To hit a far off target, you have to shoot over the target. Every archer knows this.

We need to see the good results of the Prohibition, and we need to see what countries are like that never had a prohibition.

In the Philippines, cigarettes and alcohol are dirt cheap. 1/10 the price as in the US. And hard liquor is sold everywhere. Every little convenient store, and there are alot of those, and every grocery store sells hard liquor.

There are no restrictions on these items. There is no tax. I would even say that it would not be in the interest of these industries to restrict these items. I would want to investigate to see if the political system has been taking contributions from these industries.

As you can imagine, there are alot of alcoholics. Probably at least twice as many as in the U.S. The children sit around taking shots of hard liquor until they are drunk. The other day, I saw a pack of kids age 8 - 12 smoking cigarettes.

And everywhere you go, there are drinking parties. And the people are very poor. The people don't get involved in government or protests or anything. They are just get drunk and forget their poverty. The government does not tax the people, but the corporations pay the bills, so the laws are passed on behalf of the very wealthy. So these companies can put people to work for $1 / day in the province, and $2 / day in the islands, and $4-$5 / day in the cities.

It is most miserable. And the children are getting drunk and smoking cigarettes, instead of pursuing their education. An uneducated nation is going to be a poorer nation. I would say.

But our government has exercised wisdom, and has put restrictions on these things. And we probably have alot less alcoholics, and we are probably better off.

Thanks to Ellen White and other activists.

God in His wisdom probably knew if Ellen White said the state can't pass laws against alcohol, then the result would have been very bad. I think God knew the issue would have to be "over-shot", in order to work.

------

Think about this. God wanted Ezekiel to cook with dung, so he over-shot and said human dung. Ezekiel complained and God gave him cow dung. So the result was that God was able to get Ezekiel to cook with dung.

God even said He was going to kill all Israel and make a nation out of Moses. That's the worst thing that can happen. Moses prayed and God killed only those who would not repent. So, in over-shooting, God was justified in killing some. It could have been worse, right?

If you sell a car, and you need to get $4000 for it, you might ask for $5500, knowing they are going to talk you down to about $4000. Another example of over-shooting.

So, in the prohibition, the people who took alcohol for granted moaned. They said anything is better than this. OK, tax our alcohol and tobacco.

So, as a result of this "over-shooting", we have restrictions on these things. And we've seen what countries are like that have no such restrictions.

If you think about it, the same civil rights that allows people to drink also allows us to keep the Sabbath.

You might say that is blasphemy, but that's the only think I can say. Has there ever been a nation on earth that made alcohol illegal? Is there any evidence that alcohol was illegal in Israel? No. There is no law against alcohol in the books of Moses.

We would have to put Noah in jail.

I'm not saying alcohol is good. I never touch the stuff.

If the issues were severe enough to argue for changing the Constitution of the United States to make Alcohol illegial (no matter the issue of right to privacy) --- severe enough so EGW argues for "voting on Sabbath" and severe enough that she is given a vision about the SDA church needing to be the "head and not the tail" in that movement...

And if the issues were severe enough regarding the value of human life to engage in civil war...

Then what about the issue of "value of human life" today?

What about the issue of the Lev 18 sin in the gay agenda that causes the downfall of nations -- even though it too involves the right to privacy for the individual?

Are these not far GREATER moral issues though in some respects the SAME moral issues faced in the 1800's?

in Christ,

Bob

So, you agree with my "over-shot" theory, then?

-----



Slavery was an issue in the 1800s, and Ellen White said conditions would be worse than slavery. Scoffers say that slavery was abolished and there are not conditions worse than slavery in the world today.

But they have probably never been to 3rd world countries where the government is owned by industries that want to exploit the country for cheap labor. They got these people working for a few dollars a day. That's not enough to live on.

The black slaves in American lived like kings compared to these poor souls. They had all the food they could eat. Their lodging was paid for and clothing provided, and they probably had an allowance that was probably better than the wages in the 3rd world countries. And they got the gospel.

So if we want to talk about "value of human life" issues, like slavery, then unless these homosexuals are starving to death, I don't think that would be a more important concern than those who are now starving to death, and working for nothing, in conditions worse than slavery. And the problem is government corruption.

Duet. 16:19 Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.

1. Value of human life -

Conservatively -- about 1.4 million infants are killed in America each year - (Avg 3700 / day)

http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/ABORAMT.HTML

The value of human life is one of THE TWO moral issues where Ellen White pushed for church action at a voter level.

From 1790 to 1860 the slave population grew until it reached about 3.9 million total.

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/wahl.slavery.us

America kills that many infants every 2.5 years. (45 Million killed world wide each year)

And of course - it is listed in Lev 18 as an issue for which the state is placed at Risk of being judged by God prior to the second coming.




2. The gay agenda issue is the other item listed in Lev 18 that we face today.

Both of these represent moral issues that do not deal forms of worship.

both of them are a call to repentance, prayer and confession as we see Daniel doing in Dan 9:1-4.


in Christ,

Bob

Let the people do whatever they want with their eggs, sperm, and embryos. If they want to use birth control, or morning after pill, or get an abortion, it's their right. It's none of our business.

I will retract that if you can find something from Ellen White. All I have is this:

[color:#BF0000]Prov. 29:16 When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth...[/color]

You can't outlaw homosexuality. But there's no need for the state to recognize gay marriage.

My concern is for those who's condition is worse than the slavery that existed in the U.S. This is an issue the church should get involved with. We need to figure out a way to free the slaves from the evil corporations that control their corrupt governments. That's a worthy missionary work.

And don't try to say there are no evil corporations and corrupt governments. There are. I'm tired of all the ignorant skeptics that scoff at every conspiracy theory.

So who's willing to sit down and talk about what can be done about the poverty? Don't say it's outside of our power. Somebody has the power. Just what would it take? It would involve everyone on earth.

By contrast we have the social moral issues of Ellen White's day being clearly addressed - with activism in our chruch and by Ellen White hereself.

1. The value of human life - vs right to property -- slave owners argued for the right to property -- argued that churches should keep out of their business.

Ellen White did not agree.

2. The moral issue of drug abuse -- vs the right to privacy -

Businesses argues for the right to sell acholol and citizens to buy and drink it -- and that churches should stay out of their business.

Ellen White argues for a constitutional ammendment to stop them.

------------------------


Today -- the extreme left argues for the right to kill infants and they argue this is a right to property -- and right to privacy that the church should not interfere with -- Church argues instead for the value of human life.

Today -- the extreme left argues for the right to promote abominations identified in Lev 18 regarding gay rights -- that God says will place the State at risk. They argue this is right to privacy.

Same moral conflicts -- different contexts.

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthrea...of_h#Post190590

in Christ,

Bob

We don't need to keep going on about this. The prohibition has done it's work. Alcohol and tobacco are heavily taxed and heavily regulated and the nation is better for it. If you want to keep pushing for another prohibition, you will be wasting your time and everyone else's. Just talking about it is a waste of time. There has never been a nation that made alcohol illegal. So it's unrealistic.

Ellen White said lawmakers should prohibit alcohol. And they did. And the result of that was good.

The production of alcohol, along with everything else, has been commercialized, due to modern advancement of technology and industry. That's why alcohol, along with everything else, can be produced and provided for a very low cost, unlike when it took alot of work to make it. That's why it's necessary to regulate it. But pushing to regulate it, wouldn't have worked. It needed to be over-shot.

And the abortion band wagon doesn't do anyone any good. The only thing you have going is that late term abortions do seem rather barbaric, which can be seen as a degradation to civilization. But so does teaching our children they are animals, because that causes them to think of themselves as animals, so they kill each other and get each other pregnant. But we can't do anything about that, either. That's the kind of secularism the Muslims are fighting to resist, and we are fighting to push it on them.

What did Ellen White say about abortion, now? Nothing? I can't find the word "abortion", "abort", "fetus", "terminate pregnancy" in Ellen White's writings. I'd say if we focus on these things, then we're getting distracted. From a legal perspective, not from a moral perspective. Of course if you want to teach a church body that they should not drink or have mid to late term abortions, then that's OK. But to push such legislation will backfire and hurt us. The same principle of freedom that allows for things we don't agree with protects our right to keep the Sabbath and to publish that the Pope is the Antichrist.

I think it's more important to abolish slavery in 3rd world countries. To me, this is a worthy cause. It says God hears the cries of the poor and afflicted.

Neither Ellen White nor SDAs ever argued for a constitutional ammendment to "tax smokers" or "Tax drinkers".

The issue I am addressing is the moral issues faced by early SDAs -- their activist solutions and then the same moral (value of human life... etc) and right-to-property and right-to-privacy issues that surface to day



Your efforts to keep missing the point are noted.

But simply ignoring the problem raised is not a kind of solution to the problem being stated here. (Hint - I am not arguing for another constitutional ammendment)



This is the same "value of human life" issue that Ellen White faced with the issue of slavery and in that day she also confronted Christians in many denominations arguing that slavery should be allowed for those who wanted to engage in it -- and talking about it was not doing anyone any good.

Perhaps they too thought it would be better to solve world hunger than free the slaves.

So nothing new there --

Which is my point - we have the same issue and we find people who might otherwise claim to value human life when it came to slavery -- are swallowing the camel when it comes to killing infants.

in Christ,

Bob

Yes, I would have.

1 Tim. 6:8 And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.

The slaves in America where well fed, and probably well clothed, so they are told to be content. I don't even know if they had such a thing as "world hunger" back then, but if there was, that would be the bigger issue. Because hungry people obviously don't have food. That's worse than slavery. In fact the hungry people today are slaves, pretty much.

Ellen White said there would be conditions worse than slavery. We see that today. So it would be a lapse for you to say:



These are the issues I'm burdened with now.

1. Fix the "worse than slavery" problem.

2. Inform We the People of the Papacy's ambition to take over our country and take away our freedoms. But instead of Papists, we can call them Fascists. This is happening right now, in secrecy.

Prohibiting these things is unconstitutional. And it's not Biblical, either.

Prov. 31:6 Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.
31:7 Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.

If the Bible tells us to give him drink so he can forget his poverty, then why would you want to make doing so, illegal?



If you're talking about abortion, you mean to say "fetuses", not "infants".

And they are not our fetuses, so we can't do anything about it. Are you offering to take care of all those babies? You must be like a billionaire, right?

The ones killing infants are the Federal Agencies who are illegally burning our cults, with their children, at the behest of the Papacy. This violates Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Assembly, and Right to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.