R.I.P. Margaret Thatcher

Today we saw the death of Britain's "Iron Lady", Margaret Thatcher. She was well respected, not because everyone agreed with her, she had many detractors. She was respected because she knew the difference between principle and preference. Principles are those things which are NEVER up for compromise.
She was preceded in death by Lawrence Auster, another individual noted for his failure to compromise.
In these days of political correctness/Gramsci Marxism, the failure to compromise on anything and everything is viewed as a negative. Only unreasonable people are unwilling to compromise.

If that is the culture we are promoting, then may I always be viewed as obstinately unreasonable and uncompromising. Because there are some things upon which I will never, with God's generous assistance, compromise.

The most basic of these principles is the self evident, unalienable right to life. Every individual is unique and intrinsically valuable. We are made in the image of God and therefore precious beyond measure-every single one of us. Yes, that includes the ones with whom I most emphatically disagree. The taking of a life, from conception to naturally occurring death, is a grievous and solemn thing, not to be taken lightly.

I took comfort from the likes of Ms. Thatcher and Mr. Auster. Not because I always agreed with them, but because I saw in them the strength to stand their ground. In a culture that insists on the compromise of all that I hold sacred, I value their examples. We need more people who are willing to be labeled, unapologetically unreasonable in these times.

Like the songs says, "You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything." The level of self delusion and denial that I see around me in America is alarming. But worse is the willingness to compromise on principles. If we have no principles worth seeming "unreasonable" to defend, then how can we possibly hope to restore our Constitutional republic? Our form of government depends upon having a people who have principles and who will stand on them, unapologetically and uncompromisingly.

If you have nowhere to stand, when the time comes that you need to stand, you will not. Find out where you stand Americans.



"He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly; he that despiseth the gain of oppressions, that shaketh his hands from holding of bribes, that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood, and shutteth his eyes from seeing evil;
He shall dwell on high: his place of defence shall be the munitions of rocks: bread shall be given him; his waters shall be sure. "~ Isaiah 33:15-16

Stand Like a Rock

RINOs, sellouts, big tent republicans. All names for those who have been elected by conservatives because we thought they shared our values, only to have them cave when they get into office. Why does this happen time and time again?

Is it that the party politics, team spirit of it all has corrupted our election process? That would seem to bear a large portion of the blame, but there is another component which bears examination. That component is the word and process of compromise.

Compromise, on it's face, seems like a good thing. It is a useful tool when negotiating in areas of disagreement. Often, in bitter negotiations, a compromise where no one is entirely happy is viewed as a proper solution.

Politicians are often encouraged to compromise in order to get "something" done. An alarming idea at best, since our system was designed to prevent our politicians from doing certain things unless they compromised their principles. Our founders have said over and over again what sort of people we ought to prefer in our elections. People of good character and Christian values. Trustworthy and high minded statesmen. In other words, people who will not compromise on matters of principle. And yet, here we are.

Why was it important to our founders that we elect the best among us to serve in Congress? I submit that it was to be sure that those who served would be those who understood the difference between principle and preference. Thomas Jefferson wrote "It matters of style, swim with the current, in matters of principle, stand like a rock."

Here's why it matters. Compromise in an area of principle is not a negotiation, it is a loss. Let me say that again, compromise in an area of principle equals a LOSS.

We are to elect Congressmen and women who know that matters of principle should never even be in the same room as the bargaining table, much less on the table itself. In our current culture of moral relativity, we seem to have lost the knack for differentiating between principle and preference.

This is one area where being a Christian is of service to a legislator. If he or she has an absolute against which to measure his/her actions and decisions, it is easier to tell which items are items of principle (Like our God given and Constitutionally affirmed rights) and which are matters of preference (like whether to spend allocated monies for one form of defense or another).

We need to elect people based on character and values, not party. Because anyone who is willing to compromise on principle just to keep their party in power is someone who is willing to lose all that makes this nation what it was intended by our founders to be. The freest, most independent nation on Earth. A nation of principled individuals whose understanding of personal responsibility and self determination would set them a cut above those of any nation that allowed their government to do their thinking for them. For too long we have seen our legislators lose, step by incremental step, the principles upon which this nation was founded. This is the battle we are fighting and every individual in this nation of voting age has a duty to vote accordingly.

To those who protest that by abandoning the "two party system" we will give the election to "the other side", so what? If we do not elect people of good character who will not compromise on principles, we are lost anyway. Because those "good, party members" will compromise again and again, until we stop electing them. The choice you offer is between an immediate loss and an incremental one. Again, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

"Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked." ~ Psalm 97:10