Friends,
You have probably heard about “Project 2025,” the 900+ page blueprint for bringing about changes in the US Government that was published by the Heritage Foundation. You can read the document here, but, as I said, it is quite long. According to an explanation by Mike Wendling of the BBC, which you can find here, “The document calls for the sacking of thousands of civil servants, expanding the power of the president, dismantling the Department of Education, sweeping tax cuts, a ban on pornography, halting sales of the abortion pill, and more.” While there is some crossover between “Project 2025” and the platforms that were adopted at the recent Republican National Convention, one should note that presidential candidate Trump said this about the document on Truth Social, “I know nothing about Project 2025, … I have no idea who is behind it … I disagree with some of the things they're saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.”
I am making that caveat because it is not my intention to write about specific partisan political positions and I apologize if it seems that I am doing so. However, the issues addressed, the argument presented, and the rhetoric in which they are given in this document are matters of justice and well-being. As a person of faith, and especially as a pastor of a church that is committed to inclusion and justice, I will spend some time over the next few weeks reflecting on some of the arguments and rhetoric that is found there. Let me say again, if you want to read the document for yourself, you can find it here. I do not pretend that I am completely free of bias or perspective on these matters. Far from it. I am addressing “Project 2025” as a person of faith who strives to be biblically informed and justice driven.
The first section is entitled, “A Promise to America,” by Kevin Roberts. Roberts begins with “Promise #1: Restore the Family as the Centerpiece of American Life and Protect Our Children.” Upholding the family and protecting children are laudable goals across every political spectrum as far as I know, but Roberts seems to think otherwise. He argues that the next President “must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke cultural warriors,” namely by deleting the terms “sexual orientation and gender identity (‘SOGI’) diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.”
There is a ton to unpack here, but it is clear that the original goal of "upholding the family" does not include addressing reproductive health, and “family” does not include families with same-sex parents, nor does the goal of “protecting children” apply to families whose children are struggling with their gender identity. In fact, Roberts offers a peculiar definition of “pornography,” arguing that pornography is “manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology….” With that stipulation, think about what it means when he argues, “Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders.” That suggests that a librarian who shelves a book about a family with two moms belongs in the same category as a pedophile, child molester, or teen sex-trafficker.
Even places where one might want to agree with Roberts, such as his warning against the pernicious influence of "Big Tech" on children, one should notice that he specifically focuses on “TikTok,” not “X,” “Instagram,” “Facebook,” or “Truth Social.” Whether the focus away from “X” or "Facebook" is due to Elon Musk's and Peter Thiel's stated support for conservative candidates or not is hard to say. The focus on TikTok clearly plays into his warnings against Chinese espionage, which he weaves hand-in-hand with Wilsonian globalism, the United Nations, the European Union, and the “decidedly anti-human” environmental extremism.
It seems clear that Roberts is not writing to people like me. In fact, it's quite clear that I am among the problematic types he is arguing against. I am particularly appalled that he describes person who are committed to inclusion using the term “cheap grace,” which was made famous by Dietrich Bonhoeffer in a completely different context. But, again, I'm not his audience. Curiously, I find myself echoing former President Trump's words, “I disagree with some of the things they're saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.”
To be continued ...
No comments:
Post a Comment