<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
A:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">“<b>TWO
ARE BETTER THAN ONE” MINISTRIES</b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Jim
& Marie Watt</b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Tel:
<a href="tel:253-517-9195" target="_blank">253-517-9195</a> - Email:
<a href="mailto:jmbetter@gmail.com" target="_blank">jmbetter@gmail.com</a></b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Web:
<a href="http://www.2rbetter.org/" target="_blank">www.2rbetter.org</a></b></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">September 6, 2012</p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">
<br></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
--></style></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><font style="font-size:16pt" size="4"><b>The
Great American Worldview Test - The 2012 Election</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Thursday,
September 6, 2012</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>In
his latest blog article, “The Great American Worldview Test - The
1012 Election,” R. Albert Mohler Jr. writes about the radical
difference between the worldviews represented by the Democratic and
Republican platforms, respectively. Mohler suggests that the moral
implication of these distinct platforms could not be more serious. He
writes:</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT">“<font size="3"><b>We
are not looking at minor matters of political difference. We are
staring into the abyss of comprehensive moral conflict. Christian
voters can escape neither the consequences of their vote, nor the
fact that our most basic convictions will be revealed in the voting
booth come November.”</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Dr.
R. Albert Mohler Jr., serves as president of the Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary, the flagship school of the Southern Baptist
Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>American
presidential elections are the world’s most public display of the
democratic process. The global media follow the American elections
with a fervor that is easily understood - what happens in an American
presidential election matters all over the world. Our presidential
campaigns are political pageants and electoral dynamos. But, as any
honest thoughtful observer will understand, our elections are also
great worldview exercises. We reveal our worldview by our vote.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>This
is particularly true of the 2012 election. The presidential nominees
of the two major parties represent two very different worldviews and
visions. President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney have adopted
policy positions that placed them in direct conflict, and the
platforms of their respective parties reveal to radically different
rendering of reality.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Year
ago, Governor George Wallace of Alabama remarked with disdain that
there is not “a dime’s worth of difference” between the
Democrats and the Republicans. In a sense, he was at least partly
right. A look back at the platforms of the two parties in the 1950s
and 1960s reveals little division over many of the issues that now
frame our national debate. Some of today’s issues were simply
missing, of course, given the fact that they were not even part of
the national conversation. But on issues of the economy, foreign
policy, the function of government, and a host of other issues, the
parties held positions that were far closer than is the case today.
Divisive issues such as then was in Vietnam would be addressed with
different policy proposals, but the platforms of the two parties
reflected a shared moral and political framework - a truth that would
shock many Americans today.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>All
that changed with the social and political divisions that came with
the 1968 and 1972 elections, when the Democratic Party experienced
its great transformation concerning a host of social issues. The 1980
election saw the Republicans experience their own transformation,
with social issues such as abortion rising to major attention in the
party platform.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Fast
forward to 2012, and the distance between the two parties is
breathtaking. The nation's political polarization is clearly evident
in the radical distinctions between the Republican and Democratic
platforms. But this polarization is not merely political. It is
fundamentally moral and ideological. These two platforms present two
contradictory understandings of realities as basic as human life,
liberty, and the institution of marriage.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Though
the two parties have taken opposing positions on many of these issues
for years, the radical nature of this current polarization is new.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>The
parties differ about matters such as health care and the environment,
the power of public employee unions, Medicare, and foreign policy.
But those differences, real and consequential, place in contrast with
the positions taken by the parties concerning the issues of abortion
and same-sex marriage.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>In
2012, the Democratic Party becomes the first major political party in
the United States to call for the legalization of same-sex marriage.
“We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure
equal treatment under the law for same-sex couples,” states the
platform. This follows President Obama’s announcement earlier this
year that his “evolving” position on same-sex marriage now
reached the point that he would openly call for same-sex couples to
be given the legal right to marry.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>The
velocity of the Democratic Party’s shift concerning same-sex
marriage was on full display on the site of the 2012 Democratic
National Convention, when former President Bill Clinton nominated
President Obama for re-election. In 1996, President Clinton signed
the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law after a massive
bi-partisan majority in Congress approved the legislation. That act
established that the United States government would recognize only
the union of a man and a woman as marriage, and that no state would
be required to recognize a same-sex union performed in any other
state.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>Just
16 years later, the Democratic president who signed that act into law
nominated a Democratic president who is working for its repeal.
President Obama has ordered his Attorney General not to defend DOMA
in the Federal courts. He and his party now openly call for what that
federal statute - still bearing the full force of law - prohibits.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>The
Republican platform stated: “We affirm our support for a
Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man
and one woman.” Thus, the Republican platform calls for nothing
less that a Constitutional amendment to prevent what the Democratic
platform demands the law to affirm. That Constitutional amendment,
Republicans argue, is made necessary by the very fact that the
Democratic President will not defend DOMA.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>On
the issue of abortion,the Republican platform states, “we assert
the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a
fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.”
The Democratic platform states: “The Democratic Party strongly and
unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make
decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal
abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts
to weaken or undermine that right.”</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>The
worldview clash could hardly be more dramatic. The Republicans frame
the issue in terms of the unborn child’s “fundamental individual
right to life.” The Democrats frame the issue as “a woman’s
right to make decisions” - including the explicit right to decide
to kill the baby in her womb. These are two contradictory moral
claims.</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>One
party claims that <i>no</i><span style="font-style:normal">
abortions should be legal and the other claims that </span><i>all</i><span style="font-style:normal">
abortions should be legal. Each party is driven by their own moral
logic. The Republicans are driven by the belief that, at every point
of development, every individual human being is sacred and has a
fundamental right to life. The Democrats are driven by the </span><span style="font-style:normal">belief
that the woman’s unfettered right to choose an abortion is
paramount, and that a woman can demand an abortion at any time for
any reason - or for no reason. As their language states, “We oppose
any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” The most
revealing words there are “any” and “all.”</span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b><span style="font-style:normal">Both
parties hold these positions because they are, in truth, the
inevitable consequences of basic worldview assumptions. These
assumptions include belief that marriage is essential to human
flourishing and cannot be redefined without bringing on human
disaster, contrasted with the belief that the liberation of humanity
from oppression and prejudice requires the redefinition of marriage.
In the background are contradictory assumptions about human
sexuality, sexual morality, moral authority, individual autonomy, and
the ends to which human being</span><span style="font-style:normal">s</span><span style="font-style:normal">
are to aim their lives.</span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b><span style="font-style:normal">The
assumptions framing the abortion positions of the two parties include
the belief that every human life is sacred and to be protected at
every point of development contrasted with the belief that a human
life takes on greater worth and right to live as the development
continues, but is tentative at least unto the moment of live birth.
The belief that the baby is itself the most urgent moral unit is
contrasted with the belief that the woman and her right to control
her own reproductive destiny is paramount. Behind these beliefs stand
convictions and assumptions about human dignity, the worth of human
life, the responsibility of the society to every human life, the
purpose and end of human reproduction, and nothing less than the
meaning of both life and death.</span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b><span style="font-style:normal">We
are not looking at minor matters of political difference. We are
staring into the abyss of comprehensive moral conflict. Christian
voters can escape neither the consequences of their vote, nor the
fact that our most basic convictions will be revealed in the voting
booth come November. Christians cannot face these questions without
the knowledge that God is the Giver of life, who made every human
life in his image. We cannot consider this election without the
knowledge that our Creator has given us the covenant of marriage as
the union of one man and one woman as the demonstration of his glory
and the promise of human flourishing.</span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b><span style="font-style:normal">Americans
will elect a president in November, but our vote will reveal far more
than our political preference. The 2012 election is a worldview
exercise of unprecedented contrasts - an unavoidable test of our most
basic convictions. The electoral map will reveal more than an
election winner. It will reveal who Americans really are and what we
believe.</span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><u><b><span style="font-style:normal">NOTE</span></b></u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><b>:
</b></span></span><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">My
wife Marie and I are 89; so in a sense the upcoming election won’t
have that much of an impact on us. But - we are parents of 3;
grandparents of 7; great-grandparents of 2. For </span></span></span><u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="font-weight:normal">them</span></span></u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">
- our vote is </span></span></span><u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="font-weight:normal">most
important</span></span></u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">!</span></span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">After
reading the above article by Albert Mohler, Marie wrote: “This is
the </span></span></span><u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="font-weight:normal">most
powerful</span></span></u><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">
I’ve ever read concerning voting - answering to God, especially on
moral concepts - and on our Contrasting Parties.</span></span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">I
personally came across Dr. Albert Mohler a few months ago by chance
while surfing the Net to find confirmation on a “Pornographic”
article. I was impressed with his clear understanding and analysis of
the problem. </span></span></span></font>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">I
served as Assistant Pastor in Chicago in 1949 under Dr. D.A.
(Scotchie) McCall, Senior Pastor of the Tabernacle Baptist Church. He
was uncle to Dr. Duke McCall - then President of Southern Baptist
</span></span></span><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">Theological
</span></span></span><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">Seminary.</span></span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="font-style:normal"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">Both
Marie and I felt this is an article that will help both Christians
and thoughtful citizens in their voting obligations this November -
Jim & Marie Watt</span></span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>TO
SUBSCRIBE - Please Email: <a href="mailto:mailing-subscribe@2rbetter.org" target="_blank">mailing-subscribe@2rbetter.org</a></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>TO
UNSUBSCRIBE - Please Email: <a href="mailto:mailing-unsubscribe@2rbetter.org" target="_blank">mailing-unsubscribe@2rbetter.org</a></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>FOR
ARCHIVE ARTICLES - Web:<a href="http://2rbetter.org/pipermail/mailing/" target="_blank">http://2rbetter.org/pipermail/mailing/</a></b></font></p>