For the record, I won't be voting for ANY of the candidates this time around, just as I didn't in 2008, even if for slightly different reasons, as personal things had me somewhat consumed (to put it mildly) in 2008. I'm a registered Republican. I consider myself a fiscal conservative (as in we shouldn't spend money we don't have), and socially, I consider myself somewhere between centrist and libertarian (as in we should live and function as a community while respecting personal liberties). While it used to be true of me to an extent, I no longer vote for the jersey, but prefer to consider the make-up of the individual wearing it. This proves difficult when our primary process grinds the honesty and integrity completely out of our candidates (assuming they had any to begin with), and when the majority of our candidates care more about the jersey they wear than about the good of the nation. It also leaves me in a minority when most voters care more about the jersey (for a myriad of emotionalistic and religious reasons) than the Constitution and foundational liberties of our nation, and, more about the jersey than the foundations of their faith. Bold statements? Perhaps, but I'd bet the farm on them.
I feel considerably estranged from my political party. This ain't your Daddy's GOP. The extremists control it, and if they can't wrestle the nomination for one of their own (which they couldn't this year), then they sabotage the hopes of the nominee to make sure that they still control the party's fortunes. Without their support, no GOP candidate can win a general election, so the candidate is left with no choice but to surrender their integrity (which means they had little to begin with) and give in to many of the extremists' whims. I've been saying for a few years, only half-joking, "this Tea Party crowd's gonna be the end of us all", and especially as the religious right has melded into them and largely taken the TP over, it looks even worse. In 2010, the voters elected perhaps the most stupid, extreme, and ignorant Congress in the history of our nation. All from misguided emotion and religion, with an assist to the color of Barack Obama's skin.
I was watching a clip recently, an interview of Ann Coulter by Piers Morgan, and I could hardly believe my ears. You know how the rallying cry of the Tea Party crowd (particularly the religious zealots) is about "taking American back" and restoring it to what our founding fathers envisioned? When Piers Morgans questioned Coulter about the Tea Party and asked her if they compared favorably to the French Revolution (which was primarily an uninformed mob taking over with an emotionalistic mob mentality), she resisted that comparison, saying that they compared more favorably to the original Tea Party, and added (get this now), "the founding fathers weren't especially fond of the original Tea Party". O.M.G. And she was defending the Tea Party. Defending them. Yep. So the founding fathers didn't really like the first batch. What do you think are the odds they'd like this current group? Slim and none would be my guess.
We've viewed ourselves as "elite" for so long, and for all the wrong reasons, that we haven't even noticed the rest of the world passing us in just about every key area - education, life expectancy, infant mortality, we're the only industrialized nation in the world without a national health care system - and if you dare assess and address any of these issues honestly, the word "socialist" starts flying around. We have inane laws and regulations coming out of our bungholes, to the point that pretty much every American, technically, is a lawbreaker, a criminal. Unwittingly, of course, in most cases, but still lawbreakers. We lead the world in the percentage of our citizens incarcerated. We've become the elitist snobs of the world, when we really don't have anything to be snobbish about anymore. Our freedoms? About 95% of the countries of the world have our freedoms. We've fallen behind. We need to get our heads out of the sand.
We have a HUGE segment of evangelical Christianity that, aside from being clueless about their own faith, think that America is in some kind of national covenant with God like Israel was in the Old Testament. This goes beyond a basic misunderstanding of the old covenant and the new covenant into pure emotionalistic stupidity. Every four years, this group measures ALL sin and Christianity by three issues alone: 1) abortion 2) gays 3)Israel/Islam. They're convinced that God will judge our nation because of these issues. Jeez. If God were going to judge us as a nation, I think "The Bachelor", "Big Brother", and "Real Housewives" would make for better starting points. Christianity, with fundamentalism leading its charge, has just become SO shallow in this country. It literally diminishes its adherents, yet we think that we have some kind of national patent on Jesus Christ. No wonder we haven't noticed the rest of the world leaving us in the dust. There are a good number of international readers here, from every continent save for Antarctica, and in their emails to me even they've noticed that American Christianity is an entity all it's own, something they, as Christians in other countries, view with fascination, bemusement, sometimes confusion, and often see as generally bizarre.
We have an enormous segment of fundamentalist Christians who declare, with utter absolution, their commitment to the infallibility of the bible, and their own determination to live by it, including the "Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus" part, who speak of their anticipation, anxiousness, and excitement for Jesus to return and rapture them prior to a tribulation...and then they go to the polls and seemingly try to delay it for at least another four years, this November placing their Christian hopes in a Mormon to delay the tribulation rather than in the guy who professes faith in Christ. Seems to me that if they really wanted Christ to return, they'd vote for the candidate most likely to speed up the process.
I won't be voting for Obama. Not because he's a Democrat. Not because of the color of his skin. Not because of his religious affiliations or lack thereof. I won't be voting for him because, unlike a JFK, a Reagan, or a Clinton, I don't think he has a strong enough leadership personality to overcome an opposition party that hates him (for many reasons, including the color of his skin) and desires his failure, therefore desiring the failure of our nation. They want him to fail MORE than they want America to succeed, because in reality, they'll only be happy with America's success if it happens on their own (usually religious) terms and conditions.
I won't be voting for the other options because they aren't better options.
For those of you voting solely on the abortion/gays/Israel-Islam issues, that's your right, but let me ask you these questions...
- What position did Jesus take on abortion?
- What position did Jesus take on gay rights?
- What position did Jesus take on Israeli politics and Islam?
- What were Jesus' views on American politics/the Republican platform and the Democratic platform?
Hypocrisy and stupidity abounds. Politics+Religion=We're Screwed.
And for those who say..."I've NEVER wanted my country to fail, but Obama IS a failure!"...
ReplyDeleteI'm calling you on your bullshit.
Blog and this comment, Well Done!! I reside in Arizona, which I consider to be one of the most politically backwards places in the country. The majority here go around reiterating misinformation and blaming everything on our President. Who in spite of the cards stacked against him that you have so clearly pointed out, has made progress these past four years. Yes his opponents will deny it and I am sick of having to listen to their drivel. Lisa
DeleteSo well said, Lewis! This is something I've been thinking about and talking with my hubby about for quite some time now. Especially the part about Christians voting for a Mormon and shunning the guy that actually professes Christ.
ReplyDeleteAnd for what it's worth, this is the first election year that I won't be voting either for very much the same reasons as you.
"...and vote for a Mormon like a good Christian should."
ReplyDeleteTHAT is really all you needed to say! I grew up Southern Baptist and the Mormon church was viewed as the Cult of all cults. I'm having a hard time dealing with the fact that the Baptists are willing to get behind this guy. It causes a schism in my brain. Like I've falllen into some weird alternate reality. It disturbs me on so many levels, I can't even begin to describe them all.
The thing is is that "American Christianity" is no longer a religious faith, it's a political faith. Jesus has nothing to do with it.
Mormons profess Christ. They just mostly have their own form of religious addiction in which modern-day prophets and obedience to the church organization take the place of most Christians' Bible worship.
ReplyDeleteThey worship a different Jesus, yes; a corporate Jesus who wants his church to build shopping malls, rather than the Eldritch Horror of TurboJesus who is coming to destroy the world and save only his followers. (Although from being raised Mormon, I remember knowing the Second Coming was going to happen soon, just minus the Rapture.)
Would you at least spoil your ballot to voice your displeasure in a way that is measurable in voting stats?
ReplyDeleteSpoiling a ballot is better than not voting at all.
It wouldn't mean anything to either party. If it would, I'd probably do that.
DeleteI'm not voting for the Mormon. I'm voting for the Baptist. But that has nothing to do with -why-.
ReplyDeleteI myself don't really understand the idea that Christians shouldn't vote for a Mormon, or even an atheist. When I go to a doctor, I want to know whether he has the education, experience and qualifications to treat my illness. His religion is really not an issue. When I vote for a political candidate, I want to see a track record of wise decisions regarding legislation, proven moral integrity, and experience in the political system (and yes, that means knowing how to prioritize, choose his or her battles, and compromise where appropriate).
ReplyDeleteI'm not voting for Romney, but it's not because he's a Mormon. It's because I think his policies are the wrong ones for the nation at this time, because of the way he conducted himself in the corporate world, and because I think his choice of a running mate is pandering to the Tea Party.
I'm voting for Obama, not because he's a Christian (though I'm glad he is), but because I think his policies in general are better for the nation at this time, he has shown a willingness to compromise where appropriate and to choose his battles, and because though I disagree with certain things that I think constitute a compromise of his integrity, I don't see in him the kind of personal grasping for money that I believe I'm seeing in Romney.
I've read several places argumenting about Christians being hypocritical by voting for a Mormon instead of a Christian, and I feel the need to address that. I think first off, many Christians (by virtue of their "Republican" beliefs and ignorance) don't know that Obama is a Christian. If you read the statistics, over 25% of Americans still believe Obama is a Muslim. I think we can say almost with certainty that those 25% of people are fanatical Christian Republicans. Secondly, for religious fanatical voters, it's not as much about the religion of the candidate as it is about the religious moral views of the candidate. Obama, while he says he is Christian, supports gay marriage and abortion, two things which fanatical religious people adamantly oppose. So for them, they have to support a Mormon in order to vote for their social fascism. Plus, I'm sure you'd agree that evangelical religious fanatics would probably maintain that if you do not agree on their social moral issues (ie you're pro-equality and choice), then you are not a real Christian. In this way, it is easy to justify not voting for Obama because they probably don't view him as a true Christian (assuming they're aware that he is not Muslim).
ReplyDeleteOf course, that doesn't make it any more right, I just disagree about the hypocrisy of it.
Just so everybody is clear (cause there was some confusion earlier today)...I don't think Christians are morally obligated to vote for only Christians, or that there's anything wrong with a Christian voting for a Mormon or a person of any other faith. I'm just making note of the irony of it all.
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to compare Obama's leadership to JFK, Reagan, and Clinton, you also have to consider the level of opposition they suffered. I really can't speak for JFK, but neither Reagan or Clinton had to suffer the indignity of having to prove they were actually citizens when they probably had to prove it to officially run in the first place! That's not even the worst thing that Obama had to endure from the opposition this administration. GOP politicians have openly said that they will do whatever it takes to keep him from being re-elected. GOP politicians have actually condoned rape just so they wouldn't have to give Democrats any small victory. What kind of leadership can surpass that?
ReplyDeleteI agree that Obama faces more rabid opposition than any other modern President has (maybe Clinton's second term comes close), and I feel that this, rather than any particular deficiencies on Obama's part, is what would hinder a successful Presidency. If the Republicans keep the house, and make gains in the Senate (I haven't kept up with a lot of the numbers there, so I'm dealing in something of a blind hypothetical), he'll be treated as a lame duck for the entirety of his second term. Terribly unfair to him, and not a good situation for the country, but such is politics when the extremists are at the steering wheel.
DeleteI plan to vote for a third party because I can't find it in me to agree with either of the major parties. Even though voting for a third party candidate won't get that person elected, larger percentages of the vote going to third parties will let them hit numbers which will qualify them for things like more funding and more debate participation, which offers some slim hope of changing the overall conversation. It's the best thing I can think of to do with my vote in a system that feels increasingly illegitimate.
ReplyDeleteI'm not voting this election because I cannot in good conscience.
ReplyDeleteI don't appreciate the way Obama was willing to play chicken with our paychecks when he dug his feet in about his policies at the expense of military members and their families. I also don't know if Romney has proved he can keep his religion out of his politics (remember his stance on Jerusalem?), and I don't trust how patriarchal and authoritarian his belief-system is.
So in good conscience, I will be staying home this election. I will get judged and many will quote, "Render to Caesar" or "choose the lesser of two evils" at me. But for me, this is a matter of choosing between a known evil and an unknown, and I can't do it. So I choose to abstain- that is my vote.
God's in control; may the "best" man win.
If you are not pleased with Obama or Romney, have you looked into the Libertarian and Green parties? Sure it may be no more than a protest vote, but at least you voiced your conscience. If only a few million more people would do the same, maybe the one party, (excuse me), two party system would change.
ReplyDeleteMy semester abroad in Russia my junior year of college affected my political views radically, particularly those on foreign policy. I'll never forget how astonished I was to see our "great nation" through the eyes of the rest of the world - quite embarrassing, actually. It was election year, 2008, and I had already voted via absentee ballot for McCain, but by the time the election came around I was rooting for Obama. And then when he won and I said something celabatory on Facebook, one of my Christian friends said icily that she HOPED I had not voted for Obama, as he was for abortion, and I chafed at her small-mindedness.
ReplyDeletewhenever people start to drive me insane, i come here, heartened by the fact that there ARE sane Christians. [not to insult Christians, i don't - but, as you say, some of them... sigh]
ReplyDeletequestion: my interpretation of "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, God what is God's" is that Jesus was saying that government should be SECULAR, should NOT be run by religion or with "religious law"
what do you think, Lewis? [this is ignoring, of course, the fact that the US was founded as a SECULAR nation, with a stated aim of keeping church and state SEPARATE...]
all that said - i follow Heinlein's maxim - i vote AGAINST. in this case, against Romney. sadly, i believe you are entirely correct about the continued BS the GOP is gonna pull. still, i will vote AGAINST their BS. this is NOT me trying to get anyone ele to do anything, mind - just giving my thought on what *I* should do. everyone must vote their own conscience, even if that means not casting an actual ballot [it *IS* a vote, to not vote. na da?]
I think reading something like that into Jesus' statement is anachronistic wishful thinking. There simply was no such thing as secularism in the 1st Century. State and religion were so fundamentally tied together that nobody had any notion that they were different things, both in Second Temple Judaism and in the Roman principate of which the reigning Jewish religious authorities were vassals. Jesus, being a fire-breathing apocalyptic prophet, would lack all frame of reference for such an idea. I suspect he was just giving the sort of snarky, evasive answer he often gave to questions that he perceived as trick questions (or as stupid questions); for Jesus everything belongs to God, and for Jesus' straw-Sanhedrin everything belongs to Caesar. Everyone would take from his answer what they brought to the question (as, with all due respect, you seem to have done), which I think in this context was Jesus' intent.
Delete(I am of course not Lewis, and don't mean to be rude by stepping in with this reply. I apologize for any offense against local customs.)
I am not voting for either one either. But I do have a major problem with Christians saying they will vote for the 'lesser of two evils'. That are in fact admitting that they are voting for evil. Jesus said to either be Hot or Cold, not luke warm. You can't get any more luke warm by voting for the lesser of two evils. They are proving themselves such hypocrites, and they proudly admit it. That would be like demanding that Porn not be allowed in your house. Then one night you want to watch tv and there are only 2 shows on. Both porn. So you sit down and decide to watch the one with less porn then the other and proudly proclaim how you are still following God's path by doing so. WHen in fact, those two channels weren't your only choice. You could have turned off the TV and done something else. I myself would prefer Obama win. But I will not be a hypocrite like most Christians now a days. And this in not even getting into the 'Mormon' aspect of it and how the Religious right would vote for a mormon instead of a a professing christian and act like they are doing it for Christian reasons.
ReplyDeleteI completely disagree with you JOR. Jesus told Pilate, "my kingdom is not of this world, else my followers would fight". Jesus was very plain that the kingdom of God he so often spoke of was not an earthly political realm.
ReplyDeleteSo when he said, "Render unto Ceasar the things that are Ceasar's" he meant the taxes the Pharisees were asking about. Pay up. And when he said, "Render unto God the things that are God's" he meant the love, compassion, kindness, faithfulness, etc. that we call the things of the heart. The kingdom of God is within.
That is about as clear a distinction as can be drawn between politics and religion.
"My kingdom is not of this world" is partly spiritualistic, sure, but it's more than that. Jesus taught his disciples, at least, that the old world with its powers and authorities was passing away and a new, just world was ushering in. His eschatology involved an immanent resurrection and a coming new age, not some kind of disembodied afterlife or mere inner contentment with injustice (which frankly seems like a recipe for endless oppression). Pilate, for his part, was clueless and seems to have dismissed Jesus as a harmless nutcase, but the temple hierarchy had inkling enough of what Jesus meant to keep pushing for his execution. They were clueless in their own way, of course.
DeleteNow I do think it’s clear that Jesus is instructing his followers to pay the Romans’ taxes, but I suspect it’s for roughly the same reasons he told them to turn the other cheek, bless them that curse you, give your shirt to those that steal your coat, and for the same reason Paul told slaves to diligently obey their masters and the persecuted Roman church to obey the civil authorities, etc. It was practical advice for surviving in a harsh world under many layers of bloodthirsty kleptocracy (and shaming their oppressors while they were at it), until Jesus’ return in theological-military triumph. Yes, in the meantime "the kingdom of God was within them"; they were ambassadors for the new, just age. It had nothing to do with separating religion and politics, whatever that even means*. Of course, none of this kind of thing is an effective way to carry on a revolution, let alone a world-conquest, but Jesus believed God was going to take care of that part directly (and very soon).
*If, for example, people lived out love, compassion, kindness, faithfulness, etc. (what you identify as the religious stuff), do you think that would have no political implications at all? I say this as someone who is in every conventional sense non-religious, but a faith that is easily separable from something so pervasive as politics seems to me to be a dead faith. What’s the point of a religion that has no content? This is not an endorsement of the religious right, incidentally. I'm against everything they stand for, but I'd be against everything they stood for even if they had "secular" reasons for it (as they do, for much of it). In any case, in the world Jesus and his followers lived in, there simply was no conception of politics separate from religion. The Romans were not Enlightenment secularists (we are talking about people who would in a few decades start feeding Christians to lions for entertainment on the grounds that Christians were a bunch of cannibalistic atheists provoking the wrath of the gods).
No parentheses were harmed in the making of this comment.
"It was practical advice for surviving in a harsh world under many layers of bloodthirsty kleptocracy (and shaming their oppressors while they were at it), until Jesus’ return in theological-military triumph."
ReplyDeleteJesus only meant "the kingdom of God is within you" in some strange meantime before he comes back with an army and sets up a theocracy?
You are one fucked up dude. You don't understand the gospel AT ALL.
Look what we may have to look forward to in future elections:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/tim-tebow-politics-president-nfl-career_n_1895281.html
Just a few of your favorite things. :)
Good heavens, man. You're not voting for Obama because conservatives just hate him too much? I'm not voting for him because he's ok with partial-birth, giving money to people who hate Americans, keeping us dependent on foreign oil, a Marxist, and wants America to be something it shouldn't. I think your hatred of conservative nutjobs is blurring your vision.
ReplyDelete"We've viewed ourselves as "elite" for so long, and for all the wrong reasons, that we haven't even noticed the rest of the world passing us in just about every key area"
Except that so many have utterly lost sight of God, some are adopting Sharia law, and no one gives a damn about aborting babies. What was Christ's stance on this? He spoke against harming little ones, so I don't think He's ok with stabbing babies' skulls or tearing their tissue. God spoke against gay sex, so I doubt Jesus was concerned about giving men the right to sodomize each other, especially to remake this as a sacred union. As for Islam, it didn't exist yet, but since it was created by a sociopathic liar (like Gothardism), bred so many that became mass murderers, made life hell for Jews, and viewed women and children as vessels of destruction, I doubt He's favorable with the idea of coddling it.
No, God isn't a Democrat or a Republican; the idea's laughable, and so is trying to paste His Name to certain causes. But that doesn't mean several individual issues do not either honor His ways or spit in His face. I highly recommend the book "The Marketing of Evil"; I was pro-choice until I read it.
Jennifer
There is still balance thank God for your comments
DeleteThank YOU :)
DeleteRight, instead we should vote for a Muslim who wants to wreck America-like a good American should. I'm voting as an American, pal, as well as a Christian.
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot of misinformation, and the product of conservative rhetoric and propaganda, in your comment. My guess is that it came from the movie - made by a hard-core partisan who, btw, was just fired from his post at a Christian school for screwing around on his wife.
DeleteI have no idea what movie you mean but, lol, I know what Obama is, has done, and stands for, and whatever else, it's not the America our forefathers built.
DeleteIn any case, thanks for being open-minded enough to publish my comments.
DeleteWho is Obama? What has he done? What does he stand for? How does it differ from the founding fathers? And on what do you base these opinions of him?
DeleteWell, the founding fathers probably wouldn't be happy that our leader came from nowhere, is ok with killing babies and taking our taxes to pay for others' birth control, passes bills without our approval or even reading of them, would prefer we be dependent on oil from people who hate us, lowers our weapons when our enemies don't, and promotes a socialistic society. Try reading Levin's "Ameritopia". What do I base this on? His deeds, and often his own words.
Delete"I'm having a hard time dealing with the fact that the Baptists are willing to get behind this guy."
ReplyDeleteBetter to get behind a guy who loves illegal immigrants, wants your tax money to vote for birth control and create late-term abortions on demand? Who's most likely a Muslim? Yeah, there's a good idea.
A Muslim? Seriously? If he's a Muslim, he really, really sucks at being a Muslim. In fact, quite a few of his statements would require death under Sharia Law.
Deletei want to +1 this comment SO BAD!
Deletei am absolutely sick of the whole "Obama is Muslim" idiocy. he's so not Muslim it's insane, but the issue is that people who don't know anything ABOUT Islam, who only know what "everybody" knows which is 95% untrue and the rest is exaggerated. really, all they know about Islam is that it isn't Christianity, is newer THAN Christianity, and that Europe considered Islam a rival/enemy for centuries, leading them to attack the Middle East over and over again in the Crusades. that's it.
*WHY* do they think Obama is Muslim?
because he isn't white. period. sigh.
LOL Yes, because he's not white, it's more of the racist crap, we're all black-haters. I can't believe I just heard this crap.
DeleteHe sucks at being a lot of things. But considering his Muslim father, his habit of being bent at the waist greeting foreign Islamic leaders and his eagerness to pacify them, and his own reverend and politics, he's far more likely to be a Muslim than any kind of Christian. So I'm a little amazed at the idea that a Christian could be scolded more for voting for a Mormon.
Deletebowing is accepted diplomatic behavior for the leaders of MANY countries and religions. he bowed to the Pope, too - you going to say he's Catholic?
Deletei mean, my dad's a rabid - i mean RABID - atheist. i was a LOT more involved with my father than Obama was with his. i *MUST* be an atheist, right? because my dad is. i have NO CHOICE, none at all - what *I* believe is irrelevant...
as for "Pacifying" them... i don't even know what you mean by this. elsewhere you rant that he's "keeping us reliant on foreign oil, the countries that hate us" - you blame OBAMA for the Oil Companies refusal to allow alternatives to be developed? when they've been doing THAT for 30+ years? or is it because he won't flat-out conquer other countries? especially Iraq, which the US attacked *illegally*...
his reverend is Christian. his politics are Center politics - if you mean the Health Care thing, did you know we're the ONLY 1st world country without it? did you know more babies die in the US from FIXABLE medical issues than in CUBA?! [I.E. we are 42nd in the world in infant mortality - Cuba and India both rank higher at keeping infants alive. same with maternal mortality]
i won't touch your "baby killing" BS, except to note that 50 years ago, the Christians in this country really didn't care about abortion one way or another - until it became a political issue, in fact.
likewise, i'm ignoring the rest of your "socialism" BS. because you're BEING A SOCIALIST RIGHT NOW USING THE SOCIALIST TELEPHONE AND INTERNET SYSTEM!!! and if you've ever used fire department, police, ambulance, emergency room, 911, the ROADS... socialism IS NOT BAD. it doesn't always WORK [not that there has EVER been a socialist government. there have been gov'ts that adopted the NAME, some that have socialist programs - but we've NEVER seen pure socialism. which is sad... reading what Jesus had to say, one would think HE was a socialist, and would approve of such measures] but socialism is NOT inherently bad or evil. and i don't know why people are freaking out about the idea. i don't get it, at all.
do you have anything of SUBSTANCE to say?
In any case, I ask that wherever we stand, we pray hard for this country; we do have nutjobs like Doug Phillips on one side, spreading ignorance and fear, and radical liberals on the other who would love to force our kids to have secular education and the rest of us to pay through our noses for causes we don't even believe in (and then there are both libertarians and conservatives who are so scared of the government, they're blind to the fact that, in cases like the children of the polygamous compound, the government desperately needed to take action and were instead forced to dump the kids back in the snake pit). Because of all these inbalances on both sides, we're in a bigger mess than ever before. Pray, and pray hard.
ReplyDeleteMeh. Just needed to vent to a group that would understand...this election season, I was chewed out for failing to believe that Obama could be the antichrist (yes, someone got mad at me because I did not actively believe this), and I have been told that anyone who is a liberal must hate God and will spend eternity in hell with their father Satan.
ReplyDeleteI'm serious, guys, did I wake up in the Twilight Zone?