Thursday, August 21, 2008

"Families"

Does this Matthew25 Network video make anyone else nervous?

9 comments:

Alayna said...

Yeah, it's definitely a bit scary. I really don't think Christian groups should ever endorse politicians - they're subtly hinting that you should vote for whoever they endorse because it's the Christian thing to do.

And how can a guy who isn't against abortion be all about "family values"? That's somewhat oxymoronic...

LynnaeEtta said...

Way to catch the irony, Alayna. I totally agree with you; I don't think Christian groups should endorse politicians, either, particularly when a particular politician stands for something unbiblical.

Jenny said...

It's not unusual for Christian groups to make some sort of political endorsement (think 1960s and Vietnam)... and I'm not sure that I have a huge problem with it, provided that they back up their position and explain why they think that way... and don't pull the "you're not a Christian unless you side with me" statement... ??? (I'm really just musing here.)

I think what I have a bigger issue with is the fact that the endorsement by these pastors is based upon something that has nothing to do with religion or Christianity. (Okay, yes, "good" Christians will treat their families well. But there are also people who are not Christians who treat their families well.) It doesn't seem to be that strong of an endorsement... I'm kind of left thinking: what's wrong with him that that's all you can say about him? And why are you endorsing him in the first place if you can't think of anything better to say?

Joel said...

not so much scary as just... bad. Bad message, bad music, bad ACTING!!

crappy video. and what do you think of obama's running mate?

LynnaeEtta said...

Jenny: thanks for your thoughts! Good to hear from you. :)

I know it's not uncommon for Christian groups to endorse a particular candidate, but I still have a problem with it. For one, endorsing a particular political candidate too easily makes a savior out of that candidate or party. The Matthew 25 network especially seems to be doing this with Obama, essentially saying that if we want to obey Christ's command to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and care for those in prison, Obama's our man to make that happen. Watch out for lightening! Politicians are not the answer to the world's problems. Jesus is.

Secondly, and briefly, our political system is broken (as all systems are this side of heaven) and based on who has the most money and power. It doesn't take a long look at history to know that when the church tries to play in the power & money realm, it's message gets lost and it starts contributing to the system, rather than redeeming it.

That doesn't mean I don't think we should be responsible citizens and elect the best candidate for the job - one who has integrity - it just means I think Christians should be extremely careful when endorsing anyone.

Joel: agreed. bad acting.

What do I think of Obama's choice of a running mate? The same thing I've thought of every other choice he's made: it demonstrates his politically savvy and management genius - Biden is a great compliment (not a clone) and has tons of great, bi-partisan experience in Washington. he knows the system and may be able to win over the demographics Obama's having trouble with wooing on his own. He made a great choice for a winning ticket in November.

Steve Ruberg said...

Looks to me like "the new church", represented by Brian McLaren, is repeating the same mistakes of "the old church". But not "scary" - maybe disappointing.

About abortion. We've had Republicans taking a position against abortion for more than 30 years. And where has it gotten us? Abortion is still legal - and abortions keep happening - and Republicans keep getting elected - even though they keep failing to end abortion. I'm not sure but maybe the starting place is fewer abortions? Which is something Obama keeps saying - something that most people (Pro or Anti) can agree would be a good thing. One thing for certain is that if the stalemate that we have created continues, more abortions will result. There has to be some way to move forward on this.

LynnaeEtta said...

Dad -

Agreed regarding Brian McLaren - he's not doing anything new by endorsing a political candidate, he's just endorsing a Democrat instead of a Republican, something a 'normal' evangelical wouldn't dream of doing 5, 10, 20 years ago.

About abortion: no, the debate hasn't gone anywhere and Republicans haven't ended it, despite 'promising' to in their campaigning. But I disagree with you that the starting point should be fewer abortions. It would be great if that were an outcome, but I definitely think the starting point should be no abortions, the same way I think the starting point for homicides should be no homicides. Just because there's legislation against something doesn't mean it won't happen.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't celebrate legislation that promotes fewer abortions, but I think we settle for too little when we make the starting point 'fewer' instead of 'none'.

Steve Ruberg said...

I wonder if legislation was enacted for fewer or for none, it wouldn't lower the number all that much. I remember when abortion was illegal and people would talk about getting a "procedure" done. Doctors would provide these procedures and call them something else - not abortion though. I have no idea how often that was happening.

It may be that insisting on none as a starting point has created an impasse. Neither side can have a discussion without suspicion - understandable since one side thinks its equivalent to murder.

This is lame in comparison but cigarette smoking has declined in the US because people have been educated about the health effects and there is a certain shame associated with the addiction. So maybe something similar can be done to educate people about abortion. Or maybe the real problem is something else entirely. The median age for a woman to have an abortion is 24 making $25000 or less (thirdway.org). And she's typically unmarried.

My belief that abortion is wrong hasn't changed but I think its time to try a new approach to lowering the number.

LynnaeEtta said...

It's the 20-year-old debate, isn't it? I looked at ThirdWay.org, which you referenced, and saw their support for legislation that helps to reduce the total numbers of abortions while leaving individual liberties in tact (rough quote). I'm all for reducing the total number of abortions/year but honestly feel like it's an unjust compromise to let it remain legal, despite the political near-impossibility of reversing Roe v. Wade.