Defending the Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & the American Constitution
Thursday July 24th 2014

Self-Educated Man

lincoln family bible study


Read along with us; share your insights, ask questions, post a link that adds to the discussion


Federalist 58 by James Madison. 1. Under the proposed Constitution whose interests were represented by the U.S. Senate? Is it so today? If not, how might it be remedied & by what means? 2. How did the Constitution provide for updating representation in Congress? 3. Madison credits the U.S Constitution with assigning the greatest power, that of the “purse strings” to the U.S. House. In your opinion, how might the House assert that power to reduce the size & cost of government today? 4. Explain in your own words Madison’s warning against too many men serving in the House. How might his warning be applied today as calls abound for a more direct democracy & for scrapping the electoral college system? 5. Is democracy the form of government our Founders gave us or was it a republican form? Explain the difference.


TML is syndicated by:

Google News (Internet)

Newstex - No. 1 Rated Authoritative Content

New Health Care Law Fails to Empower People

CULTURE WATCH, HERITAGE FOUNDATION

This year marks the 35th anniversary of a small but extremely influential book: To Empower People by Peter Berger and Richard John Neuhaus. If you’ve ever heard the term “mediating institutions,” this is the book that made it (more) popular.

In their 45-page treatise, Berger and Neuhaus argue that a healthy nation relies on local institutions—like faith-based ministries and voluntary associations—to mediate between individual citizens and big government. When public policies are hostile to such institutions, the very nature of democracy is threatened.

Sadly, the reminder To Empower People issued in the mid-1970s is being recklessly ignored today by Obamacare and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) anti-conscience mandate.

Berger and Neuhaus explain that civil society institutions play a key role in caring for citizens in need. These “people-sized institutions” understand social problems in up close and personal ways. Driven by deep convictions and compassion, such organizations can provide loving forms of assistance and care that government programs simply cannot offer, and they often do so for less money.

To Empower People also makes a case for why healthy civil society institutions are essential for democracy: they generate and maintain the operative values of American life. In a free society, mediating structures stand between citizens and the large bureaucratic structures of the state, transferring meaning and value to the less personal realm of government. Without these mediating structures, “values become another function of the megastructures, notably of the state, and this is a hallmark of totalitarianism.”

In light of this, the authors (whose 2008 talk at Heritage can be seen here) issue two programmatic recommendations: First, public policy should at least “cease and desist from damaging mediating structures.” Second, public policy should protect and, where possible without co-opting them, empower mediating institutions in their efforts to promote the common good.

The HHS anti-conscience mandate fails both of these propositions. By forcing groups to offer health plans that cover abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization, the mandate damages many mediating structures by stripping them of their ability to live according to their convictions. It gives unprecedented power to the federal government to dictate how social institutions must behave. It basically attempts to remake civil society in the government’s own image, leaving no room for institutions guided by moral convictions that differ from those of the President.

And if civil society organizations decide that they must stop offering health coverage to uphold their moral convictions, Obamacare slaps them with a heavy fine. There is no way out.

A very narrow religious exemption from the mandate protects only houses of worship but not organizations that serve people of other faiths. In 1977, Berger and Neuhaus put their finger on the ideology behind this: When liberals defend the religious freedom of individuals but not institutions, “the liberty to be defended is always that of privatized religion… liberals are typically hostile to the claim that institutional religion might have public rights and public functions.”

In short, Obamacare reveals a social philosophy at odds with the one articulated in To Empower People. The Obama Administration assumes that the state should take responsibility for people’s health care decisions, even at the expense of vital mediating institutions. By shifting moral decision making from civil society to unaccountable government bureaucracies, Obamacare strikes at the very underpinnings of self-government.

To protect mediating institutions, safeguard religious liberty, and restore power to people, Obamacare needs to go.


This article was originally published at Heritage.org. Used with permission.


Heritage Foundation Copyright Notice.