Politics
Why Liberals Want Moral Freedoms and Business Restraints
Or “Why Conservatives Want Moral Restraints and Business Freedoms.”
Both of these statements could be the title for today’s subject. I was tempted to put both in one long sentence, but that would have only worked two hundred years ago when titles were long. This article is also about “Freedom and Form” in human societies. That also could have been the title.
So, I rolled the dice and chose the “liberal” title to catch your attention. Now, that I’ve got you thinking, let’s discuss a possible Best Explanation of this seeming contradiction. First, let’s define the terms liberal and conservative.
Two worldviews are currently fighting for supremacy in America and other nations around the world. One is the Christian worldview upon which this nation was founded that finds its roots in the teachings of biblical revelation. Generally speaking, a conservative political and social philosophy is consistent with the Christian view of life. That’s why in 2000 a high percentage of Christians voted for George E. Bush because he was generally known as a conservative politician. Christians, or traditional values people, vote conservative if they’re consistent with the Bible’s perspective.
The other worldview that has gained ascendancy in American life in the past forty years could be described as atheist, secular, or progressive (that’s what they like to call themselves). These words are all synonyms. Generally speaking, a liberal political or social philosophy is consistent with the atheist view of life. That’s also why in 2000 a high percentage of secularists voted for John Kerry–because he was known as the liberal politician. Secularists or progressives vote liberal if they’re consistent with their worldview.
Thus conservatives share a Christian view of reality. Liberals share an atheist view of life. That’s not an opinion–it’s just a fact. Not all conservatives are Christians; Not all liberals are atheists. However, Christians tend to be conservative and secularists tend to be liberal. It can be no other way.
Now back to the seeming contradiction. Have you ever wondered why liberals always want freedom, liberty or lack of constraints in moral areas (such as sex, marriage, abortion etc.), but on the other hand they strongly favor governmental controls, restraints or regulations on business and all forms of the free enterprise system? That doesn’t appear to be consistent. Why not freedom in morals and freedom in the marketplace? Or why not restraints on morality and restraints on business?
On the other side, conservatives want restraints, controls, or regulations on personal morality in society such as sexual immorality, the sanctity of life and marriage (between a man and woman), but on the other hand seek freedom, liberty, and a lack of constraints in the realm of business and commerce. We might ask again: Why don’t conservatives want either freedom or controls in both categories?
Not only are both camps inconsistent on freedom and regulation, but also choose opposite realms for liberty and control. Conservatives want morals to be regulated and enterprise to be free. Liberals want businesses to be regulated and morality to be free. Some examples will make this point clear.
In 2008, those who supported Barack Obama cast their votes for the liberal (atheist) view of life. Barack Obama is not just a liberal–he’s a radical liberal–the most liberal senator in the US Congress form 2006-2008. As a liberal president, Obama believes in freedom in morality such as abortion and lesbian, gay, bi-sexual transgender values such as the White House LGBT “Party” that was held this week.
On the other hand, he strongly believes in controlling business and free enterprise as seen by his strong arm tactics in the “Cap & Trade” legislation passed by the House. He shows this tendency in other business areas such as the take-over of various banks, government ownership of GM, his new stable of “czars” and the coming vision of government controlled health care. Obama and his followers want moral license to do anything they want; They also work hard to place mammoth controls and regulations on the American free enterprise system.
George W. Bush represented the polar opposite as president. He wanted restraints and controls on embryonic cell research, abortion, and did not support the homosexual liberation agenda. On the other side, he gave tax cuts to business, encouraging growth and creativity, and put his trust in the free enterprise system and liberation of the markets.
So WHY do liberals want moral freedom and business control–and conservatives desire moral controls and freedom for businesses?
I believe there are two best explanations for these differences.
First is the reality of form and freedom in human existence–the need for balance in life. Human beings have been designed by God to need both order and flexibility in their lives. We need “form” for stability and continuity, and we need “freedom” for creativity and expression. If all we have is “form,” our world is stable but robotic. If we are simply “free” then life becomes flighty and unsure. A balance of form and freedom are need to give wholeness to life.
In fact, true freedom cannot exist without wholesome constraint. For example, if everything in the room in which I’m writing was “free,” then chairs would be floating in the air, tables wouldn’t hold together, my computer would dissolve and there would be chaos. The “form” in the materials around me allow me as a human being to move “freely” through the room without being decked by a levitating table. My freedom is dependent on necessary form.
All of us live our lives in a balancing act of form and freedom. We have life habits such as homes in which to live, jobs to do, alarm clocks for wake up– i.e. patterns that are necessary for stability and security. But we also need the spontaneous and free side of life where we can call a friend, take a trip, do something crazy–i.e. acts of freedom and creativity that bring a zest and joy to life. If life has too much form, we get bored. If there’s too much freedom, we probably won’t live very long.
So these dual realities dictate our pursuit of both form and freedom in life. Liberals balance it out with freedom in morality and form in business. Conservatives strike the balance with order in morality and freedom in business and vocation.
And here’s the second reason why they choose what they do.
I believe it’s the truth of spiritual warfare. There’s a God and there’s a devil. That’s the Best Explanation.
Here’s how it works. God is the perfection of moral character. He is the standard of morality–what is right and what is wrong. He is righteously and justly for sexual purity, honoring marriage, respecting life, and moral self-control which is foundational to happiness and holiness. He knows that all immorality is both self-and-socially-destructive–and will separate a person from his holiness for eternity. God requires “form” in our moral relationships for our good.
He is also the Creator of the universe and all it contains. He wants man to take dominion over the earth–to steward and improve it. This can only be done through freedom, creativity, innovation, and few restraints on industry and enterprise. God’s “invisible hand” of freedom is the key to invention, prosperity and success. And God desires his creatures to be moral so that they can be productive.
So followers of God are for controls on morality and freedom in business.
It’s the equation for success.
But there is also a devil, impacting the hearts and minds of people who do not believe. This being–called Satan or Lucifer–influences non-believers in his direction. Satan wants to destroy people (John 10:10), and the easiest way to do this is to blind them to right and wrong. That’s why he’s for free sex, fornication, pornography, homosexuality, killing babies, altering marriage–and anything else that cripples the human spirit and separates them from a holy God. He also desires to bring them to poverty of life and health through government controls of commerce and industry. Satan wants people immoral and poor.
So followers of Lucifer (either consciously or unconsciously) are for freedom in morals and controls on business.
It’s the recipe for destruction.
Thus, the Best Explanation for this contradiction is that there are two primary spiritual forces in the world shaping people’s thoughts and positions. There is a God and there is a devil.
That explains it best.
Now you know what conservative and liberal mean. You know where each idea comes from. The genius of America was the power of morality producing freedom and prosperity–through faith in God. The downfall of America will be achieved through the decay of immorality that produces poverty–through faith in men (devil-inspired).
As we -approach the 4th of July–I pray that we will choose faith, morality and liberty–for our good and God’s glory.
Got Your Permit to Study the Bible?
I’m in Southern California right now with my family which really brought the seriousness of this story to mind. Do Bible-believing Christians understand that a season of persecution could be right around the corner in this nation? Actually, not around the corner: Recently, it showed up at the front door in San Diego county.
The following story of suppression of faith will be even more likely if homosexual behavior and marriage are legitimatized by law–one more reason for you to fight the good cultural fight in your state and nation and stay on fire for liberty of conscience. RB
Carlos Ray “Chuck” Norris is an American martial artist, action star and television and film actor who also writes a weekly column for Human Events. This article appeared on 6-2-09.
by Chuck Norris
Recently a California pastor and his wife were required by San Diego County officials to obtain a permit to hold a Bible study in their home.
“What?! Is this a joke?” I wondered as I heard the news for the first time. It was no joke. Rather, it’s a First Amendment nightmare and possibly a foreshadowing of what’s to come.
Are you prepared for a future in which you hear, “Got your permit to study the Bible?”
On April 10 (Good Friday), a county code enforcement officer visited the home of David and Mary Jones after receiving a complaint about their Christian gatherings. The Jones’ attorney, Dean Broyles, president of The Western Center for Law & Policy, conveyed in disbelief, “The county asked (Mrs. Jones), ‘Do you have a regular meeting in your home?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say “amen”?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you pray?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say “praise the Lord”?’ ‘Yes.'”
The officer then warned the family to “cease and desist” the “religious gathering” or they would face weekly fines. A few days later, the county delivered a citation claiming that the Joneses were guilty of “unlawful use of land” and mandating them to “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit.”
At first, I thought, “They must have a large congregation meeting in their home to warrant this type of citation and prompt this type of commotion, right?” Actually, according to their lawyer, the Joneses have been hosting weekly Bible studies in their home for about five years, with an average attendance of only about 15 people.
Broyles appropriately responded, “If the county thinks they can shut down groups of 10 or 15 Christians meeting in a home, what about people who meet regularly at home for poker night? What about people who meet for Tupperware parties? What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a regular basis and support the Chargers?”
Well, this past weekend, barraged by hundreds of complaints after WorldNetDaily broke the news to the international community, San Diego County officials informed the world that they’d backed down from requiring the Joneses to obtain a permit. Despite their retraction (based solely upon public pressure, I might add), however, I am appalled at how far the county’s enforcement and encroachment crossed the constitutional line and became a flagrant disregard for Americans’ right to exercise their religious faiths. And I’m concerned that we will see far more of these overreaching governmental actions in years to come.
As Mary Jones shared with Fox News: “The implications are great because it’s not only us that’s involved. There are thousands and thousands of Bible studies that are held all across the country. What we’re interested in is setting a precedent here — before it goes any further — and that we have it settled for the future.”
I’m not expecting county officials to be constitutional lawyers, but they should be aware of these basic precepts of America’s makeup. For example, prior to the San Diego officials’ recanting their position regarding the Joneses’ Bible study, Chandra Waller, the general manager of the county’s Land Use and Environment Group, declared, “The Bible studies are one that’s probably in a very gray area.”
“Very gray area”? Is there anything “very gray” about the First Amendment?
I agree again with Broyles, who explained further to Fox News: “The government may not prohibit the free exercise of religion. I believe that our Founding Fathers would roll over in their grave if they saw that here in the year 2009, a pastor and his wife are being told that they cannot hold a simple Bible study in their own home.”
Part of the genius of America’s Founding Fathers was to provide and secure a foundation for our freedom of religious belief. The First Amendment simply reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Could it be any clearer that government may not prohibit “the free exercise thereof”?
Now more than ever, we need to be like the Joneses! Fight for the First Amendment and your freedom to exercise your religion.
Obama Nation’s Low View of Christianity
I don’t usually pass on an article like this under the Fresh Fire banner, but this is so important that I’m compelled to break precedent. We need to get “fired up” over the deliberate attempt by the current Administration to downplay or rid America of its founding faith. America without Christ is like Earth without oxygen–it will die. May this insightful article put a fire within you to pray, share your faith, and help rebuild our glorious foundations. RB
By Robert Knight, June 8, 2009 in townhall.com
Robert Knight, a senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries and a Senior Fellow with the American Civil Rights Union
President Obama’s comment to French television on June 1 that the United States is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world,” plus his Islam-praising speech in Cairo, Egypt on June 4, raise anew questions about his own faith and how he views America.
Questions can also be asked about his math. The CIA Factbook estimates America’s Muslim population at 0.6 percent, or about 1.8 million, which puts it in 58th place among nations’ total Muslim populations. Even if you take the Islamic Information Center’s high estimate of 8 million, that still puts the U.S. at 29th out of 60 nations.
In Cairo, Obama quoted from the Koran, used his middle name of Hussein, and indicated that the United States and Muslim nations have the same commitment to tolerance and freedom. To fathom the absurdity, think about the possibility of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution springing from the pens of Islamic scholars Thomas al-Jefferson and James al-Madison.
Over the past three years, Obama has made it his business to insist that “we are no longer a Christian nation.” He has said it in many places, here and abroad. In 2006, in Washington, D.C., he said, “Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation. At least, not just.” He posted the same sentiment on his campaign website.
At the Compassion Forum at Messiah College in Pennsylvania on April 13, 2008, he said, “We are not just a Christian nation. We are a Jewish nation; we are a Buddhist nation; we are a Muslim nation; Hindu nation; and we are a nation of atheists and nonbelievers.”
In Turkey, at a press conference on April 10, he said: “Although we have a large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values. I think modern Turkey was founded with a similar set of values.”
During the presidential campaign, the media pounced on anyone who inquired into Obama’s Muslim upbringing in Indonesia, his two Muslim fathers or his later 20-year attendance at radical pastor Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Now, his Muslim roots are touted as an asset.
No one can say for sure what Obama actually believes, since only God can know the human heart. So we are left examining his words and actions.
The media-enforced line for the past three years has been that he is a self-described mainstream Christian, end of story. Even when Obama badly distorted Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount into a clarion call to accept homosexuality, the press yawned. They yawned (or cheered) when he mocked the Bible’s relevance for politics in that 2006 Washington, D.C. speech:
“Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is okay? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith, or should we just stick with the Sermon on the Mount, a passage which is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application. Folks haven’t been reading the Bible.”
More cheers came when he spoke the language of unity while taking a shot at his political opponents during a speech at the United Church of Christ convention in 2007:
“Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and started being used to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it’s because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us.
“We can recognize the truth that’s at the heart of the UCC: that the conversation is not over [God needs an editor]; that our roles are not defined [men in dresses, unite]; that through ancient texts and modern voices, God is still speaking [yes, we’re ripping out pages of the Bible daily to suit our appetites], challenging us to change not just our own lives, but the world around us …hate has no place in the hearts of believers.”
Is it not hateful to suggest that people who disagree with you are full of “hate?” Is it unifying to accuse opponents of inventing fights that they didn’t start?
More odd things have been happening since Obama’s election that should give pause to even the most cynical observers.
On the Saturday before Obama’s swearing-in, V. Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire, gave an invocation at a pre-inaugural event at the Lincoln Memorial. The New York Times interviewed him beforehand:
“Bishop Robinson said he had been rereading inaugural prayers through history and was ‘horrified’ at how ‘specifically and aggressively Christian they were.’ Bishop Robinson said, ‘I am very clear that this will not be a Christian prayer, and I won’t be quoting Scripture or anything like that. The texts that I hold as sacred are not sacred texts for all Americans, and I want all people to feel that this is their prayer.’”
As one of his first judicial appointments, Obama named Indiana federal judge David Hamilton to the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Hamilton, who had ruled that a pastor could not invoke the name of Jesus in an opening prayer for the Indiana legislature, said that, on the other hand, invoking Allah at a public event is fine.
In April, it was reported that Obama appointed Harry Knox, a Catholic-bashing homosexual activist, to the Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Knox, who directs the religion program at the largest gay pressure group, the Human Rights Campaign, described Pope Benedict and other Catholic clergy as “discredited leaders” because of their stand for traditional marriage, and called the Knights of Columbus “foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression” because of their support of California’s Proposition 8 marriage amendment.
On April 14, 2009, the Obama team had Georgetown University cover up the Greek letters IHS, which stand for Jesus, so they would not show up when he spoke in front of them.
On May 7, Obama declined to hold any White House event to mark the National Day of Prayer, a decision hailed by Barry Lynn’s hard left Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.
In his eloquent commencement speech at Notre Dame on May 17, Obama sounded a conciliatory note, lamented, sort of, the abortions that he wants taxpayers to fund, and gave more clues that Christianity will move over and shrink before a universalist moral relativism:
“The size and scope of the challenges before us require that we remake [not “reform” or “restore,” but “remake”] our world to renew its promise; that we align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age.
“Your generation must decide how to save God’s creation from a changing climate that threatens to destroy it….. And we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity — diversity of thought, diversity of culture, and diversity of belief.”
If diversity in and of itself is god, where does that leave Jesus Christ – the Lord of Lords and King of Kings, the Alpha and the Omega, the Way, the Truth and the Life, through Whom all things were created?
Well, the Obama Nation might just ask Him to change his name to … Allah.