Justice and Mercy #29 - Politics
Posted by admin on Mar 6th, 2008
2008
Mar 6
This week we bring on the guys from Verum Serum and talk about the Christ follower’s role in politics, as well as the role of the church in politics.
You can download it here or listen to it below.
If you’d like to contact us about the podcast you can email me.
Click here to subscribe to the podcast in Itunes.
Here’s the feed for every other podcast client
Also if you’d like to help us out you can vote for our podcast.
March 6th, 2008 at 11:39 am
An entire discussion on Christians and politics, and not once did the Constitution ever get mentioned as a standard of judgment on the issues.
March 6th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Is that good or bad?
March 6th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Well, given the fact that without the constitution, we’re little more than a country ruled by the majority (51% tyranny), or worse … mob rule … I’d say it’s pretty sad.
Perhaps people still believe we’re a democracy. That’s incorrect.
We’re a Constitutional, Democratic Republic.
March 6th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
If the Constitution were the basis for the Xtian life I would agree. since its not, I’m not sure why its a problem.
March 6th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
But it is the basis of American politics. You weren’t discussing the Christian life, you were discussing Christians and Politics. I think the a mention of the Constitution would have been highly relevant.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
We did mention the Bible a number of times (which I thought was the Christian’s guiding document)…
March 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Please don’t get me wrong, the podcast was very interesting, and I enjoyed it. But this trend of ignoring the Constitution as the premise is disappointing.
The Bible IS the guiding document for Christian living, but it’s not the guiding document of a free nation.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
We weren’t discussing how to run a free nation. We were discussing how to conduct our selves as Xtians.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I thought is was a discussion on politics?
March 7th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I am very troubled but the current political idealogy in the christian subculture. I hesitate to tell my wife that I would consider voting for Obama over McCain(if that is the ticket). Of course, the assumption is that I would be supporting abortion and gay rights if I did. She doesn’t realize how much her opinions have been framed by the right wing. I am trying to open her eyes to the fact that the right wing has always existed in this country and has always been on a “fight” for something, first it was slavery, then it was women’s right, now it is rights for gays. All the previous fights were “biblically” based, just like the recent fights seem to be. I can’t help but look at the marriage of the right groups in christianity and politics and see nothing but bad.
Can I suggest a podcast to you guys? It is called Apologia, it is a great podcast of christians and atheists. very fair and good podcast, it reminds me of this podcast. Good job guys.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Nathan, the topic was “the role of Christ followers in politics.” In other words, how does our Christian faith inform our political paradigms and our decision-making processes as relates to the issues and candidates. I certainly agree that the Constitution is important, in fact essential, in our political system. However, the Constitution doesn’t shape my political paradigms or decision-making as a Christian. My faith, the Bible and the interpretations I place on the Bible, my faith community…those all shape my perspectives and how I act on those perspectives.
The Constitution provides the framework within which I am allowed to act and participate in our political system, but it is my faith that dictates HOW I act within that framework.
I think that is how both John and I approached the discussion.
I think that a great discussion would be the roots of our founding documents, from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, etc. There is certainly a lack of understanding and appreciation of how much influence the Christian faith had on the shaping of those essential documents.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Jeff: right on. for once, we have a candidate who’s actually FOR something, instead of having a bear a constant litany of what people are AGAINST.
and, as i’ve pointed out before, the abortion issue is just a red herring for the right wing, posited by people who don’t actually care about whether their tactics WORK, whether they actually do anything to reduce the number of abortions. they feel that, since they’re taking the “moral” stand, then it must be right.
well, things don’t always work that way, and sometimes we have to be pragmatic. as a “pro-choice” person (stupid labels), i’ve never met a person who was “for” abortion.
turns out that “pro-choice” policies do more to reduce the number of abortions in this country than “pro-life” policies.
gays are another red herring issue for the right. you notice they only really talk about gays during campaign season. they scare up votes, they get stupid constitutional measures (most of which don’t pass constitutional muster, but no matter!) put on ballots around the country, then the day after the election, they go ahead with their actual agenda.
like with Bush and his best friend Iraq. notice he stopped even paying lip service on the gay issue in 2005 or so.
as to the original topic, the Constitution is great, but it creeps me out when people revere it the same way they do the Bible. it’s a great document, to be sure, but it’s not perfect, and occasionally it has to be tweaked. (and then untweaked in the case of Prohibition. which is exactly the same thing that would happen if a “marriage” amendment was railroaded into it.)
March 7th, 2008 at 11:11 am
I probably should just not talk about it here, but the Obama hype really kind of baffles me. When I hear him say stuff like he’s for “hope” and “change”, it strikes me like a beauty pageant contestant saying she’s for “world peace”. There such vague concepts, and they could really mean anything to anybody, and in the end they end up meaning nothing.
Basically, Obama is not much different than the populist and socialist candidates that the Dems have put up for years. Promise the world, and tax the rich to pay for it. Of course, the Pubbies, aren’t much different.
I don’t know - I feel sort of disconnected from the whole thing. I think both sides rely on the government for too much. The right wants the government to provide security, and the left wants the government to provide prosperity. Neither one of them seems too good at actually accounting for how much these things cost.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:31 am
actually, Phil, and this is the media’s misconception:
if one studies Obama’s platforms, and especially his Senate record, one sees that Obama believes in VERY specific things, and one also sees what kind of approach he takes to solving problems.
it’s all available on the Library of Congress website.
one thing i’ve noticed is his consistent ability to bring co-sponsors from all sides of the political spectrum, and his relative ability to actually get legislation passed.
it’s pretty fascinating. i was already an Obama supporter, and i was surprised to see just how effective he is.
his stump speeches are what they are, and he’s effective at inspiring people. here’s the big difference: Obama doesn’t believe that HE can change everything, but he does believe that he must inspire the American people to demand it.
that would be refreshing, considering the comatose state the American electorate has been in for the better part of 30 years.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Evan,
Oh, no! It’s too late… They’ve already gotten to you… Must warn others!!
Just bustin’ on ya’, but I don’t think I could ever in good conscience vote for a Dem. I’m too much of a supply-sider to justify it. Raising taxes never solved anything.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Evan,
Sounds like you and I have read some of the same material on the corruption of right wing politics. Not to say the left isn’t corrupt but the right always has “wedge” issues that get the social conservatives to march like sheep to the voting booths. This time they are pumping up immigration and national security. I don’t think it is going to work.
If the right were so concerned about the social issues of the religious right then why didn’t they do anything about them when they controlled all branches of government from 2002-2006? Social conservatives need to wake up to that. I would rather vote for someone who says I am prochoice but I will do everything I can to reduce abortions (and actually does) than someone who says I am prolife and does nothing because it would take the wedge issue away. Jesus was about changing the individual not legislating his values from top down, he could have done that, but he had a better way, we christians need to open our eyes to that concept. I think a lot on this blog have.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Phil…that’s a misconception, too!
the running storyline is that Democrats will raise your taxes and misuse your money, but nobody seems to have been paying attention to the fact that the supply-side policies haven’t worked!
the Democrats are for giving regular people a break, rather than the top one percent. (sidenote: around 20% of Americans think they’re part of the top one percent.)
what happens? the very rich, who pay very little in taxes, don’t “put it back in the system,” like we’ve been brainwashed to believe. no, they shelter it offshore, they shelter it in investments, the corporations thank the American people for their tax breaks by moving their operations to Dubai (Halliburton?).
and really, honestly…it kind of grosses me out when people are such single-issue voters that they’re willing to sacrifice the nation for the sake of what they’ve been told their taxes might be were a different candidate to win elective office.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
well, Jeff, you’ll notice that nobody was paying any attention to illegal immigration until certain politicians suddenly said “OH NO, MEXICANS EVERYWHERE!”
thus, the racism button was triggered in the American right, and all of a sudden people in South Carolina are advocating building walls to keep out people they’ve never met.
meanwhile, do Texan voters want a wall? resoundingly, no. the people who actually have day-to-day experience with the issue say “no.”
and the Right has been doing such a smash-up job prosecuting “The War on Turrur,” right?
um, yeah…that’s why al Qaeda (the real one, not the small cobbled-together outlet version that didn’t exist in Iraq before we invaded Iraq) is now as strong or stronger than it was before 9/11.
but, noooo, if we leave Iraq, they’re gonna follow us back!
yeah, right, the Sunnis and Shiites are going to fight their civil war in the middle of Kentucky.
naturally.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Actually, they do work, at least from a pure revenue standpoint. Everytime taxes have been cut, government revenues have gone up. I don’t think that the justification for supply-side economics is in trickle-down, it’s just that having more money in the private economy is a benefit to everybody. Tax cuts don’t make the super-rich more charitable, per say, but it brings more cash flow all-around. The only problem is that when tax cuts have brought more money into the treasury, politicians from both parties start spending it as fast as they can.
The government has no money of it’s own. That’s what gets me. Somehow Americans have gotten the idea that the government is the answer to every problem. I think the government causes far more problems than it solves. This I why I tend to identify the most with Libertarian politics. I just want the government to get the heck out of the way.
It all boils down to this. I have no hope in government or politicians to bring real change. They are corrupted systems, no matter what. Which is why I guess I think we should limit their overall influence.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
i would suggest that part of the reason people don’t believe in government’s ability to work is that we’ve been electing people who don’t believe government works, who then appoint people to head government agencies who also don’t believe government works, and then when the government is asleep at the wheel when Hurricane Katrina hits, we can point and say “see? told ya! gubmint don’t work!”
it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy and it’s such a scam.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Scott,
Point taken. As I said, I enjoyed the conversation … especially the “libertarian” part
Here’s a question … just out of curiosity. What’s the point of having a conversation about whether or not a Christian should cast a vote for a candidate who wants to outlaw Islam, when the Constitution makes it clear that religious freedom is a fundamental American right? (that’s just an example)
That’s all I was trying to say. The conversation was all about whether a Christian should do this or that, but most of the stuff covered in your conversation was cleared up 200+ years ago in the Constitution.
Abortion = No federal right to outlaw it
Gay Marriage = No federal right to outlaw it
Civil Disobedience = The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment.
That’s all I was trying to say. Hope that makes sense.
BTW, I still contend that Ron Paul didn’t call Huckabee a fascist
March 7th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
he might not have, but i’ll do it right now.
in fact…so many people try to throw around the term “Islamo-Fascist.”
in that case, Huckabee is a “Christo-Fascist.”
March 7th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Evan,
Well a lot of great things were done without the government in America. San Fransisco was devastated by an earthquake at the turn of the century, and it was rebuilt with very little government intervention. Chicage burnt down in 1871 - well before FEMA or any other type of agency.
I’m not saying the government can’t do anything good. It certainly can. Overall though, I think we have too much, not too little.
Set my people free!!
March 7th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Evan,
you believe government works?
“That government is best which governs least.” — Thomas Paine
March 7th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I just explained that, Nathan.
I believe government CAN work. (And, Phil, 19th century examples? really? we must also remember, then, that the late 19th century was the most unregulated time in our nation’s history, the true era of the robber baron, and that during that time, the gap between the classes was wider than it’s ever been. in short, the nation was heading straight for hell. it took politicians who actually believed in government to put the country back on the right course.)
It’s so funny to me…we have so many things in our country that are “socialized.” Police, fire, roads…and we don’t complain about them being controlled by the government.
And I think using the Paine quote is a bit misleading. There’s a big difference between having an active government that works for the people, and having the government intrude needlessly into our lives.
Making sure every American has access to health care is a moral issue. Guess what? The free market simply won’t do it. Why? Because the free market is, by its nature, an amoral institution.
That doesn’t mean we have to do it the Canada way, or the France way, or the England way, or the every-single-other-developed-nation way. (I mean, really, the US is the bastard child in all this.)
Look, I’m all for capitalism, but I would suggest that there are certain things that are Basic Human Needs, rather than “ways to make money off other peoples’ suffering.” Because, really, that’s all our health insurance system is right now.
We’re not number one in quality, either, despite the way we’ve been brainwashed. We fall around #39 or so.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
And really, you want to free up some money? Why don’t we cut the military budget in half? The amount we spend on our military is absolutely obscene. Some people think that’s the mark of a successful nation. It’s not.
This is the joke of the “tax-and-spend” liberal. They’re all tax-and-spenders. But for some reason, conservatives don’t consider it “spending” when it buys bombs, or when it breaks our bank, and our military’s backs in order to finance illegal wars of choice against people who were never a threat to us in the first place.
What a joke.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Evan,
I probably won’t debate much longer. I do have to get some work done.
I just don’t think government will ever really solve any problems. I really pray we never get a universal health system like Barak or Hillary are advocating. It would be disastrous.
Really, I think the problem with health care is that right now we have a system that is part socialized, and that is causing costs to go through the roof. If you have a product that you give away for free or a very low cost to the end user, the demand and price always go up. It’s just economics.
I really think health insurance needs to be more like car insurance. People have car insurance to cover major costs, not things like oil changes or other minor repairs. Because most health insurance plans cover alomst everything, anywhere from checkups to major surgery, the price of everything goes up. It always does in third-party payer systems. Heck, if I’m not paying, give me two, doc…
Anyways, I don’t know how old you are, but if you’re young, you’ll probably become jaded like me by the time you’re 30.
Right now, even in my day job, I deal with dumb government regulations all the time. Building codes dictate to me how many light fixtures I can put in a room, or when lights have to be turned off. I guess the goverment knows best…
March 7th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Well, the military is at least one responsibility the federal government is charged with in the Constitution. Whether or not it’s always used correctly is another question.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
i’m 30-ish.
but i would point out that we actually spend more per capita on health insurance the way we’re doing it now than if it were guaranteed under some kind of government sponsored plan.
part of it has to do with the fact that the uninsured/underinsured don’t get the (much less expensive) preventive care they need.
as to the health insurance/car insurance idea: are you saying that some people deserve better health care than others, due to the thickness of their wallets?
if so, gross.
i have things to do, too…
March 7th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
also, wouldn’t a healthier population, with access to health care regardless of ability to pay, be freer to contribute to society, and thus prop-up the capitalist model all the more?
my stance isn’t an either-or. i’m just saying that there’s a difference between basic human needs and bottom-line business, and that they should never mix. compete ’till your heart’s content over who can build the best iPod-type-gadget for the cheapest, but don’t play roulette with peoples’ health.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Evan,
My point is that applying free-market principles to the health care industry would most likely bring total costs down, therefore making it available to more people. I’m not advocating a social Darwinism. I don’t see how any Christian can. I just don’t think we should look to the government to take responsibilty for what the church is called to do.
Anyway, I’m not angry at you or anything. I actually quite enjoy these discussions. It just seems after awhile they become circular.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
We’ve been applying free market principles to health care for decades…that’s what got us in that mess.
Okay, somebody has to hang up the phone first.
“No you hang up.”
“No. YOU hang up.”
“you.”
“you.”
etc.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
“i would suggest that part of the reason people don’t believe in government’s ability to work is that we’ve been electing people who don’t believe government works, who then appoint people to head government agencies who also don’t believe government works, and then when the government is asleep at the wheel when Hurricane Katrina hits, we can point and say “see? told ya! gubmint don’t work!â€
it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy and it’s such a scam. ”
Excellent point, break government then step back ans say, see I told you so.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I thought you all might like this:
Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should loose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.
Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark)
He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I haveâ€.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Evan and Jeff,
I’m interested in what you think the governments response should have been to Hurricane Katrina. How did the government fail? Genuine question…
March 7th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
We as Christians should look upon the eternal and not the temporal, and in doing we will see that the good soldier of Christ will not find himself entangled with the “affairs” of this world. I find it curious that the implication is because the “founding fathers” were mostly Christians that this means something spiritually. These Christians made sure immediately that no religion would be established, and the name “Jesus” is conspicuously absent from either the Declaration or the Constitution.
Politics continues to be a murky, humanistic attempt for sinful man to gain power through attacks, innuendo, resume padding, hollow promises, careful wording, obscene amounts of money, and an incredibly obvious carnal system that should repel spiritual believers and surely not draw them.
And I will reinstate my predication which I have also made on Scott and John’s blog which I enjoy, that the next president will be Hillary Clinton. And if you do not vote for her (as in Bill Clinton) you are voting against God’s will. That is if you believe God’s will is democracy.
Come out from among them and be ye separate and touch not the unclean thing.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Well, first off, Bush should have had a competent man in charge of FEMA and not a corporate buddy. Many of the issues with this administration is that a lot of people are in charge of positions that they are not qualified to handle. Secondly, Bush should have been a little more engaged during a time of crisis instead of vacationing on his ranch for 3 days before he actually got involved. I think those are 2 areas where competent leadership would have helped the Katrina situation
March 7th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
maybe they could have decided AGAINST toxic FEMA trailers. maybe they could have transported the ice to Louisiana and Mississippi instead of, um, Iowa or wherever it was.
maybe they could have made sure the money and planning were available to ensure the levees wouldn’t have broken in the first place!
maybe Bush, yeah, could have gotten involved on day one rather than waiting around, like he did with 9/11.
so many places…
that piece hits the nail on the head, Jeff.
i like that it specifically mentions the people who fought and DIED for the working standards we have in this country.
the unregulated free-market type always wants to mourn for the losses of the CEO’s (that haven’t even happened). well, guess what, the saying goes “a rising tide rises all ships.”
newsflash: the CEO’s aren’t the tide. they’re on their yachts. don’t worry. if workers have basic protections, if middle and lower-class people have guaranteed access to quality education and health care, the CEO’s will still be on their yachts.
March 7th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
WOW! Talk about sound bite war!!
March 7th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Aye - it’s like having DailyKos and FreeRep tossed at each other, with the truth as the only thing missing, since it resides somewhere between the poles…
March 7th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
LOL, AMEN, Chris!!
March 7th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Are you implying I’m a Freeper, Chris?
I do look at that site every now and then, but man, most of those people scare me. I don’t really consider myself that much of a right winger. I do kind of enjoy ticking off liberals, though. I also enjoy ticking off conservatives, though, as well.
Most of the time I let the leftist stuff slide (I even regularly stand up for Tony Campolo and Jim Wallis), but today, it was bugging me for some reason. Probably because tax day is coming up.
Oh well, life goes on…
March 7th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Maybe Phil and I are closer than we think because I am not a Daily Kos type but I certainly think the left is closer to reality than the right. I don’t agree with everything left but government needs to be there for “we the people” otherwise the gap between the haves and have not will continue to increase. All the while the evironment will get worst as well as the overall economy. Let’s say he is right of center and I(maybe even Evan) am/is left of center.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
yeah, i’m pretty leftie, and proud of it.
that Freeper place is weird.
i’m not as much of a DailyKos person as i am a Wonkette person. Kos occasionally. (i’m talking about opinion stuff here). Slate. Vanity Fair (some of the only true investigative reporting left in the world). The Nation. the foreign press (stuff that doesn’t automatically assume an American bias is always a good thing)…
actually, i get my news from all over the place.
but yeah.
pretty leftie.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Evan,
I hate to admit it, but I actually find Wonkette pretty hilarious. Sometimes, it’s too vulgar, but I tend to like that style of humor.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
From here:
Personally, I’m right of center, not so much because of abortion, but primarily from a constitutional standpoint. It seems to me that the constitution is a guarantee of opportunity, not outcome, and that it is the church’s job to serve the poor, not the government…
As for health care, since I’ve got multiple touch-points into the system, I have to say that it’s the government’s interference that has made costs skyrocket, not free-market ones. I know far too many Canadian patients and doctors who come to the states for care (or to work) because of the whacked-out vagaries of the socialized medical system…
March 7th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
i don’t believe the government should factor in what the church might or might not do when dealing with basic human rights of its citizens.
as to Wonkette, Phil, if you like Wonkette, then you have a basic understanding of my personality, political and otherwise.
i’m actually thinking about applying to become one of their writers. maybe.
March 8th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I’m going to show my age here and I openly admit to being an “OF”. Getting back to the original topic of the podcast I think voting is a right earned by the blood of others. It comes with few qualifiers such as you have to be a naturalized citizen and not a convicted felon(of course not counting certain politcians). Once we have that right I think we have a duty to vote. It has nothing to do with being christian and I won’t offer up any Scripture to validate it. The mere act of voting has nothing to do with “lording” over someone or something. As christians I think we have a duty to occupy, by that I mean participate in the inner workings of our government. Again, not based on any Scripture, it’s just the way I was raised.
Over the years I’ve seen the presidential elections become more about social issues rather than what I was taught so many years ago by my sociology teachers.We elect a president based on four issues. Foreign policy, his(or her) ability to offer up judicial appointments. He is to be the “commander and chief” of the military and last, his power of veto in order to maintain balance between the house and senate and we the people. In my mind there is a fifth point but, right now this old brain can’t cough it up at the moment, mebbe there is some other “OF” out there has it. At best, on social issues, the president can only suggest. Social issues come about via the house and senate.
I’m old enought to remember John Kennedy saying, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what what YOU can do for your country.”. We’ve come a LONG way since those words were spoken. By today’s standards, Kennedy would be dubbed an ultra-conservative.
The church gave up many of it’s social duties to the government. It was a slow process and as each year passed more and more was given up.
March 8th, 2008 at 10:32 am
The problem is that is the things that fall into the category of “rights” seems to be ever-expanding. The people who drafted the Constitution never would have thought of things like education, health care, clean water, etc. as rights. To them rights were not given by the government. They were more freedoms granted by God that the government was supposed to protect. That was why there was orginally some resistance to the Bill of Rights. Madison didn’t want to give the impression that rights were actually granted by the federal government.
The government should do things that allow things like an affordable health care and education system to thrive, and I think it should make sure laws are in place that work against systems that are discriminatory against certain groups of people. As far the government providing these things goes, I think that the private sector does a lot better job in actaully getting the tasks done.
March 8th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
okay, sure, but….
the founding fathers weren’t perfect. too often we beatify these men who were just men, trying to make a better way. they didn’t create the bestest country in the world ever, end of story, period. arguably, a late 18th century mentality doesn’t exactly fit with a 21st century reality.
their “health care” was rudimentary at best, and as such, they couldn’t possibly conceive of what an acceptable standard for health care would be today. we learn. we grow. back in those days, women died in childbirth all the time and if you got sick, well, that sucks.
and i don’t buy the “freedoms granted by God” idea for one second. yes, God was mentioned a couple of times here and there, but as a nation, we have to get beyond this idea that God “bequeathed” us anything, at least from a national perspective. God doesn’t prefer the United States. but it’s really a circular point anyway: if the federal government is supposed to “protect God-given rights,” then, from a governmental perspective, that’s not any different from “granting” the rights, per se.
and, as i said, i’d hate to have to rely on the church to maybe do something to help me, you know, if they had the time. seriously.
as to the second part…you have an arguable point, but the problem that always comes up is that the same exact people who treat “socialized medicine” as a big scary monster hiding under the bed ALSO rail against governmental regulation of the private sector. i’d suggest that if the government stepped up and did its job and regulated the hell out of the private sector, then we wouldn’t have the economic problems we’re facing, at least not to the same degree.
all you have to do is look at the current banking crisis to see that. and what’s the gubmint doing now? trying to help poor poor big bidness out of the bed they made for themselves by doling out billions of dollars in worthless loans (which they accomplished by outright lying to the people they gave them to), then selling said worthless loans in bundles to hedge fund barons and the like, and as usual in big bidness, they all crossed their fingers and lined their coffers while it lasted, and now yet again, there they are, hat in hand, looking for a bail-out from the gubmint.
and liberals are supposed to be the ones looking for hand-outs.
puh.
leeze.
March 8th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Evan,
I don’t think the government should be in the business of bailing out either party who make unwise financial decisions when it comes to loans. As far as I’m concerned a company who gives a $300,000 mortgage to someone who makes $25,000 a year made it’s own bed. It shouldn’t be up to taxpayers to pay for their poor money management.
Also, I’m not against all government regulation. Some of it is good and makes sense. Things like building codes, anti-discrimination laws, and food safety laws make perfect sense. Where it starts becoming an issue when the government starts using its to take away freedoms because politicians think they know best. In California, laws have been passed that will make it mandatory for all private residences to be handicapped accessible. There’s a good chance these types of laws will be moving to other states as well. It’s idiotic. I could point to another dozen or so similar things.
I don’t believe America is or ever was a Christian nation. A lot of the people who founded the country were operating under a false notion of divine mandate. That doesn’t mean they didn’t set some things up in the Constitution that were very wise. And, supposedly, we are still governed by the Constitution. Yet a lot of the things the federal government is involved with right now are not even talked about at all in the Constitution.
I still wouldn’t consider health care a right, per se. It’s a good thing. It’s necessary, and we should try to find solutions that make it available to as many people as possible. But I don’t see it as a right. For one thing, who defines what basic health care is? What lengths do we go to for each person? When health care becomes an issue controlled by the feds, a politician answers these questions. I really don’t want that.
I see abortion as a human rights issue, though. Abortion is one person taking the life of another because of convenience. In cases of a woman getting pregant, excluding rape (which is a pretty low number, like less than 1%), the people who engaged in sex already chose to give up their right to choose. They should live with the consequences. I’m not saying we need to treat them harshly, but I do think that abortion should not be a legal option. Now, I don’t think that the legal avenue is the best way to pursue this issue, but I’m just giving this as an example of something I would consider a human rights issue.
March 8th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
i think we just fundamentally disagree here. i think, regardless of how it’s achieved, though government regulation of private health insurance plus a government programme for those who can’t afford it, or whether by a full overhaul of the system bringing it under governmental purview, health care is something that should be guaranteed to all, regardless of circumstances. to say that some are not as entitled to the “life” or “pursuit of happiness” part due to their income? well, that’s un-American, as far as i’m concerned.
that would be great, except that many of the people who end up pregnant do so because they’re uneducated on the basics of sex, and/or they don’t have the protection they need. we can thank abstinence-only education for some of this, since people, particularly teenagers, are going to have sex, whether we like it or not, regardless of how they’re raised. the lack of education was striking to me back in high school when two kids in a Southern Baptist-influenced Bible study i was in ended up making a baby, because they were so uneducated about sex in general that they bought into a certain prevalent myth…”you can’t get pregnant if X.” yeah, you can, and look! you did.
as to whether it’s a legal option or not, it doesn’t matter. people will still get them. it’s kinda like how drugs aren’t legal…yet no person in this country is more than two or three degrees from getting whatever they want, whether they realize it or not. or, if they live close enough, they can just hop to Canada. the open secret about abortion is that, even among the people who rail against it from a moral perspective, they still quietly visit the Planned Parenthood when it’s their kid much of the time. i know this from experience.
i’ve always said that if we want to actually address the abortion issue, we can’t do it from a moral perspective. it exists, and it will always exist. we have to address the root causes that lead people into that waiting room to have their unwanted pregnancies terminated.
March 8th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Well, I don’t think either of us is going to change the other’s mind, so we will have to agree to disagree.
One last thing, I would say is that do agree with you that we need to address the root cause of abortion. The thing I would say is that it is a moral and spiritual issue at the root. That is why the law will never be able to really deal with it.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
but the data show that it’s an economic and education root…
i think part of the problem is that there’s this myth among pro-lifers that large numbers of people just “casually” get abortions.
sure, there are those who don’t think much of it, but i would suggest that for the majority of people who do it, it’s a heartwrenching decision.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
I’m sure it is. That doesn’t make it any less heinous. I feel sympathy toward those who have had abortions. I will extend mercy to them, and I believe God does as well.
I just have a hard time believing that anyone old enough to have sex doesn’t realize that pregnancy is a possibility. I’m sure there are some cases, but overall, education isn’t a silver bullet either. There isn’t one. I’m not against sex education. I don’t think it has to be abstinence-only, but I don’t think it needs to glorify pre-marital sex either.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
oh, they realize it, but you have to remember being a teenager, and the utter lack of maturity that it entails, combined with the insane rush of hormones that cause people to be phenomenally stupid for the better part of a decade of their lives.
you’re right that there’s not a silver bullet, but the thing with the education is that kids need to know EXACTLY how to prevent pregnancy. (and that includes more than “don’t have sex.” because some of them are going to.)
this is just an isolated example, but i alluded to the Christian kids above who got pregnant when i was in HS. obviously their parents never took the time, because they probably thought “well, surely, MY kids aren’t doing this, i mean, we’re strong Christians! and the Bible study meets at our house all the time!” well, kids can get caught up in myths like “well, it’s not sex if X.” ” you can’t get pregnant if Y.” and as you well know, i’m sure, when kids are responsible for teaching kids, it’s the blind leading the blind.
these two didn’t have an abortion, by the way. but some in the same situation do.
i just think that, as a society, we need to make available to people ALL of the education they might need, and ALL of the “implements” they might use, if they find themselves in a situation where, “i was planning to wait for marriage, but WHEEEE!”
oops. pregnant.
y’know?
and i agree that abortion is heinous.
that’s another one of the myths i think has taken hold, perhaps partly due to some of the tactics of activists on the pro-choice side of things: i think you’d be hard pressed to find somebody (who is, like, sane) who would actually say, “oh, abortion? i love abortion!”
March 8th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
good points evan. as we’ve discussed this, you know my thoughts (which i’m not comfortable with putting out here for the whole world to see… or at least all 15 of you)
however, I would say (not to pull the “I’m a woman” card) that becoming pregnant in not the best circumstances (even while married!) as made the issue of abortion look way different to me. Not that I’m saying “Hooray! Abortion!” but it’s one thing to say it’s a spiritual/moral subject when you’re not pregnant… and a whole other one to say it is an economic issue when you’re actually pregnant and scared out of your mind.
March 8th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
well, i was kinda addressing one part of the issue…
but you know that
March 10th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Let’s just get a couple of things straight:
1. Whether or not you thing the Constitution is relevant, is irrelevant. As far as founding documents go, it’s pretty freaking perfect. Not because it covers ever single possible problem the country could face, but because it grants rights to the people to amend it if necessary.
2. “Basic Human Rights” is the most oft-used, and scarcely understood principles ever concocted. Please stop claiming that everything under the sun is a basic human right.
3. Republicans aren’t conservatives. Don’t for a minute think that pointing the finger at GWB and saying “he does it too” works as an argument for liberalism. Republicans are slightly more conservative than Democrats, but only slightly.
4. State government is the primary intended solution to most problems. The federal government was intentionally given limited power.
5. Taxes are the most modern iteration of Robin Hood pragmatism. Taxing for the purposed of funding a government function is fine. Taxing in order to simply give the money back out is not fine.
6. Rights don’t change with the centuries. If you didn’t have the right to clean water in 1800, then you don’t have the right to clean water in 2008. As far as the Constitution is concerned, you don’t have the right to water at all, just the freedom to go find it.
7. People are lazy by nature. Big government always makes them lazier.
8. There will be some who cannot work, and therefore cannot help themselves. We have individual, moral responsibilities to help them. Contrary to what was said earlier, it’s an oxymoron to say “We have a moral responsibility to steal from those who have, and give to those who have not”.
9. How much good could you do if you had 1/3 more money in your paycheck? Who do you trust more to do good with that money, you or the government?
10. Military spending is overblown. We maintain a half-trillion dollar per year military budget (plus the war), and it needs to stop. Many liberals say we need to cut that back and spend it at home, but I say we need to cut back period. No need to spend that money at all. Just give it back to the people who paid it.
Finally, if any liberals think we are in any position to spend any more money on any new programs, just know that we have a 9.4 trillion dollar national debt. You don’t buy new things until you pay off the things you already have.
Please stop playing games with other people’s money.
March 10th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Nathan, relax, you’ll get another headache. Have faith, man, the devil is well able to operate his government. Estimated cost for this years politics=
Billions with an “s”. There’s a real sleek system!
BTW - The National Treasure movie doesn’t reveal to you one startling fact about the Declaration of Independence. It wasn’t written by Jefferson, it was written by Maureen Dowd’s ancestors!
March 10th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Rick,
Headache’s gone … thank the Lord! You can pray, I will too. But I’m gonna do something about America. Faith and action, ya know?
March 10th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Does anyone remember the Three Stooges episode when they were plumbers and in fixing the shower leak they just added pipe to the leak?
Politics in action, much pipe adding, same old leak.
March 10th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Rick,
The founders could have said that too … and there would have been no Declaration of Independence, no Constitution, and no America. The world would most likely be run by competing tyrants today if the founders and revolutionaries hadn’t taken action.
March 10th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Unless there was a God who could do anything.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
why ever leave the house then? why not just sit inside a pray all day? in fact, why even respond to me? if God wanted me to not be so passionate about this subject, he COULD after all just correct me Himself, right?
You sound very Calvinistic for an Armenian, Rick