Likewise, once we’re confident that the Supreme Court won’t create a constitutional right to same-sex “marriage,” we’re still left with the task of preserving the traditional definition of marriage. We still have to persuade people that marriage is more than a private arrangement based on nothing more than mutual affection. If we’re not prepared to do that, then no matter how many justices we get on the Supreme Court, we’re only buying ourselves some time.
Someone who viewed his battles from a long-term perspective was the great Christian abolitionist and parliamentarian William Wilberforce. This perspective enabled him to take setbacks—and there were plenty—in stride. If he lost one skirmish over the abolition of the slave trade, he would learn from it and return better prepared.
And Wilberforce never lost sight of the need to persuade those outside the seat of power. That’s why he distributed literature all through England. So, by the time Parliament banned the slave trade, the people of England were in agreement with him. And Wilberforce would never have allowed the excesses of the twenty-four-hour news cycle to get to him, even if the reported setbacks were real. Neither should we.
Today’s BreakPoint offer: Subscribe today to BreakPoint WorldView magazine! Upcoming issues address global poverty, student ministry, The Chronicles of Narnia, and more! Call 1-877-322-5527.
William J. Stuntz, “Police Powers,” New Republic, 19 July 2005.
Jonathan Chait, “Social Selection,” New Republic, 15 July 2005. (Subscribers only.)
Collin Hansen, “Conservative Religious Groups Praise ‘Originalist’ Roberts Nomination,” Christianity Today, 20 July 2005 .
Ted Olsen, “Weblog: Jane Roberts for Supreme Court Justice!” Christianity Today, 21 July 2005 .
BreakPoint Commentary No. 050708, “Rule of the Clerks: Behind the Scenes at the Supreme Court.”
Kevin Belmonte, Hero for Humanity (NavPress, 2002).
C. John Sommerville, How the News Makes Us Dumb (InterVarsity, 1999).