Take No Prisoners

Civil discourse is the hallmark of a wholesome society, or so I have been told. If the absence of civil discourse reveals an ailing society, then it seems the patient is very ill. Consider:
• The President of the United States, when his TelePropTer is handy, makes his case for each new social nostrum by offering rational choice between a non-existent opposing view and his own.
• Whenever a secular humanist failure is so egregious that it can no longer be concealed from public view, its occurrence is “unexpected.”
• Experts are always “surprised” when common sense conservative expectations come to pass.

So what are we who don’t share the popular delusions that human behavior is perfectible, that men will gladly work to pay for those who don’t, and that men who have been conditioned to expect entitlements will somehow throw off their chains and become free – what shall we do to educate everyone who exercises the franchise (that is, “votes,” for those of you who attended compulsory public school during the last 40 years)?

Shall we say, “On the one hand, the Founders clearly understood how to organize government for the general welfare of our nation, and on the other hand, Obama, Reid, and Pelosi may not?” I’m thinking this is both erroneous and unlikely to change many minds.

A left-wing loon recently told me that he believed people should be responsible for their own actions, and that he thought Obama’s redistributionist plans were just and fair. This fellow is a secular humanist – the first clue that his reasoning powers are suspect. When one tries to reconcile the competing notions of individual responsibility and government taking disproportionately from one taxpayer to subsidize a tax-taker, one can see how hard it is to reason with someone who holds such views.

Decades ago, I learned a communication model with five sides to use when the method I normally use doesn’t work. The five sides are Persuasion (by logic), Intimidation, Disclosing, Disengaging, and Visioning. Most of us are familiar with trying to explain the six reasons why you should agree with me (persuasion). Congress is hard at work on Intimidation (the Employee Free Choice Act, under which union goons can intimidate workers to sign a card requesting union certification). I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but when I let you in on a “secret,” that is called “disclosing,” and it can persuade people who are susceptible to joining the “inside circle” (You get those fund-raising appeals in the mail, don’t you?). Disengaging is what you do when you show the palm of your hand to someone who approaches you while you are on the phone. And the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. used visioning when he made the famous “I have a dream” speech.

Since we aren’t likely to persuade committed idiots, er liberals, by logic, let’s try another communication style (take no prisoners). Every time we are asked to look the other way by Obama, John Kennedy, or Bill Clinton to ignore the latest liberal failure, we get an inspirational speech with an unimpeachably inspirational goal (visioning).

So what’s the lesson here? Do as Reagan did. Cheerfully, relentlessly, and optimistically show the merits of faith in God, adherence to the Constitution, and private charity. Humorously show the weakness of liberal propositions. Love everyone, and positively correct those who err and fail. Gladly help those who accept their own responsibility for failure.

Clearly show others a VISION of the America that can and should be: free, loving, decent, honest, charitable, and self-reliant.

Above all, let the healing hand of our Creator shape your life. Accept His mercy, acknowledge His lordship, and study His word. The example of His followers is a powerfully persuasive force for good. His message is clear – there is mercy for those who love God and follow His word, exclusively for them alone.