In 1994 the citizens of the world stood by in a sort of paralyzed numbness as the nation of Rwanda, one of the most Christian in central Africa, suffered the horrors of what was at first termed a civil war, but soon was assigned its proper name—genocide. 800,000 people died. An interesting political side-note to the tragedy was the furious debate in which our President at the time, Bill Clinton, hemmed and hawed and danced around the issue of whether or not he would formally call the slaughter a genocide. Genocide was something the Nazis did to the Jews and other minority groups over fifty years earlier—it was something that most understood only through the old, black and white photos and film reels seen in documentaries, or perhaps in a few modern-day movies. Did we really want to go that far, with all its legal, political, and global implications?
Now, I want you to imagine the look on a Rwandan orphan’s face today if you were to say to him, “That was such a hard time, I know. Social issues really can be difficult.” He or she would look very puzzled, if not angry—and would know for sure that you are unaware of the true magnitude of the slaughter, and perhaps shared the indifference of the nations of the world who were so criminally slow to respond to stop the killings. Now imagine his (or her) response when you invited him to a picnic with some friends who just can’t bring themselves to call the Rwandan slaughter a genocide—as a matter of fact insist on calling it a social issue. “Let’s all get along, little guy, you’ve been through a lot, what with those pesky social issues in your past. Have some chips.”
Today, in my Oregonian, I read that President Obama, in supporting his decision to ask Pastor Rick Warren to provide the Invocation at the Inauguration Day ceremonies, said that American needs to ““come together” even when there’s disagreement on certain social issues.” Certain social ssues. It’s those three words that caught my attention. I fear that the new administration’s strategy to market its particular form of morality and ethics for our nation will be to mix all the concerns of its citizens regarding both public and private behavior into a very big stew pot and call it “Social Issue Concerns.” It’s a way of forcing a common denominator on all moral issues, and you’ve probably heard it practiced before.
“Before we judge the motives and actions of Islamic militants, we must remember all the damage done in the name of religion, particularly that done by Christian crusaders in centuries past.”
“Before we criticize the Holocaust policies of the Third Reich let’s remember the devastating policies of the United States that wiped out the Native Americans.”
Such arguments have more than just a hint of validity—they are based in historical truth, after all. But they are also poorly employed when they are used to justify the continuance of a present evil, or to mitigate our abhorrence of it.
So, when President Obama wants us to all just get along, and to make issues that are for (biblical) Christians core issues concerning the preservation and valuing of human life—simply social issues, just disagreements between folks, I have trouble swallowing it.
I’m certainly aware of that we face many, many, truly social issues: Should we drill in Alaska, develop more solar energy sources, sign the Kyoto Accords, do more to protect our salmon runs, support NAFTA? All important issues. Should we spend our tax money on parks, schools, roads, public safety, or a shiny new fountain on the waterfront? Again, relatively important, social issues.
Should we decide after thousands of years of law, culture, precedent, and human history to redefine what the definition of marriage is? Sure, go ahead and practice your freedom to judge history and vote your culture into one of your own preference. Should we take a poll on whether or not we continue to fund and even encourage the routine, state sponsored aborting of our in-utero children? Should we force doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and paramedics to violate their consciences and support these….social issues, by providing abortion services to all who ask for them? Unthinkable to Christians, but very consistent with a commitment to down-grade all ethical concerns and issues to the same level—to mere social issues.
I fear that in the big, “inclusive” tent concept that has taken on the trappings of a religious cause—there will no longer be right or wrong; in the place of these old fashioned ethical distinctions there will be “righter” actions and “wrong-er” actions, and the only man truly uninvited to the party will be the one who refuses to throw core ethical issues of the most basic nature, such as the tragic, genocidal, allowance of the state-sponsored abortion industry of the United States, into the social issue pot. He may be invited, but he’d better mind his party manners and not ruin the festivities.
I’m glad Rick Warren is praying for the country, and the President, at the Inauguration. I’m sure he’ll do exactly what those who invited him are hoping he’ll do. But I fear that the core issues of right and wrong that are taught in the Bible will become, for the Christians of our nation, simply social issues—and they are so much more than that. We Christians must remember that we are called to a contrary lifestyle, one that lives according to a different set of rules, a different, even divine, understanding of what is good and what is evil, what is right and what is wrong. We’re not omniscient; we certainly don’t have all the answers, but the ones that we do have, we must not fudge on. We must not allow ourselves the luxury of defiling language along with conscience, of calling state funded abortion on demand one of many social issues that we must all agree to disagree on. Pray for Pastor Rick Warren, before he prays for us. And don’t let yourself call something an issue that is really an imperative. As it says in our Book:
Deliver those who are being taken away to death, And those who are staggering to slaughter, Oh hold them back. Proverbs 24:11
downtownpastor