Quantcast
Sponsors
Special Reports
Editorial: How NOT to vote
Oct 23, 2008
By JAMES A. SMITH SR.
Executive Editor

This presidential election is the most important one in decades—perhaps even one of the most important since our nation’s founding. So it is said by partisans of all political stripes. It seems similar comments are made every four years.

Although it is undoubtedly important who is elected president, allow me to suggest a little more humility is called for when considering the import of such matters. Whoever is elected, God will be just as sovereign in human events in the United States on Nov. 5 as He was before.

While we should not stake too much on the outcome of a presidential election, Christians bear a biblical obligation to be active in the electoral process. The Apostle Paul taught first century Christians ruled by the pagan Roman emperor that they were obligated to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1-7). For American Christians in the 21st century living in a democratic republic, our submission includes helping to decide who will rule, from the White House to the school board.

When considering this duty, there are many comparatively petty personal preferences that may influence how and for whom we cast our ballots. For faithful Christians, it should not be so.

Making history or racial/gender pride. I’m thankful that America has progressed to a point that race is not an impediment, and a major political party was willing to nominate an African American for president. The same could be said about the other major political party’s willingness to nominate a woman for vice president for its first time, only the second time in U.S. history. Nevertheless, neither the prospective election of the first black president or first woman vice president should be relevant for how a Christian casts his or her ballot. Making history is not a legitimate motivation for Christians in voting.

I believe in Martin Luther King’s dream of a day in which persons will be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. As such, it would be inconsistent with King’s dream for black Christians to vote for Barack Obama solely because it would be a historical first to have an African American as president. It would be just as wrong for women to vote for John McCain solely because they wish to see a woman be elected vice president for the first time ever. It must also be said that it would be wrong to vote against candidates on the basis of race and gender.

Perceived economic self-interest. Among the worse reasons for a Christian to base his or her decision to vote for president is which candidate is perceived to be most beneficial to the voter’s pocketbook. I’m aware of Baptists, including pastors, who say they will cast their ballots for one of the candidates in response to the current economic crisis. Certainly there are greater issues at stake for our country and the Christian worldview in the outcome of this election than our financial bottom line. Of course, money matters are important, but a Christian’s perceived economic self-interest should not be primary.

Political party preference. Whether you’re a “yellow dog” Democrat or dyed-in-the-wool Republican—or are loyal to any other political party—casting a ballot for or against a candidate solely on the basis of the candidate’s party identification is unbiblical and a failure to exercise Christian citizenship properly. No political party deserves the blind loyalty of a Christian voting bloc. Parties, like candidates, should earn the votes of Christians based on the policies they espouse and are committed to pursue once in office.

Denominational affiliation. A candidate’s denominational affiliation is oftentimes not terribly germane to how that person would govern and is, therefore, not relevant to how Christians should cast a ballot. Lifelong Episcopalian John McCain has attended a Southern Baptist church for many years and reportedly now considers himself a Baptist, although he has never submitted himself for membership, including biblical baptism, in the Phoenix church he attends. Barack Obama’s denominational affiliation is now in limbo after having removed his longtime membership from the extremely liberal United Church of Christ congregation once pastored by the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter was supported by many Southern Baptists, excited at the prospect of voting for a fellow Southern Baptist while ignoring the views Carter held on certain moral issues. Four years later a great number of those Southern Baptists (like my father) cast their ballots differently.

Internet rumors. Like no other, this election season has been marked by Internet-fed rumors about the candidates, especially about Barack Obama. Whether Obama was or will be sworn into office with his hand on the Quran as a clandestine Muslim is among the baseless rumors filling e-mail inboxes. Similarly unfounded and scurrilous rumors have targeted McCain’s vice presidential running mate, Sarah Palin.

In Their Own Words ...
on abortion.
on Iraq.
on the federal courts.
on the energy crisis.
on immigration.
on 'gay rights.'

Christians should be known for telling the truth, not engaging in idle gossip. Although the truth should be known about the candidates’ history, beliefs and proposed policies, they should be judged on the basis of well-founded, documented facts. These facts are readily available and provide a thoughtful basis on which Christians should vote. One responsible comparison of the candidates’ positions on important issues is available here. Further, the Witness has run for a number of weeks an “In their own words” feature, providing comments by McCain and Obama on key issues. Similar information is available about candidates for other offices.

For Floridians this election year, it’s not just president and other political offices about which we must make informed decisions. Among the most—if not the most—important outcome of this election will be the vote on Amendment 2, the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment. Be sure you turn over your ballot and vote “yes” on Amendment 2 to define marriage in our state constitution as only between one man and one woman, protecting this sacred institution from the whims of activist judges—like those in Massachusetts, California and Connecticut—who redefine marriage.

Christians should set aside race, gender, denominational distinctions, as well as political party loyalties, perceived economic self-interest and other considerations, and instead decide which candidates on balance will best advance our Bible-based convictions. I concede that voting on the basis of Christian beliefs does not resolve entirely how to prioritize the plethora of issues that must be considered when casting a ballot. Paramount for me is the protection of the sanctity of human life—both in the womb and from prospective terrorist attacks—and protection of the family.

In the end, Christians will rank the issues differently. Nevertheless, it should be these commitments, rather than secondary and tertiary matters, that should dictate our voting decisions.

Christian Americans have the privilege to help decide the future of our nation and should do so taking seriously the vote as a sacred duty, a gift from God—a blessing for which we will one day give an account of our stewardship.

Bookmark and Share

You must be login before you can leave a comment. Click here to Register if you are a new user.

Login ID:
Password: Forgot password?