I would like to thank you to the endeavors you might have produced in publishing this posting. I am trusting the same greatest function from you within the long term too. In fact your fanciful writing abilities has inspired me to begin my very own blog…

Some suggest that the politics of Jesus and Christians can be completely defined by voting on two single issues (abortion and homosexual marriage). This, IMO, is just wrong. That’s why I love Wendell Berry’s approach (most exemplified in his essay Sex, Economy, Freedom, and Community).

Elsewhere he writes:

“[Movements] often become too specialized, as if finally they cannot help taking refuge in the pinhole vision of the institutional intellectuals. They almost always fail to be radical enough, dealing finally in effects rather than causes. Or they deal with single issues or single solutions, as if to assure themselves that they will not be radical enough.”

He goes on to say,

“And so I must declare my dissatisfaction with movements to promote soil conservation or clean water or clean air or wilderness preservation or sustainable agriculture or community health or the welfare of children. Worthy as these and other goals may be, they cannot be achieved alone. I am dissatisfied with such efforts because they are too specialized, they are not comprehensive enough, they are not radical enough, they virtually predict their own failure by implying that we can remedy or control effects while leaving causes in place.”

Anyway, that’s how I feel about the “conservative” agenda. Not that I’m more comfortable with the “liberal” version. I guess dissatisfaction is the operative word.