Shaun Groves
Some of you are new so, old timers, allow me to bore you for a second with some back story.
Two elections ago I made a list of things I wanted a president and his party to do. I wanted to match the items on the list with the perfect candidate. I found that perfect candidate: The Church. I stopped voting.
I realized the problems I most wanted a president to solve weren’t his or hers to solve, but mine and yours. And I realized that, for me personally, voting for a do gooding president was detrimental to my own do gooding.
But now I’m considering voting for this guy.
He’s not perfect – not even close. But I’m considering voting for him because he wants the government to do the one thing I believe the American Church most needs the government to do: Get out of the way.
The America church owns enough buildings, has enough money, hordes enough skill and time and talent to obliterate the health care “crisis” in America, and make serious dents in homelessness, addiction, education failures, abortion, and unemployment. It’s our job to do so. But we aren’t, I believe, because we don’t have to. Caesar does it for us. We look to Caesar to do the work of the Church – to guarantee our life and liberty here and abroad. But what if instead of doing the do gooding for us (or promising to) Caesar, played by Ron Paul, just gets out of our way? What then?
We could use our thousands of acres of property to start schools, grow crops, house the homeless, heal the sick, father the orphaned, train and employ the unemployed, counsel the addicted – provide life and liberty and even a dose of happiness for everyone the government has attempted to care for since FDR introduced Americans to government dependence. Or thousands could go under in a tidal wave of religious apathy caused by Paul’s brand of federal libertarianism.
My biggest questions then about Ron Paul aren’t about his ability to be our president, but about our ability to be the Church if he becomes our president.
My willingness to vote this time around, in other words, depends less on my confidence in the candidate and more on my confidence in us.
Katherine says:
This is awesome, and I agree whole-heartedly. EXCEPT that I share the same fear you mentioned. What if the American Church really does suck as much as we appear to suck? What if instead of meeting needs of the poor because there is no one else to do it, we just have fewer routes to go the places we want to go because now we incorporate avoiding the poor? I would be hopeful for the opposite, but absolutely fear that we are not just apathetic, but in love with our apathy.
Warren says:
Peace is not permanent; it is mortal.
Peace is not global; it is intimate.
Peace is not predictable; it is spontaneous. Ron Paul is a man of peace. I respect John McCain for his service and his is a compelling story. I like John Edwards—a United Methodist and a southerner (like me). I am attracted to the energetic orator Barak Obama. I think Gov. Huckabee is one of the funniest, most sincere people in the world. Ron Paul, though, may be like Esther—the person for just such a time as this. His ideas seem so counterintuitive only because so many of us have only known a Bush or a Clinton as President in our lifetime. You see from the You Tube piece, you have to go back to framers of the Constitution and people like Jackson and Lincoln to find people who think and speak like Ron Paul—it’s odd that he seems so “fresh” and revolutionary, but he does. I’m undecided, but I’m intrigued. Pray for the candidates. Pray for our coutnry. But most of all, pray to be changed—may God let us become the change we hope to see in the world. Peace, W
West says:
Warren and Shawn, ya’ll have a great POV. Thanks for getting the noodle workin’ this morning.
cool dad says:
I support Ron Paul. One of my friends, and now you Shaun, made a great point: I may not agree with everything he says, but I believe he is this what this country needs.
I’ll avoid the soapbox, but I believe he is the most principled candidate. My favorite example is him refusing the congressional pension, which he labels ‘immoral’. In short, the pension pays members of Congress outrageous annual payments after retirement. The average pension payment is about $50,000/year. It must be pretty nice to set your own pension.
Sorry… back to being a goofball commenter.
Curan says:
sounds like the anti-christ to me…
Alymc says:
I like Ron Paul. I agree on most things with him …
I agree that the church’s position has been taken over by the government …
and if the Church can’t step it up and do these things .. I would ask are we really followers of Christ?
NerdMom says:
I hate to disappoint but I believe that Ron Paul is out. Please still consider voting. Remember the rule, if you don’t vote you don’t have a right to complain.
Shaun Groves says:
To complain about what specifically? Not rhetorical.
Alymc says:
I know many people who plan on writing his name in on election day …
How sweet would that be to see a large percentage “Ron Paul” if he wasn’t even on the ballot.
NerdMom says:
What to complain about? Just use your imagination as to what might happen in the next 4 years
. As far as the write in option. While there is a coolness about seeing your candidate have a showing, don’t you think your vote could be better used? And yes, I mean even as the better of 2 evils.
Shaun Groves says:
NerdMom, what I’m wondering is whether you mean I can’t complain about the job the elected president does if I don’t vote or about anything taking place in America.
If I don’t vote it will because I see the office of president as inconsequential relative to the power of the Church. So, no, I won’t complain about what he/she does. Disagreeing is different from complaining though don’t you think. I’ve not complained about George Bush but I don’t he should have gone to war without following the constitutional process to do so. That’s disagreement, not complaint. IF there’s a difference…and now that I’m saying it out loud I’m not sure there is. Hmmm. You got me.
Rick says:
Hmmm. Now I’m thinking. I’d avoided it for the most part up to now. Dang it.
NerdMom says:
If you will not use your constitutional right to effect the government you can’t complain about anything the government does. I think that the 2 (church and government) overlap greatly. I can say society is greatly effected by government. Especially in the last decades when government has gotten into social engineering.
Shaun Groves says:
What are three issues that are moving you to vote this year, NerdMom.
Health care?
Education?
Taxes?
War?
What are the big three for you?
Alymc says:
I wouldn’t vote for “the lesser of 2 evils” because there are certain things I just cannot support .. I won’t get into those ..
Cali Amy says:
I think you can complain about governmental choices and actions even if you don’t vote. So far, anyway. It might seem strange, but I don’t think they’ll throw you into prison for it…yet anyway.
NerdMom says:
I don’t have a magic 3 per se. I would love to see someone who is truly small government. I think a lot of these issues could be better if we could get the government out of it. Take education. Now in the theory of full disclosure, I homeschool. But no matter how much money the government spends they can’t fix the system. If they were to privatize I think the outcome would be greater.
I am pro-life but I think that we could make better strides getting a pro-choice libertarian/small gov republican than a pro-life big gov candidate. At least the small gov person will get the federal funding out of it (or try to). This is versus the pro-life big gov who just tries to overturn Roe v Wade and pours more money into education.
Do I see a dream candidate? Not Really. But, I do believe that a liberal republican will be better that a moderate democrat (in most cases).
Now to stow my soap box back in the pantry in case I need it later
.
Shaun Groves says:
So can you complain post-election about the way an issue is handled if your vote wasn’t determined by your view on that issue?
btw, Ron Paul doesn’t want the government to pay for abortions and he wants to dismantle the education department. Just sayin’… “Perfect candidate” enough for you?
I don’t mind the soap box coming out at all. Glad to see passion anywhere.
tunz says:
“I am pro-life but I think that we could make better strides getting a pro-choice libertarian/small gov republican than a pro-life big gov candidate. At least the small gov person will get the federal funding out of it (or try to). This is versus the pro-life big gov who just tries to overturn Roe v Wade and pours more money into education.”
I am not quite getting this, I have always felt that pro-choice is a deal breaker. Perhaps I am being too short sighted. I would be open to being swayed, if this is the appropriate forum for that, Shaun.
Shaun Groves says:
An even better forum for that would be the message board.
P.D. Ross says:
Why do people say stuff like this?
“Remember the rule, if you don’t vote you don’t have a right to complain. “
If none of the canidates are worthy of your vote why should you feel like you have to vote or you can’t voice your opinions about things. I think choosing not to vote can be a louder and greater vote than voting on someone who had enough money to get nominated. Me not voting is me screaming that this goverment is seriously screwed and I want no part of it.
Shaun Groves says:
Oh, P.D., you’ll never sell records talkin’ like that. T-shirts maybe. But not records.
Brody Harper says:
All that and he will even legalize weed!!
Shaun Groves says:
You would know that, Mr. California.
Stephen @ Rebelling Against Indifference says:
I know more people supporting Ron Paul than anyone else. Derek Webb just officially endorsed him today, after being contacted by his campaign (I don’t know if his endorsement is online yet).
Brian Seay says:
Why does the church need the government to ‘get out of the way’ before it can do what it is called to do?
Shaun Groves says:
It shouldn’t, but it does. Remember a while back when I posted about who gives to charity and who doesn’t? Who doesn;t surprised me, but not the sociologists conducting the study. Democrats give less than Republicans. Odd, I thought. Self-described liberals give more than elf-described conservatives. The study wasn’t conducted by Rush Limbaugh or some Republican think tank either – it found that the more a person trusts social change to the government the less that person is involved (through giving and other activities) in bringing about that change themselves.
It would be great if human psychology were different, but it’s not. For many of us.
Remember when I called our (former) church and asked them to help me help an injured friend of ours? He needed to see an eye doctor and an orthopedist? Remember what the church told me? Get him signed up with aid from the state.
If the state didn’t take care of the elderly wounded, would the buck stop with the local church? Honestly, I don’t know. I’m scared to find out. What if the churches don’t do their job when the government stops doing it? A lot of people suffer then. Is it better for SOMEONE to be taking care of them, even the wrong people in often times the wrong ways? I’m inclined some days to think so.
NerdMom says:
Ok, I go off to Awana and Bible study and this subject gets hopping
. Tunz, I will go into it later when I have time to put together full thoughts. I know it sounds contrary to traditional thought but… you will have to hear my logic. PD Ross, when you don’t vote, you don’t count. Plain and simple. Politicians don’t take you into account and no cares about your opinion. Shaun, don’t group Californians like that
. I agree with Brian’s sentiment. You can’t/shouldn’t force people to act by creating (or causing) a system to fail.
Brian Seay says:
Shaun, I agree with your take on human psychology BUT using that same type of argument – would the church have the funds to minister in the way you are proposing if Ron Paul got rid of the IRS and the tax deduction that people get for giving to churches? I realize that’s a run on sentence but you get the point.
lackofsuperpower says:
so I was watching debates a couple days ago and thought to myself…I bet Shaun is a fan (use whatever term you please for liking him) of Ron Paul. I knew that I could come here to confirm it…sure enough. I’m in a agreement with the initial post and find myself less apathetic when listening to Ron Paul. Jesus is the real cure to apathy.
Andrew says:
So,
A long time ago, we had a debate on whether we should be in war, and as Christians we should support war (specifically the War in Iraq). I was one of the biggest supporters of war and even wrote Shaun a 2 page, single spaced essay (other wise known as a rant) on why it is our duty…
Anyway, I couldn’t get away from the things I was hearing on here and from Shaun.
After much research and praying and studying, I’m proud to say I have done a 180 (well, maybe a 120ish) degree turn, and have come from the “dark” side
I heard about Ron Paul and went to his website (http://www.RonPaul2008.com), and found myself agreeing with so much of what was there. I have become an avid supporter of his, and am VERY involved in our Nashville chapter (you can get involved by calling 615-730-7300).
The biggest thing I hear is…of he doesn’t have enough support, he has no chance, and his supporters are too few to make a difference. Well all I want to ask you who say those things is how many did it take at the Boston Tea Party in 1773 to start a revolution and change the country, then and now. Political change CAN happen, if folks will have the courage to stand up for what they believe, even if it goes “against the grain” or sounds “radical” or “crazy.” As evidenced in the remarks above, many do not vote. Probably many who hold your same views and ideologies. It is estimated by some that upwards of 50% do not vote. Therefore, to say one candidate does or doesn’t have enought support based on the population as a whole, or the popular “vibe”, is not a correct assesment. Those passionate and on fire can make a change, and can be come a majority of a small overall turnout.
Let it not be said, that we saw a problem, but did nothing to try and correct it.
We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.
Thomas Jefferson
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin
If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it.
Thomas Jefferson
The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.
Thomas Jefferson
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson
To know what you prefer instead of humbly saying Amen to what the world tells you you ought to prefer, is to have kept your soul alive.
Robert Louis Stevenson
Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.
George Bernard Shaw
I am just absolutely convinced that the best formula for giving us peace and preserving the American way of life is freedom, limited government, and minding our own business overseas.
Ron Paul
http://www.ronpaul2008.com
HOPE FOR AMERICA
Jim Booth says:
I really liked your message until I read this. How blind you are, Mr. Groves. This deeply troubles me. We cannot create a sectarian, exclusive organization under the banner of Christ to create democracy. And democracy is what America strives to preserve and defend. Mr. Groves, you advocate a theocratic system, which will not work. Churches do not have the wherewithall, nor lack of bias to maintain the general welfare of a nation. And will this new vision of yours include any other faiths, and under what auspices? The best way for Christians to influence government and to create social justice is to become active in the process.
Warren says:
Shaun,
You asked someone for their “Big 3” in terms of the issues they will use to decide who to vote for. I’m still contemplating my response, but here are some thoughts:
If you are Pro-life, you should support overturning Roe v. Wade. You should also fight to end the death penalty in every state. George Bush is Pro-life, but as Governor of Texas he saw record numbers of criminals put to death. If you are Pro-choice, you should support the government paying for abortions because if they don’t—the choice is only for those with the income to have an abortion. From an economic standpoint (not moral/ethical argument) it would be cheaper for the government to pay to end a pregnancy than to provide services for an unwanted, low/no income child. Are you beginning to see that the government and church have different agendas?
How about the issue of throwing out the IRS and all the codes they enforce. Seriously. Help me see the problem with a federal sales tax—tax people on consumption rather than income. No loopholes. No homestead exemptions. No forms for the individual citizen to fill out. Charges sales tax and hold business accountable for collecting, reporting, and paying. What would you do with all of the unemployed tax professionals—how about turning them into auditors to monitor the publicly-traded firms that operate in the U.S. to protect investors and employees of those companies. Or, if you just have to keep all those bodies on the federal government payroll, offer them positions in SERVICE to the citizens.
Fiscal policy versus monetary policy. The Federal Reserve has just as much—or more—power when it comes to affecting the economy. The legislative branch can raise and lower taxes. The executive branch and legislative branch wrestle over government spending—up and down. WWII was good for the United States from an economic standpoint—government spending on a war spurred the general economy and brought our country out of the Depression to its greatest boom time. The current war has increased government spending and taken workers out of the economy—it has an effect on unemployment statistics and spurs the economy. Is “the war” about combating terrorism, taking control of natural resources, seeking revenge, or what? I respect John McCain, but it’s hard to support a candidate who is committed to being in Iraq and the Middle East for the next 100 years.
I have three small children and I work for myself—so education and healthcare are certainly big issues for me, but I don’t think the Federal Government will “fix” the problems with either of these systems. I’d love to have Hillary Clinton working on the healthcare issue, if she is half as passionate about it as she seems, but I don’t want to see the Clintons back in the White House.
Okay, my three (plus one):
Education—we compare poorly against other countries on many measures, but so many of those countries do not offer public school education for every child. We must “raise the bar” but we must continue to have an inclusive education system that ensures basic skills—reading, writing, and arithmetic—for all children.
Healthcare—I don’t want socialized medicine, but I do want access to affordable healthcare.
Taxes—I want a candidate who supports a Federal Income Tax and dismantling the IRS as it current exists.
War—I want a candidate who will get our troops out of the middle east.
The church can offer a lot to the education system and to the healthcare system. The government must change the tax code and the leader of the “free” world needs to make the decisions as commander in chief. I can support our president. I can support our troops, but I think we should get out of the middle east.