Who is shaping the future of America? What is the future of America? Do people even care anymore? Or, are Americans more interested in who will win the next American Idol competition more than what type of world we are heading towards?
It seems almost as if it has become “uncool” to even think and have an opinion anymore. Our society has become so lethargic and indifferent to certain realities that one could say that America is suffering from “reality avoidance”.
I remember years ago sitting in Economics class while in undergraduate school. I distinctly remember learning about what is called “diseconomies of scale”. It is a very interesting and very real thing that can happen to a large corporation. And, I believe it can also happen to the Body of Christ. It could be coined a “spiritual diseconomies of scale”.
First, let’s look at what is known as diseconomies of scale in regards to an industry functioning within our capitalist economy. Let’s imagine a large corporation that has 100,000 employees here in the U.S. With an organization of this size it is extremely important to keep track of what everyone is doing in order to prevent duplication and even outright competition between the various and different departments of such organization. When such a breakdown does occur, that is, duplication of effort and competition among departments, it is called diseconomies of scale. And, if the diseconomies of scale becomes pervasive enough, it can ruin the organization.
One of the by-products of diseconomies of scale, that is described in Wikipedia, is called “isolation of decision makers from the results of their decisions”. I encourage the reader, at this point, to refer to the Wikipedia article as it is very good at explaining all of this.
To expand upon the term, as found in Wikipedia, I will say that what we are seeing today is “isolation of those who are making bad decisions from the consequences of their bad decisions”. In street, the people who are making a mess of things are not having to deal with the mess they are creating. Or, even worse, some decision makers don’t have a clue as to the unintended effect of their decisions. Let’s take a closer look.
As a nation, the United States is facing what I believe to be an impending and devastating diseconomies of scale. In particular, this problem is occurring in the area of interpretation of law, and the writing of law. And, the church in America is setting directly in the crosshairs of the negative and unintended (or, in some cases intended) consequences of bad law. But, it’s not just the church. In reality, our society as a whole will have to deal with these consequences. Let’s look at some current and pending examples.
In Massachusetts we see the debate going on about the rights of transgendered persons to have unrestricted access to either Men’s or Women’s restrooms, depending on which gender they have “chosen” to be. This is impossible to interpret now, and it will be impossible to interpret in the courts once the lawsuits start coming in. On a practical note, one of the reasons that cities and towns are even open to such a law is because the idea of building, retrofitting and paying for a “third” class of restroom at all public locations is prohibitive. So, we see cities and towns falling back on the legal system for a way out, but, it will be even worse in the end. It would be an “unenforceable” law. Here’s an example. Let’s say it’s 10:00 p.m. at a highway rest area stop and a young mother of 25 years of age who weighs maybe 120 lbs and her young daughter who is 4 years old start walking toward the Women’s public restroom. Then, upon making their way to the restroom, the mother notices a large masculine appearing person who is let’s say 6’3” tall and weighs around 230 lbs. And, this person is, as they say in bodybuilding, “ripped”. But, upon noticing the hesitation of the mother to go any further toward the Women’s restroom, the person says to the mother “Oh, it’s OK, I’m transgendered”. At that point, what is the young mother to do? Would she say “prove it”?
One can clearly see by the above scenario that such a “law” will be unenforceable. Let’s look at another example of an unenforceable and un-interpretable law. The pending Hate Crime law before congress which is designed to give protection to and special rights to the homosexual community. Let’s say a Pastor of a large urban Baptist church preaches a sermon that includes a discussion of homosexuality and same-sex marriage in his discourse. And, in the course of his message, this particular Pastor states that, according to his interpretation of the Bible, he believes that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are sinful and that anyone practicing such behavior will go to Hell. This is his religious belief. But, then, a gay person who happens to be sitting in his audience takes a CD of the message to the downtown police station and asks that the Pastor be arrested for “Hate Speech”. Could such a thing happen?
Here is the complexity and what I see as a “political diseconomies of scale”. The Hate Crime law, at this point, is un-interpretable and unenforceable. Because, in order to arrest the Pastor for violating the “rights” of the homosexual, the police will, in turn, have to deny the Pastor his freedoms of speech and religion. So, which is our society going to choose? We are getting ready to see a legal environment in which the rights and freedoms of some groups are going to be taken away so that a different group can be free from what they perceive as public expression that they believe violates their rights.
So, we now see that the lawmakers (congress) who are promoting and passing such laws are fitting into the category that we see in the definition of characteristics of “diseconomies of scale”. In other words, some of the very congressmen and congresswomen that are passing such laws will be “isolated from the consequences of their bad decision making”. Isolation of decision makers from the consequences of their bad decisions.
It doesn’t stop here. There is still one developing factor that will dwarf all that we have looked at thus far. The issue I am referring to is Sharia Law. This is the body of law that is practiced by Islamic countries. You may be saying, “Well, what does that have to do with us here in the U.S.?” Before we get to that point, let’s look at the concept of law and government for a moment.
I remember sitting in an undergraduate class called Federal, State and Local Government. The professor of this course was a seasoned veteran who had taught for decades. He was a classic liberal and he and I had an amicable professor/student relationship. I remember it well, one day in class when a fellow student (the kind of student who thought he was the teacher rather than a student) made the statement “imagine a Presidential election in which the vote count margin came down to just a one vote difference between the two candidates and the winner wins by just one vote! Imagine what that would do for democracy!” Then, I’ll never forget the professor’s response (and, this was some 26 or 27 years ago) as the professor said “that really might not be such a good thing”. And then, the professor went on to explain why he saw it as problematic, as if almost to prophetically describe what we all witnessed in 2000.
It was this same professor who taught that one of the hallmarks of a government, one of the most legitimizing factors of a government, is to set a body of law and then set a framework to interpret and enforce such law. So, we now see today, a serious and slowly developing effort on the part of Muslims to set up the practice and enforcement of Sharia Law within our society. So, what happens when a Muslim and a non-Muslim are involved in a legal dispute over something and both sides are using two different bodies of law to interpret what has transpired and how the matter should be judged? Which side will carry the most weight? Which carries more legal weight, Constitutional Law or Sharia Law?
Perhaps, seeing the problem as described above, we could set up yet another 3rd body of law and a 3rd party of law making and law enforcement to weigh out the matter and find the “common ground” between the two other bodies of law? Or, if that doesn’t work, maybe set up a 4th group to try and “work it out”.
But, it doesn’t stop here. Did you see in the news where just recently, the Hizb ut-Tahrir held a “conference” in a Hilton Hotel just outside of Chicago. The theme of the conference was “The Fall of Capitalism and The Rise of Islam”. It is reported that several Arab States as well as Russia do not allow this group to operate within their borders. But, the U.S., in the name of freedom of speech and religion, will allow it. This represents more political diseconomies of scale. In other words, this extreme, radical religious group that wants to overthrow the U.S. system of government has every right to express themselves. It is their “right” to do so. To put it in street “it is their right to promote and organize as a group and overthrow the very government that “gives them the right to do so”. Then, the rights and freedoms of expression that used to exist under the old government will no longer exist. This is exactly the scenario that is developing right before our very eyes. It is already happening to a serious degree in England, France and Holland.
So, the Christian church is caught in the crossfire of all this and the rights of the church are slowly slipping away in our society. The respect that the church once enjoyed in the U.S. is no more. We, as Christians, must give up our religious freedoms in the name of diversity. We, as Christians, must give up our freedoms in order that those who want an entirely different body of law and government can have what they want. Things are getting very interesting. Perhaps, as a society, we are entering into a period of which the old Chinese proverb could apply. “May you live in interesting times.” I think with all the “pushing and shoving” between the different groups within our society, it is naïve to think that things are not going to get interesting.
