MInTheGap

Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.

The Paris Hiltons Of Politics

March 25th, 2009 Visited 1826 times, 2 so far today
This image was selected as a picture of the we...

This image was selected as a picture of the week on the Malay Wikipedia for the 26th week, 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In 1776, things were much different than they are today.  America was made up of a primarily Christian people– some of them slaves, some prisoners, some outcasts and some that were looking for a fresh start.  Whether it was Anglican, Puritan, Catholic or Quaker, the nation was made up of people with a common set of moral guideposts, a common mental framework, and a concept of a common Creator God.

That’s what you see flowing through the Declaration of Independence, as a people that held to the Bible’s demands that you submit to the governing authority over you grappled with when and if that governing authority could cross a line where obedience was no longer required– indeed, that revolution could be pursued.

That’s part of what makes the defectors so interesting– it wasn’t that all the people in the colonies believed that the revolutionaries were right in their theological defense.  Some were not persuaded, and chose to do nothing, while some looked at the moral argument and chose to side with the British Empire– of which they were all subjects.

So, in the aftermath of the Revolution, the group of leaders had to come up with a government.  As anyone who has been a part of helping to craft a church or organization’s constitution knows, the writers of that constitution are predisposed to put into it things to address problems that they are now having.  This is exactly why the Bill of Rights had to be passed soon after the Constitution was ratified– not because the founders believed that the government could infringe on those rights– or should have any say on those rights– but because the states wanted assurances that they could choose to worship as they pleased, etc.

However, foundational to all of this was the idea of this common moral framework.  The Founders understood that without a common foundation for right and wrong there would be the tendency to define morality with whatever the populace believed to be moral– and within that, people (being human) would sometimes vote against what they knew to be right for their own gain.

And that’s what we’re seeing now.  Having removed the Christian law and moral tradition from our education system, and replaced it with secular humanism, we have a war of ideologies going on, and a shifting moral system.  And we’re seeing the result of that war, and we’ve yet to see what has happened in every other country… where it ceases to be just that “you’re wrong” but goes into “you’re evil.”

Sure, some are saying it, but it’s not public sentiment– yet.

Our Founders were rich in understanding.  They worked hard to give us both freedom and a strong Constitution.  We are the inheritors of it– but we’re spending it away as quickly as possible because it’s not really our “money” and we don’t understand our history and how the world works.

We are the Paris Hiltons of politics.

Comments

4 Comments

RSS
  • Ling says on: March 25, 2009 at 11:04 am

     

    Does worry me sometimes, that notions of right and wrong change so quickly, and the way the ‘majority’ keeps changing what it deems to be sacred and what’s permissible in the name of entertainment and freedom.

    There’s got to be some absolute values, not subject to interpretation or the polls. But that’s not going to happen, is it?

  • Rachel says on: March 25, 2009 at 1:21 pm

     

    Part of the problem is that we’ve abandoned the concept of an absolute morality, or at least a standard to which we can derive our morals. Today our morals are based on “what I feel is right” instead of one standard to reference. We will continue to have an upheaval of morality in this country as long as we base our opinions on how we feel.

    Rachels last blog post..Where Are You Planted?

  • Martin Schratt says on: April 4, 2009 at 2:01 am

     

    Actually, Secular humanists were there at the founding of the country and even at the reformation (shocking I know). Thomas Payne foremost among them, but Jefferson and Washington were not exactly Christian fundmentalists either.

    You assert that: Whether it was Anglican, Puritan, Catholic or Quaker, the nation was made up of people with a common set of moral guideposts, a common mental framework, and a concept of a common Creator God.

    Really?

    Have you studied the discussions about slavery? Or How about the Bleeding of Kansas? The people who populated our country back then are just as diverse as we are today.

    And just as willing to persecute, ever study about the Mormons?

    And then you assert:

    And that’s what we’re seeing now. Having removed the Christian law and moral tradition from our education system, and replaced it with secular humanism, we have a war of ideologies going on, and a shifting moral system. And we’re seeing the result of that war, and we’ve yet to see what has happened in every other country… where it ceases to be just that “you’re wrong” but goes into “you’re evil.”

    More questions:
    What exactly is the “Christian Law”? ‘Cause if you mean the ten commandments they are actually Jewish. Most Christians don’t feel bound by them and Roman Christians interpret them quite differently from “Protestant” Christians.

    And finally what results are you talking about? And what countries?

    Finally, making an epithet out of someone’s name effectively destroys you claim to moral superiority. It is also ineffective communication. I understand that you think our political dialogue needs improvement, what I don’t understand is how you propose to do that. It is as if you believe that if everyone read the Bible for 20 min each day then we would all achieve political agreement.

    As a Christian and a Humanist let me suggest that because we are human we will never agree on politics. The first challenge God has given us is not to agree about everything, but to find ways to live with each other despite our disagreements.

    • MInTheGap says on: April 11, 2009 at 10:04 pm

       

      I’ve decided to take the time to respond to the “meat” of your comment in a separate post (to appear on 4-13), but I will address your final comments.

      Sometimes it’s important to catch attention through a title, and my point of the post was not so much to judge Ms. Hilton as to say that we’re not in a position to judge her– because we’re guilty of the same thing. We are the ones that have inherited a great founding and a great heritage and are choosing to waste it all.

      And, to tell the truth, I wish that we would take a lesson from her– because as she’s kept herself out of the news and has seemed to reform, so we need to see the light and go back to the truths of Scripture.

MInTheGap

Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.

%d bloggers like this: