Welcome to Lamp Lit.
Your comments are always welcome.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Uncle Tom's Cabin

Incapable of putting my thoughts into words, I have mused on Harriet Beecher Stowe's poignant masterpiece for several weeks. What can be added to her expose' of such a grim era?

Lincoln is quoted as having commented upon meeting Stowe, "So this is the little lady who started this great war."

If it is possible that you are completely unfamiliar with Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe, then in short the novel is a tale of the antebellum south, slavery, pride, and pain. An ever omniscient point of view puts the reader into the mind and motive of the slaves, the free, children, aged, poor, and wealthy all playing a part in the quagmire of an economy and way of life dependent on the subjugation of mankind by his neighbor.

From the perspective of a contemporary, Stowe draws the reader into her novel with piercing pleas for sympathy. The story is frequently punctuated by addresses to the audience such as her depiction of Tom on the night of finding he is to be sold away from his wife and boys:

"He leaned over the back of the chair, and covered his face with his large hands. Sobs, heavy, hoarse, and loud, shook the chair, and great tears fell through his fingers on the floor: just such tears, sister, as you dropped into the coffin where lay your first-born son; such tears, woman, as you shed when you heard the cries of your dying babe. For, Sir, he was a man, ---and you are but another man. And, woman, though dressed in silk and jewels, you are but a woman, and, in life's great straits and mighty griefs, ye feel but one sorrow!"

The agenda of this book needs no epilogue for clarification. Though driven heavily by emotional appeal, the force and purpose of the book are nonetheless consistent and, in a word, Christian.

The characters are realistically drawn on the canvas of imagination. Both static and dynamic characters brush through the pages providing flesh for the stereotypes. The static, prototypical, cruel master found in the character of Simon Legree lives up to the debased standard of wretchedness, and indeed fails to find grace in the eyes of the author. Only a moment's flicker of conscience is allowed for such a brute who is ultimately punished greater than all of Stowe's creations, being damned to the fires of hell, skids greased by his mind numbing alcoholism.
The death of Tom's previous master Augustine St. Clare is a different tale altogether. St. Clare who had lived a similarly godless existence, but with a morality the polar opposite of Legree, is permitted to reach out for grace on his death bed, and the prayers of Tom lead St. Clare on a final journey of peace.

A novel obviously says as much about the author as it does about the subject matter. Indeed, this particular book does also, so much so that one could imagine feeling at ease chatting and discussing the characters with the lady who conceived them.

For me, the most impressive characters lie in Eva, and her father St. Clare. As a father of 2 daughters, the young Eva (Evangeline) embodies the 2 blonde haired gifts of conscience I know all too well. How her innocence struck at the heart of the issues at hand and proved a catalyst for hope in the lives of her negro friends. And I shed tears over her part of this tale.
I certainly sympathized most with the kindly yet austere Augustine St. Clare. I envisioned myself in his plight, and struggled to see how I might have lived any differently. His perspective on life and candid nature were kindred to my own. Of all the lines in the book, the one I remember is that spoken by him to his somewhat self-righteous cousin from the North. When pressed to give his honest impression of the slavery dilemma, he retorted:
"I am one of the sort that lives by throwing stones at other people's
glass houses, but I never mean to put up one for them to stone."
I'm afraid my cynicism found a kindred spirit in Augustine St. Clare.

This is a classic literary work that though highly criticized at its inception, will have my voice join the choir of its proponents. There are only a few books which I feel should be required reading for any young person. This is one of them.

It could be tempting to imagine that the raw power of this work was spent on an era that was healed long ago. Shame on us for thinking that its didacticism is now impotent since the Emancipation Proclamation and 13th amendment. The abolition of southern slaves hardly brought about a universal abolition of the slave trade. It is said that today more humans are enslaved than at any other time in history.

The themes of justice, love, honor, purity, honesty, and a pure and undefiled religion are timeless. And, only a fool would say that bigotry, subjugation, and cruelty have been eradicated from humanity. On the contrary, the battle for morality is harder fought and the battle lines no less clear for us in this century than they were for those in the past.

Saturday, June 4, 2011

PRA vs. UNCRC Part 3 - So Let's Talk About It

By now you should have read Part 1 & 2 of this discussion...

To be very clear - We are completely in favor of protecting children. Absolutely. However, based on statements from socially left-leaning policy makers, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Treaty is obviously being staged as a battering ram to be used against the "traditional" family, ultimately harming the very children they want to protect!

So, if the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) Treaty is indicative of a problem, then what is our proposed solution?

Good question.

Ingeniously, some of the foremost thinkers in "Christian" legal circles have proposed a constitutional amendment to secure the rights of fit parents. The PRA or Parental Rights Amendment has been drafted with the intent of heading off the what many see as a critically dangerous trend toward state control over the functions of the family. You must visit their site or an array of others and study the arguments yourself, as that is not the point of this posting. However, I've quoted the following from their site...

The only kind of law that can override a treaty is the Constitution of the United States. State laws or state constitutions cannot override treaties. There is no guarantee that federal statutes could override treaties—moreover, we enter a binding legal promise to obey a treaty when we ratify it. America should not promise to obey a treaty and then claim it is appropriate to obey the treaty only when we want to. America of all nations must respect the rule of law.

There is only one possible solution for the eroding support for parental rights in the Supreme Court that can also stop the encroachment of international law.

We need to place the time-honored test of parental rights, as recognized by the Supreme Court for over seventy years, into the explicit text of the Constitution.

We cannot wait until our rights are formally demolished. We must act now to stop international law and protect these two key principles:

· Fit parents should be allowed to direct the upbringing of their children.

· American legislators, not international tribunals, should make the public policy for America on families and children.



In a nutshell that is the point of the amendment. But there is a problem. Who knows, or worse yet, who cares? I haven't seen any related banners, billboards, or television commercials. Who is getting out the word, and is the communication effective?

I recently attended a seminar co-sponsored by associates of the Parental Rights crowd, where the precious and spirited Beverly LaHaye spoke. Among the topics she broached was the downward spiral of our society. (Granted, this is nothing new.) She claimed that the largely uncontested and underestimated battles against prayer in school, and for homosexual marriage were the elephants in the room 20-30 years ago. No one cared to address them; those that did obviously failed to light up the night; thus, here are those pachyderms stampeding our children today. She made the clear point that we have another elephant in the room.

I agree with her that we need to step up and recognize the tusks, ears, and huge piles covered with flies for what they are. Unfortunately that same seminar, which spent much time on this very issue, sent me away with an ironic dilemma:

How do we communicate our concerns to our friends and neighbors? I'm a Christian and have many Christian friends who will understand my Biblical reasons for opposing the UNCRC. However, there are simple common sense reasons for more than just my Christian friends to become active in this fight. A united effort is essential for the PRA to pass.

In this series of posts, that question has been the foundation for my writing. How do we communicate this need? I respect the ParentalRights.org crowd deeply, but at this point they preach to the choir. In order to get a Parental Rights Amendment signed, we need to move out of the pulpit and into the public. What is preached to the choir will be disregarded by those less inclined to sing. I believe that our manner and tone must be different when communicating outside traditional Christian circles. And, though fear and sensationalism are fine for the media, we frankly weary of the emotion, and that certainly isn't the tack we want to take.

For example, do we think that the authors of the CRC had the undermining of the US justice system, the US family, and the Christian faith in mind when composing that document? Possibly, but not likely just like that, or at least not in that order. So why would we attack the treaty as if that was the intent of the treaty? I don't think we should.

Here are some words / concepts that I think may help us reach a broader audience with regard to the UNCRC...

Expensive.
Misguided.
Tedious.
Irrelevant.
Superfluous.
Waste - in regard to our legislators' time.
Excessive burden on already over-burdened social workers.

Likewise, here are some words / concepts that may help our audience understand the importance of the PRA...

Timing.
Morality.
Judicial indiscretion.
Family autonomy.

Diplomacy is not just for diplomats. These views must be communicated and not just preached. Preaching is what is emitted from bumper stickers, while communication must involve your time.

But then, what good is knowing what to say if we choose not to speak? On May 3rd I attended a Holocaust Memorial Service at Temple Sinai in Oakland, CA and was reminded by one of the speakers of the famous Edmund Burke quote - "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Interestingly, the actual origin of that quote has not been discovered, though some suspect that it rises from Burke's Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents, "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

Either way it is speaks to us today. It speaks to this issue.

Action Steps:
  • The PRA website has a great page that lays out how to help in this fight.
  • Start talking about it!
  • We will try to keep this issue alive here at Lamp Lit. Please let us know your thoughts, ideas, or observations.