Keys Writings 2013, Part 7

This entry is part 7 of 25 in the series 2013

March 9, 2013

Root of Fear

Tom asks: A lot of born again and regular Christians believe that through God they will never have fear again hardly….or rarely. JJ, have you ever been scared before since becoming an initiate at the current level you are at?

Can high disciples still get scared and why?

JJ All lives will have fear at one time or another, even God. After all, we are in the image of God as well as one with God. Therefore our fears are a part of the life of God.

DK wrote that “Fear has its roots in the warp and woof of matter itself.” Since the matter of the universe is the physical body of God this means that God Itself has fear woven in the fabric of his body.

Joseph Smith made this interesting statement; “What did Jesus do? Why I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. My Father worked out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to my Father, so that he may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt him in glory. He will then take a HIGHER EXALTATION, and I will take his place, and thereby become exalted myself.” TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH; Pages 347-8

The apostle Paul said: Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Phil 2:12

The main thing that causes fear is an approach to the unknown with the possibility of loss. If you are in a battle for your life there is a possibility of loss and the outcome is unknown.

When God created he universe he did not know of all the problems he would encounter and this fear became embedded in the fabric of the universe.

Here’s an article I wrote on the subject that should give some additional light.

Reader: “Fear is fear because it is related to illusionary beliefs.

JJ: Where do you get the idea that fear is based on illusionary beliefs? Are we to accept this just because you or someone else says so?

Saul: “If it were not based on illusionary beliefs what would it be based on? Truth, true belief or true knowledge?”

JJ: I may be the first to tell you this but yes, fear is based on truth. How one reacts to truth perceived determines the fear.

Let me give an example. Let us suppose that you are living a very positive life and the thought of any type of fear is the farthest thing from your mind as you are enjoying a ride in the country with your wife and kids. As you descend down a mountainous range, you feel quite secure for you have traveled it many times; but this time is different. This time your brakes go out. You press the pedal several times and nothing happens as you speed around corners barely managing to evade running off the edge, which would surely end the lives of you and your family. Because you have traveled this road many times, you know things will only get worse because the incline just increases. You make a calculation that tells you that the chances are very great that you and your family are going to be greatly injured or die.

This “truth” brings numerous fears to your mind.

As we said previously, fear always involves a loss of some type and the possible loss here is very real. The fears in this situation revolve around the following losses:

(1) Loss of your own life (2) Loss of your family’s lives. (3) Loss of opportunity for your kids to grow up and face the challenges of life. (4) Loss of an earthly relationship with your family.

Numerous other losses could be cited here but the point is that all theses fears, revolving around loss, are based on a very probable truth.

Now even if a miracle happens, and you regain control, this does not mean your fear was based on illusion. At the time that you were descending without brakes, it was indeed true that you had a high probability of disaster. The only thing that averted it was the fact that your fear did not let you accept such a fate and you did all in your power to change the future.

Even a fear within a dream is based on truth. I used to dream on a regular basis of this grotesque monster in various forms that chased me. It often pursued me for some time and often caught me at some dead end and, as it approached me, I experienced great fear and usually woke up about that point.

Now one may object here and say “That was just a dream and not reality so your fear there was based on illusion.”

Not so my friend for it is indeed true that I was having a dream and that within the dream I was perceiving a monster and there was a real possibility of loss.

What were the possible losses involved?

(1) I was enjoying most of the dream and the monster threatened the loss of an enjoyable dream experience that I wanted to savor.

(2) Loss of sleep. I didn’t want to wake up and have to struggle getting back to sleep.

Then one night when I was having the dream something different happened. The monster had me cornered and there was no place to run. I was to either die within the dream, never a pleasant experience, or figure a way out. I looked up at the monster and he was ferocious indeed. He was about twenty feet tall and mean as hell and appeared ready to devour me in about three seconds.

As I contemplated, the thought of fighting back occurred to me for the first time. But I had difficulty in accepting it, for the monster looked a hundred times stronger than me. When I realized that I was faced with the choice of fighting or doing nothing, I decided to go out fighting and I attacked the monster. To my surprise I saw fear in the monsters eyes when I attacked. This gave me courage and I continued and when I pressed forward I discovered to my joy that I was much stronger than the monster. I then proceeded to give him a good beating and finally picked him up with super human strength and threw him off into oblivion.

Just as the monster caused a fear in the dream state, just as real as a fear in the awake state, even so did I feel a joy at overcoming the monster that was just as real as anything while awake. In fact I felt great for about three days after the dream.

The reason I talk here about truth within dreams, is that I’m sure you are going to tell us that life in these dualities is not real, therefore, all fear is based on perception within the dualities which are not real.

Whereas the real truth is that whether we be in the illusion of physical duality, or a dream state, it is indeed true that our consciousness is there and the perceptions we have there create a real experience. Even though the monster did not exist in this higher reality, the experience of the monster was real and this made the fear real.

If you lose your brakes going down a steep incline, it does little good to tell yourself, “this is not the true reality.” It is a true reality that you are in the experience and if you do not make the best of it you will suffer loss.

Listen to what a Master of Wisdom has to say about fear: “You ask: What are the basic causes of fear? To that question, if carried far enough back into the esoteric history of the solar system, there is no intelligible answer to be given. Only the advanced initiate can comprehend. Fear has its roots in the warp and woof of matter itself, and is par excellence, a formulation or effect of the mind principle, and a result of mental activity. The fact that birds and animals know fear puts the whole subject upon a wider footing than if it were simply a human failing and the result of the activity of the functioning of the human mind. It is not incident upon a man’s possessing a reasoning mind; if he used his reason in the correct way, he could eliminate fear. It lies in what is called “cosmic Evil”, a high sounding phrase conveying little. It is inherent in the fact of matter itself and in the play of the pairs of opposites-soul and matter.” Djwahl Khul

In harmony with this Joseph Smith made the interesting statement that “God created the worlds with fear and trembling.” This would explain why “fear has its roots in the warp and woof of matter itself.”

Now some have said that all fear is caused by a lack of love, but such is not the case. In the example of the fear generated by the failing brakes, the intensity of it was increased because of love for wife and children.

Fear is overcome through using the mind to calculate the best possible moves to eliminate the perceived future loss. For instance, in my dream I mentally calculated that the only possible way out was to fight and this eliminated the fear. I did not overcome the fear of the monster by loving it, but by defeating it.

It is true that many have fears that are not justified because of wrong perception. For instance, one may fear that his spouse is cheating on him because of misperception or a wild imagination, but when he has attained correct use of the mind, then his perception will be accurate. When perception and calculation are accurate then fear will be based on the real as in the example of the loss of the brakes.

This portrayal of fear by many teachers of the day, as a thing held only by the deluded, the unloving, the unevolved or the ignorant, has led many into great illusion. Because many seekers have swallowed this pleasant sounding doctrine without processing it through the mind they enter into a world of deception and denial.

When a fear surfaces, instead of facing and defeating it, they generate a “fear of fear” and they will think something like this:

“This fear is not real so I can not be experiencing it. Only the lesser evolved and the unloving have fear and since I am evolved and loving I cannot be experiencing it. Therefore, I deny this fear.”

Thus the seeker deceives himself rather than facing the fear and transcending it. That fear which is denied or suppressed does not go away. Instead it foments and grows and when it resurfaces it will loom greater than it was at the moment of burial.

The Now is the time to face and overcome and join in the company of the Great Ones.

Copyright 2000 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved


March 12, 2013

DK on The Avatar of Synthesis   Link



March 12, 2013

The Great Unifier

I’ve been contemplating the principle “like attracts like” and have arrived at some additional insights. The interesting aspect of this principle is that no two people are alike. Since this is true then the question to ask when we see two people or groups attracted to each other is this. What is that which is similar which forms the basis of attraction and what is the primary ingredient that causes attraction?

With two individuals who fall in love we might say the ingredient is love. It is difficult to not be attracted to a person who truly loves and admires you. On the other hand, when the freshness of the falling in love is replaced by the difficulties of living life together then something else must come into play if the attraction is to remain. It helps if the couple has similar interests and desires, but what is the core principle of a lasting relationship.

How about friends? They do not fall in love, but fall in like. What makes a friendship last a lifetime?

How about nations and national leaders? What causes one nation to be drawn to and support another?

To understand it helps to look at the friends and enemies of Hugo Chaves who recently passed.

Who did he hate the most? In particular he hated the United States. Who did he like? He liked Cuba and Iran along with their leaders Castro and Ahmadinejad. What did they have in common? Was it religion?

Not really. Ahmadinejad sees Christians as infidels that must be subjugated and Chavez is a Roman Catholic who often spoke of Christ as his savior. Then Castro is a non believer who rules with a secular/atheistic form of communism. Religion has been very restricted and controlled during most of his rule.

If religion is the grand unifier then you would think that Chavez would be pals with the United States since all presidents have been Christian, like himself, as well as most of the population.

Maybe it was liberal causes like gay rights and gay marriage that attracts them. Not really. Chavez was tolerant of gays and didn’t support persecuting them whereas Castro and Ahmadinejad have viciously persecuted gays in their country.

Could it be their governments? It is true they all incorporate aspects of socialism but Castro rules with hard core communism and Venezuela and Iran allow some free enterprise and land ownership. Also Iran is a theocracy something contrary to Cuba’s communism as well as Chavez’s government.

What then do these three states that are so attracted to each other have in common? Where is the like being attracted to like?

I’ll leave this for the group to discuss and give my answer shortly.


March 13, 2013

Re: The Great Unifier

We received some good answers on this question. Keith correctly thinks that the various tyrannies are united in hate toward the West because we frustrate their agenda. Steve rightly talks about the desire for control and to be controlled.

Alex says they have a common interest of hating American imperialism.

I believe LWK pointed out the core unifier most clearly. He said:

They all hate individual freedom. Isn’t there an old saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend,” or something like that? The U.S. to a lot of the people of the world still represents the abstract concept of individual freedom, no matter how much the reality now differs from that vision. That is a concept all of these countries hate.

Kelly and Johann’s answers were along these lines but with a different slant.

The big division in the world is between those who respect the principle of freedom and those who do not. Those who do not respect the principle will be attracted to each other as well as those who do like the principle.

Larry correctly pointed out that we have fallen short of the ideal but, even so, there is enough freedom in the world to cause a union of hatred that attempts to diminish it.

The quest for freedom is the quest to be free from the mark of the Beast for the Beast takes the place of the God within and becomes a God without that must be followed above and beyond anyone’s inclination to follow the inner direction. Under the Beast you are only allowed to follow your inner direction if it is in harmony with his direction.

Because individual freedom is always a threat to the Beast then wherever it shows itself will be a center where the wrath, cunning and distortion from the Beast will be unleashed.

Just take a look at some of the freedoms we have here and the attacks against them, sometimes subtly and other times very openly.

(1) Free speech This has been under attack from the beginning of this country and the avenues of attack are increasing.

Question before continuing: In what ways is free speech under attack?


March 13, 2013

Big Secret

We have a new pope. What the world doesn’t know is this. Dan has more light and truth in his little finger than the Pope in his whole body.

Tom: So what is wrong with our new pope FRANCES THE 1ST. He A CONSERVITIVE. What the matter with him?

JJ Nothing’s the matter with the pope if you’re looking for a good Sunday School teacher.

John C Now, THIS is a quote for the archives. Something to be remembered 100 years from now.

JJ Thanks for the appreciation John. Maybe I’ll use your name next time. For some reason, Dan’s name often comes to mind when I think of the struggling disciple seeking to scale the mountaintop, but of course many here are seeking the same thing.


March 14, 2013

Re: The Great Unifier

Alex: I was talking about the vision of a differently arranged states during the “millennium”. But what you are talking about is a different thing.

JJ It’s not different. The principle is the same whether it is related now, during the millennium or a thousand years ago.

If a people live in a desirable land with peace and plenty, those living in an undesirable land will want to take as much advantage of it as they can get away with. Period. This has always happened, does now happen and will happen. Making a “suggestion” that the unwanted ones just leave is laughable and has never worked and will never work.

Undesirables are only kept out by force, not suggestions.


March 15, 2013

Free Speech

Question: In what ways is free speech under attack?

We are fortunate indeed that the Founders had the foresight to make free speech the First Amendment. This has given us a lot of protection to say what we want. But has the Beast acknowledged this and rolled over and played dead as far as speech is concerned? Not hardly?

The Constitution was the weapon hat inflicted the deadly wound on the Beast but the scripture predicted this deadly wound would be healed making the Beast alive and well. Alive and well he indeed is and attacks free speech at every opportunity.

“How is he attacking free speech?” asks one. “Can I not go on a street corner and proclaim my disagreement with the President or any other leader?”

Yes, you can legally disagree with authorities but that is where it ends. There are quite a number of ways free speech is curtailed.

First, there legitimate limitation. This is speech that can cause real damage such as the famous example of yelling fire in a crowded theater. If one slanders another person he can be sued in a court of law. If a government employee gives out top secret information he may be prosecuted and lying in a court of law is illegal.

Unfortunately these legitimate limitations give those who wish to control others an excuse to work toward expanding on them. Those working for the Beast are doing everything in their power to make what they consider hate speech illegal.

In most cases hate speech is merely speech that pawns of the Beast hate and despise. They hate much of what is said on talk radio so they seek to pass laws regulating or limiting it. They hate common sense ideas that will bring greater freedom and wealth to individuals so they condemn them through the media. They hate the free market so they blame it for all our woes.

They hate the mention of God and spiritual principles so they seek to silence all such talk on property controlled by the Beast.

To suppress the masses the unjust authorities seek to tell is which words we can say and which ones we cannot. This is called politically correct speech. When these words were first demonized many laughed and thought these ideas would come to naught, but they underestimated the power of the Beast in the land of the free.

Those who saw nothing wrong with using the words handicapped, midget, crazy, bum and many others may not be arrested for saying them but could lose their job or be attacked and humiliated by offended associates

Speech criticizing President Obama has been curtailed in many cases by accusing the critics of racism even when nothing in the speech referred to race. It has been said that one is racist if he uses words such as lazy, fried chicken, ghetto, Chicago, apartments, welfare, illegal aliens, and other words when speaking of minorities.

Many of our professional workers have their speech curtailed. If a doctor advises alternative medicine then he could loose his license. We had a family doctor who was barred from the local hospital because he disagreed with another doctor’s diagnosis.

Attorneys have to be very careful with their speech as well as any paid member of the clergy for fear of losing their job. Church members are often forced to speak only positive things about their leaders or suffer excommunication or rejection.

A book could be written on examples but the point is that the war against free speech is alive and well and it takes a strong individual to stand up to the forces arrayed against free expression.


March 16, 2013

Re: Power of Prayer

Keith said he received a negative attack after a prayer. He said, “The prayer was a petition – a pleading for a higher life to initiate a gathering somewhere on earth to get this ball going.”

JJ Well, Keith, if there is anything the dark fores do not want is a gathering of lights. On the other hand, it is the desire of the forces of light and love so in the end more forces will be with you than against you. Continue on your course of prayer and the darkness will lift if you keep your focus and pure intent.


March 16, 2013

Re: Free Speech

Concerning the principle of free speech it is interesting that there is confusion over what it is. The general idea in most minds is that we are free to vocalize any opinions that we desire so long as we do not endanger lives, slander or cause financial loss.

In other words, I am supposed to be able to say or write whatever I want, even if it is offensive or hurts some feelings. No men in black will come to my door and take me away.

This seems pretty simple but there are many interpret this in a distorted light.

One example was Bill Maher on his show, which was called “Politically Incorrect.” After the terrorist attack of 2001 he stated that the hijackers were men or courage. This offended many people and in particular it offended some of his advertisers who withdrew from his program. This loss of revenue was a partial cause of his show being cancelled.

After the advertisers withdrew Maher complained many times that his free speech rights were violated, but were they?

Was he accused of breaking any law? No.

Was there anything in place to prevent him from telling anyone he came into contact with that the hijackers were courageous? No. Even though this opinion was offensive to many he could voice it all he wanted.

The only way to keep the advertisers on the program when they did not want to be there would be to force them to stay. And if they were forced to pay Bill Maher to speak then who’s freedom is really taken away?

Right. Not Maher’s freedom, but the advertisers.

Free speech does not mean that you can force others to pay for you to broadcast or print your words. You have to get that done though your own efforts for the guarantee of free speech does not guarantee anyone’s success.

A similar situation happened in 2003 when the Dixie Chicks said they were ashamed that President Bush was from their home state of Texas. Many fans were offended and stopped buying their records and some offended DJs stopped playing their tunes. Again, they complained about a violation of their free speech.

These people need to read the First Amendment which says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech”

Did Congress pass a law that abridged the right of the Dixie Chicks to criticize President Bush or to prevent Bill Maher from praising the terrorists?

No, of course not. In both cases it was ordinary people, not Congress that were offended by their speech and refused to financially support it. Any individual can refuse to support any speech he deems undesirable.

In fact, political groups as well as business interests do this all the time. Many groups on the Left strongly disagree with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and have organized protests in attempts to get their advertisers to drop their support. This turned out to be fairly successful against Beck and he was dropped from his place on the Fox News channel. They were not as successful against Rush and other conservatives.

Now some consider this an unethical and unfair approach in dealing with political enemies but there is nothing in the First Amendment that prohibits even disgusting attempts to influence the media.

The key to understanding true free speech is the phrase, “Congress shall make no law” restricting it.

True free speech is threatened by law and powerful authorities, not opinions of the rank and file public.


March 17, 2013

Annihilating Time

Keith made an interesting find which is worthy of comment. He writes:

I came upon the following from D.K. (White Magic: Rule 10 Group of World Servers) and was blown away by the following phrase, …”humanity…will eventually annihilate time…”

Below I have taken the page and paraphrased the intent. A mind blower. ‘ANNIHILATE TIME’ ‘OMNIPRESENT’ ‘OMNISCIENCE’ This is the future of humanity according to D.K. I have read White Magic before and somehow missed this.

“About the year 1400, the Hierarchy of Masters was faced with a difficult situation…After noting and watching this trend of affairs for another one hundred years, the Elder Brothers of the race called a conclave of all departments about the year 1500 A.D. …At this conclave…They had, in connection with these aspirants, two problems:

They had to deal with the failure on the part of even the most advanced disciples to preserve continuity of consciousness, a failure even now manifested by even initiates.

The Masters found the minds and brains of chelas curiously insensitive to the higher contacts, and this again is a condition which still prevails.

The plan as at present sensed, and for which the Masters are steadily working, might be defined as follows: – It is the production of a subjective synthesis in humanity and of a telepathic interplay which will eventually annihilate time.

It will make available to every man all past achievements and knowledges, it will reveal to man the true significance of his mind and brain and make him the master of that equipment and will make him therefore omnipresent and eventually open the door to omniscience

all can therefore strive towards achieving continuity of consciousness and at awakening that inner light which, when seen and intelligently used, will serve to reveal other aspects of the Plan

To bring this about has been the objective of all training given during the past 400 years”

“Just amazing,” Keith says.

JJ Great find for contemplation Keith. When I read your post I did not recall reading that myself so I checked my White Magic book that I had read several times and was surprised I did not have it highlighted. Then I checked my notes I saved on my computer and sure enough it was there with “annihilate time” highlighted in bold. It looks like I eventually did catch it but due to an imperfect memory I didn’t recall the phrase in the present.

Yes, it is an interesting phrase, but in interpreting DK or any inspired writer one may be mislead if he interprets literally. The whole picture of the presentation must be considered. Here is my take.

By annihilating time he doesn’t mean that time will no longer exist. For instance, the spheres of existence after death are often referred to as places where time no longer exists but this is not literally true. In truth we are not concerned about the passing of time there and because minutes and hours are not counted as they are here. It is as if time does not exist but time still does exist for us here and continues to pass.

The time barrier DK is talking about is that which exists between lives. Within one lifetime it is fairly easy to annihilate time. Any time a seeker attempts to focus he can withdraw into his consciousness and regress himself to any point in his life that lies within his memory. He can then relive those past moments as if they are happening now, thus annihilating time.

He points out that a problem that most disciples have is they cannot annihilate time between lives. It would be desirable if they could obtain “continuity of consciousness” so time could be removed as a barrier and then they could retrieve knowledge and intelligence from past lives.

When he says that this will make us “omnipresent and eventually open the door to omniscience” he is hinting at the powers available when the Oneness Principle is mastered. To tune into this one must enter the Eternal Now in his consciousness and in a sense this annihilates time.

Very few remember details of their past lives without the assistance of regression techniques. There are a number of degrees available to the disciple as far as continuity of consciousness is concerned. The most important achievement is for the disciple to retrieve his past wisdom and knowledge of principles and understanding. He must obtain the confidence that this understanding should bring. He will then intuitively comprehend all that was available to him in the past though he may not have all the details available. The historical details of the past must be discovered through various techniques, but often such retrieval is not necessary.


March 17, 2013

Google Glass

Back in 2001 I posted this:

“For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. Luke 12:2-3

“Like it or not we are entering an era, irrespective of how much freedom we have, where it is difficult to keep secrets for as soon as a message goes out from your computer through your

housetop’ into the internet it is pretty much open to the eyes of the world.”

Amazingly this prophecy is now about to reach a level of fulfillment that few imagined. Google has invented a device you wear that cannot only connect you to the internet and GPS but allow you to videotape everything you see. When the time comes hat 10% or more of the people wear this device then just about every human movement will be captured on video by someone.

You can read about Google Glass here: Link


March 18, 2013

A Question or Two for JJ on the Bible.

Tom: I know that the Bible has been translated some of it’s original meaning lost. What % is the Bible accurate like is it 98% accurate including stories like Samson (the strong man), King David killing a giant and ect. … And what about the Book of Mormon…how accurate is it?

JJ Concerning the Bible the problem is not so much with translation (though that is a problem) as with not having the original text. In Bible times if you wanted a copy of some scripture you had to either get it from a scribe or copy it yourself. Now copying texts in ancient times is a little like the game of Chinese Whispers, as mentioned in Eternal Words. After a few copies are made changes occur. For example, imagine a scribe making a copy of one of the gospels and comes across a scripture that does not sound right to him. He is likely to change the wording to make it read better or to add a notation giving it a clearer meaning in his opinion. Then the next guy makes a copy from his copy. The changes in wording are then passed on and notations are sometimes included as if it were original text.

It is estimated that the earliest full copies we have of the gospels are around the twelfth copy. Common sense tells you that the twelfth copy would deviate substantially from the original.

The message of my book Eternal Words is that certain phrases and teachings that embody principles are so clear that they will survive future distortions. For instance, “the truth will set you free” is so profound that the basic meaning will survive the copying process.

The teachings that a book contains are much more important than whether or not all the details of the stories are true. One can look at it this way. Throughout the universe every story one can imagine has happened somewhere. Therefore, most any story you read is true somewhere.

Teachings, on the other hand, are a different matter. Where stories of people are different everywhere, principles are not. If a principle is true here it will also be true in all parts of the earth, the solar system and the galaxy.

Therefore, when I read a book of teachings of questionable origin I look not for the black and white historical data but I look at the lessons taught and the knowledge and principles conveyed.

I do not believe that either the Bible or Book of Mormon are 100% correct historically, but all the stories have seeds of truth and represent real events and people. Both books have a lot of good teachings but even the best of books must be read through the eyes of the soul. If this is done then the seeker will savor that which is good and discard that which does not register.


March 19, 2013

More Threats to Freedom

This continues my article on threats to freedom.

(2) The right (freedom) to bear arms. The second freedom at threat is the freedom to bear arms. I’ve already written about this so I’ll make this short.

One of the greatest threats to the beast of unjust authority is a populace that is armed. One of the first steps that enemies of freedom take when they ascend to power is to disarm the public to make them much easier to intimidate and control.

What is disturbing is the number of people who see no need for the Second Amendment as insurance against a possible dictator. They seem to think a loss of freedom or the rise of a Hitler or Stalin could never happen to us. Wrong. It could happen to any nation and could even happen to the world as a whole – a scary thought indeed.

We have already given up too many of our freedoms. We have reached a point where freedom-loving individuals must take a stand and say, “no more!”

(3) Freedom over the fruits of our labors. Most people are happy to pay a reasonable amount to contribute to or common security and welfare, but when taxes get too high the laborers begin to feel that their freedom to enjoy their hard earned gains are threatened. If we add up all the taxes we pay, including the subtle ones, the average person pays well over 50% of his income. It is interesting that it was common for slaves in the Roman Empire to be required to pay a third of their earnings to their master. We pay more to our master (government0 than the ancient slaves who ran a business for the slaveholder.

Now we are at a point where taxes are not only increasing but we are asked to pay more. We are asked to pay our “fair share.”

I’d say that paying more tribute than a Roman slave is more than a fair share and a threat to individual freedom.

(4) Freedom from excessive laws and regulations.

Like taxes the average person does not feel his freedom is threatened by reasonable laws but it seems our legislators have too much time on their hands and want to control our lives with increasing detail.

A symbol of this overreach is New York Mayor Bloomberg’s law that attempted to prohibit the sale of large drinks at fast food restaurants. It is true that sodas are not very healthy, but it is up to individuals to decide what is good for their health, not the state. The state regulates where people can smoke and drink to excess. They tell us what drugs we can and cannot buy and incessantly preach to us about things we should be doing for our own good.

The trouble with giving the state too much regulatory power is that in attempting to protect us from ourselves they often wind up denying access to products that individuals feel would improve their lives. There are many, but here is a handful. • Medical Marijuana • Raw milk. Many feel this is healthier than pasteurized milk but it is illegal to sell it in many areas of the country. • Natural and often harmless alternative medicines. For instance, Laetrile a cancer medicine derived from apricot pits, is banned by the FDA. • Legislators are always seeking to ban natural cures and even vitamins. They have even proposed to make the sale of all but a few supplements and vitamins illegal and subject to a doctors prescription.

Perhaps the greatest example of overregulation in modern times is Obamacare. Many were alarmed when Nancy Pelosi championed the 2800 page document telling us that they had to pass the bill so we could discover what was in it.

Well, the bill was passed and we are still discovering the content and intent. So far this discovery has led to 20,000 pages of material explaining the regulations that will control our lives. I don’t know about you but I’d say that out of 20,000 pages there is bound to be a couple pages of regulations that will make me feel like screaming.



Copyright 2013 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Series NavigationKeys Writings 2013, Part 6Keys Writings 2013, Part 8

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *