James Kevin Craig 311 S. Main St. Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714) 835-6304 [In Propria Persona]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAMES KEVIN CRAIG, ) CASE NO. Plaintiff, ) CV-94-8090 RSWL (SHX) ) ) PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO vs. ) DEFENDANT STATE BAR OF ) CALIFORNIA'S FIRST SET STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA,) OF INTERROGATORIES Defendant. ) ) ________________________) PROPOUNDING PARTY: DEFENDANT STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA RESPONDING PARTY: PLAINTIFF JAMES KEVIN CRAIG
INTERROGATORY NO. 2
State all evidentiary facts, other than legal argument upon which you base your allegation contained in paragraph 8 of the Complaint that the concept of a "State" is thus condemned as the institutionalization of violence, and the political philosophy which justifies the existence of this violence is contrary to your religion.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2
As with my Response to Interrogatory No. 1, a complete statement of "all evidentiary facts" which explicate my opposition to the State would fill many volumes. Some of those volumes were listed in my Petition before the California Supreme Court, Appendix A, "Petitioner's Religious Views," p. 37, note 27, reproduced here.
Once again, clear Biblical statements have not been consistently practiced by Christians over the centuries. Greatly simplified, the argument runs as follows:
Ethically, God commands us to love our enemies and not to kill. Nevertheless, we use the State to conduct a "bold foreign policy for a New World Order" (that is, to kill nearly a quarter million innocent people in Iraq) and to "speedily bring criminals to justice" (that is, to kill them).
God commands us not to steal. We use the State to "redistribute wealth" through "taxation."
God prohibits fraud through currency debasement. We make it the cornerstone of the State's economic policy.
God commands us not to kidnap. We use the State to enslave through conscription and imprisonment.
What distinguishes the State from private citizens is its claim to sin with impunity.
Historically, this claim is without foundation. God created man to do the "works of mercy" in a family-centered society. Men left the family not out of necessity, but to pursue their lusts in violation of God's Law. The Biblical record shows that God nowhere commanded men to form a State; the state is the instrument through which rebels violate God's Law. These arguments were set forth in the California Petition, Appendix A, "Petitioner's Religious Views," especially at note 23.
Philosophically, this movement from Patriarchy to Politics is justified by a philosophy of atheism and secularism. We are told that our high ideals of good and justice will be thwarted by evil and the forces of injustice unless we adopt policies of justifiable war and legalized violence. Miraculous divine intervention cannot be relied upon, if it in fact exists at all; we must arm ourselves. The philosophy of the State presupposes the ultimacy of rights over self-sacrifice, competition and threats over harmony, and vengeance over forgiveness. Constitutionalism denies that order arises spontaneously and can safely continue in the absence of organized political force, and yet in the Bible we are explicitly challenged to repudiate violence and trust in the Providence of God. These two philosophies are utterly irreconcilable.
Christianity began to dominate in the Middle Ages. But after the "Enlightenment," Secularism triumphed, reaching its apex in the 20th century. During this century's reign of Secularism, over 180 million people worldwide have been murdered (deliberately killed) by secular governments. Here are 180 million reasons to condemn the State, and any philosophy which justifies this killing or uses it to win an election is anti-Christian.
Back to Vine & Fig Tree.
Back to Christians for a Test Oath.
Christian Anarchist Home Page
Ninety-Five Theses on Biblical Anarchism
(1) Ironically, many evolutionists and Secular Humanists now question faith in any coercive political apparatus to generate or preserve law and order, and I quote them frequently: see generally,
Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek was also a defender of what he called "spontaneous order." See generally, his The Mirage of Social Justice, volume II of Law, Legislation, and Liberty, published by the University of Chicago Press, 1976. See also J. Birner, ed., Hayek: Co-Ordination and Evolution, 1994.
Unfortunately, Christians have not frequently spoken in defense of "anarchism." One exception is Jacques Ellul, Professor of Law at the University of Bordeaux, France, in Anarchy and Christianity (1988). [Back to text.]
(2) See the remarks from the Dictionary of the History of Ideas. [Back to text.]
(3) See Interrogatory No. 1. [Back to text.]
(4) This presupposition dominates nearly all of The Federalist Papers. [Back to text.]
(5) The Bible is critical of the State and institutionalized violence from cover to cover. Its rhetoric is almost unremittingly strident and defiant. But the Bible also commands us not to return violence to the State for its violence. These commands to "submit" to the wrongs of the State have historically been understood by many Christians to justify the existence of the State. This is tragically erroneous. When Jesus says "turn the other cheek," He is not saying that hitting people is morally legitimate! [Back to text.]
(6) R. Rummel, Death by Government, 1994. [Back to text.]