We explore real-life reformation here in this informed, online community.
Most Western constitutions were drafted to rest on Biblical foundations which acknowledge the will of God for families, churches and civil governments. Today the drivers of drastic constitutional overhaul are re-writing the language with the obsessive revolutionary aim to dismantle those Biblical theological foundations.
Here’s an example to watch:
On Friday March 8th, revolutionary anti-Christian bureaucrats in Ireland are demanding that the people show up at the polls to approve some new constitutional language which will gut the importance and protection of family and motherhood from national life.
Fortunately, the people can vote to keep the original language. But the media is urging them to scrap it.
Read the original language here and you will see immediately why the revolutionaries want to mutate it:
1° The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.
2° The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.
[That ‘necessary basis of social order’ is based on marriage, which is why:]
1° The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.
Well, the attack came, the State did not obey constitutional law, and now the people in this referendum are the final protection against the attack. What will they do on March 8th?
Precious in the sight of the LORD Is the death of His godly ones.
Psalm 116:15
Rod Dreher asks, "I don’t understand why the government doesn’t deploy the army and shoot rioters until they stop. Philippe Lemoine, a Frenchman, says it’s not that simple."
Excerpt:
"We have let things rot for so long that, at this point, relying primarily on force to restore order would require a degree of violence far greater than what people realize and what is politically feasible.
It's possible to contain a riot using only moderate force when the number of police officers is high relative to the number of rioters, but when riots are so widespread and involve so many people because you have allowed this kind of things to happen for so long, that's just not possible and you have to use extreme violence to make up for the lack of manpower.
I know people on the Internet will say that it doesn't matter and that we should just do it, but the reality is that most of the people in charge are not prepared to use that kind of force and neither would most ordinary people if they saw ...
Even Marine Le Pen’s recent statements track this line: personal Islamic practice is compatible with the Republic; replacing French law with Sharia is not. French Muslims who are simply citizens practicing their "religious faith" “have no reason to worry” about a Le Pen election victory.
But can one be a practicing Muslim without demanding and practicing Sharia?
