Spirituality and Government Compulsion Are of Two Houses

There is no holy obligation to create a government which enforces holy obligations. An Islamist society may take a different view if things; but for Christian ministers to throw whatever authority they may yet have (and they’re using it up at gas-guzzling rates) in support of “Obama-care” is insufferably arrogant. Be clear about this. The feasibility of providing a doc-on-demand for every resident, legal and illegal, of a society whose public coffers have long been empty may strike some of the fanciful as less dubious than it does those of us who can handle a column of figures. (After all, there are still so many RICH PEOPLE around!) Quite beyond practical issues, however, the “call to Christians” in this instance is unpardonably exploitative on the part of an ever more cynical and unprincipled administration and deplorably pompous on the part of self-styled men of God.

To feed the hungry, clothe the poor, and cure the sick insofar as is within one’s means is incumbent upon all Christians (though “the poor are always with you”: the utopian crusade to eliminate poverty, far from reflecting faith, bespeaks the secularist’s need for “results”). An obligation whose fulfillment is enforced, however, ceases to be a matter of choice and loses all its dutiful character. A robot is not “good” because it “bravely” defuses a bomb. It has no choice in the matter—it is programmed. Likewise, people whose contributions to the poor are extorted at gunpoint have not become charitable; they might well be deemed more morally admirable, indeed, for choosing to be shot, since in doing so they would at least assert themselves as creatures of free will. But we who hold the gun, you may say (I hope not—but someone may say) accomplish our moral duty by making those of ample means surrender a little wealth to the have-nots. This is a ghastly assertion, for the following reasons: in aiming the gun, you not only sacrifice time you might freely have spent yourself upon laboring for the needy (by staging garage sales, say, or holding raffles); you also and PRIMARILY (from a spiritual perspective) impose your chosen concern for the needy upon another free being—you deprive that other being of the freedom to struggle with his duties, to decide upon and live with his choices, and (in short) to grow in spirit. You have taken away what God has given… and who are YOU, little worm, to do so?

I have no great use for riches or love for the rich. I do not subscribe to the theory that all the rich have reached their state by being virtuously energetic. Maybe so, maybe not: energy is not in itself a virtue—one can be energetically deceptive or merciless. By the same token, however, I do not consider myself capable of foreseeing what good a rich man may do with his lucre if left alone. He may fund research into MS or build a plant which cheaply desalinates water. Who am I to force upon him and his like the creation of a vast bureaucracy dedicated only to a single repetitive activity as a string of ants is dedicated to carrying crumbs to the anthill? Or who am I to say that such force would execute God’s will?

If Obama’s phalanx of conscience-pricking ministers is so comfortably righteous in thus delivering God’s verdict on public policy, why does the same group not insist that the President outlaw abortion? Are these holy men more confident that welfare queens have a God-given right to be treated for obesity from my son’s college fund than that God intends for babies to enjoy the right of birth? Surely God wants children to have two parents; all indications are that the products of single-parent households run a greater risk of having a poor education, a low income, a higher stress level, and a prison record. Why does this circle of luminaries not lobby Obama to criminalize extra-marital sex and divorce? Why not ban TV shows and movies which celebrate violence? Why not dissolve the military and dismount all our defensive weapons systems (if we still have any)? Surely Jesus would never have approved of the gun, the tank, or the missile…

The truth is that not one of said ministers is capable of comprehending the complexity of the choices which sin and death have visited upon this world. No mortal is—but secular utopians in the sheep’s clothing of the pulpit least of all. Indeed, it is evident that many of these soi-disant oracles enjoy rather generous salaries themselves (not to mention all the perks of the job) and could really do much more to help the needy out of their own pocket. How about starting by sending the kids to public school and doing away with conferences, vacations, and nights on the town?

Whited-sepulcher hypocrites and grand-standing fools, one and all. God deserves much better servants… but the President couldn’t ask for a more star-struck bunch of puppets.