Posted on 02/18/2014 5:28:04 PM PST by SeekAndFind
WASHINGTON — Young Evangelicals argued that Christianity and libertarianism are compatible, and some even claimed that Christians should advocate for libertarian causes.
"Christians actually ought to feel outraged that the redemptive power of charity has been taken from us and given to an unfeeling, coercive state," Leah Stiles Hughey declared at a Saturday panel at The International Students for Liberty Conference. She claimed that when government gets involved in giving to the poor it denies the God-given human dignity of both giver and receiver.
Hughey's husband Jason explained that "the Bible is not a book of political theory." Nevertheless, "there are themes we get from the Bible that give a good foundation for Christians to embrace libertarianism or even anarchy," Jason Hughey said.
The Hugheys and three other panelists provided 5 reasons why they believe Christians can be libertarian in their political beliefs.
1. Christianity Celebrates Voluntary Action, Value Creation
Jacqueline Otto Isaacs, a blogger at Values & Capitalism, explained that the Christian worldview also supports libertarianism. "The message of the Gospel, the good news, is that salvation from our sins is offered through Christ — this salvation is voluntary and individual, and this is the core message of Christianity," Isaacs declared.
"Christianity literally starts with the individual, celebrates the individual's dignity and opportunity for salvation, and then grows outwardly into the community and Christ's kingdom," Isaacs said. She focused on the idea that men and women are made in the image of God. "God created everything out of nothing, and we can create economic value out of scarcity," she explained.
Since Christianity is about voluntary action, so much so that God allowed us to sin and fall short of his glory, governments should let individuals make their own decisions, Isaacs argued. "God respects our freedom, even to reject him, so we can respect the freedom of others," she said.
Jeffrey Tucker, CEO of Liberty.me and distinguished fellow of the Foundation for Economic Education, argued that Christianity offered something unique in the world, a universalist ethic. "Christianity should have a universalist, globalist, expansive outlook, always — and that's the free market, too," Tucker told CP in an interview on Saturday. The free market "has this driving force towards globalism, global community, and universal cooperation — in that way, the free market and Christianity totally agree."
2. Big Government Does Not Solve Poverty
Philip Luca, vice president of Social Media at The American Marketing Association, discussed his experience from going up in Eastern Europe. "We really went all in trying to put our goods in a common pot, and letting the state handle distribution and letting there be no poor among us," Luca explained. "What happened is that all of us became poor."
Isaacs cited Federick Bastiat's book The Law, which argues that the best way to bring the poor out of poverty is through free markets. Man in the image of God can participate in the Lord's redemptive work — "God redeems us from our sins and we can work towards redeeming those around us from poverty and ignorance and disease."
3. The Biblical Role of Government
Jason Hughey agreed, citing specific scriptures to argue for a smaller role of government. Hughey pointed to 1 Samuel 8, where the people of Israel asked Samuel for a king. When Samuel went to God, "the Lord was not happy with this – the people of Israel were turning their back on him," Hughey explained. God granted Israel's wish, but warned that their king would conscript their sons, take away their daughters, and tax the people. Hughey ended the reading with the line "and you will be his slaves."
Hughey then pointed to the gospel of Mark, where Christ describes what it means to serve others. "I think it's very interesting that the model of service that Christ points to for the church is stated in direct contrast to the way the political authorities rule and lord it over others," the speaker declared.
Finally, the speaker addressed Jesus' commandment to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's." Hughey argued that the emphasis in this passage is not to dignify government but "about rendering unto God what is God's," since "God is the highest authority, Christ is the highest authority, and not Caesar."
4. The Welfare State Harms Christian Charity
"Christ's example through scripture gives us a model of what charity should look like and government, by stepping in, harms that model and generates tragic consequences for both the givers and the receivers in that situation," Leah Hughey claimed. She emphasized Jesus' declaration in John 18 that no one takes his life from him, but he offers it of his own accord.
Hughey argued that "because his sacrifice was fully voluntary, a bond was established at the cross between Christ the ultimate giver and his people the ultimate receivers." Through charity, Christians partake in this great gift.
But government redistribution ruins this connection, Hughey claimed. "When the government steps in and acts as the giver of what could have been a private gift, instead of having a posture of humility and gratefulness, the receiver actually becomes envious and starts to compare what they have to what the giver has, and feels entitled to the possessions of another human being, which we know from scripture is harmful."
While the receiver feels entitled, the giver becomes angry, Hughey argued. "Instead of getting to decide how their charitable giving is allocated, it's taken from them and redistributed," she said. "They never see where it goes, so they just have a feeling of bitterness towards the welfare state."
5. Wealth Is Not Inherently Sinful
Leah Hughey also argued that scripture does not proclaim wealth as inherently sinful. She addressed a certain reading of Matthew 19:24 — "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God."
"In scripture Jesus has several interactions with wealthy people, but some of them he didn't encourage to sell everything," Hughey argued. She explained that Jesus' warnings are focused on the "heart issue" of whether someone "puts possessions over Christ," and not a mere attack on the rich.
What we conservatives know, is that social liberalism leads to larger, more intrusive government, it imports, breeds and creates, liberal voters.
Most Libertarians are for individual rights, but also for individual responsibility. Redefining them as something other than what they are in order to demonize them is a straw man logical fallacy argument that lacks merit.
It would be similar to defining Christians as people who believe in drinking Jesus’ blood and eating His flesh so they must all be cannibals... The logic is faulty....
In the real world of politics which will become law first, the radical leftist social and immigration agenda of the libertarians, or the conservative parts about ending welfare and food stamps etc?
If you want me to renounce God and support the left/libertarian social agenda, then let’s wait until we get in the conservative, limited government first, then we can talk about it.
Instead we have 60 years of history proving that the more liberal socially we become, the more people are sucked into liberal voting, not right wing voting.
The official past Libertarian Party Platforms supporting children being open for sexual relationships under the law has been linked to in this thread.
That’s not demonization, that’s the party’s historical record.
You can personally choose to be part of that party or not.
What you cannot do is silence criticism which that party has fully earned.
Libertarianism: Slavery to Self (Sin)
Socialism: Slavery to State
Christianity: Love is the law of liberty
Libertarianism: Consent is the law of liberty
Socialism: The will of the State is the law.
See, the big hurdle you big government lovers have is, like your liberal brothers and sisters, you can’t get outside of groupthink. Frankly I’m tired of having to explain what a small “L” libertarian is to people too dim to operate outside of the fake left/right paradigm. Get 100 libertarians in a room and maybe one or two of them care that there even is a Libertarian Party platform, let alone support it. Most libertarians know that party platforms are 100% bulls***. But if you want to use one or two loons who want to call themselves “Libertarians,” to smear the rest of us then that means I get to hang Fred Phelps around your neck and assign all of his positions to you.
....Leah Hughey also argued that scripture does not proclaim wealth as inherently sinful. She addressed a certain reading of Matthew 19:24 — "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." "In scripture Jesus has several interactions with wealthy people, but some of them he didn't encourage to sell everything," Hughey argued. She explained that Jesus' warnings are focused on the "heart issue" of whether someone "puts possessions over Christ," and not a mere attack on the rich.
Scripture is only cited twice in the whole article. In both cases IMO it is cited correctly. And then you get overarching nonsense like this:
Hughey's husband Jason explained that "the Bible is not a book of political theory." Nevertheless, "there are themes we get from the Bible that give a good foundation for Christians to embrace libertarianism or even anarchy," Jason Hughey said.
I do not love the government.
But children are not available as sexual partners for adults so the libertarian party is out, and always will be.
There are not only two options.
I do not have to condone the normalization of sex with minors to be opposed to socialism.
But conservatives are good with Fred Phelps picketing soldiers funerals, right? He’s conservative so that means all of you are good with that.
Nope.
Cult leader (they use their own holy book, not the bible) and former Democrat activist Fred Phelps is not okay, nor in any way conservative. He pretty much defines the lunatic fringe.
Ronald Reagan was conservative. And pro family. And the Meese Commission on Porto graphics which Reagan launched in 1985 was aimed primarily at child pornography. Sex with kids is not okay.
You sure you want to keep insisting that a party which has run a platform calling for sex with kids to be legal is compatible with Christianity? You aren’t doing well at debate and you seem to bring up public figures without having a clue as to what their histories are.
You are a deceitful, devious, proudly blind and deaf jerk who refuses to answer a simple yes or no question even when it's been patiently asked of you a dozen or more times; your "answers" have been to libel me and launch the most disgusting and evil accusations -- FALSE accusations -- at me. You are deserving of contempt and you certainly have MINE, even though most of the opinions you express on FR I stand in firm agreement with. YOU yourself are an emotional creep who libels those who disagree with how YOU would use government by then accusing them of actively advancing such evils as abortion, the gay agenda, and drugs. YOU LIE and you are a pollutant to conservatism, so PLEASE just ignore my posts from now on, okay?
You have ZERO credibility with me, ansel, even though you and I are on the same page with regard to so many issues. You are the kind of social conservative who is hurting and damaging the cause of Freedom because you are SELF RIGHTEOUS and bossy.
You are the same as liberals when it comes to government philosophy -- the only difference is that YOU want to use government to boss and micromanage and control people YOUR way instead of the LIBERAL's way.
THANK YOU.
The bad part is that, judging by posts I've read on past threads, there are WAY TOO MANY times American conservatives come to Free Republic looking for kindred political/moral spirits, jump in on one of these threads talking about how small-l libertarian is so important to conservatism and morality -- then these clearly moral, Christian compatriots are instantly accused of being child molesters, abortion advocates, drug pushers, and enthusiasts of the homosexual agenda. So those would-be FReepers leave because they think, "I guess FR isn't the place for me." Jim Robinson loses money, and conservatism loses credibility.
And the reality is that the "all libertarians are child-molesting abortion-pushing homo-loving sickos" FReeper contingent actually represent a very small handful of FReepers and conservatives, but they are so vocal and persistent, and because they scream and yelp so loudly and attack so viciously and deviously, they can leave the impression that THEY aren't a despised minority. Which I believe they are on FR.
They are bad news and deserve to have their asses kicked. THANK YOU, Orangedog, for your well-aimed kick at their proud, self-righteous, deceitful patoots!!!
Your stalking is getting way out of control.
Read post 41 again.
Phelps is not a conservative, he is a democrat with some sort of personal cult of about 80 people that isn’t involved in or interested in conservative politics.
You also posted something that clearly and obviously isn’t true, about conservatives and soldier’s funerals, so I guess that says volumes.
Well said.
The party the libertarians formed to advance and represent their politics is a perfect representation of libertarianism.
The while libertarians often work on the major parties for practical reasons, for instance to move the GOP left on social issues, their own party remains pure to libertarian principles.
No, I don't, but at least we have proven that you're a liar. The sad part is you're not even good at it.
Liar
Go away, liar.
Thanks. But for the most part it’s a wasted effort. Many here don’t like libertarians because we hold up a mirror to them that is very uncomfortable for them to look into. Lots of talk about respect for the Constitution...except for Article 1,Section 8 and the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 10th amendments. But the rest of the Constitution is A-OK with them!
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.