Posts
I guess you would need to first view this video to understand what got the subject started...
Or view the website here:
Here are His comments in response to the video clip:
interesting video, but off to the right it says that it's non-partisan. i'm not sure what this group's definition of non-partisan is...it appears to be that you just make sure you talk about issues and not candidates. however, all of the issues in the video are highly politically charged partisan issues, so i can't agree at all with "value voters USA" calling this a "non-partisan" video.So here's my response to him:
roe v. wade passed 35 years ago....almost 36 years ago now i suppose. people (christians) have been trying to overturn it ever since then, to no avail. the harder we have pushed, the harder we have been pushed against. it has become an issue that elects presidents. but in all of our christian political maneuvering, what have we accomplished? votes for candidates based on one issue? we make our stand on single issues so important when there are so many more issues to think about. we push so hard against pro-choice "liberal" voters without considering that they are our neighbor. we spew hateful rhetoric about people without considering how Jesus might have reacted to these situations (or if he would have reacted at all...i.e. "give to caesar what is caesar's"). did Jesus use politics to push against a political machine? did Jesus come in power, or in love? when those who supported him attempted to usurp authority and place him in a position of power so that he could enact change from the top down, what was his reaction? "no thanks" would be putting it mildly...more like "get behind me, satan!" so why do we as christians then make it so important to ourselves to have this power, to make choices for those people that we do not know? is it that we sometimes feel helpless in our ability to reach out to a world that we do not necessarily understand, and so we instead try to reach out to them in the way that appears most valid or easy? perhaps. is it that we feel so strongly about Jesus but not so strongly about our neighbor that we are content to make our christian political stand, building our church on politics rather than building the church on people, the way that Jesus did? maybe. it is scary to get into people's lives that we don't agree with. it is scary to consider someone who has committed what we might consider an atrocious abomination to be our equal, let alone to consider them our brother. but i guarantee that a church that cares more about people than principles will change the world.
i asked a lot of questions in that paragraph. i know the answers to those questions for me, but i don't know the answers to them for you. and the reason i know the answers for me is because i once voted for candidates based on their stances on abortion and gay rights. i'm not saying that everyone that does so is as uninformed as i was, but i will honestly tell you that i was woefully uninformed for someone who believed as strongly about political candidates as i did. but the thing is, can we really believe that in all of our political maneuverings that we are going to overturn roe v. wade? and if we do believe so, then what next? will we have celebrations in the street, that we finally abolished abortion? abortions were common long before roe v. wade was passed. if we overturn roe v. wade, does abortion become a felony? our prison system is already overly crowded. and how does it show love to our neighbor to take away what they perceive as their "rights" and then throw them in jail when they still don't see it our way?
some would consider it "right" to vote to end abortion. i consider it right to help people and care for people in a way that makes abortion not necessary or desirable. i think we can both agree that abortion is a mountain that the faith of christians across the nation wants to move. i am a part of that faith. however, in the minimal wisdom that my short twenty-four years on this earth has garnered me, i cannot see a time when roe v. wade is overturned, regardless of how many of the 60 million evangelicals of our country vote pro-life. therefore, i vote for things that i believe we can change. i vote for candidates who support education more than war. i vote for candidates who believe that economic and social opportunity is something for everyone, not just those whose birth freely dictates that opportunity. education, economics, and healthcare are three of the top indicators for likelihood of a young mother to have an abortion. i support legislation that encourages equality of those three things across america. for me, my faith in Jesus Christ calls me to support these things. the obvious irony of this is that for a majority of christians in america, faith in Jesus Christ calls them to vote a completely different way from the way that my faith calls me to vote.
is it possible for us to be united under one faith and still be politically divided? i sure hope so. because the conclusion that i have settled upon is that only one of the current candidates for president has a desire to try to answer the questions that i have asked. only one of the candidates has a worldview that allows him to understand that most of the issues facing our world are MUCH more complicated than simply voting yes or no to legislation without reading and understanding the full implications of the bill.
regardless of where we stand politically, the person holding the opposite view (or standing in the varying shades of gray between) is not the enemy. the inaction and counteraction caused by years of worrying more about party lines than productivity is the enemy. demonization and hatred based on differences of opinion is the enemy. when we believe that our neighbor is the enemy, we cripple our country, we cripple our faith, we cripple ourselves.
i apologize if you were not wanting to get a response (much less a response of this magnitude) to a simple mass e-mail. however, i believe that both sides of the argument need to be expressed. also, i have just as much to say (if not more) on the issue of homosexual marriage, but considering the bulk of the video you sent me had to do with abortion, i chose that as the topic. if you are interested in talking about the other side of the story on gay rights, let me know. (section deleted due to personal nature)
grace, peace, love.
Hey man, haven't talked to you in forever! Hope you don't mind a little political discussion in regard to your post, I guess if you did mind you wouldn't have posted, right? After reading your note, in some ways I can really see where you're coming from, but in other ways I'm completely lost, so hopefully you can expand on a few of your points for me, and I'll attempt to put my perspective out there as well.What are your thoughts? This discussion is currently ongoing, will post further results.
I guess I'll start out by saying that I think you're right about the video...definitely partisan! Anytime you see something that says "non-partisan" in my experience hasn't really ever been truly neutral, but leaning one way or the other to some extent.
As far as voting is concerned, I don't know anyone who votes based solely on one issue. Sure, some issues may carry more weight than others, so you have to consider "trade-offs" if you will. For instance, you couldn't possibly agree with Obama on 100% of the issues, right? I am voting for McCain, but that doesn't mean I agree with him on everything. One of my biggest concerns is who will lead this country to a more Christian Nation than it is now? Who has more Christian values? I hope you watched the Saddleback Interviews with each candidate, because it was very insightful into some of the basic Christian beliefs of each candidate. Obama couldn't even say when life begins, most likely for fear of losing some of his liberal base. Who knows if he's ever said when life begins...as far as we know, the answer to that is "above his paygrade." Where is the fortitude there of standing up for what you believe in? Still waiting to see that side of him. The way I see it there are only 2 ways of knowing what he truly stands for: 1) Looking at his past voting record (or lack thereof in the state senate); and 2) Elect him into office and pray that all my hunches about him are wrong.
As far as "giving to caesar what is caesar's," let's not forget who comes first in the equation...First fruits go to God, cheerfully. So compare "cheerful giving" on both sides of the equation. Published income tax returns tell us that giving to "Charity" has been not so important on the Obama/Bidden ticket, whereas Charitable contributions have always been a rather large percentage in the McCain family. You could say, "well, the McCains are wealthy, so they have more to give," but that's why I say look at percentage. So when you talk about helping people, I completely agree...it is our responsibility to help, care for the needy, the helpless. It is OUR responsibility, not the government. If you've ever had a chance to deal with church benevolence, then I'm sure you know that sometimes giving money is not always the best help hurting people can get...however, if it's only money they want, then sometimes you have to turn it down. You'll find that most people don't really want help: They want MONEY!! They want a free handout, from someone who makes more than them. I know what you're thinking, not everybody wants a free handout...true, not 100%, but definitely a large percentage of the underprivileged population do. That is exactly what Obama wants to do, by "spreading the wealth around" (The basic definition of Socialism), to give other people the same "opportunity." Opportunity comes from motivation, not money. Look at successful immigrants who have come here legally with nothing and have opened up and run successful businesses...it happens all the time! So what makes the difference in opportunity...was it money?? Or was it motivation? I would say some have the desire, drive and the work ethic to be successful in the business, while others complain about not having the same opportunity because of the lack of money. So, should we help poor people? Absolutely: The question is how. Sometimes giving money is appropriate...but not always! Helping people get jobs, or go to school, become an apprentice in some trade, or get counseling or rehab to deal with problems...these are all ways that we can use money (or time) to help people, without leaving them the temptation of spending this handout on whatever materialistic objects or bad habits they may have.
I would like you to think about the statement you made about "building our church on politics rather than building the church on people." I think our church is built on the principles of Christianity, based on the New-Testament, and helping people is a big part of that. Now, if we compare the 2 main political parties, we would have to go down the line, issue by issue, and decide which party is most aligned with the basic principles of Christianity. So in a lot of cases, I think you find that the church, more often than not, affiliates itself with the GOP, like I said, based on the principles. We do both agree that the Poor need to be taken care of; where we disagree is who takes care of them. I would say the first is we as individuals, and also the church.
As far as someone's perceived "right" to have an abortion, why not consider it from a different perspective...what about a baby's "right" to live? Who gives anyone this authority or "right" to declare that another human life is not worthy to be born into this world? Yes, in a perfect world, it would be nice if we could get to a point where we don't even need to have a law that abolishes abortion, because abortion would be "not necessary or desirable." Now, let's get back to reality here, people will always make "mistakes" and no matter how hard we try to stop it, there will always be "unwanted pregnancies." The question is, what is the "right" thing to do with the living human being. Obama says that he wouldn't ever want his daughters "punished" with a baby if they made such a mistake. Yes, we should love and take care of that young mother...but 2 wrongs don't make a right! You don't solve the problem by letting them "choose" if they want to kill a human life or not, which is exactly what the democratic party stands for!! So if you're going to talk about caring for people, then you have to say that the democratic party would sacrifice one human life for another in order to "care" for the mother (if she so "chooses"). If our body is a holy temple, a LIVING sacrifice, how is supporting a woman's right to choose in line with God's word that every human life is made in His image to love and serve Him? You talk about equal opportunities for people...aborted babies don't get an equal opportunity. OBAMA SUPPORTS ABORTION! Once again, that isn't the only issue here, but it is a big one. Liberals could care less that a human life is being killed, so long as we have "rights." However, as Christians, we should help both the mother AND baby in all circumstances.
I want you to know that I appreciate you, and always have, and I hope I have not been offensive in stating my experiences. You are not my enemy, but satan is, so we must use the Bible as our sword and guide in all things, INCLUDING politics. I am grateful that you shared your opinions, and hope you will respond. Please excuse typo's, it's been a long day!! =) Have a great one!
Rocky
No comments:
Post a Comment