The Clinton Legacy
Dec. 26, 2000

As a nation we are moving toward the same political position that most of Europe and much of the world has embraced, the philosophy of socialism. Each generation expects from government more direction, intervention and assistance. Government becomes to them the arbiter and regulator –– the nanny.

More and more the force of government directs what its citizens lives will ultimately be: how far their freedoms will extend, what their institutions will look like, how their businesses are run, and even what moral atmosphere will prevail.

In the long-run government even supplies the definition of "liberty." Even in a nation like ours where our very national character is described by the word "freedom" the direction in which we move is determined by a tiny minority. We have recently had a remarkable example of that in our national presidential election. Five federal judges determined the outcome of the process, and a change in the position of any one of those five could have caused an opposite result. In essence, then, the course of our nation rested on one person.

We like to think of ourselves as a nation governed by laws, not personalities; but the truth is that none of us are convinced of that. Otherwise we would not be so concerned that "our man" be placed in office––especially on the U.S. Supreme Court. In the days of the infamous Warren Court when Chief Justice Earl Warren presided, the most liberal interpretation of the Constitution was espoused, even to the point of revisionism. Judicial activism rose to its zenith, destroying, in the view of Conservatives, the very meaning of the Constitution. Liberals now fear a reversal of their "gains" if conservative judges are appointed. It is evident that it's a foregone conclusion in everyone's mind that personalities rule.

How can any nation be free of such personality rule? The terrible truth is, we can't! It's part of the human fabric. Another fact, perhaps more alarming, is that it is not the finest of our race that find their way into the highest offices and most influential positions. It is most often the exact opposite.

If we are afflicted with severe naivete we may think of our world leaders as men of high degree. Perhaps that's because we think they are the learned, the experienced or the highborn. If they are not royalty they are at least cut from the same cloth. But what does the Bible say? It may surprise you.

Psalm 62:9 "Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity." God apparently esteems our men of high degree more lightly than our men of low degree, whom he calls "vanity." Furthermore, when God humbled Babylon's famous king Nebuchadnezzar, he was sending a message to us. Daniel 7:14, "This matter is by decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will, and setteth up over it the basest of men."

The nation of Israel in its biblical history had a glorious beginning under the pristine leadership of Moses, then Joshua and the Judges until the time of Samuel when Saul was anointed its first king. Under his successor David the kingdom was established and flourished. Under David's son Solomon it peaked and began its descent because of the brilliant, gifted, sensuous––unfortunately––and idolatrous man whose lusts overcame his wisdom. Although he presided over a time of prosperity, his legacy was ruin.

There were good, honest and godly men who later appeared, from time to time, to take the helm of Judah's government. Some managed temporarily to pull the nation out of its death spiral. But they were a minority and were no match for the nation's death wish––its suicidal yearning for the gratification of its basest desires. The people had been trained to enjoy the exhilaration of the thrill of the free-fall––the illusion of freedom the plunge provided. They didn't want to hear warnings about the sudden stop: too negative, too restrictive, too alarmist, too conservative. In all of that long history we learn that there are more fools than wise men in high places. We learn also that the man in charge has tremendous powers of moral influence upon the collective conscience of the nation.

There were people who insisted, and still insist, that character is not an issue in political office as long as the politician does his job. Mr. Clinton ran his early campaign on the slogan, "it's the economy, stupid," and that struck a chord with many voters. It implied that the only important thing was the economy, and as long as that remains good other issues are unimportant. The truth is, however, that there are some things that are more important than the economy, because they are more fundamental. In a materialistic mindset nothing is more important than the material. But that is shortsighted. Economies fluctuate, but the spiritual stability of a people is foundational. What Jesus said about an individual is true also of a nation, "What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul; or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?"

It means a great deal to a nation when its families are intact and when its children have a clear perspective on what is right and what is not. In large part they get this perspective from watching their leaders––first the leaders of their homes, and then the leaders of their nation. They set the pace. What they do is acceptable.

On Dec.19, 2000 newspapers carried a report on a study that made it clear that our children are confused about what constitutes sex. Many adolescents, according to the study, now consider oral sex something that does not count as sex. In 1996, as part of an effort to reduce teen-age pregnancy, congress provided 50 million dollars a year for five years for abstinence-only education. To be eligible for the money, states had to offer programs teaching "abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for school-age children."

In research last year among Midwestern teen-agers twelve through seventeen who had received abstinence education, there was no consensus on what qualified as abstinence. "Health educators themselves are no more clear: a survey last year found that nearly one third believed that oral sex was abstinent behavior," according to the report..

Do you find that appalling? Are those the people that you would choose to present sex education to your 15-year-old? Who, before this time, would have believed such rubbish? Is it because the one who occupies the highest office in the land has set that example publicly? He has changed forever the way many of our young people will look at sexual morality.

The report continued by saying, "Abstinent or not, the public health risks are real. In one region of Georgia, the research report said, a health screening project among middle school students intended to detect meningitis bacteria in the throat, found, to everyone's surprise, that several girls had pharyngeal gonorrhea."

It would seem that even where abstinence is being taught in public government programs, it has nothing to do with the desirability of communicating moral behavior. It has only to do with reducing teen pregnancy and the burden that is placed upon government agencies. Even while such programs are being taught, the educators themselves lack spiritual insight, or even an understanding of moral behavior; and at the top the most influential man in America is putting on a demonstration of what is OK in American culture. His legacy is a horror story; one from which we will recover with great difficulty, if at all.

The men in the highest offices of the land came in with their Bibles under their arms, declaring themselves members of the largest Christian denomination in the land and embracing Marxist political philosophies. They promised us the most ethical administration ever, and then they demonstrated to us that destructive hippie philosophy of the sixties was right. God's commandments don't matter. If the economy is good the displeasure of God is inconsequential. If it feels good, do it.

As a nation we have lost a lot. Our recent experience has been like that of Israel under Ahab and Jezebel. We thank God that it is nearly over, but its consequences will linger, perhaps, for many years, making it difficult for righteousness to prevail. Mr. Clinton's legacy may well be judgment upon our land. Wisdom would dictate that we appeal to God's mercy for our nation, repentance for our people, and great humility, wisdom and spiritual strength for our new administration.

The nation that forgets God will be turned into hell. But blessed is that nation whose God is the Lord.