Courage in Politics
I'm back! I've been a little busy to post for the last two weeks or so, but I'm back!
It's not often that we see true courage in politics, so I thought I'd point it out.
By the way, the exception to the above statement is virtually every candidate running on the Constitution Party platform. This takes a tremendous amount of courage, both because they stand for the truth, and because, as a result, they wind up as targets for persecution from people who call themselves "conservatives", including friends, family, and so-called conservative organizations.
Within the two major parties however, such courage in defense of the truth is becoming more and more rare.
Here in
I've spoken with all three of them, and as usual, the rhetoric is thick and difficult to pierce. Most of what these gentlemen say sounds great...as far as it goes. That's the problem. It doesn't go very far.
In spite of the most probing questions that I have been able to ask, (without having a concentrated sit-down interview--which I doubt their campaign managers would allow) I'm not convinced that any of them have the intestinal fortitude to take a stand even on those topics where they verbally sound conservative, with one exception.
His name is Jerry Zandstra. In response to a question I asked him about what he would do when faced with a blatantly unconstitutional appropriations bill--supported by the Republican majority in Congress and the Republican President--he said that he believed that one of the qualifications necessary for anyone to hold the office for which he is running is that that person not need the job. In other words, they need to be willing to lose the next election if that's what it takes to do the right thing.
Needless to say, I agree whole-heartedly. Talk is cheap, however, and I have taken his words with a grain of salt.
Recently, however, Mr. Zandstra has taken an action that speaks far louder than those words.
In our state, an organization called Michigan Citizens for Life has stepped up to the task that we should have taken in hand years ago.
This organization has initiated a petition drive to put an amendment to our state Constitution on the ballot in November. This amendment recognizes for the purposes of
I'm disappointed to say that the organization calling itself "Right to Life" (both national and state branches) has opposed any measure that would result in such complete protection of innocent human life. They opposed the
Mr. Zandstra, being pro-life not only in word but also in deed, informed Michigan Right to Life of his intention to support the initiative.
He was told in no uncertain terms that if he did so he would lose his MRTL endorsement.
He did. He announced formally that he would support the petition drive and MRTL summarily revoked their endorsement of him.
Right to Life's endorsement is perhaps one of the most important to any Republican candidate. Mr. Zandstra demonstrated that he was willing to risk losing the election if necessary in order to do the right thing.
For this courage, I applaud him. Neither of the other candidates have demonstrated such courage, and for that reason, I consider him to be the best candidate running on the Republican ticket.
This is not the first time that he has taken a risky position, but this is perhaps the largest risk to date.
It still remains to be seen to my satisfaction whether his worldview is as whole and complete as it must be in order to tackle the many difficult tasks facing our next United States Senator, but he has at least demonstrated a certain integrity that bodes well for the rest.
Thank you, Mr. Zandstra, for demonstrating that there still exist politicians who can take a stand for right no matter what.
Mr. Zandstra's Campaign Website
3 Comments:
Praise the Lord for men like Mr. Zandstra.
It's encouraging to find another person who is willing to stand up for what is true and right!
Thank you for sharing about him.
I must be missing something here. Why on earth would a pro-life organization be so diametrically opposed to the concept that life begins at conception? Is it just too unpopular for them?
Wait ... I just visited their website. They have a media release up from July 10, 2006, which says,
Michigan ’s Prenatal Child Protection Amendment defining “a person” as beginning at conception will not be on the ballot this November. According to last years’ statistics, an average of seventy preborn children in Michigan are murdered daily by surgical “abortion”.
Not being able to collect 317,757 signatures from Michigan voters by today’s deadline, campaign organizers have run out of time for the ballot access this year.
Far from being discouraged, Michigan Citizens for Life chairman Cal Zastrow, said “ We’ve just begun. We’re not done until every child in Michigan is protected by love and by law....
Is this blatant two-facedness, or am I missing something important?
Political opportunism. They don't want to beat a dead horse, since that would draw attention to the fact that they helped to kill the horse in the first place. "National Right to Life" and (in some cases) its state-level chapters have a record of opposing any attempt to actually end abortion.
I introduced a resolution of support for the MCFL petition drive into the Oakland County Republican Party Executive Committee (of which I was a member at the time) and there was a representative from the "Right to Life" organization there to argue against it! She needn't have bothered. I was lucky to get a second for my motion! One long-time member had the gall to suggest that this would be inappropriate to do as the fourth or fifth largest county Republican Party in the nation. Hear that? Defending the unborn is an inappropriate action for a Republican Party organization.
As the deadline got closer, however, and some folks thought that the petition drive might succeed, (they never released any numbers along the way) the MRTL group tried to posture themselves so that they wouldn't get hurt if we did indeed succeed in getting the initiative on the ballot.
I don't support the so-called "Right to Life" organization. There are some local chapters that are actually pro-life (although most of those, it appears, have split off from the state and national organizations) but for a national pro-life group, I support Life Dynamics. (www.LifeDynamics.com) They are solid and effective. They're on the forefront of the fight and they mean to end abortion, not regulate it. Sadly, most people think that RTL is actually interested in ending abortion, (as that organization claims) just like they think that the NRA is actually pro-Second Amendment (it isn't).
Bottom line: we as pro-RIGHT activists need to keep our eyes open and not merely follow blindly those who claim to be "conservative".
Post a Comment
<< Home