Political Roundup

South Dakota abortion ban – As most of you probably know, South Dakota has passed a law banning abortions in all cases except when the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. Some in the pro-life movement have criticized the law, saying that a Supreme Court ruling against the law could threaten our ability to enact pro-life laws in the future.

Maybe I’m idealistic, but I believe every state should ban abortion and I believe every chief executive – mayors, county commissioners, governors, and even the President should ignore the Supreme Court ruling that makes the murder of unborn children a Constitutional right. Why would anyone carry out a law that makes murder legal? Why would any chief executive allow checks to be written to organizations that make money by murdering unborn children? Sure, we should generally obey the governing authorities even when they are wrong – but not when the government asks us to stop doing something God told us to do or to do something God told us not to do. Carrying out a law that legalizes and in some cases even funds the murder of over 1 million babies every year is wrong no matter what the Supreme Court says.

If I were the president, I would make sure that not a dime went to abortion providers and I would refuse to enforce a Supreme Court ruling that overturned a law banning abortion. The problem with the pro-life movement isn’t that it is overreaching, but that people who understand that abortion is murder continue to vote for people who say they are pro-life, do precious little to stop the practice (if Republican presidents had merely appointed pro-life Supreme Court justices Roe v. Wade would have been overturned), and then they oversee the people who write checks to abortion providers.

And knowing how indifferent our “pro-life” elected officials are on this issue, I voted for them anyway. I pray that I will never again vote for anyone who would compromise, appoint a pro-baby murder justice, write a check to an abortion provider, or carry out any law that legalizes unborn baby murder.

Iraq - I believe the Muslim world is at war with us whether we acknowledge it or not. Our government is responsible for defending us against those who are at war with us and they are entitled to use lethal force if necessary. [The governing authorities are to punish evildoers and they don’t bear the sword in vain. (Rom. 13)]

Given that this is the case, it is up to our President and the Congress to decide when and where we need to fight those who are at war with us. I’m not sure that now is the time and I’m not sure Iraq and Afghanistan are the places, but someone must be responsible for making those decisions and that person is President Bush with the consent of the Congress. I pray that those decisions have been made with wisdom from on high and I believe there is nothing wrong per se in fighting the battle against Islamic militants in Iraq and Afghanistan.

However, I do believe that if the President believes this is the time and those are the places he should fight more aggressively. If the President intends to subdue the military opposition in Iraq, he should use overwhelming force until the opposition has given up the fight. It is not fair to the soldiers who are sent, for our government to be fighting the battle with one hand tied behind its back, so to speak.

Iran and Nuclear Weapons – If the United States government went into Iraq in part because it was pursuing nuclear weapons, then what would prevent it from going into Iran? If the Iranian government is at war with the United States, if it is working to destroy the United States and supporting others who believe the same, then it would make sense that Iran’s nuclear capability would be a grave threat to the United States. Again, this leaves the President with the responsibility of determining whether now is the time and Iran is the place to stop the spread of nuclear arms to nations that are working to destroy us. On the one hand, a preemptive strike against Iran could start a chain of events that would lead us into a much bigger war in the very near future. Or, it could prevent nuclear weapons from being made that would either be used against the United States or to blackmail the United States. We pray that God will give President Bush the wisdom necessary to make the right decision.

That being said, I don’t believe our government has the right to compel a government that isn’t at war with us and isn’t supporting a government that is at war with us to give up a defense motivated program to develop nuclear weapons. My belief in the right of the U.S. government to destroy Iran’s nuclear capability is based solely on our right of self-defense – on my belief that the Iranian government is working to destroy our nation. Whether that right should be exercised requires wisdom.

Immigration – I disagree with many political conservatives on this issue. I don’t see any problem with millions of immigrants coming to this country to work and build a better life for their families. The Scriptures say we are to be kind and even generous to the alien. And what a great opportunity to spread the Gospel! If the Mexicans want to live here, throw away the quotas and let them come!

The problem I have with the current immigration, then, isn’t the immigration itself but how the government is handling the immigration. First, given the fact that Muslim militants are seeking a way to destroy us and that criminals from other countries are trying to find a way in to prey upon our people, our government should defend the borders – something it has been quite unwilling to do. Our government should determine as well as it can that the people crossing our borders are not a threat to our security. Apparently, it isn’t too difficult to come into the United States unnoticed. The borders should be protected.

Second, immigrants shouldn’t cost so much money to support. But in my opinion, this is not really an immigration problem but a welfare-state problem. Government programs such as compulsory public education, unemployment insurance, social security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unsustainable at current birth and death rates, but more important they usurp what should be responsibilities of individuals and families. Immigration used to be relatively inexpensive – in fact increasing the population of productive people through immigration increased the wealth of our nation. The government was primarily in the business of protecting life and property and not in the business of raising children and providing for retirement and health care. These were things families did on their own. As the Law of Moses says, we should treat the alien the same as the native born. If we can’t afford immigration it’s because we have foolishly created a welfare state that we can’t afford (and shouldn’t even if we could).

2006 elections – If you are concerned about the Republicans losing the 2006 elections, I believe your concerns are well founded. As a waiter in a family restaurant, I hear a lot of discussions and I assure you people are not happy with Republicans generally and with President Bush specifically. Conservatives are fed up with out of control government spending and compromises on social issues, while liberals are fed up with the war. The best argument the Republicans have for reelection would be, “We are really bad but the Democrats are far worse.”

As I get older I become more convinced that the only way to save the country from the secular liberals is for Christian conservatives to abandon the Republican Party. This may seem counterintuitive – for it would probably hand the government over to the Democrats, who will implement much more quickly the secular liberal agenda. But the country probably needs to see what happens when the liberals get their way (and make a mess of things) before they will be ready for a government based on Christian principles. As it is, the Republicans, who appear to be the party more closely aligned with our principles, are running the country more and more in a liberal and secular manner but are doing it more slowly than what the Democrats would. In my opinion, the only chance for this secular, liberal philosophy being adopted by the mainstream is for its program to be implemented slowly, which is just what the Republicans are doing.

Guess what? I’m not voting Republican in 2006.

<<Previous

Next>>