Tag: Politics

Posted on

A Christmas Day Reflection

By Jim Spiegel

On this Christmas day I have been reflecting on our unity in Christ, which seems increasingly threatened by divisions within the American Church, especially due to disagreements over political issues. This prompted me to think about the following possibility. Suppose, upon our arrival in the Next World, we ask Jesus, “Who was right regarding those early 21st century American political issues which divided us so much, even those of us who followed you, Lord? Was it the conservatives or the progressives?” What if Jesus replies, “Both sides were right and wrong about many things” and then he proceeds to itemize the insights and errors on both sides, to which we respond by saying, “Wow, it’s all so clear now. Why didn’t we see this during those days when we were so caught up in all of those political squabbles?” Then what if He says, “because it was not my will that you would see these things clearly but rather to test you and mature you through such disagreements. Those issues, vital and important as they were, served primarily as means of interpersonal engagement, to catalyze the forging of your souls, to build virtues of patience, generosity, perseverance, humility, and grace. In short, your political debates functioned as props on the stage of human life, the main focus of which was always about making you all more like me, though even you, my precious children, at times lost sight of this. But don’t worry about it, guys. For all is well now. And all manner of things is well.”

What if that is how it will go down in the Next World? And suppose we somehow could know now that this was God’s main purpose regarding all of the political strife which currently grips our nation. How might this change the way we approached all of these divisive issues?

Posted on

Politics Gone Viral

By Amy Spiegel

For many years, as a mother of four, I dreaded this time of year. The excitement and cheerful decorations of Christmas are long gone. The green and sunshine of spring seem a still distant hope. When the kids were little, these were long and grey winter days with no snow spent wishing for sledding and igloos to help burn off some of that seemingly endless childhood energy. The long and grey days with lots of snow were spent stuffing kids in and out of snow pants and wishing they would just stay inside. But my greatest dread was sickness. Inevitably, we would schedule a playdate, spend several lovely hours with friends only to have someone throw up all over one of the kids as we were saying goodbye. Okay, that never actually happened, but there did seem to be a proportional relationship between the frequency of playdates and the chances of my kids getting sick. In order to avoid whatever gut-spilling, bowel-emptying plague which was currently laying siege to our circle of friends, I would become hyper-vigilant regarding contact with others. If I saw the slightest hint of illness, runny nose, sneezing, unidentified ooze leaking from any orifice, I would yell “Retreat!” and hustle the kids off as quickly as possible, giving the offending orifice a wide berth large enough to drive the Titanic through…sideways.

This season of political divisiveness and strife has me living in the same nerve-fraying state of alertness. Politics has become a virus from which I would like to be immunized or, better yet, simply avoid all together. I know this is not the way of the informed citizen and might seem a complete shirking of my civic duties, but I’m ready to at least use a few sick days. It isn’t that I don’t care about the issues being debated. Quite the reverse. The stakes have never seemed so high: illegal immigration which encompasses national security, our legacy as a nation of immigrants, and the fate of those caught in the middle; racial equality; issues of religious freedom and tolerance; abortion; gun control; and the list goes on. All matters of vital importance and deserving of our attention. Nevertheless, on a fairly regular basis, I dream of leaving others to solve our problems and packing up husband, kids and dogs (sorry cat, you are on your own) and heading to hill country with a lifetime supply of dehydrated beef stroganoff and the complete works of Sir Conan Doyle.

I know that in the last two hundred plus years of our nation’s history there have been times of greater political division (e.g., the Civil War, Vietnam, etc.). But what I find so maddening about our current political divide, beyond the character assassinations and untethered vitriol on both sides of the aisle, is its ever-pervasive presence. Go to the movies or turn on the television and you’ll have some high school dropout lecturing you about the environment or gun control or the “wage gap.” Try to watch sports and you’ll have it turned into a political exercise about racial prejudice. You can’t even shop for school supplies or buy a cupcake without declaring your support or disapproval of one side or the other. Every corner of our culture has been infected with politics. In other words, there is no common ground. There is no place to meet in the middle and enjoy a laugh or well-played game. Everywhere is a pulpit and everyone a preacher.

I’m not denying anyone’s right to use whatever platform they have been given to propagate their particular perspective. I only ask they consider the context in which they do so. We watch movies for their artistic and entertainment value, not to be indoctrinated but to be enlightened and uplifted. We watch sports to be amazed and inspired, to feel a part of so larger than ourselves, not to be lectured and subdivided.

Maybe if we spent a little more time on common ground, rooting for the home team, laughing together, enjoying the same musical or theatrical experience, we might find the road to political compromise a little less rocky. Maybe those moments of shared experience will be just what the doctor ordered.

Posted on

Hodgepodge

By Jim Spiegel

1. The Illusion of Time — A few months ago I stumbled on this Nova series “Fabric of the Cosmos,” narrated by Columbia University physicist Brian Greene.  I was transfixed by the second installment in the series entitled “The Illusion of Time” which explains the relativity of time in lay-friendly terms.  I defy you to watch the entire episode without uttering the word “wow.”

2. Doing Politics Well — This piece by Messiah College professor Dean Curry might be elementary in certain respects, but in the current atmosphere of division and rancor such balance is refreshing.

3. The Roots of Mass Murder — I have read numerous articles in response to the Newtown school shooting, but perhaps none as wise as this Washington Post commentary by Charles Krauthammer.

4. Life Imitating Art — Check out this disturbing story about a Ukranian teenager who wants to look like a cartoon character, specifically characters from Japanese anime films.  Apparently, she is considering undergoing eye surgery to make the change permanent.  Ugh.

Posted on

Post-Election Reflections

By Amy Spiegel

I suppose at this point that most of you have had it up to the proverbial “here” with politics and any discussion thereof. I have felt a strange absence post-election—no more pundits predicting this outcome or that, no heated debates filling the airways, etc.

I am trying to put absence to good use, however. Pre-election, I participated in a political panel discussion on Taylor’s campus. The topic was civility—how we can discuss and debate issues many of us feel very passionately about without discrediting ourselves, or our Savior. I have been considering some of the things that were said that night and one thing keeps coming back to me, maybe because I said it. In response to a question I sadly don’t remember, I encouraged the students to make sure that their lives reflected their political convictions. That is to say, if you say you are for the poor then make sure you don’t just depend on the government to take care of the poor. If you say you are for freedom of speech, then don’t shut down others when they try to speak.

So I have been thinking about how my life reflects my political convictions and how I can better align those convictions with my everyday life. Here are a few ways I am doing so:

1)  I believe that the ultimate solution for our woes as a nation, as the human race is Jesus, so shouldn’t I spend at least as much time listening to people talk about Christ as I do listening to people talk about the right and the left? My kids can rattle off talk radio hosts like nobody’s business, but shouldn’t they be able to rattle off famous pastors and theologians just as easily? So I am trying to listen to Christian radio more. I say “trying” because so much of it is so awful I would rather listen to NPR’s coverage of the Republican Convention, but I am finding some of it very edifying. It has added depth to our car conversations. So no matter what Alistair Begg is saying, I’ll listen. I would happily listen to that man read a telephone book.

2)  I have been very critical about the wasteful and truly immoral way our government is frittering away billions of dollars, and yet am I as careful as I ought to be with my own family’s resources? If I want a government that spends wisely, then shouldn’t I be a citizen who spends wisely? We are hardly extravagant people, but when I think of the needs that are out there, I am sure we could do better. I also want to be willing to see government programs from which I benefit, namely public charter schools, cut for the sake of whole, however painful a loss to me personally.

3)  I believe in the American republic and the right to elect our governmental officials, but what happens when those elected don’t reflect my positions? Since the election, I have been reminding myself that one side has to lose, and why do I think I have the right to be in the majority? It feels pretty safe to be in the majority and it is easy to talk about democracy then, but what about when you are in the minority? Even if I dislike the outcome, I must respect the process.

Ultimately, all these things add up to this, I want to live a life that makes politics irrelevant. I want to teach my kids, and myself, that the best public service we can perform isn’t done on election day but every day before and after.

Posted on

On Disagreement and Civility

By Amy Spiegel

I am not a big fan of Facebook. Or rather, I am not a big fan of what Facebook brings out in me. A few years back, I took a much welcomed hiatus that only ended with my need to utilize social media in order to promote my book. I have enjoyed being back in the loop more than I thought I would. I like challenging an old friend to a game of Words With Friends or learning about the marathon that a college classmate that I don’t really remember just ran. When things turn political, however, I get a bit uncomfortable. There is often something presumptuous in the way people post their political opinions online, an assumption that by being “friends” we must share more than just part of our past.

When confronted with strongly worded missives from either side of the aisle, I must confess, I have been tempted to simply de-friend the offender or at least hide any further posting. But the other day, a college acquaintance threw down the gauntlet and I chose to face the challenge head on. I carefully worded my comment, attempting to at least fake open-mindedness, though I hoped I was doing more than faking it. And guess what? My acquaintance didn’t reach through the computer screen and yell at me. He responded with great civility and we moved on to new recipes and amusing e-cards.

While I was pleased with this encounter with civil political discourse, I was embarrassed to realize how hesitant I am to share my political views in an unfiltered environment. Admitting a strong leaning to one political affiliation or another feels like an invitation for backslapping from one side of the aisle and discord with another. Why is arguing about politics such a big deal? I have debated with people about plenty of issues, so why should I shy away from doing so on political topics?

I guess the problem boils down to the fact that I love being right but hate making other people feel “wrong.” I discovered this when I finally won a game of Settlers of Catan only to realize that in order for me to win, other people had to loss. I have always assumed the same to be true of political battles. One side wins and the other loses. But what if this isn’t necessarily true? Isn’t our country based on the idea of checks and balances? Aren’t there plenty of goals we all agree on? The differences seem to be ones of means rather than ends. I don’t hate poor people or the environment. I don’t stay up late at night hoping for more wars or economic disaster. When did politics become such a winner takes all proposition?

I have been greatly encouraged by Mitt Romney’s recent comments regarding the issue of compromise. He has said he isn’t willing to compromise on the goals but the methods are up for negotiation. While some might say this is a lack of clear planning, I see it as an opportunity for bi-partisanship. Maybe if we all stop looking at the future of the country as a mere game, we just might all manage to win.

Posted on

Playing Politics

By Amy Spiegel

The recent Indiana primaries, along with the umpteen-million political ads on the radio, have me thinking about politics and more specifically the term “political.”  You hear this term used all the time.  Someone made a “purely political” decision. Someone else is “playing politics.” Considering the fact that all these “someones” are politicians, should we really be surprised at all this politicking? What’s so bad about being political, especially when it’s your job?

I looked up the definition of the term and found that “political” refers to “the theory and practice of government, especially the activities associated with governing, with obtaining legislative or executive power, or with forming and running organizations connected with government.” Well, that doesn’t sound too bad, now does it?

If being political is just the “practice of government,” then wherein lies the problem? I think the problem is that when you have two parties with two different ideas on how to do something, be they individuals or in our case two opposing political parties, someone has to win and someone has to lose. Today for instance, I desperately wanted Jim to help me clean the house. And he graciously agreed. I was overjoyed…right up until the point when he suggested we clean the house in a way not normally practiced by myself. I had a decision to make: take away his mop and say “Have fun mowing the yard!” or do things his way. Point is, we couldn’t do it both ways. And the same is true in government. There is only so much compromise that is possible. One side gets their way and one side does not. Too often, I think people use the phrase “playing politics” to describe a decision one side makes that they simply don’t agree with.

In a country as large and as diverse as the United States, there is little hope of complete agreement. After all, that is sort of the point of our founding the political system we have, where differing points of view can be freely expressed. But that doesn’t mean that all those points of view are going to make their way into law. When those views come into conflict, one view will win out over the other.

So when we see politicians make certain decisions for “purely political” reasons, maybe we should remember that, well, they are politicians after all.  And when we want to accuse them of “playing politics,” perhaps we should consider that both sides are “playing” that game, whether or not our side has won the latest round.

Posted on

On Glenn Beck and Restoring Honor

By Amy Spiegel

As a stay-at-home mom with no television access, the radio is a huge part of my news and entertainment world. I often spin the dial while cleaning or cooking, and catch a bit of talk radio. It not only keeps me in the loop, but keeps me company as well. Sometime post 9/11, I became a fan of the Glenn Beck Radio Program. This is back when Beck’s fusion of entertainment and enlightenment was heavy on the entertainment. I resonated with his conservative views and belly laughed at things such as “Moron Trivia.”

Over the years, however, the show and Beck have taken a decided turn towards the serious. I must confess to longing, at times, for a good prank call rather than hour upon hour of warnings and—is there any other word for it?—prophecies regarding the political and economic future of our country. Sometimes listening to G.B. is a bit like being in the mall with my kids when they spot some unfortunately overweight person and proceed to very loudly announce to all those gathered within earshot “Look Mommy, that man’s really fat!” You can’t really argue the facts of their case but it is certainly socially awkward to have it brought to your (and the rest of the mall’s) attention.

I have felt an increasing internal tension as I have listened to Beck’s calls for repentance and a return to our founding values. That tension did not resolve itself as I listened to much of the Restoring Honor rally he hosted in Washington D.C. this past weekend.  It wasn’t that I disagreed with any of the basic principles being expressed. I certainly think that our nation, both corporately and as individuals have plenty to repent of, but I am not comfortable with marrying my faith with my allegiance to my nation. Now don’t get me wrong: I certainly think that my faith should permeate every area of my life, those which would be deemed private and those which would fall into the public square. And since our country can be a moral agent for both good and evil, it seems appropriate that we have both pride and shame regarding our nation’s deeds. As I have listened to Mr. Beck call Americans to lives of honor, hope and charity (and expect those who “serve” as our leaders to do the same), I find I can only agree. As I have read the criticisms of those who oppose or are offended by him, I find a great lack of substantive examination and a great deal of name-calling and pettiness.

In the end, I support Beck’s ideals of restoring honor to the lives of our citizens. But I would hope that he would support the idea that it is not in the founders of nation but in the Creator of the universe where our ultimate hope lies. Whether or not we as a nation survive or perish, one day all nations will gather and we the people will discover what it is to be truly free.

Posted on

Straddling the Aisle with Violet Beauregarde

By Amy Spiegel

I have never been terribly interested in politics. This might seem a strange confession coming from someone who graduated with a degree in political science. I am not sure what exactly drew me to the major originally, perhaps the fact that I really liked arguing–or, well, thoughtfully discussing issues with people. After serving as a summer intern in Washington D.C., however, I lost all hope that politics actually accomplished anything. Seeing the partisan biases and territorial attitude of so many politicians day after day was a clarifying moment for me both as a student and citizen. I felt quite immune to Potomac fever. (I loved the city itself, though. So many great restaurants!).

My apathy has remained fairly well intact until recently. The presidential election has captivated my attention, as it has so many Americans, in a way that I find quite surprising. It feels a bit like when you are waiting for your oil to be changed and pass the time by watching some random soap opera provided for your IQ-lowering entertainment. Thirty minutes ago, you didn’t know who Trish and Buff were and now suddenly you are breathless to discover if the Siamese twins Trish had are really Buff’s or those of his evil brother, Duff. I suddenly find myself utterly enthralled by the whole drama that is our election process. I’m completely hooked. But living in a fairly conservative area–this is like saying that penguins live in a relatively frigid environment–I have been carefully seeking all sides of the issues, not wanting to end up like one of our feathery Antarctic friends, huddled together with my kind, more concerned with the survival of my species than the greater good.

Fortunately for me, Jim and I do have a few friends that we greatly respect who lean a little farther to the left than ourselves. The day Barack Obama announced his running mate, I ran into one such couple at Bailey’s soccer game. While serving Cheerios to the youngsters, I asked our friends what they thought of Obama’s choice. I asked with a genuine desire to know, not in the way we so often ask questions of those who disagree with us. Per Jim’s recent post, I want to be strengthened in my own convictions through the thoughtful arguments of others or discover where my view is flawed and change my mind. One of our friends shook his head and expressed disappointment at the choice of Senator Joe Biden. He said that he had really believed that Obama wanted to reach across the aisle and start to change things. The phrase stuck with me through the rest of the day–“Reach across the aisle.” I can’t count the number of times I have heard commentators use that phrase. What struck me, though, was the fact that I don’t live on one aisle or the other. Jim and I would both consider ourselves social and fiscal conservatives but on other issues such as gun control and the death penalty, we would be more sympathetic with liberals. Our friends are greatly concerned with social justice but they are pro-life. So where does that leave us–straddling the aisle? What if you are neither red nor blue, but more purple? Where is the purple party–hanging out with Violet Beauregarde in Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory? When you can identify with both parties to some extent (and neither completely), how do you go about deciding whom to vote for?

I believe I found the answer this past weekend, sitting on the floor of a Denver book store. Jim and I were attending a wedding in the Mile High City and made the most of it with a date night consisting of cruising Barnes and Noble and a dinner of Indian food. Jim called me over to check out a book on Barack Obama. I can’t remember the title but it was clear the author was not a fan of Obama’s. I skimmed it with an open mind, on the lookout for the glaring exaggerations and misrepresentations I find intolerable from any party. What I read, however, was chilling. It was related to Obama’s views on abortion and specifically the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. I recently learned about this act and the work of a former nurse turned public speaker named Jill Stanek (www.jillstanek.com). I have been shamed by my ignorance and apathy regarding this act and the abortion issue as a whole.

Jim and I really wanted to refrain from making this blog political but what Obama is supporting through his opposition to this bill isn’t political; it’s permission murder. I don’t want to use our blog as a forum for demonizing one political party or another, but I will say that I cannot in good conscience vote for this man. I strongly urge you to be your own means of persuasion, to look at the issues–and not just from the mouths of the candidates but by looking at their records. Whatever the results of your investigation, at least you can pull the lever with confidence in whom and what you are supporting. Who knows, if enough of us who are neither blue nor red decide to straddle the aisle, Violet Beauregarde just might win.