Why Christians Should Vote for a Mormon
So here's the deal. Would you rather a real Mormon or a fake Christian in office protecting our religious freedoms? We understand we don't really choose who takes office. People other than us setup a few people for us to choose from. And very early on there is usually a front runner, a few close behind that have a chance to contend for the nomination. Then there are the issue candidates. These are the guys (ladies) that have an issue they want to get out so they run for president. They have no real hope of winning but perhaps they can get their issue some attention. There are also the few that are really running for Vice President or running for president in the next election (think Regan before he won the nomination.)
So the reality your only choice is the front runner or one of the potential upset candidates. You could vote for one of the issue candidates or the VP hopefuls but that will mean someone other than you will choose the presidential nominee. This is cool if you just don't care who get's it. If you do care you have to choose from basically the top 3. In this election cycle it's Giuliani, Romney, and McCain. There is still a wild card in Thompson. He may replace McCain shortly. Time will tell.
There is still time to get behind Thompson if he's your man. But I want to talk about the top 3 for now. Let's just face it. McCain is simply not electable. His problem is more of presentation then content. Think JFK for the opposite. McCain comes across angry. He doesn't come across as fatherly (Regan) or jovial (Clinton, Mr.) America simply doesn't want an angry man with his finger on the button. (Ya know the flashing red one that says wipe Iran off the map with one missile button...) It's difficult to trust an angry man. If it wasn't for his electability in the general election, I would get behind him. His service in Vietnam makes just about all the other candidates look like pansies in comparison. He is a man's man. But 50% of the voters out there aren't men. And given the likely hood of the republican nominee will face Hillary Clinton, I wouldn't want to alienate 50% of the votes and encourage them to run to the first woman who actually has a shot at becoming president.
So that leaves Giuliani and Romney. Giuliani is a professing Christian. Romney is not. Does anyone believe that Giuliani’s religion is anything more than politically expedient? It's certainly not the type of Christianity we saw in "I an alcoholic but Jesus saved me" G.W. Bush.
Romney on the hand, his religion is a negative when it comes to his political career. Every election he's ever run in he's had to answer the same questions. Is being a Mormon going to overrule his judgment as Governor, president, etc? Being a Mormon is a detractor because real Christians believe that Mormons are in a cult and basically going to hell. There are individual exceptions. The whole populating planets and special underwear thing is kind of creepy. Compare him on this issue to say Obama who was raised Muslim! Obviously being a Muslim candidate for anything in this country is a non starter. So voila! I'm not Muslim anymore and I can run for office. Romney didn't do that even though it might have been politically expedient for him to do so.
So there you have it. You and I as Christians get to choose from a luke warm Christian, Giuliani or a real Mormon, Romney. Which one is more likely to embrace family values at the presidential level? If it's expedient to do so, I would imagine Giuliani to be the kind of guy to trade morality for something else that he finds more important at the time. Romney on the other hand I could see losing a reelection bid because the political establishment wanted him to do something that was contrary to his religion. Take for example the slide the party has taken towards pro choice. Who do you think is a better candidate to protect the life of an unborn baby?
Mormonism like is typically very strong in the family values area. Yes they have the creepy polygamy thing. But that's not Mitt's type of Mormonism any way. The brand of wishy washy religion that Giuliani displays seems like it would mutate and change to get whatever he really wanted. And God only knows that that is.
That is why I think a Christian should vote for a Mormon.
Peace.
So here's the deal. Would you rather a real Mormon or a fake Christian in office protecting our religious freedoms? We understand we don't really choose who takes office. People other than us setup a few people for us to choose from. And very early on there is usually a front runner, a few close behind that have a chance to contend for the nomination. Then there are the issue candidates. These are the guys (ladies) that have an issue they want to get out so they run for president. They have no real hope of winning but perhaps they can get their issue some attention. There are also the few that are really running for Vice President or running for president in the next election (think Regan before he won the nomination.)
So the reality your only choice is the front runner or one of the potential upset candidates. You could vote for one of the issue candidates or the VP hopefuls but that will mean someone other than you will choose the presidential nominee. This is cool if you just don't care who get's it. If you do care you have to choose from basically the top 3. In this election cycle it's Giuliani, Romney, and McCain. There is still a wild card in Thompson. He may replace McCain shortly. Time will tell.
There is still time to get behind Thompson if he's your man. But I want to talk about the top 3 for now. Let's just face it. McCain is simply not electable. His problem is more of presentation then content. Think JFK for the opposite. McCain comes across angry. He doesn't come across as fatherly (Regan) or jovial (Clinton, Mr.) America simply doesn't want an angry man with his finger on the button. (Ya know the flashing red one that says wipe Iran off the map with one missile button...) It's difficult to trust an angry man. If it wasn't for his electability in the general election, I would get behind him. His service in Vietnam makes just about all the other candidates look like pansies in comparison. He is a man's man. But 50% of the voters out there aren't men. And given the likely hood of the republican nominee will face Hillary Clinton, I wouldn't want to alienate 50% of the votes and encourage them to run to the first woman who actually has a shot at becoming president.
So that leaves Giuliani and Romney. Giuliani is a professing Christian. Romney is not. Does anyone believe that Giuliani’s religion is anything more than politically expedient? It's certainly not the type of Christianity we saw in "I an alcoholic but Jesus saved me" G.W. Bush.
Romney on the hand, his religion is a negative when it comes to his political career. Every election he's ever run in he's had to answer the same questions. Is being a Mormon going to overrule his judgment as Governor, president, etc? Being a Mormon is a detractor because real Christians believe that Mormons are in a cult and basically going to hell. There are individual exceptions. The whole populating planets and special underwear thing is kind of creepy. Compare him on this issue to say Obama who was raised Muslim! Obviously being a Muslim candidate for anything in this country is a non starter. So voila! I'm not Muslim anymore and I can run for office. Romney didn't do that even though it might have been politically expedient for him to do so.
So there you have it. You and I as Christians get to choose from a luke warm Christian, Giuliani or a real Mormon, Romney. Which one is more likely to embrace family values at the presidential level? If it's expedient to do so, I would imagine Giuliani to be the kind of guy to trade morality for something else that he finds more important at the time. Romney on the other hand I could see losing a reelection bid because the political establishment wanted him to do something that was contrary to his religion. Take for example the slide the party has taken towards pro choice. Who do you think is a better candidate to protect the life of an unborn baby?
Mormonism like is typically very strong in the family values area. Yes they have the creepy polygamy thing. But that's not Mitt's type of Mormonism any way. The brand of wishy washy religion that Giuliani displays seems like it would mutate and change to get whatever he really wanted. And God only knows that that is.
That is why I think a Christian should vote for a Mormon.
Peace.
Labels: Politics
posted by John Husband at 10:55 AM
1 Comments:
I am a pastor who was brought up in the church. I regularly struggle with the question of how I can do more to serve God in ways that challenge me and my family.
I don't ever plan on voting for someone based on their religion. I believe in the separation of church and state. I believe in religious freedom for other religions too. The fact that Romney has stuck to his gungs says something about his character for sure, but voting for him because of his religion seems foolish and irresponsible.
Every choice a politician will make has a good and bad side. Being staunchly pro-life is necessarily choosing against mercy for a woman who's been abused or violated. Being staunchly pro-choice diminishes the value of human life. Is one of these really more "Christian" than the other? I think both could be supported biblically and i believe this is one of many, many issues that are similar in nature.
A person's religion will impact their life and choices and should thus be considered. However, assuming that a person's religion makes their choices in any area a foregone conclusion denies the complexity of the human heart and places faith squarely on assumptions instead of God.
Post a Comment
<< Home