It’s the biggest dilemma I've faced in a long time, maybe the biggest one ever. I'm supposed to choose the "leader of the free world" from a short list of two people. One promised hope and change - a social healthcare system, government provision, higher taxation, and redistribution of wealth. The other promises a return to a government that won't unilaterally decide which American businesses should succeed, and an America that won't apologize for the fact we area strong nation built on hard work, determination, and most of all - protected by the blood of generations of my brothers in arms.
I am no Republican. Nor am I a
Democrat. I'm an American. I'm a Christian. I am an officer. I have a family that will grow and prosper according
to God's plan, regardless of who sits in our nation's highest office. I will continue to serve my country and
protect the constitution against its enemies.
I will continue to respect and pray for my commander in chief, whether I
agree with him or not. As long as my
orders are not illegal, immoral, or in opposition to God's word, I will carry
them out while I hold my current commission.
I also agree with the direction the current Republican candidate wants
to take our nation. But he's a Mormon. I don't know everything about the LDS church,
but I know enough to say their teachings are not in accordance with God's
Word. For a comparison of Christian and
Mormon doctrine, see this
link. On the other hand, I could
vote for the incumbent. But I don't know
exactly what his beliefs are. Is he
Christian? Muslim? I can't tell, but based on his actions and words,
I get the feeling he thinks no belief has to be mutually exclusive. My God is exclusive. What!? The God of the Bible who loved us so
much that "while we were sinners, Christ died for us" -
exclusive? Yes - exclusive of all
untruth. Exclusive of all evil. Exclusive of all unrighteousness. All the things I am or have been -
untruthful, evil, and unrighteous - the same things we all are. I accept that. I also accept that my exclusive God who
demands justice be done, has provided the means for both justice and
forgiveness through Jesus Christ.
"for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus."
- Romans 3:23-26
I don't trust the Mormon. I
don't trust the other one either. They
are career politicians whom I believe will say whatever they think it takes to
get elected. So let me boil it down to
the issues that have decided my vote, along with a brief explanation of why.
1.
Abortion: We, as a nation, have chosen to water down
this issue to a point where being pro-life is considered the radical
right. Life begins at conception. I value life.
Being "pro-choice" exists under the guise of protecting a
person's right to choose whether or not to carry a child to term. First, "pro-choice" is a
misnomer. We should call it what it
really is, regardless of how unpalatable it sounds - "pro-abortion". The "choice" being made is the
choice to end a life for the sake of our own health, welfare, or in most cases
- convenience. In the best of
circumstances, we are taking the life of someone incapable of defending
themselves in order to preserve our own life.
In the worst of cases, we are doing it for our own comfort or
convenience. Either way, it shows a love
for ourselves that is greater than our love and respect for the life of another
- even our own child. Anyone who uses
terms like "reproductive freedom" when referring to the right to have
an abortion, clearly does not respect life.
And, yes, I'm going to bring up the slippery slope argument...if we can
take the life of an unborn child who cannot speak for themselves, what's to say
we can't take the life of a mentally or physically disabled person who can't
speak for themselves? Wouldn't it make
it easier on our society and healthcare system - not to mention more convenient
for those burdened with the care of those who cannot care for themselves? Like it or not, that's the pro-choice
mentality. Read Brave
New World - it’s a classic. I will
not willfully choose a leader who lives under the veil of our culture's
misguided perception of what it means to be "pro-choice".
2.
Government
involvement in business: Although not a
stark moral issue like abortion, this also has to do with our freedom. Capitalism depends on competition. Competition means there is a reward for
working hard and doing well in our business endeavors. When the government takes away this purely
competitive element by redistributing the earnings of those businesses who have
triumphed in competition to those who have not, it has just created an
incentive to be mediocre. Those who are
already mediocre know they have a safety net.
Those who are excellent may find it more rewarding to become mediocre. Because of ambiguous terms like "too big
to fail", struggling businesses [or industries] have been given the go
ahead to continue in the mediocrity and complacency that took them to the point
of failure in the first place. So what
happens? The most appealing location on
the topography of business performance becomes mediocrity. All move in this direction. Our national competitive landscape begins to
fall under the control of the few in government who make the decisions of which
businesses receive government assistance.
In essence, business survival is taken out of the hands of the consumer
and put under the control of the state.
Hmmm...sounds familiar...something I read about in history, maybe?
Two issues? That's it? Narrow?
Maybe. Look deeper. These two issues embody freedom and
life. No matter where I live or who
rules this nation, I have freedom
because Christ has given it to me. I
have life because of God's grace and love...but if I have the power to choose
to live in a nation which is guided by policies which take our nation as a
whole closer to freedom and respect of life, that's where my vote will be.
So, I'm not voting for the Mormon or the Christian or the - fill in
the blank. I'm voting on ideals which
are manifested in the policies, past actions, and future plans of the
candidates. I'm voting on the hope that
my kids will grow up in a country where freedom and respect for life are part
of our national identity...and if they are not, I will continue to instill
these values in my family.
Dilemma solved? Not
really. But it’s the best I can do with
the evidence at hand. Do your duty -
vote.
Ultimately, I can rest in this…
"...the Most High is sovereign over all kingdoms on earth
and gives them to anyone he wishes.
- Daniel 4:25
There is not an endorsement of any type of economic system found within scripture. There is no verse equating capitalism or socialism with the kingdom of God. As a result we must draw our conclusions from what Jesus and the apostles taught and the appropriate application of Biblical teachings.
ReplyDeleteEarly Christians freely shared their material goods with the needy. Some even use this example as justification for a socialist economic system. However, these same people convienently neglect to mention that this was a purely voluntary arrangement. Not only that but these early Christians never tried to forcibily redistribute the assets of non-Christians or fellow believers. The apostles consistantly taught that giving was not mandatory.
If we compare good Biblical character traits to character traits that are rewarded under capitalism, they look very similiar. God rewards and encourages honest labor, investment, and thrift. The Bible approves of wealth gained by industriouness and self-control. All are important traits for success under capitalism.
Next we must understand that economic liberty is required for other freedoms. For instance, private property is required for the exercise of certain rights. If you can't buy a printing press or TV station or sell newspapers you have no freedom of the press.
Economic freedom helps to disperse power, which allows for the rise of private institutions such as associations, corporations, think tanks, labor unions, universities, etc. The competition that capitalism promotes drives down the price of consumer goods such as clothing, food, and shelter. This has a positive impact on people of modest incomes. Not only does free market societies have higher literacy and increased life expectancy but ironically it increases equality of income distribution.
Today the state does more harm than good by promoting practices such as; minimum wage laws that force disadvantaged workers out of the marketplace, occupational licensing that makes it difficult for poorer citizens to enter certain trades, trade barriers that protect selected industries pushing up the cost of clothing, food, shoes, and numerous other goods, etc.
God wants his children to glorify Him through our work.
All of this was to say simply that our economic philosiphy IS a morale decision and if you don't think so then remember this: The one organization guaranteed not to promote ethical and religious values is government.
Thanks,
Chris R.
I'm afraid it wasn't a tough call for me. Other than a couple drinkers, I've never known a Mormon who wasn't industrious, friendly, respectful, community oriented, etc. Well I guess there is Harry Reid.
ReplyDeleteCyrus freed the Jews and what was he? Zoroastrian?
If Romney communicates conservative principles daily, he will do no harm to the Judeo-Christian culture of the US. The Bush admin forgot that you have to explain and teach and lead and convince, and IMO damaged the brand.
Not sure I agree with the characterization of Romney as a career politician. He's done things - now he's doing this. Think I heard he didn't collect salary as governor.