Daniel Maine

 

I would like to discuss with you your speech at The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) today.  Now, I didn’t just read the clips that reporters thought an Olympics distracted public might want to gloss over while waiting for the next skier to crash.  I took the time to listen to the entire speech so I won’t be dissuaded by comments that you were misquoted or taken out of context.  I thought that much of your speech was exactly what a constitutional conservative should be saying.  Of your four principles on which you made the emphasis of your speech, I whole heartedly agree with three.

In inversed order, principle # 4“Bullies pick on weakness not strength” is a clear statement of common sense and Realpolitik.  I agree with the principle that our nation must remain strong militarily.

Principle # 3, “People spend their money differently when it’s their money”.  No argument.  The best way to control the rising cost of anything is to make sure the person doing the buying has a significant emotional investment in the cost.

Principle # 2, “We can’t spend more than we have.”  Fiscal conservatism at its most basic.  Again, no issue.

Principle # 1, “God is in charge.”  OhhhKaaay?  1st question.  Which God we talking about?  Yahweh, Zeus, Dagda, Odin, or maybe Hera, Cerridwyn, or Freya.   Or perhaps you meant Buddha, or Kali.

You said the founding documents of our country enshrined these ideas.  You quoted the Declaration of Independence to say that it was our creator from who our rights flow.  I think you were using this quote, incorrectly, to insinuate that the founding fathers thought that The Creator should be involved in the governance of men.  The Declaration did not speak to the governance of the colonies, only to throwing off the yoke of tyranny.  

 “Section 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practise Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.” 

This is a quote from the Virginia Declaration of Rights.  This document was written by George Mason prior to the Declaration of Independence and a document from which Thomas Jefferson, a Virginian, drew heavily in writing The Declaration of Independence in 1776.  After a failed attempt at a federal government (The Articles of Confederation), the Founding Fathers went back to convention and wrote the constitution in 1787, there was no mention of God in the structure of our government.  There were no limits placed on God’s influence on our government either.  In 1789 The Bill of Rights was drafted to spell out the limits of power that government had in the lives of citizens.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”  This is the preamble to the Bill of Rights that congress set down in 1789.

It is very clear what their purpose of adding the bill of rights was intended to do, limit the abuse of the power of the constitution. The 1st limit they stepped forward to clarify was; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,.”  One of the most enduring ideas of the time of the Founding Fathers was that each person must practice his duties to God as he saw fit, and that Congress shall not establish or endorse a religion.

Governor Pawlenty, please understand that the intent of the founding fathers was to establish a government controlled by the citizens, represented by men and women of sound mind and good judgment.

Oh wait, that’s where we made our mistake.

 

First, I present this requisite disclaimer. 

Although I have been identified as a member of the United States Army (and still proud to be so) any comments made in this forum under my name represent the thoughts, musings, and political diatribes of Daniel Allen Maine alone.  I do not speak for the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense, or the Government of the United States in any fashion.  My opinions do not represent policy of any of the afore mentioned Agencies.  Anyone seeking policy statements from said agencies are asked to seek out the Public Affairs Office of the military post nearest their location.

Next, I would like to thank Jason Pitzl-Waters for the invitation to present my meanderings to this audience.  I hope to be worthy the trust you have shown me.  I have read the postings of my fellows that have been presented as of this writing and find myself in good company.  I believe I will be challenged by the conversations we will have in the future.  To each of the authors of these pages, PROST!

Power! Human beings and political parties alike seek to amass power.  Some wish to have enough power to control their own lives.  Some seek power to control the world.  Wherever human beings come together and try to accomplish anything they play politics, establish a pecking order, or competing factions, all positioning for control, for power.

I have been a political hack.  I worked grass roots politics in Seattle, attending caucus meetings, special elections, and political conventions.  In that arena, the principles are understood.  People are positioning, helping people they agree with, earning IOU’s to be called on in the future, or working to defeat someone they disagree with. It is pure.  There is no deceit, at least in motive, nor are there hard feelings, until there is deceit in deed. I was out as a pagan while working in Republican politics.  I was received with surprise and curiosity, but welcomed and put to work.

As I began moving about in the pagan community in Seattle, I kept my political proclivities to myself.  My coven mates knew, but I wanted to be known for who I was as a pagan before I was known for my party affiliation.  When I came out to the community at large that I was a Republican, I was not surprised.  The reaction was mixed, of course.  There was acceptance, but there was also shock, rejection, and mistrust.  I found it humorous that I had received more acceptance from a party accused of exclusion than I had from a community that prided itself on acceptance.

As I watched the interaction within the community and listened to the conversations being discussed in public, I came to the conclusion that the Polytheistic Community at large had a bi polar disorder.  In one moment, the vast majority would decry the evils of politics, how it was a base and degrading, a pursuit for the uncouth.  In the next moment, I would see politics being practiced with a fervor unmatched in the most heated of national campaigns.  The infighting was enough to push one of the more successful leaders and groups, Pete Pathfinder and the Aquarian Tabernacle Church, to separate themselves from the at large community.

I watched as pagans came together to attempt to plan events.  A bylaw of the organization decreed that no decision would be acted upon without consensus.  This bylaw empowered one person to hijack any planning.  Nothing got done unless it happened the one person’s way.  It could be done by anyone with the patience to hold out until the others came around to do things their way just to get anything done.  This person understood power, I disagree with the person’s use of it, it prevented a lot of good work being done, but the person understood.  That organization no long exists in Seattle.

Pagans need to be involved in politics, eventually it must happen.  Without our participation in the political arena, our status as equal under the law will continue to be chipped away.  California already treats pagan chaplains who work the prison system differently from those of the majority faiths.  The courts will only sustain our position for a while.  If we cannot stand for ourselves, become a force that cannot be ignored, we will become marginalized.  We do not even need to win, although that would be a blessing.  We must, however, back a viable candidate, a reasonable initiative, something that shows we are capable of putting up a winnable fight. 

Pagans must first get past themselves.  In my line of work we call it “embracing the suck”.  To do this we must stop arguing about how we are all so different and start finding the ways we are the same.  Highlighting the differences to find our identity will only keep us divided and marginalized, giving those who would keep us down the opportunity to do so.  We must accept politics as necessary.  You cannot succeed at something you abhor. 

I wish Cara were right when she said that “most people and political Parties want the same outcome; a happy, healthy, open and caring populace.”  Most people and political parties want to gain power for their use as they see fit.  Cara’s statement is only accurate if it benefits those attempting to wield power.  A disaffected, disgruntled populace is often far more useful for wresting or wielding control.  It can keep your people energized and your opponents’ people demoralized.  It isn’t the way things should be, it is the way things are.  Wishful thinking doesn’t work in politics.  Ask John McCain’s campaign staff.

Thus ends my first salvo in this my field of dreams.  I invite your opinions, your arguments, and perhaps your agreement.  The road ahead should be interesting.

Dan

© 2012 Pagan+Politics Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha