I had this great idea for an article about why we should vote idealistically instead of pragmatically…and then Colin wrote it (read here). He told me I should write mine anyway since there’s a lot to say on the subject, but I suspect he just wants to sue me for plagiarism. So with that irrational paranoia in the back of my mind, I tried to hit on some points he didn’t address.
The Republican/Evangelical Christian alliance
About once a week, I’ll see an article in the paper about how conservative Christians are having a hard time choosing a Republican candidate to rally around. Giuliani is the devil, Romney is a Mormon, etc. The pickings are so slim, evangelical leaders are talking about supporting a third party candidate if they aren’t satisfied with the eventual nominee. The GOP is alarmed by this talk, as it should be: In the 2004 election, one third of republican voters identified themselves as conservative Christians. And how does it respond to this potential crisis? Does the GOP attempt to cater to the concerns of a third of its constituency? No. The repeated cry is, “Don’t support a third party candidate! Then the Democrats will win. We’ll have eight years of Hillary, and you know you would hate that. Voting third party is the last thing you want to do.”
I beg to differ. Why should anyone vote for a candidate who doesn’t represent their views? Why should anyone support a party that casually disregards the things they care most about? Suppose Giuliani wins the republican nomination, and every conservative evangelical who doesn’t actually like him decides to vote for a third party candidate. What happens? Giuliani loses 20-30% of his expected support, the third party candidate gets slaughtered, and a Democrat comes to power for the next four years. The renegade voters may feel like they did more harm than good, but do you really think the GOP will run out another Giuliani for the next election? Not if they have any sense. By being willing to take a short term hit in the name of idealism, Christians (and anyone else, really) CAN bring meaningful change to the system.
Questioning the alliance
The Republican party obviously benefits from evangelical attachment, but is this union good for the Church? As Christians, we are devoted to a higher calling, to a Kingdom that transcends this world. And yet, the church so often seeks power and influence through the Republican party and its “moral emphasis,” to the point where we’ve got way too many eggs in the elephant’s basket. Fortunately, younger generations of conservative evangelicals are growing uneasy with this unholy matrimony. Increasingly, younger Christians consider things like poverty and the environment to be moral issues, areas traditionally emphasized by democrats.
It’s unrealistic to expect all Christians to vote for the same person or care about the exact same set of issues. But what if a substantial percentage stood up and said, “We are people of peace and we won’t support a candidate who wants to keep fighting a war indefinitely. And Jesus taught us to care for the poor, so we will not stand behind a candidate who has no plan for helping them.” If enough of us took a stand like that on the issues that matter most to us, the major parties would be forced to react. At the least, they would be forced to embrace those causes in order to win our votes. And who knows, maybe we can even bring an end to the two-party system that saps our elections of diversity. But none of this can happen if we give into the fear of pragmatism.
“Increasingly, younger Christians consider things like poverty and the environment to be moral issues, areas traditionally emphasized by democrats… And Jesus taught us to care for the poor, so we will not stand behind a candidate who has no plan for helping them.”
Maybe, just maybe, Christian conservatives recognize that government getting into the poverty-fighting business (at least in the ways it currently dirties its fingers) does NOT help the poor. Jesus taught us as INDIVIDUALS to help the poor, not to make government forcibly tax the rich to give to the poor. Read Life at the Bottom: The Worldview that Makes the Underclass by Theodore Dalrymple for a thorough discussion on the foolishness of government welfare. Seriously, read it, it will quite probably open your eyes to the evils of socialism, among other things.
As for environmentalism, perhaps Christian conservatives don’t like to be lemmings following the Rev. Al Gore and his bogus global warming cult. That COULD be a reason, who knows? Be stewards of the environment while not WORSHIPING it (and science).
I don’t think that conservative Evangelicals will abandon the Republican party even if Giuliani is nominated. A recent Gallup poll showed that even among conservatives who plan to vote on values (specifically, abortion and gay marriage) Giuliani still commands the most support of any Republican candidate. (Giuliani, Moral Values, and the GOP Nomination, Nov. 13)
That’s because no one is really paying attention to politics yet. 37% of people think he’s pro-life, only 8% pro-choice. Compared to January… it is weird, it’s going the opposite direction. Uninformed people, get a clue!
You know, I think in this case, I could see supporting a third party candidate (or not voting at all). But only as long as that candidate really filled the voids that were missing in the Republican candidate. For example, if Giuliani faces Clinton, I plan on not voting. However, if there were a candidate who fit the bill on the abortion issue running on the ticket while not being completely in left field on other issues (this rules out Ron Paul), I can see myself voting for him. Like Hungry says, this would show the Republican party that pro-lifers are not to their party what blacks are to the Democrat party, we’re not a given. I wouldn’t want the differences to be much more than on the abortion issue, as this would only muddy the water. If Ron Paul was the third-party candidate and took a bunch of votes away from Giuliani, the Republicans wouldn’t learn that abortion was the issue, they would assume (and probably rightly so) that foreign policy was the issue. So I almost would want a third-party candidate who had very middle-of-the-road Republican values except on abortion, where he was very stridently pro-life.
Actually those numbers are reversed. 37% think he’s pro-choice, 8% think pro-life. The label on the chart in the Gallup article is incorrect, they’ve got the pro-life and the pro-choice switched.
OH ok, whew. I was starting to think a bunch of voters are retards… oh wait.
“A good soldier does not concern himself with the affairs of this world.” (In Corinthians somewhere) Upon this scripture, I feel the Lord has asked me not to vote, but to continue to help the poor widows, orphans, and others in persecuted countries in the Body of Christ ourselves. Why wait until someone gets elected and tries to funnel our tax dollars to help the poor? We can do something ourselves with some of the extravagant monies we spend on holidays, by giving them (our money) to our poor brothers and sisters in the Lord. Ministry we go through: InJesusName.org. Trustworthy and effective-widows get rice, clothing, and food, and in turn they give thanks to God, their provider. Many also write us a precious letter of thanksgiving.When did we see you hungry, Jesus? When you did it unto the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto Me. We can truly bless Jesus by doing this, and the truth that it is indeed more blessed than to receive will come to life.
HI-FYI-I wrote the name of my blogspot wrong when registering. It is thissamejesus.blogspot.com. Apparently, it had 2 http’s in front of it instead of one. Thanks
“No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him.” 2 Tim. 2:4
Patti, I assume this was to what you were referring.
If you feel called (by the Lord) not to vote by that verse, more power to you. However, the context seems to indicate something else (or at least doesn’t speak to political involvement specifically). Immediately before this sentence, Paul is speaking of enduring hardship and being strong as a soldier of Christ. “Soldier” here is a metaphor, as are”civilian affairs.” We’re not literally soliers, nor (if you read further down) are we literally runners in a race. The context would seem to imply that a Christian should not get caught up in worldly pursuits (most likely money, fame, materialism) and forget to embrace the hardships that come with following Jesus. I don’t see from this one verse an indication that we MUST not vote. Isn’t this a false dichotomy, can’t you both vote AND help widows, orphans, and the like?
I have mostly voted republican over the many years I’ve been voting, and I’m a Christian, but I resent being lumped into the Republican-Evangelical alliance. That is why I’m registered as an independent.
I also basically hate politics and the way-too-long election season in this country. I don’t pretend to understand all the different things a president is supposed to be knowledgeable about such as global economics, history, war, public policy, and especially the law of unintended consequences.
So, like a silly old lady, I vote what I know: a person’s personal life makes a difference and life begins at conception. I study those two things in a candidate. My political ideals aren’t that extensive, but they are lofty, and I stick to them.
I won’t vote for Giuliani or Clinton.
I will give Giuliani partial props for sticking to his position on abortion. Many other candidates would have given lip service and “said the right thing” to win pro-life support. Not Giuliani, I heard him on the radio doing an interview with Prager a couple months ago and he said that if abortion is the premier issue with a voter and they don’t like Giuliani’s position, they SHOULD vote for someone else. He went on to say that however, he intends on appointing strict constructionist judges… blah blah blah. I do respect a politician who doesn’t say what he knows is the easy thing to say or what people want to hear.
That said, still not voting for ya Rudy.
Thainamu, can you really register as an independent? It was my understanding that it Texas the only time party affiliation comes up is when you vote in a primary. And then whoever’s primary you voted in is your party for the year.
Is it true that some states don’t allow you to register when you go to vote in the general election? You have to register beforehand? I’ve only voted twice (2004 and 2006), and both times I registered at the polls. But that’s Minnesota.
You have to register 30 days in advance in Texas.
Jasen said, “Thainamu, can you really register as an independent? It was my understanding that it Texas the only time party affiliation comes up is when you vote in a primary.”
Hmm, you may be right. It was many years ago that I registered and dealt with the the issue of my affiliation then. Perhaps I have just considered myself an independent for many years, even if it doesn’t actually say that anywhere.
Jew, but once you’re registered you’re registered right? You don’t have to do it for every election. They keep sending me new voting cards whenever I need one anyways.
“Maybe, just maybe, Christian conservatives recognize that government getting into the poverty-fighting business (at least in the ways it currently dirties its fingers) does NOT help the poor. Jesus taught us as INDIVIDUALS to help the poor, not to make government forcibly tax the rich to give to the poor…As for environmentalism, perhaps Christian conservatives don’t like to be lemmings following the Rev. Al Gore and his bogus global warming cult. That COULD be a reason, who knows? Be stewards of the environment while not WORSHIPING it (and science).”
I completely agree with you, Darius, especially on the poverty issue. I’ve worked extensively with people on welfare, and I’m convinced it’s pretty much the WORST thing we can do for poor people. I was just trying to point out that younger conservative Christians are more concerned with these issues than previous generations, and political parties would be wise to take this into account. I’m certainly not advocating Democratic strategies for dealing with these problems.
PATTI, thanks for weighing in. I agree that we shouldn’t look to the government as the primary vehicle for carrying out Christ’s mission for us. This is a big part of why I’m a Libertarian: I want the government to leave a lot of stuff alone and let the private sector deal with it. I would be inclined to vote for a candidate who believed in such a strategy. But how does not helping elect worthy leaders make you any better at helping the widows and orphans of the world?
Colin, I liked my title better. I’m suing you for causing me severe psychological trauma.
Jasen Tracy said: “Jew, but once you’re registered you’re registered right? You don’t have to do it for every election.”
That’s right, you don’t need to re-register unless you move. You can skip an election and they won’t unregister you or anything like that.
Ok, Hungry, sorry if I misinterpreted. I thought you were libertarian, so I didn’t know why you seemed to be implying that governments should get into the poverty business.