It's been a wicked long time since I posted on this blog. Guess I've been busy, and I've been posting on my blogs in Myspace and Facebook too.
Anyway, I've been getting more and more interested in the idea of being a Christian but a political liberal. Courtesy of a group on Facebook, here's some indicators of if you might be a Christian liberal:
Don't put us in your cold war relic ideological box. We're not Republicans and not Democrats. We're not right wing or left wing. And we'll never be a political bloc because there's only about 7.7 of us per state- but we're going for 8 in this election! So come and do politics Jesus/Old Testament/New Testament style.You might be a Christian Liberal if you agree with MOST (we can respectfully agree to disagree here and there) of this stuff:
1.You believe that you as a individual and the government have a joint responsibility to promote social justice (i.e. anti-poverty, criminal justice reform, environmental protection, etc.)
2. You believe that human-rights should dignify and protect life and liberty in every possible policy (i.e. abolishment of the death penalty, defending the rights of the unborn, international human rights advancement, etc.)
3. You do not believe in patriotism (though love of a nation's people/culture is is fine). As "citizens of Heaven" (or for the non-religious- "citizens of the world"), our loyalty to the state only exists insomuch as the state advances basic liberties and rights (i.e. freedom of speech, religion, etc.)
4. You believe a role of Christianity is to instill morality within Christians, not through legislation and within an unbelieving society. Therefore, laws that dictate personal morality should exist as little as possible (i.e. legalizing gambling, gay marriage, soft drugs, etc.)
5. You do not sell out to theological relativism. Just because we do not believe in forcing scriptural values on others, does not mean scriptural authority ceases to exist.
6. You believe in achieving "liberal" goals which include equality of opportunity and an economy of equity, but that they can only be achieved through the "conservative" lens of our fallen human nature and emphasis on personal responsibility.
Something I hate is when people- both Republicans and Democrats- claim that God/Jesus is on their side and would be a member of their political party if He was here today. Jesus, as far as I can tell, was a radical in his day- liberal in some respects, conservative in others (sounds like an Independent to me :-)) He upset the established political leaders, preached a message of love, but also predicted harsh judgement for those who failed to accept the Son. He's living proof that modern conservatism and liberalism can be reconciled.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Friday, June 30, 2006
Psalm 37
"Delight yourself in the Lord and He will give you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the Lord; trust in Him and He will do this: He will make your righteousness shine like the dawn, the justice of your cause like the noonday sun."
Psalm 37: 4-6
A challenge, perhaps? Delight yourself in and commit to the Lord. It would seem that doing so would reap great rewards.
Psalm 37: 4-6
A challenge, perhaps? Delight yourself in and commit to the Lord. It would seem that doing so would reap great rewards.
A Governing Philosophy Rebuffed
A step back to the law, finally.
A Governing Philosophy Rebuffed: "In some ways, the ruling replicates a pattern in American history where presidents have acted aggressively in wartime, only to be reined in by courts or Congress. Even some Bush supporters said yesterday that it may be appropriate now to revisit decisions made ad hoc in a crisis atmosphere, when a president's natural instinct is to do whatever he thinks necessary to guard the nation against attack.
'That's what presidents do, and I say thank goodness for that,' said George J. Terwilliger III, deputy attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. 'But once you get past that point . . . both as a matter of law and a matter of culture, a more systemic approach to the use of authority is appropriate.'"
A Governing Philosophy Rebuffed: "In some ways, the ruling replicates a pattern in American history where presidents have acted aggressively in wartime, only to be reined in by courts or Congress. Even some Bush supporters said yesterday that it may be appropriate now to revisit decisions made ad hoc in a crisis atmosphere, when a president's natural instinct is to do whatever he thinks necessary to guard the nation against attack.
'That's what presidents do, and I say thank goodness for that,' said George J. Terwilliger III, deputy attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. 'But once you get past that point . . . both as a matter of law and a matter of culture, a more systemic approach to the use of authority is appropriate.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)