This past weekend I was feeling pretty good. I had just finished working for the Obama campaign in Gary, registering people to vote. I was very proud to have volunteered to put my time in for something I believe in. I needed to go down to my Grandfather's house to try (unsuccessfully I might add) to move his pool table out of the basement. On the way there I saw a sign outside on a church marquee reading: God is always right, never left. While I completely agree that God is always right meaning correct, the sign made me extremely angry. It took everything within me not to stop and chew out the pastor of the church. I have been thinking a lot about this attitude, and it is a problem amongst Christians.
Is Jesus a Republican? The easy answer is no, and as much as it hurts me to admit he's not a Democrat either. No person should consider their political party choice to be divined by God. I am well aware that there are moral issues in politics. However the "moral issues" in politics are not limited to gay marriage and abortion. I am pro life, however I don't make all political decisions on that alone. I weigh both candidates. I also don't always pick the Democrat. I have voted for Senator Richard Lugar (R) many times mostly because of his stance on foreign policy and willingness to break from his party. The other moral issues in my mind, are issues dealing with poverty, treating of all Americans equally, and peace. These are part of the reasons I am going to vote for Senator Barack Obama.
I have dealt with this issue for a long time. Christians thinking that in order to be a good Christian you must be a Republican. I can remember during the 2000 presidential campaign, guys at Moody feeling they needed to pray for my salvation, because I was a democrat. This attitude has bigger ramifications than some may think. While most committed white evangelical Christians are Republicans, most committed black evangelical Christians are Democrats. Dr. King said that Sunday morning is the most segregated time of the week. If we ever want to try to come together as Christians we need to start to understand that there are differences among us. We also need realize that one group is not right and the other is wrong. There is no way you can say that the bible states which political platform is more Godly than the other. No Christian should therefore admonish another for their political views. And as pastors we have an even higher level of accountability. The preaching of political views from the pulpit is wrong no matter which side of the line you are on.
atp tennis official site in daily news
2 years ago
5 comments:
Would you vote for a candidate who endorsed and actively promoted the killing of members of a certain race that many did not want around? Surely not. And whatever remarkable views such a candidate might have about other things, this one would surely override them.
Then why think that a candidate who endorses and actively promotes the killing of immature human beings, whatever his or her views are about other issues, should be given a free pass because he or she "loves" the poor? One might think that the poorest among us are the very ones many on the left have no problem killing.
At the very least, surely you can see why a candidate's indifference to the unborn might be a overriding issue for a lot of folks.
I understand your argument. First I think it's important to say that under the Bush administration, there has been no legislation to try to overturn or even limit Roe vs. Wade. Regan also ran on a pro life stance, and he placed a pro-choice judge on the Supreme Court. Secondly John McCain has been pro-choice his entire career, until he realized he needed to change to gain the Republican nomination. Another point to make is that the McCain platform is only antiabortion not pro-life. I find it very hypocritical to say you want babies to be born, but won't provide health care for that child. Also they don't want to provide prenatal care for the mother. We live in a country that is 180 in infant mortality rate according to the CIA World Factbook. Black children are twice as more likely to die within the first year. I won't even get into how poverty leads to crime thus leading to deaths. I am not arguing the morality on abortion. I do feel that there is more to consider as a Christian besides abortion. What I am saying is that Christians can't claim that God demands a Republican vote.
Every voter will prioritize their issues and pick the candidate which least offends those priorities in an extremely complex algorithmic process. Some, admittedly, are less complex (single issue voters).
Jesus had a lot to say about a lot of things including social justice, which there is no doubt in my mind would include the unborn.
However, to assume Christ would prioritize the unborn over the impoverished feels extremely disingenuous as would the opposite.
Ben, while we might take divergent roads, we certainly agree on this overall concept.
Some, however, might weight Ecclesiastes 10.2 into the equation.
(I'm kidding but it's a fun right-wing joke)
I do think we agree. I get tired of hearing about all the politicians that are speaking on Sunday morning at churches around here. I do think churches should encourage people to vote, especially in our community where voter turnout is low. However most churches have taken it a step further by telling their congregations who God wants them to vote for. Does God really take a firm stance on Lake County Recorder? The Ecclesiastes was quite humorous. Taken out of context as much as the left takes Exodus 21:22.
1. It is true that the US has, according to the CIA Factbook, an infant mortality rate ranking at 180. But this means our mortality rate is *low*--179 countries have *worse* infant mortality rates than the US. In fact, we are only three spots down from the EU (at #183), which, as you know mandates health care for all ages.
To put it in perspective, the EU's infant mortality rate is only .00046% better than our own. Now you still might think is is unacceptable, but the situation is not nearly as bleak as you make it sound.
2. Nothing in my post said anything about Republicans. There is surely enough blame to go around. But I was only making the argument that Christians have, at the very least, a prima facie argument for not voting for someone who endorses and actively promotes the killing of immature human beings.
3. You say "I find it very hypocritical to say you want babies to be born, but won't provide health care for that child." Why is this hypocritical? I don't think anyone should kill you, Ben. But does this *all by itself* entail that I'm also committed--on pains of irrationality--to thinking that the government should pay to keep you alive? Of course not! Judging that an act of killing is morally wrong doesn't mean that I must also commit myself to the view that if that person is not killed then I'm the one responsible for caring for it.
4. Bush did sign into law the ban on partial birth abortion (which Clinton vetoed twice). So while you are correct that the Bush administration did not try to overturn Roe v. Wade, there is a very good reason for that. They can't--an executive cannot simply overturn a Supreme Court ruling.
Post a Comment