Conservatives for the oppressed
Upon the death of England’s good King Edward VI in 1553, the Scottish Reformer John Knox confessed his and his nation’s sins. He saw these as related to God’s sudden withdrawal of the blessing of good government. Among other items of repentance, he included “oppression and violence we have not abhorred.” Conservative evangelicals in America need to abhor oppression.
“Oppression” is a word that gets tossed around a lot on the political left, often with dubious justification. But oppression is a political and economic reality. The Bible speaks of it with deep concern and quite often. The Lord “gives justice to the oppressed” (Job 36:6 NKJV). He is a “refuge” for them (Psalm 9:9). Shouldn’t godly government have the same concern? To all His people in their various spheres of life He says, “Is this not the fast that I have chosen: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and that you break every yoke” (Isaiah 58:6)?
Oppression is the inhuman use or cruel treatment of the weak and helpless by the stronger and more secure. It’s the little guy getting mugged in some way by the powerful and well-connected. The left associates oppression with capitalism and with corporations in particular. Evangelicals have become active in fighting the oppression that comes from drug traffickers and sex traffickers. Gary Haugen of International Justice Mission has mobilized a generation of young evangelicals against the beastly evil of human trafficking. But cruelty and injustice may also come from a local employer, a labor union, or a government agency.
Government’s job is to protect everyone’s liberty, but especially those least able to protect themselves. It’s often the poor who suffer oppression, though just because you’re poor does not mean you’re oppressed. The Bible mentions the fatherless, the widow, and the alien. But people of this sort, who are especially vulnerable to oppression, or shall we say, abuse, attract surprisingly little attention from the political class. Whether they are in the liberty-for-all wing of the Republican Party or the social justice camp of the Democratic Party, they all claim to speak for the middle class. But members of the middle class can fend for themselves. Their chief threat comes from government social and economic engineering. No one ever mentions the poor. At best they will speak of “working” people, by which they mean highly protected, unionized employees.
As the party of liberty, human dignity, and the rule of law, the Republican Party should take up the cause of the poor and the oppressed—the little guy, if you will—as the cause of all. If the weakest among us are safe and free, then we’re all safe and free. And conservative evangelicals should lead the way.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top23 Comments to “Conservatives for the oppressed”
Just heard last night of a slave ring that was broken up in England. Here in Canada, last year, they discovered a group of Roma who were brought from Eastern Europe and forced work as slaves: http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/10/08/15626456.html
One oppressed group that gets completely ignored are the children of broken homes. I have several peers who come from shattered families. They have no life skills to be able to break out of the circle of poverty and despair, and are beginning to repeat their parents’ mistakes.
Report comment to moderator
The pro-life movement works to protect those who cannot protect themselves: the unborn, young women in crisis pregnancies, victims of sex trafficking, minors who are being pushed to make decisions that will haunt them the rest of their lives, the disabled who are being threatened with death by starvation, handicapped children who are the targets of euthanasia via abortion…
When someone supporting a Democratic candidate asks me for my support, I ask them whether they protect the right to life. When they stammer and say they don’t, I tell them I can never vote for someone who does not protect the most vulnerable by preserving their most basic civil right – life.
Report comment to moderator
As the party of liberty, human dignity, and the rule of law, the Republican Party should take up the cause of the poor and the oppressed—the little guy, if you will—as the cause of all. If the weakest among us are safe and free, then we’re all safe and free. And conservative evangelicals should lead the way.
Yep, women definitely need to be allowed to lead churches.
Report comment to moderator
And here are some oppressed Christians you guys can cheer for. Just hope they aren’t “driving” through your neighborhood some evening.
(Reuters)Sepember 13 – Eight members of a traditional Amish sect were behind bars on Tuesday after refusing to pay fines for failure to display orange-red safety triangles on their horse-drawn buggies.
The eight were being held in the Graves County Jail, serving sentences ranging between three and 10 days for failing to pay the fines on religious grounds.
Graves District Judge Deborah Hawkins ordered the men jailed Monday in Mayfield, about 200 miles from Louisville in western Kentucky. The defendants contend that paying the fines would amount to complying with a law that violates their religious restrictions against wearing or displaying bright colors or relying upon man-made symbols for their safety.
Graves County Jailer Randy Haley said Tuesday that the men brought Bibles with them when they reported to jail late Monday night and were given dark-colored jumpsuits and sandals to wear instead of the standard orange coveralls. All were placed together in a large holding cell, Haley said.
The Kentucky Court of Appeals denied an appeal of the men’s misdemeanor convictions in June. The case has been appealed to the state Supreme Court, which has not ruled on whether it will hear the case…
And, by the way don’t I recall some rather loud objections on this board about Muslim prisoners being allowed to wear different prison clothes…?
Report comment to moderator
Surprisingly I find little to disagree with in this column.
My wife works for our local Legal Aid office earning a fraction of what she’s make at a private firm. It’s telling that she’s one of the only evangelical believers at her office.
Report comment to moderator
Although I would consider myself conservative, and an evangelical, to single out evangelicals as having become involved in fighting abuse is flagrant arrogance. The truest statement made is that “no one ever mentions the poor”. And then to posture how “we” should take up the cause because “we” are morally superior to “them” is more puffery. The poor weren’t cared for any more during the last administration than this one, even though $800 million was promised during the campaign. As human beings, with any kind of moral compass, everyone on the planet should take up the cause. How did “compassionate capitalism” work for the poor in your neighborhood? This kind of self-promoting commentary just advances divisiveness.
Report comment to moderator
3. Luckily, here, churches are free to decide that for themselves and women are free to join or not join those churches.
Report comment to moderator
kbells: Yep, as long as they really don’t have anything to say except amen.
Report comment to moderator
8. Huh?
Report comment to moderator
If conservatives abhorred oppression and violence, I would be glad to vote with them.
On the strength of this article alone, I just might vote for D. C. Innes. Run, DC, Run.
Sadly, for now we have a conservative movement that cheers the mention of 234 executions or of the uninsured dying young. And that’s just this week. Let’s not get into the whole war and torture thing.
Report comment to moderator
Ok, I try to stay out of US political debates, but twice I’ve seen mention of the Tea Party cheering about the young man dying without insurance. So I looked it up, watched the clip, read the commentary (liberal website). The reports exaggerate. A few people yelled “Yeah” to the provocative question “So would you just let him die?” The cheering was in reply to Ron Paul’s statements about responsibility.
My opinion is from someone who supports a public healthcare system, and doesn’t hold libertarian views.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia – Women who attend churches that only have male leaders do so because they choose to. I don’t want to preach or be a pastor. Ugh, the heavy responsibility, the dealing with the entire congregation’s wants and wishes, the deciding of church business – I go to church to be encouraged and to mingle with other believers, not to work. I also don’t like listening to women preach. The women church leaders that I have heard have been extremely vapid and annoying.
Those women who want to be a pastor have several denominations to choose from, or they could become a nun, which is what one feminist that I met did.
Women have choice in churches. And their speech is not limited to ‘Amen’. We all can sing and talk before and after the service (it is considered bad manners to talk while the pastor is speaking) just like the men. Hey, I’ve even done an Advent reading in my church.
Report comment to moderator
Ditto on the question. The cheering wasn’t what its being made out to be. At the same time, I wish they’d asked a different question. Instead of the dying man being someone with a “good job” who “makes a good wage” I wish it had been someone with a “not so good job” who makes “not so good a wage” and can’t afford private insurance. What to do with that guy would make for more interesting discussion.
When the “good job” guy turns down his subsidized insurance that only costs him $200-300/mo then it’s easy to say he should suffer the consequences of that decision. Because he had real options.
Report comment to moderator
Phos, I agree. From watching the clip and reading a liberal website myself, the reports were greatly exaggerated. Yes, it was out of line for the few that did, but it wasn’t a large group that it was made out to be.
SS, this article is challenging evangelicals to simply do what we are supposed to be doing. That’s not claiming moral superiority. As Christians we do have a high calling and there is nothing arrogant about that.
Report comment to moderator
“When the “good job” guy turns down his subsidized insurance that only costs him $200-300/mo then it’s easy to say he should suffer the consequences of that decision. Because he had real options.”
Kinda like the guy that buys a sports car but doesnt wear his seat belt?
Someone still needs to explain to me, how INSURANCE, saves anyone?? Numbers please??
Report comment to moderator
“Sadly, for now we have a conservative movement that cheers the mention of 234 executions or of the uninsured dying young. And that’s just this week. Let’s not get into the whole war and torture thing.”
I’ll trade you the 234 and the rare handful of uninsured dying young for the 50 million dead from abortion.
Sound good?
Report comment to moderator
Least one, the basis of the article makes a moral distinction between the “left” and the “right”. The “left” is castigated, while the evangelicals are touted as fighting oppression. That is arrogant. It is the antithesis of Christ breaking down barriers while he walked on the earth. His speaking to the woman at the well, and all the other counter-culture demonstrations he made to challenge the established religion are in direct contrast to the tone and central message of this article, which says, we’re better than they are. That is what Christ scoffed at…the Pharisee that prayed, “oh Lord, don’t let me be like that guy”. This isn’t simply a challenge to do what we are supposed to do, it’s claiming superiority. That’s arrogance. And while I’m not a scholar or student of scripture, as the author probably is, I’d bet money that you can’t find this kind of language in our Holy text. The lumping together of a group’s mindset is racist, and makes it all the easier to be dismissive of anyone you choose to label as someone holding a different view than yourself. That’s arrogant. The 12 Christ chose didn’t come from the the “good” people. There isn’t any Beatitudinal language that says, “don’t be like them”. The article contrasts being an evangelical with those on the right…the underlying message being, you can’t be both. That’s arrogant and preposterous. Christ engaged one on one, irrespective of their place, and even marveled at the Centurians faith. My encouragement would be to not think so highly of our “enlightened” position. I don’t believe you could find many on the right that say they want to promote oppression. We may not agree with their methods, but let’s not dehumanize them to the point of being sub-human. In Yancy’s “Dissapointment WIth God” he tells of his own experience of flying often for 20 years. On every flight, he asks the person next to him, “what comes to mind when you hear the words evangelical christian”. Cold, ostracizing, unaccepting, judgmental,and on and on. Never once has he heard any terms that have anything to do with love, come close to mirroring Christ’s behavior. That’s how we are perceived. So let’s get off our damn high horse and spend our energies serving, rather than pointing the finger at the other guys and casting stones.
Report comment to moderator
So let’s get off our damn high horse and spend our energies serving, rather than pointing the finger at the other guys and casting stones.
Please do. You seem to be the one riding the tallest horse at the moment. Feel free to dismount at any time and get your hands grimy with the various works of ministry. The ‘ministry’ of generalized criticism is overstaffed at the moment.
Report comment to moderator
@#16 THORN
Thank for bringing that up. It amazes me how liberals against the death penalty ar e indifferent to the abortion of millions of preborn babies who have done NOTHING immoral. It’s cruel to reward the evil and punish the innocent.
Such heartless hypocrisy to often expressed by liberals is one of the reasons why I became a conservative.
Report comment to moderator
@THORN
One more thing. Here is a timely quote from Charles Evers (brother of Medger Evers), which sheds light on why he left the Democrats and become a Republican:
“Democrats give low-down, dirty criminals endless legal appeals. Brutal criminals must be cut down quick. Think that isn’t Christian? Then do something Christian for the man’s victims.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/08/lets-kill-racism-forever-put-naacp-out-business#ixzz1YEQk9O1F“
Report comment to moderator
Phos, although this thread wouldn’t support the notion, I too make it a point to refrain from engaging in political debate. Thorn, very interesting post… Evers is in a position to know, I’m not, but I like the first line of the last paragraph and the first half of the second….”I say let’s all climb out of poverty and vote whatever political party serves our needs. Let’s kill racism dead…”. Okay Debra. I can conclude the same if the author’s comments aren’t considered criticism. Perhaps more to your point though, I look pretty foolish criticizing arrogance arrogantly. So, I stand down and apologize for any offense caused by the obvious hypocrisy. Since you asked, I founded a NPO that offers life-skills assessment, job training, entrepreneurship development and micro-enterprise incubation to the low-wealth in our community who want to pursue self-sustainability. The model we are using has metrics that show a 50% reduction in federal assistance after a year in the program, a 78% small business survival rate after 5 years and that for each dollar we invest the community benefits $3.80. I’m also part of our widow’s ministry. One of Tim Keller’s books claims that the white conservative church (of which I’m a member) has thrown the baby out with the bath water with respect to the poor and that his statistics support that only 1/6th of those receiving aid are able-bodied and would rather game the system and collect a check than work. Yancy’s comments still haunt me. I understand the pendulum has swung the other way now, and the only group it’s a acceptable to be intolerant of is evangelical conservatives. I would just like us to own some of the reputation the group we belong to has collectively help build. That doesn’t mean embracing someone else’s immoral ideology but to respond in humility, unlike how I did.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you for the gracious response, SS. The stats on your NPO are impressive–particularly the small business survival rate, which is a monumental feat in itself.
If Yancy’s expereince has caused you to do some soul searching and more fully put into practice your relationship with Christ, then it’s a good thing. But reputation is a funny thing, in that it can be earned, and it can also be manipulated. In general, I don’t think it’s helpful to be self-flagellating over failures–the enemy of our souls has that more than covered. It’s better to encourage each other in spiritual growth and good works, as you have done….and as D.C. Innes does in this article. ;–)
Be well.
Report comment to moderator
#21
ss,
I like your approach, individuals helping their community, rather than the big government approach.
For you, it’s not just “a job”.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!