There are a lot of interesting things going on these days. Evangelicals endorsing Mormons, black candidates that can’t manage to be black enough, and lets not forget that the Rockies are somehow in the World Series. These are indeed strange times.
It has been interesting to see the Religious Right struggle to find a candidate to fall behind. Each candidate comes with his own set of problems. Liberal, divorced, flip-flopper, pro-choice, weak on defense, and so on. The Republican field has, for the first time in a while, had a front runner that is pro-choice (more or less). This has been a struggle for many conservatives because for most “Christians” abortion is not just political. It is also a moral issue. This has created an interesting potential problem for pro-choice, right-wing republicans. On the one hand we need a leader who is a good communicator, strong on defense, and tough on terrorism. On the other hand we also need a conservative who will cut spending, stop abortion, drill for oil regardless of wildlife, and stop taking so much money out of my paycheck.
But what is a good conservative to do if all of these qualities are not represented in the same candidate?
If I knew that in May of ‘08 there were going to be another catastrophic terrorist attack I would want Guliani in office. He has proven that he as the leadership and communication skills required to lead the nation through uncertain times.
If I knew that there were not going to be any major national emergencies in the next four years I would probably vote for… well… I guess Romney. He at least has done his best to look like a conservative. Of course the last time we all voted for a “conservative” for president we got one small tax cut towards the beginning of his presidency and nothing but more and more government spending for the next 6 years. Needless to say I think a lot of us were disillusioned. But thats another subject for another time.
I don’t beleive most evangelicals will vote for Giuliani in a presidential race. If most Evangelicals don’t vote that means Heil Hillary for the next four years.
Is it really wise for someone to stay home from the polls or to vote third party over only the issue of abortion?
No
Is abortion murder? Yes. Is it morally wrong? Yes. Is it hurting America? Yes. Is it worth handing the election to Hillary just so you can feel good about how important it is to take a stand on abortion? No
There are many questions that you have to ask yourself before you partially puncture a chad at the voting booth. But the biggest question you must ask yourself is: Is this person best for America?
If you even casually read the news you know that we live in troubling, dangerous times. The consequences of having a president who will not attack America’s enemies are just not worth it. What if after 9/11 Bush had waited around for the UN security council to defend America? What if he had just sent strongly worded letters to the Taliban? What if the Alkaida terror network had never been damaged? What if Bin Laden were a man living comfortably in Afghanistan instead of a scared rat running from cave to cave fearing for his life? The “what if” could continue, but I think you get the idea.
During the 2000 election we had no idea how vital and world-changing the next presidency would be. Thank God Florida finally got its act together and that Bush was the president when those planes hit the twin towers. Thank God he showed resolve, courage, and leadership. Thank God America pulled together and made its enemies run and hide.
National security and leadership in a time of crisis aren’t just a couple of issues to consider. They are the issues to consider. The whole reason humans have put up with government over the last few thousand years is that its the best way anyone can think of to protect each other. If we elect a president who can’t defend America we are really failing each other. I am not going to endorse a candidate just yet. The issue of national security is far to complicated to simply base our decision on the past. We also have figure out who has the best plans for the future.
America, please don’t take this decision lightly. A lot of people died so that we could get to choose who leads us for the next four years. Making this decision isn’t going to be easy. You might have to read a few newspaper articles, watch a debate for an hour, maybe even think about it a little bit. But I know we can do it. America has had made us the richest, safest, strongest people the world has ever seen. Don’t you think its about time we did a little something for our country?
10 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
The self-laudatory hubris of evangelicals who withhold their vote drives me to fits of sputtering indignantly and incredulously at their utter stupidity. I’ve been feeling this recently on reading about the reactions of BJU grads regarding Dr. Bob Jones III’s endorsement a Mormon. They’re a minority of course. And the evangelicals who are loathe to vote for Giuliani aren’t completely ridiculous like the BJU-protesting Mormonophobes–abortion is a moral issue. So I applaud, to some degree, their moral fortitude. But do they honestly think that voting for a pro-life candidate is really going to do stop abortion? All that to say that I agree–pick a candidate that’s best for the country overall. You don’t have to agree with every jot and tittle of a candidate’s platform to vote for them.
mass murder hardly seems like a jot or tittle to me. whether or not our future leader agrees to the death of thousands of innocent kids ought to be a deciding factor in choosing our next president.
More unborn chilren died in the United States today than people died in the September 11th attacks. Not to downplay the war in Iraq and our national security, but abortion, combined with the issue of same sex marriages, is too critical of an issue to ignore in a candidate. Political parties are amorphous things and if Guilliani were elected president in 2008 he would steer the republican party in a direction it absolutely should not go. Furthermore, if evangelicals and fundamentalists do not stand on the issue of abortion, then who will? Romney may be a flip-flopper as the issue goes but if he expects support in this election and re-election in the next, he knows he must stand against abortion. And who is to say that Romney or any other Republican will not be a strong leader in the war against terror? Whether the president has any power in changing the public policy over abortion is questionable, but to have a pro-choice candidate as the head of the “conservative” party in America is deplorable to me as it should be to any conscientious republican.
According to the constitution what, exactly, can a president do to stop abortion?
appoint supreme court justices who in turn can overturn cases, like the partial birth abortion, which was banned this past year only because bush appointed two conservative justices who were pro-life. the decision was
5-4 and both of Bush’s appointees were on the conservative side. When you consider that justice John Paul Stevens is getting pretty old it becomes even more important that a pro-life candidate sit in office just in case he resigns or dies. The president can also veto pro-choice legislation passed by the democratic congress…he can do a good bit.
So far the democratic congress has done nothing to further the cause of abortion rights. Judging by the political climate at the moment, I see no reason for this to change.
Yes, there is a possibility that one supreme court justice (or 8, who knows?) could retire or die. But if congress is still controlled by the democrats the senate will refuse to confirm the president’s appointee anyway. We saw how hard it was to confirm judges with a Republican majority in both houses, how much more difficult will it be to get a pro-life judge past a democrat-controlled congress?
Also, lets not forget that a supreme court nomination is not supposed to be based on political bias. It should be based on someone’s knowledge of the constitution, and experience on the bench. Right at this moment, the constitution does not protect an unborn child. Thats the real problem, and there isn’t a thing any president can do about that.
On the other hand, the president is the head of the military. I know we all feel secure right at the moment, but lets not forget that one bad president could mean the end of America as we know it. There are a lot of people out there that hate America and want to kill you. All I’m saying is that the president can do more to keep America safe than he can to stop abortion. Because of that, it is unwise to allow this to become a one-issue presidential race.
Presidential elcetions should never be one-issue races. We need a strong leader who can do some serious over-hauling to the budget, maintain America’s morals, and be strong on defense. Unfortunately I don’t think any such person exists.
You see the moral issues are improtant, because I am watching as the moral fibers of America decay. Do you realize the moral decay was a factor in the fall of Rome?
So you see its all important, but, like you said, every canidate has their flaws. I guess once more we’re stuck looking for the lesser of two evils, even though the lesser is still evil.
Something intelligent.
I guess I should clarify. By “every jot and tittle,” I was referring specifically to a)evangelicals who would choose a presidential candidate based on his religious beliefs (we should know by now not to take a politician’s stated religious preference too seriously, as there’s a good chance he’ll adopt whatever denominational preference is politically expedient), and b) one-issue voting. True, mass murder is a problem, a huge problem, but invading other nations isn’t too small a problem either(if the American gov’s involvement in the Middle East were primarily a humanitarian and justice-orientied issue, why didn’t we ever do anything about genocide in Darfur or Rwanda?).
My point, however unclearly communicated, was that each candidate has his flaws; to forsake voting altogether because the candidates have flaws is unrealistic and irresponsible.
Vote your conscience. That’s how it works. If you’re comfortable with voting for an overall good candidate who is “pro-choice” (man, I hate that word), then by all means, vote for him. It will be truly impossible to find someone who has all the qualities conservative Christians want AND a plausible chance at the presidency.
Yes, abortion is bad; but if you think for ONE SECOND that, even in the most condusive scenario imaginable, Roe v. Wade will EVER be overturned, you have some serious issues. Abortion has become a national institution in this country. It’s sick, but true. The best we will ever be able to do is curb the very worst aspects of it… if such things exist. And while the president can help in this matter, it’s not completely up to him, and many would believe.
You must be logged in to post a comment.