Yet More of the "New Tolerance"

-
eHarmony has been forced (coerced, pressured) to make matches for gay couples.

How long until all religious organizations must provide for gay couples?

Doesn't it bother you that religious organizations that have as part of their belief system the opposition to gay relationships are more and more forced (coerced, pressured) to compromise their beliefs and accomodate the gay lifestyle, or refuse and face lawsuits?

What organization will be free from this coersion (force, pressure)? Will churches be forced (coerced, pressured) to marry gay couples or face lawsuits and possibly lose their non-profit status?

And if the gay community is successful at forcing (coercing, pressuring) religious organizations to compromise on this tenant of their belief system in order to stay in business, what other groups will then be embolded to force (coerce, pressure) religious organization to compromise other tenants of their beliefs? Will religious organization be forced to completely drop all of their convictions in the face of political correctness and lawsuits?

Where will all this end?

Click here <-- to see the article about eHarmony.
-

What Does 'Conservative' and 'Liberal' Mean, Anyway?

-
I've been in the habit of using the terms "Conservative" and "Liberal" on this site. As I have a general idea of what they mean, I haven't bothered to actually define them. But I have had some comments from a few individuals at various times that the terms are just labels and don't necessarily convey ideas accurately. So, I thought I would try to actually define them. I went out to the net to try to find a straighforward definition of each one and I actually had a hard time. It seems that what's out there gets lost in a host of different shades, permutations, histories, etc. After some considerable searching, I found the following definitions that fit most succinctly with my personal view.:

Found at IRCPolitics.org
Conservative - Represented by the Republican party, or political Right. One who generally favors economic liberty, free markets, private property, privatization of business and lower taxes. They claim to want less, or limited Government. They prefer personal freedoms over equality and they support a strong national defense. Their champion is probably Ronald Reagan.

Liberal - Represented by the Democrat party, or the political Left. A Liberal is one who generally leans towards Democratic Socialism and even some degree of Marxism. They support the welfare state, Social Security and Socialized Healthcare. They believe that by raising taxes, and redistributing wealth, Government can eliminate the social inequalities they abhor. Their champion is probably Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I found the above definition of liberal to be a little extreme. I thing the key terms of this are "leans toward." I don't consider liberalism full-fledged Socialism or Marxism, but I would say that liberal thinking and beliefs is a strong bridge toward those things.

Ironically, I found the Wikipedia definition of liberalism to sound rather conservative to my ears:

Liberalism is a broad class of political philosophies that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.

Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. Within liberalism there are various streams of thought which compete over the use of the term "liberal" and may propose very different policies, but they are generally united by their support for a number of principles, including freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, an individual's right to private property, free markets, and a transparent system of government. All liberals, as well as some adherents of other political ideologies, support some variant of the form of government known as liberal democracy, with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law.

Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment and rejected many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, established religion, and economic protectionism. Liberals argued that economic systems based on free markets are more efficient and generate more prosperity.

The first modern liberal state was the United States of America, founded on the principle that "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.


Well, after that, I had to look up conservatism on Wikipedia and here's what I found for that:


Conservatism is a political and social term whose meaning has changed in different countries and time periods, but which usually indicates support for the status quo or the status quo ante. In Western politics, conservatism refers to the school of thought started by Edmund Burke and similar thinkers. Scholar R.J. White once put it this way:

"To put conservatism in a bottle with a label is like trying to liquify the atmosphere … The difficulty arises from the nature of the thing. For conservatism is less a political doctrine than a habit of mind, a mode of feeling, a way of living."

Russell Kirk considered conservatism "the negation of ideology".

Conservative political parties have diverse views. For instance, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, the Conservative Party in Britain, and the Liberal Party of Australia are all major conservative parties with varying positions.

Cultural conservatism is a philosophy that supports preservation of the heritage of a nation or culture.

To me, that definition is pretty off. To me, conservatism is not a vague concept, neither is it a "negation of ideology." And it's much more than just to preserve what once was, although that is a part of it. But preserving what was just for the sake of preserving it is not the point. The point of preserving what was is to generally think that what was had a lot of things about it that are better than what we currently see. However, we need to have a basis for deciding what to preserve. To me, the reason to preserve things is because things were generally more conservative before than what they are now.

So, how would I define conservatism and liberalism?

Conservatism: The belief that government has a vital, but limited role to play in our society. Government is to provide for a common defense and an orderly society. The belief that individual freedom and liberty are worth defending, both domestically and internationally. The belief that for freedom to survive, it must rest on a moral and religious foundation. The belief that the free markets are the best way to lift up the general standard of living in a country.

Liberalism: (I actually had a hard time defining it, so this is more of what I see it as, my observations, than an actual definition, per se. I would be very interested to see what others say is the definition of liberalism.) I see current liberalism as driven by an over-riding sense of injustice in society. As such, it is the belief that government must provide for the equality of all. Government is generally regarded as favorable and should grow to encompass more programs to help more people. I see current liberalism as tending toward more secularism, more centralization of power, more government intervention on behalf of the "little guy."

So there it is. Maybe, this will help us get beyond just the labels and actually talk about what, specifically, we mean by these things.
-

"To Provide For the Common Defense"

-
You know, even I would sometimes get tired of hearing conservatives go on and on about how our national security is the most important thing. I’ve often gotten tired of that, thinking, “Yeah, yeah, I get the point. I know.”

But watching this video really puts it in perspective. Did you know that, right now, in as little as 33 minutes, a country can hit the US with a ballistic missile? I didn’t know that. And if that missile is armed with a nuclear warhead, we’re toast!

All our arguments over policy, all our disagreements over liberal or conservative ideas will be for nothing if our country is not protected. We MUST protect our country first! Then, and only then, are we safe to have our debates over how we should run our country.

This video is a must-see. And it’s just the “trailer” to the real movie coming out in February.

If you care about the safety of our country, please become well-informed, watch this video, and hold our leaders accountable!

Click here <--to watch the video.
-

The Surge in Iraq Worked

-
The Surge Worked. <-- Good video witness of that fact.
-

Proposition 8 is Becoming a Flashpoint

-
More of the "new tolerance" on display.

It seems that the current front in our cultural conflict right now is in California with the passage Proposition 8.

Below is a video that shows a pro-gay protest. An elderly lady and a couple of guys approach the group with a large cross. Almost immediately, the group of protestors take the cross and stomp on it, push the lady around a bit, and completely drown out the lady.

Yes, she may have been just trying to bait them, but they sure had no hesitation in taking the bait. Not a pretty scene at all.

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

Palin Speaks at Governor's Conference

-
Governor Sarah Palin speaks to other governors.

She says we need to stop being addicted to "OPM" - Other People's Money. (At about 5:45 in the video)

She's great!

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

The New "Tolerance"

-
So, there's this 8th grade girl who conducts an experiment just before the election. She wants to see what the reactions of her school would be if she wore two different shirts.

The first day, she wears a shirt that says "McCain Girl." The reaction was, shall we say, less than totally inclusive. There were people calling her stupid and saying that she should die. Very nice.

The next day, she wears a shirt that says "Obama Girl." Guess what? The reaction the next day was totally different.

You really have to read the whole story. Political correctness and "tolerance" have turned even a high school into a very intolerant place. I think it only gets worse when you get to college.

I wonder where this is all going?

Click here <-- to read the whole story
-

What's Your Worldview?

-

Sometimes, it seems that our beliefs are so disconnected from everyday reality, that they don't really matter.

Well, they do.

Here's an example from everyday life - riding a bus - where the beliefs of Christians are challenged. How many of us know people who may be wobbly on the issue of works vs. grace? How many are already in doubt as to the existence of God?

Although the Humanist group behind this story claims to not be trying to "change minds about a deity," they do say they are trying to "plant a seed."

Christians aren't the only ones planting seeds of thought in our culture.

Click here <--to see the story.
-

Christian Compromise on Abortion

-
BreakPoint has a post on the movie "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas." Within that post is a pretty scathing indictment of Christians who compromised on abortion. Here's the quote:

"But I think everybody needs to see it. ESPECIALLY this week when so many Christians have seen their way to compromising with the greatest social evil of our day - abortion. Our people voted to overlook a little thing like the slaughter of the unborn, because of other considerations like economic prosperity, climate change and the desire to have all the other nations in the world like us again."

I think the point is that abortion is no less of a holocost than what occurred during WWII. And, just like in Germany, it is perpetuated by people who choose to minimize it, look the other way, rationalize it, and/or justify it.

As Christians, what is our response to abortion? What should our response be? Are those two things the same? If not, why not?
-

Waiting and Watching

-
Prior to the election, I was involved in several debates with people who were strong Obama supporters. However, since the election, our debates have basically stopped. I think we all know that Obama won and we’re just waiting to see what he will do and what will happen. I think that once events start happening during his administration, the debates will start up again.

I’m looking forward to that time because:

• I really enjoy the back and forth of debate
• I relish the opportunity to sharpen my ideas and ability to articulate them
• I’m always hopeful of actually helping someone to come closer to a conservative point of view

Until then, I'll be here: waiting and watching.

-

Fight FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)

-
If you are against the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), then sign the petition.

Click here <-- to sign the petition.
-

How Will Things Go for Obama?

-
Over this last week, I've been trying to get used to the idea of an Obama presidency. As I’ve emotionally recovered, I’ve been able to think a little clearer (at least I think so.). As I’ve thought about it, I’ve tried to envision what I think is a likely scenario for these next 4 years.

From my conservative perspective, I basically think things will look really good for about 6 months, and then everything will fall apart.

I really think Obama’s domestic agenda will be harmful to our country. His refusal to allow domestic oil drilling, his insistence on raising taxes, his cap-and-trade proposals among other things will cause a net effect of rising unemployment, rising interest rates, and lower consumer spending. Companies will have to scale back in the face of all of this. The recession will be extended and deepened.

I think his foreign agenda will not be good as well. I think aggressive countries (Russia, Venezuela, Iran, etc.) will try to push to see what the limits are of our new administration. I also think Obama will tend to react in such a way that will only encourage further aggression. The world will become more volatile and will have multiple hotspots. I’m not sure about Iraq. I’m hoping that he will not withdraw troops too soon. But I’m worried that he will be pressured to try to expedite it and if that happens, I foresee escalated violence breaking out there as well.

I think that by the end of summer 2009, Obama will be totally embroiled in trying to fight fires both domestically and abroad and will be pretty ineffective at that point.

In addition, I think his stance on social issues are harmful. I think his radical stance on Abortion will be one of the biggest things that really drives Christians away from him.

From a purely political point of view, these bad things would be good for the Republican and conservative causes. The American people will once again swing back towards the right and elect more conservative republicans in 2010 and possibly 2012 as well. But it’s just really sad to me that it seems like it takes disasters occurring for the other side to be able to make any progress in advancing their ideas.

From a personal perspective, I really hope I’m wrong about these bad things happening. I really hope that Obama can do a lot of good things for our country. But I’m doubtful.
-

When Bad Things Happen

-
I remember back when Bush was president, one of the things that sometimes happened was that the Democrats and media seemed to oppose him on everything. One aspect of that stood out to me in particular: when things were going well (i.e. the surge was working, the economy was good, etc.), they would oppose him about those things and seemed to even hope that bad things would happen just to prove that Bush was wrong. It seemed that when the war went badly, or the economy tanked, they were so enthusiastic about trying to prove Bush was wrong that it looked like they were actually happy that bad things happened. It gave them an opportunity to bash Bush.

Well, I've recently noticed a very interesting dynamic within myself. Now that Obama is going to be the president, I actually noticed myself having some feelings that were very similar. When the stock market went down the first two days after Obama was elected, I found myself reacting differently than I had in the past. Instead of feeling upset and sad about it, I found myself feeling vindicated - as if just because Obama is going to be the president, all bad things are now his fault.*

I condemn that in myself just as I condemned that when it looked like Democrats did that to Bush.

I think it's going to be VERY interesting having a president in office that I oppose. How many times am I going to catch myself doing the same things I opposed when Bush was president? How many times will the arguments I used against others need to be applied to myself? I think this will be a very enlightening and growing experience. Since I recognized things I didn't like about people's reactions to Bush, will I be able to not indulge in the same things now that Obama will be our president?

I pray that the answer will be "Yes." But I know myself well enough to know that it will not be smooth sailing. But I think it's an exercise worth pursuing. I think it's a very worthy goal to avoid acting in the same way as some of those I opposed, now that the situations are reversed.

If anyone reading this ever sees me doing things like that, can you let me know? I would really appreciate it.

(*I feel a need to clarify a point here. I think it's perfectly legitimate to oppose a policy or decision that I don't agree with. And if/when there are bad things that happen as a direct result of things he's done, that's fair game to talk about as well. These are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the tendency to hope, to wish, to yearn for bad things to happen just to say "Aha! See? I told you so. He's wrong." That is not right. One should never hope for bad things to happen to anyone.)
-

Roskam Wins!

-
One bright spot for Illinois conservatives is Peter Roskam. He won his district by 16% - an excellent showing in this state, in this Democratic year.

Click here <-- to listen to his victory acceptance speech.
-

What now?

-
Well, the election is over and we have a new president-elect: Barack Obama.

As a conservative, I did everything in my power and within my sphere of influence to fight against his presidency and for McCain’s victory. My focus, especially, in the final weeks, was very narrow and concentrated on the person and character of Obama.

But that person is now elected to office.

So what will this conservative Christian do now?

I will concentrate on ideas. I really don’t want to become a bitter contrarian who only criticizes, analyzes, and tears apart every word, action, and motive of the guy I didn’t support. He’s president now (technically, not until January 20th, but you know what I mean). In every way that does not contradict my conscience, I will endeavor to respect and support the President.

However, I will continue to focus on trying to persuade, broadcast, and propagate both conservative and Christian ideas. I personally believe there is a great deal of overlap between the two and I hope to expound upon the links between conservative thought and Christian thought. Even though I don’t have it all thought out, my gut leads me to think that conservative thought is actually a natural extension of Christian thought. I would very much like to explore that theory.

As such, my primary audience is other Christians with whom I do not agree. I’m really interested in how our Christian beliefs get translated into political beliefs and actions and why they are so often on divergent paths. I hope to trace those paths and pinpoint the area(s) of divergence and camp out at those very spots.

My hope is that by concentrating on that area, we can discover more deeply what the truth is. In areas where I feel I am correct, I hope to be able to persuade and clearly articulate my views and bring others to those ideas as well. In the places where I am incorrect, I want to be as open and honest and receptive to change and growth as I can be. Just as I am painfully aware of how difficult it is for me to acknowledge my faults and change my thinking, I am aware of that tendency in others as well. There is no illusion here of a wholesale migration of “liberal Christians” to the conservative Christian viewpoint. Neither should there be an illusion of my swift and painless movement to more liberal ideas.

But, I do believe that this is a worthy discussion to have. I do believe that there is hope for greater unity among Christians in all areas of life, including political. That is my particular focus. This unity is not achieved through blind adherence to ideas. It’s achieved through deliberation, discussion, debate, and dialogue. I also believe that personal and world events will contribute their fair share of persuasion to the discussion.

In the end, my vision is for a body of Christ that is in much more agreement on a much wider and deeper scale than what we currently see. That, contrary to what our culture may say, is a good thing. When the Church is in greater agreement, we are then in a much better place to make a positive impact on our culture at large. That is really what this is all about. I’m not out just to prove that "I’m right and you’re wrong." I’m out to bring about greater unity, not through avoiding conflict, but through embracing it as the path to a hard-fought unity based on a firm foundation of truth discovered and articulated through our sweat and blood.

Please, whether you agree with me or not, join me on this mission. I’d love your company.
-

Congratulations on the Obama Victory

-
On this day, I wanted to follow the example of John McCain and give my congratulations to Obama and all of those who support him on his victory last night.

Tomorrow, we'll tussle and debate some more, but for now: Job well done.
-

The Invisible and Forgotten in Chicago

-
This is powerful.

More of Obama's legacy from Chicago.

Click here <-- to watch how Obama handled things while a State Senator in Chicago.
-

Go to McD's Again!

-
From Concerned Christian Americans:

McDonalds Straightens Up and Fries Right

Because the McDonald’s boycott by American Family Association has been so successful, McDonalds has now told AFA that they will remain neutral in the culture war over marriage. As a result AFA has stopped their McDonald’s boycott, which began in May, after McDonalds joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

McDonald’s Vice President Richard Ellis has resigned from his seat on the board of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, and no one from McDonalds will be replacing him there. McDonalds has also stated that when their membership in the NGLCC ends in December, they will not be renewing it.

An email to the McDonald’s franchise owners, stated: “It is our policy not to be involved in political and social issues. McDonalds remains neutral on same-sex marriage or any ‘homosexual agenda’ as defined by the American Family Association. It would be appropriate to thank your local McDonalds manager for the change in policy by McDonalds. Congratulations to Donald Wildman and the American Family Association for their effective efforts. If you would like to send a note of thanks to the American Family Association, their address is P.O. Drawer 2440, Tupelo, MS, 38803.
-

Still Undecided?

-
Still can't make up your mind? Maybe this will help.

Click here <-- just in case you're still undecided about Obama.

(I know, I know. I just said I was burned out and just waiting and watching. But seeing these things makes me want to shout from the rooftops and sound the trumpet and blow the whistle - DON'T VOTE FOR OBAMA! VOTE MCCAIN!)
-

Holding My Breath

-
I know it's been a little light on the postings around here lately. I'm basically in the hold-my-breath-wait-for-the-results-to-come-in mode and I'm also a little burned out.

I'll be posting more regularly after the election.

Until then, GO VOTE!
-

McCain on Saturday Night Live

-
Hilarious!

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-