Bishop N.T. Wright shares his thoughts.
A Weblog Dedicated to the Discussion of the Christian Faith and 21st Century Life
I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, –that unless I believed, I should not understand.-- St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Is There a Religious Reason to Vote For or Against Obama or McCain?
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
From my faith perspective, I am torn between Republican and Democrat. I do believe in the sanctity of human life and define marriage between one man and one woman. Of course these are the two issues that American evangelicals have championed. Unfortunately, they have greatly oversimplified and (somewhat) cheapened the word "morality" by narrowing on only those issues. Democrats, contrastly, seem to have a larger sense of helping the poor and the "least of these," which is a tremendous theme throughout scripture. Thus to vote for one would be to somewhat ignore the other. I just find it hard and almost impossible to "vote Christian."
I completely agree with you on the religious right and their narrow perspective on moral issues; but I just do not see how the Democrats have a larger sense of helping the "least of these." They too have their narrow focus on morality as well; and it can be argued that they too have cheapened the notion in the support of legalized abortion, which has failed to protect millions of "the least of these."
How to work through all of this is difficult indeed, but I am not only disappointed in the religious right, but in the evangelical left as well. Jim Wallis and Brian McClaren have not presented a viable alternative to James Dobson and Pat Robertson. Both religious right and evangelical left have compromised the politics of the kingdom in favor of power and influence.
Thanks for your comments.
I suppose "least of these" was too broad. I agree with your thoughts about the Dems deficiencies in terms of abortion. It's clear, though, that Democrats seem to include the poor more in their rhetoric, whereas Republicans favor the trickle-down philosophy that seems to prioritize the rich.
Yes, there is no doubt that the Republicans are quite lacking in reference in explaining how their views help the poor. In fact, the only Republican I can remember who spoke of how the poor could benefit from a free market economy was Jack Kemp back in the mid 90s. Other than that, they have certainly not made their views clear.
As far as the language of trickle down and trickle up, I just do not find that language helpful in describing economics for various reasons that would make my response too long-winded.
Thanks again for your thoughts.
Post a Comment