Re: A brief defense
[Rod Dreher  02/27 12:05 PM]

Ross, I’ve tried in the book to say over and over again that what I call crunchy conservatism is not an ideology or a religion, but a sensibility. What that entails, I think, is a recognition that all have sinned and fallen short of our ideals, because we do live in the real world, and some of us have more freedom of choice than others. I have friends and family who have to have a two-income household whether they want to or not because they’re struggling to get by, and neither spouse can afford to quit his or her job and be home with the kids. But I know others who, it seems to me from the outside, have imagined that their luxuries are necessities, and who are in a position to make certain material sacrifices for the moral and spiritual betterment of their families. I don’t at all condemn people who are doing the best that they can with what they have. I’m struggling to do the same thing, and have been blessed to be in an economic position where my college-educated wife can stay home with the boys — even though giving up that second income means that we can’t have as big as house as we might like, or even take vacations like other families (we haven’t been on a family vacation in four or five years). I’m not complaining; we prioritize within the means we have, and we are always trying to look for ways to make our material lives fit our spiritual ideals. All I ask conservatives — all conservatives — to do is to rethink in a serious way whether the various ways we live today are consistent with what we say we value as conservatives, especially with regard to the integrity of our families.