I have a confession to make: I am a political nerd. I have been interested in politics since the 1984 election, well before I was able to vote. In 1988 I voted in my first election and I have voted in every election – local and nation – since that time. 2020 is no exception. Indeed, my ballot has already been cast.
Much like 2016, faithful followers of Christ have serious questions about both of the two major candidates. We want some answers. We want direction. We want guidance. And, much like 2016, I’ve been asked, “what do you think of this election, pastor? What are we going to do?”Two tings I have heard most often are: “vote your conscience” or “we have to choose between the lesser of two evils.” But, these sentiments do not provide the guidance they purport. For example, voting your conscience only makes sense if your conscience is guided by biblical principles. After all, your conscience could be guided be seared by a win-at-all-costs ideology, or a flat our hatred for the “other” candidate. In that case, “voting your conscience” is not as wise as it seems.
Some have argued that when we vote we always, to some degree, choose between the lesser of two evils. While there is an element of truth in that sentiment, it only makes sense as a voting rationale if there is an appreciable difference between the two evils. Apart from that, it is merely a way to excuse voting for someone that you would never vote for otherwise.
Sadly, both of the aforementioned pieces of advice seem to come down to voting for personality. Thus, we are guided by our subjective answer to: Which individual do I "like" the best? Frankly, that is not a good or wise way to proceed when it comes to making a decision about who to support for the leader of the free world. Indeed, for the individual that will have a direct effect on setting the course of the Courts, trade, taxes, and a host of other issues, well beyond that person's time in office.
While I have no easy answers for this year’s Presidential election, I would like to make a few suggestions. A number of years ago, I developed a three principle method of evaluating candidates. These principles have guided me since I first cast a vote in November 1988. I provide my framework here in hopes it may help you as you enter the voting booth this year.
The Declaration of Independence declares: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It seems to me that “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” provides a good three principle framework for evaluating candidates. So, here is how I think about “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” in the context of the policies supported by the candidates.
1. PRO LIFE
There is no right more fundamental than the right to life. Every person who advocates a pro-choice position is able to do so only because their own mother chose life. Think about that for a minute. I recognize there are difficult situations people find themselves in and circumstances that are often less than ideal for a pregnancy. Yet, none of those situations or circumstances justify the killing of an innocent child. Mother Teresa once said, “I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child... A direct killing of the innocent child, 'Murder' by the mother herself... And if we can accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
While I have no easy answers for this year’s Presidential election, I would like to make a few suggestions. A number of years ago, I developed a three principle method of evaluating candidates. These principles have guided me since I first cast a vote in November 1988. I provide my framework here in hopes it may help you as you enter the voting booth this year.
The Declaration of Independence declares: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It seems to me that “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” provides a good three principle framework for evaluating candidates. So, here is how I think about “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” in the context of the policies supported by the candidates.
1. PRO LIFE
There is no right more fundamental than the right to life. Every person who advocates a pro-choice position is able to do so only because their own mother chose life. Think about that for a minute. I recognize there are difficult situations people find themselves in and circumstances that are often less than ideal for a pregnancy. Yet, none of those situations or circumstances justify the killing of an innocent child. Mother Teresa once said, “I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child... A direct killing of the innocent child, 'Murder' by the mother herself... And if we can accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
Indeed, a new report entitled, "How Americans Understand Abortion" by Tricia C. Bruce, a sociologist at the Center for the Study of Religion and Society at the University of Notre Dame, indicates that some people are not opposed to abortion because, "they support the desire of the pregnant woman to pursue a good life for herself." In other words, too often, the issue of abortion has nothing to do with the baby in the womb or the life that child may live, but rather, a desire for the mother of the child to be able to dispose of the baby in order to pursue the "good life." Mother Teresa revealed the real reason our culture advocates abortion when she said, "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
Therefore, when I vote, the first principle that guides me is whether a candidate is pro-life. This, in my estimation, is the most practical way to ensure that every person's right to LIFE is protected.
2. PRO LIBERTY
The Declaration of Independence says we are endowed by our Creator with the right to LIBERTY. The first amendment specifically mentions the right to religious liberty, among others. But, make no mistake, religious liberty is the "first" liberty guaranteed by our Constitution. But, of course, other liberties are enumerated as well, such as the right to free speech, a free press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The Founding Fathers had experienced the tyranny of King George and had openly rebelled against that tyranny. They were able to do so because they were armed. In their day a militia was a group of ordinary citizens who formed to defend an area or region. It was a precursor to the present day military. Yet, the right to keep and bear arms was not inextricably tied to the idea of the military, as some presume today. Rather, the right of citizens to rebel against tyrannical government necessitates those citizens posses the right to keep and bear arms.
Frankly, the way we ensure that all of our liberties are protected is not by trusting that the government will take care of protecting it for us. Rather, each individual has the right to protect their liberty on their own. The Founding Fathers understood that an armed citizenry was a check on tyrannical government overreach. So, because I believe in protecting all of the liberties recognized in the Constitution, the second principle that guides me is whether a candidate supports the 2nd amendment.
3. PRO LIMITED GOVERNMENT
The third principle that guides my voting decisions is whether a candidate favors limited government and lower taxes. This principle comes out of the Declaration as well. We are endowed by our Creator with the right to the pursuit of happiness. Simply put, it is difficult to pursue happiness if the government continually takes more and more of your income!
These are three guiding principles for me. They are not the only issues that I care about or that I think are important. But, these three I find to be in alignment with the rights recognized in the Declaration of Independence. Let me add that, during every election cycle, we should extend grace to one another, whatever conclusions we may reach about public policy and individual candidates. Ultimately, my conscience is not bound by a donkey or an elephant, but by the Lamb of God. In trying to work through my biblical understanding of public policy issues, this is where I have arrived. I respect your right to come to different conclusions than I do.
Frankly, the way we ensure that all of our liberties are protected is not by trusting that the government will take care of protecting it for us. Rather, each individual has the right to protect their liberty on their own. The Founding Fathers understood that an armed citizenry was a check on tyrannical government overreach. So, because I believe in protecting all of the liberties recognized in the Constitution, the second principle that guides me is whether a candidate supports the 2nd amendment.
3. PRO LIMITED GOVERNMENT
The third principle that guides my voting decisions is whether a candidate favors limited government and lower taxes. This principle comes out of the Declaration as well. We are endowed by our Creator with the right to the pursuit of happiness. Simply put, it is difficult to pursue happiness if the government continually takes more and more of your income!
These are three guiding principles for me. They are not the only issues that I care about or that I think are important. But, these three I find to be in alignment with the rights recognized in the Declaration of Independence. Let me add that, during every election cycle, we should extend grace to one another, whatever conclusions we may reach about public policy and individual candidates. Ultimately, my conscience is not bound by a donkey or an elephant, but by the Lamb of God. In trying to work through my biblical understanding of public policy issues, this is where I have arrived. I respect your right to come to different conclusions than I do.
