Is there really any sane and logical reason that normal, well-educated Americans would insist that an ever-growing number off genders exists over and above the normal God-created male and female? I believe that the number of variations has now risen to somewhere in the 30s. Can you imagine that—30s? Or that state governments insist and force females to allow men to use their locker rooms, bathrooms and showers, and that male gender persons be permitted to compete against female gender persons in otherwise all female competition athletic contests, even though the males obviously almost always have a distinct structural advantage simply because of the way God created males?
In addition to those, one of the political parties—the Democratic Party—seems to have become almost wildly addicted to what comes very close to be nothing more than mob violence instigated by goons hired to serve that very purpose. You may think that that is pretty far out, but brethren, that has been documented and proved.
But where is the outcry from Democratic Party members to halt that tragic departure from political rationality? Not only that, but the same party, as I read in quotes that I usually see and read on the Internet, also seems to be decidedly lopsided in terms of those running down the United States of America. It wants to open the borders of this nation to a virtually uncontrolled invasion, to secure virtually uncontrollable power of the federal government.
I do not have a deep and broad education in world history. For some reason, geography always came easy for me, but it was not my favorite subject—history was. I believe, as a result of my more acute interest in history, I seemed to pay more intense attention to it than other subjects, especially Western world history. I'm talking about the historical movements of and the general conduct of peoples in Europe, in the United States of America and in Canada. When Evelyn and I were being called in the late 1950s, Herbert Armstrong's booklet, The United States and Britain in Prophecy, really intrigued me. It grabbed my interest—the very first program that we heard, which was on a Sunday morning in January in 1952.
If I can state my opinion of the time and place in Western world history, I believe that what is happening socially and politically internally in America in our time is similar to that period leading into the French Revolution—and France has yet another Western world nation. It was during the French Revolution that Mr. Guillotine—do you know to whom I am referring?—became extensively used to rid the French world of those considered to be "the enemy," and enemy was also French! The French Revolution was essentially a civil war.
If my judgment is correct, the United States of America has not yet reached the peak of the horrifying violence that lies ahead, because that time in France was exceedingly hate-filled and violent. It was a confusing and bloody period of time that managed to produce—somewhat similar to here in the United States—popular fictional books (as compared to our movies), filled with daring adventure and romance, books like A Tale of Two Cities, The Scarlet Pimpernel, The Count of Monte Cristo, The Three Musketeers and Les Miserables. They were all written near and even within and about the French [Revolution] times.
They all were purely fictional at their heart and core, but were set in the period leading into an during the historical backdrop of the French Revolution. Now, within the books themselves, the story flows were just close enough to being essentially true in terms of describing the general overview of the times, and so well written by extraordinary artists regarding attitudes and tempers that they truly caught the imagination of the public, probably partly because it was a murderously wild time. As a nation, France had lost virtually all sense of civility and common decency with the chopping off of heads on public display by orders of those currently in power, in order to intimidate the public into a more "decent" sort of behavior. It was the Western world's most vicious period of time, until Adolf Hitler came along.
We must pay attention, brethren, to our domestic behavior. "We" meaning those of us who are in the church observing what is going on in this nation, because it's leading somewhere. If France is any indication—and Germany is another one—we Western world nations are headed the wrong direction and it's showing up in our citizenry.
Now, why? Because both of those nations, as far as we know, are essentially Israelitish. If that is the way we judge things—having the same basic ancestry—then we must search out some answers, because according to Amos 3:2, God says to Israel, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth. Therefore, I will punish you for your iniquities." We should make a change toward better behavior. But France, you see, never had the spirituals roots and religious background of the United States, and therefore it spun out of control internally much quicker than we have.
Our moral decline has been preceded by a long and gradual spiritual decline that is still continuing, being clearly led by what I would term as largely materialist and secularist. It is a "who needs God and His commandments? I want mine now at someone else's expense" attitude. It is not truly a unique spirit. It is abjectly, almost entirely, self centered, fitting groups of those who generally think alike in very strong opposition to each other. A level of this always exists within this nation's history, because we have always been somewhat competitive. But it is building toward a level that sets off, that triggers, violence because the number of those given to taking to violent measures grows because they are determined that they will not achieve their goals unless they take the violent route.
There has always been animosity between groups here, but it did not always used to be not this intense in times past. Because of the religious bent of the people of this nation, people were before more willing to make a sacrifice and back off short of making war against their neighbor. But that willingness is disappearing. Who or what in our national character failed us?
This leads to the next commentary. Who or what in our national character has failed us? I believe that the blame can be placed in many places. However, listen carefully. The major and the most telling growth of intensity of animosity has been in those who enter into public service.
1) The government. They're leading the parade toward violence.
2) Those involved in religion—also public service.
3) Those involved in university level education. They're beating the drums.
There are people who search this kind of thing out in other revolutions that have taken place in the past. It is almost always identical—the same kinds of people who are leading the parade. Government, churches, and education.
In that the 1970s, I read book titled The True Believer by Eric Hoffer. His writing is an analysis of those who participate in mass movements, including revolutions. Mr. Hoffer stated that the driving leadership—listen carefully—at the forefront of almost every revolution is always wrongly believed to be the downtrodden masses. Not so, says Mr. Hofer; the downtrodden masses are only the foot soldiers taking orders from the real leadership. The real leadership is almost always the well-educated, because they have the most to lose and they are focused on the true objectives where the downtrodden trodden masses are not. The downtrodden masses' focus is almost always only on themselves and their needs, because their need is almost always immediate. But with the well-educated and the moneyed, there need is not immediate, so they drag the thing out into a revolution.