Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For July 15, 2015

July 6

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost consisting of the audio broadcasts of an interview with Robert Godfrey over the same-sex marriage issue. This appeared in heidelblog.


Some points need to be made here. First, Godfrey makes a good point in criticizing the current emphasis on individualism in society. And yet, the individual is always implied, if not explicitly referenced, in each of the amendments to the Constitution. So there is a certain libertarian bend in The Constitution.

The next point to be made is a more thorough examination of how Christians should interact with society. One solution never mentioned is that perhaps we should work to share society with others as equals rather than as part of a privileged group.

Finally, citing the freedom of religion in a way that implies that it only supports the Christian view forgets that some who argue for equal rights for those in the LGBT community do so because their religious views are at odds with that of the Church. And so we must deal with the issue of how to resolve a collision between the religious liberties of multiple groups. In addition, the Jim Crow era has taught us that we need to recognize and oppose the use of religious views that are used to deny equal rights for others.

Also, we need to consider how the Church has reacted so strongly to the changing of sexual mores but has been quiet about the economic exploitation that has been so much a part of our nation's economy, the destruction of the environment our way of life has caused, and war/militarism in the name of patriotism. Outsiders see us being obsessed with sexual sins and cold system and societal sins.
---------------

July 8

To Raleigh Sadler and his blogpost on how to care for those who are trafficked workers who also go to church. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

There is another way by which we can hep trafficked people. We can work for economic justice. It isn't just manipulation through relationships that causes people to be trafficked, it is poverty and the lack of good paying jobs. Poverty is a driving force in prostitution and pornography. And in an economic system where recovery from collapse goes predominantly to the wealthiest and where many decent paying jobs have left for other countries and where some corporations and banks pay such low wages, many of their low-skilled and not so low-skilled employees must apply for government assistance to live, it is not difficult to see how some see prostitution and pornography as ways of escaping poverty. In fact, poverty among some college students is causing them to use prostitution and drug dealing to escape their financial difficulties.

If churches are to better address the problem of trafficked labor, they need to address issues revolving around economic exploitation as well as do what was suggested above. Certainly it is important to pray and be aware of both the people around us and the issue of trafficked labor. But to focus so much on that while ignoring a driving force for why people engage in sex-work and are vulnerable to trafficking is to partially sabotage one's efforts at addressing the problem of exploiting people through trafficked labor.

--------------

July 14

To Joe Carter and his blogpost on what he wants the Pope to know about free economies. This appeared in the Acton Blog.

What I wish advocates for a free economy would realize is that a free economy is like freedom itself in the  sense that it is not free. The price of both freedom and a free economy has had to be paid by some and many who belong to the group some are not enjoying the benefits of a free economy, just the costs.

Why a free economy is not free is because of two reasons. First, the necessary structures that support a free economy are not free. These structures include both physical, legal, and societal infrastructures. For access to these infrastructures to be public, government must play a leading role in providing for them. That means that taxes must be paid. However, advocates of a free economy want the tax burden to be either neglected or shifted to another segment of society. The shifting of that tax burden provides greater freedom the elites in the free market.

Another reason why a free economy is not free is because a nation's economy has as its primary responsibility that of providing for the people as a whole. But advocates of a free economy believe that the purpose of a free economy is not that of fulfilling any social responsibilities, but that of providing opportunities to make as much as one can. Now advocates, like the writer of this blogpost, believe because the latter approach, that of emphasizing the provision of opportunity and the denial of responsibility, is most effective at providing for all. And to sugarcoat that, redefinitions of a free economy, such as the one Carter provides here:

A free economy is not a laissez-faire, each-to-his-own system of consumerism. It’s a system in which people are allowed to use their resources and abilities most effectively to serve others.

are used to sell the idea of a free economy. The problem with the redefinition of a free economy is that it is euphemistic. That people are allowed to use their resources to serve others does not imply that any adequate percentage of people will. In addition, the boast that a free economy does the most to alleviate poverty is misleading. First, look at the definition of extreme poverty $1.25 per day. One could move people such as Americans closer to that goal through economic schemes and rightfully claim that they did not create any more extreme poverty. At the same time, the country with the tightest controls on its economy, China, has contributed the most to the statistics being bragged about here and its economy is not exactly free. But in the freedom that it has allowed. progress has been achieved at a tremendous cost to both the environment and workers' conditions. And as for India, while some have benefited from the free economy, hundreds of thousands of farmers have committed suicide because of the debts they incurred from their free economy.

So we have to ask this question: Is the free economy being preached here designed to be a kind of new California Gold Rush or is it designed to meet its responsibilities at serving all of the people?

----------------

To Joe Carter and his blogpost on how Greece's current and America's coming economic problems are a result of paying for items like pensions. This appeared in Acton's blog.

Odd that what is not cited here are what banks did to contribute to Greece's economic policies. Neither is the corruption that exists in Greek government and society. Neither is the notion that avoiding paying taxes has also contributed to Greece's problems. Why haven't these factors been mentioned here? It is because of those who want financial elites to be free from social responsibilities.

Here is a fact. That the current Greek problem came about from the combination of heavy borrowing, which was turned into growth, and the global financial collapse of 2008--remember that our economic collapse which was due to private sector corruption and public sector negligence/impotence (see http://www.psmag.com/business-economics/the-corrupt-economics-behind-greeces-fiscal-problems ).

Here is another fact. The money from the first bailout of Greece's economy primarily went to banks that had loaned Greece the money. It was like preventing a foreclosure on a country. In return for that bailout, austerity measures were put in that hurt the economy, what else would one expect when one further consolidates wealth, along with conditions of new austerity measures that not only furthered Greece's recession, they were punitive and used unrealistic expectations (see http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/29/joseph-stiglitz-how-i-would-vote-in-the-greek-referendum and http://www.psmag.com/business-economics/the-corrupt-economics-behind-greeces-fiscal-problems and http://blogs.lclark.edu/hart-landsberg/2012/10/28/the-role-of-government-in-the-economy/ )

Here is another fact. There is corruption in Greece's government and it revolves around schemes invented to make money. In addition, many of the loans made to Greece was more about how to make money off of them than to help (see http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/06/30/eurozone-profiteers-how-german-and-french-banks-helped-bankrupt-greece ).

Now we add to that the Greek aversion to paying taxes, you have part of Greece's problem. And instead of bringing up those items, we are being told that Greece cannot afford to pay its pensions and be fiscally responsible. And we are being told that so that this dilemma projected on to Greece should serve as a precedent for all others including us in the US.

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For February 11, 2015

Feb 8

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost quip stating that the Crusades have no influence on today's Muslim attitudes toward the West. This appeared in the Heidelblog.

Perhaps, when looking at the Crusades, one must at least look at the behavior of the Crusaders toward the indigenous population as well as the racist pronouncements and spiritual incentives given by Pope Urban II. It is simply out of tribalism that one does not condemn the crusades.

Yes, there were political reasons for the crusades back then, not just religious ones. But modern Western imperialism was motivated by access to and control of Middle East natural resources. And so, regardless of the name or motivation, you still have the results of Western invasions in the Middle East today by countries with a Christian heritage into countries that have more of an Islamic heritage. And with Islam being a political religion as well as a spiritual one, we can start to see what prompted attacks on the West.  

Finally, the article from which the above quote was take discusses 9-11 in reference to the crusades. And it is correct to say that the crusades had no bearing on that attack. It is what the West did during the 20 century that provoked the kind of anger we saw in the terrorist attacks of 9-11. Their attacks were unjustified but their anger is at least understandable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feb 10

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost quote describing the infidelity in same-sex marriage. This appeared in the Heidelblog.

The lack of precision in the statements made as well as data collection methods as well as the amount of data collected leaves the quote used in this post unsubstantiated. And conclusions drawn from this snapshot are rather dubious since there is no discussion of history or trends. 

We should note from an article with inadequate data collection is that about 70% of married (that is heterosexual marriage) men cheat on their wives (note the source: http://magazine.foxnews.com/love/cheating-statistics-do-men-cheat-more-women  ). Meanwhile, another article gives different info both in terms of percentages and direction ( http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/marriage/story/2011-09-05/Gay-straight-couples-more-monogamous-than-in-the-past/50267258/1 ). It is what Andrew Sullivan said that the data is 'all over the map' (see http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/07/02/monogamy-gay-men-lesbians-and-straights/  ).

BTW, my own collection consisting of personal friends show no instances of cheating in either heterosexual or same-sex marriages.

So it seems that only those who are eager to jump to conclusions will do so.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Joseph Sunde and the list of 5 reasons why Christians should be understand and be concerned about economics. This appeared in the Acton blog.

What's missing in these reasons for caring about economics is any serious reflection on our current economic system and how fair and unfair it is to the stakeholders of our economy. So what seems to be endorsed here is a synthesis between a prosperity gospel based on individual responsibility with a stewardship of the world. 

By appearances, that sounds good. But what is missing is how some of the greatest wealth being garnered is accomplished by exploiting the work of others whether that exploitation involves abusing workers, underpaying them--which sometimes occurs because of supply and demand--and/or making workers, and thus their communities, disposable. See, the greatest wealth being garnered is gained through investments. And those investments often give the investors a greater voice in a company than years of service provided by workers. And in many cases, if the current labor that provides the wealth for a company can be procured at a lower pay scale, then those who are providing that labor can be sacrificed in order to maximize profits. 

Funny how the exploitation of workers was not mentioned but hard work was. Perhaps that was done purposely so that we don't fully explore the theological implications of politics. And perhaps it was also purposely done so that only workers become aware of their responsibilities in the public square.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Elise Hilton and her blogpost reviews an article by Jonathan Witt that associates the quality of water with the degree of economic freedom in a nation. This appeared in the Acton Blog.

Besides the fact that Witt's data sample is not only small, but contains mixed results based on the size of the sample, the title is misleading--though he makes one or two good points off this title. For many people, the fewer regulations that exist, the more economic freedom there is for the individual. But Witt writes favorably about those nations where there is a moderate or reasonable approach to regulations. BTW, his use of the word 'anarchy,' to represent a system with no regulations and what some would call the situation with the greatest economic freedom, shows an inadequate understanding of the word. For anarchy refers more to the number of dominant leaders than to the number of laws and regulations. And the number of dominant leaders sought by anarchists is 0.

In addition, his reduction of the reasons why clean water exists or not down to freest economies seems to miss the correlation between population density and clean water. For some of the dirtiest bodies of water he listed occurs in countries that have areas of highly dense populations such as in Indonesia, India, and China. Besides, calling England one of the freest nations, singled out because of the quality of the Thames River running through London, when it is one of the nations that is under such great surveillance makes one wonder about the criteria for determining the freest nations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Marc Vander Maas and his blogpost containing an audio of an Acton Institute colleague Jordan Ballor has Ballor talks about current efforts to access more fossil fuels. This appeared on the Acton Blog.

Besides the strawman Ballor creates about those who oppose projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline, Ballor seems to avoid mentioning the specifics about man-spurred climate change. And in so doing, he doesn't do justice to the urgency needed for us to switch from our reliance on fossil fuels to non-fossil fuel sources. In addition, though he advocates our responsibility in terms of how we extract fossil fuel resources, he also seems to ignore how some sources of fossil fuels could make it impossible for us to extract from responsibly in terms of not significantly damaging the surrounding ecosystems. 

Finally, there is a way of helping those who are poor besides increasing the amount of fossil fuels we extract and make available on the market. That way is to find better ways to share what we already have and are using.