I know many will see the statement above and think it is an oxymoron. Conservative Christians are often labeled in the media as some of the most hateful and cold-hearted people in America, but I would like a chance to explain my side of things. You see, I don’t consider myself hateful, bigoted, cold-hearted or anything of the sort. In fact, I think of myself as very loving; I think I care very deeply for people even those I don’t know personally. I understand my beliefs stand in contrast to many and that my religious convictions cause me to take a different stance on many issues, but I still see my view as loving. I want to be clear, I am not writing this in an attempt to convert Atheists to Christians or liberals to conservatives, nor is my goal to show my side of things is the only loving side. I simply want a chance to explain what I believe and why I consider it to be a loving point of view.
I was reading an opinion based article the other day where the writer was attempting to answer the question, “Why are so many people in Hollywood liberals?” He admitted to not knowing the reason but claimed he, personally, believed that the people in Hollywood are typically of a more artistic mindset and people with an artistic mindset tend to work through things on an emotional level. He then went on to explain that he believes liberals tended to examine issues and problems from an emotional mindset while conservatives tended more towards a logical mindset. Understand, I’m not claiming that this is true, but the article did strike me as interesting. Especially since, I already know that I tend to handle things by looking for a logical solution. I also found it interesting considering that conservatives and liberals will look at one problem and come up with two completely different solutions and then look at each other and in disgust proclaim the other person’s solution is stupid and evil. The vast contrast between the two parties makes a lot more sense to me if it comes from a tendency to look at things from a different mindset, emotional vs. logical.
I know the common phrases that are used are liberals want to destroy America and Conservatives are hateful and greedy, but I don’t consider this to be true, at least not on the whole. I will grant you that these statements might be true about some in each party, but from personal experience it certainly isn’t true of the majority. I believe ultimately, members of both groups want to help make both America and the world a better place. We just have completely different ways of doing it. I am also willing to concede to the notion that sometimes my logical mind may not take everything into account that is needed when approaching a problem, but I think everyone, liberals and conservatives, should be able to concede to the fact that they may not always see the entire picture also.
Hopefully, this has helped to both clear the air and explain my purpose. Now to get to the actual issue at hand and attempt to explain my stance on some of the hot topics of the day:
Raising Minimum Wage
I am against the raising of the minimum wage. Actually, I would even go farther and say that I don’t believe that there should be a minimum wage at all. I know that many would say that is either cruelty to not want people to make more or greed to not want to help out the people struggling working minimum wage jobs, but that isn’t what my stance is about at all. I actually do want to help people make ends meet, and I want people to be able to make a reasonable wage for the work that they do. However, I think raising the minimum wage will cause more problems than it will ever be able to fix. Raising the minimum wage is going to raise the cost of living. If companies pay employees more, they will have to charge more for the product in order to keep their profit margins. If they don’t raise prices, they will have to have fewer employees which means we have a higher unemployment rate. As the cost of living goes up, the change in minimum wage will start to cancel itself out and minimum wage workers will still be struggling. At the same time, you now have to look at the people that didn’t get a substantial raise to make up for the change in minimum wage who are now making less money when compared to the new cost of living, meaning now you have even more people living in poverty. Now let’s say by some strange occurrence it worked and the higher minimum wage allowed people to sustain themselves on entry level positions. Many talented people would grow comfortable in those positions. They would never leave and discover the potential they have to do and make so much more.
The reason I am against the minimum wage as a whole is I don’t think the government should control how much business are paying their employees. I think business should be able to decide how much they are willing to pay and employees should be able to decide how much they are worth. I know some will say that corporate greed will cause everyone to live in poverty without government regulations, but even the greediest CEO has to have employees to make his product and make money. He can’t make millions of dollars doing it all on his own so he has to pay a competitive price. If he offers too little money then nobody will work for him; they will choose a different company. Companies that aren’t willing to pay enough will go bankrupt. I honestly believe that the minimum wage has actually caused employees to settle for what companies offer instead of deciding their own worth and in many cases caused employees to make even less than they would in a truly free market.
Sharing the Wealth
By sharing the wealth I mean the idea of taxing the wealthy to provide money for the less-fortunate, public health services, public college funds as well as many more items that I am sure have been proposed. Simply put, I don’t agree with the idea that the rich should be taxed to help take care of the poor. First of all, we need to realize this isn’t a new idea. Socialism and Communism have both attempted this before, to disastrous results I might add. So quite frankly, I am against this before I even start to think about it. Any idea that has proven to be a failure time and time again, causing poverty not only on a civil level but also a national level, would seem to be an obvious one to avoid. Yet, here we are.
The whole idea of redistribution of wealth is in my opinion immoral. They earned it; you didn’t. What right do you have to control their money? However, contrary to what the media would say. I do want to help those that are less fortunate. As a Christian, I recognize that God has called us to help the people around us, but even on a human level, it just seems like the right thing to do. I don’t think it should be the government mandating our kindness and goodwill towards others. It should be a decision and action made on a personal level. Giving to charity, doing fundraisers and even just giving money to those that need it are simple ways we can help. It should be up to me how much I give and when I give. Once you make a federal mandate the government will not only take a cut of the money from the extra taxes, but it will be enforced by law that you have to give no matter what. Meaning if you have extra expenses, you still have to pay this additional tax, but if it was being done on a personal level, you give what you can. We also need to ensure that we aren’t just giving people money; we should also be helping them get back on their feet and helping them find jobs. The government isn’t doing this, they just send you a check until you find something, causing a never ending cycle for many people. If we start helping people out on a one by one basis we can come along side people and not only help them out financially, but also give them the advice and tools they need to actually turn their life around. “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat the rest of his life.”
Abortion
As I’m sure you have guessed I am pro-life. I don’t believe that anybody has the right to take life from anybody else. I actually find it hard to believe that there is a debate here. As a Christian, God clearly states that He forms us in the womb, which tells me that a fetus inside the womb is a baby and a human; therefore deserving of the same rights as any other human. However, common sense tells me that, when I hear that a woman is pregnant, I immediately know that means she is going to have a human baby, and the baby deserves the same rights as any other human. I would also argue the reason there is typically such a feeling of guilt associated with women who have abortions is because deep down they know they have a killed a human baby and not just a “bundle of cells,” as some prefer to call it. The same reason women around the world go through a period of mourning after a miscarriage. They aren’t crying because they lost an egg, they are crying because they lost a baby, their baby. Nobody feels guilty for removing a tumor or ridding a body of parasites, but yet, it would seem that a large number of people that have abortions have a profound sense of guilt afterwards. It isn’t some crazy phenomenon; it is simply the human reaction to doing something that you know is wrong.
It has become commonplace to argue against pro-life with a myriad of “what-if” scenarios: What if she was raped? What if the baby is going to die anyway? What if the mom’s life is at risk? Typically the scenarios are made as extreme as possible in order to make the pro-lifer seem absolutely heartless when they answer it. However, there is a problem with the argument from the beginning. You can’t argue for the rule by using the exception. I mean let’s try this for other things. “We shouldn’t get speeding tickets because, what if the person was driving 85 through a school zone because he was shot and bleeding to death?” “We shouldn’t charge people with murder because what if somebody was holding a gun and they accidentally dropped it and the gun just went off and killed somebody?” Would it make sense to change the laws because those exceptions are possible? No! You keep the law in place and then you look at the exceptions and make a ruling on each individual basis. You actually see examples of this in our criminal justice system all the time. So needless to say, I will not be looking at abortion through the filter of exceptions but rather as a rule.
The idea that is tossed around for most pro-choice is that the government should not have the right to tell a woman what she can and can’t do with her body. Pro-lifers are then scolded for wanting to take a woman’s right away from her, but I don’t see it this way at all. I do agree that woman should have the right to their own bodies. I believe a woman has every right to choose what she does up until the point that her rights start to infringe on the life of another. I don’t believe a woman having the right of her own body gives her right to the life that is inside her. Again, if I look at it biblically, I would say only God has the right to choose life or death for a woman or her baby. However, just common sense would tell me one person’s inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness can’t intrude on another’s. This would be a place where a lot of people would start to bring up exceptions. I’ve already said I don’t want to get into them, but I will answer a couple quickly. First is the medical emergency question. My answer would be speak to a medical professional and figure out your best option. If the mother is in trouble, chances are the baby is, too. So you need to speak to a doctor and find out what you need to do. Another that I have heard is what if the woman is single and can’t afford it or having the baby will interfere with her chances to go to college or continue her career. My answer would be the same that it would be for anyone that made a mistake that had big consequences. “You knew what you were doing, you knew the possible outcomes, and now you have to deal with the consequences.” Now this isn’t to say that I have no compassion and never help out. As I have stated before I believe that we should all help those less fortunate than us. I am not going to scold her for being a single mother and I’m certainly not going to call her a burden for needing help supporting her children, but I’m not going to do everything for her either. I would hope that after a time she would eventually decide she wants to do something to improve her life: seek out a better job, go back to school or whatever. I’m not saying that it would be easy but if she were willing to make a concerted effort to improve her life, I would do whatever I could to help her achieve those goals, and I actually believe most Conservative Christians would do the same.
I understand it is easy to look at Conservatives arguing against government assistance and think that we are cold-hearted and don’t want to help anybody out, but I know that it isn’t the case for me and I don’t think it is the same for most. We want to help others and we want to help lift people up to a level of success. We just simply don’t see the current assistance programs doing that. We don’t think the government should have to help people because we believe that people should help people. We don’t think it should be a check every week; we think it should be, “I’ll give you some money and help you get back on your feet.” We want to break the cycle of poverty through action, instead of allowing the government to perpetuate it through inaction.
Something I think we should all try doing a little more is actually talking to each other and asking for opinions on a one by one basis. Don’t assume that I agree with everything that you have ever heard a Conservative say and I won’t assume you agree with everything Liberals have said. Talk to me and ask me what I think about a particular issue. If my thoughts differ from yours, ask me why I think that way. We can have an actual conversation and exchange ideas. I can explain my thoughts and you can explain yours. If we are both actually willing to listen and keep an open mind, we may be able to come to a middle ground or at least some kind of understanding.
I think that the term Conservative has received a bad rap. People think it means we have a narrow close-minded view of the world, but it doesn’t. I don’t hate anyone. I want the best for everyone. I care and love others and want to help anybody I can. However, I want a limited government (that is the conservative part). I think the government should stick to its job and let the people take care of each other. I believe Jesus taught us to love and take care of each other by taking action not by waiting for the government to do something about it. I’m not hateful, bigoted or uncaring. On the contrary, I have actually laid in bed in tears because of the pain I see in the world. I am actually a very loving person but I am always going to live and love as a Christian. I am going to live based on Christian principals; I am going to take my stance based on Christian standards. I know those may not always make me popular, but at least you know what to expect. You know you can always expect me to be a Christian and always be who I say I am. This also means I will always love you, I will always care for you and I will always be willing to help you out, even if we don’t agree. We can stand on completely opposite sides of the spectrum in religious, political and social thought, but if you come to me and ask me for money so you can buy food; I will give you whatever I have to give. Why? Simple! That is the love of a Conservative Christian!
