Most well intentioned and zealous, conservative Christians get their claws out when I say I am for Obama. They just assume that I am pro-death and that I cackle in glee each time I cruise around in my hybrid-VW upholstered in baby flesh.
Barf.
So let me offer a proufound and deeply sincere "thank you" to you and all my fellow bloggers and friends who have not tread this path. Contrary to the conclusions of some, I am not just "pro-life." I am extremely pro-life. But I tend to interpret "life" in ways that not only incorporate the yet-to-be-born, but also as the already-born and the non-human life that we happen to share this planet with. I just don't understand how anyone can be "pro-life" without being pro-human, pro-peace and pro-environment too. Abortion is terrible, and I hate it, but I also hate unjust war, disregard for human rights and this environmental suicide-machine that we continue to feed in ignorant bliss.
Unfortunately, in our system, picking a president seems to be more about choosing the lesser of 2 evils than electing a man or woman who we can truly support with 100%. For me, for this election, the lesser of the evils happens to be the Democratic candidates.
Tell me how you pick your president and what "pro-life" means to you.
in peace,
-CL
(most of these posts were originally imported from my Facebook note: "How Pro-Life are we really?" No user posts have been edited except for this initial description.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nice. I share that "pro (all) life" sentiment. I seem to be raising the same conflicts with some of my friends. We cannot be single issue voters. As great as that single issue may be, we neglect and damn an unfathomable number of others.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your stance on "pro-life" because we are called to be good stewards of all that God has given us. Life is important. Unfortunately, most people don't research the candidates enough to gauge who is the lesser of evils. Even with the research, how do we know the information that is presented is the truth. I am not accusing or pointing fingers, I am merely stating an observation I have made. Probably the most important thing that we need to do as responsible voters and "stewards" is research all the candidates and pray hard before you vote. Don't be afraid to listen with your spiritual ear and respond to what God has to say.
ReplyDeleteThanks Corbin. I've been really struggling with this issue and your brief note provided more insight for me. I haven't made a decision yet but am always thankful for insight from thoughtful Christ followers.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you brother!
ReplyDeleteI'M NO LEGAL EXPERT, but...
ReplyDeleteAn interesting point was raised when I was listening to NPR recently. The most significant responsibility of the President of the United States is as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. As the chief of the Executive branch, the President's primary responsibility is in carrying out (executing) laws formed by Congress (legislature) and interpreted by the judicial branch. The President can recommend legislation, but cannot introduce it. The President can appoint justices, but can't issue verdicts himself. While the President can't declare war without the consent of Congress (Congress is the only branch that can declare war) historically, this Congressional declaration always comes at the request of the President.
This Congressional consent is lifted in conditions such as if the US were attacked, or were under immanent threat (sound familiar?), in which case the President can deploy the armed forces. As far as I understand, this can also be done with police actions or operations that are militaristic, but not a formally declared war.
There's a lot of overlap in the responsibilities of the 3 main branches of the government, and responsibilities can get muttled. However, the Commander-in-Chief responsibilities remain, and along with the heavy international relations responsibilities of the President and the ability to draft treaties, these seem to be the responsibilities in which the President receives the fewest checks and balances.
Obviously, I'm no expert, but regarding Corbin's commentary on the Pro-Life stances of the candidates, it seems to me that the most lives are at stake when it comes to war. After all, there will continue to be back-alley abortions, but there won't be any back-alley wars.
It's important to consider, then, in this election and others, who is most ready to shoulder this burden, listen to the American people, and as Bryce said, "listen with [their] spiritual ear" and do what is right.
Well said as usual, Corbin. I wasn't able to articulate these sentiments as well as you did when discussing my own support of Obama recently. Thanks for your openness and insight.
ReplyDelete-M
My dad and I discuss politics too. I wish he was as cordial as your friend... He thinks I'm literally supporting evil's push to control America when I state my support for Obama.
ReplyDeleteLike you, I am trying to balance the whole plank and not just look at a single issue. Like you, I am so tired of watching the rich destroy our planet in the name of progress. I'm also big on balancing the budget, and in the last 28 years only one President has led that effort and succeeded - a Democrat.
I don't look at the election as the lesser of two evils. I look at the policies and dreams of both sides and decide which one I prefer. Unless I run for President (hah!) I'll never be presented with a candidate that likes everything I like.
In supporting a candidate I lose on some issues that matter to me, but I gain on others. That's the nature of an election. I love kind debate, and I'm open to hearing more and even to changing my mind. Harsh debate tends to make me stand my ground even firmer no matter what is said.
My two cents worth (or three - sorry).
what...you've always been a left wing loon meat. HA!
ReplyDeleteThanks to everybody who has commented in on my note; I appreciate the intelligent input. -CL
ReplyDeleteThat's an interetsing perspective - one I haven't considered before. I think I like it. But I also look at what each candidate would do for the humans in the country.
ReplyDeleteFor example, if you have a communist running against a one-step-to-the-left-of-anarchist...the communist would want to tax you at like 80%, then implement mass redistributions of wealth; the almost-anarchist would want to tax everyone at a flat rate of .01% and probably eliminate many govenrment-run programs. both have their ups and downs, depending on your perspective, but you'd have to - as you have done - weigh the most important issues for you and decide on one.
now...we don't have these two extremes. but the principle is the same. obama tends to be more socialistic, while mccain is much more conservative (and not so libertarian i believe). so, depending on your economic and social beliefs, your choice would be quite different.
that being said, i am more of a libertarian, so i will go for the closest choice who's not crazy (ron paul) - john mccain. that's the great thing about this country though - we can all decide what's more important and act accordingly.
and just for the record, obama says he'll withdraw ALL troops from iraq in like 18 months or something if elected (regardless of progress there it seems). i'm not sure the military would like that very much, and i think that's a terrible idea. we stil have troops in germany and japan! maybe we shouldn't, but we sure helped them both turn around pretty quick to become two strong economies post-war.
ok, i may have wandered a bit, so i'll quit. good discussion!
B,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your gracious & articulate thoughts on the election. I appreciate your perspective, but I find your polarizing examples between antichrists and communists a bit overwrought. As you have said, the ACTUAL differences between the ACTUAL candidates are not nearly so extreme. I am curious as to how you define “socialism,” but a better thing for me to point out is that you are comparing apples and oranges here. “Socialism” is not the political opposite of “Conservatism” as you have tried to frame it. The opposite of socialistic is “capitalistic.”
“Conservative” (with regard to politics) is a term defined as “holding to traditional values and attitudes and cautious about innovation and change.” The specific set of beliefs, economic models & forms of government are somewhat irrelevant for a true conservative because the term merely means that they do not easily accept change (whatever that change may be from or to). In this sense we might have an extremely conservative Democrat, Republican, Maoist, Christian or atheist.
For the sake of argument though, let’s assume that McPalin is more of a capitalist than a socialist and that OBiden is slightly the reverse order of that. We need to assess the core values of socialism and capitalism. Most people, when they hear “socialism,” think former Soviet Union or Red China, and indeed these could be seen as extreme and unfortunate manifestations of socialism. However, on the other end of the socialist spectrum exists this crazy band of first century, Palestinian Jews & their rogue rabbi, Jesus. They seemed to operate under a pretty communal (dare I say communalist?) paradigm. In the pages of the Book of Acts, we find a church were money and other resources were collected and re-distributed “as they had need” (Acts 2:43-45). I do think that we should be reminded that “communism” has its etymological roots in the word “community.” Oh what a horrible idea! Don’t tell Joseph McCarthy’s ghost.
The problem, as has been repeatedly played out in human history ever since Marx, is that communism is extremely difficult to get off the ground, especially in the presence of (universal) human selfishness and unavoidable power differentials. The only way it can work is via love for others, and especially love for those who we do not know and may not ever even meet.
Capitalism, on the other hand, essentially says, “Forget everybody else, I am in this for ME.” It elevates personal benefit above all competing values. And it works great for those who are innovative and possess the privilege and resources to enslave it for their personal betterment. It breeds great wealth for such individuals and the nations in which they reside (think tax base). This is perhaps a slightly unfair judgment on how our own nation operates, but capitalism IS the order of the land, and we press it to its extreme advantage, usually at the expense of other people, nations and the environment too. But if you have ever served at a homeless shelter, lived close to an oil refinery or been to the barrios of a 3rd world nation, then you have seen the gross inequalities that exist on our little planet and who/what suffers to perpetuate the personal, conspicuous and luxurious consumption of others.
Which one of these models best represents how Christians should live?
-Corb
Iraq: I agree that Iraq is a quagmire and there are no easy answers here. As for what the “military” likes, I would think that it would prefer not to get fed to the meat grinder for no legitimate reason other than to save face for its so-called Commander in Chief who, unlike the servicemen and women he’s toyed with, gets to go back home come presidential inauguration day 2009.
ReplyDeleteWe were sold on the lie for war that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. They didn’t.
Then we were told that Al Qaeda had roots in Iraq. They didn’t (at least not before the US invasion of that country).
In the meantime, the US fired the entire Iraqi army and government (which were the nation’s largest employers), neglected to give them new jobs and didn’t take their small arms, ammunition depots or anti-armor weaponry away from them. Oh, and we didn’t protect any of the Iraqi infrastructure or basic laws and the country looted itself into the stone-age, including their national museum, art galleries, libraries and universities. Think this wouldn’t happen in the States? So what we got is a lot of unemployed, angry, well-armed Iraqis who had starving families and a (new) common perpetrator of injustice (The United States of America). Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
We CREATED the insurgency and we have no idea what to do about it. And at what cost? Over a trillion dollars, thousands of dead servicemen, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians and an Arab world who has had all of its suspicions about the West confirmed yet again. Sounds like a good deal. What could a trillion dollars have done here at home? Hospitals, schools, alternative energy research? We’ll never know.
Germany and Japan. Yes, that is a decent point. But how about Vietnam or the Korean Peninsula? Success and failures of the past can not be pressed into service to justify present and future, ill-conceived and unjust conflicts built on fundamental misrepresentations of the truth. And there are some significant differences between the WWII players and the current opposition we face in the Near East. I won’t drone on about all that now, but I will say that there WAS a “post-war” Japan and Germany. What we must understand is that Islam is a religion that is steeped in violence and that there will NEVER be a post-war period with its more zealous believers. We as a “Christian” nation have decided that it must therefore be our course of action to kill all of them before they can kill all of us, but that kind of thinking has NOTHING to do with Christ, and indeed is literally ANTI-Christ. Thanks King George.
Obama wants to bring home all the troops? I would presume that he means to bring them home alive, and I submit that this is better than the alternative that happens to be playing out as I type. Does it resonate with anyone that we never should have been stirred up enough to go there in the first place? I’ll leave that to the coming election to decide.
Ben, you’re the man and I appreciate your engagement here. I hope I haven’t rubbed you too far the wrong way. I invite you to push back on this, you won’t offend me; I promise.
-Corb
first: i suppose you're right about the capitalism v. conservatism thing. my bad. and i kind of agree with what you're saying there.
ReplyDeletesecond: a "lie" is a falsehood presented purposefully. if you actually believe something is true and it turns out not to be, then you were mistaken, not lying. there is no proof that the US or any other government was "lying" about the WMDs.
third: the US didn't go in to commit genocide, as Saddam had done. we want the best for EVERYONE, not just one cultural group. while we may not have done the 100% most ideal thing, we are certainly NOTHING like the "old boss" as you say.
fourth: i agree that we will probably never have an official "post-war" in iraq or afghanistan, but rather we will be there or we won't. but at least with korea, we ended up with a really great half. South Korea has bloomed into a technological wonderland with companies like samsung, hyundai, and kia. south korea is arguably the most advanced technological country in the world - giving us communications, robotics, computer-related technologies, etc. so don't write them off just because we didn't officially "win".
fifth: i like to look at the big picture here (regarding Iraq). i believe it was our moral duty - as a country with the means to do so - to stop and tyrannical dictator from killing his people and destroying his country. if you saw a car wreck, would you stop to help? if you witnessed a murder, would you testify against the assailant? of course. this is the same. only instead of one murder, the world saw millions. call it what you will, but that is just not right.
furthermore, the UN had enacted sanction after sanction, threat after threat against Saddam over the 12 years following Desert Storm*, and Saddam ignored each and every one. if nothing else, then as a charter member of the UN, it was our duty to enforce those sanctions.
yes, the cost is a bit outrageous, but it's a war. wars are expensive. while of course, i would love to see no one die, i believe it was all necessary. and before you or anyone else says, "yeah, but you're not one of those soldiers!" know that i hope to be within the next year.
* you may remember that the reason Desert Shield and Desert Storm occurred is because a bigger country tried to take over a little country by force. recently, russia invaded georgia. while we did not go in with the military (yet...?), our position is the same - this is bad.
so there. i pushed back. you should know that i really enjoy talks like this. and i especially appreciate that you aren't just ranting or throwing out blatant lies; you're actually backing up what you say. not many people do that.
wow, we sure got a bit off topic from your original post. either way, this is a good discussion. well done.
oh, and tell L happy belated birthday for me and that i'm sorry it's late! :-\
Intelligent remarks...got to have fun sometime. In all seriousness you can't just leave your topic of capitalism as you did. Yes, there are draw backs, and yes ultimately some "prosper" more than others, but ultimately it is capitalism that is what makes us great. Each of us has entered into our adulthood without some predisposition that you will be a worker or at three years of age you are a gymnast. We are each allowed to live our lives, experience different things, and work towards what we feel we want when we want it. I have graciously had the opportunity to study criminal justice, psychology, counseling, and now I maintain databases. I can choose if I want to work a job with long hours, or spend time with family. I can choose. You can choose. It's too easy to say that with capitalism we change the way of the land forcing others to live in unsightly areas. Brothers I beg you to reconsider. I know friends from nothing that have worked hard to become doctors. My mother grew up in a house where some rooms had dirt floors and went outside to get water. They made a choice to work hard and now have a great house, and they were able to provide for their children a better childhood than they had. It is not those who work hard and again "prosper" as a result of capitalism that force people to live next to oil refineries, it is the will of the individual that chooses who they are and where they end up. Our country is the result of immigrants moving to a land of promise to become who they want to be, and to be free in the creation of their future. It is those who do not truly have the capacity or mental illness that we who "prosper" should support. Not the lazy and those who feel something is owed. I urge you not to take your freedoms and liberties for granted.These liberties that are ultimately possible because of our great country's capitalism.
ReplyDeleteBen,
ReplyDeleteGood point making distinctions between unintentional falsehoods and deliberate lies. I agree with you. However, given the responsibilities and collateral damage that can accompany such blunders, the Iraq situation seriously causes me to doubt our government's decision making abilities. I hope it would also cause you to reconsider the decision to offer your life to this unblinking machine. It also makes me wonder if the initial charges and suspicions against Iraq were a bit overblown in order to drum up popular support for the war. I think we have to admit that it worked at the beginning. Our government is currently (if slowly) coaxing us into being aggressors against Iran too.
Don't misunderstand me, I have a LOT of respect for those who choose to serve in our armed forces. However, I have zero respect for the civilian politicians who, out of revenge, ignorance or arrogance, commit the sons and daughters of others to be put in harm's way. There are occasionally fights our nation ought to make, but Iraq doesn't qualify. And remember, as a soldier, you don't have the option to disagree. Regardless of the morality or quality of the politicians' decisions, all you "get" to say is, "Yes SIR!"
Ben, you are better and worth more than that to me.
-Corb
Yes, I agree, and thank you. You're too kind.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am not joining because I agree or disagree with certain politicians. I am not joining because I want to go to war with a certain country. I'm not even joining because I voted for George Bush. I am joining because I believe the US Constitution is the third greatest document ever written, behind the US Declaration of Independence and the Bible. While it certainly is not perfect, the principles behind it are worth fighting for, and if necessary, dying for.
So now, we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. If I can help them taste democracy, I will. Politicians come and go. Republicans and Democrats will always find something to disagree about. Generals retire, other men are promoted, and still others have yet to even join. But the Constitution remains constant. The process it defines allows us to change it as we see fit in an effort to make it just a little better. I say "we" because we, the people, elect the congressmen who make laws. We, the people, have to vote on any changes to the Constitution. We, the people, in essence, control the government. Majority rules.
So. You have major doubts regarding our government's ability to make decisions. Do something about it. Join Obama's campaign. Tell everyone you know (I guess you've already started doing that here). Make change happen. Aaron is right - with capitalism, we can do what we want when we want. If enough people agree with you, super. If not, you can try again next time. I may not agree with you, but that is the beauty of this country, and something I wish to protect and give to the world: choice and freedom.
Ben, Thanks for pushing back. I appreciate your continued engagement.
ReplyDeletePoint #3 (Old Boss/ New Boss): Yes, I agree that Saddam was an evil butt-head and needed to go down. And I agree that our president, as much as I think he is a tool, is not of the same, nefarious pedigree as Hussein. However, I submit to you that the average non-extremist Iraqi today (those who are still alive and haven’t fled the “nation” anyway) would say that their lives have not improved, and in fact have gotten worse since the US showed up. Has anyone else noticed that our forces are no longer being approached as liberators but perpetrators? Iraq has gone FROM an evil, but half-way orderly, dictatorship TO complete civic breakdown with martial law, civil war, anarchy and chaos in general. Deposing Saddam created a power vacuum that "coalition forces" were not prepared for, and we've been trying to duct-tape it all back together ever since. We are STILL losing that battle.
"We want what's best for everyone." Ben, this is propaganda that is patently false. The US does not want what is best for everyone; it wants what is best for its own interests, and sometimes those "interests" are determined, not directly by the people, but by a lone president who decides that he no longer needs congressional approval to pick fights with other nations. Reference King George and Iraq. That we elected him twice absolutely boggles my mind. This is also why terrorists feel that US citizens are viable targets: We let our inept politicians make the decisions for us.
This also plays in to your point #5: Moral Duty & Car Wrecks
This is the story that we've been telling ourselves to feel better about our provocative and misguided (even if not deceitful) attack on Iraq (and other nations that we have interests in). But if we really care about the poor, brutalized people of the world, then I ask for an explanation on our nation's abject reticence to do ANYTHING about Darfur, North Korea, China, the Congo, Cierra Leone, East Timor (in recent times), and in places like Pol-Pot’s Cambodia, Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, Apartheid’s South Africa, the Native American’s of our own nation and on and on and on.
You may say that we did do something for the Jews (and other Europeans) in the sites of Nazi Germany, but this never would have happened on moral principles. It was only AFTER we had been shocked into action at Pearl Harbor that we were roused from our apathy. A similar story can be said of China and N. Korea: We don’t care about limiting their influence because of the way they kick their people around. We are rattling our saber because of their economic and militaristic rivalry to our own nation’s power in these areas. That they don’t accept our political and economic systems scares the crap out of us, especially in light of the size and (admittedly insane) leadership of their armies. I suggest that the only reason we haven’t tooled around with N. Korea more is A) because we’re too preoccupied in Iraq and Afghanistan, and B) because they have a huge army and the ability to strike S. Korea and Japan. And finally our nation is FORCED to play nice with China because of their own might, especially with regard to nukes. Don’t be fooled into thinking that our government has any genuine interest in bettering the lives of North Koreans or the Chinese for their own sake.
I appreciate your commitment to the ideals, principles and documents of our own nation. I too believe in them and honestly, have benefited handsomely from them. Nevertheless, I think we would do well to at least consider the inherent arrogance of our saying: "Our system is better than yours, so we are going to smack you around until you like it and make it your own." In historical and religious terms this is called a "crusade" or "Jiihad." I hope that both of those terms make your skin crawl as much as they do mine. What gives us the right to force our values on others? We still have yet to consider that any option besides democracy is a viable way to govern, and this blows my mind. What happens when an entire society votes for Sharia Law, or to make the world Islam (against the rest of the world's will)? According to democracy this MUST be the right thing to do. I wonder if US Christians/ Republicans think that they get to vote for leadership in heaven. :)
-Corb
#3 - I respectfully disagree, but have nothing more to say. :-)
ReplyDelete#5 - I hate to admit it, but you're right. We were sort of forced into The War. It's a tricky thing balancing our morals and principles against our respect for the sovereignty of other nations.
last - look at lebanon. they finally got to vote in a fair election and voted for a terrorist group! then bush was like, "wait, you can't do that!" but i think that's ok. i really don't like that that happened, but they got to vote. they CHOSE their leaders. that's what we wanted them to do. the problem with america is that we say we want you to chose, then try to force you to chose a certain person/party. that's not right.
anyway, we can go round and round with this, but i think i'm done for now. you certainly may post this on your blog, i have no problem with that. i think this has been an excellent discussion. you're a very fair and level-headed debater. thanks!
B,
ReplyDeleteYou are a stud. Thanks for your thoughts, and your permission to paste on the blog. It's been great typing with you. Now we'll have something to joke around about for the next family reunion. 2010, right?
yer bud,
-Corb
Capitalism.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to be too gruff. I value both of your opinions (Jumper & Rimel); but you are missing the point.
The problem with capitalism is not that it can create opportunities for people. I do not deny that it does nor that my family has profited from it. The real problem with capitalism is (again) that it necessitates selfish behavior whereby people only think about themselves, their power, their purchasing power, their family and their perceived needs. And this has nothing to do with what kind of lifestyle a person leads, how motivated or how lazy they are. Poor people in this nation are often just as selfish and capitalistic as their crosstown CEOs.
Aaron, how do you feel about illegal immigrants? And are you suggesting that people who live next to refineries choose to do so? You said it yourself that “some people will prosper more than others.” Have you seen Fight Club? We (those of us with a sense of entitlement) grow up thinking that we’ll all be millionaires, movie stars, athletes, doctors and business owners, but we won’t. Capitalism always necessitates the under-class. Who will build or refine the oil for that Hummer, eh? How much is the Exxon CEO paid and where does he live in comparison to the local, fume-breathing wrench turner at the oil field? Do you honestly think the hard-hat doesn’t work as hard if not harder than the CEO, in his A/C office? By the way, as an educated, responsible, employed high school teacher in Texass, depending on which way the wind was blowing, clouds of caustic, refinery fumes would engulf our entire city and school for hours and sometimes days on end. And how do we define “next to”? For us to think that polluted sea, land and air only affects the poor, lazy types in unsightly areas is thoroughly disappointing.
The related problem with capitalism is that it engenders no sense of responsibility for our fellow humans nor the environment that sustains all of our lives. Here is a fact for us “haves” to consider: Our way of life, rate of conspicuous consumption, and environmental destruction is simply not sustainable over a long enough time horizon. It is well understood that if all individuals on this planet consumed resources at the same rate of the AVERAGE US citizen, our planet would catastrophically wither and self-destruct in short order. I am not even talking about global warming, but simple supply & demand principles and statistics.
Capitalism alone makes no concession for the needs (or wants) of others, and this comes at great expense of those other people and the environment that must sustain us all. When entire nations behave according this paradigm everyone else on the planet and even in their own land lose their humanity and are replaced with pawn-like status and valued (or devalued) solely in terms of how they can benefit those with more political and economic clout. Why do we buy our stuff from places like China, Guatemala and Indonesia? Because this way we don’t have to pay more money at our local Wal-Mart in support of such idle notions as pollution control, minimum wage, health care or human rights or corporate accountability. Our nation has decided that these things are required for our territory, but not those poor, desperate people in other nations. Good enough for us, but not those other people over there. Our nation’s forefathers would have called this “taxation without representation.” This is racism and abuse, and it is an embarrassment to ignorant pride in the so-called “American” way of life.
Finally, I think that a strong case can be made that "doing what we want, when we want and how we want" can lead to as many evil things as good ones. Lets not forget that genocide and self-destruction are recurring themes in human history. Like nuclear power, capitalism can be a tool for goodness or great terror, but it offers us no insight (within itself) on how to use it.
As such, I am not suggesting that we categorically give capitalism or democracy the old heave-ho. Nor am I so naive to believe that we can all just sing songs around the (natural-gas) campfire as we plan a perfect, communal utopia where everyone loves each other and the sky is not cloudy all day. However, what I AM saying is that we need to let the true gospel of Jesus Christ take our EVERY thought captive and let that burn the chaff off of and radically re-shape our worldviews, lifestyles and passions.
This means that we care more about others than we do for ourselves.
This means that we love our neighbors and our enemies and that we take into consideration our cross-town neighbors as well as our global neighborhoods. This means that we take Jesus’ message seriously and understand that what he offers is not just a slice of heaven when we croak, but rather a way to live HERE and NOW that reflects the kingdom that he said is in our midst.
Ok, Corbin, nice soap-box. Where’s the practicality?
ReplyDelete1) As Ben has suggested, VOTE. Turn away from candidates who sponsor the selfish, war-mongering, saber-rattling, oil-drilling, racist, myopic, short sighted and narrow-minded leadership that has plagued our country for far too long. Yes, more than the last 8 years. Obama is the better candidate here, but he is not perfect and there are a few things that I am thoroughly suspicious about. But he is a step (even if a small one) in the right direction.
2) GIVE. Refuse to let selfishness be the modus operandi of your life. Give to charitable organizations. Even if you are not a Christian, there are many viable options to be charitable towards other than the church: political advocacy groups, environmental organizations, disaster relief movements, your local soup kitchen or elementary school.
3) CONSUME LESS. Buy used instead of new, walk, ride a bike, buy a fuel efficient and used vehicle, recycle, turn off your A/C, get efficient light bulbs, telecommute, buy organic, buy carbon offsets, buy refurbished, buy recycled TP, paper towels, printer paper, envelopes, clothes etc. Fix it or give it away instead of throwing it out.
4) LOVE MORE. Be an advocate for the poor and powerless in our nation and abroad, friend and foe alike. Be a champion of peace, human rights, and the environment. Reinvigorate random acts of kindness, ESPECIALLY for your enemies. Question the stories we are told and the stories we tell ourselves, then execute the crap and embrace the good. Buy organic and Fair Trade and Fair Wage goods. This can be more expensive, but ask yourself what your values really are and consider the corresponding altruism or selfishness involved.
5) PRAY. Human nature is selfish and short-sighted. We can’t do this on our own. We need Jesus as he is and not as we have supposed him to be.
You are all champs. I know I can sound a bit nutty.
Thank you for reading me here.
-Corb
“Turn away from candidates who sponsor the selfish, war-mongering, saber-rattling, oil-drilling, racist, myopic, short sighted and narrow-minded leadership that has plagued our country for far too long. Yes, more than the last 8 years. Obama is the better candidate here, but he is not perfect and there are a few things that I am thoroughly suspicious about. But he is a step (even if a small one) in the right direction."
ReplyDeleteOh Corbin....lol. I disagree so much with you on this statement but love ya anyways! :) Interesting conversations. Michael loves this kind of thing and will be interested to read all of the discussion later. He will really find it interesting since he served in the National Guard and spent some time in Iraq and has some very strong opinions on some of the things you guys were discussing about the war. You made me think on some things...I don't think my mind has really been changed on a much..but it's always good to think about our position and why we feel the way we do.
Corbin - just to clarify - do you mean to say that because so many more people are killed by war than abortion that you support Obama because he wants to pull out of Iraq, even though he supports abortion on demand?
ReplyDeleteC. Robertson,
ReplyDeleteThanks for following and for adding to the discussion.
You asked me this: "do [I] mean to say that because so many more people are killed by war than abortion that [I] support Obama because he wants to pull out of Iraq, even though he supports abortion on demand?"
My answer is, "No." But I am saying that abortion is terrible and that war is terrible and that anyone that supports either of them is not as "Pro-Life" as they might otherwise like to imagine. I am also saying that no deep-thinking voter should make a single issue (war OR abortion, or any other single item) the sole foundation regarding what (or who) they vote for.
Lastly, I am saying that, as a Christian, I must support human leadership that best reflects as many values of Jesus as possible, or, given our nation's current spiritual befuddlement, to support leadership that is least opposed to those same values. As far as I can tell, that leadership is OBiden, not McSame.
Does that help clear up anything?
-Corbin
Hey Corbin,
ReplyDeleteM. Barr here. I have really enjoyed reading your comments and positions. Amanda has been telling me about it since she first found you and I am just now getting a chance to read it all for myself.
I am proud to say that I agreed with most, if not all, of your comments and found them all to be well thought out and properly evidenced. I do think for myself that many of the points you raise are extremely valid and underrepresented in the media, government and the economic machine. Although I do not call myself a Republcan or a Democrat, for full disclosure, I typically vote Republican.
I don't know that we disagree on this point but I will make it then you can sharpen or dull it as needed. I thank you for your willingness to do so with love and grace.
Capitalism/Socialism: I believe that even our early church members who redistributed according to ability and need did so in light of an open market. i believe whole heartedly that within the church we are held to this standard that has been horribly diluted and corrupted with a prosperity doctrine. I do not believe that it is the governments responsibility to mandate these changes through legislation. The early church was able to do this well and effectively because of the unselfishness that came from being wholly changed by the relationship of Christ in their lives. So long as communal property is attempted without this relationship it will not be successful. We are all born into sin and act on selfish desires. It is only through Christ that we are able to at any level overcome these desires and share our temporal, worldly wealth. Once a government, regardless of economic policy begins to mandate at every level where our dollars should go they will probably be misdirected as evidenced by the proponderace of evidence we have through history, that on our own we screw it up. So to sum it up, we(the body of Christ) have an ultimate responsibility to serve all mankind, the Gov will fail.
M. Barr!
ReplyDeleteHey, great to read you, Man! It has been TOO long. Bless your amazing wife for re-establishing contact with me. She's a thinker! I really appreciate both of your input and perspectives here. While this may not come across very well in my recent slew of postings, I really don't want to pretend that I have it ALL figured out. I think I'm doing the best I can here, but I also realize that everyone else is too, and that when we tend to disagree, a dose of humility is in order for good conversation. So thanks for responding in kind (indeed, kind-er)!
-CL
Capitalism-Socialism:
ReplyDeleteYou nailed it.
M, you brought up a great set of points on this, and I absolutely agree with you. If anything, humans HAVE proved that socialism and commun(al)ism only work in a microcosm of people who ALREADY care and love one another. As we all know, that rules out most of the rest of the world. The nations that have tried it (China, former USSR, Vietnam) have all totally failed in a true socialist endeavor and wrought significant evil and pain in the process. Whatever else I might say about China, please do not hear me advocating their system. It blows, and I know it.
Additionally, I ain't saying that our government can legislate that we all love each other or that we should move into a national hippy-commune. As much fun as that might sound, it's not going to work, and I know that too. What I am suggesting though, is that we (as in the American public in particular, but also the entire world citizenry in general) need to seriously question the way we live, why we live that way, and consider the consequences if EVERYONE behaved in a similar fashion. There can be an upside or a downside to this, but that depends on how seriously we take our neighbors and Christ into consideration. The key is to hold onto the good and ruthlessly sniff out and destroy the bad. And when I say “destroy” I mean that which is darkened in our OWN hearts and souls, NOT that which we think we perceive in others. If ANY of this is other than what we hear in Jesus’ radical vision, then please call me on it.
Some movements of the past and indeed some psycho earth-movements of the present have advocated that we simply stop having kids and depopulate blah, blah, blah. I know that goes a bridge too far and doesn’t reflect the desires of God either. I think a better solution is for all of us to live lives of peace with the planet and with each other (inside AND outside of the womb) and to help others do the same. If I am willing to export, indeed force, anything about my values on other people and nations, it’s not the Bible and it’s not the US Constitution, nor our Armies but rather the personhood of Jesus, his radical message of love and his means of nonviolent protest. I submit that if people (in our country and others) knew Christians for their peace, love and humility, instead of their violence, hypocrisy, hatred and arrogance, then a lot more of them would be willing to let Jesus in the door, and we wouldn’t have to “force” anything in the first place.
-CL
Abortion: I believe as you it is an absolute wrong. Until we are willing to protect these, it is hard for me to believe that I can take any politician at his word that he values life in any way. I do not believe in one issue voting, but I do believe in a heirarchy of values and for me this is right up there. Until we can protect life at this most innocent level it seems, to me atleast, it will be impossible to convince the nation, let alone the world, we should protect the living, let alone the environment.
ReplyDeleteEnvironment: I believe that the gov's role in this is minimal. The gov can tax unwanted business practices and give breaks/stimulus to those that are "green." I think that ultimately the free market with its supply/demand formula will bring forth the products that people desire when they put their money where their mouth is. I get so tired of people living in 10,000 sq.ft multimilliion dollar homes telling us to be green. It is exactly these people who have the means and ability to actually change and invest in alternate energy sources. I digress. I do believe we must be stewards of our environment and that we must take steps towards clean energy and reusable materials.
Abortion:
ReplyDeleteWe’re actually not too far apart on this. I may disagree with you here in part, but not in principle. As Amanda and I discussed though, I think there are worse things than abortion, and I am still waiting for a candidate to do something serious about it. Despite Republican presidents and their congresses, the issue is still legal, and I tend to dislike everything else that our so-called “Pro-Life” presidents have let in the door with them. Additionally, I don’t yet know how to navigate the territory of having the government tell us what we can and cannot do to our own bodies. The upside is no abortions. The downside is forced abortions (like in One-Child-China at the moment). This is where good fights can go catastrophically wrong. We tend to think only in terms of our own agenda and not in terms of the precedent we set and ultimately, what else comes in with it.
Another example: I’m all for prayer in school, let’s vote on it! Dearborn, Michigan: Islamic prayers sponsored in the PUBLIC school system. Suddenly, prayer in school doesn’t sound like such a fine idea.
Any insight you can offer here will be appreciated.
-Corb
Environment:
ReplyDeleteOnce again it seems that we are birds of a feather here. Well, almost. :)
I DO think it is government’s duty (in part) to regulate, impose and penalize individuals and companies that do not act in responsible ways. This imposition goes beyond JUST environmental issues and must include things like fair-wages and human rights too. My reasoning is this: businesses are not often motivated by altruism, but rather by bottom-line profit. While I am convinced that “green” business practices can be more profitable than their alternatives (especially in terms of less tangible items), the businesses and economies of our world are largely stuck in a paradigm of using and abusing anything and everyone they can in order to bolster their gods (profit margin, political power, military might, and in some cases, religious authority too). As you have said, the free-market is gradually coming around, but it has not been fast enough to prevent some serious, possibly irreparable damage to our planet and its people.
-CL
War: It is not God's will for the world to be in this constant state of chaos. I do believe that Iraq is a mess. I think that at best it was a poorly executed action to at worst a complete blunder. I do not know how to handle it now that we are there. I agree that we have created a place that is hard for its citiizens and yet better for those who are not being executed on a regular basis. I honestly don't know what to do about. I believe that to stay or go have enormous life and death as well as significant moral issues. To stay means continued loss of American life and an everincreasing budget. To leave makes me think "we broke it you fix it" and that will probably mean more death to those who remain and a contunued loss of quality life for those people. Maybe you could offer me a little more insight in this area. Side note: You made a comment that some of our most recent actions were involved in making the US a target for terrorists. I think that I disagree, unless you can clarify for me. I am of the belief that this all comes down to a much bigger picture than your country against mine, your religion against mine. This all comes down the the stuggle that has taken place since the beginning of time. Satan's will is to kill, steal and destroy. God's is for peace and love. These opposing wills have battled since Genesis and are foretold in Revelations. People are thust into the middle of this battle and many times are unwitting pawns or willing advocates for their cause. Religions by their very nature take these ideas and try to make sense of it all and come up with differing ideas of right and wrong. It is through this confusion of right and wrong that Satan's power lies. In the garden he confused the issue, with the temptation of Christ he confused the issue and he is still at it today. In the Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis there is a section, I paraphrase, where the experienced demon instructs the inexperienced to not waste his time and energy by convincing his victim there is no God. He should instead distract him with other ideas and tasks. I believe that is why you see so more similarities in the religions than diffences. Satan has figured out that if you offer enough truth you can sell the lie with little or no problem. Ultimately there is one truth, all ideas are not equal and valid. For those who believe that we "must accept and accomodate all ideas as equal." are blind of the fact that by doing so they are making all ideas wrong and meaningless. My thoughts on this are not inspiring but I do think that Ravi Zacharias has much to offer for further exposition. At the end of the day as long as the struggle between God and Satan is present so to will our world be wrought with plague, war, murder and disease. Scripture assures us of this sad truth. Corbin, I hope that this all makes sense. I really miss seeing you around am so proud to be able to call you a friend. I believe that the Lord has great plans for you and I pray that you will continue to be blessed and seek the Lord in your endeavors. As iron sharpen iron.
ReplyDeleteYour brother in Christ, M. Barr
Last thing for the night.....Vote, vote, vote! Up, Down, Left, Right, just do it!
Iraq:
ReplyDeleteI can't tell you how much I appreciate your input on this. I do have several friends and one fantastic father in-law who are in the armed services and have served tours in Iraq as well as Afghanistan. I am happy to know another. This does not make me an expert, but does at least help me know how to weigh what picture our media paints of the situation(s). I don't know how to offer a viable solution for Iraq. I contend that we shouldn't have gone there in the first place, but I also realize that this type of hind-sight thinking is not at all helpful and fails to deal with the reality of today. I am concerned and I hope we can learn the lessons well, but I also can't help but to see some parallels between Iraq and Vietnam. Our nation's inability to learn from some of its past mistakes is thoroughly discouraging to me.
Good point on the terrorists. Their citation of our democratic government and hence, the public’s culpability, is only an excuse for them to be indiscriminate, murderous thugs. I have no illusions that if we were a true, rule-of-one kingdom, that terrorists would only go after our king and his horsemen. I suspect that the real reason terrorists mostly target civilians is because they make a soft-target. Bullies never go after someone who is of equal or greater strength. They are cowards and know that if they mess with the bull, they’re going to get the horns. If they fight, they have to fight dirty. But the truth is, as you have said, that our battle is against spirit and not necessarily flesh and blood. Satan is inextricably involved. Unfortunately, he is at work in all nations and their structures, not just terrorists, so I cannot easily paint one nation and army as totally evil while thinking that the opposition is completely good and righteous. I do not intend to suggest that you have made such a claim.
The rest of your posting was so well aimed and potent that I don’t think I can add anything to it without ruining something beautiful. We are indeed involved in something bigger than ourselves and what we can easily perceive with our 5 physical senses.
Thank you for your encouragement, wisdom and acuity.
Blessings to you, M.
-Corb
Hey Corb,
ReplyDeleteWell spoken, and thank you. I believe you are a great man of God and these conversations make me wish we were a little closer so we could have some coffee on a hillside and discuss this while enjoying God's creatiion.
School prayer: For me the things in this life are not the things that the Gov allows us to do but the things that it may prohibit. I am all for what I believe our founders set as the establishment clause. I believe the government should have little to no input on the individual's right to prayer in the school. I also believe that the there should be no gov sanctioned, indeed forced religion, practice. I don't know how this fits with semantics but I would consider myself a conservative minimalist. I believe in all areas the smaller the gov the better off we would all be. I am a conservative socially, economically by the definition you gave earlier. I do not fear change but rather believe that routing people and the earth for changes sake is irresponsible and inconsiderate. For me, I want the government to be aware that people that have a religion have a right to make decisions based on those ideas so long as they are not harming others(by harming I do NOT mean their feelings.) I am so tired of all religious types having ideas but do definitive beliefs out of fear of being wrong or embarrassed. Religion by its very nature is absolute. I too am somewhat perplexed on many of these issues and through continued study and conversations like these I am forming my views nearly daily. Thank you for your response and I hope to continue this dialogue as you are definetly making me really think through my posistions. Sorry if this doesn't all make great sense. I've been up about 20 hours and I ready for bed. And I absolutely agree with the sniffing out our own darkness.
Take care and be blessed.
Michael
[Corb],
ReplyDeleteI would be curious to hear some specific instances of Senator Obama's words/actions that you believe exemplify Jesus and convinced you to support him. I would also be open to hearing which of Senator McCain's words/actions caused you to believe he does not exemplify Jesus and convinced you to not support him.
On another note, here are some numbers on the death toll in various wars for American solders: WWI ~116,516; WWII ~400,000; Korean War ~33,000; Vietnam War ~55,000; Iraq War ~4155 (Note that various sources differ on some of these numbers). The estimated total here comes close to 601,000 over a period of 94 years. In contrast, in the United States since Roe v. Wade (35 years ago), over 40,000,000 abortions have been performed (that is more than 66 times the death toll from war). Note that I am only considering abortions in the United States and comparing them to the number of war dead for United States soldiers.
C. Robertson,
ReplyDeleteI feel like you are not hearing me. I have to wonder if you would have dropped those alleged abortion/ war numbers on me regardless of what my previous response to you said. I don’t know how to make it any more clear that I am AGAINST abortion. But maybe you could clear this up for me: Are you pro-war?
Nevertheless, please allow me to respond to the numbers you cited regarding American war casualties in Iraq and in the 20th century. I do not quibble with many of the statistics that you offered. To a greater or lesser degree they seem accurate enough. But there is a problem. As you mentioned, you have only cited the numbers of casualties sustained by AMERICAN armed services. But unlike abortion, wars are not carried out in isolation. To cite only our armed services’ losses is a perfect example of capitalistic, egocentric and imperialistic thinking: it only tallies what war has cost US. To say nothing of an additional 30,000 maimed military US personnel, you have neglected all the slain personnel from our enemies and allies alike. Even more amazingly, you have neglected the non-combatant deaths, which some estimates place at just over a million for Iraqi alone. Any guesses on how many people Saddam Hussein killed in the years prior to our nations deposing of him? Estimates are around 600,000. Old boss, new boss? I wonder if the dead care.
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html
And what of the enemy combatants and non-combatants of all the other wars that you listed from the 20th century? Can anyone count the dead from all this destruction, let alone the toll on our life-support system? Does your exclusion of these people mean that they do not matter to you? Does anything BESIDES abortion matter to you?
Of course I realize that all of these wars and deaths were not caused by the US and I do think that, on occasion, the US really are the “good guys.” But, do you have any idea what the current US military budget is? Any guesses on which gets more funding: Education or the Military (or abortion alternatives for that matter)? Do you know what our national debt is? Do you know who had allegedly trained and financed Osama Bin Laden in the mid-1980s? Do you know what (next to taxes) generates the most money for the US gov’t? Here’s a hint: Do you know who the world’s largest producer and seller of military equipment and munitions is? What does this say about our nation’s commitment to peace? Do you know which current presidential candidate opposes limits on assault rifles and their armor-piercing rounds? Do you know which candidate is committed to all avenues of diplomacy and actually following the constitutional requirements BEFORE throwing US soldiers into harm’s way?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_to_Osama_bin_Laden
The problems here are systemic, not fully owned and operated by either political party or the public. Nevertheless, both abortion AND humanity’s blood-lust in war reflect our culture’s two highest values: short-sighted, myopic personal convenience and personal power/ wealth. Until we learn to put others first and take responsibility for our own actions, whether it is sex or doing violence to our environment and already-born neighbor, voting alone will never be enough. Politicians chase whichever way the winds of public opinion happens to be blowing at the moment. Talk is cheap, but actions count. Nonetheless, the two ARE related. So I propose that the only way we can truly get candidates that are who and what we really want to lead us, is for the American public to CHANGE which way those winds are blowing. We can’t do that if we make elections a one-trick pony show and we can’t do it unless we take action well above and beyond merely voting on Super Tuesday.
ReplyDeleteThe only way to really get after it is to take what my friend, M. Barr, has said regarding the BIG picture. For us Christians, this big picture has got to be a present, here and now kingdom of Jesus Christ. Both of our main-line political parties and indeed, our entire political, economical and social structures are so lost and in desperate need of redemption that it is difficult to know where to start. I am pushing hard here, but my ultimate allegiance is not to a political candidate, but to Jesus. We have got to vote, but this is not enough. Neither is it enough to “buy organic” once in awhile or slip a $20 in the offering basket on Sunday, especially if we only do so to let ourselves off the hook from living out a concerted, ongoing effort to live in radical opposition to the way things are.
I am convinced that Jesus does not want tamed and timid followers. We do not serve a domesticated, declawed lion who purrs at us on occasion. He wants passionate men and women warriors who oppose all that is evil, from abortion to war, from poverty to excess consumption, from environmental suicide to selfishness in general and on and on and on. So I am being extreme here in the hope that through all of our words and politics and tough thinking, we might begin, collectively and as individuals, to budge and build momentum in the “right” direction as revolutionaries for the only Kingdom that will ever really matter and endure forever.
Voting alone is too small a thing and it does not release any of us from being active participants in peace, healing, love and reconciliation with our neighbors, enemies, the planet, and yes, our unborn too. Regardless of how we vote and why, what are we doing, this week, month and year, to actually serve our King and his mission to redeem the whole of creation? How can we partner with him more than once every 4 years?
in desperation and love,
-Corbin
M. Barr,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your encouragement. You are helping me think through some issues here too, and I highly value your perspective. Indeed, I value the all the people here who have let themselves be heard. Thank you.
-CL
Corb,
ReplyDeleteI loved your last blurb there, God has called us to more than just voting. For this very reason I believe God has given me a heart for missions. Not the full time kind, but the organization of trips and teaching people that missions are multifaceted. 1. To serve those we go to in a physical practical way. 2. To serve those we go in an eternal way through the gospel of Jesus Christ who is the only way to eternal salvation. 3. To come home and use these trips as an excuse to share the gospel. 4. To realign our ignorant thoughts and beliefs about other cultures. 5. To bring us back to earth and realize that as the "haves" we have much more responsibility than those who "have not." To make them "haves" and I am not speaking of finances. 6. To further inspire us to act the "mission way, everyday." I know that if we could all stop for 5 seconds and listen for God's calling in our lives it may be radically different than the path we are taking or it may be only marginally different with significant impact. Either way it begins with shutting the world out and allowing Christ in.
Lastly I would like to say that I truly believe the country is ripe for a new party to arrive. I think people are looking for true, hard core values people who are willing to go to bat for ALL of your previously mentioned ideas of peace, environmental conservatism and identifying each person as valuable and respected. We are constantly picking the ones that are sort of what we are looking for but not wholly. I hope as you said earlier that something is beginning(or continuing) here that is much bigger than all of us and that we will all heed our own words and move towards the direction of Christ. Take care and rock on.
As iron sharpens iron,
Michael Barr
Hi Corbin - I'm guessing this is where you would like my comments posted instead of on Facebook. I would like to preface my response with the thought that when we communicate via blogs, much is lost in translation, so to speak. Nonverbal cues (body language) and vocal inflections are no longer part of the overall message and it is easy to misread what is written. I have, myself, fallen into the trap of assuming what someone meant and inferring meanings other than what the writer intends. With that in mind, I would like to share a few thoughts.
ReplyDeleteYou wrote: "I feel like you are not hearing me. I have to wonder if you would have dropped those alleged abortion/ war numbers on me regardless of what my previous response to you said."
My response: The numbers were from various websites and I am aware that not all web sources are reliable (that's why I gave some estimates in some cases). Regardless, there is value in considering facts and, following a quick check of Internet sources, those are the facts that I found. Please correct the numbers if you find them inaccurate. I am not trying to ambush you with “alleged abortion/war numbers.” I was trying to present facts to make a comparison. I prefer to ask questions to find out what people think, present facts, and see how people respond - it's the scientist in me. :-)
You wrote: "I don’t know how to make it any more clear that I am AGAINST abortion."
My response: Have I indicated to you in any way that I believe you are FOR abortion? If so, I apologize.
You wrote: But maybe you could clear this up for me: Are you pro-war?
My answer: I consider war a necessary evil under certain conditions in this present world. The Old Testament is filled with stories of war between the people of Israel and inhabitants of the Promised Land and nearby areas. The reality is that there are some people who want to kill you, for whatever reason (religion, control of natural resources, etc.). When necessary for self-defense and protection of oneself/family/country, I believe that war is justified. Is war pretty and do only the soldiers get killed/wounded? No. At the root of war is greed and hatred by one party or the other (or both!). If the greed and hatred is on our part, then we are not justified in going to war. Please let me know if you want any clarification on these thoughts.
You wrote: "Nevertheless, please allow me to respond to the numbers you cited regarding American war casualties in Iraq and in the 20th century. I do not quibble with many of the statistics that you offered. To a greater or lesser degree they seem accurate enough. But there is a problem. As you mentioned, you have only cited the numbers of casualties sustained by AMERICAN armed services."
"Even more amazingly, you have neglected the non-combatant deaths, which some estimates place at just over a million for Iraqi alone. Any guesses on how many people Saddam Hussein killed in the years prior to our nations deposing of him? Estimates are around 600,000. Old boss, new boss? I wonder if the dead care.
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html"
"And what of the enemy combatants and non-combatants of all the other wars that you listed from the 20th century? Can anyone count the dead from all this destruction, let alone the toll on our life-support system? "
My reply: Wow.... that got you really hot didn't it? Well, let me explain. As I mentioned in my Facebook post, I was using only American casualties because the numbers I had for abortions were only for America. In my mind, the comparison of American war casualties to American abortion numbers would be more accurate when looking at the cost in lives for War vs. Abortion. I am quite aware that enormous war casualties have been incurred for other countries (e.g. - Russia during WWII). However, I do not have any statistics for the number of abortions for those countries. Does that make sense why I only gave the American numbers? In my mind, the comparison I made would be the only valid one I could make since I didn't have the facts from other countries.
You wrote: Does your exclusion of these people mean that they do not matter to you? Does anything BESIDES abortion matter to you?
My response: Obviously, my comparison is not at all meant to diminish the loss of lives from other countries. I think we both agree that the death of millions throughout history, whether by war, famine, abortion, or natural disaster, is a terrible loss. If I somehow gave the impression that the loss of those lives was meaningless, I apologize. The numbers for non-American deaths were simply not applicable to the comparison I was making (see note above).
To answer your second question - no, abortion is not the only thing that matters to me. Just to clarify - because I am quite pressured for time between teaching school full time, taking care of the farm and household, and assisting Bruce with some of the issues related to the new clinic building (along with turnover of an apartment...time to clean after the last tenant), I don't have time to spend typing long blogs. I have made an exception tonight to try and properly address the questions you had (but, I have to admit I need to finish this up and get some papers graded!!). Because of the little time I have, I kept my comments and questions to a minimum and tried to address only one topic at a time. Please do not consider that to be indicative of someone who is a one-issue personality. In fact, I applaud your earlier statement that choosing a presidential nominee to support requires consideration of many issues.
Corbin - you are part of our family and I am glad to see you stand firmly for what you believe, as I hope you would be encouraging for me to stand for what I believe. As the conversations continue, I think we will learn more about each other and that's an exciting prospect for me! I think we will find areas of agreement and disagreement – that’s natural when you take any two people in the world! As was mentioned previously in this thread, iron sharpens iron. As we engage in discussion, our own thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes become more focused and shaped (and maybe, even changed). And, you know, that's what good discussion is all about, isn't it? :-)
Have a blessed rest of the week and I'll try to check back on the discussion as I am able.
Carol
Aunt Carol,
ReplyDeleteYou are very charitable. I am glad to hear that you are not necessarily pro-war and that abortion is not the only issue you vote on. I am also glad that you didn't seize on the opportunity to fire back too hard. As I re-read my "imperialistic, egocentric blah-blah-blah" comment I thought to myself: "Oh my."
I usually aim to be a bit less inflammatory. Believe it or not, peaceful (but passionate) dialog IS a value of mine.
I remain convinced that Obama and Biden are the better candidates and that they best reflect the majority of values that are consistent with Jesus' own purposes. Abortion is the glaring and embarrassing exception to this. Nevertheless, I have to wonder, if all other issues were equal, how many Christian supporters would switch sides if it was McCain who supported abortion rights and it was Obama who was against them. I think that how each of us answers that question can say a lot about how expansive or narrow our political outlooks may be.
Similarly, like my friend Michael, our views are probably not altogether that different across the board. So I intend to address this last part to both of you:
We may or may not vote exactly the same, but that doesn't mean that we could "cancel each other out" either. Indeed, we seem to be standing shoulder to shoulder more than we are head to head, and that is what our nation needs to initiate and sustain lasting, positive change. As we pray, work, vote and hope for peace in a darkened territory, I am glad to know that it's not just me and Jesus vs. the World. You and I are part of a broader human and Christian community that may have peripheral disagreements and differences, but can also unite under the core of love and legitimate change for the cause of Christ. May others be motivated and join us in our partnership with him and his quest to redeem all life everywhere.
That's what being Pro-Life means to me.
in peace,
-Corb
Aunt Carol (et al.),
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that abortion is not the only reason you support McCain. Why else have you voted for him?
-CL