How would Jesus vote?
November 2nd, 2008 | 
Author: 
Sojourners bumper sticker
It’s about 9 on Sunday night, and there is a crowd gathered around the flag pole in front of the Clark County Courthouse. My guess is that they are praying for the country in preparation for Tuesday’s presidential election.
This morning at First Fire, it was announced that members of the congregation would be holding a prayer vigil on Election Day at the church campus in Winchester Plaza. Many other churches around the nation are doing the same. That may be a good thing — as long as churches don’t openly support particular candidates.
Last Saturday, after covering Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell’s rally in Winchester, I had a conversation with a church friend about this election. I confided to her that the current two-party system poses a dilemma for people like me on the evangelical left (which is why I’ve been registered as an independent since 2002).
On the one hand, I’m conservative on sanctity-of-life issues such as abortion and euthanasia, and on matters of personal responsibility and personal morality. On the other, I’m liberal on issues such as justice for the poor (the earned income tax and Medicaid, for example), welcoming the stranger (immigration) and being good stewards of creation (i.e. the environment).
But for Christians, this woman said, abortion is the one issue that must take precedence over all others. The rest are just “temporal issues.”
While I respect this lady’s opinion, it isn’t an easy decision for me. I think I know how I’m going to vote Tuesday, but the closer the election gets, the more doubts I have.
One consideration for me is that “temporal” issues are what presidents and legislatures deal with every day.
Abortion is mainly a judicial matter, not a legislative or executive one, and legal abortion has a long history of judicial precedent. It’s been 35 years since Roe v. Wade guaranteed the right of abortion in every state, with some restrictions allowed during the third trimester.
Regardless of what activists on both sides say, it is not realistic to think that any president could appoint Supreme Court justices who would make abortion illegal — or, to put it another way, to make felons of frightened young women or their doctors.
Also, abortion can be a temporal as well as a spiritual matter. For example, during President Clinton’s eight years in office, the abortion rate declined. During President Bush’s eight years, it has gone back up. The main reason for this, I believe, is the economy. Fewer people were poor during the Clinton years, largely because of the adminisration’s economic and social policies.
So the way I see it, if you want to reduce the number of abortions (and who doesn’t?) you should vote for leaders who will improve the economy, provide more funding for social programs to help poor families and single mothers, put more emphasis on sex education in schools and promote adoption. If those same leaders also believe abortion is wrong in most circumstances, it may make them more attractive to pro-life voters, but it may not make them any more effective.
As for the myriad of other temporal (and spiritual) issues, I think it’s reasonable for Christians to emphasize the things Jesus and the Bible emphasized.
Poverty and justice for the poor are mentioned some 2,400 times in the Scriptures.
When Jesus announced his ministry, he said his purpose was to preach “good news to the poor,” and he proclaimed the “year of the Lord’s favor” — that is, the year of Jubilee: a God-mandated forgiveness of debts and redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. (Some would call it socialism.)
Also, when Jesus told a parable of the Last Judgment, he said those who would be welcomed into God’s kingdom are those who care for the hungry, the homeless, those without clothes on their backs, the imprisoned, the “least of these.” In other words, the poor.
By any objective measure, neither the Democratic nor the Republican Party is consistently “Christian.” Pro-life Catholic and evangelical Democrats are troubled by the Democratic Party’s tendency to make opposition to any abortion restriction whatsoever a litmus test for support. And “compassionate conservative” Republicans are often bothered by their party’s lack of concern for the disadvantaged.
Sojourners magazine sums it up well with a slogan that became popular during the 2004 presidential election and which has been revived this year: “God is not a Republican … or a Democrat.”
From 1980 until 2004, the Republican Party had a lock on evangelical and conservative Catholic voters. But that isn’t true anymore. Many younger evangelicals and Catholics are crossing over to the other side or becoming independents. Also, for the first time in many years, the Democratic candidate for president is someone who is comfortable talking about his faith, and the Republican candidate is someone who is not — although they both identify as Christians.
So, whoever wins on Tuesday, it will be interesting to see what the results of post-election polling show about how people’s religious faith influenced their votes.
I think the answers may surprise many of us.
Posted in Uncategorized
Enjoy the blog, Randy. I find that the older I get, the less I see things in black and white. I think any person who thinks for himself or herself makes the same transition as they go through life.
So, yes, I am really peeved when I see people try to use God as a weapon in politics. It cheapens BOTH! As for its effect on religion, see Europe. As for its effect on politics, see the more radical Islamic countries.
Another thing that gets to me is when people talk effusively about a candidate being “one of us.” There’s nothing wrong with that in and of itself, of course, but it’s SCARY to think that criteria would be the only or even primary reason to vote for someone.
Let me explain. When I look around the office where I work, I love and respect all my office mates. I would trust ANY of them with our children. I would say the same about most members of my extended family and my neighbors. But does that mean I would trust my country with ANY of them?
No, I don’t want “one of us” running my country. What’s wrong with wanting someone better than me? What’s wrong with wanting someone more educated than me? Someone who shows better judgment than me? Someone who understands complex issues better than me? Someone who has more intellectual vigor and curiosity than me? Someone who has more youthful energy than me? Someone with better ideas than me? On and on I could go.
Kinda like this election cycle.
Remember during the 90’s the house and senate was controlled by Republicans to keep Mr. Clinton (whom I met at the Whitehouse in 1995) in check. As to your religious outlook, you sound a bit “new-agey” so I find it hard to call you a true Christian. You sound like want your religion wrapped into a tidy little package that suits your needs, and that if you encounter any suffering you just make adjustments to make you feel better about you. Anytime somebody attacks a person’s religious views, you are dubbed “Jesus Freak” or some kind of slur of that nature. I only share this view with you because I am worried for you and many others like you. I am not trying to judge you, I am sharing my concerns of the nature of your blog. Fact is the world is really black or white, it’s good vs. evil etc…
Just so you know, the Bible doesn’t ever mention the USA anywhere in it’s text, and to me that says under an Obama nation, we will suffer many things in the coming years. We are fast approaching things that are spoken of in the books of Daniel, Ezekial, and of course Revelation. As for me, I am trying to continue reading what many call an antiquated book and finding many things that amaze me that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
I expect you to smirk and/or snicker upon reading this because intellectual giants much like yourself don’t want to face what some call the truth. Just remember… I have always heard there is a big difference between knowledge and wisdom.
[...] the election. I was left wondering the same question that he raised in his blog. His blog was “How Would Jesus Vote?” I will begin by saying that in general I don’t really think that God takes sides in things [...]
Well, I’ve never been called “an intellectual giant” before, and realizing the limitations of my intellect, I would reject the term. I’m just a journalist who happens to be a Christian — an orthodox (i.e. theologically conservative) one, not “new agey” or liberal in interpreting Scripture. I agree with Tex Himler that you have to look at all of it. The problem with many political right wingers is that they conveniently leave out the parts they don’t like, especially those that mention our social responsibilities to care for the poor, welcome the alien (i.e. immigrant), be good stewards of creation, not charging the poor high interest, being peacemakers, etc. You can’t pick and choose. Yes, the Bible is conservative on some things, like abortion and sexual fidelity. But it is ultra-progressive on economic issues, race relations, etc. To read it any other way is to read it through tinted lenses.