A little over a week ago I posted some observations about a commerical about Dick DeVos I saw on T.V. Someone named Enid read and responsed to the post. (read it here).
First of all...even though Enid calls you all insane, I'm fairly confident that Andrea, Serina, Kate, Lisa, Amy, and Stephanie are all in their right minds (although the baby may be making Andrea a wee bit crazy). I appreciate Stephanie's comments...and agree that politics can be overwhelming.
I find the core of Enid's argument to be the same old story of "Republicans don't care about the poor, and only the Democrats do anything about poverty." I'll be the first to admit that I don't know every detail of all that the Bush administration has (or has not) done to help the poor. I do know a couple of things...through his administration and the Compassion Capital Fund millions of dollars have been given to small, faith and community-based organizations to help them address the needs of the poor in their communities. The Bush administration also made availalbe millions of dollars for after-school programming in low-performing schools through the 21st Century Community Learning Centers funds. The organization I worked for was a major player in getting $43 million of those funds for after-school programs for poor kids in Detroit. After-school programs have been proven to help kids improve their performance in school...and there is a strong link between succeeding in school and escaping poverty. Sure, these two examples don't address all the needs of all the poor in Detroit, let alone the entire country. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater and make the assumption that a Republican administration is not addressing the needs of the poor.
In general, I try to avoid chosing the canidiate I vote for based solely on his/her party. I voted for Granholm in 2002. I'm voting for DeVos this year. The last presidential election between Bush and Kerry was a tough choice for me. I feel kind of strange defending myself to someone I don't know...but Enid, please don't assume that I don't realize the impacts of politics on the lives of the poor. As you point out, I do live and work in a city where 30% of the population lives in poverty. It's not hard to see the impact public policies have on the lives of the people of Detroit, and I spend at least 40 hours a week doing my darndest to try and make life a little bit better for these people.
Ultimately, the issue of poverty is much bigger than Republicans vs. Democrats. My perspective on poverty and wealth and a Christian's response has been influenced by the book "Neither Poverty nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Material Possessions" by Craig Blomberg. In a nutshell, God never intended people to be trapped in generational poverty. He established a way of life for His people where a person would be able to escape the cycle of poverty and have their family property restored to them. As Enid points out, God makes it very clear in His Word that believers are to care for the poor. So what happened? Well...sin entered the world, and people where never able to live up to the standards God established. Today, as we live under the new covenant and not under the law, we still find ourselves falling short of the mandate to care for the poor. I'd be the last person to say I had all (or even good) answers to this tough issue...all I know is that every person has been created in God's image, and is therefore worthy of dignity and care whether they are a poor person in Detroit or a wealthy person in Grosse Pointe. My hope is that my life, my actions, and my career reflects this conviction.
Enid closes with the statement that she "likes making the rules". Hmm...do people really make the rules? Romans 13 tells us that "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Be careful of what you try to take credit for.
(I know Amy could speak to all this much more eloquently than this...I look forward to her response.)
6 comments:
i think you're prefectly elequent... it's pretty gutsy to remark on the coments of someone you don't know. you can then only make assumptions... i like that you don't bring out all of your credentials... Enid, you're talking to my very compassionate roommate who is personally involved in re-writing "the rules"... she's pretty serious about her role as both a Christian and a social worker... she just worked for months on a plan to end homelessness in Detroit. Please don't accuse her of being either uninformed or lacking compassion or crazy.
Amanda, you do not need to defend yourself in any way. You spend your time ending homelessness in Detroit as a career. You think critically about your political choices (no offence to all you party loyalists...but voting all one way just because that it is'your party' scares me) and are obedient to a God who commands social justice. For all we know, Enid is the one that created the commercial that sparked all of our humerous comments, and felt a zing from our humor.
I appreciate everyone's responses to my comment; they are clearly well-thought-out and informed. I must admit that I judged some of you a bit too harshly, and I'm sorry for jumping to conclusions about your supposed lack of interest in, or ignorace about, politics. To be honest, I think the comments (clearly from family members) to your previous posts about this election upset me more than your post about the commercial that you saw. Living on the west side of the state, I see many people who will be voting based on some emotional reaction to a campaign message, and are ignorant to the facts of this election, as well as some of the reprocussions that their votes may have on society... and maybe not just for the people of Michigan -- the effects of this may set a precedent that will spread past the borders of the mitten state (e.g., Proposal 2). I guess I would align many of those comments with the people that I come into contact with every day, and that's what made me decide to comment on your post. But speaking more specifically to the original comments to your post about the GW/DeVos commercial, a couple of people responded with statements like "I hate politics!", but I don't doubt that these same poeple will be voting on November 7th, and I'm guessing that they will not be armed with the facts that they need to make an informed choice. And although I will obviously not be voting for Dick DeVos this election, I say this as a registered independent who will not be voting strictly for the Democratic party, either.
As for your reference to President Bush's faith-based initiatives plans, I encourage you to check out this interview with the former deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, or if you're willing to spend more than half an hour on the topic, check out his book: Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction.
1.) None of us who commented on the original post are related to Amanda.
2.)I think those who said "I hate politics!" are probably more turned off by what politics have become, not the system in its entirety. Hating politics also doesn't equate apathy, ignorance, or shoot-from-the-hip voting.
3.) I happen to abhor political games, attacks, and partisan spats junior high-style. When I wrote "I don't, well, care" at the end of my comment, I meant that I don't care who attacks whom better or meaner in a political ad. I also don't care who can make the nastiest attack on their opponent or who can make the ugliest picture of Bush in their comparison ad.
4.) Enid, I think you jumped to a lot of conclusions that just aren't correct. I fully support healthy debate and dialogue, but how you responded felt a lot more emotional (rather than in the spirit of voter education) and ill-directed.
Enid (and everyone else) -
Thanks for your response to my response. Thanks too for the link to the book and interview - I'll check them out.
Naturally, we all have topics that we are passionate about, and isn't it great that we live in a country where we are free to express our diverging opinions without fear? Just think - less than 100 years ago women didn't even have the right to vote. But now, through the passion and outcry of many women (and men) we have this right to make our voice heard.
If this same passion is applied to the issue of poverty, just imagine what the world could look like in another 100 years!
Well said on your respons Amanda.
Post a Comment