Generally my posts are meant to be light hearted and humorous. That’s true for both my Facebook account and this blog. But this one is a little different. This one is more of an open view of my opinions as of late and not meant to bring humor. Sorry to disappoint. It also has a lot to do with my personal perspective of the combination between my Christianity and my politics. So if you aren’t one to discuss either, then know that I will not be upset in the slightest if you decide to quit reading now. Seriously...
The first thing that I have been disappointed in with this election is the lack of civility when it comes to disagreements. I have a friend at work that could not be a more polar opposite to me. If I say yes, he says no. If I am A, he is Z. But we can have completely civil conversations while we’re sitting at lunch. He knows that I disagree with almost everything he says, and the feeling is obviously mutual. We usually leave lunch laughing at each other and how stupid we think the other person’s viewpoints are. We also know that there are significant differences in our views and that despite our best efforts we will not arrive at some common ground. There isn’t a compromise between our beliefs that we could reach that will make both of us happy. The thing is, we can have lunch the next day and talk about fantasy football with each other. I feel like with this election, the vitriol spewed from both sides is not done in a manner that is constructive in any way. It’s as if keyboard warrior trolls have decided it’s their purpose in life to intentionally cause strife and discontent. And don’t mistake my lack of aggression for lack of passion. I am very passionate about what I believe. I just know that in the many many times I have debated friends about policy, not one time has ANYONE EVER listened to talking points and decided to change their mind. If anything, people will go home and Google information on how I was wrong, and then start again at tomorrow’s lunch. So I ask: Is the intentional provocation by disrespectful memes or posts necessary…? Do they serve a purpose other to inflame your opponent…? Then why be a troll?
I don’t feel like it has simply been Democrats and Republicans attacking each other. It’s also been passionate third party people attacking the two party system under the pretense that “you people are fools and sheep who continue voting this antiquated two party system. You need to get informed about the issues and vote Ron Paul, idiots.” Is this assuming that anyone who votes one of the two parties is simply not informed, and once they do get informed, they will obviously see how foolish they’ve been and switch to the third party?? A friend of mine is deeply entrenched in politics and pointed out to me that there isn’t a party out there that will most likely represent ALL of your values and beliefs, but inevitably you have to choose the one that MOST represents your values.
But most importantly, the one that bothers me the most in this past election has been when Christians attack other Christians on the grounds of “which party more accurately has the heart of Jesus in this election.” Would Jesus rather teach the people a parable about working hard and storing up food like the ants, or feed them himself with bread and fish? Would he heal the sick by telling them all they had to do is get up, or would he tell them there is something they should do first before they are healed like the lepers? Would he favor one Christian value over the other? If so, which one? Usually the posts presented by my Christian friends are followed by a verse from the Bible emphasizing the point they’re making. Are there other verses that say the opposite of what THAT verse just said… Yeah, but the verse they chose to use is clearly better… sure yours is stupid…
I don’t know the "Jesus" answer to the following questions, but since this is my blog, I’ll simply give my opinion on what I interpret the Jesus answer to be…
The first thing and obviously most passion generating issue is that of abortion. I have some friends who say that abortion is the product of a demographic comprised mainly of the poor and that rather than address the issue of abortion, we should address the issue of safe sex and that in some communities sex is a means of currency or personal value. My wife and I have worked many years in the poorest neighborhoods in Baton Rouge and I can tell you, this argument is valid. Women in certain demographics are without question only valued on the basis of what they will do sexually for men. This inevitably leads to pregnancy, and often abortion. But my main issue with this point is that it doesn’t address the product of the problem: a life that was ended because of a choice of someone else. I work in forensics and my job often entails analyzing evidence for the presence of the person that performed a homicide. Blood on the knife blade matches the victim; DNA on the handle of the knife matches the suspect. Case closed. For some time now I’ve been “the abortion guy” at the crime lab. Not for my views, clearly, but rather because when an abortion case came into the lab I was the guy who had to identify the body of the fetus, take a sample, and see if the suspect could have been the father of the fetus. Regardless of whether the person had a legal abortion, the act of the 30 year old impregnating the 16 year old is statutory rape, and will be prosecuted as such. I have analyzed fetuses ranging from 6 weeks to 7.5 months. I can tell you this-- When you’re looking at an aborted fetus, and you decide to cut off a portion of the finger of the fetus to obtain a DNA profile, to me there is NO question whether or not that was a life. It was a life, and I just removed her finger. There was one time that I received a 7.5 month old fetus in six parts: Two arms, two legs, a torso, and the remnants of a crushed head. This was homicide in its worst form. My wife is seven months pregnant and I can see my daughter moving around in there like she’s practicing Brazilian jiu jitsu. The fetus I got in six parts was farther along than my daughter is now. I don’t say this to inflame someone, but none the less I feel it in the depths of my heart, you cannot have the heart of Jesus and think that is acceptable. For any reason.
The obvious next step is contraceptives. I don’t know how I feel about that. Honestly I don’t. From a Christian perspective, I don’t see how it’s God honoring to provide the necessities to those who choose to have premarital sex. Is it practical in today’s society? Yeah it is… From a logical, non-Christian standpoint, providing the ability to prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place is better than a subsequent abortion. But does that make it right?
Homosexuality. This is a tough issue for me. In Louisiana I merely KNEW a couple gay people, but weren’t close friends with them. But when I moved to Austin, Texas, I had very close friends who were gay. My only perspective of gay people prior to that was the stereotypical flamboyantly gay man on TV who threw out “fabulous” more times than acceptable in any conversation. But when I moved to Austin, I had a greater understanding of the gay community. When you grow up in the south, you almost have the perspective they people are just choosing to be gay to be annoying. But that is a stupid, stupid thought. Much like my coworker now, my gay friends knew I was Christian and new what I believed, but they also knew that I wasn’t going to be swinging the King James Version at them like I was swatting away flies. The issue of homosexuality is more difficult for me because from a NON-CHRISTIAN perspective I cannot think of ANY reason not to allow them to marry whoever they choose. I can’t think of a constitutional reason not to allow them to marry either. If I weren’t a Christian, I would probably be a champion of gay rights. But there’s the rub… The Bible is unequivocally clear about homosexuality and how God doesn’t tolerate it. Friends have said that Jesus himself never said anything about homosexuality. This is true, except for that Paul in the Bible did, and “all scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, correcting, training and rebuking so that the man of God will be equipped for every good work.” (Timothy). So Jesus did not directly state it, but the Holy Spirit did, and that’s the same. Does this mean that I’ll take it upon myself to be the champion of ending gay marriage? No. But when someone asks me my opinion on the subject, I have to acknowledge to myself that nowhere in scripture did God tolerate homosexuality. The cliché is often used, “love the sinner, hate the sin.” This is as close to my view as I can get.
I have many friends who will say that the Democratic platform is far more geared to helping the poor. I think this is totally correct. The number of programs aimed at helping the poor far outweigh those from the Republican or Libertarian programs. This is a source of frustration for me. Again, my wife and I worked in super poor areas of Baton Rouge and can attest that some people DO NOT get the same chance at success as others. This is directly the result of generational patterns. These are patterns where school is not as important as simply finding a meal for the day. Where the ability to solve for X makes no difference when you come home and you don’t know where your parents are or if they’re coming home today. But it’s not just “education” that makes it difficult, but the current system of welfare. Most of my friends don’t understand the welfare system at all, but know that they do not like the idea of going to work when someone else can stay home and collect a check. I would challenge people to understand the welfare system and see its pros and cons. For instance, if you stay home you collect 350 dollars a week in welfare (just for number reasons 350). If you find a job which pays 351 dollars a week, you can’t be on welfare. Now, assuming you find a job that does pay 351 dollars a week, you still have to find a way to get to work (bus, but people are trying to cut the public transportation system beyond repair) pay the ticket for riding the bus (money that now comes out of your 351 dollars a week). So by the end of your 351 dollar job, you have now spent more getting to work than you would have made simply sitting home and collecting a check. Now, this is a "for instance," and not meant to be seen as the typical. But it’s one of many issues the poor deal with daily. Again, my issue overall is that programs for the poor should exist. I wish that the republican platform would include more programs that help the poor. Republicans will say that they want to “reform” programs like this, but again, people throw out things like “we should reform welfare and not just let people buy huge plasma TV’s with my hard earned dollar.” This is true, reform is necessary. What most don’t understand is that the government says you get so much to live on per month. If you don’t spend it, you have to give it back. I don’t know ONE friend of mine that would say “you know what, I got 1000 dollars to live on this month, but I only needed 500. Let me give the rest back...” NO WAY. Every one of us would have immediately gone to Best Buy and bought the TV and Xbox. Don’t lie. Reform is necessary, but ridicule for the choices they make is foolish given that most don’t understand the reason behind the choices. It's the same with the State, use it or lose it. Well then, I think I'll use it... On whatever I think is "valuable."
Regardless of the level of "poor," the choices people make should never contradict the word of God. If you are poor and can’t afford a child, or simply became pregnant because of a choice you made, that does not mean you can blame the abortion of the child on a faulty premise that this is a product of a terrible environment and unfair socio-economic status. As a Christian it is OUR JOB to help the poor. Jesus DID explicitly say that helping the poor is a clear responsibility of the Church. Is it the government’s responsibility? I believe it is to an extent. A government like ours that can spend billions to trillions on aid to other countries has very little excuse for allowing a child to suffer because of the choices of the parents. Or allow a sick person to die because they can’t afford medical insurance. I think that many of my friends who are against social programs would be far more in favor of them if they knew the money was being spent wisely. Here is the major issue for me; better, wiser use of government taxes for social programs. But more importantly than the issue of whether to raise taxes to help the poor is the fact that the CHURCH that should be the one stepping up and making the difference in these communities, NOT the government. But since the church isn't doing it to the extent that it is needed, what else can be done?
There are numerous issues that I don’t feel like going into here. I just feel like recently I’ve been really disappointed in the maliciousness exhibited by my friends with regards to the election. What’s funny is that some people that read this will think “Yeah, those morons need to know when they should keep their mouths closed and not offend people.”
And the cycle will continue.
I'm off my soapbox.
