Political Might
In New York City, February 27, 1860, in perhaps the most important speech of his political career, Abraham Lincoln defended his views just a few months before the Republican National Convention would select a presidential candidate. He closed his speech by encouraging the audience to hold fast to their convictions with this statement:
Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by members of destruction to the Government nor of dungeons to ourselves. LET US HAVE FAITH THAT RIGHT MAKES MIGHT, AND IN THAT FAITH, LET US, TO THE END, DARE TO DO OUR DUTY AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.
I mention this because we find ourselves bombarded by political advertisement that uses various approaches to win our votes. Some tactics would include: slamming the opponent; aligning with a party, position, or policy that will appeal to a particular voter base; causing oneself to be identified with a philosophy or ideology that appeals to the largest constituency; slurring the issues to where the foundational principles are forgotten in the propaganda of the information communicated; or answering questions about specifics with general answers about non-specifics unrelated to the inquiry that are so emotionally charged that the original question becomes lost in the debate. These are just a few of the skilled manipulations enacted upon the American public during election time. Would Lincoln still think that “right makes might,” or would he conclude in our political media that there is greater might in skillful spin and demographic voter analysis?
The Apostle Paul wrote the young preacher Timothy,
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Tim 1:8-11 NIV)
Was he meaning that foundational to our laws should be a fundamental question of right and wrong that empowers our system of law? If so, he and Lincoln would agree.
David Bearden
Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by members of destruction to the Government nor of dungeons to ourselves. LET US HAVE FAITH THAT RIGHT MAKES MIGHT, AND IN THAT FAITH, LET US, TO THE END, DARE TO DO OUR DUTY AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.
I mention this because we find ourselves bombarded by political advertisement that uses various approaches to win our votes. Some tactics would include: slamming the opponent; aligning with a party, position, or policy that will appeal to a particular voter base; causing oneself to be identified with a philosophy or ideology that appeals to the largest constituency; slurring the issues to where the foundational principles are forgotten in the propaganda of the information communicated; or answering questions about specifics with general answers about non-specifics unrelated to the inquiry that are so emotionally charged that the original question becomes lost in the debate. These are just a few of the skilled manipulations enacted upon the American public during election time. Would Lincoln still think that “right makes might,” or would he conclude in our political media that there is greater might in skillful spin and demographic voter analysis?
The Apostle Paul wrote the young preacher Timothy,
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Tim 1:8-11 NIV)
Was he meaning that foundational to our laws should be a fundamental question of right and wrong that empowers our system of law? If so, he and Lincoln would agree.
David Bearden
posted by David Bearden @ 11:21 AM
1 comments
1 Comments:
I have always thought that the law of love is a contradiction in terms. Augustine was right when he said love God and then do whatever you want. Love and liberty go hand and hand.
Post a Comment
<< Home