Saddleback Civil Forum

Well, it looks like there may be a problem obtaining a copy of our national budget. I contacted my congress-person after following my own advice in my "$106 million Question". So far I have recieved nothing in the area of response and my consumer satisfaction level is rapidly declining by the day. I still stand on my platform that we, as taxpayers, have a right to see where our money is being spent. Beforehand as well as afterwards. We should have more say in the manner in which our funds are spent. And I still encourage everyone to consider contacting their congress-person with theor thoughts. As for me, I guess the brouhaha will escalate until I am able to look at the budget. Don't say that I didn't warn anyone!

On a different note, I would like to offer my "two-cents" on the Saddleback Civil Forum held Saturday night and televised throughout the weekend.:

For starters, I really liked the format. While I enjoy the "vim and vigor" involved in a good, old fashioned debate, I found that the interview process allowed for a more comprehensive look at the candidates at this stage of the election. I like the fact that both were asked the same questions and were unable to hear the other's response beforehand. They were both given equal and ample time without interference or interjection from their opponent. As a result we didn't have to hear alot of rehashing and going back to the same question while the candidates postured and positioned on issues. There seemed to be more ground covered, if you will.

In a close election as this one is, and it is close regardless of how the media portrays it, the timing couldn't have been better for voters who were uncertain as to whom they were voting for. I was already leaning toward McCain but only by default. I didn't feel like there was anyone running who had my best interests, or the interests of the average Joe, at heart. It seemed like all of the candidates were really from nowhere, representing nowhere, heading for nowhere. They seemed as flat as the canvassing which we have all been subjected to lately. Even Obama with all of his charm and charismatic perception seemed more like a "character" than a real person. I think this forum helped mold them into people for the most of us. And I think that is important; that we see our elected officials as people representing people.

And as far as the forum being held in a church was a good thing, in my opinion. Now my friend Rupert Cadell disagrees and actually feels that Bob Barr came out of this as the winner because he effectively showed his belief in seperation of church and state by not attending the civil forum. I didn't have the heart to tell him that he wasn't invited. But back to my thoughts on the forum being held in a church...

I was glad to see that a church was involved in modern politics. And I was glad to see true moderation and fair and equal treatment of both candidates. While many say that this crowd was conservative friendly, they are correct. But Obama has talked much more about his faith and beliefs than McCain has and I feel Barak had the advantage going into the evening. Everyone may not agree on these points, but I feel that being asked the same questions, in the same order, by the same moderator is fair regardless of where the questions are asked. And won't the person elected as president have to go into areas and arenas that aren't supportive of him and his views? So if anyone sees the deck as being stacked in favor of any one candidate, they should step back and see it as an opportunity to show strength and adaptivity. And if they are supporting a candidate for the highest office in the land, then they need to see that their candidate is able to do such. And I personally thought McCain was at a disadvantage going into the forum and I have heard more Obama supporters fussing about this point.

But back to why I was glad that a church was involved. I think it was a good example of how church and government can function together. I do believe in seperation of church and state. I do not want an official state religeon, not even Christianity. I don't want church to become an issue to vote on, and debate, and to become a special interest group. Evangelicals are already an interest group, and that makes me cringe. I believe in seperation of church and state due to politics, but I do not believe in absence of church in the sate due to personal conviction. Our country was founded on these convictions whether we like it or not, disagree or agree. All of our founding fathers were not deeply religeous as many church people want to believe. Not every one of our original signees of the Declaration of Independence had their eyes focused on God. All of the leaders of The Revolution weren't Christians. But the thing that they all had in common was the respect for convictions and the understanding that without core moral values we would have anarchy and the experiment in democracy would fail. We must have our freedom but freedom should not give a voice to the immoral or unethical.

We can't desire for our government to regulate morality. That is something that we must do individually. Just as God gives us freewill, so should our government. But there will be repercussions should we neglect our freewill and ignore our convictions. In many ways and by many means. And I have to admit that I was skeptical of Rick Warren and of a mega-church holding a political forum. I was concerned in areas of regulating morality and freewill. And I always cringe when the focus is on "evangelicals". Too many times I have seen "evangelicals" act like an angry, mindless mob instead of a body of believers with a common concern. But I have to credit Pastor Warren on the forum. Im know what his beliefs are and I know where he stands on most issues. But he didn't allow his personal beliefs to lead to polarization. He interjected some Bible verses and asked questions that Christians are concened with, while being kind and courteous to both candidates. He, in a sense, allowed us to have freewill. He exposed the candidates, whether by design or otherwise, and thier views without the candidates or their parties forcing anything down our throats.

I think the Saddleback Civil Forum was a succes on many levels. I think it could be a model of how the church can be involved with government and how the two can go hand in hand, even when not agreeing on an issue. Maybe not in the final stage of things, but certainly in the beginning of. And it was nice to see "church" center stage for a change of pace.

This wasn't the direction that I had planned to go in this blog, but I went ahead and rode the train of thought. And for a final note today, I would ask that we all conduct ourselves in a manner that won't polarize our fellows. I would ask that we follow our convictions but temper them to a manner in which issues can be discussed rationally. And this is advice for myslf also. I can get pretty "worked up" when it comes to politics.

And to believers in Christ; use your freewill as a ministry tool, not as a right. Then we can be seen as sincere, heartfelt imitators of Jesus not an opinionated, insecure, and stiff-necked mob.