Beltway Beat 
By Jeremiah Lorrig

I work in Washington, DC advocating for homeschoolers across the U.S. The Beltway Beat is a semi-regular series of posts on the latest happenings in our nation’s capital.

Please send feedback to generationjoshua@hslda.org

The Manhattan Declaration

Swallowed up in Thanksgiving celebrations (and my trip to California), was a news story that has ramifications that are still echoing and making waves.

A gathering of over 150 leaders agreed, signed, and now encourage their Christian friends to do the same. They were Dr. James Dobson, Jerry Jenkins, Josh McDowell, Dr. Albert Mohler, J. I. Packer, Tony Perkins, Dennis Rainey, Chuck Swindoll, Joni Eareckson Tada, Don Wildmon, Ravi Zacharias, 15 Roman Catholic bishops including the New York and Washington Archbishops, Leith Anderson of the National Association of Evangelicals, Harry Jackson, seminary leaders, professors, pastors, and the primate of the Orthodox Church in America. With a list like this, what is happening?

In New York City on November 20^th a large gathering of Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox leaders came together to review and sign a new declaration, the Manhattan Declaration to define the most important issues facing our culture today. This declaration was written by Chuck Colson, Timothy George, and Robert George (of whom I have had the honor of meeting Robert George and Chuck Colson). In a sense, these men took on the roles of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, and Rodger Sherman. Like these men, they drafted the declaration and submitted it to be signed, not to the Continental Congress, but to a gathering of leaders in the Body of Christ who shared a serious concern for the direction of our culture.

Nowhere in the history of the American Church has there been such a list of leaders who came together. And the question is, “why?” What could bring these people together?

The answer is two fold. 1). The unity of the Church that Jesus and Paul talk about in John 17 and Ephesians 2. And 2). They cite how it has been the followers of Jesus over the millennia that have been the mainstay of social change. They find inspiration from “the heritage of those Christians who defended innocent life by rescuing discarded babies from trash heaps in Roman cities and publicly denouncing the Empire’s sanctioning of infanticide” as well as “Christians in England, led by John Wesley and William Wilberforce, [that] put an end to the slave trade in that country” to name only a few.

You ask, what does the Manhattan Declaration say? “We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right—and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation—to speak and act in defense of these truths.” What are these truths? 1). A comprehensive defense of human life. 2). Standing for strong biblical marriages. 3). A vigorous defense of religious freedom for all.

Here is their conclusion:

“Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

So it appears that President Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize, for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” "He's just got great chemistry," says Nobel Committee.

 In fact they state that

“Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.”

Wow, that’s quite the achievement to be sure, He succeeded in an amazing way he negotiated, … wait what has he successfully negotiated regarding human rights and democracy? In fact, what has he done that showed successful diplomatic prowess..? 

1. His "citizen of the world" comment in Berlin during his campaign,
2. His lack of Protocol with the Queen of England,
3. The possibility of him bowing to the Saudi King, in a break in long standing American tradition,
4. Talking with the Iranians, then walking away when his star power didn’t work,
5. Failing to get the Olympics in Copenhagen,
6. He chats with despot Hugo Chavez like old friends endangering Nicaragua’s struggling free government, (Nicaragua is one of three countries in the world where abortion is illegal).
7. He did not support Iran’s freedom loving population as they protested the electioneering of the Iranian elections,
8. The Saudis rejected his request for normalization gestures towards Israel (at Barack Obama's meeting with King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia, and in Washington at meetings with Hillary Clinton).
9. The North Koreans rejected Obama’s diplomatic initiatives by test-launching long-range missiles in April;
10. Russia and China wouldn’t agree to tougher sanctions on Iran
11. The Iranians said "no" to offers of talks about a halt to uranium enrichment;
12. He pulled out of Poland and the Czech Republic, “strengthening” out relations with Eastern Europe. 

In fact I can’t think of a major foreign policy success Obama has achieved.

Then again Marc Ambinder, Liberal Blogger for the Atlantic, seems to see this as a joke.  “Liberals are saying "No joke Obama should turn the Nobel Peace Prize down until he's finished with his two wars … "It might be smart for Obama to turn this prize down, at least until he achieves peace somewhere. Or trade for Olympics"

Personally I like options two.  It appears his success was based on his intentions, not actions.

Marc further states, “I think it will feed not just conservative dislike but the growing concern of independents and elites, that he is a man of rhetoric, a work of imagination, but as of now an unaccomplished statesman. The smartest thing he could do is turn it down. It will backfire on him.”    - Yup, it already is.

So much for the Nobel Peace Prize, it seems to now be a tool for endorsement of future policy rather than recognition of character and hard work.