Yesterday a visitor to my blog left this comment for me (on, weirdly, my “My YouTube Videos” page): “How could any ‘christian’ [sic] even consider voting for anyone other than Senator McCain!”
In that challenge there’s much implied and assumed—but I doubt its author was looking for an in-depth conversation about, say, the differences between a democracy and a theocracy. She was being personal.
So, speaking personally: I like John McCain. I’m not thrilled with the way he’s handled this presidential campaign, but I believe that once in office he’d settle down and do a good enough job. I’m afraid I have to say, however, that what got me waving adiós to Mr. McCain was his choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate. There was no way I personally could avoid thinking that choice had a good deal more to do with McCain’s immediate need to get elected than it did with any long-term vision of his for getting America back on track.
When he first picked Palin, I thought, “Wow! Excellent way for Our Man John to snag disaffected Clinton women and the right-wing Christian vote he’s so thoroughly alienated. Sweet!”
Then I saw her interviewed, and realized that half the women who shop at my Albertsons (which, since I’m a house-husband, is about the only place I ever see anyone at all) are as prepared as Sarah Palin is to be vice-president of the United States—let alone president. (And I know that’s not true—or fair. It’s probably only a third. Kidding! It’s a fourth.)
I could be wrong about that. Yesterday I thought sautéing onions and mushrooms in canola oil instead of olive wouldn’t compromise the flavor of my spaghetti sauce–and I sure was wrong about that. But whaddaya gonna do? Life is a series of judgment calls. You gather your information; you decide; you execute; you hope you did the right thing; if you didn’t you try to fix it.
In matters of consequence we Christians, of course, add to that first step, “Ask God.”
If, when you ask God for whom he wants you to vote, the answer you receive is, “Vote McCain!” then you can tune out the media, because you’re definitely decided.
I personally won’t be voting for McCain, because I fear the lack of judgment I believe he’s too often shown during his current campaign. But if God does tell me to change my vote, you can trust I’ll have a “McCain/Palin” sign in my front yard faster than you can say, “This way to heaven!”
Until then, all I can do is all any of us can do, which is make my best call according to my best lights. I’ve got good friends—real friends, people of God whose judgment I’ve come to respect and rely upon—who are voting for McCain. I’ve got dear friends who think Obama is the bomb. We sometimes get together, all of us, and we talk, and exclaim, and expound. And after a long, heartfelt prayer, we all return to our homes and loved ones. And all along the way each of us hopes and prays that this country, which we so passionately love, is going to be all right.
(Postscript: After I wrote the above, I clicked on to the website of The New York Times. And there I saw today’s headline story [Powell Backs Obama and Criticizes McCain Tactics] about how, on this morning’s Meet the Press, Republican Colin Powell had endorsed Obama. A bit from the article: “Mr. Powell told Tom Brokaw, the host of Meet the Press, that he had been disturbed in recent weeks by the negative tone of Mr. McCain’s campaign …. Mr. Powell, who was secretary of state in the first term of President Bush, also said that he was concerned about Mr. McCain’s selection of Ms. Palin as his running mate and had come to the conclusion that she was the wrong choice. ‘She’s a very distinguished woman [said Powell], and she’s to be admired, but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president.’”)
Follow-up to this post: Beyond The Christianization of Abortion.
Related post o’ mine: Does the Holy Spirit Vote Republican?
Just out: UNFAIR: Why the “Christian” View of Gays Doesn’t Work (softcover edition; Kindle edition; NookBook edition). You’re invited to check out my Facebook page, and my group Unfundamentalist Christians, the motto of which is “Above all, love.”
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 57 comments… read them below or add one }
← Older Comments
Candace, McCain was not exonerated, the prosecutors felt there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute. Different meaning altogether. Was there anything else Mr. Wade wrote that was not factual?
I found this on the web and it echos my sentiments exactly.
Please read, and think about what is being said.
Why, As a born again Christian, I cannot morally vote for John McCain
October 30, 2008 by Anthony Wade
As I am sure it will come as no surprise to many who know me, I will be voting for Barack Obama this year. I am doing so as a born-again Christian who believes in the bible as the inerrant word of God. I am doing so because I feel morally compelled to do so. It is my Christianity that compels me to vote for Obama. Allow me to explain.
The organized church has long held the notion and belief that we should be voting for the candidate that most closely represents our values or beliefs. This has been a sham. You must understand that while we believe what we believe in the church, the world is entirely different. The world of politics is inherently corrupt. There is simply no escaping it. The desire for power and money take precedent over values and beliefs. It is a fairy tale to assume that we will elect a Christian who will not be inherently corrupt. In 2000 we elected someone who claimed the mantle of Christianity and eight years later we see the destruction left from the presidency of George W. Bush. If anything, we should learn that merely saying you are for Christ does not mean anything. The bible warns us:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ – Matthew 7:21-23
The bible implores us to look at the fruit, not the words. The country has been impoverished, the educational system and infrastructure are in ruins, there are over 200,000 people dead in wars that have been proven to be based upon pre-meditated lies, our civil liberties have been eroded and torture is now the official policy of this land. I have heard the cries of “it can’t all be his fault.” Yes it can and yes it is. It is time we stopped enabling and avoiding the truth.
Thankfully, Bush cannot run again but we need to take lessons from his presidency. I have heard the cries of the pro-life and anti-gay marriage platform. It is time to be honest about them though. The GOP has no intention of ever overturning Roe versus Wade and even if they did, that would not outlaw abortion. It would only return the issue to the states. They cannot afford to overturn it because it is their greatest weapon every four years. If there was no abortion issue, the only thing they would have left to run on is endless war and tax breaks for the rich – not exactly a winning combination. So, I know it is unsettling for Christians but the reality is what it is. On gay marriage, both candidates have the same position.
More importantly though is you have to understand that Christians are being used. Christians are being co-opted. The people that send you the pro-life emails and anti-Obama emails are the same folks. They are not Christian and do not care about the cause of Christ. They only care about you voting for their person.
I am voting for Obama because I know when someone tries so hard to lie about someone, they must not have any substantive reason for me to vote for them. The McCain campaign and its operatives have spent 90% of their efforts trying to make me afraid of Barack Obama. The Obama lies that have been spread have been varied and insidious. The bible speaks directly against this. God hates lying lips. I know that Obama is not a secret Muslim, refuses to wear a flag pin, wont say the pledge, wants to take God off of the currency, knew someone 10 years ago who was a domestic terrorist 40 years ago, or supports infanticide and partial birth abortions. These are lies. I will not be used by people who wrap Christ around lies while they try to convince me to vote my Christian conscience.
I do not pretend that either candidate represents true Christian values. I have heard some of the theology of Obama and it is wrong. But I also know that McCain is an admitted adulterer, liar and thief (Keating Five). The bottom line is that I have not heard John McCain tell me one good reason, Christian or otherwise, why I should vote for him. The economic policies of the last eight years have been a disaster and have seen the middle class squeezed into the working poor. McCain unashamedly admits to wanting to continue the same failed policies. The number one topic in the bible is taking care of the least in society but we have lost our way. With so many living in poverty and 50 million without healthcare, how can we say that we are a nation of Christian values? The foreign policy of arrogance and unprovoked war over the past eight years has decimated our military and damaged our credibility in the world. McCain could be even worse. He has mocked about dropping a nuclear bomb on Iran. The 200,000 people dead in the Middle East may not mean anything to some folks, but they mattered to God. I am tired of the church turning the Prince of Peace into a war monger. The truth is there is not one pro-war verse in the New Testament; not one.
I am also voting for Obama because John McCain carelessly put political expediency first, not his country when he selected the most unqualified vice presidential candidate in the history of this country. The fact that she is a Christian is absolutely irrelevant. Once again, what is the fruit? She was on video asking a congregation to pray for the 30 billion dollar pipeline deal in Alaska, referring to it as “God’s will.” She has been exposed now as having abused her power to try and ruin the career of someone who had the temerity to divorce her sister. Her answers on everything from the simple to the difficult display her utter emptiness. I also do not need the “shucks” and winks. We have had eight years of a president who couldn’t put a coherent sentence together with two hands and a thesaurus. I do not want another. The days of wanting to have a beer with our president are graciously over. Can you honestly see Sarah Palin negotiating nuclear proliferation treaties? ‘Aww shucks Putin, I can see you from my kitchen window.” Wink wink. No thanks. And enough with the ridiculous notion that she has more experience than Obama. Barack was the first black President of the Harvard Law Review. He spent over a decade as a constitutional law professor (you remember the constitution don’t you?). He then spent over another decade as a State Senator where he represented 750,000 people, which is 100,000 more than Sarah represents as Governor. So save the canned GOP talking points please. She is horribly unqualified and dangerous to this country, period.
So as a Christian I cannot morally vote for someone who will continue the status quo. Someone who will continue to punish the poor for the sake of the rich. My bible tells me I cannot support that. I cannot vote for someone who cares so little for life that he can casually joke and sing a song about nuking another country just because they look different than us. My bible tells me I cannot support that. I just can’t.
I can hear the cries already from the far right. They have been sold the wedge issues for so long now that everything always comes down to abortion and gay marriage. It is as if there is nothing else going on in the world that matters to God. Genocide and famine? Nope, we got to stop abortion and gay marriage. Jesus Christ charged us with bringing the Gospel to a lost world. That was the Great Commission. That does not mean we are to bring our morality to the world but the love of Jesus Christ. Remember what we believe is at stake. We believe in heaven and hell. Eternal life with God and eternal separation from God. I ended a recent debate with a well intended Christian who felt morally compelled to vote McCain this way. Even if you were able to succeed in your plans to stop all abortions in the world and stop all gays from marrying; you have accomplished nothing. Based upon what we believe, they all would still be going to hell because of their separation from God. The Great Commission replaced by what man feels is more of a moral imperative. We need to stop trying to bring the morality of Christianity to people and get back to the red letters in the bible. Get back to bringing the world the love of Jesus Christ.
Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 41-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess.
Anthony Wade
@ Roni:
Your Mr. Wade is not free of the lies he purports to so despise and "educate" against.
Case in point: His referring to Keating 5 to impune McCain. McCain was exonerated of any wrongdoing.
I take no advice from someone who presents themselves as walking the high road on the one hand, and then proceeds to engage in exactly the same tactics he rales against.
Wickle: totally funny. Beautiful.
Morse: thanks, man. see ya' in hell, fry-boy.
John -
I’m sorry; I must have missed that part in the Bible about how it’s a sin if I don’t vote for John McCain in 2008. If you’d just point out where it says that, I’ll be extremely happy to change my vote.
It's in II Extrapolations 20:08, I think.
As an atheist who is voting for Obama, my people will gladly accept any Christian who votes for Obama into the 'non-Christian' family.
Is the word "Jesus-ian" taken, perhaps?
I'm sorry; I must have missed that part in the Bible about how it's a sin if I don't vote for John McCain in 2008. If you'd just point out where it says that, I'll be extremely happy to change my vote.
John,
I looked carefully at your post. I have considered it carefully. I read all the comments.
I don't believe one can be a Christian and Vote for OBAMA. It will be sin. OH, God can forgive you, he forgives Adultery and Murder. If you vote OBAMA you might even be forgiven. BUT, you sin with intent.
Kind of dicey territory.
Tavdy: thanks for your kind words re: "I'm OK." I KNEW you were smart—and now, of course, I know you're exceptionall brilliant.
Chris: good point on the donations "issue."
tavdy, I just copied your remarks. Thanks for sharing them. That was just such a compact remarkable assemblage of facts.
How is accepting donations from willing donors being a hypocrite?
You know, you may have just inspired me to donate to his campaign.
“Mr. Obama is soundly anti-Second Amendment and I do honestly believe that the disarming of America would become a reality. “ – Mike Boyce
Given the recent spate of violence against Democrat supporters in states like NC and TX, I’m inclined to agree with your concerns here – and I don’t think I’m the only liberal coming round to that position either: some Democratic voters are already buying guns for self-protection against the less enlightened of the pro-gun lobby. Of course this just increases the likelihood of people dying.
[/sarcasm]
Unfortunately I was serious about liberals buying guns for self-protection – it’s already happening in several of the battleground and red states. Personally, I’m undecided on the issue – banning guns doesn’t stop killings, it simply means that killers resort to blades instead – and knifing deaths can be just as unpleasant, if not more so.
“But, the most troubling feature of the Democrats, and especially the Democrats controlling the Senate, the House, the White House and most likely the Supreme Court, would the the totalitation nature of their government and the damage that would do to all who disagree with Socialism.” – Mike Boyce
If Congress is currently biased towards the Democrats, it is because the American people elected more Democrats than Republicans to Congress. If they elected more Democrats, it’s because they believe they will do a better job than the Republicans. That’s the way democracy works – everyone gets a say.
In addition, the US Supreme Court was, until George W Bush’s nomination of Samuel Alito to replace Sandra Day O’Connor, divided equally between conservatives, liberals and moderates. Currently the court is divided between 4 conservatives, 2 moderates and 3 liberals*, thus claims that the Court would be swung in favour of liberals would really mean it would be given balance between the two sides once more. As it happens, it is unlikely that any conservatives would step down during the coming presidency, so I do not see how Obama could be expected to bring balance to the Court – let alone swing it in the liberals’ favour – if he is elected, which is what you suggest. On the flip side, one liberal (Stevens) almost definitely will step down. If McCain is elected and follows the example set by his predecessor, the Court would have 5 conservatives, 2 moderates and 2 liberals – which I’m sure you’d agree is imbalanced.
Finally, regarding socialism, the US is thirteenth on the Economist Group’s Quality of Life Index, and twelfth on the UN’s Human Development Index; in both cases all the nations that outrank the US have socialist-capitalist hybrid economies. Several nations – Ireland, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland Sweden, Australia, & Finland – are above the US on both lists. Of the top 25 cities on Mercer’s Quality of Life Survey, all 25 are in countries with socialist-capitalist hybrid economies. The nationalised health services found in most other Western countries, such as the UK, Belgium, Canada and Poland, typically cost less than 2/3 the cost per person of the US privatised system, and they all outperform it on key benchmark figures like life expectancy, cancer survival and infant mortality.
In addition, the current US financial crisis was caused, in part, by the lack of regulations on the derivatives market – a hybrid socialist-capitalist economy would typically include those protections. The main reason the hybrid economies are also at risk is because of heavy investment in the US, as can be shown by the near-collapse of the UK’s Northern Rock just over a year ago. Incidentally, I’ve seen some reports that say some US economists believe that the EU will take over as the world’s leading economy once the coming recession has passed; since the EU already has a significantly larger economy ($16.8trillion vs. $13.8trillion) this is an eminently achievable goal for Europe.
“Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin both seem to be persons of charachter, and Mr. McCain’s proven charachter is without question. Mr. Obama’s charachter is defined, in my opinion, by his association with persons of apparently poor charachter, lyMr. Ayers and Rev. Wright. His association with Mr. Resko also is a negative.” – Mike Boyce
Mr. Obama’s link to Mr. Ayers was, to my understanding, purely professional and – at best – tenuous. They served on the board of the same charity for a period during the 1990s; for Mr. Obama to disassociate himself with Mr. Ayers at that time would mean stopping his involvement with an charity working to improve education in the Chicago area. While Mr. Ayers has also campaigned on behalf of Mr. Obama during the mid ’90s, it would be naive to automatically assume that means there is a close link between them – all it tells you is that Mr. Ayers preferred Mr. Obama’s policies to those of his opponent at the time, and felt strongly enough to take action. Given that both are politically active and (at the time) lived in the same area of Chicago, it would be equally naïve to expect them to have had no contact whatsoever.
I would be at least as concerned, if not more so, at the decision by Mr. McCain to choose as his VP candidate the wife of a former member of a separatist organisation.
I did believe that Mr. Obama himself had made it clear he doesn’t agree with all Rev. Wright’s opinions, but that he valued the man for other advice he had given in the past. It seems to me that Mr. Obama is trying to avoid isolating anyone from the political process – something which the Republican party has tried to do in several states through its use of foreclosure lists to deny people the right to vote. Unless you’d like to reform the American electoral system until “only the right people can vote”? That seems like a return to the Jim Crow laws to me – preventing citizens from having a voice in the democratic process is not democracy, irrespective of how abhorrent their views might be. I haven’t yet heard of Mr. McCain publicly rebuking racists comments that have been made by his supporters.
Re. Mr. Rezko – I suggest you investigate Donald R. Diamond, the Arizona developer and McCain campaign donor, and the Ford Ord Army base deal Mr. McCain helped push through for him – a deal which cost the US tax payer several million dollars.
“my pocket book comes second to the principles of freedom, liberty, Christianity and strong self-defense.” I don’t see Mr. Obama or the Democratic Party standing for any of these principles, plain and simple. In my idealistic view, I too must ask, how could a Christian vote for the party who seems bent on the persecution of Christianity and removal of God from our culture?” – Mike Boyce
Senator Obama has a well-documented personal faith, and (like most Democrats) he is in favour of protecting freedom of religion and the separation of church and state, both of which are inshrined in the US constitution. By default, that position means he will fight to protect the right of all Americans to believe as they wish and practice those beliefs freely, and I would suggest that to oppose that position should be considered un-American.
On the flip-side, Many of the most vocal supporters of Mr. McCain and Mrs. Palin are far-right Christian groups who would like to see the American tradition and principle of religious freedom and equality ended in favour of a theocratic system of government that would deny religious liberty to not only non-Christians but also to many Christian groups.
Incidentally, religious liberty is listed under article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
Regarding your concerns over America’s ability to defend itself, a McCain presidency could leave the US at greater risk of attack by Islamist terrorists by alienating key allies in the War on Terror. It would also (in my opinion) increase both the likelihood of a war with Iran and the likelihood that the US would have to fight it alone. An Obama presidency carries neither of these risks, in part due to the broad public support Mr. Obama has in the majority of foreign nations.
“If you know of vile statements from the right, I’d like to be made aware of them.” – Seriously?
“You’re going to be voting for a guy who voted to withhold medical care from babies born as a result of botched abortions.” – Liz
One of Mr. McCain’s “Robocalls”:
“I’m calling on behalf of John McCain and the RNC because you need to know that Barack Obama and his Democrat allies in the Illinois Senate opposed a bill requiring doctors to care for babies born alive after surviving attempted abortions — a position at odds even with John Kerry and Hillary Clinton…”
Obama voted against the legislation because those protections already exist in Illinois state law, and because he believed that other provisions in the law were counter to his opinions on the right of women to have abortions. I cannot be sure how Clinton or Kerry would have voted, however I would not be surprised if they had voted in the same way. Incidentally, I disagree with Mr. Obama’s view on abortion, although I would prefer to see abortions reduced by avoidance than an outright ban based on religious dogma – even if I agree with that dogma.
$150 million dollars collected by the Obama campaign just during the month of September is obscene.
1. He first pledged to use federal matching dollars, and then completely reversed himself because he didn't want to agree to spending caps as required.
2. He tells us he cares about poverty in our nation and in the world.
People are putting such hope in him as an example to this nation, but when he sets such a horrible precedent, where will spending on the next election be? A billion dollars per candidate?
Obama should be refusing to spend more money on his campaign out of conscience. He's being a hypocrite.
Lol no – it's just that American politics is so much more interesting than British politics. Well, unless you count the rather amusing current bitch-fest between David Cameron's right-hand-pillock George Osborne and the House of Lords' newest member, Baron Mandelson (Yes that Mandelson) over five meetings Osborne had with a Russian oligarch in an attempt to get a £50K donation. This is at a time when the oligarchs' debt-fueled industrial empires are crumbling around them. But that's more a case of amusingly ironic farce than anything actually serious.
TBh I just get a little annoyed of seeing the same old trite anti-Obama comments, most of which are either irrelevant, blatant lies or spun so badly trying to actually get to the truth is like sitting no a giant spinning top for an hour – all you'll get is dizziness and a headache. I also get annoyed by similarly spurious of the claims made against McCain and/or Palin, such as that Todd Palin is a current member of the Alaska Independence Party (he isn't, but he used to be).
And no, I didn't get an 'A' for it (Unless you want to give me one). However you get an 'A' for the first three chapters of "I'm OK – You're Not" – I honestly don't know whether to laugh, cry or nod sagely in profound agreement when reading it. Unfortunately trying to do all three both weird and hilarious, and therefore distracting, so I try to avoid them.
Holy cow, Tavdy. Did you actually WRITE all this? This is really … one amazing comprehensive, super-articulate, finely crafted … blog comment. You didn't write this JUST for this blog, right? This is … like, some PAPER you turned in somewhere? And got an "A" for???
Paul,
There's nothing inherently anti-socialist about Christianity. Indeed there are a number of Christian Socialist groups who may disagree with you. Such as: http://www.thecsm.org.uk/
But Obama is not a socialist politician. He isn't fighting for worker ownership of the means of production. From the UK perspective, he'd be centre-right, and has received support from senior Conservative politicians here such as David Cameron and Boris Johnson.
And redistributive taxes are not a solely socialist policy, they can been seen as a strong way to placate the masses, to prevent revolution and to maintain peace and order, making strong capitalist sense. The recent history of the Poll Tax in the UK is a good example.
Brian: That’s the EXACT same part of Powell’s endorsement that riveted my mind and heart, too. It was EXTREMELY good.
NICE quote from the Constitution!!!! (And totally … trenchant, actually, final comment there.)
Let me start by saying that I don't like either candidate. But Obama's stances are so far from my Christian beliefs that it is impossible to vote for him. First of all, socialism is wrong. You do not take from one group for the sole purpose of giving to another. The Bible says that we should give, but that is not giving; that is redistributing. The Bible says, "if a man does not work, then he should not eat." We are responsible for each other, but that is not the way to do it. I could go on forever describing how bad an Obama presidency would be, but others have probably done that for me. I cannot vote for someone whose whole world view is directly opposed to the Bible.
John…
Two things. The best moment in the Colin Powell interview on Beat the Press in which he endorsed Obama was when he said Obama is a Christian but what if he were a Muslim?"
—-
Gen. Powell: "Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel particularly strong about this because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay, was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone, and it gave his awards – Purple Heart, Bronze Star – showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the head stone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It has a crescent and star of the Islamic faith.
And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was fourteen years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could serve his country and he gave his life."
—-
I'm going to finish this post by quoting yet another radical document, the Constitution of the United States:
———-
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
———-
The Constitution said it. I believe it. That settles it.
Well, I’m only voting for a presidential candidate this year so I can complain for the next four years. That’s how disappointed I am in all the candidates this year.
My feelings are – by golly, if you don’t vote – you don’t have a right to complain.
Yes. Sure. Perfect. Whatever. No offense–but don’t care. Hope you don’t either, really. I’m sure you have more of a life than that. God, I hope so.
@John Shore: I can’t dissect your sentence into the proper parts (subject, object, etc), but re-reading your quote that included “murdering babies”, I think it could be easily interpreted two ways. The entire statement clearly was pejorative, but the “murdering babies” bit could be read both as your position or mocking someone else’s position. Can we call it a draw?
…and yes, abortion is horrible, but there are worse things…such as knowingly forcing a child into poverty, addiction, or disability.
It certainly does! Awesome. I can’t BELIEVE the time people take to … well, in this case, make a point on a blog. Excellent work. (I knew I was going to catch it the moment I wrote “Such people….”
Anyway, yes. Right. This is the beginning of what could certainly become an enriching conversation. I’m afraid I personally won’t be having that conversation with you, because so much of what you’ve said here needs, to my mind, so very much clarification and then further exploration and so on and on and on and on. For instance, just your question, “…doesn’t a vote for that candidate imply support for that general world view as well?” would take forever to parse through, you know? Just the phrase “general world view” is bound, sooner or later, to trigger a 50,000 word exchange and analysis that would wade and splash and leap (and invariably drown) in semantics and philosophy, to name but two pools.
Too much for me.
I just personally appreciate Obama’s position on abortion: It’s a tragedy; no one casually decides to have one; I’m comfortable with the idea that ultimately—given privacy, given our long-cherished separation of church and state—deciding for a woman what she should or shouldn’t do with her body falls outside the proper purview of the government. I wish no one ever had an abortion. It’s a total nightmare. I just don’t see enhanced governmental invasion of our privacy as the answer to that nightmare. I REALLY like the idea of concentraing as many of our resources as possible on doing everything we can to ensure unwanted pregnancies never happen in the first place.
You and I agree that abortion is a terrible, terrible thing. We only differ in what we think the most effective solution to that problem is. Which never seems as great a separation to me as I know it sometimes does to others. We have differing ideas about the means, but agree on the end. That’s the important thing.
Just to clarify, Mike (FVThinker) Burns:
*** Amendment I to the U.S. Constitution ***
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti
John,
This discussion made me tired. It’s why I don’t like to get into political discussions on my own blog.
I understand why you are voting for Obama, just as I understand other believers who are voting for McCain ~ I think that it is important to recognize (as I am sure that you and *most* of your readers do) that there is no political candidate who is God’s choice. As you said, we do the best we can.
I have been all over the map during this campaign. I was all about McCain until he began running one of the sloppiest, most error-prone campaigns in recent memory, up to and including his selection of Palin. I am still considering Obama. However, I am beginning to lean towards Barr. Not because I buy the libertarian position (I don’t) but because he is the only candidate who hasn’t robo-called my house scores of time and choked my mailbox.
John, you said:
"And, like any sane person, I actually share their core sense that abortion is … horrible. Of course it is. No one SUPPORTS the murder of babies; the very assertion that people who vote for Obama are in favor of people murdering babies is so stupid it wipes out the rules of normal engagement. Such people never want to have a real conversation [...]."
Actually, I do want to have a real conversation, and I won't consign anyone to hell for voting for someone.
My thoughts:
If a candidate's voting record shows consistent, unwavering marquee support for a specific, hot-button issue (whatever it is), doesn't a vote for that candidate imply support for that general world view as well?
For example, no true pacifist would ever have voted for George Bush because he made attacking terrorists literally the hill he would die on, if necessary. Hillary Clinton, when first lady during her husband's first term, tried to lead universal health care, and though it was rejected, she went to the mat for it as a core belief of hers at that time. I think Barack Obama has made it pretty clear that the abortion issue is extremely important to him and to his core supporters. For example, he said one of the first things he plans to do is to sign FOCA – Freedom of Choice Act, that would guarantee a fundamental right to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8), and he also wants to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which lets taxpayers avoid having their tax dollars pay for abortions across the board (while now we pay for just those abortions where rape, incest, health of the mother are at stake).
I'm not a single issue voter, and I never will be. I don't vote based on abortion alone, but it does factor into my decision-making.
I do look at a candidate's level of devotion to an issue. Senator Obama has made it clear that he doesn't just want to preserve abortion rights as they are, but finds it important expand those rights significantly. He co-sponsored a bill to make it easier for industry to create human embryos for medical use; the downside is the discarding of those potential lives that would be necessary as a result of tests that are completed. He even voted against including women who have crisis pregnancies to have their unborn child's health care covered by the SCHIP program, while his friend, Democratic senator Ted Kennedy voted for it.
Abortion seems to be one of those marquee issues for which candidates have one of these three positions:
1. Strong opposition
2. Middle of the road "leave it as it is – it's a necessary evil," or
3. Unwavering support and expansion
Based on track records and public statements, John McCain seems to be strongly opposed. Barack Obama seems to fit into the unwavering support and expansion viewpoint. And voters seem to responding strongly to those policy views, from what they can tell about the candidates. You don't appreciate the harsh language being used by those posting on your blog (and I get that), but I think the above facts are driving the emotional reactions on both sides.
I hope that qualifies as a "real conversation."
I QUOTED someone else using the term, Mike, and did so pejoratively.
Sigh. I should have stayed on my break…
← Older Comments