Contact Me

Friday, August 31, 2012

Values Voting (?)

Love that code word. Values. You know exactly what people are talking about- banning abortion and gay marriage. And I just heard the other day that Israel is a values issue. What?? Obsequiously supporting and defending with all we have this nation that brutally oppresses/dispossesses another population and calls births of the occupied people a threatening demographic time bomb is a value, something God wants you to do?? Right off a cliff. Crazy.

Anyway, I was doing some more thinking on politics and religion as I always do. I don't think God is for one party/candidate or the other or that a vote will send you to hell, but I always re-think it since this is not a majority opinion where I am- or maybe it is a minority opinion (spoken of in code, like- "be a Christian in and out of the voting booth," "values," etc)  and I believe it to be in opposition to the Bible so it just bothers me that much. But I could be wrong. So I continue my exhausting thought process...

Some frame this as candidate A wants to ban abortion and gay marriage, these are "Biblical issues," therefore candidate A voters are doing God's will; while candidate B wants to let people make their own decision (on these particular Biblical issues), so he is for sin and if you vote for him, you are "approving of such" (Rom 1:32) and deserving of death (spiritual). I think this is a stretch in many ways.  If voting, say, Democrat is a sin because of the assumption above, then why is it ok to spend money in places that sell alcohol or support candidates who have had divorces or candidates who place an entire book of false doctrine ahead of the Bible? Why not say greed and giving is a Biblical issue, so how can you vote Republican when they want to cut aid to the poor, make it easier for the wealthy to make more money, support Paul Ryan who idolizes Ayn Rand, the atheist who preaches selfishness? 

So now both parties are out. Must you embrace everything the party does/says/is? Does voting mean you approve of such or just that you think A or B is the best person for the job? There are more problems with the assumption, but I'll get the that later.

I wonder if there is a difference between those who favor banning sin by law who don't sin and those who don't necessarily support sin being made illegal, yet who also choose not to sin. Is one more righteous, as some would have us believe? Are those who don't necessarily want sin banned by law guilty of the sin even though they believe, do and teach God's will. Is living a faithful life, choosing not to sin, refusing to say God approves of said sins not enough?

Then we go back to Jesus. Is this what he stood for? Did he overthrow Rome and put a government in power that made sins illegal or encourage anyone to do that? Was not the purpose of the old law to bring us to Christ, rather than the opposite or to construct a new law that was like the old one minus the ritual and animal sacrifice? Is the goal to teach people or to keep them from sinning? I guess it is opinion whether you think having laws banning sin teaches or inflames, provokes and hardens hearts. I know I need to spend less time on politics and more on spiritual matters to be more Christ-like, but Christ didn't have a political test you had to pass. Politicizing certain Bible issues and not others is cherry picking, inconsistent, divisive, and hypocritical when political positions are used as a test of faith for someone else-- especially while your own candidate/party's Biblical issues are ignored.

Speaking of inconsistency, conservatives are usually for people choosing, not government. Why should government dictate abortion and gay marriage? Should government be IN religion and NOT in your money- taxes, etc? This seems a bit backwards to me. I'd rather have them in my money and not my religion if I had to choose. The conservative position on wanting the government to dictate on certain moral issues gets a little more absurd when we factor in the current Romney-Ryan ticket. You trust a Mormon, who baptizes the dead without consent (from family, last wishes, etc), whose religion didn't allow African Americans in for a long time, believes in the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible (the former contradicts the latter) to have MORE of a say in your religion or to be the one to get the country morally on track? And Paul Ryan with his Ayn Rand problem- he idolizes her and gives her books out as gifts to his staff. She is an atheist who promotes selfishness, along with the totally free market, no regulation economics. These are the people you want in charge of your values at the government level?

And this is just religion and politics... maybe I'll post the problems with his foreign policy, immigration, health plan double talk, lies he's told about Obama's record, and the rest of why this Republican ticket is about as attractive and comical as McCain- Palin. Except McCain had a shred of integrity. Big difference actually.

And that's it for this edition of  "I'm probably going to wish I'd deleted this"  :)