Christianity has flourished in the United States since its founding.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution restrains the government from abridging the religious rights of its citizens so that people may worship as they see fit, with like-minded people, and that they may live their lives in accordance with their faith, without restriction. 

It’s a Saturday morning and you decide to go to the mall. Instead of jumping in to a $25,000 automobile that most of the time just sits idly in your garage, you take out your smartphone and use an app to order a ride. Within minutes you’re on your way in the comfy area of the backseat with no annoying driver making small talk. You arrive safely at your destination, curb side, all for a few bucks that were automatically charged to your account. You don’t even have to say goodbye.

When you want to be picked back up, you just order a ride again. The problem is that you need to run many errands and have many stops. All of them will require you to dial a ride.

In this election year, we are once again called to make a decision on what kind of country we want to have. Do we want to have a big government system that is quasi socialist or do we still value limited government and personal freedom that has been the hallmark of our republic since its founding.

Although we need to know what the candidates believe, we first need to decide what type of government philosophy we identify with. This will guide us on Election Day.  When we know what our philosophy is, we become principled in our beliefs and we’ll know exactly where we stand on nearly every issue and with every candidate.

President Obama delivered his final speech to the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 20, 2016. Throughout the speech, he admonished world leaders that all countries need to conform to global tolerance, integration and to reject any form of nationalism or traditional beliefs.

Much of the speech can be seen in a positive light by freedom loving people everywhere who value peace, liberty and prosperity. The danger, though, is to elevate Obama's global goals above all else so that the ‘ends justify the means’. For example, to achieve peace and to eliminate fundamental Islamic terrorism, we shouldn’t have to reject all forms of fundamental belief systems.

There are three examples in recent history of supply side economic policies and how this pro-growth macro-economic theory has jump started severe recessions and led to years of economic growth.  The proof of its effectiveness can be seen even with all the smoke and mirrors put up by big government liberals.

Supply side economists believe that if you put the capital that already exists back into the hands of the taxpayer and decrease government regulation that it will result in greater economic activity, more business investment, and more risk taking by entrepreneurs. This will then lead to a growing economy with more tax revenue and more job opportunities with ever increasing wages.

The kneeling of Colin Kaepernick is not a type of protest that others employ to illuminate their grievances because our flag, our national anthem, our type of government and our freedoms represent what’s great about this country.

You don’t witness athletes sitting during the national anthem or turning their backs for other causes such as American jobs being outsourced due to global competition or from massive influxes of illegal immigrants. If they did protest the flag in this way, they would be labeled as xenophobic, racist and white supremacists who are filled with hate. They certainly wouldn't be viewed as brave souls standing up for displaced American families. Why is it that certain grievances are okay to protest in this fashion while others are not?