1. Galadriel says:

    While I understand the importance of being civically involved—and I plan to vote–I try to stay away from it as much as possible. The lack of civility and manners really turns me off.

  2. Kerry says:

    Thanks for commenting, Galadriel.

    I agree with you. Having an honest discussion about many issues these days seems to be next to impossible. (Though from what I’ve read, things in the past weren’t much better.)

    This is sad in many ways. The American Constitution and the form of governance it represents is a gift. A type of government where anyone can have a voice, and contribute–a rarity in human history. It is a shame that it so often comes to shouting and name-calling.

    But even that is better than blind submission and tyranny.   

    • Kerry:

      (Though from what I’ve read, things in the past weren’t much better.)

      Anyone want to join in?

      Ma! Ma! Where’s my Pa? Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!

      Galadriel:

      The lack of civility and manners really turns me off.

      Yet this is precisely what makes for great storytelling — robust debate, even meanness, and “honest” even if nasty rhetoric. I wonder even that if we endorsed more of this in our fiction, news anchors and media would not feel the need to go for such dramatics. Or it could just make the incivility worse. I’m not sure.

      At the same time, some of the loudest voices calling for “civility” in public discourse merely want to discourage it in their opponents, while reserving this right for themselves and their allies. I am thus more skeptical of their rhetoric.

      Hot political rhetoric is like hot sauce. It’s great to sprinkle on meals of substance and flavor of their own. But you’d be foolish to drink directly from the bottle.

      Kerry:

      But even that is better than blind submission and tyranny.

      Yes indeed. And if the controversial “lesser of two evils” phrase and definition is troublesome, I like to think of it like this: if God allowed, or appointed as a nation’s ruler, anyone better than the “lesser of two evils,” we would be even more tempted to give honor to that person rather than to Christ as permanent Ruler.

  3. Lauren says:

    Wow! This has given me a lot of material think about for my own stories.  I’ve always love politics, but I’m never quite sure how to work that into the story without being too distracting, or making it stand out too much.
     
    I know it jars me out of the story if I’m reading along and then think, “Oh! The author is talking about modern/current political debates.” (Unless, of course, that’s an expected part of the story.) 
     
    I think what’s important is too boil it down to core issues, ones that transcend current debates.

    Just curious, did you really meet Ronald Reagan? How awesome!

  4. Kerry says:

    Hi Lauren! Thanks for stopping by. I’m glad you found something useful in what i wrote. Yes, find the issues that move you, and pour that into your story.  Amazing things will happen. 🙂

    I was within five feet of Reagan at that speech. A very neat thing to be a part of. It was right before his second term of office. 

    To add another bit of irony, my wife’s grandfather–a retired Major General–used to work with Reagan and Bush Senior. Has pictures of himself with them. It is very cool. I get to hear his stories. He has a unique perspective on many of our past presidents. 🙂

  5. Lauren:

    I think what’s important is too boil it down to core issues, ones that transcend current debates.

    Kerry:

    [… F]ind the issues that move you, and pour that into your story.  Amazing things will happen.

    Frank Peretti has perhaps done this very well, at least in his 1991 novel Prophet. He himself believes the “issue of abortion” took over that story (according to a 1997 interview in World Magazine). I respectfully disagree. Yet either way, the issues of abortion and how the news media alter, repackage, and skew Truth were very central to that novel’s themes — yet Peretti fleshed them out organically, showing how they affected people, not just movements. And with nary an angel or demon in sight.

    • Kerry says:

      I respected Frank for the way he described the media’s handling of the abortion issue. Even though I was pro-life when I read it, it was the first time I encountered the idea that the media was controlling the debate, and painting pro-lifers in a certain way to further their own agenda. Made me wonder if that was true…

      Then a few years later I met someone who had been part of the early pro-life movement, and I found out that it was absolutely true. He told me how his group would be sitting peacefully on one side of the street, holding hands, singing “Kumbaya” together, while on the other side the pro-abortion folks would be screaming and spitting. The news would show the pro-abortion folks and label them as being pro-life. 

      There is alot of wisdom in that Benjamin Franklin saying:  Believe none of what you hear, and half of what you see.

    • D.M. Dutcher says:

      Peretti actually covered abortion before. He did an audio drama called “Tilly” which was reproduced as a standalone novella. I’m not sure how well it holds up now, as I read it when I was a young teen. 

      I can’t think of many Christian novels that screamed “politics” to me. A lot did end times, but I’ve not seen too many that dealt with the purely political part of life. Like what duties a Christian owes the government, what a Christian-dominated society would look like politically, or what have you.  Knox’s irregulars by J. Wesley Bush tackled it a little, with his future Calvinist society sort of like Starship Troopers. There wasn’t much reflection on it, but it did pretty well, although maybe a little cross-purpose since some of that world’s policies would not sit well even with Christians.

What do you think?