Culture of Death (A Note for Neal Boortz and other Libertarians)
My views are anchored in our heritage of freedom and faith. For our founders, individual freedom was paramount, but Christian character was equally important. The former was established in the founding documents, formalized finally in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The latter was not a thing of civil laws, no can be; nevertheless, numerous founders and leaders down through the years asserted the necessity of Christian character based on faith in God, warning that freedom would falter if virtuous character were abandoned, not only by leaders but by the citizens. Neither a constitution nor laws can assure character or virtue. Sadly, the results of that loss are already obvious, as we are led largely by liars, so much so that “lying politicians” has become a punch line.
That brings us to social conservatives, the charge of “theocracy,” and abortion, topics Neal Boortz hammers relentlessly. I was a radio broadcaster for 15 years, and I enjoyed hosting talk programs. I am not uncomfortable on the air, and I'm not intimidated by famous people. Still, I will not attempt to discuss this as a caller, partly because I doubt I'm as quick on my feet as Boortz, partly because my argument is not a few words.
I'm not sure I'd consider myself a social conservative, partly because I seriously doubt the value of trying to pass laws against things that have become part of the present culture. Abortion was never legal when most people would have been horrified at the thought; and when the Supreme Court abused its power to permit it, most still were horrified. With the propaganda and indoctrination that have since transpired, undoing the Court's decision is nearly if not entirely impossible, despite over 35 years of trying. As one who still leans in that direction, I would prefer representatives that would, at least, help end the worst aspects of this “legal” practice and still protect our free speech right to oppose it, but my concerns run in a somewhat different direction.
Before I explain that, I'd like to comment on the charge of “theocracy.” Nonsense is my simple retort. Even the most devout Christians have learned the lesson of “Christian government” by sinful humans. It has been tried and largely failed because it fell into tyranny, a thing far, far from Biblical faith or justification. Like Islam, to some extent, well-meaning leaders fell into the temptations of power, and evil men learned how to use the labels to creative their own weapons of control. Christians have only one King, and He is Jesus Christ. Few of us would trust any human, no matter how admirable, to have governmental power over us; the lessons of history speak loudly and clearly.
What we do want is a restoration of freedom that includes faith, not one that seeks to box in Christians, especially, at every turn, not one that celebrates immorality, selfishness, and death. “Separation of Church and State” is a myth, an egregious judgment by the Supreme Court that flies in the face of the plain language of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...” This prohibits the government's influence in and over the Church, and clearly protects the free exercise, including when such exercise is political. Nothing in the culture of that time would support the absurd lengths to which a “wall of separation” has been used to restrict Christians. The phrase from a letter to a Baptist church clearly reassures them of keeping the government out, not the reverse, to say nothing of the fact that Jefferson was not an author of either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights so that his opinions weren't necessarily relevant in any case.
Yet again, this has become a problem of culture, not of law, although the current President is operating close if not beyond present law. What of the culture? I call it a “culture of death,” and it is to this concern that I would encourage Mr. Boortz to address his obviously capable mind. Now, I'm not Catholic, but I probably owe the phrase to Pope John Paul. Wesley Smith wrote a book Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America, which discusses the concerns related to medical ethics, but I've never read it (though I probably should). Peggy Noonan wrote a column that is well worth reading. Nearly 30 years ago, Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop warned us where we were heading, and now we've arrived.
Yesterday, a teenager randomly killed three strangers in a suburban Cleveland school. A BBC investigation claims as many as 2500 children die of neglect or abuse in the United States every year. A father kills himself and his two sons. A woman who may have killed her two-year-old daughter is found innocent to the shock of many. Nearly 55,000,000 babies have been aborted since 1973 when the Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade. Do these stories have a common thread? I believe they do.
Whether you are a Christian or even sympathetic to Christian ideas, it's nearly impossible to deny some remarkable changes adherents brought to the world. Perhaps the greatest isthe value of life. Since both Jews and Christians believe that the humans are created in the image of God by a special act of creation, and since Christians followed Christ's teachings to make disciples wherever they went, in a very short time, the world went from having a low regard for the life of babies, slaves, women, prisoners, and the sick and injured to one that was filled with hospitals, orphanages, shelters, and humane prisons. British Christians led the charge in abolishing slavery and then, to a great extent, used their empire and its maritime power to force its abolition through much of the rest of the world. A majority of American Christians opposed slavery, except where their very livelihood seemed to require it, and their opposition surely led to its eventual abolition.
Sadly, as Schaefffer and Koop predicted, Western Civilization has turned a corner, and frankly it is slowly returning to the pagan worldview that cared little for life. It is absurd to imagine that 55,000,000 abortions has no effect on the values of Western culture. The very existence of the “quality of life” view, supporting the abortion or starvation of infants with birth defects, the quick removal of life support to those seriously injured or sickened, and both assisted suicide and euthanasia, encourages a general movement away from the “sanctity of life” to a culture of death. Some have even tried to defend this new view, in direct response to Pope John Paul, as a culture of liberty.
Since he is a prominent voice to the culture, I am saddened that a Neal Boortz assumes that the libertarian view of individual choice is the end of the matter, and it's only about a woman's right to control her own body. I might wish he were right, but he isn't. If he says nothing more, then he becomes at least silent proponent of the culture of death!
Support for unrestricted abortion is apparently slipping; the President's clever strategy to shift the debate from abortion to contraception may be another indication that abortion isn't a winning issue for him. As I've already indicated, that interests me here only in that it may indicate a shift away from the death culture. I believe that is where Christians, conservatives, and even thoughtful libertarians must engage their resources, less to win elections and more to teach and change minds. Abortion is a largely ignored, almost invisible sign of the problem, despite its magnitude; killing children or abusing them is an entirely visible and unpleasant indication of the deeper trouble in our culture. While we work to reduce the size and power of the government, on one hand, I believe we must work just as hard to address the culture to restore it to a culture of life. Personally, I see that as easier from a Christian perspective, but think the reality of the problem makes it possible to address from the broader view.
I will be honest. I don't presume to have this all figured out. I believe strongly in individual freedom, as it relates to government; consolidation of power and money only assures the eventual rule of evil men who thirst for power. However, even free people can become an evil people if nothing curtails their selfishness. Multiculturalism that accepts everything (but ultimately believes nothing) coupled with moral relativism is worthless. I believe Neal has alluded to having faith personally, and I think his blunt objection to social conservatives is consistent with his well-thought-out libertarian perspective. I would simply urge him to use his voice into the culture to encourage the development of personal value systems consistent with life and not death.
Interestingly, many of us who are advocates of individual liberty, including Boortz, are ardent opponents of Marxism; the culture of death is wholly compatible with Marxism. One only needs to look at any Communist nation to see death the nearly ruling ideology—Mao and Stalin alone killing 100,000,000, apart from the ravages in N. Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, and, yes, even Germany (Hitler's “National Socialist” Nazi party was socialist, not conservative or right-wing, despite leftists' wishful thinking). China's abortion mandates have killed nearly 400,000,000 unborn children,most likely leading to the world's highest suicide rate among women. With the preference for aborting girl babies, it well deserves its “culture of death” designation, perhaps the world's leading death culture, yet admired by some in the West.
In the end, the power of government is the power to kill, a primary reason why every thinking individual should oppose big, powerful governments. Those who trust government or certain leaders are foolish to do so. Part of our challenge in opposing Marxism, big government, and death must be to show people the connection, especially those whom Boortz and others call the “moochers,” those who look to the government to provide for them, to “take from the rich” to give to whomever. Such is also the risk in nationalized healthcare, of which Obamacare is merely a prelude, if not overturned. Already its mandates are creating greater spending than promised; the end of such a process are those “death panels” advocates loved to mock—abortion and infanticide—encouraged, paid for, if not mandated—at one end to limit the population's growth, and delayed and refused medical care and euthanasia at the other, where medical costs are the highest. That's where our increasingly Marxist, culture of death is taking us.
One of my Facebook friends, after seeing the BBC piece on American child abuse, remarked that we're living in tough economic times. Yes, we are, but I contend that to be irrelevant. A culture of death has little to do with wealth or poverty; rich people can be terrible parents while the poor can rear children who themselves become prosperous. Society may reflect the collective values of its people, but it is individuals who are good or not. In this respect, selfishness is the ultimate evil, one subtly encouraged by teaching “self-esteem.” Here again the culture of death becomes evident, as the selfish come to value no life but their own. Lack of resources doesn't lead to neglecting children; selfish parents neglect their children, rich or poor (Selfish parents are also more likely to decide to kill a child, especially via a socially acceptable abortion).
Perhaps the broader culture cannot embrace a “life is sacred” value system, but I'd like to believe a diverse people could see that life is precious, every life. That's what we all need to do, to create a foundation for thought that life is precious, especially innocent life, especially dependent life (I still support the death penalty for the worst cases of murder, adequately proven and clearly NOT innocent). For me, this is not a conservative or a liberal issue; it needs to become an American issue, one seen and valued by people of many other diverse opinions. However, I believe, in the end, it will be the wise people, many of them conservative, libertarian, and classic liberal, and not a few Christians and Jews, who can, and I hope will, take up and meet the challenge. The very life of our nation and its people depends upon it!
Comments