What do you stand for?

But what exactly does it mean to stand for something? Rather than the opposite of sitting, it means to hold firmly to a particular opinion or belief. To stand for something means you give it your wholehearted support. (What Does It Mean To Stand For Something? Wonderopolis, https://wonderopolis.org/wonder/what-does-it-mean-to-stand-for-something)

According to Collins dictionary/thesaurus (found here), it has three meanings or connotations: to represent something (hence synonyms such as to mean, to exemplify, to denote); to tolerate (hence synonyms such as to suffer, to bear, to endure); and to support (hence synonyms such as to champion, to promote, to recommend).

It’s that last meaning, to (whole-heartedly) support, that is relevant to this post. I’ll come back to it.

According to the seven laws for humanity as described in the Torah tradition, the base obligations of a human being not Jewish is to avoid certain forbidden actions. The core laws do not directly govern beliefs or thoughts, only actions. Unfortunately that is made unclear by some teachers that state that certain beliefs are commanded by the seven core laws, but, at least in the context of this post, I won’t focus on that. So a Gentile who hasn’t committed acts of injustice, God-cursing, idol worship, theft, murder, incestuous or adulterous sex, bestiality or living-meat eating, they have fulfilled or obeyed the seven laws, regardless of thoughts or belief.

It’s important to set that foundation here because where I go next will show itself to be more a philosophical point, one dealing with thoughts and beliefs, and not necessarily a seven-laws legal point.

Now amongst Gentiles that knowingly and willingly, maybe even devotedly, keep the seven laws, there are those who have a strong allegiance to the values and laws of their “country.” By “country,” I mean the people group owned by a certain gang called “government.” [I’ve already discussed the fact of population ownership by the government-mafia in a previous article so I won’t dwell on it here.] You’ll see from previous posts, there are those that “stand for” British values. There are those that stand for their American constitution (according to what I’ve read, the fact that amendments have been ratified makes them part of the constitution). I’m gonna call these people “noahides,” since many call themselves by that name and generally associate keeping the seven laws with also a conscious belief in their divine Mosaic origin.

So there are a fair amount of nationalist noahides or patriotic noahides. And yet those noahides will say they stand for the seven laws.

I want to repeat something here. The seven laws are the standard, the basic standard, for non-Jewish humanity. It applies to individuals and thus groups and therefore governments and their laws, to the rights and values created by such governments. Those seven laws prohibit injustice, cursing God by his name, the active worship of idols, etc.

So I’m going to compare British and American standards that patriotic noahides claim to “stand for,” support and wholeheartedly give credence to, and compare them to the seven laws that those people also claim to “stand for,” champion and promote. Not only that, but let me also compare the common view of “noahide” that many “stand for,” namely a God devotee or acknowledger who keeps the seven laws based on that acknowledgement, with the values of the “country” those noahides also stand for.

Oh no, David. I can see where you’re going with this.

Yeah, I’m sure you can.

So, according to Article 9 in Schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in the UK, there is such thing as “freedom of thought, conscience and religion” in which it states,

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. (Human Rights Act 1998, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1

In an amendment to the American constitution, it states the following.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1, The U.S. Constitution Online, USConstitution.net – https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html)

As you can see, British and American law protects the exercise, the manifestation, the active worship of all manners of gods. If you look at the whole depiction of the right in British law, you’ll see there a clearer rendering of the fact that such a “right” is actually limited by the dictates of the political gang, that people don’t truly have freedom of religion unless that religion submits to the “true” higher power, the State.

Anyway, that’s a different subject. The main point is that when a nationalistic noahide stands for the US constitution or British values or that of any country that espouses similar values, they say that they give their wholehearted support to the legal protection of the active worship of various religions, including idolatrous ones.

Compare this stance with the seven laws.

A gentile who worships false gods is liable provided he worships them in an accepted manner.

A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment. However, a gentile is not executed for a type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would not deem worthy of capital punishment. (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Wars, chapter 9, law 2)

The seven laws oppose active worship of other gods. Add to that the following teaching.

The general principle governing these matters is: [Gentiles] are not to be allowed to originate a new religion or create divine commandments for themselves based on their own decisions. (ibid, chapter 10, law 9)

So the core divine morality for Gentiles rejects the existence of novel religions throughout time.

So what does a patriotic noahide stand for and support? The legal protection of the free expression of active worship of other gods, the existence and practice of religions? Or the prohibition against such practices and actions? It can’t be both. A person cannot stand for fully supporting the legal protection of idolatry and religionism on one side and fully supporting the legal prohibition of such things. That is called self-refutation or self-contradiction.

I can already hear a counter-argument.

But, David, such a prohibition, even if divine, isn’t practical right now. We don’t live in a time where the seven laws are upheld by nations or communities. So we have leeway to support the best practical system we have now which would be that of my own country at present.

I would love to hear such reasoning with regards to murder. Remember, the seven laws are the most basic standard for Gentiles given by God. As well as being intended to be implemented legally, they are a code of morality too. Thus the argumentation is saying that, because morality isn’t practical right now, we have leeway to give our full support to immorality. If one therefore lives in a land where theft and murder and sexual immorality are prevalent, the seven laws not being practical, one can give their full support to the legal protection of murderers and thieves.

[On a side note, supporting government in our gentile lands normally ends up with giving support to the legal protection of the immoral. Just look at Hilary Clinton or Tony Blair.]

This sort of reasoning makes God’s commandments something of a convenience. When it becomes inconvenient, they can be legally abrogated and the noahide would stand for such an abrogation. And thus such a noahide cannot be said to stand for the seven laws.

It would be my normal modus operandi to belabour the point, going through each place and point where the stance of “standing up” for values of a country’s government contradicts the seven laws or a wider human morality. But why hammer the point on the one who chooses to read this? The point is very simple. I’ll reiterate it.

The seven laws govern actions, not beliefs, so I cannot condemn the patriot noahide for an evil act against the seven commandments. But when I look for faithfulness to the seven laws, the way they judge the actions and “laws” of humanity, then it cannot be found in the nationalist who gives wholehearted support (the meaning of “to stand for”) to a system that opposes that of the seven!

What makes this a bit strange is that those who call themselves “noahides” and their rabbis teach that a “noahide” is one who keeps the seven laws because God commanded them to Moses. Yet the nationalist noahide supports systems of government or values that are anti-truth and anti-God. Does that make sense? “Hey,” says the noahide, “you can only be a ‘noahide’ if you believe God gave the law.” Oh. Ok. “Now let me stand up for, let me champion, anti-God or godless systems of people control.” Huh?!?

Again, I’m not going to again bring up the contradiction between what I see as a greater morality and government, like a document or belief that a gang can make loans and make their victims and their future generations pay the cost. [It’s ok; I know rabbis teach that people are the property of the government, so that makes it ok, right? Not!] I won’t focus on each of the seven commands and spout out my deep abhorrence for the successful bullies called “government” due to the way they help to screw up world morality, being very influential in screwing up the minds, hearts and lives of people. No, I won’t do any of that as I think I’ve made the point.

It’s great to be a person who avoids those acts God forbade us Gentiles. It’s fulfilling, not commanded but fulfilling, to know it is God who gave those prohibitions. But how many people push past the simple inner conviction about God and Torah, the religious and spiritual bits, push past the nice feeling of doing what he says, or reading/studying a book from a rabbi, push past that and crave a consistency between private life, seven law convictions and political life?

Life goes on.

https://ia601504.us.archive.org/32/items/WhatDoYouReallyStandFor/What%20do%20you%20really%20stand%20for.mp3