Leviticus v. Leviathan

 

Introduction

Read the Foreword

Sample Each Chapter

Book Reviews

Contact Mr. Holstad

Schedule Mr. Holstad for Your Group

Order the Book

 

© Alethos Press LLC

PO Box 600160

St. Paul, MN 55106

Webmaster

 

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14

Chapter 15

Home Page

Will we have law or unfettered power?
By Dave Racer

      Minnesota’s Constitution, like the United States Constitution, is mute as it concerns abortion. Given that, I expected the court to uphold the legislature’s ban on funding of abortions. The legislature had a nearly two-decade record of forbidding such funding.
      Instead, Hennepin County Attorney Michael Freeman decided to enter the case on the side of the plaintiffs, identified as Gomez. Gomez wanted the state to fund abortions.
      As bad as it was for a “neutral” prosecutor to get involved in this manner, even worse was Attorney General Hubert “Skip” Humphrey’s stipulation to the court that the state constitution contained a right to abortion. No such thing exists.
      As I scratched my head about these matters, I received a call from Wayne Holstad, an attorney whom I had known casually because of Alan Keyes, a 1996 Republican candidate for president. I had served as Keyes’ National Campaign Manager, and Wayne had grown interested in Keyes’ knowledge, intellect and rhetoric concerning a wide variety of issues. As a result, in 1997 Wayne asked me to arrange a meeting between him and Alan Keyes — they, along with Julie Holstad, met Keyes for lunch in Alexandria, Virginia. As well, Wayne asked me to review a book he had begun to write.
      The busyness of life interrupted my review of the book, but when Wayne called me, he also asked if I would be a plaintiff in a lawsuit he planned to bring on behalf of James Tarsney, another Minnesota attorney. Tarsney meant to overturn the Gomez decision, and Wayne offered powerful and unique insights to help him do it. But they failed. The Eighth Circuit Court ruled against them.
     I know enough about law that when I read the Gomez decision, I could see it contained numerous fatal flaws. What I lacked in understanding the case was how decades of bad decisions by other courts effected such a tragic finding in Minnesota.
     In 2002, I took a run at the Minnesota State Senate, and I also brought Alan Keyes to Minnesota to help me raise money. Wayne and Julie came that day, and brought others. After the campaign, I became curious about Wayne’s book and called him. I asked for an updated copy and as I read it, I realized how vital, timely and important a book it is.
     At the time, I worked on a true crime book about Andrew Cunanan, the gay spree killer. But I had days away from that work, and asked Wayne if I could help him whip his book into shape. We began slowly sifting and sorting it during April of 2003, and began to aim for completion during the late fall of the year. The more we worked on it, the more I saw how essential had become Wayne’s work.
American courts have shown in recent decisions that they are very confused about religious freedom and moral issues.
      During 2003, in Alabama, in Glassroth v. Moore, a federal court decided that displaying a Ten Commandments monument in a public building violated the constitution. During the same period of time, a Texas federal appeals court decided that the constitution does not bar the public display of a Ten Commandments monument. These decisions closely followed on the heals of yet another Texas case, Lawrence vs. Texas, in which the United States Supreme Court declared that state laws banning sodomy were unconstitutional. Then the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declared in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health that the state must bestow marital benefits on homosexuals and lesbians.
      What seems apparent in these recent decisions is that justice has almost nothing to do with our constitution or the wishes of the people, and everything to do with the power the Court has amassed for itself.
       Leviticus has been replaced with Leviathan.
      James Madison, universally acknowledged as the “Father” of the United States Constitution said, “We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of GOD.” According to Leviathan, Madison’s utterance was unconstitutional. The carvings of the Ten Commandments above the Supreme Court’s bench need to be chiseled out of the wall; the etchings, statues, paintings, murals, ceramics, and mosaics that represent thousands of references to America’s Christian heritage, many of them fashioned during the time of the founding fathers, must be expunged because Leviathan has declared them to be unconstitutional.
     If you are like me, you sense the absurdity of it all, and ask “Why? How did this happen?” That is why Wayne’s book needs to be read, to understand how the Court, conceived as the weakest of the three branches, became the strongest; how Leviathan wrestled power away from the people and turned its back on Leviticus.
      Is there an antidote to Leviathan? Oh, yes. Wayne clearly identifies it. Christians, and constitutionalists who do not fear an honest evaluation of history, be ready to have your lives changed.

— Dave Racer is an author, columnist, publisher and political consultant. He is the President and CEO of Alethos Press LLC, and editor of this book. See http://www.daveracer.com and see http://www.alethospress.com.
 

Chapter Sample Page          Home Page