Hanover Leftist Nonprofit in Violation of its Declared Mission and IRS Regulations? PART 2

How both sides are missing the target. OPINION

Most people on both sides of the referendum acknowledge voting as a civic duty extending from a right. But what is and who defines the right, and is it inalienable? Most certainly, it is, whether acknowledged or not, and here is why.

The NO side ignores the 1st Amendment component and rails against the vote in pursuing their agenda. They want their speech (raising $60k in cash) to prevent others from having it. This notion contradicts our Founder’s intent to self-govern and the party Creed. The NO outlook on the First is like the parable of the talents- they want to wrap it up and bury it. Pragmatic dependency by appointment is the end, and the end justifies the means, so they feel justified to lie.

The Democrat component on the Yes side wants the vote with little recognition of inalienable, if at all, and is relevant only as immediate circumstances demand. In other words, they are also pragmatists but of the gap-filling variety. They want to apply situational and subjective morality over others on any given issue. They are materialists, and the end justifies the means because there is no higher power to answer to, and the Founding Docs can be reinterpreted to suit the cause of the day.

Both sides fall into one self-serving trap or another when motives other than acknowledging inalienable as Divine providence dominate. Inalienable, if a gift from God, must be fulfilled and applied as the Framers, who were largely ordained ministers, intended.

Desire or intent, views, motivations, apologetics, accusations, and distortions cannot change the nature of inalienable to alienable any more than characters in a novel can change the script they exist within. What God has wrought is supreme. Abdicating this principle allows the powerful opportunity to take it away from us all at some point. The news cycle is full of encroachment after encroachment on our liberties.

This principle is not new and has been understood for millennia. And is contained in Scripture and emphasized in political documents such as the Magna Carta and in Church confessions, catechisms, and articles of religion, including my own-

XXVI. Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacraments.

Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God’s gifts diminished from such as by faith, and rightly, do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ’s institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.
  AD 1562 ~Book of Common Prayer

Intentions of a minister of that age could not defeat a Sacrament, nor can the ambitions of political parties in this age defeat inalienable by dismissing it by presuming on faith or by claiming the divine doesn’t exist. Both ideas are equally in error- Simon Says is Simon Says- an exercise in subjective self-serving, justifying pride and ambition. God’s will is not optional, fashionable passing, or provincial. It has no expiration, and no one’s scheme changes Him, the nature of his gifts, or the consequences of ignoring them.

This principle is why I cannot be on either side. I support the vote because I recognize it is an exercise of duty to my God, who gave me this right to use and not bury it in a napkin. My motivation is thankfulness and fear of God- not a desire for power, men’s threats of losing society, or parties forgetting whose power they wield.

Once grace is given to us and recognized (John 3, Eph 6.6, for instance), we have an obligation to see that the gift is not buried or exploited and that it is exercised and applied. God’s will has trumped political expediency for millennia. Doing a little evil (lying to scare people away from this right or misusing it for evil intent once obtained) so a perceived good can come from it is a sin. The same sin offered to Jesus in the wilderness- presumption of faith for NO side and the denial of God by many for Yes. Either way, I cannot go along to get along.

The NO side leadership says, “The vote is for me, and the hell with thee.” I believe they want the appointments for the power to award contracts for new schools.

The Leftists mixed in the Yes side want more seats to advance their child-sexualizing agendas. We want to get back seats when we are in the minority- and we will likely become a minority because our BOS is full of members beholden to developers. The current rush to development will bring liberal School Boards, not elections, in and of themselves.

Neither intent is justifiable nor excuses our civic duty, extending from inalienable. I will vote yes because it is my duty and the right thing to do and because I am confident we will elect a more conservative School Board than we have now. Other people’s motives do not relieve me of that duty, change inalienable to alienable, or give an excuse to be a coward and fear liberty in a vote.

Some on one side want to exploit kids, and some on the No side want to keep control of 40% of the budget without accountability- both equally lie for gain. It turns out the Leftist group Hanover Forward is not a 501c3 and can endorse candidates according to them. In the next post, I’ll show what they endorse. It is notable that they do not post their information according to transparency norms for non-profits. Having gotten called out, they had to make an excuse on their wall- you can read it there with my trolling.

Up next: The Leftists aim to take advantage of the yes vote to turn the school system into a grooming factory.

Five & Dime VA/HCC is an opinion blog employing satire, commentary, and facts to entertain and convey my opinions on religious, cultural, and political issues.  

I expect you to know the difference.