Yesterday, I decided to re-read, "The Theme is Freedom", by M. Stanton Evans. I had read it several years ago and read seversal chapters a few month ago. It is about religion, history, politics, and the American "tradition". I absolutely love what I have read. It resonates with me. His thesis is that liberty is America's primary value and the liberal has undermined liberty by "social programs" and "social engineering".
He argues and makes plan the outcomes of such programs and engineering. And it is pertinent to the problems we have today. He also argues for the value of religion in America's "liberal" climate. I recommend that you get a copy and find out for yourself what "true conservatism" is about and why we must change the way America is headed.
I will write more after I finish the book!
Showing posts with label conservatism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservatism. Show all posts
Friday, December 10, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Quotes from M. Stanton Evans
"Tax cuts are like sex; when they are good, they are very, very good. And when they are bad, they are still pretty good."[39]
Evans’ Law: “Whenever ‘one of our people’ reaches a position of power where he can do us some good, he ceases to be ‘one of our people.’”[40]
Evans’ law of inadequate paranoia: “[N]o matter how bad you think something is, when you look into it, it's always worse."[41]
"Liberals don't care what you do as long as it's compulsory."[42]
"I've always felt that anyone who has his head screwed on right should be conservative when he is young and, as he gets older, become more and more conservative."[43]
"One of the things that happens to you when you get old, really two bad things, one of them is that you lose your hearing, and I forget what the other one is."[44]
"We have two parties here, and only two. One is the evil party, and the other is the stupid party. I'm very proud to be a member of the stupid party. Occasionally, the two parties get together to do something that's both evil and stupid. That's called bipartisanship."[45]
"We all know that Mrs. Clinton has complained about the vast right-wing conspiracy, and of course, she is correct about that, and we are all part of it, but when I was starting out, it was only half vast."[46]
"The National Council of Churches adopted a resolution condemning the Reverend Jerry Falwell for mixing religion and politics. It's a mistake that the National Council itself does not make, of course: It has nothing to do with religion."[47]
"It was really hard for us young conservatives to recover from the Goldwater defeat; it was all the worse because in those days we had no grief counselors."[48]
"I never liked Nixon until Watergate."[49]
WiKi
Evans’ Law: “Whenever ‘one of our people’ reaches a position of power where he can do us some good, he ceases to be ‘one of our people.’”[40]
Evans’ law of inadequate paranoia: “[N]o matter how bad you think something is, when you look into it, it's always worse."[41]
"Liberals don't care what you do as long as it's compulsory."[42]
"I've always felt that anyone who has his head screwed on right should be conservative when he is young and, as he gets older, become more and more conservative."[43]
"One of the things that happens to you when you get old, really two bad things, one of them is that you lose your hearing, and I forget what the other one is."[44]
"We have two parties here, and only two. One is the evil party, and the other is the stupid party. I'm very proud to be a member of the stupid party. Occasionally, the two parties get together to do something that's both evil and stupid. That's called bipartisanship."[45]
"We all know that Mrs. Clinton has complained about the vast right-wing conspiracy, and of course, she is correct about that, and we are all part of it, but when I was starting out, it was only half vast."[46]
"The National Council of Churches adopted a resolution condemning the Reverend Jerry Falwell for mixing religion and politics. It's a mistake that the National Council itself does not make, of course: It has nothing to do with religion."[47]
"It was really hard for us young conservatives to recover from the Goldwater defeat; it was all the worse because in those days we had no grief counselors."[48]
"I never liked Nixon until Watergate."[49]
WiKi
Friday, June 18, 2010
What Is Happening in Our Country?
So many stories about the undermining of our liberties, that is boggles the mind.
In America, religious liberty meant that one was able to worship as one saw fit. Now, we hear that Shairia law wants to be affirmed in our Justice Department, as a valid expression of religious liberty. Laws that determine how one's faith is expressed is dangerous in fundamentalist's hands. History has borne out what has happend under Constantine when power, politics, policy and religion mix. It sounds like Islam is seeking a similar scenario in our country.
On the other side of madness are those who want condoms to be handed out in grammer school! Parents will not be able to "opt out" on this one, it is said. Where is the liberty for parent to determine how their children will hear, and understand sex and its expression?
Our Army was training a number of Muslims to fly aircraft and gave them sensitive information, only to wonder what happened, when they went AWOL! What were they doing and why did they try to escape? Why were we training these and giving them our secrets? Why would we trust these men? Will there be reprecussions? What will they be?
Then, we hear that the federal government will bring a lawsuit against the State of Arizona!!! What is going on? Doesn't the governor have a right to know what is going to happen before another nation? And don't citizens have more right in their own country than illegal immigrants? Where are the values of law and order? Is chaos the means of over-taking our government, as the former KGB agent warned back in the '80's?
Are the revolutionaries on the left intent on destroying America for a "greater good" or for restitution for past "sins" or present ones? Are the conservatives demanding that their religious view be affirmed at the expense of valid scholarship? Where is reason, then?
Why were the barges held "at bay" so that they could meet requirements of life-saving devices that MIGHT protect life, while oil gushes into the Gulf where life is actually being destroyed? Who and what were they thinking?
I have been concerned for our county, but these days seem to have no "rhyme or reason". The culture wars have become headless reactions to problems that need deep and thoughtful solutions.
In America, religious liberty meant that one was able to worship as one saw fit. Now, we hear that Shairia law wants to be affirmed in our Justice Department, as a valid expression of religious liberty. Laws that determine how one's faith is expressed is dangerous in fundamentalist's hands. History has borne out what has happend under Constantine when power, politics, policy and religion mix. It sounds like Islam is seeking a similar scenario in our country.
On the other side of madness are those who want condoms to be handed out in grammer school! Parents will not be able to "opt out" on this one, it is said. Where is the liberty for parent to determine how their children will hear, and understand sex and its expression?
Our Army was training a number of Muslims to fly aircraft and gave them sensitive information, only to wonder what happened, when they went AWOL! What were they doing and why did they try to escape? Why were we training these and giving them our secrets? Why would we trust these men? Will there be reprecussions? What will they be?
Then, we hear that the federal government will bring a lawsuit against the State of Arizona!!! What is going on? Doesn't the governor have a right to know what is going to happen before another nation? And don't citizens have more right in their own country than illegal immigrants? Where are the values of law and order? Is chaos the means of over-taking our government, as the former KGB agent warned back in the '80's?
Are the revolutionaries on the left intent on destroying America for a "greater good" or for restitution for past "sins" or present ones? Are the conservatives demanding that their religious view be affirmed at the expense of valid scholarship? Where is reason, then?
Why were the barges held "at bay" so that they could meet requirements of life-saving devices that MIGHT protect life, while oil gushes into the Gulf where life is actually being destroyed? Who and what were they thinking?
I have been concerned for our county, but these days seem to have no "rhyme or reason". The culture wars have become headless reactions to problems that need deep and thoughtful solutions.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Traditional and Progressive Tension
Progressive views are important to evaluate, as they are what is on the "cutting edge" of any given subject. This is the challenge of reason's embrace of discovery. But, just as important is tradition's "tried and true" values of experience. The traditional view is verified through experience, while the progressive seeks to experiment.
I learned that my family had wanted to try the "progressive", radical, or experimental approach in addressing "the back issue" of one of our family members. But, was this appropriate to all of the needs of this family member? That is one of debate for the family and is ultimately one of personal decision and choice by the patient.
The conservative or traditional approach is to manage pain through physical therapy, continued exercise, pain pills and cortisone shots. We will have to "wait and see" if this is enough to get the patient back on his feet. Otherwise, he must face the possibility of back surgury, which could be a radical step for his age of 93.
There is presently available a non-invasive type of surgury that fuses the spine with "super-glue" to strengthen it. The family has wished that this type of progressive treatment would be embraced by his family physician. But, family physicians have differences in philosophy or approaches to medicine. And the family should not have been surprised to find that this particular physician was not particularly pre-disposed to a progressive medical philosophy.
Traditional and progressive views are both important to hold in tension in free societies, for each holds a value to free societies. Traditional views are based on the wisdom from experience, while progressive views are open to the creative elements of innovation and experiment.
The progressive and "conservative" or traditional view was evident when my family member and I watched two Supreme Court judges discuss their differences on the Constituion, while he was in the hospital. It was fascinating to see how the two differed in their analysis, concerns and approaches to one document that defines our "American way of life".
Wisdom sees, but is bound within the contexts of time, while experimentation is based on reason's genius or creativity or the needs of society for change. Roots and innovation are necessary fodder for society to flourish. And the Founders used both to create "a more perfect union". We cannot err on either side if we desire to further the cause of democracy in America.
I learned that my family had wanted to try the "progressive", radical, or experimental approach in addressing "the back issue" of one of our family members. But, was this appropriate to all of the needs of this family member? That is one of debate for the family and is ultimately one of personal decision and choice by the patient.
The conservative or traditional approach is to manage pain through physical therapy, continued exercise, pain pills and cortisone shots. We will have to "wait and see" if this is enough to get the patient back on his feet. Otherwise, he must face the possibility of back surgury, which could be a radical step for his age of 93.
There is presently available a non-invasive type of surgury that fuses the spine with "super-glue" to strengthen it. The family has wished that this type of progressive treatment would be embraced by his family physician. But, family physicians have differences in philosophy or approaches to medicine. And the family should not have been surprised to find that this particular physician was not particularly pre-disposed to a progressive medical philosophy.
Traditional and progressive views are both important to hold in tension in free societies, for each holds a value to free societies. Traditional views are based on the wisdom from experience, while progressive views are open to the creative elements of innovation and experiment.
The progressive and "conservative" or traditional view was evident when my family member and I watched two Supreme Court judges discuss their differences on the Constituion, while he was in the hospital. It was fascinating to see how the two differed in their analysis, concerns and approaches to one document that defines our "American way of life".
Wisdom sees, but is bound within the contexts of time, while experimentation is based on reason's genius or creativity or the needs of society for change. Roots and innovation are necessary fodder for society to flourish. And the Founders used both to create "a more perfect union". We cannot err on either side if we desire to further the cause of democracy in America.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Views From Below
I have been thinking about how people come to understand their faith along the lines of belief, belonging, and behavior. This is of major importance, I believe, if there is going to be an understanding across faith dimensions...
Belief is a set or way of understanding meaning. These meanings are made within our heads as we experience life. These meanings come from many factors in our life and this makes up our personal history. Beliefs contain everything from how we understand God, to how we understand life and how it should function because of these beliefs.
Behavior is how we understand what is appropriate and by what means. These are the social norms we live by and are given within our cultural and familial settings.
Belonging is our specific cultural, and familial membership. These can be formal or informal memberships, but do prescribe how behavior is to be understood, as they uphold the values that make for the social norms.
In this mix, we also must allow for individual development beyond these "identifications", or determinants. Although most people do not understand their beliefs as culturally specific, or their behavior as determined by these cultural limitations, there is development beyond these understandings, which are conventional social norms.
Whenever an individual reaches beyond their parental, and cultural "thinking patterns", then the mix will always be individually determined, as a unique "call" of individuality, which is the giftedness that is to be given back to "life".
Conventional morality is specified by "order" and the status quo. It behaves because "that is just the way it is", without question. most Americans in the South and many elsewhere just accepted the subjugation the the African American race, because this was the "accepted form". This is where the moral limits the ethical.
The conservative Church, for the most part, has held to the moral, and has limited the ethical change that needs to be made. Conservatism is the epitome of status quo and conservatism hinders the development of human flourishing due to "fear" of subversion of cultural norms.
While conservatism limits, it also gives historical bearings, so that there is some way to view life with a "frame". Without a frame there is a free for all in social change.
Perhaps, in thinking about social change, we should enlighten our understanding about how social change has taken place before and what it meant for those it impacted. Without a sense of history, we will not have the impetus to move forward or to slow down. Globalization calls for a re-working of our understanding of faith. And, I personally believe that we cannot dismiss pluralism in some form, otherwise, we are idolizing our particular reference point, or experience.
So, this morning while thinking about my faith, I question and I prod, but that is just "who I am".
Belief is a set or way of understanding meaning. These meanings are made within our heads as we experience life. These meanings come from many factors in our life and this makes up our personal history. Beliefs contain everything from how we understand God, to how we understand life and how it should function because of these beliefs.
Behavior is how we understand what is appropriate and by what means. These are the social norms we live by and are given within our cultural and familial settings.
Belonging is our specific cultural, and familial membership. These can be formal or informal memberships, but do prescribe how behavior is to be understood, as they uphold the values that make for the social norms.
In this mix, we also must allow for individual development beyond these "identifications", or determinants. Although most people do not understand their beliefs as culturally specific, or their behavior as determined by these cultural limitations, there is development beyond these understandings, which are conventional social norms.
Whenever an individual reaches beyond their parental, and cultural "thinking patterns", then the mix will always be individually determined, as a unique "call" of individuality, which is the giftedness that is to be given back to "life".
Conventional morality is specified by "order" and the status quo. It behaves because "that is just the way it is", without question. most Americans in the South and many elsewhere just accepted the subjugation the the African American race, because this was the "accepted form". This is where the moral limits the ethical.
The conservative Church, for the most part, has held to the moral, and has limited the ethical change that needs to be made. Conservatism is the epitome of status quo and conservatism hinders the development of human flourishing due to "fear" of subversion of cultural norms.
While conservatism limits, it also gives historical bearings, so that there is some way to view life with a "frame". Without a frame there is a free for all in social change.
Perhaps, in thinking about social change, we should enlighten our understanding about how social change has taken place before and what it meant for those it impacted. Without a sense of history, we will not have the impetus to move forward or to slow down. Globalization calls for a re-working of our understanding of faith. And, I personally believe that we cannot dismiss pluralism in some form, otherwise, we are idolizing our particular reference point, or experience.
So, this morning while thinking about my faith, I question and I prod, but that is just "who I am".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
