With the blogosphere ablaze with comments on the conflicting messages heralded by the conventions of our two political parties, some of us are befuddled about the facts. Rather than raise my voice in favor of one set of facts against the other, I find that it’s more advantageous to consider the relevance of truth.

Facts come to us in a random and often disconnected fashion. Truth transcends our individual experiences and opinions by offering a more comprehensive and penetrating perspective. Facts describe reality as we think it is. Truth frames reality as it is intended to be. Some may argue that there is no transcendent truth and therefore no corresponding obligation on our part to honor the demands of that truth. Truth, we are told by some, is relative and must be left to the god of individualism. Perhaps I should say the gods of individualism.

One political party announced its intention to eliminate all references to “God” from its platform. Then, in a bizarre move, the resolution was reversed on the floor of the convention, much to the chagrin of many delegates who chose to “boo” the decision. Party leaders clearly have a problem with the reality of truth as evidenced by the decree that ultimate accountability, and sound decision-making, could be sacrificed on the altar of vote pandering. Ideas like marriage, life and freedom must be redefined in order to suit the new and emerging conscience, so the question of God’s presence must be reconsidered in light of his impact upon the party’s platform. In the current political environment, it comes down to this: To God or not to God.

The new facts, as espoused by some, open rightful opportunities for those wanting to enjoy love, economic advancement, affordable healthcare, and reproductive freedom. For these privileges, no wrestling with the truth is required, only a platform built upon the suppression of any reference to God. By adopting the sentiment expressed by Dostoyevsky’s Dmitri Karamazov, “If God doesn’t exist, then everything is permitted,” any cause or deed is defensible. When truth gets in the way, dismiss the court of determination, then you’re free to redefine your actions any way you wish.

Perhaps you think I’m being too harsh. In his argument in defense of the British soldiers in the Boston Massacre trial, John Adams declared, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” Even before he was elected president, John Adams appealed to truth as the ultimate framework for evaluating the facts. He knew that the prevailing passion of the citizens of Boston incited an egregious distortion of the facts leading to a redefinition of the truth. In these conditions, no form of justice or freedom can be achieved. Fortunately, Adams’ case prevailed and the accused were released. Though some may wish to censor appeals to God, the truth is the harder we try to demand god-less speech, the deeper we sink into our own wishes, inclinations, dictates, and passion. Having surrendered to the gods of personal whim and self-serving passion, we’ll experience the complete and utter loss of freedom, hope and security. This is the truth.