Conservatives Talk While Liberals Fight

The assertion that American conservatives won’t fight is verified everywhere we look.
I have written a number of posts to this effect. For example, I have mentioned how George Wood, leader of the Assemblies of God denomination, concluded that involvement in politics would be shortsighted. That conclusion makes no sense at all in light of the cultural decline that has resulted from our long-term non-involvement in politics. My own sense is that Dr. Wood is choosing not to fight.
My purpose is not to single out Assemblies of God or Dr. Wood. They are doing a good job for the Lord, better than most in my opinion, and in regards to unwillingness to confront the moral evil of the day, they are far from alone. I mention him because of his attempt at justification for not being involved in the fight. Unfortunately, as far as evangelical groups and their leadership are concerned, I do not know of anyone on the front lines. That doesn’t mean that such groups do not exist, but if they do they have not made enough noise for me to identify them.
Nor am I suggesting that no individual evangelicals or para-church groups are doing battle. Franklin Graham has been a real warrior and has the scars to prove it. Jay Sekulow of American Center of Law and Justice (ACLJ) has also been in the thick of the battle both in America, all the way up to the Supreme Court, and in foreign courts on behalf of persecuted Christians. Don Wildmon and the American Family Association were some of the earliest to engage in the conflict. Many warriors have fought the abortion battle across the years, and in that arena we have seen some good progress.
My concern is found in the absence of churches and denominations, lack of a comprehensive or even major engagement in the conflict. Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority represented this type of effort, but with his passing from the scene, I see no one representing you or me in the battle, especially no one with a strategy for winning that we can identify and contribute to. The scores, if not hundreds, of para-church groups fighting the fight are unfortunately too small and too splintered to achieve comprehensive change.
The same might be said regarding conservative political groups.
I was again reminded of the American conservative bent toward rolling over and dying as the liberal juggernaut rolls over us by an article put out by the Gatestone Institute entitled “UK: Political Earthquake Next May?” The article describes the rise of a genuinely conservative political party in England and the power it is gaining, being embraced by many on the right and on the left. The article mentions similar parties that have been formed in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Denmark, and France.
But do conservatives in the United States possess the temerity to form a third-party? No way. We have fearless talk show hosts such as Mark Levin who shout into microphones all of the evils of the ruling class in this country, both Republican and Democrat, revealing that our present precipitous downward slide is being propelled by both parties. But when it comes to forming a third-party that might have a chance to provide a remedy, we are told that this is a bad idea and instead that the answer resides in winning back the Republican Party. How do they propose to do that and how is it working for us?
If Rush and Sean and Glenn and Mark and a host of other conservative commentators would have gotten on the third-party bandwagon with President Obama’s election for his second term, it might be developing into a formidable force as is the United Kingdom Independence Party [UKIP].
Likewise, if the Tea Party had decided that it had had enough opposition from the Republican establishment and committed itself to form a third party, by now it might be experiencing some traction. But doing so would be far too radical, far too much like fighting for the cause. Far be it from us.
We see, then, that evangelical and political conservatives are lovers and not fighters. We are talkers and not actors. We are committed to work within the system, but we are not sufficiently committed to take on the system.
Meanwhile, liberals have no reservation about fighting. They don’t mind kicking Bible reading and prayer out of public schools, or scraping the 10 Commandments all off the façades of public buildings, or killing babies, or asserting that homosexuality is on a par with heterosexuality, demanding that Christians embrace the same view and using the law to ruin them if they do not. Obama is not bashful about sending the IRS after conservative groups, even after he was caught doing so. He is not bashful about asserting that he was for traditional marriage when he was campaigning and changing his mind after the fact. Harry Reid was not hesitant to use the Nuclear Option in order to pass ObamaCare. The media is not bashful about spelling out the rules of engagement: liberals are allowed to engage conservatives in the conflict but conservatives are not allowed to fight back. Nor is the mayor of Houston bashful about going after sermons of pastors.
[By the way, conservatives should not view her backing down on this issue as a victory. Rather, such a move is the first step in the liberal game plan. Even though they withdrew the demand, in subpoenaing the sermons they made the point that doing so was thinkable. That means the second attempt at doing so will not be nearly as shocking, then being viewed as possible. By the third attempt it is probable. This is the game plan used to implement homosexual rights.]
Why is it that liberals are the only ones who fight? What prevents conservatives from engaging in the conflict in a substantive way? I plan to address that issue in my next post.

Have a comment?