As we dig out from a record-setting snowstorm, I am reminded of the old saying: "Behind every cloud, you can find a silver lining." This storm left many stranded in some strange place or at home without electricity. Even worse, the storm is blamed for multiple deaths. While many people sought refuge from the storm's effect by going to shelters, churches and community centers, I was warm and snug in my home with my family. On the physical level, we experienced some discomfort as our electricity was off for a day. This left us without water and the "necessities of life," like televisions, microwaves, and computers. Fortunately, we have a propane cook stove, so we were able to keep warm. The "silver lining" is the warmth, security, companionship and love provided by my wife and children -- not just during a storm, but every day of my life. Sadly, despite greater economic wealth and political power of any nation in history, the United States is in a blizzard of declining morality and civility. The moral decay is largely the result of both a direct frontal assault and perversion of our most fundamental institutions and beliefs. At the heart of the problem is the twisted and irrational belief in unrestrained freedom, defined as the personal desires and attitudes of the individual. Divorced from the restraints of society, family, and God, unbridled individualism leads to moral decay, anarchy and, ultimately, tyranny. The list of pathologies is immense, such as high divorce rates, illegitimate births, rampant crime, abortion on demand, and rising drug use among teens. Despite the gaining, widespread belief of unbridled freedom from left and right, the concept is alien to the principle of freedom that founded this country and brought it greatness. Steve Forbes, in an article in the current issue of Policy Review, gives a great definition of the true idea of American Freedom: "Americans have always defined true freedom as an environment in which one may resist evil and do what is right, noble, and good without fear of reprisal. It is the presence of justice tempered with mercy. It is a rule of law based on fundamental moral truths that are easily understood and fairly and effectively administered. It offers equal opportunity to better their lives, morally, spiritually, intellectually and economically." Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, defined the source and foundation of American Freedom: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The belief in unbridled freedom forces people to forget everything but "the pursuit of happiness." This leads them to ignore and attempt to reject the other principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence. First, they must reject the self-evident truth that there is a Creator. To accept that there is a God implies there is something greater than the individual and, thus, can require adherence to moral standards. John Adams said, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passion unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cord of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Over the last thirty-five years, the supporters of unbridled freedom have done everything they could to destroy the influence of religion in both our public and private lives. Too many people no longer have any guard rails to steer them away from the pitfalls of life that lead to self-destructive lifestyles. Look at the headlines in the news today. In New York, a 20-year-old who has Aids has intentionally infected at least eleven others. They believe he may have infected as many as 100 more. He is now in jail on charges of raping a 13-year-old girl. He enticed many to participate in exchange for drugs. How can they condemn these actions, if a person can define for himself what is right and wrong? In speaking about the beliefs of the founding fathers, Steve Forbes illustrates the danger of unbridled freedom: "To navigate the oceans without consulting fixed stars, Americans knew, is to risk being turned around by waves and wind, circling aimlessly with dwindling stores of food and water. To believe in the randomness of man’s appearance on the earth, the Founders likewise intuitively understood, would be to deny the existence of fixed moral truths, established outside of man’s own personal whims and predilections. In such a world, no one could judge with authority what is right or wrong because everyone would be entitled to his own personal system of values. Hence there could be no equality before the law because the law would consist of whatever people in power declared it to be." The perfect example of where this has already happened is the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to legalize abortion in the case of Roe v. Wade in 1973. There was no precedent, constitutional language, or even scientific evidence to support making abortion a Constitutional right. The guiding principle is an example of the pursuit of happiness from the standpoint of unbridled freedom that is divorced from any moral restraints. The whole argument for abortion is based on unbridled freedom. It is argued that a woman can do whatever she wants because it is her own body, and society can’t tell her what to do with it. This sounds great, but it ignores the reality of the situation. Biology 101 teaches that from the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, a new life has begun. There is a living organism with forty-six unique chromosomes that immediately produces human proteins and enzymes. This will not change over the baby's entire life. It is not an organ of its mother. It is a separate entity. The Nobel laureate and biophysicist Francis Clark says, "the amount of information contained in chromosomes of a single fertilized human egg is equivalent to about a thousand printed volumes of books, each as large as a volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica." Therefore, the desires of one human being are granted superior status to another. Life is deemed not as important as the pursuit of happiness. The result is that 35 million young lives have been snuffed out since 1973. Our Constitution clearly allows the state to take life in certain extreme situations, but only after due process of law. The Roe decision allows the individual mother to become judge, jury, and executioner. In his book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah, Robert Bork relates a conversation with some abortion supporters that clearly illustrates that their belief is based strictly on unbridled freedom. In talking with the pro-abortionists, Bork commented that he thought that if people decided that abortion was the taking of a human life, they would change their mind. Bork says, "I was startled at the anger that statement provoked in several women present. One of them informed me in no uncertain terms that the issue had nothing to do with the humanity of the fetus, but was entirely about the woman’s freedom." This is why abortionists are not willing to concede on any procedure. Despite the American Medical Association’s support and a huge majority of the people's support, abortionists keep fighting the ban on partial birth abortions. They do this despite no evidence of medical necessity and evidence that it is a gruesome procedure that kills viable babies. The procedure is a loophole to allow infanticide. The head of the baby is ready to pop out, but the doctor keeps it in the womb and kills it. All risk of the birth has been taken. There can be no rational claim to medical necessity. If the doctor pulls the baby out, it lives, and it would be considered murder to kill it when 5 minutes earlier it was legal. My twin boys were born 5 weeks early. Due to minor complications, they were delivered by c-section. I was able to see them when they were still inside the womb. There was no doubt that they were living human beings. Both were in perfect health, despite being premature and the fact that Joseph only weighed 3 pounds 13 ounces. It is evil when the decision could have been made to snuff their lives because of another individual's selfish motives. If ever there is a situation when an individual is imposing their will on another, it is this -- despite the claims of unrestrained individual freedom. As we approach the new century, it is time for America to renew its commitment to a freedom that recognizes the moral restraints of a Creator and will value life as much as the pursuit of happiness. This is the only way we can maintain true freedom. If we continue to sled down the slippery hill to hedonism -- pulled by the false premises of unbridled freedom, we will ultimately lose all forms of freedom. Billions of dollars are spent each year, by both the public and private sectors, to take care of those whose pursuit of happiness have left them unable to take care of themselves -- whether it be one of the millions of drug addicts or alcoholics, one of the 10% of the population that has a sexually-transmitted disease, or the children of a broken home. Crime is rampant, as well. We are nearing moral anarchy. If we don’t restore a freedom restrained by the moral framework of faith and family, the only solution to restore order to society will be by governmental force. Steve Forbes calls this the greatest challenge facing America in the twilight of the 20th century. "Yet the argument that there must be a moral basis undergirding a free society is one of the great unfinished challenges of our time. We have neglected the vital task of teaching our children, reminding ourselves, and communicating to others that man’s rights to live free, pursue happiness, and own property come from God and are to be secured by the state." This is not an easy task, but it can be done if we renew our commitment to freedom tempered with the balancing effects of faith and freedom. We can reverse the negative pathologies of unbridled freedom. Let us follow the desire of the eternal American optimist, Ronald Reagan: "You have a rendezvous with destiny. We can preserve for our children this the last best hope of man on earth or we can sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."
|
SNOW LIFE 
