Sunday, December 11

Exporting Conservatism: Interference with a foreign nation's affairs?

In response to my previous post about U.S. non-profits supporting and helping Colombia keep its pro-life legislation, and protecting the unborn, TankerTodd over at RedState.org had these comments.
Even setting the abortion question aside, I am a little uncomfortable with American private groups seeking to interfere with another nation's policies. Each nation is sovereign and their right to create crazy laws is protected insofar as they are arrived at through democratic means.

If one country wants to cane the crap out of kids for breaking the law, who are we to tell them otherwise? If another executes drug traffickers, how can we intervene? We definitely don't want a foreign country interfering with our laws, nor do we want Colombia or any other nation. A great example of this are the whiny Europeans, especially the Brits, that sniff at our capital punishment. (This coming from the Continent that brought us WWI and other fun things. This from the Brits whose Tower of London has a gory history.)

It is further irony that these are liberal groups pushing for this change. Liberals are supposed to be, well, liberal. You know, "whatever floats your boat," and "live and let live" and all that. But of course modern liberals are more totalitarian than libertarian, and this further proves it (not that we need any more proof!)
Well, good people can avoid what TankerTodd calls "interfer[ing] with another nation's policies" but you know for a fact that the United Nations, and all the trans-national ultra-liberal NGO's are going to interfere!

But, I am not advocating interference. If a nation has inhuman practices, like caneing their kids, we SHOULD speak up, apply international political pressure, and be a voice for truth and good. I don't call this interference--I call it supporting good. By the way, this is different from say the Brit's or the French crying about our death penalty. A large powerful country like ours can handle the pressure. A tiny country like Honduras gets threats of loss of funding and that sort of thing in order to have them move to the left in their way of doing things. Big difference.

I have a friend who was a Senator in the Honduran congress. He always welcomed conversations, consultations and advice and had a thirst for ideas and suggestions. He did not consider it interference--he saw it as support and as part of his own learning process. When the Honduran government started leaning towards granting homosexual activist groups special rights, he called me up, and asked for help locating research and documentation that would help him defend his position--no special rights for homosexuals. Like wise, I have been involved in providing resources and support to national NGO's and churches in Nicaragua, Honduras, and other countries in South America that are taking a stand for moral and conservative values.

Is this interference? I doubt it. I helped him articulate what was already a core value--marriage is sacred, homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. One deserves protection as a pillar of society, the other does not. We have fought this battle for years, and are making huge progress. They are just now starting to face this political battle, and welcome ideas and support from those that have been there before.

Don't get fooled. This is a global economy, and we cannot isolate ourselves and think it doesn't matter. Liberal groups, funded by the U.N. among others, will continue to export their fight for socialist, liberal ideology, and when the battle has been lost in far away lands (it already has been lost in many places), they will use these as launching pads to bring down those values and the social order instituted by our founding fathers.

I've been there. I see it happening already.

P.S.
If you like my posts, I invite you to vote for Latino Issues as best Latino blog in the 2005 Weblog awards.