Compendium Of Best Pax Posts On "Too Pure Principles" And The Collapse Of Conservatism
To some extent I agree with the principled stance set forth by Carson in "One Nation: What We Can All Do To Save America's Future." http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/12/dependable-miraculousness-seek-first.html
"Seek First The Kingdom Of God And His Justice And All These Things Will Be Added Unto You"
Despite our theoretical overlap, here is my point-by-point criticism of "One Nation."
1.) Carson says that the legality of "same-sex marriage should be left to the individual states." To which I respond: "Should the legality of miscegenation be left to the States?"
Christian Defence Of Slavery Preached From The Pulpit
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/02/christian-defense-of-slavery-preached.html
The good doctor begins by emphasizing "a right to any type of weapon" but immediately qualifies his advocacy by saying any weapon "they can legally obtain."
The situation is akin to abortion. Once we admit any exception -- for example, legal abortion in case your 12 year old daughter is rape-impregnated by Willie Horton -- then the discussion is not about either/or but "where on the spectrum." Hand grenades? Howitzers? Bazookas? Biologicals?
So...
If citizens are deprived of nuclear weapons -- or even heavy artillery -- why not deprive them of semi-automatic weapons?
Why, in light of the Federal Government's oversight of interstate commerce, can Uncle Sam not mandate obligatory fingerprint triggers so that only the original owner can fire the weapon?
Notably, American Police Departments -- and the ATF -- oppose armor-piercing munitions and don't look fondly on automatic weapons either. http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20150226-plans-to-restrict-armor-piercing-green-tip-ammo-cues-furor-rush-to-buy-it-up.ece
A final note. Although I am an ardent supporter of stiff gun regulation, it has never occurred to me to "take away Americans' guns." I see this assertion by Carson and other 2nd Amendment evangelists as a manifestation of sub-clinical paranoia and not relevant to the real discussion of gun control.
"Gun Cartoons and Gun Violence Bibliography"
Handguns At Home And The Scourge Of Suicide Among Young People
Handguns At Home And The Scourge Of Suicide Among Young People
Mom Killed By 2 Year Old Child Described As "Responsible." NOT!
http://paxonbothhouses.
One Heartbroken Mother's Plea To Other Parents: Ask If There's A Gun In The House
One Heartbroken Mother's Plea To Other Parents: Ask If There's A Gun In The House
80% Of All Firearm Deaths In 23 Industrialized Countries Occurred In The U.S.
http://paxonbothhouses.
“Toy Guns Outlawed At Republican Presidential Convention. Real Guns Allowed”
3.) Carson's most striking self-contradiction relates to federal income tax. According to candidate Carson "it may be that a flat tax is the only tax that treats people fairly." However, a couple paragraphs later he advocates "a proportional tax system as the only way."
What can Dr. Carson possibly be thinking?
By definition, a "proportional tax system" employs a graduated tax schedule according to which the wealthy pay more and people of modest means less.
I do not think I'm missing anything. Rather, I believe Carson's thought process was muddled and that his editor should not have signed off on these slipshod passages.
4-A.) To Carson's credit, an entire chapter is dedicated to "The General Welfare," a central phrase in the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
For the record, note that it is a rare Republican (or, for that matter, any non-partisan conservative) who will promote "the general Welfare" according to any commonplace definition of "general Welfare."
Similarly, the current chaos in the U.S. House of Representatives (which has been caused by Republicans cannibalizing one another in fey effort to choose their own party's successor to the House Speakership) reveals a political party that both refuses "to form a more perfect Union" while struggling to rupture the Union that already exists.
To me, this self-cannibalization seems treasonous although allegations-of-treason can never penetrate the de facto immunity accorded to American legislators.
4-B.) Dr. Carson promotes wide-ranging opportunity for churches, business leaders --- and even government itself (in a strictly circumscribed minoritarian way) --- to undertake efforts (the more local the better), efforts that will enhance "The General Welfare."
Notably absent from Carson's discussion of expanding efforts to promote "The General Welfare" is any reference to "obligatory national service." (ONS)
"Pax On Both Houses: Good Ideas For The Body Politic"
A Compendium Of Practical Political Projects
Historically, the American military has been the most effective promotor of social change, be it racial integration or gender integration.
Not long ago American conservatives would have applauded obligatory national service.
But now -- partly because a minuscule percentage of "1% children" join the military -- conservatives are staunchly opposed to obligatory national service.
Another reason for conservative opposition to ONS is that, under the influence of Ronald Reagan's vilification of government itself, they see government as "The People's" enemy and will do nothing to expose young, impressionable people to the suasive force of "that enemy."
5.) Finally, Dr. Carson believes citizens must be armed to the teeth as the only way to prevent tyrannical takeover. Just yesterday, he suggested that the Holocaust might never have happened, or its murderous effects minimized, if Jews had been armed.
Again we see conservatives' conviction that government is a "hostile entity" that cannot be trusted.
This implicit (and perhaps explicit) contempt for government may also be rooted in Seventh Day Adventists' suspicion of all government organization.
The first line of the church's Preamble states that "this universe is based on the willing obedience to God's creation," a position that subordinates good government to willing obedience to God. https://www.adventist.org/en/information/official-statements/documents/article/go/0/church-state-relations/
Perhaps Adventists argue that non-believers fall in a sui generis "category" and that non-believing sectors of government are honorable in their isolation.
However, I would not "bet the farm."
Given Adventism's First Principle of "willing obedience to God" I imagine Adventists would expect "good people" to 1.) believe in God and 2.) that the degree of their goodness will depend on the extent to which believers "willingly obey God."
Addendum: Insofar as automatic weapons and armor-penetrating munitions are deemed necessary to prevent tyrannical takeover, I will note that the Soviet Union -- the most persistent tyranny of the 20th century -- fell without a shot being fired.
No comments:
Post a Comment