WE'VE BEEN WORKING OUR WAY through the liberal agenda behind Glenn Beck's "Nine Principles and Twelve Values" lately. Last time we focused on principle #3: in which he challenged conservatives to become less dishonest.
The next principle—number four—involves the family:
The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
After his caution in the previous two principles, it's refreshing to see him drop all pretense.
He simply and boldly pronounces a fundamentally liberal message, and lets the chips fall where they may.
The message comes in two parts:
-
The family is sacred.
The family is the most precious and important unit of our society. It contains the most important relationships, it's where our children are nurtured, it forms the fundamental structure of our culture.
Government's role in regard to the family, is to protect it.
Period. -
My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
The values and moral and religious issues which pertain to the family, to the spouses and to the children, are none of the business of government, but should be decided by the couple themselves.
Government has no business interfering in this process. It is not the government's job to get involved in those decisions, to make laws telling a couple what to do, or what they can't do within the confines of their home, or how to raise their children.
Neither is it the job of the government to interfere with the religious training parents give their children through the public schools.
It hardly seems necessary to say more.
Beck is really sticking his neck out here.
He may, once again, have completely blown his cover, the liberal bias is so clear.
Let's take them one at a time.
First, "The family is sacred."
Even his most conservative readers will hardly be able to miss the indictment of the right-wing here.
There is nothing more important than creating a society in which marriages and families can flourish, where parents can be confident that, if they work hard, they can supply their children with a safe home, nourishing food, reliable health care, and a good education.
Our government could certainly do more to make this possible, to strengthen the structures and programs which support strong families, but it has already done a great deal.
It has created minimum wages, so that the working poor and the middle class can come home after working all day with enough money to provide for their family life.
It has created a public school system, and public libraries, to make education accessible to those who cannot afford private schools or even books.
It has instituted school lunch programs, to help the poorest families make sure that their children have at least one nourishing meal per day.
It has created a welfare system so that when a factory closes, or the town is hit by a recession, there's a safety net—keeping the families intact until they can get on their feet again.
Beck's point is that every one of these programs to strengthen and protect the family have been promoted by liberals.
And all of the attempts to dismantle these programs, to limit their usefulness, to undermine the security of families in this country have been led by conservatives, trying to save a few pennies of their tax dollars.
The right-wing needs to wake up and understand just how important the family is.
Which brings us to the second half of Beck's third principle:
My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
Bravo. Another bold and liberal proclamation from Beck.
It is up to the spouses—the mothers and fathers, husbands and wives—to wield the moral and religious authority within a marriage, not the government.
The government has no business interfering in the inner sanctum of a marriage, either between the spouses or in matters of child-rearing.
To be clear, Beck is not saying that government shouldn't stop a husband from beating his wife, or starving his children, or selling them into slavery, etc.
Obviously, there are issues involving the health and safety of spouses and children where government should intervene, just as it would with any other citizen.
But when it comes to issues of values or religion, Beck is saying that government should remember its place.
If a question is religious in nature, government should keep its distance. It shouldn't tell me what religion to bring into my home. It shouldn't tell me that my children have to be either atheists or Baptists.
If my children go to public schools, the government should not use that fact to influence their religion or contradict the religion they are taught at home.
It should not, for example, require them to bow their heads to a prayer, when their home may be atheist, or to pray to a different God if their home is religious.
Nor should it set up a situation where they will be embarrassed if they don't bow to a different God than they were taught about at home.
It is not the business of government to tell me whom to marry, or whom not to marry—only I and my spouse have the authority to decide that.
Government should not tell me I must marry someone of the same race, and it must not tell me I must marry someone of a different gender.
These are religious and personal matters, between me and God in the sanctity of my family, and government has no business interfering.
Nor should government be telling me or my spouse whether we can use birth control, or what kind of birth control to use.
Nor should government be involved in my family's decisions on other religious or moral issues.
It is up to me and my spouse to decide when we believe life begins, and whether an abortion is a good or bad thing for our family, in whatever circumstances we find ourselves, not some government bureaucrat.
It is not for the government to decide an issue that many good people disagree on.
If my spouse and I choose to follow the teaching of the Bible that personhood begins at birth or after, it is not the place of the government to contradict us.
Even if our reasons have nothing to do with the Bible, it is still a matter of conscience and values, and should be decided within the family, on the authority of the spouses—not by some activist judge or politician.
And the fact that the religious right want government to intervene in this most sacred and personal circle of our lives, because they have chosen to believe differently, Beck says, does not give the government that right.
He demands that conservatives stand behind the sanctity of the family, and stop backing government interference in matters which should be decided by each couple independently.
And he is right.
Next time, principle #5— If you break the law
you pay the penalty. Justice is blind
and no one is above it.
