The Last She's Right Post, Ever

I think it is time that I leveled with you about why I do not condemn other people who are not following God's laws. Sure, I couch it in terms of non-judgmentalness and encouraging a personal relationship with God, that each person needs to work our their life with God, not to be told what to do by some legalistic religious guidelines, but who am I kidding? Even I know that there are some truths that cannot be denied about what it is that the God of the Bible wants us to do (or not do).

Not that I don't believe those other things; I most certainly do.

The reason that I do not take it upon myself to tell other people what God wants them to do is that I do not always do what God asks of me, at least, not always at first. Sometimes I am stubborn. It's not just atheists that do not want to bow down. It can be hard for good little Christian women like myself, too.

And let's face it, when it comes down to it, which is worse? A non-believer having pre-marital sex or a firm believer disobeying what she has openly admitted to herself God is telling her to do? Unfortunately for me, it's the latter.

So, that's why I tend to stay away from the holier-than-thou condemnation of other people's sins. I think I read something about that somewhere.

Why am I telling you this? For a while now, quite some while, I have known that I need to put politics on the back burner. When I say "needed," I mean God wanted me to. I am not saying that this is one of those absolute truths. This was an individual thing. God wanted me to take a breather from politics.

I complied right away. I finished out my term as City Chair of the Republican Committee and then I resigned. I have not run for office, despite being lobbied several times for different offices from members of two political parties, and a deep passion to do so.

Where I went wrong was that I replaced my previous involvement, as a political party activist and candidate, with my current involvement, as a political blogger and government access TV show host.

I don't think that political blogging is wrong, or that I need to give it up completely, but I know that I need to bring what I am doing with this blog to a close.

I have prayed about this situation for quite some time, even though I was pretty sure about what I needed to do. I am not about to give up something I love doing, unless I am sure that I have to. I flat out said to God, "If you want me to stop doing She's Right, I am going to need you to be very clear about it. I need a real sign."

So, being struck with a mysterious cold that made me feel dizzy every time I sat at the computer wasn't clear enough. I still blogged.

A freak knee injury that left me unable to sit at the computer wasn't enough, either. I still blogged.

It wasn't until my husband set up the laptop for me to blog from bed and it died on me, that I started to get the point. When my husband came home and looked at the computer, he could not figure it out. He tried a number of things, but it would not even load the operating system.

I told him to forget it because I knew it was the sign I was looking for, I need to stop doing She's Right.

When he later came back to the computer to try and fix it, it worked fine. There was no sign of a problem.

I know that is not enough to convince you skeptics, but I think it takes more faith to call that a coincidence than it would to say that God gave me my sign.

Anyway, I am not giving up blogging. I am just moving away from the political blogging, but not entirely. Politics is something I love to talk about. My new blog will have some political posts.

At first, I was just going to combine my homeschooling/crafting blog with this one, but I didn't want to blog with such an in your face blog title. I felt like I needed to start anew.

I can't say what my new blog will look like. Well, I can say what it will physically look like, since it is already up. I just don't know what direction it will take.

I do know it will not be She's Right.

It makes me sad to say goodbye to those of you who will not like the new blog, but as those deeply thought-provoking lyricists in Semisonic said, "Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end."

The new blog will be more about homeschooling than this one, since, well, this one was not about homeschooling at all. I am also going to talk more about my personal faith, as well as recipes, crafting, and family life.

I will still keep up with current events and politics and post on those topics, too. It just will not define the blog, as it has this one.

So, now that you are wondering if this post will ever end, it is.

Check out my new blog: All Things Hold Together.

The most recent post, as of writing this, is very reminiscent of the style of this blog. You might like it. Hey, I'm still the same woman!

Thank you all for making this such a great experience. I appreciate every reader and every comment. Well, almost every comment.

Take care and may God bless you in all that you do.

(Even you, JD. Just because you don't believe in Him, doesn't mean He doesn't love you.)

PS: I will still be doing the She's Right show monthly (the third Friday) on Channel 17, at least for now. I will put up a simple website at ShesRight.org with upcoming show info, related links, and podcasts, etc, as soon as I get a chance. (Right now that URL leads here.)

How much freedom will we give away for a dollar?

Er..make that 3.7 million dollars, I guess.

Two of my favorite Vermont bloggers share their perspectives on the primary enforcement seatbelt law being considered (i.e. they get to pull you over just for not having a seatbelt on).

Jeff Soyer weighs in at Alphecca.
As does Geoffrey Norman at Vermont Tiger.

Take a look.

President Wright

Jack over at Green Mountain Daily was wondering why the Burlington Dems elected Republican Kurt Wright as City Council President.

Well, let's ask them. Democrat Ed Adrian of ward 1 had this to say:

Adrian explained why he is voting for Wright in a message he posted on the Buell Street Neighborhood Forum. He said Wright, a state representative as well as councilor, has more experience than Ashe, would offer a balance to the Progressive administration of Mayor Bob Kiss, would be fair, would be unable, as one of just three Republicans on the council, to "stack" council committees, and, Adrian pointed out, Democrats, even with five of them on the council, don't have a candidate for president this year.

Jack makes the common mistake of assuming that the Democrats and Progressives are part of the same team. That might be true often on state issues and even more so on national issues, but the truth is, the Democrats, Republicans, and Progressives all have distinctly different visions for this city.

If the Democrats had elected a Progressive to lead the City Council, that would have given a notable advantage to the Progressive agenda.

City politics in Burlington is a strange beast. It gives new meaning to the phrase "politics makes strange bedfellows." There are no clear lines and most issues are decided by unexpected coalitions.

Electing Wright will not give any kind of advantage to the Republicans, who occupy only 3 out of 14 city council seats. It was a smart move, giving the Democrats more influence than electing Ashe would have.

What strikes me about this is the inability of state Democrats to get the city Dems to vote for Ashe. The Free Press report claims that they tried to do so. Obviously they failed.

That is not unlike the legislative experience of the Democratic leadership in Montpelier, which cannot seem to accomplish anything it set out to do, despite having a veto-proof majority in both chambers.

I have to wonder how a party with complete legislative control in the bluest state in the nation cannot seem to get anything done.

I have my own theory, but you are going to have to wait to hear it...

Who Decides?

Did you read the story about the case in Texas where the hospital wants to discontinue treatment for a 17-month-old terminally ill child against the unanimous wishes of the family?

I am not going to retell it, but you can read it here.

There are so many angles to this story, I almost don't know where to start.

In the WaPo story, it says,

Texas's six-year-old "futile-care" law is one of two in the country that allow a hospital's ethics committee to declare the care of a terminally ill patient to be of no benefit and to discontinue care within a certain time frame.

At the risk of sounding stupid, how can treatment that is keeping a person alive be seen as having "no benefit"? Isn't living in and of itself a benefit?

I find it disturbing that the decision to end life support has been taken away from the family. It is now up to a medical ethics team to determine the value of an individual's life.

How will this play out when our health care system is government-run? When there isn't enough money to fund universal healthcare, which history (and the present) shows us will be the case, will euthanasia against the wishes of the family become standard practice for all lives that the ethicists consider unworthy?

This is really not a question of whether or not this child's life should be sustained. Sure, that can be discussed and debated. I cannot say what I would do in this situation and, God willing, I will never have to find out.

The issue here is who gets to make the decision about when to end the life of a child. And what the consequences of the answer to that question will be.

She's Blogging

Woo, hoo! My husband, who is totally awesome, by the way, set up his laptop in our room, so I could blog in bed, while my knee recovers. I am completely bored in here; I hate daytime TV (we don't have cable channels), I can't really get into a book with three wild boys running around, and there are only so many things I can crochet before I go crazy, so this is cool.

I am going through serious news and blog withdrawal, so I need to read for a while before I blog. I just wanted you all to know that I will post later today.

I have been thinking lately about the whole America was founded on Christian principles vs. No, you people are rewriting history debate that has been going on for who knows how long. I never really thought much about it because I didn't see how it was relevant.

I think I want to look at this issue more in depth. Was America founded on Christian principles? If so, does this matter and how would it be relevant to today? More importantly, how is having a nation grounded in Christian principles different from a "theocracy," as the left likes to claim is the real goal of this movement. (It's not, by the way.)

This is not what I will post about today. I need to educate myself first. I just wanted to put it out there and invite you to make comments about it and/or leave links on this topic.

I have plenty of other topics to blog about and half-written posts to complete to keep me busy for today.

Carnival of Principled Government

I am sorry that the posting has been so light lately. I injured my knee last Monday and it usually hurts to sit at the computer. It didn't help that I was up so much on Sunday, with church and hosting Easter dinner for my family.

The third Carnival of Principled Government is up. Check it out.

I have to run. It's my birthday and my husband and kids are about to bring out a cake for me. I guess I should be there!

The God Debate

Hi blog readers. I hope you all had a great weekend. I am just too wiped out from a busy weekend to blog right now, but I wanted to put up a link to a discussion between Rick Warren and Sam Harris.

The God Debate

It's kind of long, but I thought it was interesting. If you're into that sort of thing.

Happy Monday!

Happy Good Friday

Try as I might, I just can't seem to get myself interested in blogging about politics today. With Easter two days away, I just don't feel like the political griping is all that important. It's kind of hard to find the significance in such triviality on the day we remember that Jesus died for us.

Have a wonderful Easter weekend!

And if you really miss me, you can always stop over at Crafty Mama's Homeschool and read my Easter recipes and last minute craft ideas that I will be posting throughout the day today.

It's About Principles

clipped from vermontsnarkyboy.blogspot.com It’s about principles, you idiots. Say it. Do it. And believe it. And as George Bush has tragically shown, people will actually vote for that kind of consistency. Moreover, voters will NOT vote for a crew that says they want to solve health care and then won’t even introduce legislation to address it; that says they believe Bush has trashed the Constitution and committed high crimes and misdemeanors against the people but won’t allow impeachment resolutions to even have a vote (Thanks, Gaye); that talk about high school taxes but throw a party when they get so much as a hint that they can “go slow” on the issue; that talks a tough game at election time about stopping the war but then vote to give the same president they’ve called a criminal more than $120 billion to just carry on.

I clipped this from Snarky Boy (see blogroll) the other day, but never got around to blogging it. This clipmarks thing is very cool.

This snippet reminded me of something I heard on some TV news talk show that I don't know the name of, said by someone who I also don't know the name of. That was helpful, huh?

What was said was that Republicans tend to vote for someone who stands firmly on principles - even when they don't agree with the principles - rather than vote for someone who changes with the political winds.

Interesting, I thought.

Last election, there was a lot of unrest on the right. Many right-wing commentators, this blogger included, were disillusioned with the GOP because they failed to stick to their principles.

There is little doubt in my mind that the Democrats will do (are doing) the same thing. I wonder who people will vote for then.

Perhaps the GOP rebirth is closer than we think.

Carnival of Principled Government

Argh! I have a couple of good semi-composed blog posts that I am dying to finish, but I hurt my knee really badly yesterday and I am going to be spending most of the day away from the computer.

Hopefully, I will get a chance to blog later. Maybe I can have my husband set up his laptop so I can blog in bed (the ultimate luxury), if he comes home from work this afternoon.

Fear not, I have a great link to occupy your time. The blog Principled Discovery has started a Carnival of Principled Government.

In celebration of Liberty Day, coming up March 16, 2007, Principled Discovery will be hosting its very own blog carnival: The Carnival of Principled Government. Entries should uphold the founding principles of the United States, either directly or indirectly and may focus on historic or current events, trends or ideas. The specific principles are outlined in the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers and our other founding documents. The basic principles are:

Representational government
Unalienable rights (life, liberty, property)
Limited government
Local control
Personal responsibility

This isn't exhaustive. My readers who also use the Principle Approach will undoubtedly think of several (at least seven) and they are all relevant.

For anyone who does not normally read this blog and is unsure where I am coming from, this entry probably best summarizes my views on the relationship between the individual and the state as conceived by our founders.

The 2nd Carnival of Principled Government, Axioms of a Free Society was posted last week. Check it out.

Free-Market Environmentalism

This was originally published 3/30/07 at 5:18 PM, which was Friday evening, so I bumped it up to the top of the blog.

I want to talk about the environment. This is one of those issues that really shouldn't be partisan, so I want to explore why, I think, it is.

I think there are a couple of factors at work here. The most obvious is that the people who tend to be active in the environmental movement also tend to have other views that are at odds with the conservative movement. Many conservatives, this blogger included, tend to eye the environmental movement with a great deal of suspicion that it is a front for imposing anti-business, anti-capitalist, anti-freedom, and anti-progress legislation, among other things. (Funny how those folks are often called progressive.)

I am personally much more environmentally conscience than most conservatives that I know, including my own husband. I will have to admit, though, that most of it started out with my own benefit in mind, not the collect good of the environment.

I use all natural dish soap, laundry soap, cosmetics, shampoos, household cleaners, even bug repellent (Burt's Bees. It works awesome and smells like herbal tea). I garden organically, buy organically raised, hormone-free meats, rBST-free milk (since way before it was popular), and stuff like that. Those things are for my health, though. I am, as my sister calls it, freakishly sensitive to environmental contaminants.

When I started living like that, though, I started to realize how harmful chemicals, pesticides, and cleaners are to the environment. I also started to realize how important it is to be aware of not only what we put into our bodies, but also what we put into our environment.

It has raised my level of awareness about how anything I do will affect the planet.

Since everyone is affected by what others do to the environment, I think this is more than just a personal issue, but I do not think is warrants a heavy-handed government solution.

As people are becoming more environmentally aware and more people are calling for environmentally friendly products, the market is providing solutions. That is what the left does not seem to get about the free-market - we control it with our buying power.

The anti-business brigade always says that all big corporations care about is money, but they never seem to stop and think about where that money comes from - consumers.

If we all put our money where our mouths are, so to speak, and buy environmentally friendly products, we will see strange things start to happen. Before we know it, every grocery store will have a natural foods section - wait, that already happened. Kellogg's will start making organic cereal - wait, that already happened, too. Okay, well, before you know it, I will be able to buy organic cotton pajamas for my kids at Wal-Mart - oh, man! That already happened, too.

The key is educating people and convincing them to buy "green" products, not for the government to legislate personal behavior. (Now, why does that phrase sound familiar?)

To be continued...

PS, that Wal-Mart link is a great read.

Note: I just Googled "Free-Market Environmentalism" after I published this and found that it has a whole Wikipedia page! (I haven't read it yet.) Can I ever coin a new phrase? Sheesh!

Okay, it's a book, too. Man, I really need to read more!