Welcome to the 
Politics Home Page

horizontal rule

    The days where a political party could count upon a loyal constituency have gone.  One of the major new groups that has recently formed is the religious right – the political voice of those people who hold conservative, time-honored traditions that have their roots in the Judeo-Christian ethic.  These people have largely been marginalized and pushed to the political sidelines because they were not organized and could not seem to even agree on whether to even enter the political arena .  Even though the religious right is a substantial minority, perhaps 25% of voting adults, until very recently they have been ignored by the political establishment.

    I believe it was the realization that religious liberties were being seriously eroded and that the moral climate of this country had entered a free- fall that many Christians began to realize their God-given responsibility to take action.  With the Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion and subsequent legislation that broadened abortion “rights” to include every pregnancy right up until delivery, religious conservatives heard a call to arms.  It was no longer possible to consider yourself a Christian if you just went to Church on Sunday, went to Bible study, and memorized Scripture if by your neglected the country as it was being destroyed.

    In America, we are witnessing a struggle between two worldviews; the Judeo-Christian worldview and what might be called the postmodern world view.  These two worldviews differ upon nearly every significant issue for they come at life and its issues from nearly diametrically opposed directions.  

Christian Worldview

    The Christian worldview is the one upon which this country was founded; most of our Founding Fathers were unabashedly Christian in both their writings as well as their approach to life issues.  The Christian worldview believes that the final authority is God, receives moral direction from the Scriptures, and believes in absolute truth and in absolute right and wrong.  The Christian worldview believes that a healthy person should work for their food; if they cannot work then they should be given help, if they will not work they should not eat.  Most importantly, the Christian world view believes in individual responsibility; our station in life is not primarily the fault of our environment, the way we grew up or the money we did or did not have.  We are responsible for what we become - no one else.  The Christian worldview believes in minimal government, with the people keeping as much of their hard-earned money as possible.  Generally, the Christian worldview believes believes in taxation of everybody equally, not punishing the more successful for their success by taxing them at a greater percentage than those less economically successful.  Such belief might relate to the principle of the tithe whereby Christians are to give a set percentage of their income to the Church - rich people are not expected to give a higher percentage than the poor.  The Christian worldview believes in the sacrosanct nature of the family; a child is the responsibility of the family to raise - probably with the same values of that family.  If the school is unable or unwilling to instruct their children properly, or if the school system teaches values which are contrary to those taught in the home, then it is the family's responsibility to try to effect change in that school system or take the child out and home school.  

Postmodern Worldview

    The postmodern worldview believes in a very different society than that outlined above.  This worldview believes that the individual is the final authority; there are no absolute rights and wrongs, only infinite shades of gray which might change with the moment, the situation, and the individual.  Thus, no body of "truth" exists for truth also may change depending upon the situation.  The postmodern worldview believes that healthy people should work but frequently, due to situations beyond their control, can not (or will not), and should be supported in some fashion by society.  Frequently, people who are unable to work are victims in some fashion; victims of their past, their environment, their socio-economic status, etc., and as they are victims of society they are entitled to some recompense for their victimization.  The postmodern worldview tends to favor large government in order to administer this victim mentality, making sure everybody gets "their fair share" of the American dream.  This worldview tends to favor "progressive" taxation whereby richer people pay a greater percentage of their income than poorer people believing the rich can afford to lose more of what they worked for since they have so much anyway.  The postmodern worldview holds that children are taught "by a village" - or by society at large, and that primary responsibility for children's education resides with government and not the family.  Thus, children are de facto owned by the government, but allowed to be fed, clothed, and boarded by their parents.  Children need to be taught the principles of the postmodern world view, and the Christian worldview needs to be washed from these children's minds if at all possible.  Indeed, there can be no mention of God within the school; and history of the United States will be presented in such a way so as to minimize mention of its Christian foundation.  Certainly, the postmodern worldview would do anything within its power to minimize the number of children taught at home outside of its grasp, and would likewise resist any intrusion of Christian values into the school such as prayer clubs, distribution of Christian literature, or prayers at graduation.  In this way, within one generation the Christian worldview might be erased from our national consciousness through government school.  

    Christian parents who assumed their children were being educated in schools similar to what they themselves experienced often find out too late that their children have been thoroughly indoctrinated by the liberal education establishment.  Their children are total strangers with a totally different worldview than their parents, and maybe have gone through other experiences associated with the postmodern worldview such as an aborted pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and thorough disinterested in the Church or anything having to do with Christianity.  This liberal philosophy becomes even more ingrained when the kids go off to college, when they are frequently lost forever.  The liberal establishment is fully aware that their fight with conservative, Christian philosophy has its primary battleground in the schools.  If they are able to successfully remove children from their parents’ oversight for only one generation, then they will have succeeded in re-educating American in a liberal mold.  It is our responsibility in the religious community to see that this does not happen.

New World Order

    Another liberal agenda is to promote the concept of a “New World Order.”  Certainly, during the Gulf War Crisis of the early 90s, we heard much how the outlaw country, Iraq, threatened this new order.  Certainly, there was considerable public agreement that Iraq was an outlaw country; however, few people had any real concept of what President Bush meant when he alluded to a " new world order."  This vision of a new world is rooted in the philosophy that the national state system we have experienced over the past several thousand years is archaic and needs to be revised in the age of worldwide communication and commerce.  In this new order, the protection of the sovereignty of the United States will no longer be the primary goal of our country’s politicians.  Instead, they will be working toward blending our country with all the other developed countries in the world.  We will be blended with these other countries in terms of our economy, finance, money, education, politics, military, etc.  It will become more and more difficult to discern our country from others because we will all have so much in common.  

    It is thought that this political union into a world government with its blurring of national boundaries will make future wars and local conflicts more difficult, since there won’t be distinct political entities to have this conflict.  Rather, there will be much more in common between and among countries than what there is different; there will be less to fight about.  While this may sound good, there are several very substantial practical difficulties.  First, for whom do our soldiers fight?  We are involved now in a war in Bosnia – our troops are there under the auspices of the United Nations to establish the peace by force if necessary.  About two years ago, our military forces were asked to wear the uniform of the United Nations; some refused.  One particular U.S. Army Specialist, Michael New, refused to put on a U.N. uniform and take commands from a foreign commander.  For this act, he was court marshaled.  Then there are the treaties, which reduce our national sovereignty whether or not you might agree with the underlying premise that they might help our economy (which also seems doubtful).  One of these most infamous treaties is NAFTA, the North America Free Trade Association.  This is a treaty between the United States, Canada, and Mexico that virtually assured job loss from the United States to Mexico as factories relocated where labor is cheap, profit margins increase, and American jobs are lost.  But even more important than job loss in the United States is the economic, political, and military union taking place in Europe.  The European Union (EU) has importance that is literally of Biblical proportions.  The EU now has its own currency (the "euro"), its own government, and are all trading partners with very little in the way of economic boundaries.  Even more recently, the World Court has been established in The Hague ostensibly to try national leaders accused of war crimes, but whose jurisdiction extends over everybody throughout the world and supercedes the national government of member countries.  Americans would no longer enjoy the protection of our national Constitution; rather, we would be subject to the legal system of the World Court - much of which is being written.  President Clinton, a believer in the new world order, signed a treaty obligating the United States to this Court; however, since it has not been ratified by the Senate, it is not binding upon this country.  Thankfully, President Bush has recognized the threat of the World Court to our sovereignty and refuses to abide by its precepts. 

    The Christian must be ever vigilant for Christianity is being assaulted from on many fronts, and if we are to pass our principles of morality and decency to our children, then we must be especially careful to equip them to understand the fallacy of the secular worldview.  This Website tries to demonstrate the reasonableness of Christianity from multiple perspectives, and proposes that the other worldview will only lead to despair and disillusionment.  But we need to fight for our rights; otherwise, they will be quickly gone.  We must not believe that our fight is only spiritual, for there are physical battles to be fought as well.  I believe Christ would have us fight political wars to preserve Christian values in our society just as He would have us fight spiritual wars to present Christian doctrine in a meaningful fashion.  A free society makes evangelization much easier than does a closed one.  The secular worldview preaches tolerance but would banish Christianity from the marketplace of ideas labeling it as intolerant and exclusive.  

    We must enjoin the battle and not surrender our children by default.

horizontal rule

Home ]

Can Christians actively engage in politics?
How does the Christian worldview differ from the postmodern world view?
What is the "New World Order" and how does it integrate with Christianity and Democarcy?
What is the battle over our children all about - Why does the postmodern worldview want to ban God from the public schools?