Leaving aside the issue of marriage and how it should be defined, how government deals with abortion is one of the most important measures of justice for society. The most basic role of government is to protect the weak from being persecuted and victimized by the strong.

What we see in this nation is mass murder on an unprecedented scale. Every year, 1.2 million unborn children are killed in our “medical” facilities. To date, about 50 million unborn children have been killed, a figure that is many times larger than even the Nazi Holocaust. Abortion is the most important moral and political issue of our time because of the sheer numbers of human beings that have been killed by abortion since 1973.

How can we possibly argue our nation is great when this senseless and unprecedented slaughter happens right under the noses of an apathetic population? How can we say “God bless America” when we are murdering children created in His image by the tens of millions? Is the United States of America not worse than Nazi Germany, based on numbers alone? A true patriot would want his nation to repent and turn away from this terribly wicked abomination.

Brindle argues that arguments over abortion distract from “real political issues like the rule of law and foreign relations”. For the 50 million lives snuffed out by America’s abortion industry and the broken spirits left behind after those deaths, there is no issue more “real” than protecting innocent and defenseless human life in the womb.

I honestly cannot understand how anyone who claims to be “pro-life” could argue that abortion should not be a political issue. If it were legal to kill newborns, would we not work to change the law to protect those lives? If it were legal to kill blacks, would we not feel obligated to fight against this injustice and genocide? We simply cannot abandon millions of unborn children to be exterminated by this country’s abortion industry.

Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not He who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not He who guards your life know it? Will He not repay each person according to what he has done? — Proverbs 24:11-12

I generally agree with you, Josh. But one caveat: the line of argument that you are making eventually gets turned into the idea that you must have a perfect messenger in order to stand up for values. Well, we can’t get that messenger, but values still need to be supported–and publicly.

I have a strong belief that if any social reform in our country is to occur, it will come from, as you said, social institutions.

As a Christian, I am reminded of the passage in the New Testament from Matthew.

Matthew 7:3-5 (NIV)
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

The Christian Church in American obviously has a many planks. We need reform in our own churches (or in Nathan’s case synagogue) to root out the moral perversion before we can start calling out the moral perversion in society. Does that mean we stand idly by while society crumbles around us? No. It means that if society see us taking care of our own problems, society will change itself. We should harken back to King David’s sin and how as Israel’s physical and spiritual leader, when he stumbled, so did Israel. When he was spiritually in tune with God, Israel flourished.

We have so changes to make in our own backyard, before we can start tackling the problems in the rest of the neighborhood. Until then, liberals (and moderate Republicans) will always be able to look down upon us when a SoCon leader stumbles.

Arguments about abortion and marriage don’t belong in the political realm. They belong in the social realm. The fact of the matter is that social conservative that I am, I simply don’t care if the Left propounds a liberal social agenda of abortion on demand and gay marriage with all the trimmings. What I’m more concerned about is how our social and religious institutions fight back. As political people, we waste entirely too much powder trying to counter left-wing political arguments on these subjects when we need to be focusing on real political issues like the rule of law and foreign relations. They distract from serious arguments that affect our existing Constitutional freedoms.

The place for teaching the correct stance on abortion and marriage is in the social realm, that is to say, in the home, in the schools, and in the religious institutions.

If you’re not teaching these values in your home, what kind of parent are you?

If your child’s school isn’t teaching these values, why isn’t your child in a values-oriented private school or being home-schooled?

If your church or synagogue isn’t teaching these values, why aren’t you trying to get that changed, or failing that, finding another church or synagogue that does?

To those who would argue that non-public schooling is too expensive or too time-consuming, maybe you need to reexamine your priorities. Do you really need the McMansion in the suburbs with the three-car garage and the matching Lexii to go in them?

To those who stick blindly to their particular religious institution because of family or social ties, open your damn eyes. Find out what your denomination’s teachings are on social issues that matter to you, and if they don’t match your beliefs, have the guts to say you will no longer remain affiliated if it won’t conform to your way of thinking.

Personally, I left Reform Judaism and the synagogue I grew up in fifteen years ago because I was sick and tired of the left-wing agenda followed by both the lay and rabbinical conferences. I’ll be damned if I’m going to support that kind of crap with my annual dues.

If more conservative people would stand up and be counted in the social realm, we wouldn’t have to worry about the political realm.

Cal Thomas has written an interesting article on this subject that would be worth reading and commenting on. It can be found at:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas110608.php3

In short, he argues that the “Religious Right” (aka Social Conservatives) should be working for social change through service rather than through the political process. I disagree with a part of what he says, but there is a significant part of what he says that is valid. Namely, that social change does not come through legislation, but by Christian involvement.

I don’t think he is completely correct. In particular, ignoring the issue of life has a major unraveling effect on society and ignores one of the primary freedoms considered central by the founding fathers.

But we need to consider how we approach things. Running as “Social Conservatives” is a divisive way to run. Governor Palin has never run as a social conservative. Is she? Yes. But her message both as VP candidate and as Governor has not been “about” social positions. Her message has been about Conservatism. The Conservative movement has been damaged a lot by this fracturing of conservatism.

The Conservative movement has also been damaged by litmus testing. For instance, McCain was damaged early in his Presidential run by social conservatives disagreeing with his stem cell research positions, when his opposition to abortion and other social conservative positions was very solid. This enthusiasm was somewhat improved with Palin, but it really never got to a point that was needed.

The Conservative movement has also been damaged by the social conservative focus. Social Conservatives are willing to compromise on all of the other parts of conservatism (e.g. fiscal responsibility and limited government) for the sake of a position on abortion or homosexual marriage.

This fractured conservatism must end.