready willing and able to save us. He is only waiting for us to cry out for help. There is no expectation that we can help ourselves. In fact the Bible teaches that we are totally incapable of helping ourselves. Jesus is the only one that can help us. What we need is to turn to Him; then the Holy Spirit will give us the desire and the power to repent. We can turn away from death, decay and despair to hope, growth and life.

This theme is throughout scripture; in fact Paul tells us that it is the purpose for scripture.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NKJV)
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Notice the progression.
Doctrine—God’s teaching about Himself, and what is right and wrong. This makes us aware of our desperate condition and our need for Him.

Reproof—This is a call to repentance. It is telling us where we are wrong and our need to change.

Correction—This is a clear explanation of how to turn around and head toward God and righteous living.

Instruction in righteousness—It is not enough to turn around. We must learn how to live righteous lives. We must practice staying on the right path.

The end result is to be perfect (that is mature or fully developed) in all good works. We are no longer practicing evil which harms us and everyone around us. Instead we are practicing good works which blesses us and everyone around us.

The “Gospel of Love” as it is often communicated calls people into relationship with Jesus without a call to repentance.

The true Gospel is based on a clear understanding of the Holiness of God and of the destructive nature of sin. The true Gospel message compels us to repent and to call others to repentance also.

To do anything else would be completely unloving.

Proposition 34

Anyone that has been paying attention recently realizes that there are major problems with our justice system. There are plea bargains that have convicted persons of minor crime when they actually committed a more serious crime. In some cases they have plead guilty to a crime that they didn’t commit because they were afraid they would be convicted of a more serious crime. In other situations an accused criminal testified against someone in order to reduce their penalty.

The worst is the great number of convictions that have been overturned due to new DNA testing or witnesses that have recanted their testimony. There is a long list of individuals that had life imprisonment or were waiting on death row and their cases were overturned.
There is no doubt our justice system is a mess. Persons that are guilty go free and people that are innocent are falsely convicted.
This situation has led people to put together Proposition 34. The proponents of Prop 34 make two basic arguments.
1. Keeping a convict on death row costs more that giving them life imprisonment.
2. The worst that could happen is that an innocent person would be executed. Prop 34 would eliminate that possibility.

Let’s back up and look at the problems with our justice system:
1. Persons that are guilty go free. Well-funded defendants with high priced lawyers can beat the system. When law enforcement and prosecutors fail to do their jobs effectively people get off. When critical evidence is withheld the wrong verdicts are reached.
2. Persons that are innocent are falsely convicted. When the defense attorneys fail to do their jobs people are falsely convicted. When law enforcement and the prosecution manipulate the system they can obtain a false conviction.
3. The system is much too slow. (Justice delayed is justice denied).
4. The system is much too costly. The appeals process is too costly and incarceration is too costly.

These are the key problems. The question is, “Does Proposition 34 do anything to solve these problems?” No! It doesn’t in fact it seems to say that we are OK with a person being falsely convicted and sentenced life because it costs less than executing him or her.
There is one more question to ask, “What does the Bible say?” When it comes to the question of capital punishment Christians often make a mistake in interpreting and applying scripture.

They interpret a summary of God’s Law for the entirety of the law. They look at the Ten Commandments as the entirety of God’s Law. In actuality the Ten Commandments is a summary that can be easily memorized and covers all of the key points, but the full explanation of God’s Law is spread through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

So they read “Thou shalt not kill” to mean that no killing is allowed at any time for any reason. In reality “Thou shalt not kill” is a command against premeditated murder. The penalty for murder is execution. There are at least 13 different categories of crimes that call for the death penalty. Clearly the Bible teaches a trial system that seeks justice and calls for executions for a number of offences. Surprisingly there in no crime in the Bible that is punished through long term imprisonment.

We should seek to revise our system to be just, efficient, and cost effective. Proposition 34 doesn’t accomplish any of these. Proposition 34 is totally inconsistent with scripture.

Vote NO on Prop 34

Proposition 32

I am not going to spend a lot of time on this proposition. Please read the “Historical Background” portion of my post on Prop 30. It will give you a good background on the power of the Government employees union and their influence in California Government.
If you have been close to California politics at all you will know that the Government employee unions exert an incredible amount of power. This is particularly true of the California Teacher’s union. Pretty much nothing happens in California Government without the union’s consent. The thing that gives them so much power is the money they get from dues. Currently the union uses part of the union dues to lobby the government, support candidates, create and promote propositions and produce political ads. I am sure you have seen many ads paid for by the teacher’s union.
These propositions typically take money from the general fund and shift it to education, or some special program. The funds become locked in. The result is the Legislature has less and less flexibility in managing the budget.
Currently teachers can file a paper with the union that tells them not to use their dues for political purposes. But this does little because they simply use more of other teacher’s funds for these purposes.
In the past this has been a particular problem for Christian teachers, because often the unions have been promoting candidates and policies that were considered anti-Christian. Examples would be:
• Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender education (interwoven into all subjects)
• Aids education in Kindergarten through 12 grade
• School based health clinics that distribute condoms and refer or transport girls for abortions
• Disallowing any mention of God, creation or intelligent design in the classroom
• Recalling science text book because they didn’t teach enough evolution
Make no mistake Proposition 32 is an anti-teacher’s union measure. The simple question is do you want to continue the cycle of money and influence. Where the union lobbies for more and more Government money to promote their agenda and limit teacher accountability. Then collect money from dues and use it to lobby for even more money and less accountability? Or do you want to break the strangle hold of the government employee unions and allow the government to be responsive to the people as a whole?

Proposition 30

Historical Background
Before you can understand Proposition 30 you must understand some history of California Government, the California citizens and California government employee unions (particularly the teacher’s union). For years California has had increasing debt and the State Government has been unable or unwilling to get it under control. Every time the legislature proposed a cut in government spending the government employee’s unions would go on the attack. It became nearly impossible to keep your job in Sacramento if your balanced budget included any cut to teachers, firefighters or law enforcement officers. So the standard approach was to just continue to increase the state debt year after year. Finally some of the citizens realized that we could not continue on this path so we passed a proposition requiring that Sacramento pass a balanced budget and if they couldn’t the automatic across the board cuts would go into effect. Since then the state legislator has repeatedly failed to pass a budget. Often the government has gone for months without a budget so that the state controller was issuing I-O-U’s rather than paychecks. When Governor Schwarzenegger attempted to institute the across the board cuts most departments accepted the cuts and made adjustments. (Please note here that the legislature is given the responsibility of passing a balanced budget but they wouldn’t do their job, so Governor Schwarzenegger was force to implement conditions of the balance budget proposition passed by the people). The teacher’s union fought back. They sued, saying that their existing contracts did not allow for their jobs to be cut. So now we had conflicting laws in place. The California teacher’s union created a special increase in teacher’s dues in order to wage a media campaign against Governor Schwarzenegger. Many of millions of dollars were spent on TV ads, vilifying the Governor. You probably remember seeing some of the ads. (Note this wasn’t even an election year, and the real villain was the legislator that didn’t pass the budget.) Finally the situation was settled, the Governor backed down and he never fought the unions again. The unions backed their friend Jerry Brown as Governor and he was elected. In many ways he has an even harder job than Governor Schwarzenegger. Governor Brown has promised to back the unions but he can’t do it and balance the budget. That is why the legislature repeatedly has been unable to pass a balanced budget. The other method would be to raise taxes, but it takes a two thirds majority to pass a bill to raise taxes and the Democrats can’t get the votes because the Republicans are determined to reduce the size of government and not raise taxes or increase debt. When times are hard and many people have lost their jobs it is difficult to convince people in the private sector to take on additional taxes in order to save government jobs. So we have a continuing stalemate. The Government couldn’t get the two thirds majority to pass a budget that is balanced by raising taxes, but they could get a simple majority to pass a budget that was contingent upon Proposition 30 passing. The legislature and Governor once again skirted their responsibility to pass a balanced budget and shifted the responsibility to someone else so they would not have to take the heat for “making the hard decisions”. In this way the government unions will do all of the campaigning for the proposition; they will pay for all of the ads and if it passes they will not have to make the cuts that need to be made. The politicians will all get re-elected, the California economy will slow even more and we may delay bankruptcy for a few more years.

Problems with Proposition 30
Proposition 30 makes a number of very bad assumptions.
Temporary fix for a Long Term problem

Prop 30 assumes that the size and spending of the California Government is sustainable and we are currently experiencing a temporary shortfall in revenue. Therefore it seeks a “temporary” fix for a long term problem. From all indications the California Government has been growing at a rate that is totally unsustainable, evidenced by our repeated inability to pass a balanced budget. We have been living on credit for much too long. At some point we have to stop spending and pay down the debt. It is funny that we understand that a family can’t continue to borrow money indefinitely but for some reason have been convinced that the Government can. We have been spending money in a way that assumes a constant and consistent growth in revenue. The biggest of these is the government pension plans. We have commented to guaranteeing pensions for former government workers and to give them regular increases no matter what. With this current trend we will spend more and more of our taxes on paying interest on government borrowing and on pensions and less and less on actual services. This is like running your household budget based on your very best raise ever, and assuming that every year you will get an even bigger raise. It assumes that you will never have a family crisis, no one in the family will ever have a serious illness or lose a job. Good family budgets set aside money for bad times they don’t always assume good times.

This kind of planning is called presumption and is specifically warned against in scripture.

James 4:13-16 (NKJV)
Come now you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit”, whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that.” But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil.

The California Government expects things to turn around without making any significant changes. It is not going to happen.

California has just simply become arrogant. We stand against the laws of God and expect His continued blessing. Or worse yet we think that we obtained our success without God and we can continue to succeed without His blessing.

Prop 30 assumes that the economy will significantly improve in the next 4 to 7 years. There is no good reason to believe that the economy will turn around and start an upward climb as it has in the past.
Teachers Jobs are the most important

Prop 30 assumes that the jobs of teachers, firefighters, and police (the large government unions) are more important than any other government jobs. By the way, read the long list of jobs in the proposition that are considered “public safety” jobs. No one wants their job cut and everyone thinks their job is vital but that doesn’t make is so. What we are currently calling overcrowding in the classroom is more like the average class size 40 years ago (and schools were preforming better then). Besides supposedly this is only temporary. I think classes could deal with overcrowding for a few years. After the Long Beach earthquake in the 1930s my dad went to school in a tent for more than a year and learning still happened.

If they had to cut back on fire fighters and a hook and ladder truck didn’t pull up to your house with 10 firefighters when you called for the paramedics, would you feel your personal safety was in jeopardy?

If they had to cut back some of the police force and there wasn’t an officer to write that traffic citation, would you be concern about the public safety?
Others can afford to pay more to save teacher’s jobs

Prop 30 assumes that everyone in California can afford another ¼ cent sales tax on everything they purchase (except groceries). It also assumes that those that make $250 thousand a year or more can afford to pay more. The bill actually says that. As if the writer know every family budget and how the money is allocated and somehow everyone that makes $250,000 a year has money sitting around. I don’t know about you but it seems no matter how much I make it is all accounted for; there is never extra money lying around.
Many persons in California are experiencing hard times. Many have lost their jobs and extended family is pitching in to help out. Now we are being asked to help out public employees. The average parent of a student in a classroom in California makes $51,910 a year. The average teacher in a California classroom makes $67,871 a year (works only 9 months, gets much better benefits and pension). It seems to me based on the numbers that the teachers are the ones that could afford a cut.

This proposition is based on covetousness teaches want to take money from others and give it to themselves. This is theft. Two of the Ten Commandments address this. “Thou shalt not steal” and “Thou shalt not covet”. Stealing that is done with a ballot is still stealing.

Vote No on Proposition 30
• It unjustly takes from one group in order to enrich another, the Bible calls that stealing.
• It is based on covetousness.
• It allows the California Legislator and the Governor to avoid their Constitutional responsibility to pass a balance budget.
• It delays dealing with the real problem of cutting the size of Government and structuring it to be sustainable for the long run.
• It favors Government unions at the expense of everyone else.
• The summary makes the law appear to be simple and rock solid. Try to read the actual text if you can; it is extremely complex and confusing. I still didn’t figure out how the guarantee the jobs of public safety workers when all of the money is allocated to the teachers. Lawyers will be fighting over this for years.
I have tried to be as accurate as I could. I wasn’t able to research everything; so please feel free to correct me.