We are in the midst of a decisive debate on the values and vision that will determine the direction of our culture and society for years to come.
We are not in a simplistic war between good and evil, right and left, or even traditional versus modern.
We live in an age of contradictions. The Right advocates freedom while often ignoring the systemic evils of global business.
The Left speaks of tolerance while vilifying anyone who espouses long-standing moral precepts.
Minority communities continue to agitate for "justice" while excoriating internal critics who call for self-examination.
Virtue gurus call for heroism and self-reliance, yet find themselves unable to master addictions.
How do we navigate forward in an era fraught with peril and potential?
We must reassert that true freedom depends upon explicit and implicit adherence to moral principles and personal responsibility. Our culture of victimhood must yield to an ethos of mutual respect and community sacrifice.
We must learn to live with our deepest differences without being forced to affirm what is reprehensible to us. Toleration is not approval; moral and spiritual universes are different.
Let's raise the level of our debate beyond sound bites and personal posturing to a new plane of serious reflection. Only then will we have the fortitude to face the future.
Wednesday, June 02, 2004
Thursday, May 06, 2004
Self-Examination, Not Self-Destruction
As I write these words, President Bush is issuing multiple apologies for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers. The outrage is understandable, and once again the U.S. is held to standards of conduct found in few places on our small globe.
My advice to our President and our nation is this: Apologize, punish the offenders, and MOVE ON.
To spend much more time in hand-wringing invites derision from the enemies of our values and weakens our position of strength against the perpetrators of terror who have no compunction about killing anyone who is not an Islamofascist.
Our situtation is much like the 1930s, where Britain, France and the USA refused to respond to any of the Nazi provocations until it was too late to avoid a major war. Western moral and military weakness condemned the world to a war costing over 50 million lives.
The USA and her allies must regain the moral high ground, operate the military effectively, and emphasize the values that have sustained freedom. This includes being self-critical, but not self-destructive.
Wallowing in self-immolation instead of working for self-improvement will place our planet in danger of a new Dark Ages of bigotry and intolerance.
It is time to move on. We must recognize the problem, repent of the violations, provide restitution to victims, and resolve to do better. Self-denial is good and leads to service for humanity. Self-destruction opens the door to totalitarianism. The choice is ours.
My advice to our President and our nation is this: Apologize, punish the offenders, and MOVE ON.
To spend much more time in hand-wringing invites derision from the enemies of our values and weakens our position of strength against the perpetrators of terror who have no compunction about killing anyone who is not an Islamofascist.
Our situtation is much like the 1930s, where Britain, France and the USA refused to respond to any of the Nazi provocations until it was too late to avoid a major war. Western moral and military weakness condemned the world to a war costing over 50 million lives.
The USA and her allies must regain the moral high ground, operate the military effectively, and emphasize the values that have sustained freedom. This includes being self-critical, but not self-destructive.
Wallowing in self-immolation instead of working for self-improvement will place our planet in danger of a new Dark Ages of bigotry and intolerance.
It is time to move on. We must recognize the problem, repent of the violations, provide restitution to victims, and resolve to do better. Self-denial is good and leads to service for humanity. Self-destruction opens the door to totalitarianism. The choice is ours.
Thursday, April 01, 2004
Life, Liberty and Property
One of the foundations of modern civilization and the American Experiment is the ability and opportunity to own private property.
John Locke, the 17th century philosopher who inspired the Founders of our nation, asserted that the best government is that which preserves "life, liberty and property." He understood that citizenship and the "commonweal" of a healthy socieity were best ensured through personal responsibility for one's own domains.
From ancient Jewish writings we learn the same truth. The Book of Nehemiah details the urban renewal of Jerusalem. Each family was called upon to take care of their property and help rebuild the common walls and gates. Even though it was a community project, Nehemiah's appeals included personal stewardship of family-owned property.
History is the long, slow process of human liberation from ancient patterns of oppression and limited ownership of land. From the Magna Charta in 1215 that granted nobles some rights vis a vis the English monarchy to the US Consitution's protection from unlawful search and seizure, we have seen - at least in the West - an increase in the percentage of people able to own land. This percentage growth is concomitant with political freedom.
The 1620 Pilgrims briefly flirted with communal living, but quickly moved toward personal ownership, knowing that it led to the best care for the land and the community.
For over a century and a half, Marxism in all its nefarious forms has sought to change this arrangement under the guise of "the people" owning all land and the means of production. Marx and Engels rightly excoriated industrial and social abuses, but their cures have proven worse than the disease!
Fast forward to 2004. Under the guise of "Greenbelts" and "Eminent Domain" activists in multitudes of communities are literally robbing families of their legacies and livelihoods. The true stories I have heard just this week are the fodder for a dozen movies. The evil character in these scripts is not the cattle baron or the railroad magnate, but local and regional board members and government officials bent on fulfilling a chilling agenda.
There are two levels to this agenda. The public one is ecological balance and the preservation of open space in the midst of suburban sprawl. Sounds great...until you find out the unethical tactics and deeper plots. Families who have lovingly farmed and ranched land for generations are being forced to sell at fire sale prices or actually evicted for unproven minor infractions. One woman I spoke with has lost two properties due to new environmental regulations that turned a few puddles of water into a protected wetland! Of course, there is no compensation for her inability to develop her land.
The hidden agendas are frightful. One facet of the long-term plan is less private ownership and more government regulation and redistribution of wealth - socialism in any other terms. The other aspect of the deeper plot is the strategic aim of neo-pagan "deep ecologists" who want to untimately reduce the human population by half and restore Mother Earth to her pristine, pre-human condition.
These goals are self-destructive to our present freedom and future survival. Nearly two centuries of "enlightened" experiments have shown that socialism ultimately results in either bloated government agencies at best and totalitarianism at worst.
Who are the ones who decide what is best for us?
John Locke, the 17th century philosopher who inspired the Founders of our nation, asserted that the best government is that which preserves "life, liberty and property." He understood that citizenship and the "commonweal" of a healthy socieity were best ensured through personal responsibility for one's own domains.
From ancient Jewish writings we learn the same truth. The Book of Nehemiah details the urban renewal of Jerusalem. Each family was called upon to take care of their property and help rebuild the common walls and gates. Even though it was a community project, Nehemiah's appeals included personal stewardship of family-owned property.
History is the long, slow process of human liberation from ancient patterns of oppression and limited ownership of land. From the Magna Charta in 1215 that granted nobles some rights vis a vis the English monarchy to the US Consitution's protection from unlawful search and seizure, we have seen - at least in the West - an increase in the percentage of people able to own land. This percentage growth is concomitant with political freedom.
The 1620 Pilgrims briefly flirted with communal living, but quickly moved toward personal ownership, knowing that it led to the best care for the land and the community.
For over a century and a half, Marxism in all its nefarious forms has sought to change this arrangement under the guise of "the people" owning all land and the means of production. Marx and Engels rightly excoriated industrial and social abuses, but their cures have proven worse than the disease!
Fast forward to 2004. Under the guise of "Greenbelts" and "Eminent Domain" activists in multitudes of communities are literally robbing families of their legacies and livelihoods. The true stories I have heard just this week are the fodder for a dozen movies. The evil character in these scripts is not the cattle baron or the railroad magnate, but local and regional board members and government officials bent on fulfilling a chilling agenda.
There are two levels to this agenda. The public one is ecological balance and the preservation of open space in the midst of suburban sprawl. Sounds great...until you find out the unethical tactics and deeper plots. Families who have lovingly farmed and ranched land for generations are being forced to sell at fire sale prices or actually evicted for unproven minor infractions. One woman I spoke with has lost two properties due to new environmental regulations that turned a few puddles of water into a protected wetland! Of course, there is no compensation for her inability to develop her land.
The hidden agendas are frightful. One facet of the long-term plan is less private ownership and more government regulation and redistribution of wealth - socialism in any other terms. The other aspect of the deeper plot is the strategic aim of neo-pagan "deep ecologists" who want to untimately reduce the human population by half and restore Mother Earth to her pristine, pre-human condition.
These goals are self-destructive to our present freedom and future survival. Nearly two centuries of "enlightened" experiments have shown that socialism ultimately results in either bloated government agencies at best and totalitarianism at worst.
Who are the ones who decide what is best for us?
Life, Liberty and Property
One of the foundations of modern civilization and the American Experiment is the ability and opportunity to own private property.
John Locke, the 17th century philosopher who inspired the Founders of our nation, asserted that the best government is that which preserves "life, liberty and property." He understood that citizenship and the "commonweal" of a healthy socieity were best ensured through personal responsibility for one's own domains.
From ancient Jewish writings we learn the same truth. The Book of Nehemiah details the urban renewal of Jerusalem. Each family was called upon to take care of their property and help rebuild the common walls and gates. Even though it was a community project, Nehemiah's appeals included personal stewardship of family-owned property.
History is the long, slow process of human liberation from ancient patterns of oppression and limited ownership of land. From the Magna Charta in 1215 that granted nobles some rights vis a vis the English monarchy to the US Constitution's protection from unlawful search and seizure, we have seen - at least in the West - an increase in the percentage of people able to own land. This percentage growth is concomitant with political freedom.
The 1620 Pilgrims briefly flirted with communal living, but quickly moved toward personal ownership, knowing that it led to the best care for the land and the community.
For over a century and a half, Marxism in all its nefarious forms has sought to change this arrangement under the guise of "the people" owning all land and the means of production. Marx and Engels rightly excoriated industrial and social abuses, but their cures have proven worse than the disease!
Fast forward to 2004. Under the guise of "Greenbelts" and "Eminent Domain" activists in multitudes of communities are literally robbing families of their legacies and livelihoods. The true stories I have heard just this week are the fodder for a dozen movies. The evil character in these scripts is not the cattle baron or the railroad magnate, but local and regional board members and government officials bent on fulfilling a chilling agenda.
There are two levels to this agenda. The public one is ecological balance and the preservation of open space in the midst of suburban sprawl. Sounds great...until you find out the unethical tactics and deeper plots. Families who have lovingly farmed and ranched land for generations are being forced to sell at fire sale prices or actually evicted for unproven minor infractions. One woman I spoke with has lost two properties due to new environmental regulations that turned a few puddles of water into a protected wetland! Of course, there is no compensation for her inability to develop her land.
The hidden agendas are frightful. One facet of the long-term plan is less private ownership and more government regulation and redistribution of wealth - socialism in any other terms. The other aspect of the deeper plot is the strategic aim of neo-pagan "deep ecologists" who want to untimately reduce the human population by half and restore Mother Earth to her pristine, pre-human condition.
These goals are self-destructive to our present freedom and future survival. Nearly two centuries of "enlightened" experiments have shown that socialism ultimately results in either bloated government agencies at best and totalitarianism at worst.
Who are the ones who decide what is best for us?
John Locke, the 17th century philosopher who inspired the Founders of our nation, asserted that the best government is that which preserves "life, liberty and property." He understood that citizenship and the "commonweal" of a healthy socieity were best ensured through personal responsibility for one's own domains.
From ancient Jewish writings we learn the same truth. The Book of Nehemiah details the urban renewal of Jerusalem. Each family was called upon to take care of their property and help rebuild the common walls and gates. Even though it was a community project, Nehemiah's appeals included personal stewardship of family-owned property.
History is the long, slow process of human liberation from ancient patterns of oppression and limited ownership of land. From the Magna Charta in 1215 that granted nobles some rights vis a vis the English monarchy to the US Constitution's protection from unlawful search and seizure, we have seen - at least in the West - an increase in the percentage of people able to own land. This percentage growth is concomitant with political freedom.
The 1620 Pilgrims briefly flirted with communal living, but quickly moved toward personal ownership, knowing that it led to the best care for the land and the community.
For over a century and a half, Marxism in all its nefarious forms has sought to change this arrangement under the guise of "the people" owning all land and the means of production. Marx and Engels rightly excoriated industrial and social abuses, but their cures have proven worse than the disease!
Fast forward to 2004. Under the guise of "Greenbelts" and "Eminent Domain" activists in multitudes of communities are literally robbing families of their legacies and livelihoods. The true stories I have heard just this week are the fodder for a dozen movies. The evil character in these scripts is not the cattle baron or the railroad magnate, but local and regional board members and government officials bent on fulfilling a chilling agenda.
There are two levels to this agenda. The public one is ecological balance and the preservation of open space in the midst of suburban sprawl. Sounds great...until you find out the unethical tactics and deeper plots. Families who have lovingly farmed and ranched land for generations are being forced to sell at fire sale prices or actually evicted for unproven minor infractions. One woman I spoke with has lost two properties due to new environmental regulations that turned a few puddles of water into a protected wetland! Of course, there is no compensation for her inability to develop her land.
The hidden agendas are frightful. One facet of the long-term plan is less private ownership and more government regulation and redistribution of wealth - socialism in any other terms. The other aspect of the deeper plot is the strategic aim of neo-pagan "deep ecologists" who want to untimately reduce the human population by half and restore Mother Earth to her pristine, pre-human condition.
These goals are self-destructive to our present freedom and future survival. Nearly two centuries of "enlightened" experiments have shown that socialism ultimately results in either bloated government agencies at best and totalitarianism at worst.
Who are the ones who decide what is best for us?
Thursday, March 25, 2004
The End of the American Experiment
I am deeply concerned about two issues in the public eye. At first they may appear to be unrelated, but they both point toward disaster for the future of the United States.
The first issue is gay marriage. For millions who adhere to the three major monotheistic religions, the phrase "gay marriage" is an oxymoron at best and an immoral union at worst. Without commenting on the nature or morality of private sexual activity between consenting adults, what is lost is this debate is the fundamental definition of family and what kind of "unit" is essential to a free society.
The American Experiment in representative democracy depends upon conscious and unconscious adherence to basic moral values. Our founders assumed that American citizens would be hard-working, honest, law-abiding, and loyal to family, clan and community. Marital fidelity and sexual discipline were critical virtues that unleashed the energy and inventiveness that formed the greatest nation in the history.
When Martin Luther King marched for Civil and Voting Rights for millions of disenfranchised people, he did so with a call to faith, moral rectitude, and a renewal of ideals held by all Americans. He and his colleagues took for granted the nuclear and extended family that included lifetime loyalty of husband and wife.
No civilization in history has ever questioned the primacy of the husband-wife relationship, even those cultures that wink at homosexual activity or other departures from "the norm."
The present call to equalize gay unions with heterosexual ones ignores biology, family psychology (ideally, Johnny needs a Mommy and a Daddy), history and sociology. Please notice that I have deliberately left out religious opinions, because they are so divisive. I think the great religions deserve consideration, for it is Monotheism that gace birth to morality and the legal traditions that uphold order.
The second issue is abortion. "Not another column on abortion!" you may cry. Recent attempts to have an unborn child considered a person in the case of a pregnant woman's murder have exposed the anti-child lobbies for who they really are. Several states will charge a person with double murder if an expectant mother is killed. Pro-choice advocates are so afraid of any opening that might restrict a woman's right to destroy her unborn, being-born or just-born child that they will not grant personhood to the tiniest victims of violence.
How are these issues related? Gay marriage and refusing to accept the personhood of the unborn are the twin sides of a chilling plot to undermine our very notions of life, morality and responsibility. Gay marriages can not naturally yield the next generation or unveil the male/female balance essential to emotional health. Refusing to see the unborn as persons makes all babies expendable. We are living in the first generation that realizes they were (and are?) expendable if they get in the way of the selfish needs of parents.
Gay marriage and abortion are, at their roots, a repudiation of life and the ultimate enthronement of the human ego as the only sovereign in life.
Without the value of life and the priority of family structures to gurantee our future, we sacrifice humankind's long-term health on an altar of self-destructive hedonism.
The American Experiment will end if we do not reaffirm first principles that value all life and ensure our future as a nation, even as a species.
The first issue is gay marriage. For millions who adhere to the three major monotheistic religions, the phrase "gay marriage" is an oxymoron at best and an immoral union at worst. Without commenting on the nature or morality of private sexual activity between consenting adults, what is lost is this debate is the fundamental definition of family and what kind of "unit" is essential to a free society.
The American Experiment in representative democracy depends upon conscious and unconscious adherence to basic moral values. Our founders assumed that American citizens would be hard-working, honest, law-abiding, and loyal to family, clan and community. Marital fidelity and sexual discipline were critical virtues that unleashed the energy and inventiveness that formed the greatest nation in the history.
When Martin Luther King marched for Civil and Voting Rights for millions of disenfranchised people, he did so with a call to faith, moral rectitude, and a renewal of ideals held by all Americans. He and his colleagues took for granted the nuclear and extended family that included lifetime loyalty of husband and wife.
No civilization in history has ever questioned the primacy of the husband-wife relationship, even those cultures that wink at homosexual activity or other departures from "the norm."
The present call to equalize gay unions with heterosexual ones ignores biology, family psychology (ideally, Johnny needs a Mommy and a Daddy), history and sociology. Please notice that I have deliberately left out religious opinions, because they are so divisive. I think the great religions deserve consideration, for it is Monotheism that gace birth to morality and the legal traditions that uphold order.
The second issue is abortion. "Not another column on abortion!" you may cry. Recent attempts to have an unborn child considered a person in the case of a pregnant woman's murder have exposed the anti-child lobbies for who they really are. Several states will charge a person with double murder if an expectant mother is killed. Pro-choice advocates are so afraid of any opening that might restrict a woman's right to destroy her unborn, being-born or just-born child that they will not grant personhood to the tiniest victims of violence.
How are these issues related? Gay marriage and refusing to accept the personhood of the unborn are the twin sides of a chilling plot to undermine our very notions of life, morality and responsibility. Gay marriages can not naturally yield the next generation or unveil the male/female balance essential to emotional health. Refusing to see the unborn as persons makes all babies expendable. We are living in the first generation that realizes they were (and are?) expendable if they get in the way of the selfish needs of parents.
Gay marriage and abortion are, at their roots, a repudiation of life and the ultimate enthronement of the human ego as the only sovereign in life.
Without the value of life and the priority of family structures to gurantee our future, we sacrifice humankind's long-term health on an altar of self-destructive hedonism.
The American Experiment will end if we do not reaffirm first principles that value all life and ensure our future as a nation, even as a species.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
