Special Report: That Elusive ‘Moral Authority’

Special Report: That Elusive ‘Moral Authority’
Vol: 42 Issue: 25 Friday, March 25, 2005

On this Good Friday, if the newspaper headlines reveal anything, what they DO reveal is anything but good.

Indeed, it is as if the global moral compass has reversed itself and now points south instead of north — but take note of the fact it is NOT spinning wildly — the shift is more or less universal.

Take the ‘moral authority’ that once belonged to the Catholic Church, for example. For a billion or so Catholics — and the leaders of majority-Catholic nations — the Catholic Church was the final authority on moral matters like abortion, contraception, marriage, family, etc.

Until it was revealed that a significant percentage of the Catholic hierarchy was actively homosexual, that the ranks of the priesthood shot through with pedophiles, and that the Catholic Church used its ‘moral authority’ to shield them from exposure and prosecution.

And the Vatican pronouncements against things like abortion and its advancement of family values suddenly sounded hollow and hypocritical and altogether less ex cathedra than before.

So much so that a pro-abortion, pro-assisted suicide, pro-gay rights, divorced Catholic came within striking distance of the Oval Office, with the support and encouragement of pro-abortion, pro-assisted suicide, pro-gay rights Catholic playboy/politician Ted Kennedy.

According to exit polls, forty-eight percent of American Catholics expressed the degree of influence of the Vatican’s moral authority in their lives by voting for John Kerry.

The moral authority of the United Nations is undergoing a similar reversal. The moral authority of the United Nations is to the secular world what the moral authority of the Vatican is to the Catholic Church.

Because the UN was a community of nations not beholden to any single national or ideological interests, it was designed to reflect the moral authority of the global community. In the past decade, the UN’s moral authority has been blunted by countless scandals.

The Oil-For-Food scandal, one of the most heinous crimes in world history, is being treated largely like a book-keeping error, despite the fact it reaches all the way into the Secretary-General’s office.

What makes it so heinous is the fact that literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died so that the UN could continue to loot Iraq’s treasury. It is increasingly clear that the global opposition to toppling Saddam was an effort to both maintain the scam and keep their involvement from being exposed.

The latest revelation from the investigation has the Secretary General meeting four times with officials of Kotechna both before AND after Kotechna hired Annan’s son Kojo and was awarded an Oil-For-Food contract.

(Annan had previously denied any connection between Kojo’s job with Kotechna and Kotechna landing an Oil-For-Food contract.)

Not only did Annan lie about the meetings, it turns out the whole Kotechna story is falling apart. Kojo was paid TWICE what was previously revealed and several times what the job was actually worth, even if Kojo had other qualifications apart from his dad being UN Secretary General.

In the midst of all that, Kofi Annan continues to function as if the UN’s moral authority is intact, and the nations of the world continue to let him, even defend him and the organization.

Even the European Union’s efforts at taking the high moral ground are transparently inside-out. It leads the civilized world in involuntary euthanasia and abortion, while lecturing the United States on the morality of imposing the death penalty on convicted murderers.

Hypocrisy has never been so fashionable.


Seven days ago, a Florida judge ordered a brain-damaged woman to be exterminated by slow starvation because it was determined by judicial process that her life was not worth saving.

The Congress of the United States passed a law designed to stop the process. The President of the United States flew across the country for the express purposes of signing it.

The legal community was thrown into a tizzy. Constitutional issues abounded and the greatest legal minds in the country expressed outrage at the apparent violation of the separation of powers.

One side argued that it was the right of the husband to demand Terri Schiavo be put to death out of respect for her wishes.

The other side argued that the husband had abrogated his right to guardianship as her spouse when he entered into a common law marriage and that he had an overwhelming conflict of interests.

A Gallup Poll cited by Fox News this morning indicated that some 80% of Americans agree with the court’s decision to starve Terri Schiavo to death.

What NOBODY appears to be debating is whether or not it is wrong to kill a human being. In their final brief, Terri’s parents asked the judge to determine whether or not Terri Schiavo had a Constitutional right to life that trumped all over rights.

The judge, by denying the request for an emergency injection to replace her feeding tube, ruled that she did not. And that does NOT seem to be an issue of much concern.

Words fail me in my effort to express how amazed I am at the universal willingness to accept the concept of ‘involuntary euthanasia’ in any form, no matter how carefully parsed and packaged.

Under certain circumstances, a human being can be exterminated like an unwanted pet, according to the laws of the United States, which are evidently in keeping with the wishes of the majority of the population.

Indeed, the default is death, with the burden of proof falling on the Schindler’s to prove Terri would prefer to live. If they can’t prove beyond any doubt that she wanted to live, the court’s assumption is that she wanted to die.

The moral compass is pointed due south.

The pro-death lobby is using all the right words, claiming they are allowing Terri to ‘go be with God’ — as if God is not as capable of taking her in His time as He is every other human being who has ever lived since Adam was cast from the Garden of Eden.

The pro-life lobby is grabbing all the attention it can from the media, then using it provide ammunition for the other side to use to marginalize them as religious fanatics with a hidden agenda.

Lost in the babble is the fact that, under certain circumstances, the government of the United States can legally order a person to be put to death for the good of society. Using almost the same criteria for evaluation as used by the Nazis during their euthanasia program in 1939.

(And if it can happen here, it can happen ANYWHERE).

The Apostle John says that during the reign of the antichrist, “as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” (Revelation 13:15)

Revelation 20:4 says that John “and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God.” (Revelation 20:4)

The antichrist’s government will ALSO have the authority, under certain circumstances, and in keeping with the moral compass of the time, be able to order a person put to death for the good of society.

The circumstances aren’t the same, but circumstances change. Every journey begins with a single step.

The world is well down the road to perdition already. And with the extermination of Terri Schiavo almost complete, we’ve just turned a corner.

“He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” (Revelation 22:20)

This entry was posted in Briefings by Pete Garcia. Bookmark the permalink.

About Pete Garcia

Christian, father, husband, veteran, pilot, and sinner saved by grace. I am a firm believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ. I am Pre-Trib, Dispensational, and Non-Denominational (but I lean Southern Baptist).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s