I didn't vote because nobody has yet explained to me what post-modernism is.
It seems to me, however, that the refusal to commit to anything, even a definition, is an indication that whatever it is, it won't serve Christians particularly well.
As far as this \"engaging the culture\" business goes, I think it's mostly just a cop-out. (I know, I'm dating myself.) Our business as Christians is to be witnesses and will quite frequently involve us in challenging our culture. But I don't really see any of that going on. What I've seen in the name of post-modernism is mostly compromise and conciliation and \"accepting\" things and being \"open.\"
(Edited to continue my rant)
In particular, as best I can tell, \"engaging the culture\" mostly seems to mean some combination of the following:
1. Getting a tatoo;
2. Getting some piece of metal stuck in my face;
3. Dressing like a slob;
4. Going to movies that celebrate whatever sexual perversion is fashionable this season;
5. Listening to some greasy-haired, pasty-faced, malignant-looking post-adolescent who can neither read music nor speak coherently mutter vulgarities and pretending that it's music.
6. Denying that anything is worth upsetting anybody over, because, hey, we're all going the same place man, we're just taking different roads.
In short, I regard postmodernism as a trahison des clercs without parallel since classical times. Those people who attempt to give this drivel a fig-leaf of academic and philosophical respectability make me want to hurl.