STATE OF WASHINGTON PONDERS LEGISLATION PROHIBITTING MANDATORY CHIPS

This important story was spotted and shared by V.T., and if you've been around this site for a while, you'll know that V.T. is a regular spotter and article-sharer. But this article is in a class of its own, and, I hope, a harbinger of more such actions to come, for in the age of klepto-currencies and governments attempting to herd their populations into a cashless society, such legislation is needed, and needed as an expressed and defined component of God-given and constitutionally recognized rights:

Washington state is considering legislation that would prohibit any corporation from making any such chipping of its employees mandatory:

There was a time when warnings about governments embedding identification technology directly into the human body would have sounded like something from George Orwell rather than a public policy debate. Yet here we are. Washington State is now considering legislation to prohibit employers from forcing workers to accept subcutaneous microchip implants. The fact that lawmakers even need to debate such a law should alarm anyone paying attention to where society is heading.

These implants are not some futuristic fantasy. They already exist and have been used in workplaces. The devices are small RFID or NFC chips roughly the size of a grain of rice that are injected under the skin, typically between the thumb and forefinger. They contain no battery and do not actively transmit signals across long distances. Instead, they act as a passive digital key. When scanned by a nearby reader, the chip sends a unique identification number to a computer system connected to a database. That database determines whether you can open a door, access a computer network, enter a building, or authorize a payment. (emphasis added)

(Now, I do not know about you, but that "authorizing a payment" component is, of course, the very definition of a "beast system".  But to continue):

Combine digital identity with programmable money and biometric identification and you begin to see the outlines of a system that previous generations would have described as dystopian. Implantable chips simply remove the remaining friction. Your identification, access permissions, and financial credentials become physically embedded within your body, ready to be scanned whenever a system demands verification.

And if there was any doubt before about the nature of this system, there should not be after reading the paragraph immediately above.

The real question is why there is no real outcry nor movement against this technology, particularly from the churches. There are various reasons for that, and I want to briefly rehearse them here before I proffer my own speculation as to why some traditional churches have not led opposition to such technology nor sponsored such bills (which, by any rational  lights, they should be doing). One may dismiss evangelozionism and its whole subservience to dispensensationalist  Cyrus Scofield's "theology", for the simple reason that they do not believe they will be subject to any suffering accompanying such a system. After all, they will be "raptured out" of the world before anything nasty really goes down, so there's no need to be involved with it.  The for-the-most-part apostate liberal Protestant mainline churches have been so long ago co-opted to go along with any trendy fad in the world that their non-opposition is also a foregone conclusion.

And that leaves the "traditionalists", groups like the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or the various traditional Reformed groups, The Roman Catholic Church, the various jurisdictions of the Orthodox Church, the traditional non-liberalized non-progressive Anglicans, and so on. Why is  there no outcry from these groups?  My speculation is that they are too intertwined at this point with the "money power" to put up much opposition. Consider, as an example, the Vatican Bank. It may have been necessary, at one point in the financial history of the Roman Church, to have such an institution for its mere survival and smooth functioning. It gave it a measure of freedom and indeed functioned as a component of its sovereignty after the collapse of the papal states in the 19th century.  But by the same token, it also entangled it with the financial affairs and fads of the world to such a degree that any open and vigorous challenge to them was no longer possible nor even really "politic". And the same phenomenon holds true in my opinion, for the most part, and to varying degrees, to all the other ecclesiastical institutions previously mentioned.  So if your local pastor or priest tells you "not to be concerned" about all of this, you might have a basis in understanding why that is so.

I hope I am wrong on that speculation, and that the Washington bill will not only spread like wildfire to the other states, but that it will get the attention - and the backing - of the churches, because in this expanding surveillance world, in this world of advocacy of a cashless society, of chipping, of the emergent beast system, of a Roman Catholic being kicked off the president's panel for religious liberty (!) simply for adhering to traditional Roman Catholic teaching regarding the Incarnation vs. evangelozionism and an attempt to qualify adherence to that teaching as "anti-semitic", the rights and institutions of those traditional groups are under threat. Of course, there's always the traditional solution - the catacombs - and unfortunately, if there is no pushback such as in the Washignton bill, that's where things appear to be headed...

See you on the flip side...

(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share it with your friends.)