i’m quite curious if you would ever legislate any kind of morality on anyone. don’t you realize that at any given point someone is legislating their morality on somebody else? and most certainly in a government framework. i love your blogs but sometimes i get the impression you like to speak out against the “right’ just to be shocking. not that i represent the “right” or anything.

just my thoughts

ya this is a totally cool article. I myself vote Democrat most of the time and I don’t follow politicians just cuz they say that they are a Christian

Right or Left,

Personally, I would not legislate morality on anyone. In Matthew 22:21 Jesus says “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”. In Dinesh D’Souza’s book What’s So Great About Christianity the author refers to that scripture when discussing the idea of separation of Church and State. It seems to me that Jesus is more concerned about changing hearts than legislating morality. When hearts change, morality follows. Let “Caesar” pass his laws, and let Christ’s Church work on his heart.

I don’t speak out against the “right” to be shocking, but I do get annoyed that some Christians seem to blindly follow the “right” simply because it’s what has been done for so long. We shouldn’t pledge blind allegiance to any political party and be so easily “bought off” by words, especially when the actions don’t follow those words. It blows my mind that the abortion issue is so influential in the vote of so many I’ve spoken with, yet the fact that the Republican Party made abortion legal in the first place is overlooked.

Personally, I feel betrayed by the Republican party. Growing up in church, I was gung-ho Republican. I had not yet learned to think for myself nor to dig deeper into the facts. I felt that if a conservative talk show host such as Rush Limbaugh said it was true, by golly it must be true!

When the Bush administration started royally screwing up our country I finally started opening my eyes and looking at the perspective of non-conservatives. I didn’t jump parties. I have not become a liberal. If I had to choose a term, it would be “moderate”. I try to consider both sides.

When I (likely) cast my vote for Barack Obama, part of the reason I’ll do so is to make a statement, even if I’m the only one listening to my statement, that I don’t like being deceived. Barack Obama holds an opinion on abortion that I do not agree with, but at least he honestly states that opinion. The Republican Party candidates lie about their dedication to that cause. And I am getting very tired of hearing of others casting their votes based on those lying words.

Back in 2006 there was a book written about how Republicans use Christians, written by a man who once worked for him. I just did some searching and found a story about it on MSNBC. Check this out:

Book says Bush just using Christians

Prior to reading about that man’s opinions I had already come to believe, in many ways, that the Republican Party has been using and manipulating Christians. It was nice to read that one of GWB’s own staff members agreed.

It seems like you think Obama and McCain are the only two options. Why not consider a third/minor party or independent candidate with whom you agree almost completely? I assure you that there are enough of them running to find somebody you agree with. Some people might say that you’re throwing your vote away but I think that voting for somebody you only kind of like is really throwing it away.

When you go to a pizza place, your only options aren’t cheese and pepperoni. Sometimes it’s okay to get sausage, veggie or even supreme.

Andrew,

The idea of a third party candidate running the country is “romantic”, and I wouldn’t consider a vote for such as being wasted IF the candidate was actually qualified to run this country. Of those I’ve heard of, I can’t picture any of them doing so.

Yeah….because “taking over a country for its oil” has been SO beneficial for us.

Both the major parties in this country suck and aren’t worth their weight in feces. Neither are their endorsed candidates. It’s a lose-lose……IMHO.

Donny,

You are dead on with this post! I really think that both parties completely miss the mark on social issues — poverty, homelessness, etc. These are issues that we, as Christians, should really be focused on. I feel that I have to take that into consideration when I am choosing who to vote for. The problem becomes that there are few choices.

I like your comment that you feel “betrayed” by the Republican party. So do I, and there are many others that feel that way as well.

Excellent post!

Seems to me, Donny, that Claiborne wasn’t pushing any party at all, but was pushing Jesus! HE is the answer, after all, anyway!

You’ll always get a response to “religion” or “political” talk. Have you noticed just how few responses you got to the bike ride??? Maybe we’re all just a bunch of big mouths, spouting off and doing absolutely nothing! Food for thought, not argument.

Donny,

I’ve been reading your blog for a while and I’ve really appreciated the work you’ve done with XXXchurch.

When you start writing about the abortion issue, especially the political context of abortion, you are way off track.

Abortion is the single most important political issue in American life now. A country that allows the weakest of its citizens to be slaughtered undermines the stability of its own society. Nothing de-legitimates a government’s right to rule, causes so much cynicism about it among the populace, as does a national policy of child murder.

While it is true that the majority of justices who decided Roe v. Wade were Republican- appointed, that doesn’t mean they ruled in a way that is in line with the Republican Party platform. Those justices betrayed the voters who put into power the presidents who appointed them.

To say “Republicans legalized abortion” is simplistic and misleading. If you read the history of how abortion became commonplace in America you’ll see the radical feminist lawyers who took Roe to the Supreme Court were not Republicans, nor were most of their supporters.

This is not to say Republicans have been ideal on this issue. They haven’t, but some have been very good with regard to abortion. As a result of the Bush administration, taxpayer funding of abortions has been prevented, the use of international aid money for abortions overseas has been limited, and partial birth abortion has been outlawed.

The Democrats have opposed EVERY ONE of these. So, if abortion matters to us as voters, it seems we have to choose between a party who is gung-ho about child murder, a party that makes expanding the freedom to kill children a hallmark of their political program, and one that takes a stand, though a weak and tepid one, against it.

People like Claiborne promote the idea that abortion should be only one issue on the list of evangelical political concerns. While that is true, the problem is that he, and others of his ilk, act as though those issues ought to be equally weighted. They act as if we have no way of deciding whether stopping abortion or bad environmental practices is more important. Well, we do have a way. Claiborne may not see much difference between killing a baby and chopping down a tree, but God does and has made this clear to us.

The idea promoted by Claiborne that there is no moral difference between voting to grant enormous power to a man who would offer slight protection to the unborn versus voting to grant the same to a man who promises to take actions GUARANTEED to increase the numbers of babies killed is specious at best.

There are many more aspects of this controversy I could explore, but suffice it to say that stopping abortion ought to be the most important issue on every Christian’s political agenda if we mean to take seriously our obligations to the weak and the poor. No one in our society is weaker, more defenseless, than the unborn. They comprise the only group in America we allow to be butchered wholesale while we Christians sit around and debate just how important defending them really is.

Stopping abortion, a goal whose accomplishment requires a legal and political component, is the ultimate social justice issue. Those who preach social justice while refusing to recognize the unique injustice of abortion expose their confusion or, worse, their hypocrisy to the world.

Donny, I don’t doubt you are doing your best to sort through these issues in a way that is faithful to Christ. I encourage you to continue that process, but remember there is more to this issue than just party politics. There really is an important difference between the candidates on this issue and an important difference between this issue and all other political controversies. I pray this difference will become clear to you and countless others. So many little lives depend on it.

All the best,

Dean

Thanks for the reply. I couldnt disagree with you more because in this country WE ARE CAESAR. We determine what goes on and what gets passed as citizens. Almost like running our own household so-to-speak. I totally agree with you that hearts need to be changed. That is the ideal, no doubt. But in the meantime we shouldnt let go of one thing to hold onto the other. Look at california for example regarding homosexual marriage. Do you realize that if they legalize that permanently, there could be discrimination lawsuits for pastors and even city clerks who refuse to take part in it for conscience reasons? And i do believe that currently there are cases of the like. That is an example of them legislating THEIR morality on others. And believe me, its not going to stop there. In canada pastors are not even allowed to read passages from the bible that condemn homosexuality. They will get prosecuted if they do and its going on right now. Believe me there has been talk of incorporating that sort of thing in washington, even if its in smaller steps. And if it wasnt for certain organizations getting involved wed get steamrolled in the same direction as canada. Again i totally agree with you that peoples hearts need to be changed, but i also do not want my children not being able to say mommy or daddy in school, but instead having to be taught that every lifestyle is ok.

thanks man!

Donny,

I’ve cross-posted this letter at my blog. You are welcome to join the discussion over there as well.

Jean Wrote:

Seems to me, Donny, that Claiborne wasn’t pushing any party at all, but was pushing Jesus! HE is the answer, after all, anyway!

I agree with this statement 100%, Jean. Nowhere in my post did I say that Claiborne supported Democrats. I clearly stated both parties are messed up. My point, however, is that I will be voting against the Republican Party (unless I’m somehow inspired by the VP choice) because the Republican Party purposely lies to Christian voters in an attempt to manipulate us with those lies… most frequently when it comes to their stance on abortion and their commitment to it. It’s time to stop blindly believing the lies.

John,

I honestly lean towards thinking that you’ve been listening to too much conservative talk radio. The sky isn’t falling, I promise.

Dean,

I would challenge you to think outside the party lines and consider whether or not it is life, or American life, that you value most… because if you are concerned with ALL of human life how can you justify the civilian deaths our country has wreaked on so many other countries (not just Iraq), normally under Republican orders? ALL HUMAN LIFE is sacred. I’m sure you’ll reply that you already know and agree with this, but has it truly sunk in how many lives we’ve ended in our pursuit of oil alone? If you consider JUST that, how can you vote Republican in good conscience if you’ve sort[ed] through these issues in a way that is faithful to Christ? If voting for a Democrat who is of the wrong opinion on the abortion issue is so repugnant, so too MUST be voting for a Republican who is pro-war. There are many countries in this world that are ruled by horrible men, whose people would be better off without them in power, but do we run to the aid of each of them? We do not, so using that excuse to kill thousands upon thousands of Iraqi civilians does not hold water. And only the most ignorant of us will believe that Iraq has anything to do with a “war on terror”.

One more thing I’d like to bring up about the topic of abortion is this: where is the long term thinking? Don’t you think God, who is outside the bounds of space and time and therefore not looking for short term results, would like His people to work on the ROOT CAUSE of the problem, rather than simply bandaging the wounds?

If we worked on root causes, abortion wouldn’t be such an issue. We need to work on hearts. We need to educate kids about WHY they should avoid sexual activity that leads to pregnancy (and not just “because the Bible says so” either). We need to foster an atmosphere where expectant mothers have options that feel “real” and not just lip-service.

Have you adopted a child, for example? Has every able bodied person in your church adopted a child? Lord knows, many of those who are of the mindset to even CONSIDER abortion are likely not capable parent material. How many of them would consider an option like the one I’m about to describe…

A church not far from the town in which I live has a big billboard they rent on a monthly basis that says “Please don’t abort your child. We’ll adopt it!” How many abortions would be prevented in this country if every single church in America ran the same campaign? If we REALLY BELIEVE abortion to be the most important issue our churches face, why do we NOT spend a huge percentage of the church budget on programs that will reduce it? The laws aren’t changing anytime soon, so why don’t we pay more than lip service?

As much as I hate abortion, I have to say that it is NOT the most important issue at hand. Changing hearts is the most important issue at hand! Legislation will NEVER change hearts, ever! The ROOT CAUSE of abortion is “heart failure”. The treatment is the pure, non-judgmental love of Jesus Christ, embodied without agenda by those who follow him… NOT another Republican appointed Supreme Court Justice. 78% (7 out of 9) of our current Supreme Court Justices were Republican appointed. Obviously a Republican majority on the Supreme Court isn’t going to make abortion go away, so why do we vote as if it will?

LOVE wins. LAWS do not.

Im sorry but there is absolutely no reason to not take responsibility in the legislative process. And noone is saying that laws win converts. But laws are still needed and are constantly being read over, voted on, and passed. We still have to take part in that process. Laws and morality have to be upheld regardless if other people ever get around to “feeling” like or being persuaded by the reasoning behind them. That may never happen. Look at the prison population. Do we as a society lift all current and future legislation that theyve broken…. in the hopes that their hearts are more agreeable towards doing them? Of course not.

Thanks!

Donny, you’ve got to be real and realize the Democratic party lies to Christians too! Right now, the candidates are trying so hard to convince the religious right they’re OK and believe the same things. Some how they got the idea Christians might just have some interest in politics. There are hypocrite liars in both parties, I just think they’re more of them in the Dem party, starting with their presidential candidate..

Hey Donny,
I would strongly recommend that you look into the Libertarian canidate, Bob Barr. I think you would really like his platform. I have been a lifelong republican myself, and feel completely betrayed by the party. Both party’s are completely corrupt. Its a game, a game that they are winning while lining their pockets with our tax dollars. They want things to continue as the status quo, because pitting the “left” and “right” against each other is profitable for them!
I wish people would go back and read all the words this country was founded on, and really look at our current two political parties and realize how far we have gone away from what this country was intended to be.

Every example of the government trying to “fix” something, or run anything has been proven to be a disaster, just go stand in line at the DMV or to board an airplane and that should tell you enough about what MORE government would do. And believe me, both parties want MORE government.

As for the point of social justice, we in the church have seriously dropped the ball, and if we think any political party will have any real effect on that, than we are already screwed. Its time for the church to stand up and take care of the poor, the forgotten, the beaten down. And it shouldn’t matter who each of us voted for. We should be able to stand shoulder to shoulder, whether you are a Obama supporter, McCain supporter, or a crazy idealist third party supporter, and care for and love one another. If we truly did that, it would change this country, and would have NOTHING to do with who was in the White House.

I’m not going to comment on the politics, but wanted to say that I read the book. It was amazingly challenging. You might want to try Lisa Samson’s Quaker Summer as well. It’s fiction, but not fluffy. Even somewhat hard to read because it challenges so much.

Thanks for pointing others in his direction.

Very well said Dean!

“…if abortion matters to us as voters, it seems we have to choose between a party who is gung-ho about child murder, a party that makes expanding the freedom to kill children a hallmark of their political program, and one that takes a stand, though a weak and tepid one, against it.”

This is the way I see our choice as well.

Obama has been called the most pro-abortion candidate ever:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=/Commentary/archive/200801/COM20080109b.html

I could never give him my support.

“…if abortion matters to us as voters, it seems we have to choose between a party who is gung-ho about child murder, a party that makes expanding the freedom to kill children a hallmark of their political program, and one that takes a stand, though a weak and tepid one, against it.”

This is the way I see our choice as well.

Obama has been called the most pro-abortion candidate ever:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=/Commentary/archive/200801/COM20080109b.html

I could never give him my support.

One might make the same argument for the murder going on overseas.

I AM NOT HAPPY WITH ANY OF THE CANDIDATES AND I AM SICK OF ALL THE MURDER THAT GOES ON IN THIS WORLD.

Donny,

Thanks for your reply.

I am surprised you ask me to “think outside party lines.” Where, in my previous comment, do you see some ringing endorsement of the Republican Party?

Nowhere. Instead, you should see that I am not a party loyalist. I am a person concerned to do what is best for unborn children. If the Democrats had nominated a pro-life candidate, then there would be a real contest. As things stand, there simply isn’t.

Your contention that the death of innocents in war is somehow the moral equivalent of abortion is off base and the rest of your first paragraph is confusing.

You assert that our country has taken thousands of innocent lives in war, usually under Republican leadership. Do you mean like in Hiroshima and Nagasaki as we did under Democrat Harry Truman? In Vietnam under Democrats Kennedy and Johnson? On the fields of France in WWI under Democrat Woodrow Wilson?

Next, you try to poison the well against anyone who disagrees with you. You assert “only the most ignorant of us will believe that Iraq has anything to do with a ‘war on terror.’” Such statements usually only serve as attempts to shut down discussion by labeling your opponents “ignorant” before they have even presented their case. It’s unfair and a logical fallacy to boot.

Next, you ask why we don’t go into every country ruled by a bad man. This is a fair question and gets to the point of our discussion. The reason we don’t invade every country with a bad ruler is because no one in leadership is actually “pro-war” as you characterize them. War instead is seen as a last resort, and if we are able to affect change and ease the suffering of people around the world without war, why shouldn’t we?

You may have seen that North Korea recently has begun dismantling some of its nuclear arms program and has made overtures of being willing to change. This was accomplished without war. Surely you don’t think that because we invaded Iraq that obligates us to have invaded N. Korea as well. War is not our blanket policy. These decisions have to be made on a case by case basis.

This bears on our discussion of abortion in this way. While mostly everyone sees war as a sometimes necessary evil in this fallen world, Obama does not see abortion as a necessary evil, but as a positive good. Everyone can imagine a just society without war. Obama’s claim is that there can be no just society without abortion. He believes that any limitation on abortion is an injustice, a violation of women’s rights.

Therefore, a vote for a Republican candidate will be a vote for someone who believes that war is awful but sometimes necessary. It will be a vote for someone who believes that, even in war, civilians, especially children, ought to be protected as much as possible from suffering and death. It also will be a vote for someone who believes the same concern ought to be extended to children in the womb.

A vote for a Democrat will be a vote for someone who believes in limiting civilian casualties in war, but also will be a vote for someone who believes children in the womb are fair game, someone who wants to deny them even the flimsiest legal protections.

You say we ought to work on the root causes of abortion. I completely agree. You say legislation will never change hearts. That is also true, but in no way indicates we ought not to continue pursuing such legislation.

If “HEART FAILURE” is the root cause of abortion, it also is the root cause of every other kind of murder. Laws against murder do nothing to keep people from getting angry, do nothing to prevent people from wanting to kill. Does that mean we shouldn’t have laws against it?

The purpose of laws against murder isn’t to change people’s hearts but to dissuade those who can be dissuaded by threat of punishment and to show the population that the power of the state stands ready to avenge potential murder victims. I believe the unborn deserve this same legal consideration.

I never said legislation and politics were, by themselves, the keys to ending abortion. I said ending abortion has a legal and political component. Law and politics are arenas where our efforts are required. In recent years, Christians may have over-emphasized these areas, but that doesn’t mean we can abandon them.

As for other means of combating abortion, you ask if I have adopted a child. Whenever I interact with people who hold your views, they ask this question. It seems as if they (maybe you) think that the truth or falsity of my claims rests on what I have or haven’t done.

I usually refuse to answer this question, but for you I will. The answer is not yet. My wife and I will begin the adoption process sometime in the next two to three years. Does that make my arguments true?

Babies don’t get aborted because there aren’t enough people willing to adopt them. There are many, many, many people on adoption waiting lists who desperately want those children.

I agree with you that as Christians we aren’t doing nearly enough about this issue. You suggest spending huge amounts of our church budgets to stop abortion. I say, “Sounds great.” Let’s do it.

Donny, you and I aren’t really that far apart on this. We both hate abortion. Thank you for initiating this discussion. I hope it proves fruitful for bridging the differences that do exist in our understandings of how to handle this painful issue.

Hear, hear, Dean. Thanks so much for expressing your (and my) opinions so very well and thoughtfully. God bless you for your boldness and clarity of thought.

My family HAS adopted children, and they waited many years to do so. Why? Most babies-to-be were aborted! With the condition a lot of families are in today, I think their own children already born should be a priority rather than adopting just because they want to “do” something!

And, I, too, don’t appreciate being labeled “most ignorant” just because I don’t agree with your opinions. You do have a perfect right to express everything you wish, but disagreement isn’t ignorance.

Jean and Dean,

Unless you believe Iraq has anything to do with the war on terror, you were not called “ignorant”. As you know, having read my comment, I clearly stated:

only the most ignorant of us will believe that Iraq has anything to do with a ‘war on terror’.

If you DO believe Iraq has ANYTHING to do with the war on terror, you would accurately be labeled as being ignorant. That is not an insult. The definition of ignorant is unaware because of a lack of relevant information or knowledge. If a person truly thinks Iraq has anything to do with the war on terror, it’s obvious that there’s a “lack of relevant information or knowledge”.

And if a person truly believes our current administration went into Iraq as a last resort, as Dean implies, that too is a clear lack of relevant information or knowledge. Someone just hasn’t been paying attention to all the admissions the administration has made. Usually the blame is placed on (cough cough) faulty intelligence. In other words: we wanted to do what we wanted to do and we made up reasons to do it.

Our current President’s approval rating is at a record setting LOW. Most people aren’t fooled. And while I highly respect John McCain’s war record, and also like the fact that’s he’s more “liberal” than most Republicans, I’m pretty convinced his administration would just be “more of the same”.

As for voting based on the topic of abortion, I’d like to point out that ANY person who makes election decisions based on sanctity of life issues cannot vote Republican OR Democrat. No offense is intended by this next statement, but it’s true… Jean, Tracy, Dean and others who have voiced concerns about this issue: all of you will have to vote for an independent candidate this year if you’re really going to live up to what you’ve stated here.

An FYI: Obama is NOT pro-abortion. He’s pro-choice, meaning he believes in the right to let people choose. Nobody is “pro-abortion”. Personally, I think people need to “choose” to take responsibility for their actions and “choose” to avoid getting pregnant in the first place.

I am still bamboozled that a HUGE fact is being overlooked here: Abortion wouldn’t even be an issue if Republican appointed Justices hadn’t legalized it in 1973. Republican appointed. Republican.

Donny,

You could be right that voting for a third party candidate would be best. I don’t think it is morally required, but I am certainly considering it.

Donny, you’re assuming YOU have all the relevant information or knowledge – as if any one person does! As I recall it was a joint decision to enter Iraq.

Happy 4th! It’s just because of this fact we all have the privilege to express our thoughts, even though they are not in agreement. We should be eternally grateful for the price paid to give us those freedoms.

i could never vote for obama because regardless of the fact that some republicans favor abortion, obama voted for the horrible process of “partial birth abortion” where if the baby is born alive he favors killing it. that is just plain murder. i will vote for the lesser of evils if i have to. or not vote at all but to vote for obama would be to vote for everything i am against. Donny i don’t want to offend you, but concerning the Bible, if it is not all true then we may as well throw it away. Psalm138 says “God honors His word above His name.” Jesus is “the word of God”. its true that men argued over the canon of the Bible, but God is great enough to watch over His word no matter what men do. Its not surprising that satan tries to bring confusion concerning the Bible. of course he wants us to doubt God’s word. there are books you can read that show the integrity of the Bible, which i’ll find for you if your interested. steve