Whether you are a Christian like me or not we likely share a few values. From the economy, to war crimes, to poverty, to health care, to climate change, to energy, there is a lot to think about when attempting to balance the value of all of these relevant concerns. We know the world has many chaotic issues that are swirling around us and we want to be actively involved in the solution, as well as empower leaders who are poised to make a big difference.
Currently the spin I am hearing is that one campaign or the other has cornered the market on dealing with these issues. Both sides are accusing each other of being stagnantly well-entrenched in the old politics of their parties and if you want action on Social Justice issues then you have to either vote for them OR just stagnate in old timey red or blue politics of old. Having reviewed the cases on both sides, there is undeniably a measure of truth coming from both campaigns when it comes to being well entrenched in traditional party politics, but what is not so obvious is that Social Justices issues do in fact exist on both sides of this election year. If you are being told otherwise, then you are speaking to someone who is in fact entrenched in their political party. I have definitely watched regular everyday people promote this propaganda… on both sides of this 2008 election.
If you look at both campaigns, even quickly, they both want to address the major social concerns of our day. It is not a matter of IF one party or the other is tackling the issues you care about but rather HOW they propose the issue be tackled. Rest assured that both campaigns are covering the majority of the population’s issues. The question is not IF, it is HOW.
I really don’t want to break down each Social Justice issue, but here are a set of links to their platforms on many issues of Social Justice and Social Responsibility (they aren’t one-to-one since the platforms aren't exactly the same nor do they use the same terms.) The point here is to either take your time reading through this stuff, or take a cursory look. They do both handle issues, and the question is not IF but HOW:
The Democrat candidate: (If you are a Republican, shut up, sit down and follow the links... you should be educated on the Democrat platform)
Energy, Climate Change: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy
Healthcare: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
Early Education, Education Policies, Higher Education: http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/education/
Vision for the Court System, Human Dignity and Life: http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/civil_rights/
Immigration: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/
Government reform: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/
The Republican candidate: (If you are a Democrat, shut up, sit down and follow the links... you should be educated on the Republican platform)
Energy: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/17671aa4-2fe8-4008-859f-0ef1468e96f4.htm
Healthcare: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm
Early Education: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/read.aspx?guid=3883232c-bdeb-44e5-9387-22d1316e75ed
Education Policies: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/read.aspx?guid=2ca6f926-4564-4301-87cd-a5f35e68c0d4
Higher Education: http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/ed12978d-a54f-471e-aeed-65c65bcba6da.htm
Climate Change: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm
Human Dignity and Life: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
Community Safety: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/f26da5d0-8043-402d-ab84-769cf88a1a99.htm
Vision for the Court System; http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/read.aspx?guid=0bb29444-cdd1-4a60-81de-3263e9fb067e
Government Reform; http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/cb15a056-ac87-485d-a64d-82989bdc948c.htm
Immigration: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/68db8157-d301-4e22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm
A HUGE PROPAGANDA EXAMPLE:
The most intense example right now is a would-be mother’s relationship to abortion. Both sides care about this issue, but want to tackle it in completely different ways. The propaganda from both sides is “The issue is mostly political and the government can’t solve or fix it by changing the laws” and “We have to undo Roe vs Wade which will solve our abortion woes with a silverbullet.”
Platform Facts:
If you are for the rights of the mother as a priority, the Democrat Candidate will advocate for that by immediately passing the Freedom of Choice Act which will be more than adequate in fighting “choice limiting legislation” removing the ban on Partial Birth Abortion, undoing laws at the state level like in North Dakota this year where doctors offering abortions were required to explain the statistical chances of psychological side affects on would-be mothers as well as having to explain the abortion procedure as it affects the baby being aborted, which resulted in South Dakota seeing significant reductions in abortion, including a single day without one (since the Roe v Wade decision 35 years ago.) The net affect of laws like the Freedom of Choice Act will be uninhibited access toward making choices like Abortion at more stages in a pregnancy that we have seen in nearly a decade. As well additional funding will be provided to groups that advocate for the rights of choice to the would-be mother. These are big investments toward the Democrat Candidates HOW in this Social Justice issue.
If you are supporting the Republican Candidate then you are interested in undoing Roe vs Wade in the hope that a more reasonable rule of law be implemented that reduces the current trend of 40,000,000 U.S. abortions since 1973. You would be voting to federally support continued action at the state level by having a candidate that will not legislate against it. You would be joining that candidate to promote supporting the would-be mother through the birth experience so that the child could be made a blessing to adoptive parents that are currently enduring endless waits for adoption or have to go to foreign adoption agencies to pull that off. You would be joining the Republican candidate who refuses to arrest would-be mothers for taking part in an abortion if it still happens under these news laws, but at the same time prosecuting doctors who are willing to break the law.
No matter which side of the issue you find your values, both candidates agree that this election will determine the continued impact of Roe vs Wade upon the nation by promoting at least two Supreme Court candidates that will either uphold the rights of the mother or the rights of the child in priority for the foreseeable future in the U.S. Both candidates also believe in legislating their values on this intense topic and intend to do so.
I have heard a number of people say that nothing has changed on this issue since Roe vs Wade in 1973. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The Democrat President in the 1990s implemented legislation to legalize Partial Birth Abortion advocating for the rights of the would-be mother. The current Republican President appointed two Supreme Court justices that have consistently promoted the Civil Rights of the unborn, and as well we have seen federal legislation to remove the legalization of Partial Birth Abortion as well as state level freedom to take action on behalf of the rights of the child. Under that Democrat President of the 1990s, abortions continued at a rate of 4,000 per day in the U.S. Under the current Republican President, that number is around 3,000 per day.
Legislation and court action does work and is a part of the agenda of both campaigns. If someone tells you either that it is not effective or that it is the definitive silver bullet, again, they are simply entrenched for the purpose of motivating you one way or the other.
Take a moment and think about a young Republican preacher by the name of Martin Luther King, jr who framed his argument for Civil Rights on both the Bible (values-based decision) and his understand of the Bill of Rights (which contains Judeo-Christian references.) He was fighting hard for social change, legislation, court judgments and enforcement, just as these two presidential candidates are, for the right to legislate and motivate the courts to advocate for this particular issue of Social Justice.
I have heard people say that it would be a hard road and that changing the laws doesn’t change people. The implication is that we would either pursue a failed legal approach OR pursue a strictly social form of changing hearts on a person-by-person basis. This is a false “OR” where they should be an “AND” really. Martin Luther King, historically, did both unashamedly desiring people to legislate that morality as a matter of Civil Rights and nobody would likely go back and convince him that because the road is going to be hard and because changing the laws do not change people’s heart, we shouldn’t pursue this in any legal or legislative sense. These perspective is fully entrenched and revisionist and doesn’t agree with either political candidate in the current election or our American history.
There are so many topics in their platforms and this is not meant to be comprehensive in nature. I have limited this post to simply outline the more pressing issues of Social Justice.
For me the decision started by reading biographies and books (the first book I read was John McCain’s book back in September of 2007), then examining their platforms, and then checking out their voting record. I encourage you to do the same. Do not fall prey to the idea that only one of these candidates will address your concerns for Social Justice. The fact is that both want to do more to help issues of Social Justice than you could likely participate in over the next four years. So, if you care, then get involved. But pick the candidate based on HOW they will help and not based on the false premise of IF they will help. They likely want to help!
Personal note: I will be voting for John McCain. When it comes to issues like climate control or energy, he has more of a track record that Barack Obama. Barack has a lot to say and I don’t disagree with all of it. He just doesn’t have any experience to back it up. John McCain actually has a voting record and a plan. Obama often has a record that contradicts his announced position (on faith and life, as one example.) People are quick to refer to the fact that John McCain voted in favor of an Energy plan under Bush that lowered taxes on Oil Companies. Barack called that “giving” Oil Companies money (rather than the more appropriate explanation that He wasn’t giving them anything other than the Federal Government not taking it from them.) More importantly, Barack Obama voted exactly the same way on the same bill, “giving” Oil Companies the same tax breaks. So, press through the propaganda and read about their records and their platforms. McCain has non-tax-credit incentive programs to create Oil alternative competition and move the country toward independence predominantly through those alternatives. Both candidates support finding more oil at home as a short term solutions. But Barack Obama says he wants to break our dependence on Oil but at the same time BANKS on it. He says he will (1) tax Oil companies more, and (2) give money to average Americans to subsidize their fuel prices. The problem with this is that he is not advancing the cause. Rather he is BANKING on your continued addiction and the profitable Oil Companies. It is like Barack is saying “We need to break our dependence on drugs” but then taxing the profitability of drug dealers while specifically making funds available to you so you can go buy drugs cheaper. This is exploitative and not helpful. It is a Federal Fundraiser and not a fight against oil addiction. It brings into question the integrity of what he says he really wants to do. Many of his plans when dealing with environmental or energy related worst-practices are taxed as a solution by Obama and that is no solution to the problem at all.
I personally recommend and endorse John McCain for President.
No comments:
Post a Comment