Ben Swann takes a look at allegations to first surface in the New York Post that Census Bureau employees may have faked data to improve the nation’s unemployment rate during the final month of the 2012 Presidential campaign…
Enough with the moral indignation. I am not voting for president, plain and simple.
Whenever I mention my stance on voting, many of my fellow Christians are taken aback – horrified. I typically get a knee-jerk response along the lines of, “When good people don’t vote, evil triumphs.” As a Christian who believes in God’s word, I can dismiss such comments out of hand. Evil exists, that is true, but my vote will not bind Satan in chains. To believe otherwise – to believe one’s vote holds that power – is to suffer from pride. And pride – the fatal conceit – is a chief cause of our current condition.
The next argument I hear addresses my supposed duty to vote for a president – and the implied duty to vote for the Republican candidate, of course. But no such Christian duty exists. Certainly there are times when a Christian may be called upon to cast a vote, such as during the election of elders and deacons. However, in these instances, the Bible enumerates specific qualities required in candidates who stand for church election – without any mention of a license to resort to the lesser of evils should no qualified candidate be found.
For those who feel duty-bound to vote for the lesser of evils, consider this: good Christians voted for Hitler (1). That’s right, good Christians in Germany heard the argument and acknowledged their supposed duty by voting for that vile man, all based on the belief that he was the least of all evils on the ballot and therefore the best candidate. And I assume they regretted their votes. Or maybe not.
It is interesting to hear fellow Christians justify their past votes, all in a counterfactual, what-if manner. “Sure I voted for Bush, but he was less evil than Gore or Kerry would have been had they been elected. And yes, I voted for Bush Sr. and Dole, since, had they been elected, both would have been less evil than Clinton was. Oh, and as far as McCain, isn’t Obama evil incarnate and McCain his obvious lesser?” Are those justifications true? We will never know.
Nevertheless, as those justifications are unfalsifiable, they allow the voter to sleep well at night. But were similar justifications able to calm the nights of German Christians who voted in the early 1930’s? I wonder.
It is true the Communists have thus far murdered more than the Nazis and associated Fascists (as if some real distinction exists between those three ideological brethren), so one could argue (after the fact) that Hitler, in spite of all his wickedness, was the lesser evil on the ballot. And a vote for him was therefore justified. But the stain of voting from Hitler would be something I could never wash away – could you?
Sure, I could “hold my nose” as some like to say and vote. However, I could never escape the fact that I gave my “yes” to a candidate who has stated that he will violate my morals and ethics. If my “yes” is to be a “yes,” as it should be, I could never walk away from the evils committed by my candidate, should he be elected. Especially given that I recognized his intentions before casting my vote.
There is no biblical justification for a qualified “yes.” There are yes’s and no’s, and nothing else.
Now, if a truly good man was on the ballot, such as the one who ran in my state primary (Ron Paul), I would have no issue with voting – as I had no issue with voting in the spring. However, when faced with a lesser of evils option, I will make my “no” a “no” and vote for none. And I will let evil takes its course and reap its eternal penalty (2)
And I hope that you, dear reader, after consideration, do likewise.
(2) All the while working Isaiah’s Job, of course.
Jim Fedako [send him mail] is a business analyst and homeschooling father of seven who lives in Lewis Center, OH.
This article originally appeared at LewRockwell.com
Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com.
With the debates around the corner and the presidential race in full swing, the Obama administration is quietly planning a second term, Politico reported, as it assesses staff and crafts legislative plans.
What might seem as overconfidence, however, has some precedent in previous administrations. Still, a host of liberal groups also are quietly planning renewed lobbying efforts to pressure what would be a “lame-duck” president to push through some big-ticket projects, Politico reports.
Among the moves anticipated:
- The liberal Alliance for Justice, Leadership Conference of Civil Rights and the People for the American Way, among others, are focused on trying to make the process move faster to place more liberal federal judges on the bench.
- Heads of the major environmental groups held a two-day retreat in July at the Wye Plantation in Talbot County, Md., to consider ways to push big cap-and-trade programs in a second term.
- Environmental, gay-rights and immigration groups mindful of Obama’s own tight window for action are also working on how to get their ideas wrapped in various bills.
- Obama told Time Magazine that because of his policy contrasts with Romney, he’d interpret a win as giving him a mandate to end the Bush-era tax cuts for people earning more than $250,000.
Read more at Newsmax. By Patrick Hobin.
Photo credit: Dan Jacobs (Creative Commons)