Not Too Harsh Anymore

forward-signAbout a month ago I had a thought that was (at the time) just too harsh to even say out loud. It’s not too harsh anymore.  This election is going to be a referendum on the levels of ignorance and apathy in this country.

In fact, every day this month it’s rung truer and truer to me, as I interact with people, like:

  • The blue collar family man who hears one thing from one campaign and another from the other side, and just isn’t sure who to believe. (Is there no such thing as objective facts that can be checked?)
  • The Christian-educated woman who just doesn’t consider economics to be part of her voting values. (How will any of the things that are important to her be paid for?)
  • The 20-something young professional who favors renewing the tax credit for wind energy because it’s just such a shame to lose all those jobs. (Wouldn’t we have even more such jobs from the pipeline project or any other sort of private business construction?)
  • The Christian mother who says it doesn’t matter who the president is, “as long as my children know how to pray for the president.” (What if that president makes it illegal for your children to pray?)
  • And a number of others who just “don’t get into politics” and aren’t planning to vote for anybody.

Every one of these people leaves me shaking my head. Speechless.

I’m willing to agree that there may have been other candidates out there who would be even better to fix the economy, or stronger on the moral issues, or more adept at foreign policy. But the two candidates we have still represent two very, very different world views. The choices in leadership we face right now are, among other outcomes, likely to determine not only if we will face a second, nuclear-capable Cold War with a revived authoritarian Russia and dirty-bomb-armed terrorist states, but also whether American will pass the point of no return on her debt. And that’s not even touching a host of other important issues like education and healthcare.

The threat of nuclear World War?

The largest economy in the world on the brink of bankruptcy?

How can anyone at all remain undecided at this juncture? How can it not matter who sits in the Oval Office? And to be honest, I have yet to meet anyone who is knowledgeable about basic economics or American history that is either undecided or voting for the left.

As a poll-watcher in 2008, I saw youthful ignorance and enthusiasm for a candidate who had done an excellent job using social media to raise the emotional fervor surrounding his campaign. That was understandable (and even forgivable) although certainly frustrating at the time.

But these are adults. Some of them are Christians. And as either, every single one of them has a responsibility, a moral obligation even, to be informed and involved. And so do you.

If you like what you read, sign-up to get CT in your inbox!

Comments

  1. says

    “The Christian-educated woman who just doesn’t consider economics to be part of her voting values.”

    Are you saying that it is ignorant to be a single issue voter? Some pro-life voters might disagree with you.

    • says

      I have 2 young children. If I cared deeply about their spiritual instruction and read them Bible stories, played only worship music, etc, but did not dress them warmly in winter, never offer them fruits and vegetables, failed to teach them their letters and numbers, or not bother to hold their hand near a busy street, would you consider me to be a good mother? Of course not! Being a good parent requires attention not just to children’s spiritual formation, but also to their physical safety and intellectual development.
      Likewise, when selecting a pastor, would you select the candidate who had a proven track record on supporting traditional families, but who had run his last church into bankruptcy? I would hope not…
      In other words, all issues can be considered “moral” and we can hold a comprehensive Christian worldview, rather than dividing out some issues as “spiritual” and others as “amoral.”

      • says

        Using your example, some might say that adherence to the essentials (i.e. the deity of Christ) is the most important part of selecting a pastor. That is how many pro-life voters feel when they vote. They would say that if a candidate is not committed to protect the lives of unborn babies then they are unfit to lead. Of course there are other types of single-issue voters out there that use the same sort of rationale. These, by in large, are neither ignorant or apathetic and some of them might categorize views opposed to theirs as ignorant.

  2. tony4516 says

    Yes, I agree with you it doesn’t make sense. Like veterans who can’t see that the current Commander-in-Chief is hurting our military, or Christian leaders who tell us because this man is a Morman we should not vote for him! One thing I know for sure is that God sets or allows certain people to be leaders, it is all under His control. So my prayer is that He allows for a change of leadership in this nation.

  3. Argon says

    Didn’t forget the environmental issues (global warming, acid rain, dirty coal, loss of rainforests and in the Midwest, loss of topsoil, and fresh water availability) along with other long term issues.

    PS – I’m not aware on any recent President who wanted to make prayer illegal. Why does that idea persist?

    • says

      Probably more through a SCOTUS ruling depending on what justices have been appointed. It isn’t so outlandish when you consider kids today are still told in some school districts that they can’t pray at school (student led or self-initiated during non-instructional time) because of some SCOTUS rulings in the 60s.

      • Argon says

        I’d disagree with that worry. Most precedents are pretty well established now. There are some fuzzy areas remaining but the main debates are done. None of the current or future likely appointees for the Supreme Court have any agenda for banning prayer for all students. As for some schools misunderstanding the application of legal rulings we have examples on both sides of the coin. Indeed, because these exceptions are often identified publicly they tend to be resolved pretty quickly.

        As I wrote earlier, I’m not aware of any recent President who wanted to make prayer illegal. Do you know of any, Shane? One can propose a ridiculous fantasy but the facts and actions of recent Presidents belie those assertions. There are many legitimate reasons why one may disagree with a candidate without hyperbolic demonization.

      • says

        No not a President doing that directly because of the constitutional limits on the office. As far as religious liberty in general I can’t give President Obama high marks.

      • Argon says

        Again, I asked if you knew of any recent President who *wanted* to make prayer illegal in schools. That question had nothing to do with the specific powers of that office. It was about intentions or goals.

        The simple answer is “None.” There have been no recent Presidents who have sought to or even demonstrated any desire for banning all prayer in schools. Not directly, not indirectly, simply none at all. Period.

      • Argon says

        Still bad, still replying with innuendo. It’s like saying we’re willing to believe that you’ve never celebrated a black sabbath or desecrated a cross, at least in public. And still no: There is no evidence based on the individuals nominated or how the ones that were approved have ruled on the court.