tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post8349327854968706794..comments2024-02-27T15:47:47.923-05:00Comments on Principled Perspectives: Obama's Christian Strategyprincipled perspectiveshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06502754865268315342noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post-47109620332737070272009-07-12T11:37:24.759-04:002009-07-12T11:37:24.759-04:00Nice analysis, Mike. Food for thought there; we...Nice analysis, Mike. Food for thought there; we'll see how things go in the coming months and years.<br /><br />On a side note, I liked this formulation: "The Rights of Man are the justification for one’s 'privilege'…i.e., one’s earned wealth and 'power'. "Michael Goldhttp://www.mgtutoring.com/blog/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post-61362710635700906222009-07-11T21:48:18.938-04:002009-07-11T21:48:18.938-04:00Harold, you're missing my point in the Jesus q...Harold, you're missing my point in the Jesus quote about taxes. He was not addressing the morality of taxes as a practice but the separation of the Christian's loyalty to God and the responsibility to still acknowledge earthly authority, regardless of the kind of authority to which they were subject at the time. As far as the kingdom quote is concerned, I'm not interested in getting into a debate about the presence of a spiritual element in the human experience. I simply used it to illustrate my point.<br /><br />And, Dad, I completely disagree that one's personal compass (morality) cannot be separate from one's beliefs and actions concerning government. My personal sense of morality and personal goals, firmly grounded in my spiritual experience and practice, are separate from my beliefs and actions concerning government. I seek to live a certain way, not to force anyone else to do the same. I do not see those as being mutually exclusive.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14508025632249734480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post-20477781668949742432009-07-09T20:42:39.627-04:002009-07-09T20:42:39.627-04:00In his historical book Property and Freedom, Richa...In his historical book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Property-Freedom-Richard-Pipes/dp/0375404988/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247186100&sr=1-2" rel="nofollow">Property and Freedom</a>, Richard Pipes writes on the early Christians:<br /><br /><i>Christians exhort their followers to give away their own wealth, whereas socialists call for the seizure and distribution of the wealth of others. The economic doctrines of the Christian Churches did not go beyond the voluntary renunciation of one’s own wealth.</i> (page 17)<br /><br />Pipes believed that this church position had to do with property rights rather than the doctrine of church-state separation, a much broader political principle rooted in the Enlightenment. In addition, this would be consistent with Jesus’ belief in the individuality of man and the idea that each is responsible for the salvation of his own soul. <br /><br />So Christine is right here in regards to the issue of force vs. voluntary giving. And yes, Christianity should be a separate movement from government. <br /><br />But Harold’s point that <i>“politics are derived from morality”</i> is crucial. The ethics of self-sacrifice predates Jesus, who got it from the Romans, who got it from the Greeks, who got it from Plato. Altruism, a term coined in the 19th century but which has been the dominant morality in various forms for the past 2500 years or so, transcends Christianity and religion in general. It was the 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant who secularized it (in a quite virulent form). The so-called <a href="http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-fall/mystical-ethics-new-atheists.asp" rel="nofollow">“New Atheists” cling to altruism</a>.<br /><br />The point is not to claim that all those who espouse altruism necessarily advocate force. Nor is it the point that one is not entitled to one’s own personal ethical beliefs. The point is that the political direction of a country is determined by the dominant philosophical ideas of a culture, and morality is the most powerful force in the field of ideas. Morality is not and cannot be “a separate movement from government”. <br /><br />Today’s acceleration of the statist/socialist/collectivist trend in America is making it increasingly clear that freedom and altruism are contradictory positions. Either freedom must be abandoned…or altruism must. Self-sacrifice as the supreme virtue is simply incompatible with the belief in the individual’s right to his own life and pursuit of happiness. As Harold says, the Catholic Church has already abandoned freedom (and Christianity’s original antipathy towards forcible redistribution) <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/09/does_obama_have_a_friend_in_the_vatican_97364.html" rel="nofollow">in favor of world collectivism</a>, and more and more non-Catholic Christians are gravitating towards altruism’s logical political end. President Obama seeks to cash in.principled perspectiveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06502754865268315342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post-85764291552100758402009-07-08T21:22:48.286-04:002009-07-08T21:22:48.286-04:00"These comments make it obvious how tying cap...<i>"These comments make it obvious how tying capitalism to the Christian faith presents a profound and fatal contradiction for Religious Rightists, such as Mark Levin and Paul Johnson. "</i><br><br>You're absolutely correct on that. Since politics are derived from morality, a morality informed by mysticism will be reflected in policy decisions--"saftey nets", the banning of certain substances, treating non-procreative sexual activities as criminal, and so on. Galt's speech has an excellent section on <a href="http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/original_sin.html" rel="nofollow">Original Sin</a>.<br /><br /><i>"Notice his equation of wealth with “power”, without defining the nature of that power."</i><br><br>A common package deal. We see the same thing with "monopolies".<br /><br />In case you hadn't heard, in a particularly galling move, the Pope has come out with a missive calling for a <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aUK_q1tvHrEc" rel="nofollow">new world order</a> with real teeth to control and regulate financial markets and fight "inequality".<br /><br />***<br /><br />Render to Caesar? Ok, and what if what is Caesar's is a military dictatorship? That's a separation of church and state, isn't it? A better question might be: By what right does Caesar take our money in the first place? As far as a kingdom being not of this world, that is not a strategy for dealing with actual problems. That as an escape from responsibility and reality.<br /><br /><i>"The desire Christians have to serve others cannot compare with socialism in that there is no force for others to comply."</i><br><br>As was stated in the article, the <i>essential moral principle</i> of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFC5OYU4Lyo" rel="nofollow">socialism</a> and all other collectivist political-economic systems is that man has no right to exist for his own sake. Whether one views that as duty to the poor, the incompetent, the monarchy, the race, or a being in another dimension is immaterial.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10897769844874861468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5495065931245897039.post-13920262206652824112009-07-08T09:06:23.454-04:002009-07-08T09:06:23.454-04:00What non-Christians, and even many Christians, don...What non-Christians, and even many Christians, don't acknowledge, however, is that Jesus advocated a separation of church and state. When asked about taxes he said "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's", and in answer to people's desire for him to overthrow the governing forces of his day he stressed that his kingdom is not of this world. Christianity, therefore, should be a separate movement from government. In many cases in practice it is not. The desire Christians have to serve others cannot compare with socialism in that there is no force for others to comply.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14508025632249734480noreply@blogger.com