Running At The Wrong Pace

3/16/2007 Running At The Wrong Pace

By: Joe Murray , The Bulletin

We have met the enemy and he is us," opined Walt Kelly's famed comic strip character Pogo Possum. As it is said that truth often lies in humor, it would appear that this Okefenokee native aptly described the conservative movement in America.

Last week, this author wrote how many of the Beltway bandits championing conservative causes have abandoned the high road of principled debate for a skinny-dipping excursion into the cesspool of politics.

Say the word "faggot" and be lauded a hero. Get caught sending U.S. Attorneys pink slips for failure to initiate purely political prosecutions and call it politics as usual. Welcome to our world.
Modern day politics, for the most part, is a sham - it is a societal experiment gone horribly wrong. Men of character enter the profession with principle in hand and soon end up selling their soul for a taste of the forbidden fruit.

There is no mistaking this fact - the politics of today has ceased being about a cause and has become a racket geared toward the collection of cash, and both the right and left are guilty as charged. Somewhere along the line, those trusted with defending the cause caught the boat to Pinocchio's Pleasure Island - and we all know what happens there.
These are the politicos Ronald Reagan had in mind when he remarked: "It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first." But before we determine who these folks are, we must first look at the damage they have done.

Make no mistake; this writer does not see this nation's political past through a pair of rose-colored lenses. Politics is a nasty game, and many a person was walked upon to reach the top - whether the top is Capitol Hill or 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The difference, though, between the politics of today and that of yesterday is that the politicians of the past believed in the causes they trumpeted. When they assumed positions at the helm of political power, they focused on the cause, not the cash cow.

This has all changed.

Modern politics is founded on fear and driven by divisiveness. It has ceased being about issues and now focuses on individuals. See, political leaders and activist organizations have stumbled onto a dirty little secret that exposes the weakness of American politics.
The secret? Good people will donate truckloads of cash to causes they wouldn't normally support when they are told the sky is falling. Call it the Chicken Little syndrome.
How does this work? Who uses it? And should a people who
pride themselves on a commitment to a Judeo-Christian moral code tolerate such behavior?
The Chicken Little trick is simple in nature, dangerously effective and necessary for the institutional survival of any political nonprofit. See, most of the 501(c) 3 nonprofits in America were created to provide a voice to the voiceless. The problem is, though, that the mission of the 501(c) 3 is self-defeating, for if the organization is successful at its efforts, the need for - and monetary support of - the organization will dissipate.

What is the solution to this Catch-22? Always have a red herring that you can dangle before your supporters to make sure the institutional wallet never gets too thin. Exhibit A is the NAACP, which constantly touts "the evils" of discrimination despite the fact that the DOJ reports racial discrimination in the workplace is down 9.5 percent. The perception of politics becomes more important that the reality of results.

And just this week conservative 501(c) 3s, supposedly driven by Christian principles, showed that they, too, can get in on the act. First a recap.

This past week Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made some unfortunate comments in a now widely publicized interview. Pace, in commenting on the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, opened his mouth and inserted his foot.

Specifically, Pace stated: "I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe that the United States is well served by a policy that says its is okay to be immoral in any way." Pace was conveniently silent on soldiers that are divorced, take the Lord's name in vain, and post pin-ups of Hef's favorites.
The general's comments ignited a firestorm of controversy and some voices called for Pace to resign or be forced out of service. This, however, is not the point of this column.

The American Family Association, a pro-family organization and former employer of this writer, sprung into action sending out this "action alert": "Homosexuals working to get Marine general punished for comments calling homosexual act immoral."

AFA then warned that the homosexual lobby "already forced [Pace] to back down a step," and urged supporters to defend Pace and "take a stand for our troops who cannot get involved in this political situation." AFA, like others, had pulled out its red herring.

This is not a political situation, but instead it is a situation where a high ranking official made comments that judged individuals, not ideas. Pace singled out gay soldiers during a time of war and told these men and women that they were immoral. His comments, as a military official, were over the line and not defensible.

AFA, like other "Christian" groups, chose to run to Pace's aid and such an act suggests borderline bigoted behavior from an organization claiming the mantle of Christianity. This is disturbing.

If troop safety is AFA's primary concern, and not fear-mongering, why hasn't AFA demanded Bush bring these soldiers home? Does it really think the "political situation" of gays in the military presents a greater harm to soldiers than the bullets flying in Baghdad or are other motives being subtly conveyed to an America populace who are already fearful, thanks to past action alerts, of the "homosexual agenda?"

Conservative groups had an opportunity to bring a sense of Christian compassion to this debate, but opted instead to scare supporters into believing homosexuals were trying to raise the rainbow flag over the Pentagon. This is not political activism based upon Christian principle; it is fear mongering based on the politics of man.

This is the siren song of the Chicken Little trick. By demonizing a whole group of individuals and characterizing them as storm troopers coming for the children of Main Street America, pleas for increased donations can be issued to fight this epic battle. Translation: Fill the coffers by fueling fear. Is this what family values have become? If so, we best be preparing our last will and testament.

After six years of one-party government and very little to show for the cause of life, one would think AFA would be pointing its cannons towards the GOP ivory towers. With Lone Ranger congressmen like Duncan Hunter get zero political air cover and 4,000 being performed every day in America, are we conservatives to believe that it is the "homosexual agenda" that imminently threatens our nation?

There is something terribly wrong here. Innocent children are sacrificed to the gods of personal freedom, U.S. troops are fighting an immoral war that is not their own, and all we can clamor about is the "homosexual agenda?" Is it any wonder we conservatives are lost in the wilderness?
Furthermore, just as Eric Robert Rudolph does not reflect the values of most pro-lifers, many gays do not embody the values of the Castro District. They are human beings and just as one cannot choose the color of his skin, one cannot choose his sexual orientation. Thus, to push for discrimination based upon a predetermined characteristic is not only an unjust policy, it is one not rooted in Biblical principle.

While the Catechism of the Catholic Church holds homosexuality is "contrary to natural law," it also states, "The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible... They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."

What will it take for the conservative movement to replace Christian condemnation with Christian charity and fight against such discrimination? Maybe a trip on the road to Damascus.