Steve Camp seems to be a little bit befuddled about the nuts-and-bolts of the democratic process.
***QUOTE***
What happens when an ally in the co-belligerent fight against a liberal judiciary defects on an important value-based piece of legislation like this one? With Roe v. Wade considered to be a political plumbline for Supreme Court appointees by the White House and stem cell research a litmus test for conservative family values (thought by many to be another form of ending human life by pro-life advocates including myself) is not upheld by political conservatives, it could have a polarizing effect within the Republican Party. Do the ECB Fab Four now stand against their "Washington ally" because he’s changed his position on this issue and is no longer "in-sync" with their agenda? The ironic and interesting thing is now Senator Frist is being co-belligerent against the co-belligerents he once was co-belligerent with. Fun isn't it? Will FOTF begin a "recovery program" for former ECBers who have defected on a key point of evangelical backed valued-legislation? How will they confront this with Frist and not alienate him on other issues? Can anyone say, "Potomac two-step?"
Once again folks, when someone’s cultural burden for society, though noble, is played out by vacillating political ethics rather than immutable biblical ones, then this what you get.
***END-QUOTE***
There’s a simple solution to this pseudo-dilemma: it’s called “voting.” You vote for those who support your views, and you vote against those who oppose your views. If they change their views, you change your voting patterns accordingly.
This is why elective representatives are called…well…are called elective representatives. They are elected to represent the views and interests of their constituents. If, at some point, they cease to represent their constituents, then their constituents have the right to vote them out of office.
BTW, the same thing can happen in church. If, say, the pastor goes liberal, you either leave the church or make him leave the church.
I'm following the practice of James Taranto, blogger for Best of the Web (www.opinionjournal.com).
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt, though, that Triablogue is pretty primitive when it comes to formatting amenities. But at least it's a better than a Greek MS! :-)
I would like to second and emphasize JD's point. In politics, you have three options: don't vote, vote for a loser, or vote for the best electable candidate.
ReplyDeleteWe don't expect a candidate to agree with us 100% of the time. So it's a question of priorities. Which electable candidate offers the best overall package?
I think you guys need to read a lot more of what Campi is trying to say. Go back and read some archives. His point is that those in the Religious Right who think they are going to influence public policy enough to make people who have not been changed by Jesus Christ into conservatives and pro-lifers are wasting their time. He wants to show that politics will never change a nation. We should instead focus as Christians on evangelism and tow the line on our own theological and cultural issues rather than trying to find others who disagree with us on fundamentals of the faith and work with them on an agenda that will never work to change this nation. What we end up doing is setting ourselves up to compromise in order to get our agenda accomplished when our agenda all along should have been sharing the love of Christ with the people we end up sparring with. Doesn't that make sense?
ReplyDeleteHonestly Campi has influenced me a great deal to stop the politiking and start focusing on the message of Christ. I think we all need to do that a little more.