Posted on 06/19/2005 8:43:03 AM PDT by Heartofsong83
Religious rightly engaged
'CHRISTIAN ACTIVISTS' SHOULD BE ADMIRED FOR THEIR PASSIONATE POLITICS, SAYS MARIANNE MEED WARD
By MARIANNE MEED WARD
WHEN THE Religious Right enter the political arena, all rationality flees. But it's not they who are lacking sanity; it's their critics.
What a symphony of hand wringing we've endured since a story broke a few weeks ago about "Christian activists" taking over the Conservative party by securing the nominations of religious candidates in at least eight federal ridings.
Good God! You don't mean to tell me that these Christians are actively participating in the democratic process? They're actually showing up at riding meetings, prepared and ready to vote? They actually care about politics? How frightening! How uppity! Why can't they be apathetic like the rest of us, and just sigh tragically like a stranded damsel waiting for her prince when the corrupt Liberals take another victory at the polls?
Bollocks to the fairy story, say these Christians (using more polite language, of course). To heck with waiting for the prince. They are going to save themselves. It's almost -- gasp -- feminist.
But we like our Christian activists better when they're organizing sewing circles for stained glass windows. It would be comical if it weren't so tragic. We crap on people who are engaged citizens using the very political processes established for citizen involvement.
The charges: They're imposing their "agenda."
They're "single issue."
They're "out of touch" with the rest of the country.
The defences? There are three.
First, politics is about imposing an agenda. What do y'all think the Liberal Red Book is? Without an agenda, you become a dithering, ineffectual jet-setter who uses power to reward friends. Yes, I realize that sounds a lot like the previous and current Liberal governments. We'd all be so much better off if they actually had an agenda beyond staying in power. That's about the only thing they've mastered. If only they would use that power for something good ... but that takes an agenda.
Second, all parties are single issue, especially at the point of an election. The two (and only two) times I ever voted conservative were during the Mulroney years, for the GST and free trade respectively. Two separate elections. One issue for each. Those twin "devils" were supposed to be the ruin of our country. Yeah, right. The dollar is the highest it's been in two decades. Our economy is roaring along while the U.S. economy tanks. What a crime it is to vote single issue.
For some people, one of those elections hinged on far less than even a single issue: Their vote came down to five words during a televised debate: Brian Mulroney hammering John Turner over his patronage appointments with the phrase "You had a choice, sir."
For all our high-falutin' talk of intelligent, rationale debate on a wide array of political issues, politics pretty much comes down to emotion -- how you feel about the person you're electing the moment you walk into the polling station. (Assuming you even get there; only 60% of eligible voters even bothered to do that in the last election.) Conservatives are no more guilty of being single issue than anyone else, and they're probably far more "guilty" of having a well-thought out, well-researched position on their issue than the rest of us who are more knee-jerk and emotional. We should be so lucky if everyone in the country had even one political issue they cared enough about to haul their butt over to a riding office, party memberships and position paper in hand (do the rest of us even know where our riding office is, much less how to use it?)
Third, the religious right is out of touch with the country. Who cares? If it's true (and on their pet issues -- banning same-sex marriage and abortion -- I suspect they are out of synch if not out of touch) they'll suffer at the ballot box. That is, unless the rest of us high-minded folk who think we're above petty politics waste our democratic privilege and stay home to catch Desperate Housewives. And an appalling 40% of us did stay home in the 2004 election.
Voter turnout has been in decline for the past 20 years. The highest it ever got was 90% in 1917. The "single issue" that year? Conscription during World War I, supported by most of Canada but opposed by Quebec. Robert Borden won the election by forming the pro-conscription Unionist Party, a coalition of Conservatives and Liberals, and extending the right to vote to women and overseas soldiers, both of whom favoured conscription. Darn those pesky single issues.
I don't share the political views of religious conservatives, but I think they're a shining example of democracy in action. And they're behaving no differently than countless politically active citizens before them. We should thank them for reminding us that democracy without engagement isn't worth the paper the Constitution is printed on.
Auckland's housing is astronomically expensive. In Dunedin (4th largest city - population 125,000) a similar house costs about 30% cheaper. The problem is no one lives in those places.
I think it is probably related to the national psyche. Unlike the United States, businesses still concentrate in the traditional urban centres and poeple don't usually move to another cities unless he has decided to go live there for the rest of their lives. Everyone still wants to live in Auckland because it is where all the important jobs exist if you are not a farmer ;-), but planning regulations make building new homes impractical. Add to it migrants just like we were about 14 years ago - prices naturally go up as a consequence.
Just it is true that I think even the "expensive homes" in Organge County in Southern California is nothing when compared here. A "palace" sized home would costs at least NZ$1.5 million in regions like RD3 (meaning the middle of nowhere), while you will need at least NZ$5 million (=US$3.55 million) right here in Auckland regardless of suburbs.
Thomas Sowell would say that's the main factor, although I'm sure the cost of building materials and labor in NZ is significantly higher than ours. If only you had a border with Mexico ... (jk)
Well I imagine one would be earning at NZ$28,000 each year and the other US$32,000.
Doing what?
I just love that picture! My Sasha girl looks like those GSD's, especially the middle one staring intently at the cat. ;)
Builders (that's how we call the labour designing and building houses here).
Hard to say ... but illegal immigrant construction workers have brought the wages for carpenters, painters, roofers, etc., way down. Made my house cheaper, I suppose, but I still wish our gov would enforce immigration law (but that's another thread entirely :-).
"Thomas Sowell would say that's the main factor"
I should clarify that it is relatively easy to build new homes if you have a subdividable lot. Many houses built before 1940 had spacious gardens and many now demolish the old homes, divide the lot into two or three, and build new houses there. It is usually not too much of a hassle as the Resource Management Act is still tolerable (well, at least not before 2004). But converting any rural land into house building sites is nightmarishly complex and this is where the problem is.
Very interesting.
At the risk of moving off tracks, I think unless you see a hardcore fringe leftist everyone in NZ regards stands supporting illegal immigrants to be able to get driver's licence or take welfare benefits as lunacy, even if they agree with or even go to the left of Howard Dean on every other issue.
You have to be within commuting distance of the good upper level jobs. That means Toronto, some in Vancouver, and some in Calgary and the booming new cities of Alberta such as Fort McMurray.
That where the "real jobs" are in Canada. Almost all corporate headquarters in Canada are in Toronto and some in Calgary.
In Vancouver the reason why houses are so expensive is because of foreign buyers. The locals can't afford to live there anymore when foreigners keep on snapping up condos like they are going out of style.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.