Paul J. Epley: Nothing wrong with righteousness


Liberals seem to find it difficult to recognize moral absolutes. Liberals also seem unable to differentiate between "righteous and self-righteous" as they have determined man's laws to be equivalent, if not superior, to God's laws.

Need examples?

Five of nine Supreme Court Judges determined that killing an unborn child can be justified for the convenience of the mother by redefining birth as the post-natal event as opposed to conception, thereby circumventing the Sixth Commandment (do you vaguely remember the one about killing?). And one of my favorites, a covenant made between a man and a woman "in the presence of God," in His house and where His blessing was publicly solicited, e.g. marriage, is negated by a District Judge whose only authority was vested in him by the state.

We pledge allegiance to "One nation under God," we place "In God We Trust" on our currency, we sing "God Bless America" and "God Bless the U.S.A.," we celebrate as federal holidays Christ's birthday and His resurrection and yet we shamelessly cower to the demands of the American Civil Liberties Union and other liberal atheist front groups under the bogus assertion that we are violating the "separation of church and state provision of the U.S. Constitution" when, in fact, there is no such provision.

Conservatives believe the powers of the federal government specifically enumerated in the Constitution are to be narrowly interpreted and the words and intent of the 10th Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.") are clear and unambiguous. Conservatives are particularly outraged when activist judges usurp power in the name of advancing "a social good" or remedying some perceived injustice.

I quote Ronald Reagan, "The Constitution was never meant to prevent people from praying; its declared purpose was to protect their freedom to pray." This seems to me a fairly honest and realistic interpretation of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Even strict constructionists believe the Supreme Court may look to relevant documents to try and establish the intent of the framers in order to clarify ambiguities. However, it took an unbelievable leap of logic to misread Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists to require a "wall of separation" between church and state. As a result, the Supreme Court has effectively abolished your right to profess your Christian beliefs in public while offering special protection and preferred status to persons openly seeking to kill us in the name of Allah.

As a Ph.D. biologist, I learned that nature also is very conservative and one of life's axioms is "use it or lose it!" As a citizen, I have seen a steady erosion of our civil and religious rights because someone else's rights have been, without argument or open discussion, deemed to be superior.

The United States is approaching a point similar to that observed by Elijah (I Kings 18:21) when he said to the people gathered on Mount Carmel, "How long halt ye between two opinions?" For too long, we who have perfunctorily represented ourselves to be a "Nation under God" have dissed Him by our silence and inaction. We have collectively stood by, and only occasionally expressed our indignation, as our courts and legislatures have made a mockery of the very core spiritual beliefs upon which this nation was founded, the core beliefs that our forefathers shared, and the core beliefs that made this Nation great.

Righteousness requires action.

Paul Epley is a longtime Routt County conservative activist and is a director of the Conservative Leadership Council of Northwest Colorado.


tkdman 9 years, 9 months ago

and when a woman with children in tow come to my door and the first thing out of their mouth's is:" Most people don't chose the correct moral path" am I supposed to welcome them into my household and listen to the tripe that christian conservatives espouse, or should I listen to my life experiences (which are considerable) and do what I think is right and in line with the what we need to survive in a world that is being deminished by the so called conservatives. Support out troops, Stop all war.


id04sp 9 years, 9 months ago

And hey, how about this one? Obey the laws as they are written, even when you have a grudge against the person who will benefit.

Pass some of that logic around at home, Paul. A certain court employee needs to come up to speed on the law.


Slapper 9 years, 9 months ago

the religiously insane whether here or somewhere else are all living a delusion chapter 26. because i choose Reality over an invisible cloud being makes me no less than anyone else who makes the choice to "believe". i will put my values and morals up against most "christians" anyday and come out on top.


another_local 9 years, 9 months ago

"Conservatives are particularly outraged when activist judges usurp power in the name of advancing "a social good" or remedying some perceived injustice"

If only those calling themselves "conservative" today actually followed that path rather than attempting to install their own activist judges and legislating their own beliefs as if somehow they know better.....

Nobody is stopping you from professing your beliefs in public. Your letter was printed right? What some of us would like to stop is "conservative" attempts to force the teaching of religious right mythology to our children and attempts to force the rest of us to follow conservative beliefs and practices.

Somehow the right never seems to understand that allowing the rest of us to live as we think best does not force anyone else to live the same way. Yet they want to impose their beliefs on the rest of us. True conservatives mind their own business!


id04sp 9 years, 9 months ago

Conservatives would mostly mind their own business (including me) if liberals didn't expect us to pay for liberal benefits. If you have a child, be able to support it. What's so wrong with that idea? We do it. Why can't you?


spukomy 9 years, 9 months ago

If the liberals had their way and had "In God We Trust" taken off our currancy, what would they replace it with? Maybe we should have Atheistic currancy; "In Nothing We Trust". Or Agnostic; "In Something We Trust". Or, how about "In Allah We Trust" for Muslims. And, "In Budda We Trust", ect. Everyone can be represented with their own paper.

Or maybe we should acknowledge our Founding Father's wishes and recognize the Tradition that we have here.   Is it really that offensive to have "In God We Trust" on our money?  The people who started our nation had beliefs.  They insisted on you not getting persecuted for having your own, or none at all.

 Maybe on the back there should be pictures of the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

another_local 9 years, 9 months ago

id04sp, Do you really believe what you write? Do you think that all liberals have children and don't pay for them? Or even that all liberals advocate "liberal benefits"? Do you think that all conservatives are financially responsible? Did you know that the only balanced federal budgets in the lifetime of anyone alive today were under democrats?

spukomy, You don't honestly believe that the issue is what is printed on currency do you? Sure there are nutjobs that are worried about that stuff on the left (nicely offset by nutjobs on the right) but for the most part today's liberal is yesterday's conservative in that they want the gov't out of the bedroom and exactly what you mention: not being persecuted for your own beliefs. It is that persecution that is so worrysome about the conservative movement.


id04sp 9 years, 9 months ago

A Local,

The "balanced" budget was at the expense of a gutted defense department. The money we're spending on the war in Iraq is mostly for buying what we needed all along, or for repairing stuff that sat around broken because we had no money to fix it. Compared to our shortages that existed when President Bush took over, combat losses have been minimal. The Humvees were always intended to be "throw away" trucks anyway, and they have taken most of the damage. We've had to go out and buy lots of commercial equipment at premium prices to provide essential equipment (generators, air conditioning units, materials-handling equipment, i.e., bulldozers etc.) to make up for things that either were not purchased to replace worn out gear, or to make up for repairable equipment that was simply not repaired. 15% of the U. S. Marine Corps' equipment was sitting around waiting for repairs because we didn't have the money. So, your Democratic balanced budget was really a sham all along. It cost us a lot more to catch up than it would have if we had simply done what was necessary all along.

As for the "children" issue, I know that affluent liberals support their own, but who are the people pushing to provide benefits for kids of illegals, etc. It has ALWAYS been the liberals. I have liberal friends who make no bones about telling me that they don't mind paying extra taxes to support the poor. The fact is, most poverty is voluntary these days. We have many able-bodied people using the "safety net" to meet their basic needs while living beyond their needs in other areas of their lives (like driving around in Cadillac SUVs while receiving health care on medicaid). Conservatives don't mind helping people who need it. We do mind being taken to the cleaners by 9 people so that the 10th one who really needs help can get it.


another_local 9 years, 9 months ago

"who are the people pushing to provide benefits for kids of illegals"

That would be GWB though his amnesty plan.

Show me a cadillac SUV driver on medicaid sometime. I don't doubt they exist, but please, you don't actually believe that is the norm do you?

Most poverty is voluntary? Here in the Yampa valley I am tempted to agree with you... but in general, you need to get out more.


Murray Tucker 9 years, 9 months ago

Please practice your religion in its proper place, not in the political arena where you drive the sacred to the profane.

Conservative? Please read what Reagan said about how he viewed faith as a personal matter, not something to wear on his sleeve.

Please also read what Barry Goldwater had to say about religious zealots

Murray Tucker (see, I sign what I write!)


id04sp 9 years, 9 months ago


I have a friend who owns rental property in a rural area in another part of the country. One of his renters recently purchased a new SUV (all he needed was a job making some minimal amount of money each week) and used the rebate to pay his rent and avoid eviction. The next month the guy was evicted for failure to pay his rent.

Are these guys the norm? Except for the Cadillac, yeah, they are the norm.

Maybe you need to get out more.


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.