A little post-election reflection
Another U.S. Presidential election has come and gone.
Facebook statuses have been posted, Tweets have been tweeted, “Don’t Blame Me, I Voted For Romney!” stickers are likely being ordered by the resentful Right, and Obama supporters on the Left are gleefully mocking the despondent faces of Fox News and the Twitter-tantrums of Donald Trump, Ted Nugent and Victoria Jackson.
But like Kony2012 (<–which actually generated the highest amount of web traffic in Disciple Dojo’s history!), this election season will be quickly forgotten by the vast majority of those who seemed so fired up by it.
Don’t believe me?
Think about how many people are still talking passionately about John McCain or John Kerry.
For many people who were not thrilled at the choice of either Romney or Obama (and it’s no surprise where I personally stand if you follow me on Facebook or Twitter…or if you saw the original political post of this election season here in the Dojo!), it seemed that this election wasn’t as much about issues as about personalities and rhetorical posturing:
Those on the Left seemingly bent over backwards in order to ignore or whitewash President Obama’s carbon-copy-of-Bush foreign policy and Constitution-ignoring tactics in the so-called “war on terror” (including having a Presidential “kill list” and using drones to assassinate a teenage American citizen) because…well…the thought of a rich, white, conservative businessman who doesn’t support gay marriage or abortion-on-demand (at least not anymore) in the White House was a total affront to all sense of Liberal decency and the exact opposite of “progress”!
Meanwhile, those on the Right were so tired of this Socialist, secretly-African, closet-Muslim who bows to dictatorial regimes and hates Israel (despite giving them millions–or was it billions?–in military aid) running our economy into the ground that they were willing to back a candidate who many of them would’ve considered a cult member just months ago because he “looked Presidential” enough to beat the Liberal “Chosen One”!
Okay…now that I’ve admittedly oversimplified and caricatured to a large degree (or have I?? ;)) those on both sides of the political aisle, let me offer the following reflections from someone who did not support either candidate:
1. Barak Obama is the President of our country, and that means as Christians we must support and pray for him. I honestly believe that President Obama is a generally good man (insofar as anyone can be in a world of fallen, sinful humanity) who honestly desires to serve the country and do good as its leader. He seems to be a good husband and a great father–and this is something that is indeed laudable in this day and age.
While one may have severe disagreements with the classical Liberal Protestant theology he seems to embrace (which I do, of course!), it is simply slanderous–and therefore sinful!–for any Christian to continue claiming or even insinuating that he is “secretly” or otherwise a Muslim. If you are a Christian who does this…stop. You are bearing false witness against your neighbor and you will be held accountable for every careless word uttered.
He has been elected to the office of President for a second term, and no matter how much one may hate the thought of 4 more years of his policies, he is light-years better than, say, Nero–who the Apostle Paul had no hesitancy urging the first generation of Christians in Rome to pray for and submit to…and who Paul would ultimately be martyred under no less!
2. However, insofar as President Obama embraces and champions sinful causes, we as Christians should oppose those views honestly, yet humbly and persuasively, and pray for the Spirit to convict him of God’s truth in order to govern wisely. The President does accept and support many things which are indeed sinful, regardless of his motives for doing so. His support for abortion-on-demand, particularly partial-birth and late-term abortion being legal, is nothing short of heartbreaking and is a denial of the Image of God possessed by the most vulnerable of its bearers. We must pray and hope to he is one day persuaded of this (as are all those who support such things) and that like colonial slavery, Native American genocide and Jim Crow Laws, abortion-on-demand is one day relegated to the garbage dump of history in this nation (and around the world).
Likewise, the President’s support for things like military dominance, drone strikes against civilians who are deemed “suspected militants” by virtue of proximity and age, and indefinite detention of “suspected terrorists” without fair and proper trial, are also contrary to any sense of governing justice and should be opposed by all whose consciences are moved by it.
3. The “Lesser of Two Evils” approach only perpetuates and rewards “Evil”. I believe our voting should reflect who we want to represent us in leadership rather than an attempt at calculating how we can assure defeat of the one who we least desire to do so. If more Americans refused to vote for someone they did not comfortably endorse over someone they actually believed in to a larger degree, this two-party system in which we find ourselves would crumble. But until more are willing to vote their conscience over their fears, the two mainstream parties will continue to preserve their own self-interests over the interests of the country as a whole. Whether through voting for a 3rd party candidate one agrees with overall, or writing in one’s candidate of choice (in States where such votes are counted), a vote according to conscience is never a wasted vote.
In short, it is the “lesser of two evils” mindset that assures things like THIS (on the part of Republicans) and THIS (on the part of Democrats) continue unchallenged.
4. The President doesn’t control the country…nor is he solely responsible for its direction. The Presidential race gets all the press and attention, of course…but it is not the determining factor in American political life. There were hundreds of other candidates vying for offices at all levels of government yesterday, most of them are unknown. However, they are the ones who shape policy and vote for or against changes that have an arguable greater effect on the day-to-day life of the average citizen. Judges, Representatives, Secretaries, Treasurers, Senators…the course of our nation is just as influenced by their collective actions as it is by a speech in the Rose Garden.
Whether one likes it or not, America is not a Democracy (that may come as a shock to many, I know…but I promise it’s true!). We are a Constitutional Republic whereby individuals are elected to vote in our place on most issues of policy and action. If we want to see change at all levels of society, we must make more of an effort to know who is representing us in the halls of power–be it county, State or Federal level.
We are also a nation of states, not one big homogenous state. A few states chose yesterday to stand against the Federal government on certain issues–such as voting to end the prohibition of marijuana. It will be interesting to see how this plays out when state interests conflict with Federal law and whether more and more states will begin moving to reclaim their Constitutional right of self-governing from the tendency toward centralization of power that the Federal government has accumulated over the past century or so.
Bottom-line: If you want to see change in the socio-political landscape of your country, you must learn the basics rules of your country’s political process and begin to engage at a deeper level than just choosing a person you like (or choosing against a person you don’t like) once every 4 years.
5. John Wesley said it best. As Christians, we stand united in the confession that there is only one TRUE “King”/”Caesar”/”Lord”…and he already sits enthroned over all Creation. We are to serve as his ambassadors to this world until his return to what is rightfully his. But as humans who are limited in knowledge and separated by different life experiences and perspectives on a number of issues, we are free to disagree over how best to go about accomplishing this mission. Faithful Christians can genuinely disagree over how to best care for the sick, provide for the poor, and administer justice on behalf of the oppressed–and such disagreement does not mean that one of them is automatically wrong and in need of repentance.
A candidate can champion “traditional family values”, yet still be an unacceptable choice for the Christian who believes that their views on a range of other issues is grossly out of sync with the heart of the Gospel.
Likewise, a candidate can be “on the side of the poor and oppressed” in society, yet their compromise on core issues such as the sanctity of innocent human life (from womb to tomb) can quite easily render them an unacceptable choice in light of the very same Gospel.
So while we should be free to voice our views, challenge the positions with which we disagree, and seek to be agents for change within society at all levels, we should never let our choice in tactics and strategy come between our bond of community as one people under one Lord. And when each election cycle rolls around, may the words John Wesley spoke hundreds of years ago to his fellow Methodists continue to guide our approach to politics:
Blessings from the Dojo,
JM
PS: For an unexpected look at a book of the Bible that speaks to us as a nation in a way that few people realize, and even fewer understand, check out the 3-Disc DVD study I have created for personal and small-group use: “Revelation: A Guided Tour of the Apocalypse“. This book is a POWERFUL message of both warning and hope to Christians from the 1st century through the 21st century no matter what their national circumstances may be! It includes free participant workbooks, a full translation of the book with space for note-taking, downloadable powerpoint, and full-color handouts…all for only $50! Order your copy HERE today and help keep the ministry of Disciple Dojo going strong!
Here’s a preview clip from the course…
Categories: Blog, Book of Revelation, Eschatology, Global, Ministry, Political/Social issues
JM, I really enjoyed reading this reflection, as it delves much deeper into the political responsibilites we have as Christians than just who we vote for on one ballot every four years. I’m especially pleased to hear you mention local policy issues, which can be evaluated through a biblical lens every bit as productively as the larger cultural issues. I wish more Christians would take up the topics of zoning, transportation, infrastructure development, etc. but that’s another topic …
I was deeply conflicted about this election, and I eventually voted for a candidate for whom I have series reservations about on particular issues. I wouldn’t call it siding with the “lesser of two evils,” but I suppose I have come to terms with my practical task of using whatever power has been granted to be me to try to make things marginally less painful in this broken world. I see government as a band-aid, an act of God’s common grace as we await his final kingdom. In other words, I might get nervous for my own heart if a candidate ever runs that has a campaign I’m comfortable with.
So I’m fine with striving for sly as a serpant, innocent as a dove. In my opinion, the pro-life movement has squandered their influence by tying themselves institutionally and philosophically to a single party. We could learn from industry lobby groups. They always donate to both parties – that way they can influence elected officials by shifting funds around in response to real policy actions. Politicians know their support is conditional, so they have to deliver. Not so with abortion. Republicans can count on the pro-life vote, so there’s no way they are going to spend political capital to secure it. All they have to do is use a few keywords in speeches from time to time.
The fact that many people still cast their vote for Romney on pro-life grounds, despite the fact that he completely transformed his position on abortion for the primaries and stated in October 2012 that restrictions on abortion were “not part of his agenda,” is a testament to this deadening loyalty.
But exhibit A for me was the Affordable Care Act debate. In early 2010, the pro-life movement had an historic chance to reduce abortions by providing strict limits on any private health insurance policy that recieves a dime of federal funds. This would have been a major achievement. As it turned out, the cause was championed by Bart Stupak and a handful of pro-life Democrats (there aren’t many) who threatened to vote against the bill without this language in an amendment. Strong pro-choice Democrats protested and threatened the other way, and Obama was in a pickle.
Here was the window of opportunity. Republicans cheered from the sidelines, hoping the whole bill would crumble over this intra-party spat. But it turned out to be resolved with a compromise (Obama signed an executive order with the anti-abortion amendment, which is weaker than the statutory restrictions Stupak was seeking).
But imagine what would have happened if a handful of pro-life Republicans broke with the rest of their party to support Stupak. They would be able to off-set the lost votes from the other side, and Obama would have been able to claim the coveted bipartisan mantle for the health care policy (he’s not stupid). The fact that this did not happen confirms my suspicion that Republicans in Congress cared more about a) defeating universal health care and b) maintaining partisan solidarity than c) their stated pro-life beliefs. I’m not calling them all liars. They just knew they would be punished for switching more than rewarded for upholding the sanctity of life. Sadly, some erstwhile “pro-life” groups have become so partisan they may have even joined in the scorn.
One more point about abortion. There’s evidence to suggest that the abortion rate might go down now that the Obama administration will continue. In the years after the passage of Romney’s Massachusetts health care bill, the number of uninsured people in the state dropped steeply and the number of abortions dropped just as much. Moms with unexpected pregnencies knew they could recieve pre-natal and post-natal care for their children without going broke, thus dramatically changing the equation (I believe moms instinctively want their babies to live). Obamacare also includes tax credits for adoption.
The pro-life movement needs to understand that policies induce outcomes through push and pull. Yes, laws that restrict abortion will lessen, although not eliminate, the practice. But laws that make alternatives more attractive will have the same effect. The ultimate end is to save lives, and both strategies should be employed.
So we have to work within the system we’ve got. Third-parties are irrelevant in the U.S. Voting for a third party is like cheering for loser of the American League Championship to win the World Series, hoping the team can at least throw beer bottles onto the field and make a mess of things. Not voting doesn’t help either.
But, yes, by all means, I also pray we have the strength to oppose all sinful views and practices in government, whether we voted the administration in or not. I might draw a slight distinction between Obama “supporting abortion-on-demand” and Obama refusing to use the powers of his office to lobby for restrictions on abortion. Both I think are morally reproachable, but there is a difference in degree between pushing an innocent person off a cliff and refusing to use your power to protect innocent people through prosecuting those who push others off cliffs. At the risk of hyperextending this analogy, it’s also morally suspect to use your power to withhold counseling services to people if you have reason to believe that providing it will prevent them from pushing others off cliffs.
Geez … I just kept typing. You can tell I need to process some things 🙂 Thanks for the thoughtful post.
by Daniel N on Nov 7, 2012 at 10:33 pm