On Saturday’s WarRoom, William Federer’s discussion with Dave Brat exposed the unique American conception of individual rights and contrasted it sharply with contemporary leftist views centered on group identity and the points they made are crucial for an educated society to have when considering who they should vote for in the next election.

“The founders of America looked to the pre-King Saul part of the Bible, where people were directly accountable to God, not to an earthly ruler. When we understand that our rights come from a Creator, not the state, we recognize that our leadership and voting decisions should uphold the principle of individual rights over groupthink,” Federer told Brat. 

Federer asserts that America’s foundational principle of individual rights is rooted in a belief in a Creator, which contrasts with the modern left’s focus on group identity and intersectionality.

On the program, Federer highlights that the American notion of individual rights derives from the Judeo-Christian understanding that each person is made in the image of God. He explains, “Judeo-Christian faith gave birth to the concept of the individual… your worth is not dependent on the group, but because you’re made in the image of the Creator.” This belief posits that every person holds intrinsic value, regardless of their social or political status. Federer contrasts this with historical and contemporary systems where worth is often linked to one’s position within a group or allegiance to a ruler.

Federer points out that personal value was tied to one’s relationship with the ruling authority in traditional honor-shame cultures and monarchies. “If you’re worth something to the government or the king, your worth goes up. If you’re not supporting them, your worth goes down. And if you’re their enemy, you’re dead.” This system emphasizes a top-down approach where individual value is contingent on group dynamics and political loyalty.

In contrast, Federer underscores that America’s founders drew on the pre-King Saul period of the Bible, which emphasized individual accountability to God rather than subservience to a monarch. “The founders of America looked to the pre-King Saul part of the Bible,” he explains. This aspect of biblical history highlights a model where individuals are valued and held accountable directly by God, not by earthly rulers.

Federer criticizes modern liberalism for abandoning these principles, arguing that contemporary leftist ideologies prioritize group identity over individual worth. He asserts, “Liberals really don’t believe in equality. They believe in intersectionality—that your worth is dependent on what group you belong to and the more minority groups you belong to, your worth goes up.” This approach, Federer argues, undermines the foundational American belief in inherent individual rights, which are seen as granted by a Creator rather than by the state.

The discussion reveals Federer’s view that without believing in a Creator, individual rights become precarious. He states, “If there is no Creator, then the rights come from the government… if the state gives rights, it can and inevitably will take them away.” This perspective underscores his concern that the erosion of the Creator-based understanding of rights could lead to a system where the state grants and revokes rights.

Federer’s dialogue with Brat emphasizes a stark contrast between America’s foundational principles of individual rights, derived from a belief in a Creator, and the modern left’s focus on group identity and state-granted rights. He contends that the essence of American liberty and individual value is inseparable from its Judeo-Christian origins, and that abandoning these roots risks undermining the concept of individual rights.

Federer finished by laying out a call to action for Christians to understand the importance of voting and defending these important foundational issues in the United States.

For more context, watch the full segment featuring Will Federer:

William J. Federer Walks Through How The God Gives You Value, Not Your Intersectionality Group

SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT FROM THE WAR ROOM DISCUSSION:

In recent years, there has been a significant shift in the political landscape toward expanding government influence in various sectors, often described as the rise of “the Administrative State.”

This movement, characterized by increased regulation, oversight, and intervention, has profound implications for everyday citizens, affecting everything from healthcare and education to personal freedoms and economic opportunities.

These are points people should consider when choosing who they will vote for.

Regulatory Expansion:

The US Government at various levels have increasingly implemented regulations across numerous industries, impacting how businesses operate and how individuals engage with essential services.
The intention is often to ensure safety, protect the environment, and promote fair practices, but the outcome can be burdensome compliance costs for businesses and limited choices for consumers.

Healthcare:

The expansion of government in healthcare aims to increase access to medical services, but it often leads to debates over the efficiency and quality of care. Policies like universal healthcare or government-managed systems raise questions about the balance between accessibility and innovation.

Education:

Government intervention in education through standardized testing and curriculum guidelines is intended to raise educational standards. However, it can also lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that stifles creativity and fails to address local community needs.

Economic Impact:

Large government programs and initiatives often require significant public funding, impacting taxation and public debt. While these programs can stimulate growth and support vulnerable populations, they can also strain the economy if not managed effectively.

Personal Freedoms:

The growth of government power often raises concerns about individual liberties, privacy, and autonomy.
Surveillance, data collection, and restrictions on free speech are contentious issues that challenge the balance between security and freedom.

Political and Social Polarization:

The rise of Big Government can exacerbate political divides, with debates over the appropriate role of government in society. Different ideological perspectives on government intervention lead to polarization, impacting social cohesion and public discourse.

The rise of Big Government, also called the Administrative state, presents a complex array of challenges and opportunities.

While the goal is often to protect and support citizens, expanding government influence requires careful consideration to avoid unintended consequences that may limit individual freedoms and economic vitality.

Engaging in informed dialogue and analysis is crucial for navigating this evolving landscape and ensuring that government actions align with society’s diverse needs and values.

Please share this article with voters you know.