Secession wouldn’t seem wise; it would seem like a move in the wrong direction. I still maintain that the idea, in principle, is worthy of discussion. In one respect, it’s not all that dissimilar to what Southern Baptists did a generation ago: wisely use the political apparatus at hand to effect change.

The devil, with this plan, will be in the details, of course.

There’s one other twist to this story, however, that I don’t think was touched on three years ago, at least not in this post. In addition to having a voice in the South Carolina state government and attempting to nominate and elect candidates that share his views, Burnell eventually plans for his group to secede from the United States to form its own Christian republic. That’s right, I said secede. Still think this is an idea whose time has come?

1. An “enclave”? Did I miss something?

2. Conceded…merely making a point.

3. I’m not altogether certain what you mean by your last sentence of this idea, but sure, I’ll grant you didn’t suggest that they were acting nefariously.

4. This doesn’t seem radical, to pack up and move in an attempt to help change the direction of the country? Well…I suppose that, contrasted to 9/11 or an assault on Washington, it’s not “radical”, but contrasted to the half-measures that others are trying, I’d say it qualifies. But that’s much ado about words; a greater concern I have is that you lapse, in this point, into a utilitarian mode. It may or may not succeed; I share a healthy degree of skepticism myself over the end result. But there are many things that we might attempt to do as Christ-followers, and/or as committed constitutionalists, which might be seen as tilting at windmills. Do we never try them because they stand a high chance of failure? Do we not, for instance, attempt to amend the Constitution to avoid the lunacy of “gay marriage” simply because the odds aren’t very high in our favor?

5. Fair enough, but I think that this misses the point: we should do what we can to be “salt and light”, and while you think that this leads us AWAY from being such, it seems to me that the argument could be made that this is an attempt to more effectively do just that: be salt and light. Now…they are not advocating, as I said earlier, that EVERYONE move to South Carolina, and if they were, I’d be more concerned; they are not suggesting that a Christian can’t be “on board” if they don’t move there. I’d be concerned as well with this. What they’re doing is martialling a contingent of sufficient size to seek change in a way that they feel is God-honoring and constitutionally-correct.

Bottom line: Disagree wholeheartedly. “Culture of victimhood”, and “whining”? Not from where I sit. It seems clear that the Constitution is being trampled, and has been for some time. It is clear that our culture is going down the tubes morally. What ought our response be? Is this not A valid option? What it isn’t, from my vantage point, is “whining”, because instead of cursing the darkness—which many of us are pretty good at—these folks are trying to light a candle. It might be a pipe dream, but at least they’re doing something to try to fix the situation.

I’m not jumping on their bandwagon just yet, but I think that they raise some interesting points for discussion—so far, that’s what’s happening between us, right?

And why don’t you ever respond to one of my posts to AGREE with me, for goodness’ sake??? I’m almost always right, you know!