The recognition of the Seven Laws by the US government
So as not to put any organisation or individual who knowingly adheres to and supports the keeping of the non-Jewish Torah law at risk of reprisal by the bunch of politicians and their thugs, labeled “government,” I’m gonna share this view on my personal blog rather than in responses in other forums.
Something that is generally declared with some feeling of achievement is the fact that some politicians in the American govt have made claims about recognising something historical about the seven commandments.
In 1991, the US Congress made the following Joint Resolution honoring Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (Resolution 104, Public Law 102-14):
Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;
Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;
Whereas without these ethical values and principles the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos;
Whereas society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society;
Whereas the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility to transmit these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future;
Whereas the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world:
Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March 26, 1991:
Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, “the rebbe,” this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of “education and giving,” the year in which we turn to education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws;
and Whereas this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state.
Approved March 20, 1991, signed President George Bush. (quoted from chapter 15, “The US Joint Congress Resolution,” page 247, of the book, “Torah for Gentiles,” by Elisheva Barre)
I was confused about this weird repetitive use of the word “whereas,” so I found out that, according to dictionaries, when it’s used in legal preambles, which is what this is, it apparently means “taking into consideration the fact that.”
So this bunch of politicians seems to state that there is a historical tradition of ethical values which are the basis of a civilised society which they think their nation was founded on, and that these values were known as the seven “Noahide” laws. They state that ignoring these principles leads to the peril of chaos and that, supposedly, something called “society” is “profoundly concerned” with the weakening of these principles. It ends by saying that in that year, they turn to education and charity to return the world (not just America, but the world) to the moral and ethical valudes contained in the Seven Laws.
Now someone who actually knows the Seven Laws should be puzzled by this. Let me rephrase that because I shouldn’t fall into the trap of speaking for strangers. Let me speak for myself. I’m puzzled by this declaration, this “resolution.”
How the hell can these people, these politicians, claim that the American nation is founded on the Seven Laws when the constitution itself opposes some of the Seven Laws (the prohibition against idolatry and cursing God – the constitution, by its amendments, makes sure that idolatry and cursing God cannot be prohibited with its statements on freedom of religion and freedom of speech)?
How can it claim to be based on the Seven Laws when the law of Dinim enjoins a country to enforce the Seven Laws and to build a legal system that reflects the Torah law for Jews (not exactly, but somewhat) whereas the US government doesn’t enforce those laws, and protects certain acts of murder, does nothing concrete against adultery and homosexuality?
How can it claim to be founded upon the ethical foundation of civilisation when its history is strewn with wars of conquest against the Red Indians, civil wars, seditions acts and such like, with lies and broken promises to the previous inhabitants followed by the theft of land and slaughter?
Maybe the president and his congress had some memory issues while they were constructing this flight of fancy, fantasy and imagination. This is not to say that all of America was or is evil and that there was no good. But this recollection of things sounds like a whitewash.
This preamble also states that “society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles” (namely the Seven Laws). But what is meant by “society?” It cannot refer to the individuals that make up America as their views are very diverse and I believe that vast amounts of them don’t give a damn about the Seven Laws or much of the morality therein. It can’t refer to the government which contradicts the Seven on significant points. So where is this imaginary “society” that is so “profoundly concerned?” Is this like the mythical “We, The People” the constitution talks about, even though no more than a sixth of the people, maybe even as low as a tenth, had any say about its imposition over everyone else in the country?
And then the American Congress talks of returning the world, the whole world, to the moral and ethical values that it contradicts. Is this another country with visions of controlling the whole world? Isn’t that either pure arrogance or megalomania? They are no biblical “Israel” set to be a light to the nations. And the role the presidents of the past, such as Obama, assign to the Americans, that they are the police of the world, as can be understood from Obama’s state address, speaks more of an imperialistic mindset than anything noble.
Realistically speaking, this resolution is vacuous when it comes to actual reality. There is no substance to it.
So what I ask myself is this: what real practical worth does this resolution have? Does it mean that American legislators make sure to check the seven laws before they make law which demand the compliance of the American public? Does it mean that they repeal laws that conflict with the seven? Does it mean that they ensure that one of the things that is conditioned into the people by use of their compulsory indoctrination camps (public schools) or in their media is the seven laws?
The answer should be fairly obvious. The answer to all those questions is “no!” From their constitution, to their law making and judiciary, in every significant part of their government structure, they’ve stood against those seven laws they stated were the bedrock of civilisation. From the constitutional protection of idol worshippers and those who curse God to the more recent permission for homosexual “marriages,” and the protection of murderers who kill children who are alive 40 days after conception, i.e., abortionists, accordance with the seven laws from these politicians has been coincidental and ruling in the opposite direction to God’s law the norm. That doesn’t include the way government causes the kidnap of children from their parents by means of the CPS (Child “Protective” Services), the kidnap (incarceration) of those who have committed non-violent crimes such as drug offenses, even for traffic violations, the theft of people’s property by means of laws such as civil forfeiture, the murder of many by means of the police and army without any significant consequence to the murderers, but rather protection of the murderers due to a twisted “brotherhood” code, and much more.
The fact that two of the presidents of the United States of America and the Congress of those times declared these things about the seven laws whilst still ignoring them in any active way … the question must be asked, of what value was it?
A few facts about Congress and the politicians that make up its numbers: they are not the cream of the American crop when it comes to righteousness, wisdom or philosophy; they were not chosen out of some exemplary character trait; if one wanted to surround oneself with people of pure and upstanding character, three places that should be somewhere low on the list of possibilities would the Senate, amongst Congress and in the white house. These don’t appear to be people who hate power and are only forced into place because of an honourable calling on their lives. Rather, these are people who sought and fought for position using whatever marketing campaign worked, who then play with and manipulate interests and lobbies. Rather than gaining position to work to lose it by ensuring that the “citizens” are educated enough to be responsible enough that the politician’s role becomes obsolete, power is clung to and benefits received for as long as possible, while the people are made less responsible having more dependency on the handouts of the politicians.
If it is true that good men do not seek to rule over others, as is said in the following quote,
It is not in the nature of politics that the best men should be elected. The best men do not want to govern their fellowmen.
(attributed to George MacDonald but I cannot find the source, so I’m not sure – http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgemacd107329.html)
then many of those that grab onto positions of political power and influence cannot be the most moral of men.
I’m not saying that every single politician is corrupt, but a congregating of politicians is normally a place where corruption is rife and has a safe abode.
That’s the group of people making practically empty statements, ineffectual resolutions, about the seven laws.
Now I understand how some may feel and what some may say; that at the very least the Rebbe got the president and enough of Congress to make this declaration. At least it shows a glimmer of potential. And that is fair and good. There is something positive that can be said. Another bonus is that so many people are statists, supporters of not only the sovereignty of the state but the state itself. So for those people, the fact that representatives and heads of that now gargantuan leviathan (yes, I’m talking about the state, about government) spit out any good words about the seven laws is a great advert, some great publicity. And I won’t add a “but” statement onto that; I’ll leave it as it is.
The seven demands obedience in action, not simply thought or belief. If anyone says good about the seven yet continues to live in a way that goes against them, then that person is still very much guilty. The same can be said for congress, for presidents, for the so called supreme court judges.
Although people who respect and aim to keep Torah see some good in this resolution – and I don’t condemn them as it may just show a heart of good will – for me personally I see a bunch of lies, hypocrisy, disingenuousness and empty promises, the stock and trade of politicians, words that do not reflect or impact the lives of the speakers or the principles and legal system they uphold or are embedded in. As I’ve said, the seven laws are about action and are meant to be the basis of national and international law.
As internationally and in America the seven laws are not the basis of the law and significant parts of the seven laws are contradicted, repudiated and abolished by the government, its heads, representatives and enforcers, it only adds to their guilt when they pay lip service to its importance.