3/23/2010

Can a Committed Christian in Good Conscience Vote for any Democrat?

No.

Not anymore.

Regardless of the individual candidate's proclaimed personal beliefs, if you vote for a Democrat, you are voting for someone who has intentionally and deliberately chosen to align themselves with a political group fully dedicated to the murder of the unborn at taxpayer expense...and as we saw on Sunday night, when push comes to shove they will vote with their party instead of their proclaimed "principles."

No votes for any Democrats, not even for dogcatcher, can be justified before a holy God.

Paul told Timothy, "Neither be partaker of other men's sins." (1 Timothy 5:22) The Apostle John wrote, "If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed. For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." (2 John 1:10&11)

The GOP is far from perfect. They are not as committed to either conservatism or life as they should be. But they are not actively and intentionally facilitating the murder of the unborn. If you can't vote for the Republican in your area for some reason, then stay home. (Spare me the drivel about third parties...in our system that's a wasted vote.) Or bear the consequences of partaking in the evil done with the willing support of "conservatives" in the ranks of the Democratic Party.

5 Comments:

At 8:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Consider the following:

"16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren."
- Proverbs 6:16-19

I agree that both parties are flawed, but I think your argument is inconsistent. Your suggestion that "No votes for any Democrats, not even for a dogcatcher, can be justified before a holy God," being the biggest problem. If followed, this disqualifies us from any vote on a national and even state level as it inevitably puts blood on our hands as the leaders we vote in from either party allow death sentences, abortion, inadequate health care for those who cannot afford it, war where civilians are killed, etc. All of which speak against what Christ said about the "least of these" and "casting the first stone" and "eye for an eye"; and what Solomon said above. You're suggesting guilt by association, which if consistent, would suggest that since there are pro-choice republicans, as well as republicans that endorse war and the death penalty, we shouldn't vote for them either. Extending outside our country, (which I wish we would do more often), what about all the countries where abortion has been allowed for years? Should they all stay home too?

I agree that both parties are far from perfect, but I was played by the republicans for years as I counted myself as one. In doing so, I watched an administration fabricate reasons to kill many innocents in other nations under the guise of a just war....and with a legislative branch controlled by republicans, do very little to protect the unborn. My votes are independent but I did not stop voting.

 
At 9:41 AM, Blogger Robert said...

No I'm not suggesting guilt by association regarding Democrats, at least not in the traditional sense of the term. I'm suggesting guilt by reason of the alignment (or association if you prefer) each candidate has chosen to make with an organization openly and firmly committed to abortion. No matter what the say they believe, such a choice places them outside the boundary of acceptable conduct.

While there are pro-choice Republicans, that is not the official position of the party. You are not supporting abortion in voting for a GOP candidate unless that particular candidate is wrong on the issue. Were being pro-choice become the Republican position, I would pronounce the same anathema on them.

Carrying out a death sentence does not shed innocent blood (unless it is done on someone wrongly convicted which is at least very rare if not unprecedented--all of the well-publicized cases have failed to provide a concrete example so far). Providing health care is not a govenmental resposibility--it falls to families and churches. And I doubt you're going to like this statement much, but we neither started nor manufactured the current war (there is only one war, not two...just two different fronts) and we have fought it in such a way as to increase our own casualties because we are trying so hard to avoid civilian deaths.

 
At 11:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, I respect your clarification and consistency regarding the difference in political parties, although there is language in the 2008 RNC platform that lead me to believe it's a little shaky.

Also agreed that carrying out a death sentence does not shed innocent blood, although I do believe that the teachings of Christ, (eg. saving the adulterous woman, and turning the other cheek as opposed to an eye for an eye), make the death penalty questionable at best. Never mind, Moses, David and Paul either killed or endorsed killing others, and we see the redemptive power of God in those situations. I'm not sure making decisions of death are fully in tune with the whole of scripture.

I also respect the fact that our military may be trying to limit the death of innocents at our own risk. However the point remains that the sanctity of human life in other countries is still being violated by our country. I'm still not sure what you mean by the "we neither started nor manufactured" statement though. How did it all happen? What was the reasoning behind the invasion of Iraq?

I'm also not sure how the pro-life democrats have compromised their principles considering the president will sign an executive order today ensuring the funding of abortions would not occur with taxpayer money.

Also, I did a quick check and according to this site (http://www.pregnantpause.org/lex/world02.jsp) only 5 countries fully protect the lives of the unborn. What do Christian voters in those countries, (assuming they vote), do?

 
At 11:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last line edit on previous post:

Also, I did a quick check and according to this site (http://www.pregnantpause.org/lex/world02.jsp) only 5 countries fully protect the lives of the unborn. What do Christian voters in all other countries, (assuming they vote), do?

 
At 11:55 AM, Blogger Robert said...

The Iraq War was started by Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait. Since he repeatedly refused to adhere to the terms of his surrender, we had both complete legal and moral justification for reopening the war even absent the events of 9/11. If you've bought the dominant media story line, the links between Saddam Hussein and terrorism are blurred. But the truth is he was funding and training and providing safe haven for terrorists of many stripes. Just as one example, Abu Nidal, the man behind the Achille Lauro hijacking in the 1980s was found in Baghdad (dead of a "self-inflicted" gunshot to the back of the head so he couldn't talk) when we got there.

We have fought less than we should in my opinion, not too much.

As for people in other countries, I don't know enough of what their options are to render advice. Just commenting on the current status quo in America.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home