Where Have All the Moral Questions Gone?

As I have contemplated and analyzed last night's Presidential debate I have found myself continually perplexed by what I watched. I am fully aware that the great pressing concern of Americans right now is the economy. I also believe our national defense is a high priority. What absolutely puzzles me though, is the fact that neither candidate spoke (nor did they in the first debate) to me. That is, neither spoke to Evangelical Christians.

It's clear both candidates were attempting to hit hard on the hot button issues that interest swing voters. I'm also aware that the majority of the questions were asked from audience members. Nonetheless, it appears the candidates have either forgotten or taken for granted a great part of the voting public. My guess is that they feel they can sidestep many of the toughest questions each would be faced with as president, the "moral" questions.

Both campaigns would like to believe that since their candidates are not being forced to speak to these issues, the issues have somehow faded off the scene and out of existence. Thankfully, some are still raising these tough questions. In fact, the day before the debate George Weigel of, Newsweek, reminded us of some of these tough, yet very important questions in his article, Dangling Conversations: Posing the Moral Questions Facing the Next President. Here are his questions:

ON MATTERS OF FOREIGN POLICY
1. This past April, Pope Benedict XVI spoke at the United Nations of the "duty to protect" and described it as the litmus test of political legitimacy. Does the United States have a moral obligation to act, alone or in concert with others, when governments manifestly fail in their "duty to protect"?

2. Religiously-shaped moral conviction plays multiple, dynamic roles in 21st century world politics. Very few people at the Department of State, the Department of Defense, or the Central Intelligence Agency understand this. What will you do to change that?

3. Forget the chatter about "preemption." The correct term, within the classic just war tradition, is "the morally justified first-use of armed force." Do you think the first use of armed force is ever morally justifiable? Is so, when? If not, why not?

4. What role does distorted religious conviction play in creating the dangers we face from terrorists? How can American public diplomacy address those convictions?

5. What is the responsibility of the United States to help ensure that the new Iraq is safe for all its religious communities? What is the moral responsibility of the U.S. government toward displaced Iraqi Christians, many of whom have fled the country?

ON MATTERS OF DOMESTIC POLICY
6. Do you consider homosexuality the equivalent of race for purposes of U.S. civil rights law?

7. Is any public defense of classic biblical sexual morality a de facto act of intolerance and discrimination against gays?

8. Should Roman Catholic and evangelical social service agencies working with orphans be legally required to consider gay couples on an equal basis as foster-care providers? How about as potential adoptive parents?

9. Does the increasingly assertive role played by federal courts in adjudicating hotly contested questions of public policy threaten the moral fabric of American democracy, by taking serious decisions out of the hands of the people and their elected representatives? Are we becoming morally lazy in allowing the courts to decide so many issues for us?

10. Are you at all concerned that the trajectory of Supreme Court jurisprudence over the past six decades risks driving religiously informed moral argument out of our public life?

11. What is the moral balance to be struck between sensible work on climate change and the aspirations of the Third World poor, many of whom live in countries dependent on high-carbon-emission technologies for economic development?

12. How would your administration foster a culture of savings and personal financial responsibility in the United States?

13. What role, if any, should Washington play in elevating our national cultural life? Does it bother you that pornography is a major American export, and if so, what might be done about that?

14. What, if any, is the moral difference between a Supreme Court decision that puts unborn children outside the protection of the laws and a Supreme Court decision that once put black Americans outside the protection of the laws?

15. Does the ability to reprogram adult cells so that they function like embryonic stem cells change the moral character of the debate over stem cell research?

ON MATTERS OF CHARACTER
16. For what are you willing to risk your popularity, and perhaps your re-election?

17. Are you prepared to dismiss a subordinate who may be a friend, but who is manifestly not up to the requirements of the office to which you appointed him or her?

18. Can you live with able subordinates who are prepared to tell you, "Mr. President, you're wrong"?

19. There are things a president cannot tell the American people. But are there circumstances in which you would deem it your responsibility to mislead the American people? To deny what you know to be true? To affirm what you know to be false?

20. Who are your moral heroes?

Regardless of the issues the mainstream media and the two campaigns want to tell us matter most, we must do whatever possible to make sure these fundamentally important issues remain at the forefront and are not altogether dismissed. This will not be easy, but here a few suggestions that will help. First, personally research each candidate's political track record. Next, read carefully each parties platform (these generally can be downloaded from a party's official website). Finally, vote your conscience at the pole.

Read more...

What's Really at Stake, Saving the Planet or Saving Souls?

In a recent Newsweek article, a Religious-Right Revival, Lisa Miller suggests that Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain's selection of Alaskan Governor, Sarah Palin as his veep candidate has sparked a renewal of enthusiasm among the traditional religious right. Miller notes that a new, younger generation of evangelicals have moved beyond the traditional hot button issues of abortion and same sex marriage to issues more in tune with the mainstream such as "global warming, Darfur, illiteracy, human trafficking, preventable disease", etc. While this shift in cares among the "new" evangelicals is really no surprise, since these are the issues pertinent to their generation. It is the driving force behind this shift in concerns suggested by Miller that I find attention grabbing. Where as traditional evangelicals have been primarily motivated by things such as the preservation of the freedom to propagate the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all people, upholding the sanctity of human life, and restoring the traditional family. Today's younger evangelicals are "Eager to help care for the planet, these Christians are building bridges between left and right, between the secular and the devout, even among subscribers to different holy books. These "new" evangelicals, according to the mainstream press, are exciting now because they're politically powerful."

Did you catch it? Their primary motivation is the planet! Now do not misunderstand me, I care for our planet. I believe our planet is very important. In fact, I happen to think it is the most important planet in our universe. I also, understand that we have a God-given responsibility to be good stewards of this planet. However, what I do not understand is why these new evangelicals have made preserving planet Earth the great calling of their generation.

I suspect several contributing factors. However, allow me to touch on what I believe to be the one that tops the list and concerns me most, a diminished view of the authority of the Bible. Miller reported that "of the 60 million white evangelicals in this country, 60 percent of them believe the Bible is literally true." This suggests that 40 percent of them do not believe the Bible to be authoritative for their lives (It is probably not to great a stretch to also suggest that the majority of the 60 percent is made up by traditional evangelicals). Since so many of the younger professing evangelical Christians are not looking to the Bible as the primary basis for the development of their worldview, they must look to other outlets such as pop culture and the mainstream media to form their views. This is why they have developed a distorted non-Biblical outlook that sees taking care of the planet more important than reaching souls with the Gospel. It is also precisely why these evangelicals have put aside the "divisive religious rhetoric" and have no problem uniting with followers of distinctly different faiths. Is it any wonder they have become politically powerful? Unfortunately, in becoming so they have compromised the long standing identity of evangelical Christians in America and undermined the decades of hard work, prayer, and action so many faithful traditional evangelicals have given.

As for the enthusiasm of traditional evangelicals with relation to Governor Palin, there are many things that make her attractive. There is her so called "maverick" reputation, the fact that she is young and a woman, or even the fact that she is a faithful wife and "hockey mom" of a traditional family. However, what I believe makes her most attractive to traditional evangelicals is the fact that she is a conservative evangelical Christian who is shaped by a Biblical worldview. She has been an agent of change in a state where leftist environmentalists have thrived. She led her state in making great contributions to the country regarding the production of oil and other natural resources. She obviously is not a part of the new breed of evangelicals who are focused on saving the planet, and for that I am thankful. We do not yet know enough about the governor to know exactly what kind of an evangelistic passion she possesses, but I have a hunch she like her fellow traditional evangelicals values the saving of human lives for eternity far more than saving the planet.

Read more...