Framing My Comments
I responded to a local business survey recently—the questions related to how the current political leadership was impacting business in our area. One of the questions asked was about political affiliation. While I am a registered Republican, I did not check that box. Instead, I checked other and then wrote out what I look for in a candidate.
This morning, I read a report that allowed me to address the Court’s decision in the context of the contemporary political context. It seems that the subsequent two election cycles will determine the next phase of American history as when President Reagan and President Obama were elected. Reagan set America on a path of recovery toward greatness, and Obama redirected it to a global submission.
Living Example of Cultural Confusion
Stacy Abrams has found it convenient to shift her views on abortion by making it a solely religious concern rather than a Constitutional crisis. “I understand the sincere concerns. But those are religious concerns, or often concerns driven by personal morality,” Abrams said in a recent CNN interview. It would be logical to view this shift as a means of acquiring all those pro-abortion votes in the fall.
This shift, however, is ill-conceived on several levels. Level one is that abortion never was a Constitutional right; it was a contrived right imposed upon the Constitution by a progressive court that treated the Constitution as a living document to be modified by a changing culture. If the historical document is not interpreted grammatically and historically, then we no longer have a viable Constitution to provide political and social structure. We become a nation of chaos and begin drifting into barbarianism.
Second, while she may garner some votes from the pro-abortion crowd, she will turn away many of those who supported her in the past.
Third, she will strengthen her far-left Democratic support but will also lose the moderate Democratic populace who are tending more and more to the right, particularly in the South.
Fourth, she will alienate the many who will be offended by her making religion, in this case, synonymous with Christianity, the fall guy for the Court’s decision. Now suddenly, Christianity is at odds with the Constitution.
Fifth, the claim that, in the words of President Biden, “this poor woman will not be forced to carry this child to term” is not valid. This decision of the Supreme Court does not end abortion. It simply says that it is not a right that can be inserted into the Bill of Rights. Every state can now determine by law if an abortion will be legal in that state.
Obviously, I am pro-life. However, as extremely important as stopping abortion is, my concern is much more significant and enfolds the abortion issue. The larger issue is this. Will the Court interpret the Constitution grammatically and historically or progressively and culturally?
Another SCOTUS Decision Impacted by Cultural
Friday the House followed the Senate precedence of the previous night. An effort of Congress to stop gun violence. “Lives will be saved,” President Joe Biden touted the bill at a Saturday signing ceremony. A rather incongruent comment from one who in the past two days has bemoaned the Court’s decision to cease the killing of millions of children. Logic is defied.
Along with gun restrictions and granting government power to confiscate a gun from mentally disturbed folks, the legislation allows most of its $13 billion budget to be directed towards mental health programs and assisting schools already victims of shootings
What will the 13 billion do?
Like many of such bills, as Nancy Pelosi taught us, Congress had to pass it for us to find out what the law included. The two items mentioned, school assistance and mental health, are the two tracks that rode the bill into existence. But how much goes to each and how will the mental health portion be spent will be interesting to see.
Several years ago, I was invited to present lectures to a group of educators in an Eastern European country on the subject of “Why are young people have not traditional morals and ethics?” These educators were gravely concerned with the up-and-coming generation. I could address the root issues from a theological frame of reference and then suggest to the educators to utilize those principles to discern the immediate cultural contributors.
However, the reality is that it will cost the taxpayers 13 billion, yes 13 billion to attempt to address the social and mental health concerns. And what will it do? It will be spent on social workers and counselors who will attempt to interdict the results of poor or no parenting. It will be spent attempting to instill cultural values and ethics, personal self-control and esteem, and a desire to be self-supporting, and a contributor to society. These are fundamental dimensions of life that parents (mother and father) are responsible to pass from one generation to another in a context of love and affection.
So, what is the Christian to do?
- Be sure you are walking in the light as He is in the light (I John 1)
- Be sure you are living what you profess (Matthew 5:16)
- Be sure you are loving your spouse (Ephesians 5:22-32, I Peter 3:1-10)
- Be sure you are loving, teaching, and modeling for your children from birth to your home-going (summed up well in Deuteronomy 6:1-10)
- Be sure to be fulfilling Matthew 2:18-20—it should be a conscious choice daily
- Be sure to listen to your neighbor and offer guidance and counsel (Rom 15:14)