The irony which seems lost on Democrats in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade this past summer is that they are now in the position of being conservatives, after a fashion. Or at least their arguments for why legalized abortion should continue to be the "law of the land" nearly five decades on - these are essentially conservative arguments.
That is, they say we should not upend so much precedent, and they are against progress so long as such is defined along the lines of protecting infants from infanticide.
Meanwhile, the Pro-Life in America, at least those who are for the abolition of legalized abortion, find themselves in the curious position of contending for the most liberal option, in a sense - to protect the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for the unborn.
I think, then, it would be wise for us all to re-evaluate who is really conserving what, and who is really liberating whom from constraints which are any constraints at all. At this point in the game, measuring from the French, Bolshevik, or Maoist revolutions, these things bear closer examination.
Take taxes, for another example. Don't really take them, if you please. But consider taxes. They really are not a morally or spiritual neutral topic, however often folks who want you to just pay the damn things unquestioningly and without complaint will point out only Romans 13 and Matthew 22. But the Bible does say more about taxes than that.
For instance, it's not for no reason that one of the primary points on which Jesus was criticized so often was that he spent time in the company of both whores and taxmen. Remember Zacchaeus also, and not just for the fact that he was a wee little man. One of the marks of repentance on his meeting Christ was that he reimbursed all he had defrauded.
Or consider the story of Joseph interpreting Pharaoh's dream to be a warning from God that seven years of plenty will be followed by seven years of famine and drought. What he ended up overseeing in the way of preparations was a very fiscally conservative response. Saving grain during the good times - during the budget surplus - so that it would be there for future deficit spending - this was hardly Joseph only being against things all the time, or failing to think about the future because he was stuck in the past.
Again, then, I say it would be good for us all to reconsider who is conserving what, and who is trying to liberate us from what and whom. The Devil is most certainly in the details.
