Pragmatism Will Not Hold Our Constitutional Republic

The original title of this article is “Pragmatism is Not Compatible With Christian Principle.” This is a classic reprise reprinted from Tandem Vincitur, July 1997 and posted to this website in September 2008. It has been reprinted by others almost every election cycle and stolen by some. My policy is anyone may reprint any of my work, in whole or in part, as long as they credit the source (url, book, etc).

Here is the ancient article:

Our elected officials and bureaucrats are dealing away our rights and freedoms like they are in some kind of a global crap game. In 1994, we said we were going to turn things around with the “Republican Revolution” but the game goes on as before. The players change and the leadership–if that’s what you call it–take on new faces. Where have the Republicans even begun to roll back unbridled bureaucracies? overweening government? and the rise of globalism? They have not. Instead they have sent new mandates to the States restricting our first and second amendments, expanding the role of government in education and now giving us ID cards.

Senator Orrin Hatch chairs the powerful judiciary committee of the Senate. It is this committee’s responsibility to evaluate the judicial nominations of the President. On one occasion when Mr. Hatch was speaking before the Heritage Foundation, he warned the audience of the activist judges that Clinton had appointed–that is, he told the conservative audience what they wanted to hear. When one of the listeners pointed out that Mr. Hatch voted for the last eighty-three out of eighty-five appointees, he left in disgust.

He is not alone. Many of our most sacred of candidates will speak the conservative line while voting for legislation that expands the size of civil government, increases spending and brings us into the New World Order. Linda Smith voted for the Careers Bill, the Terrorist Bill and the like. Now she is telling general audiences that she is working to make government better. What happened to smaller?

Do you remember her dramatic win by write-in vote in 1994? That was the campaign that pitted an extremely conservative Smith versus an extremely liberal Unsoeld. After such an unprecedented success, why did she win by such a slim margin and only after a recount in 1996? She will tell you that she was targeted by the unions. I believe, however, she ostracized too many conservatives with her globalistic voting record. I predict she will lose this next election.

I think that Randy Tate lost his 1996 election for the same reasons and for targeting his campaign toward the liberals. Remember his ads reminding the voters how he had increased entitlement spending? Now the Christian Coalition wants him to chair their club. They deserve him, he voted for the New World Order and larger civil government every chance he could. At least now, he will get a pension.

Why are the congressional Republicans telling us that the new budget is so great when it increases spending, continues to promote obscenity, dis-education and death? The sorry fact is that our children are saddled with this debt by the same people who are destroying their opportunities to produce wealth and pay the debt. What we have are Republicans who are trying to convince us that they need to vote for bad bills in order to get re-elected to protect us from the bad people who will vote for bad bills.

I have been fighting within the Republican Party for many years to protect the vision and direction. It is becoming painfully obvious why the leadership, many elected officials and their wanna-be groupies have worked so hard to eliminate any and every principle and standard within the Republican platform. They claim to want to reach out, be inclusive–be kinder and gentler. But the underlying motivation is to eliminate the benchmark–remove the standards by which their actions can be evaluated.

A party platform is the voice of the people, the grassroots. If a “conservative” platform can be orchestrated to emulate the state, the people will have no idea that they are being herded into a socialist, police state. The battle for the mind galvanizes my resolve. It is clear to me that we must fight even harder within the Party for Godly principles and standards. Then again, it may be time for a third party.

Last year, after the primary election, I had anticipated that Buchanan would accept the Taxpayer Party nomination–I believed he was winnable. When that failed to materialize, I believed that there was no viable opposition to Bill Clinton, except through the election of Bob Dole and Jack Kemp. I resolved in my heart that my vote was going to be a vote against Clinton (this is the first time that I had ever considered voting “against” rather than “for” anyone). What I really wanted, was for the election to be over and Clinton to be gone.

God used the influence of two good friends to turn me from my rationalization. Their efforts alone would have failed if God had not already put me under severe conviction. For every argument I put forward, my friend in Bothell would counter by reading excerpts from my own writings to refute me. Soon, I could no longer justify my pragmatism.

Bob Dole and Jack Kemp professed to be Christians, but their actions have proved that the Bible is not their foundation. In fact, more often than not they are hostile to Biblical principle. They are strangers to our Constitution, as well.

When I remember how Dole worked so hard to divide the Christians and separate them from the Republican Party; when I consider that he voted for the FACE bill, restricting our First Amendment rights to free speech in the protection of the unborn (two sections of the Constitution violated in this measure alone); when I consider his votes funding Planned Parenthood; when I consider how both men have worked diligently for bigger government–creating a new, improved, more efficient Tower of Babel; when I consider . . . I could not with a clear conscience say that I could defend my vote for these men before God–especially when two God-fearing men were running for that office.

Both Howard Phillips and Herb Titus–two men that I highly respect–are God-fearing. They understand the Biblical foundation of law and they both understand the Constitution of the United States of America. Howard Phillips’ credentials go back a long way in the fight for Godly leadership of our nation. Herb Titus was the founding dean of Liberty University’s School of Law. He has written extensively on our Biblical and Constitutional foundation. These men were the natural choice for anyone who wanted to return to the founding principles of this nation and set forth a Biblical standard for governing.

Last week a few political hacks got together to chew the fat. Once again, when I began to put forward conservative principles and how these may be impacting our pattern of governing, several of the others turned the conversation to pragmatism and winning. They posited the argument that it takes fifty-percent-plus-one vote to win. I countered that we have almost pragmatized and strategized ourselves into the New World Order. We can no longer continue to compromise just for the sake of winning. The majority of the establishment candidates have demonstrated that they are easily swayed by global forces, pensions and campaign financing. Within this context, we cannot continue to fight to win elections, we must start fighting for the truth of God’s Word and the souls of the people.

Whenever we get into these conversations about principles versus winning, someone always brings up the argument that Jesus told us to be shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves. Mat 10:16. In this sub-clause Christ was not speaking to winning elections, nor was He in anyway suggesting that we compromise His Word to accomplish our goals or agenda. If you read the verse in full and the following verse and on through verse twenty-two, you will understand that Christ was warning the disciples to discern well who their friends and true brothers in the Lord were. For many would infiltrate the church to hand the believers over to the authorities. He ends His instruction with this admonition: “All men will hate you because of Me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.” If anything, Christ was warning against pragmatism.

This nation was not founded upon compromise and rationalism. It was founded upon the belief that we are accountable to God for the principles that we stand for and the people that we elevate to high office. And this foundation was paid for in blood. Our nation is no longer willing to pay for freedom with blood–most certainly not with social exile. We have seduced ourselves with the belief that we can pay for liberty with credit.

We will all stand before God; and the Bible warns us to fear God, not man. It is God who raises kings and deposes them, regardless of our form of civil government and regardless of our vote. I cannot run phalanx for God, nor can I help Him out-strategize the devil. If it is His will to send judgment upon us He will do just that. How do we know that the lack of electable candidates with any integrity may be a test upon the people of God to see where they will stand? If it is God’s will to break up the political parties, He will do that regardless of our compromise and coalitions. God Almighty reigns and it is our duty to give glory to Him.

My vote injects a bit of my character into the political arena. However possible, I want to inject Godly principles, not pragmatism nor compromise. I want to be able to stand before God and defend my vote. He will not reprimand me for lack of pragmatism–He won’t tell me that if I would have just compromised a little, He could have accomplished His will. On the other hand, He will reprimand me for lack of faith and failing to stand. We must hold up a standard and trust God with the results.

George Washington said, “If to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair. The rest is in the hands of God.” Jesus Christ told us that the kingdom of heaven is forcefully advancing and forceful men lay hold of it. Mat 11:12.

About the author: cominus

Cominus is the pen-name for Dean Isaacson. He was chairman of the Snohomish County Republican Central Committee (Washington) 1990 to 1992. He conducted legal research for the late Supreme Court Justice William C. Goodloe for several years and led Judicial Forum for many years. Now, he is a crazy kinda guy who spends most his time doing cold calls. He plays his harmonica in the truck because people don't want to listen to him practice - but his dog, Miles (black dachshund), loves to sing along. He is passionate about being passionate because everyone is really into passionate these days but tires easily and hides behind emails. His core belief is you will choose to serve God or you will serve the state - tyrants, as William Penn called it.

This entry was posted in christian confusion, foundational, law and government. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Subscribe to cominus. . .

    If you don't have enough junk mail, enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts - if there are any.

  • cominus on twitter. . .


  • Categories

  • Archives

I will perpetuate your memory through all generations; therefore the nations will praise you for ever and ever.
[Psa 45:17 NIV 1984]

O Lord, I have heard of your fame and stand in awe of your works. Revive them in our time; even now, make Yourself known - but in Your wrath remember mercy.
[Hab 3:3]

  • Friends and Sponsors