Four reasons why I like the Mt. Vernon Statement
Background on the Mt. Vernon Statement by Time, February 17…
[O]n the eve of the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington, more than 80 conservative leaders gathered on the grounds of George Washington’s former VA estate to unveil a manifesto reaffirming the movement’s beliefs.
The “Mount Vernon Statement,” as they have dubbed the document, seeks to tether conservatism to constitutional principles at a time when Republicans and many independents have become outraged over what they view as governmental overreach. Its authors, a group of boldface names and Beltway veterans who have been among the movement’s leaders for decades, have been working for months to hash out language that satisfies the party’s often fractious factions….
I like the Mt. Vernon Statement for 4 reasons.
- 1st, it binds the beliefs of old guard conservatives with the Tea Party new guard, giving us common ground, “a cohesive set of values and beliefs that have tied us together,” according to David Keene of the American Conservative Union, host of CPAC.
- 2nd, it binds fiscal, social, and security conservatism. I particularly liked this section of the manifesto:
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.
Fiscal conservatives are often not social conservatives (although it’s usually
not the other way around. Some go so far as to treat social conservatism
with contempt. This document reminds them there is a moral underpinning
to fiscal conservatism. And it reminds social conservatives that big
government (for instance, socialized healthcare) actually hurts, not helps.
- 3rd, it equalizes social conservatism with fiscal and security conservatism. Altogether they comprise the conservative 3-legged stool. I’m sick, as I’m sure all pro-lifers are, of the constant minimization of our issue, for instance, even this morning in Politico, where the topic was CPAC:
Ascendant are groups that focus on fiscal issues like reducing government spending and taxation, which last year drove tens of thousands of new conservative activists to the streets and town halls in protest of big spending initiatives backed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. Groups that concentrate on social issues like abortion and same sex marriage have been relegated to a lower profile, as to some extent have those focusing on national security.
I’m not at CPAC, so I don’t know if this is true. If it’s not, Politico is simply
seeing things the way MSM likes to see things. If it is, it’s understandable
that a hot button issue might take preeminence at CPAC, but that should not
be to say social issues aren’t equally important. A reminder to both: It is the
pro-life issue that threw the biggest monkeywrench in the Democrats’
healthcare plan.
- 4th, it separates conservatism from the Republican Party. As Colin Hanna said on Fox & Friends this morning, the GOP would be a “natural beneficiary of this effort,” but the Mt. Vernon Statement reorients the dynamics of our relationship. Tony Perkins said on Fox yesterday that for too long the fortunes of conservatism have been tied to the whims of Republicans in charge. No more. Quoting Keene from the Time piece again:
Republicans are carrying the burden and the baggage of the last time they were in power. People remember that. They have to be very careful about being consistent this time around if they want these people to rally to their cause electorally.
[Photo of former Attorney General Edwin Meese III signing the Mt. Vernon Statement, which he orchestrated, via the Associated Press]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I’m sick, as I’m sure all pro-lifers are, of the constant minimization of our issue … issues like abortion … a hot button issue … the pro-life issue.
The first thing to do in the way of preventing its minimization is to stop referring to it as an issue.
Issues are debatable. Killing children is not.
You’re right, Cranky. How better would I speak about it in the context of which I wrote?
OK, here’s the thing:
Killing human beings in the unborn stage is NOT a social issue! It is not social and it is not an issue!
Deciding who to invite for dinner is a “social issue”.
Killing human beings in the first nine months of life is a violent and lethal crime which should be, must be prohibited under law.
The immorality and criminality of this lethal violence against human beings has been decisively demonstrated and irrefutably proven.
All abortionist “arguments” are fallacies and have all been refuted. There is nothing at “issue”, nothing whatsoever.
Protecting unborn human rights should be the number one priority of the conservative movement and any other movement consisting of human beings because there is nothing more important than protecting human life and human rights.
Am I making myself clear?
Jill,
I have no prolem with using the term ‘issue’ as long as the ‘issue’ or the ‘movement’ do take as much or more value than the victims.
I know you set out to do your best every time.
If something is worth doing, it is worth doing even if it is badly done.
You do good work. Just keep on keeping on and as Larry the Cable Guy likes to remind us: ” Just gitter dun.”
yor bro ken
for many, it’s a minor issue.
Thanks, Ken. Always looking to improve. Am interested to learn how in this case.
I call it what it is. Abortion. The fight for equal rights. Human rights. The pro-life cause.
But I see your dilemma. That’s the hazard of putting pro-life activism under the umbrella of social conservatism. It becomes another bullet-point mixed in with everything else social conservatives stand for, when in fact we pro-lifers recognize that equal protection for the preborn is vital to restoring everything our country’s founding fathers fought for.
Mt. Vernon Statement should champion Personhood for the pre-born!
In my humble opinion Jill, (which isn’t worth much), you and Cranky are both spot on.
In the context and discussion of other political / social issues like fiscal conservatism, defense, gun control, etc., our cause is an issue.
In the context of the Pro-life cause itself? It’s a war, a crusade, a mission, a rescue operation, a battle of ideology pitting lies, misinformation and propaganda against the Truth. It’s a women’s health crisis (though not in the sense the other side spins it). Many men are victims enduring their child’s murder with no recourse.
Abortion is genocide, the worst genocide in the History of Man. It’s man at his worst. I can’t think of anything more cruel, more horrific, more satanic than to torture and kill a defenseless, innocent child.
Abortion is a scourge, it’s a stain on the soul of our nation.
And unfortunately, for millions in our country, it’s not much more than just an issue.
But that’s about to change…
for many, it’s a minor issue.
Posted by: Hal at February 18, 2010 10:38 AM
Wow…that statement put in the context of your experience with abortion…I’ve never found you more disgusting than this exact moment, Hal, and that’s really saying something because you’re a lawyer.
Not that I’m surprised a lawyer would eat one of his own smiling and then ask for seconds.
But this is encouraging. If the GOP itself can latch onto this and make it theirs, they’d certainly benefit immensely. And, it would be a kind of reform absolutely unheard of in the democrat party. Might make many people proud to be republican again.
for many, it’s a minor issue.
Posted by: Hal at February 18, 2010 10:38 AM
_______________________________________________
Well…since ‘Minor’ can also refer to a child, and a pre-born baby is a child, it IS a ‘Minor’ issue, Hal. :)
My husband has always said that how an elected official votes on life is a bellwether as to how they vote on taxes.
And he is 100% right.
Thank you, Jill, for a wonderful, wonderful article.
HAL,
Would you be more specific as to what you were referring to as the ‘minor’ issue to many?
Thanks
yor bro ken
I find this statement well written but lacking in one very important point:
The statement “the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law” is incorrect.
The Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of God’s Law.
Morality without authority is merely a suggestion based on opinion.
Minor issue. Ho hum. Who cares. Etc etc.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but many people are perfectly happy with the status quo regarding abortion in North America.
There are some on the pro life side who think it’s a big deal that abortion is fairly common and basically legal. There are some on the pro choice side who would fight to the death to keep Roe v. Wade on the books. Then there are most of the people in the middle who are either vaguely “pro life” or vaguely “pro choice” who really don’t give it much thought or concern. Minor issue.
Wow…that statement put in the context of your experience with abortion…I’ve never found you more disgusting than this exact moment, Hal, and that’s really saying something because you’re a lawyer.
Posted by: xalisae at February 18, 2010 1:14 PM
You honestly don’t know that many people are perfectly at peace with the whole “abortion thing?”
WHO CARES what people are “at peace” with? MURDER is still wrong, and it’s because GOD says so.
The weaknesses of human nature cause people to be “at peace” with many forms of violent crime and injustice. Most people did nothing to stop human slavery, the Nazi Holocaust and all the other evils of history.
Saying people are “at peace” with destroying in theory the whole human race in the Abortion Holocaust does not prove anything beyond the moral depravity and blindness of a very large part of our species.
Unhappily, this pattern of indifference to suffering, injustice and inhumanity has been a constant throughout time.
Being the eldest of a large family, no, I don’t know many people at all who are “perfectly at peace” with the monstrosity that is abortion. I’m also quite glad that I don’t, nor do I personally want to EVER be “perfectly at peace” with such a horrific practice. And more and more people are seeing it for what it is. More and more people are thinking as I do every. single. day.
And not just as someone who has seen so many people enter this world through my mother do I say this, but also as a woman who has carried and given birth to 2 children…When I think of what abortion is, and apply it to the experience of my children being completely and totally dependent upon me for their most basic elements of life…Thinking about how much they needed me and what a betrayal it would have been for me to have paid someone else money to essentially execute and mutilate them…The very idea is literally sickening on so many levels. The idea of any such harm ever coming to either of my children makes me want to vomit. The idea of how much I would be wronging them makes me feel queasy. The idea that it happens to so many human beings that are in the exact same position that they were once in fills me with despair. The fact that you have no such feelings in and of itself I find troubling.
Amen X.
Patrick wrote “Morality without authority is merely a suggestion based on opinion.” True!
The Mt. Vernon Statement does include these words: “The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God.” I’ll add that scripture tells us that God does give everyone a conscience and any self-evident truth is realized because God reveals these truths to our hearts. It’s when we sway towards our own opinions based on supposed self-need (as in murdering an unborn child for economic or other reasons) that we create our own twisted morality.
for many, it’s a minor issue.
Posted by: Hal at February 18, 2010 10:38 AM
Like cannibalism, human sacrifice and slavery in far away countries.
Same basic premise. Use, abuse and kill others for personal gain.
What I find shocking is how those who have no issue with the sexual deviance of Gosling don’t deride him for his lack of concern; Don’t harange him for his utter callousness; Don’t berate him over his blatant disregard for the man he MURDERED.
SICK DOES NOT BEGIN TO DESCRIBE THIS MAN, if he indeed did any of what he claims.
Capital punishment is the just sentence relegated for such men as Gosling. He DESERVES death.