Home
Loading
  Contact Us    
A Defining Moment

Conservatives have diverse opinions, except when it comes to the federal courts.

by James Leroy Wilson
July 7, 2005

Bookmark and Share
A Defining Moment

Anyone who has attempted intellectual discussion in an e-mail group will inevitably be forced to define his terms. Capitalism to one person may mean a society and government dominated by greedy corporations, and to another it may mean a system of voluntary exchange. A statement like "That will lead to anarchy!" sounds frightening to those who believe anarchy means chaos, but sounds like good news to an anarchist.

There are precise definitions, and then there are practical, or pragmatic, definitions. The precise definition refers to the "ideal" sense of the word and they are used by people trying to make a point: "We live in a republic, not a democracy;" "Creationism isn't real science" But the pragmatic definition is best for identifying who people are and what they do and believe.

In a formal sense, it is probably best to identify Christians as those who have been baptized in the name of the Trinity and who have not renounced it. But when people complain about "Christians," they are complaining about a narrower group of people and their attitudes, beliefs, and practices.

And those beliefs, themselves, require definition. The Christian religion requires a precise definition by which believers can be distinguished from non-believers. Even then, there is controversy, such as what "sin" is. On top of that, there are supplements to fundamental Christian doctrines which cause schisms. And then there are private interpretations. These are so varied that it is hard to believe that all these Christians worship the same God. Jesus' life and teaching are appealed to in support of both war and pacifism, both capitalism and socialism, both exclusion and tolerance. The inferences and consequences of Christian doctrine are so varied that few if any can speak with credible authority as to what Jesus would have us do.

Even narrowing the field doesn't do much good. "Orthodox" or conservative Christianity is little more than restating the agreed-upon doctrines, with perhaps a more stern and careful defense against "liberalism" and anti-religious intellectual fads. But there is such a wide gulf between, say, the claims of Roman Catholicism and Calvinism that, save for a few common doctrines, you'd hardly think they were the same religion at all.

And this indicates that precise definitions are not always so useful. What is a "conservative Christian?" Leaving aside the philosophical precision of what "conservatism" means and what "Christian" means, the most useful definition is the unanimous agreement among all self-described conservative Christians on a controversial point. The latter part is crucial: to say "conservative Christians are united in their view that carjacking is wrong" isn't true, because the agreement is so apparent among them and among the rest of humanity that it isn't a controversial or divisive point. The one common and unique point that unites conservative Christians is the belief that homosexuality is sinful. If someone identifies himself as a conservative Christian, you can conclude that he believes in a certain small set of doctrines and that he believes homosexuality is sinful. You can not conclude anything more than that.

Unanimous agreement on a controversial point. That's probably the best practical definition for an ideology or political label. There are many "precise" definitions of, say, libertarianism, but they are also very general. Even if all libertarians agreed on one, there would still be disagreement as to strategy, tactics, and even policy itself. There are self-described libertarians who support the War on Iraq, for example. There are libertarians who support tax and spending cuts in principle but oppose tax cuts today, and others who believe that terrorism is a big enough threat to justify greater federal powers in the PATRIOT Act. There are libertarians who are anarchists, and others who support taxes on land values. There are libertarians who believe in states‘ rights, and others who would use the federal government to check abuses in local government. There are libertarian Republicans and libertarian Democrats and Libertarians and libertarian independents and libertarian non-voters.

Looking beyond these issues, and questions of who is and who is not a "real" libertarian, you will find unanimous support from self-described libertarians on two issues: repealing drug laws and repealing gun laws. This not to say that libertarians think these are the most pressing and important issues of our day. But these are the defining marks. If you hear somebody say, "I'm a libertarian," you can make a lot of assumptions about his beliefs and policy preferences. You may be right on most of them. But on the repeal of drug and gun laws, you are guaranteed to be right.

Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement will be a "defining moment" for political conservatives. Conservatism has always been hard to define in a practical sense. It has always been a drift, a state of mind, rather than a coherent ideology. Conservatives have been foreign policy realists, idealists, and isolationists. Protectionists and free traders. They have been supply-side tax cutters and deficit hawks. They have been hard-line against drugs, and also against it. They have called for a stronger role for the federal government in some areas, and have resisted the growth of government. Conservatives praise capitalism, and the agrarian life. They tend to be flag-wavers, but some of those flags are of the Confederacy. Some derive their ideas and attitudes from Edmund Burke, others from Sean Hannity.

Where is the agreement? What makes a conservative? Conservatives are united in their opposition to activist federal judges. They believe judges should strictly interpret an unchanging Constitution. They resent federal courts striking down abortion laws, outlawing prayer in school, and forcing school integration. They resent courts allowing "affirmative action" policies that violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They believe that social and moral questions should be left to states and local communities to decide. They believe that our federal courts, and especially the Supreme Court, should be filled with judges who refuse to let the spirit of the times sway their judgment. When someone identifies himself as a conservative, it is safe to assume that he believes this. It is not safe to assume anything else.

President Bush is in office because of this issue. This is the main issue of the Religious Right. There are lots of people who didn't like Bush or his policies, but who voted for him anyway because of this one issue. It's payback time. If Bush doesn't nominate a conservative now, his support base will abandon him. So it's a fight worth waging for Bush, even if the Democrats in the Senate filibuster the nomination. He needs all the political support he can get.

Also, it will provide a contrast between conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats. In thinking about this article, I wondered, what is the practical definition of liberalism? What do all liberals believe? I couldn't think of anything. Liberalism has no unifying theme, and unfortunately for Democrats, a fanatical devotion to abortion rights appears to be the closest thing to one. (What else is there? Support for teacher's unions? Gun control?) By nominating a conservative to the Supreme Court, the Republicans can rally their base, who are more likely to vote with abortion and the judiciary as their main issues. What can rally the liberal base?

Comments (1)


Post a Comment

Everett Wilson from Chetek, WI writes:
July 7, 2005
Conservatives are united in their opposition to activist federal judges? I think this is what conservatives like to think about themselves, but from every news account and commentary I have read, what they want are federal judges who have made up their minds in advance on certain issues, and feel betrayed when one of their appointees decides a case on the evidence and argument presented to the court. I am not qualified to judge the performance of Sandra Day O'Connor, except to say that all of the members of the court should be swing votes as hers often was.

The liberals are no better in this respect. Both sides want a stacked court. Actually a real court is neither balanced or stacked. It waits for a case before it decides.

The behavior of both Congress and the White House in this respect is sickening, and has become more blatant than ever since Bork's failed appointment.

Send Us Your Opinion
(Comments are moderated.)
Your Name:*


Your E-Mail Address:*
(Confidential. Will not be published.)


Location:


Comments:*
Note: In order to control automated spam submissions, URLs are no longer permitted in this form.



Verification:
Please type the letters you see above.

  Printer-Friendly

Bookmark and Share


PO BOOKS BY JAMES LEROY WILSON
Ron Paul Is a Nut (and So Am I)
Published September 10, 2008

Forget about red states and blue states. Wilson's unique take on political topics is refreshingly not politics as usual.

» Buy Now
» More Information
RSS FEED
RSS Feed for James Leroy Wilson: RSS Feed for James Leroy Wilson
EMAIL ALERTS
Sign up to receive an e-mail notice when new articles by this author are published. Your address remains confidential, and you may cancel at any time. A confirmation email will be sent.

Your e-mail address:
po Books
Now Available!

Teachings of a Three Year Old... Turned Tyke,
by Hal Evan Caplan.

A father learns from the wisdom of his toddler.

More Information.

More by James Leroy Wilson
47 for 46 for 45
My favorite movies since when I was born
by James Leroy Wilson, 3/15/16
Hired Gun Quarterbacks
They rarely win the Super Bowl.
by James Leroy Wilson, 2/9/16
Fixing Football's Overtime
Get rid of the coin toss!
by James Leroy Wilson, 1/19/16
Solving the NBA's Conference Imbalance
Get rid of them!
by James Leroy Wilson, 5/26/15
The Problem of School
We develop differently, but arbitrary age rules punish us.
by James Leroy Wilson, 5/19/15
Deflating and defaming Tom Brady
Punishing without evidence
by James Leroy Wilson, 5/12/15
Should Floyd Mayweather be allowed to fight?
The Nevada Athletic Commission is wrong, but not for the reason you think.
by James Leroy Wilson, 4/28/15
» Complete List (565)


RSS FEED
RSS Feed for James Leroy Wilson: RSS Feed for James Leroy Wilson

Recently Published
View Article Salvator Mundi
Not the painting but the Person
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 12/7/17
When the Newsman Becomes News
Lamenting yet another fallen hero
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 12/1/17
Let's Hear It for Moms and Pops
Celebrating Small Business Saturday in a very personal way
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/22/17
An Earthquake in La La Land
Examining what's been exposed in the rubble
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/17/17
Where is God?
Reflecting on the tragedy in a little Texas town
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/10/17
An All Saints Day Tribute
Remembering those who left us
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/3/17
A Mighty Fortress was His God
Remembering the legacy of Martin Luther 500 years later
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 10/27/17

Get the Partial Observer's
'recently published' headlines via RSS.


RSS Feed for Recently Published PO Articles    What is RSS?
Reproduction of original material from The Partial Observer without written permission is strictly prohibited.
The opinions expressed by site contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.
Copyright ©2000-2017 partialobserver.com. All rights reserved.
Home · Site Map · Top