Showing posts with label Patriotism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patriotism. Show all posts

Thursday, February 6, 2020

Patriotism

"The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic's success, and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both houses of Congress for these many days. We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it. We have arrived at different judgments, but I hope we respect each other's good faith.

The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a Senator-juror, I swore an oath, before God, to exercise "impartial justice." I am a profoundly religious person. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential. I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the President, the leader of my own party, would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced. I was not wrong.

The House Managers presented evidence supporting their case; the White House counsel disputed that case. In addition, the President's team presented three defenses: first, that there can be no impeachment without a statutory crime; second, that the Bidens' conduct justified the President's actions; and third that the judgement of the President's actions should be left to the voters. Let me first address each of those defenses.

The historic meaning of the words "high crimes and misdemeanors," the writings of the Founders and my own reasoned judgement convince me that a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they are not statutory crimes, they would demand removal from office. To maintain that the lack of a codified and comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a president might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove a president defies reason.

The President's counsel noted that Vice President Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian Prosecutor General. If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the Vice President should have recused himself. While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong.

With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father's name is unsavory but also not a crime. Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the President's counsel that a crime had been committed, the President's insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit. There is no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the President would never have done what he did.

The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters. While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution's requirement that the Senate, not the voters, try the president. Hamilton explained that the Founders' decision to invest senators with this obligation rather than leave it to voters was intended to minimize—to the extent possible—the partisan sentiments of the public.

This verdict is ours to render. The people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfilled our duty. The grave question the Constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the President committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a "high crime and misdemeanor."

Yes, he did.

The President asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival.

The President withheld vital military funds from that government to press it to do so.

The President delayed funds for an American ally at war with Russian invaders.

The President's purpose was personal and political.

Accordingly, the President is guilty of an appalling abuse of the public trust.

What he did was not "perfect"— No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security interests, and our fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine.

In the last several weeks, I have received numerous calls and texts. Many demand that, in their words, "I stand with the team." I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind. I support a great deal of what the President has done. I have voted with him 80% of the time. But my promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feelings and biases aside. Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented, and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history's rebuke and the censure of my own conscience.

I am aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters, I will be vehemently denounced. I am sure to hear abuse from the President and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before God demanded it of me?

I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he said might raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.

Like each member of this deliberative body, I love our country. I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence. I am convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character. As it is with each senator, my vote is an act of conviction. We have come to different conclusions, fellow senators, but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience.

I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the President from office. The results of this Senate Court will in fact be appealed to a higher court: the judgement of the American people. Voters will make the final decision, just as the President's lawyers have implored. My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate. But irrespective of these things, with my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability, believing that my country expected it of me. I will only be one name among many, no more or less, to future generations of Americans who look at the record of this trial. They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the President did was wrong, grievously wrong.

We're all footnotes at best in the annals of history. But in the most powerful nation on earth, the nation conceived in liberty and justice, that is distinction enough for any citizen."
Mitt Romeny, voting against party to remove the president, February 5, 2020

Saturday, October 5, 2019

Bad Romans

"Sometimes, being a good Christian meant being a bad Roman.  So before you accuse people of being unpatriotic, ask yourself which empire they're actually serving."
Stephen Mattson

I know I discuss the bad marriage of Christianity and politics perhaps more often than I should.  But  I think it is vitally important to see it as problematic and to understand why it is such a bad idea.  Why Christianity and nationalism, why Christianity and patriotism often don't mix - even in the United States of America.

The quote above gets to the heart of the conflict.  There are times when we are called to be bad Romans.  Bad Americans.  Because our calling is to be a good Christian first and foremost.  Above all else, we are citizens of Heaven, not citizens of America.

Sadly, in America today, there are too many that conflate the two.  Who view being a good American a prerequisite to being a good Christian.  Who view being a very specific type of patriot synonymous with being a true Christian.

We have pastors like Robert Jeffress who feel that only red-blooded American Republicans who support Trump are true ChristiansOr Franklin Graham warning how progressives are anti-ChristianEven more astonishing, earlier this year white evangelical support for Trump remained at 69% percent.  Despite him representing the anti-thesis of everything they stand for and believe in.

Jesus requires the distinction that Mattson is indicating.  In fact, he outlines it in his answer to the pharisees when confronted over taxes.

"Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said.  So they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, 'Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality.  Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?'  But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, 'Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites?  Show me the coin used for the tax.' And they brought him a denarius.  Then he said to them, 'Whose head is this, and whose title?'  They answered, 'The emperor’s.' Then he said to them, 'Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.'  When they heard this, they were amazed; and they left him and went away."
Matthew 22:15-22

Jesus isn't requiring blind allegiance to country.  He is not requiring that we obey every single rule and law that our country puts forth, regardless of the character of the law.  He is pointing out the division of church and state, the line between the Way and the government.

He is flatly pointed out that he is unconcerned with the matters of the government.  "Give the government what they made.  Give me what I made."

It matters now more than ever.

Those same high profile pastors like Robert Jeffress and Franklin Graham are now suggesting civil war if this corrupt president is impeached.

Our president is asserting absolute power.

We have voice after voice after voice trying to tell us our Christian duty is to be "good Americans" as they define it.  To just go along with it.  To go along with the one party because they believe the right things.  To turn our eyes to the corruption, to the abuses of power, to the criminality.   To swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

Maybe right now, the most Christian thing we can do is be bad Romans.

Thursday, May 24, 2018

On Nationalism and the NFL


Nationalism - loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.  An extreme form of patriotism

Patriotism - love for or devotion to one's country

--------------------

So the NFL has decided to fine any team that has players that do not stand for the National Anthem.

Great, they caved.  The growing nationalist sentiment in our country "won."  And the country loses as a whole.

Let's not mince words, nationalism is not a good thing.  To quote a very insightful post I saw yesterday, a nationalist supports their country no matter what (to expand, even when their country does something that is not worth supporting).  A patriot makes their country worth supporting.  And sometimes that means fighting back against the country, even when it's not popular.  Even when your motives are not understood.  Even when it draws undue attention to yourself.

You cannot force patriotism.  Even by "requiring" players to stand, they will not be making them patriots or will not be doing the patriotic thing.  In fact, it could be argued the greater patriots will be the ones who continue to protest.  Like the New York Jets who have already indicated they will pay whatever fine is levied their way.

And let's cut out a disingenuous line of thinking right now - neither the flag nor the National Anthem represent the members of the armed services.  And refusing to stand for a National Anthem, to take part in the recitation of the pledge, or the like, is not in any way denigrating or dishonoring their sacrifices.  The flag, the National Anthem, and the pledge represent our country as a whole.  They represent the United States of America, for good and bad.  And you will find many, many veterans who support and recognize that they fought for a citizen's right to protest that flag, the National Anthem, and the pledge.  They believe that is what their sacrifice was for.

Because, if we do not have the right to protest, especially peacefully, if we do not have the right to "criticize the King," who are we as a country?

I know some of you take issue with what they are protesting.  Some of you take issue with their form of protest.  But here's the thing, at some point, when someone tells you that you have hurt them, you have to believe them.  If we as a country continue to have a race of people telling us they are still receiving unfair treatment, at some point, we have to believe them.  And that requires action to make it better.

I started this with the difference in patriotism and nationalism.  And here is what the issue really boils down to for me.

The patriotic response to this issue would be to say "I recognize that you have identified an issue that needs to be addressed.  Let's work together so that we can make this a country you have no problem standing for.  And I'll stand by you until you can."

The nationalist says, "just get in line."

What will happen when it's our turn to kneel in protest?  Given especially how some Christians paint the state of our nation and the "degradation" of Christian's rights in this country, that could be a lot sooner than anyone would think.  How will we respond when it's our turn?  And what will we expect from those around us?

Let's do better.

--------------------

Update - 7:06 am, 5/24/18 - I did not expect to add to this so soon, but now apparently our President thinks you "have to stand proudly for the national anthem.  Or you shouldn't be playing, you shouldn't be there, maybe you shouldn't be in the country."

No.  Just no.  There are many reasons why people do not stand.  And there have been long recognized reasons for not doing so.  There are religious freedom reasons why people do not stand, including for particular groups within the Christian religion (groups who will not swear allegiance to or exalt anything beyond God alone). 

To make such a statement goes against the very core of the foundation of our country. 

How have we come this far?