Obama and Christians

I hesitate to post this one. I decided to go ahead anyway, but first I wanted to point out a few things:

  1. As is true with all posts on this blogsite, these thoughts are entirely my own and have no reflection on Oakbrook Church or any of the rest of its staff.
  2. Remember that you are visiting my blogsite – and this space is reserved for whatever thoughts I am having at the moment. You can write whatever you want on your site. πŸ™‚
  3. If you don’t like the topic or the content of this article, then please be invited to take a pass on this one..but don’t forget to come back for the next one!

OK. Enough disclaimers.

I have noticed that quite a few of my Christian friends and aquaintences all across the country seem to be supporting Obama these days. I can tell by the “bumper stickers” on their FaceBook accounts, their announcements on Twitter about rooting for Obama in the debates or in the Jermiah Wright controversy, and I’ve seen references on their blogsites. Some of these people are involved with highly visible and influential churches across the country…probably names you would recognize.

One commonality these supporters have is the kinds of churches they come from. They are all from ultra contemporary, post-modern, or emergent style congregations.

Another commonality these Obama supporters have is their youth. They are almost all in their 20’s and 30’s.

A third commonality is that these supporters are attracted to the causes of social justice, fighting poverty and disease, environmentalism, and volunteerism. This one should not surprise anyone. Anyone who has an authentic, vibrant relationship with God SHOULD have some righteous anger about them. Taking care of the world, feeding the poor, freeing the oppressed, healing the sick are VERY CHRISTIAN values.

A fourth commonality seems to be war fatigue coupled with a disenfranchisement of the existing political system. This is also understandable. A lot of people feel this way (not me – but that’s another post.)

Something that makes total sense to me is Obama’s “hope and change” mantra. People ARE sick of certain things. People want to be part of something that seems to be a positive turn. This makes total sense to me. But here’s my big problem: those things that are attractive about Obama come with strings attached. They come with a high cost (and I’m not talking dollars.) What is that cost? What are the strings?

It’s this: no matter what public perception is, no matter what the P.R. people have “packaged” for us, no matter how many cool YouTube videos will.i.am makes or how many stump speeches Oprah makes, there is the following truth:

Barack Obama is a hard-core liberal. And everything that comes with it. (visit OnTheIssues.Org if you don’t believe me.) Here’s what that means:

That means abortions – and lots of them.
Obama even voted to protect the grotesque practice known as “partial-birth abortion”. He supports Roe v. Wade. And he would no doubt nominate justices who believe as he does – that the Constitution is a living, breathing “conversation”, not a static declaration of law.

It means being pro-homosexuality.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told a crowd at Hocking College in Nelsonville, Ohio, Sunday March 2nd that he believes the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of same-sex unions. He also told the crowd that his position in favor of legalized abortion does not make him “less Christian.”[…] “If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans.”

He has also stated that he would be “the most pro-gay president in history.”

It means higher taxes, more spending on entitlement programs.
These policies hurt (not help) poor minority families the most on the following basis – we create an underclass that is dependent on the government to survive. That is cruel. We should instead be teaching people to become self-sufficient. I think there is a spiritual component to this. It is economic enslavement.

It means being lenient on criminals, expecting the state to do the job of the Holy Spirit.
Obama supports alternative sentencing and rehabilitiation over jail time. When has the government ever succeeded in changing hearts and minds of criminals from evil to good? As Christians we should know that the only thing that can do that is the power of God working in us. But he does support harsher penalties for one particular type of crime – Hate Crimes. Obama supports you getting extra punishment if you thought bad things about your victim because of race, sex, religion, or sexal preferences.

He wants to pass out condoms at taxpayer expense, says its OK for Public Education Kindergartners to be taught about homosexuality, and wants a path to citizenship illegal immigrants and guest workers, and even extending welfare and Medicaid to them (this is all verifiable at the OnTheIssues website).

So I’m sorry if this offends you, but as a Christ-follower myself, there is no way that I could vote for this. I love you guys at these other churches and what you do. I love you heart for people and your passion for ministry. But I think you guys are sacrificing too much with Obama.

Hope and Change are wonderful initiatives. But what is the object of that hope? Is it in the government of men or is it in the power of God? Consider Chuck Colson’s message frrom 1994:

“Where is the hope? I meet millions of people who feel demoralized by the decay around us. The hope that each of us has is not in who governs us, or what laws we pass, or what great things we do as a nation. Our hope is in the power of God working through the hearts of people. And that’s where our hope is in this country. And that’s where our hope is in life.”

Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

Tags: , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

41 Comments on “Obama and Christians”

  1. Eric H Says:

    Thank you for posting this — I believe it is extremely relevant and important. Obama is a great speaker who knows how to frame his agenda in a way that people connect with. For me, that makes him all the more dangerous. I say that with tremendous sincerity. As Christians, the last thing we should want would be that the government take onto itself more of the duties that rightly belong to the Church.

    I am compelled to say — on the abortion issue, it is even worse than support for partial birth abortion. Obama voted against the “Born Alive Infant Protection Act” twice. This bill protects unwanted infants who survive an abortion from being killed after they have been born — in short, infanticide.

    This is a man who does not value life. That alone would be enough for me, but then there are his strong socialist tendencies and real-life socialist ties. If you’re interested in that — ask me for details sometime. He and his wife (especially his wife) have made several remarks that sound like they are straight from Marx. I know this sounds really harsh, but I swear I’m not exaggerating here.

  2. A Kline Says:

    Who said socialism was a bad thing?

  3. Steven Says:

    Great post. I think it’s what we needed to hear. Obama makes the claim that he will have to answer to us, not lobbyists when he’s president.
    Which “us” is he answering to? Only the “us” that lines up with HIS own agenda? He surely knows how to rally people, but I think that excitement (which is rare for a presidential candidate to have) has blinded us from his flawed stance on the issues.

  4. jermtech Says:

    @ Eric H: Thanks for commenting. I have heard that stuff, too. But I tried to paint the post in broad generalities and not a machine gun of statistics. And All my facts came from a non profit, independent fact-checking organization so that no one wrote off the topic due to where the facts came from.

    @ A Kline: I do, for one. Socialism fits well into the scope of Christianity (read Acts 2:42), but it is not a good solution for government. Again, one of my main core beliefs is that the government and the church should not try to do each other’s jobs.

    @ Steven: Exactly. Charisma alone does not make a good president.

  5. Eric H Says:

    To anyone who has mixed feelings (or good feelings) about socialism, I would direct you to F.A. Hayek’s book, The Road To Serfdom.

  6. Jason Lee Says:

    so heated! I love it! If you read the post on my blog about Obama… I hope every person would come away with some take aways. This is a human being, Obama, and he does bring value we can all learn from. And what I hope to do is AFFIRM what’s awesome about what’s happening…. I DO NOT affirm what he’s jacked up on. But this is 100% TRUE: nobody will ever agree with every single thing a single candidate proposes (maybe except for you Ron Paul peeps) and I do have concern with Obama’s views on issues… obviously.

    But here’s where it hits the road… there’s a limited choice. It’s not like whoever you want is gonna be president… it’s down to three. If we’re in this war in IRAQ for another ten years… how many lives do we loose there? How much money is spent there that could be spent somewhere else? How many more tax breaks can the upper class get? How much further can we damage American’s stance in the world? How worse can our foreign policy get? do we really want Bill, I mean, Hillary Clinton or John McCain sitting at a table coming up with trade policy? hmmm….

    Whatever you believe about whatever, come november, we have to decide who will be best for the country. And all of us with have to vote for somebody.

    and sorry… ron paul will not win. πŸ™‚

    so it’s totally cool to be honked off about who’s left in it… but those are the cards this country has been delt…. so you all should just go to the ron paul march in DC… the vote for somebody else. πŸ™‚

    man I love blogs… πŸ™‚


  7. Jason Lee Says:

    oh… and one more thing… is it really the government’s job to control and legislate moral issues anyway? It’s not the governments job to teach our kids morals… it’s OURS.

    let’s go.

    (this is so fun)

  8. jermtech Says:

    @JLee re: IRAQ: OK we REALLY don’t want to go there, do we? You and I will be an ocean apart on that one. I am greatfeul for the sacrifices our VOLUNTEER armed forces have made for us. They have kept the terrorists on the run and overseas. Not a single terrorist attack in this country since 9/11. And I’m not upset about the money either. Our security and safety would be a sweet deal at twice the price. At least National Security and protection of our citizens is a legitimate expense that our federal government should be spending…not like all the big government, new-deal, great society bullcrap that should never have been allowed in the first place!

    @JLee re: tax breaks DO go to the middle and upper classes. Every wonder WHY? The bottom 50% of taxpeyers only pay 3% of all tax revenue! It’s a lazy argument. Do your homework: http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

    @JLee re: our stance in the world: Who the heck gives a crap what everyone else in the world thinks? It is our perogative to do what is in the best interest of our country.

    @JLee re: foreign policy: And Obama would do better? He has ZERO foreign policy experience and his early campaign gaffes prove how green he is with the whole topic.

    @JLee re: our choices: OK – you got me there. We’ve got two liberals and a crazy old coot to pick from if you ask me.


  9. Jason Lee Says:

    haha… i love this by the way… am I little mad it’s on your blog not mine though for the traffic… πŸ™‚

    wow… uh… you’re right about IRAQ… we don’t need to go there, we will go round and round about this one…. i just think people need to stop dying over there. And maybe it’s not our place to police the world.

    just to address our stance in the world… it matters because we are getting SHAFTED HARD on jobs being moved overseas and trade agreements. I.E. KOKOMO. I.E. THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY. OBVIOUSLY what we’re doing now isn’t working. Change.

    in my OPINION, we need somebody that isn’t #1. just going to start a war or #2. going to do foreign policy and call the same plays her husband did. It’s not just a fancy saying, we do need change.

    we need to get passed choosing who we are going to vote for based on our MORALS. The government is NEVER going to change abortion, or homosexuality and I don’t want them to.

    the CHURCH is the hope of the world, not the government. and if we really do love living in a free country, it’s got to be free even with stuff we don’t like that much.

    so all i’m saying, is left with the choices we have…. Obama is the obvious choice.

    would you really vote for McCain just because of Abortion and Homosexuality? I’m pretty sure when Jesus was here it was a pretty political time. but he NEVER went that rout to change people’s morals and worldview… and there’s a reason… the CHURCH is the hope of the world, not the government.

    if the election comes down to abortion and homosexuality, then the evangelical church will vote in ANOTHER lame president because of stuff that will , ON A LARGE SCALE, never change.

    and I say hand out as many condoms as you want if it brings down AIDS, and saves lives. it’s not the schools job to teach my kids about sex, it’s mine.

    booya. πŸ™‚

  10. jermtech Says:

    Wow…you reduced my fine five point issues-oriented disagreement with Obama to one: Morals. And I didn;t even go into Foregin Policy and the War on Terror.

    You’re lumping me in with the so-called “single issue voters”. That’s not totally accurate, although I will have to tell you that I believe I will be held accountable for my voting record one day. I don’t want to stand before God and have to tell him why I voted for candidates that did nothing about abortion. I don’t want to be the type of Christian that just throws my hands up in the air and says “Oh well…there’s one we just can’t win…might as well join ’em.”

    I am just as firm in my belief about economic issues as I am the moral ones. I believe that we’ve had 50 years of liberal policies which are an absolute failure. The war on poverty shows no measurable decrease in the amount of poverty since welfare was started. Social insecurity is a disaster. The government has taken the place of the African American Father and look at the sad statistics on that. it’s a disgrace. We have created an entire generation of dependence.

    There’s nothing new about Obama. He’s just another politician – not a Messiah. We’ve had charismatic leaders before (from both parties). We’ve had a “spirit of change” before (see JFK). We’ve had a motivational optimist before (see Reagan), we’ve had other leaders who have had a groundswell of youth support (Clinton).

    Words mean things. And Obama’s words point to a continuation of the same failed liberal policies that have destroyed the character of this country.

    The Issues matter. Policies matter. Actions matter.

  11. Jason Lee Says:

    I appreciate the heart jerm… and i love ya… i think we’ll always just disagree about some things… and you’re right, people have become dependant on the government, not just african americans, TONS of lower income people, not sure if any of these guys will be able to change that… but one can hope.

    I’m sure we can both be open minded enough to see that there’s probably a million different options that could turn america’s economy, foreign policy, etc. etc. around… guess we will see what works in the next 4 years… or what doesn’t… or maybe Jesus will just come back and laugh at us all… πŸ™‚

  12. adam s. Says:

    Disclaimer: I am a friend of Jason’s and that is how I stumbled upon this debate.

    Food for thought: Catholics believe in a “consistent ethic of life” found in the scriptures, and this helps in making political decisions, such as voting, because we can see within Jesus a variety of teaching about life that are co-dependent. Therefore to build a “culture of life” we need to work on poverty, abortion, peace (and violence – the absence of peace – not the other way around), capital punishment, and other issues all at the same time. Catholics, in general, started what has become the “pro-life” movement (a misnomer), but also stand strictly against the un-just War in Iraq and the death penalty equally. That is why the “Catholic Vote” gets so much press, because though McCain is the “pro-life” candidate when it comes to abortion, he fails to pass the test on the economy, death penalty, and War in Iraq (though is policy speech recently was well rounded). The sooner we can see all these issues are connected the sooner we can actually be “pro-life.”

    More food for thought: It is debatable, as a quick google search will show, but many believe abortion actually went down during the Clinton (“pro-choice”) presidency, and this was due to his economic policies. Read: http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_archives&mode=current_opinion&article=CO_041027_stassen

    Lastly: Why is “pro-choice” considered anti-abortion? They aren’t actually opposites. One can maintain that abortion should only be allowed if the health of the mother is threatened (pro-choice), and still work against all other forms. Likewise, even if one wants to up-hold Roe vs. Wade the same person can work against abortion through economics.

    I may or may not check back to see if there is a response. So I hope this was good food for thought.

  13. morgan Says:

    “The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it.” ~P.J. O’Rourke

  14. jermtech Says:

    LOL Mrgan. Thanks for the needed laugh.

  15. jermtech Says:

    Thanks for visiting and for your comments, Adam. My Spam catcher originally caught your post so it is appearing later than originally received. Sorry about that πŸ™‚

    In the case of abortion, I actually WOULD support an incremental approach. Let’s ban the easy ones straight off the top (such as third trimester/late-term, partial-bith, etc.) Then we can have the debates about the harder ones (mother’s life at risk, rape, incest, etc.) But at least let’s start SOMEWHERE.

  16. adam s. Says:

    Good approach. Let’s forward it to the next president.

    p.s. I don’t know how that smiley face got in my post. I never use those things, they drive me crazy.

  17. occgroups Says:

    Jerm & JLee – nice little pow-wow……I found myself doing some Hilary ‘flip flopping’ as I read your posts….I can find reason to agree with both of you and I sense a genuine concern from both of you….I’m not picking a winner but Jerm’s arguments have a firmer factual foundation while J’s arguments, although valid, seem to be based on what we hear through the liberal media and an Obama ‘experience’…..Barack is slick, but what does he really believe…..not sure anyone really knows and that is concerning to me.

    Anyways, this quote form Mr. Lee caught my attention:
    “the CHURCH is the hope of the world, not the government. and if we really do love living in a free country, it’s got to be free even with stuff we don’t like that much.”

    So what you are saying is that true freedom is the removal of any structured way of life. I think the God we serve certainly has some order and values that He set in motion don’t you? I think we both agree that His way is abundant life and a life of freedom right? So…….when it comes to values that we know God holds at the core of His being…when it comes to the crap that He had to send His Son to die for…are we to just stand down and let tolerance rule the day? or as the hope of the world do we stand up for what God cares about?

    I am no expert on policies and government will debate policies until the world stops turning but we must never compromise our Biblical values and we must be willing to defend those values right?

    If we choose to not defend our values, we are basically wimps. Jesus DIED on a cross because of our sin. What are we saying to a lost world by not defending the truth….that it really isn’t the truth…that Jesus is really not the hope of the world. We, the church, are called to sacrifice our lives as Christ did….not fall over and say everything is ok as your quote suggests.

    Your quote is alluding to not fighting the fight against abortion and homosexuality. I understand what you are trying to say but your quote in reference to freedom is very dangerous. For example, abortion is murder…so if that is ok, is it ok in your free country for anyone to murder? After all, if I’m truly free I should be able to do whatever I want right. You see where I am going with this? Dangerous territory we are headed in with that kind of thinking.

    I think God wants us to defend life especially the taking of innocent life at all costs…a part of that fight is to not legalize it isn’t it? Like I said, this is just a part of the fight.
    You also quoted that you are ok with handing out condoms to kids…..to reduce AIDS…wow….God’s obvious position is purity…..handing out condoms does not align with purity….the only answer to combatting AIDS is abstinence…..any other choice is to simply put your hand in the fire and when you play with fire you are going to get burned.

    Live Like Jesus…..hold firm to those things that are central to our faith and defend them in love…….a part of this process is to uphold these values in our laws(if our laws reflect God’s heart, our world can only be better) and the other part of this process is to live a life that reflects the freedom of knowing Jesus Christ.


    ps….sorry if that was too intense…….you know I love you!

  18. Well, all I can say is I am glad I’m not the bad guy on this site anymore…lol…oh, and I’m voting Bruce Willis for prez.

  19. Eric H Says:

    Wow…this has gotten really crazy since I last checked it out. There are a couple things I want to point out real quick, and I’m going to have to take more time on the rest (I’ll probably continue some stuff on my blog).

    First — JLee, Ron Paul is still in the race, and while there is a VERY slim chance of him stealing the nomination away from McCain (still technically possible, however unlikely) you could still vote for him on principle in the primary. After all, a single vote for Barack Obama in the Indiana primary isn’t likely to mean anything anyway, whereas every vote for Ron Paul sends a message.

    Second — not legislating morality is taken way too far. It has become the mantra for relativists. The problem is the definition of morality. While we as Christians should not use government to do the work for which we should be relying on God, government IS in place to protect natural rights through natural law. At the core of natural law doctrine is the right to life. It is bad enough to not recognize that a fetus in the womb is life; it is unthinkable and an absolute, undeniable abomination to natural law (universal morality).

    Third — Jeremy, there are a lot of legitimate reasons we should be very skeptical about the Iraq situation. I won’t go into it here, but it’s definitely a worthwhile discussion to have.

    Last — I think everyone this year needs to take a step back and look at the landscape of government. We are still quite free, and we still live in the greatest nation in the world. But if you zoom out and take a look at the trend-line of freedom and prosperity, things are headed South quickly. We are at a fork in the road where things are either going to pick up speed in the wrong direction, or make a dramatic turn down the road of freedom. What direction we go from here is determined by each vote, each conversation, each individual fighting for what they believe and want. If we don’t get it now, we can work for it in the future.

    You might have seen the following quote on my facebook, it is so relevant for right now.

    β€œIt does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds”
    — Samuel Adams

  20. jermtech Says:

    Wow folks…this is an awesome thread. Thanks for the participation! Not sure we accomplished much other than presenting a few sides to the debate, but I have heard from a few different people who HAVEN’T posted that the discussion was useful and helpful to them

  21. In all actuality, I found this thread very interesting and informative. I especially like seeing the different sides of the issues…

  22. Eric H Says:

    In the second part of my post…I meant to say…

    it is unthinkable and an absolute, undeniable abomination to natural law to kill a baby on an operating table.

  23. This is a very interesting debat going on. I am JLee’s wife….signing on. I have to chime in here. To give a couple of disclaimers here, I’m not sure who I’m voting for, I’m not even sure what party I belong to. I think it is shocking that anyone can say I am a republican or I am a democrate so firmly. Both sides of the fence have great idea, great things about them. Both have problems, errors in judgment from my perspective. One of my biggest pet pevs is that Christian has become synonomus with Republican. I think that is dangerous teritory to allude to the idea that God’s vote would be for John McCain (or at least not for Obama) in this election. I have heard alot about why Obama would be like voting fore the devil :), let’s here why you Obama bashers find John McCain as the best choice. As someone who is undecided that would be soemthing interesting to hear.

    As far as JB’s respsone to JLee respsonse…..I think Jason’s heart (not to put words in his mouth becaue he is a big boy and can defend his own stements) is that anyone who looks to the govenment to police morality is going to fall short everytime. How can you expect a system where every person (non christians and christians alike) is allowed to vote, to make the right call every time on moral issues. You can’t……It won’t happen. Now, JB I agree with you, that doesn’t mean that we don’t vote for what we see alines best with God’s ideas. As Christians we need to live our lives everyday to try and align with Jesus and his teachings. So, as a Chirst follower, I would expcet that you take your faith into accout when you vote. You should take your faith into account in all parts of your life. I think what Jason is saying that at the end of the day, he doesn’t put his hope in the govenment, he puts his hope in GOD and the chuch. Let’s get serious people, what is more effective legislating abortion or the church actually loving people and reaching out to those who have unwanted pregnancies…..maybe if the chuch and parents would reach out to kids about purity and sex instead of letting thier 8th grade health class do it, we wouldn’t need condoms in school at all. The issues that you are debating, abortion, condoms in school, ect are fine to legislate , but do we want kids to that dont’ have sex because there was no condoms at there school or because they are so sold out to Chirst and His was that they woud never cross that line until marriage. Do we want moms who don’t have abortions because they aren’t allowed by law or because they value life because God values life. I think what JLee is saying is that legislation can only do so much, it is just a law. People break them everyday, true change, true hope for this country is to see a radical moment for Chirst and his fame that only comes from God not from Obama, McCain, Paul, or Cinton.

    That’s my two cents for now, go ahead, rip me apart. and I know I am a bad speller.

  24. Jason Lee Says:

    here’s what i know to be true, that I think few people could disagree with:

    1. we should read the bible for OURSELVES. Love what God loves, do what God does, speak how God speaks, act how God acts. We should try, really try, to divorce ourselves from preconcieved AMERICAN ideas of faith, or any system that any church has taught us. Just the Bible. Just God.
    2. when we do that, here’s what is 100% undeniably true: Jesus entered the world in one of the most heated political times in all of history.
    3. Jesus was bringing about the most earth changing message the world has ever heard. AND HE NEVER, NOT ONCE, NOT EVER, DID ANYTHING WITH THE GOVERNMENT.


    That’s it. Jesus didn’t run for office. Jesus didn’t even want to. It’s a MOVEMENT, so much bigger than a political system in America. And what has happened is that Christians have been assosiated as REPUBLICAN, and ANTI EVERYTHING. We’re not seen in culture as being FOR stuff… just against it.

    I think a big reason for this is our desire to try to use the political system to legislate morality.

    again… I’m not “for” all that stuff… and I’m not some crazy “relativist” and I’m not saying that “whatever goes is ok”.

    I’m just saying we fight the wrong battles. Litterally and figuratively.

    I’m just saying that we shoud open our minds to include the WHOLE WORLD, and we should open our minds to try to live like Jesus.

    I’m praying for ALL our minds to be open more every day about how Jesus would act & talk & what he would care about if he walked the earth today…


  25. jermtech Says:


    I think you are extending the “Live Like Jesus” thing a bit too far. Jesus had a unique mission and there are parts of it that we cannot follow. I do not think God would expect us to die for anyone else’s sins, for example. That was Jesus’ unique mission.

    So I think you’re extending the “Jesus didnt care about it” thing a bit too far.

    Jesus was never married. Jesus never had kids. Jesus never saw a television. Jesus never talked about environmentalism. Jesus never voted. Does that mean he wouldn’t care about any of these things if were in our place?

    The parenting thing is a good example. How would Jesus parent? Just because he didn’t have kids when he was here doesn’t mean he wouldn’t love his kids, be an involved parent, want whats best for them, attend school board meetings, save for their college fund, etc. if he were in our place.

    All this to point out that we cannot shed our Christian values when we step into the polling place. I do not think Jesus would want us to do that either. And you do not vote for everyone else – you vote for YOU and YOUR FAMILY. I vote for someone who shares my values and believes as I do. I expect everyone else to do the same. If my candidate is on the short end of the stick, well then tough noogies. But I voted my values and I think that Jesus would do that, too.

  26. jermtech Says:

    Gretchen: I agree with 98% of your post.

    Unfortunately, if you’re looking for a big defense of John McCain, you’re not likely to find it on my blog. John McCain’s stances on theings can be found here: http://www.ontheissues.org/john_mccain.htm

    He is pro-life. He believes gay marriage should be left up to the states. Those are the high points. Unfortunately, he is just plain ignorant on economic issues. A recent quote of his is this, “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” McCain said. “but I’ve got [Alan] Greenspan’s book.”

    This quote is embarrassing. It sounds like a Holiday Inn Express commercial. “I’m not good on economics, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.”

  27. Jason Lee Says:

    Jerm… this is what I’m saying. By just saying that stuff above about McCain… it’s obvious that you’re voting AGAINST stuff instead of FOR stuff. So obviously McCain doesn’t have a hard stance on gay marriage, but is pro-life as you like, but is going to be in a War FOREVER. So why is disagreeing on a bunch of stuff with mccain so much different than disagreeing on stuff with Obama? Is abortion even the only moral issue? What about the ENVIRONMENT? Or the WAR? Or using our countries money wisely? Or caring for the Poor? Maybe if you look close there’s more moral issues you’d agree with, with Obama… maybe…

    That economic quote is HILARIOUS, and even more confirms that holistically Obama would be better for America. Paul would be too, but he’s not gonna get elected.

    As for the Jesus part, all I’m saying is that to each his own. If you look at the Bible and get out of it that we should stand up and be against stuff, and vote for one moral issue above anything else, that’s fine. If you’ll vote for McCain simply because of his stance on abortion, that’s your own choice. I just think that it reinforces a narrow-minded stereo-type that the culture around us has about Christians. We can’t see beyond Abortion to vote for a president that would make America a better place. I’m not saying that I know how Jesus would parent or whatever, I’m saying that I read the Bible and get how Jesus acted, and the things he cared about… and whatever you get from that is what you get from that, even if I don’t agree with it. All I care about is that it’s coming from the Bible.

    We are never going to agree 100% with a candidate. So I like to weigh ALL the options, even the moral one’s, but there’s more to it then checking off a box about one moral issue.

    JERM…. you also are hip enough to like MAC, so you should vote for Paul or Obama. πŸ™‚

    anyway… I’m out to chill with the wife today… I have greatly enjoyed this little debate about culture, morals, politics, and the life of Christ.

  28. jermtech Says:

    What makes you think I’m voting for McCain? πŸ™‚ I only talked about him because your wife asked!

  29. Jason Lee Says:

    who would Jesus vote for?

    would he even vote?

    would he align himself with a political party?

    this is all I”m saying… can any of us answer these questions?


  30. jermtech Says:

    I can infer Jesus’ attitude about voting from the “give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s, but give to God what is God’s” quote. Notice he didn’t say, “Don’t give your money to Ceasar…don’t pay your taxes.” From this we can infer that Christ wants us to do our civic duties. Voting would be among our civic duties. But the last part of the statement tell us what is REALLY important.

    We’re all saying the same thing at this point. We are to place our trust and hope in God, not in the government of men. (Which I believe I said in the start of this thread.)

  31. YellowTeam4Life Says:

    Have we ever really had a president or someone run who was all about Christian values? I haven’t been through too many elections and never pay much attention until it’s close to voting time, but have we ever had anyone take a real hard stance? I know Bush has taken a lot of flak for his beliefs, but is he the closest we’ve been to having Christ-centered leadership in the Whitehouse? Reading all this back and forth has peaked my curiosity.

  32. jermtech Says:

    Well, a person of outstanding moral character and integrity would probably never get into the field of politics, if we’re being honest.

    And people who are extremely bright, brilliant, gifted, talented, and exceptional in their field would probably make a lot more money in the private sector than they ever would in the public.

    So…….who does that leave us with?

  33. occgroups Says:

    My comments were not meant to start any arguments about abortion, homosexuality, condoms in school etc…..I was commenting on the idea that we should just lay down our values on all fronts because we live in a free country and everyone should be able to do whatever they want because it is a free country. Like I said, I think this is very dangerous territory to tread into and this covers all areas: war/environment/sexuality/economics etc. JLee, I agree with you bro…we change the world one life at a time through relationship not through government. But I also see that government consists of people and the people we elect have an incredible amount of influence to show Christ to our country so it’s important for us to help elect candidates that will reflect God’s heart just like we here in Kokomo are trying to live lives that reflect God’s heart. I understand that Jesus may not have been active in the political circle and I agree that we are known for more of what we are against than what we are for but I also think it was clear that Jesus was ‘for’ a certain way of life and ‘against’ a certain way of life. Because of that, he was both loved and hated. In the same way, I think we have been given the responsibility to let the world know what God is ‘for’ and what he is ‘against’ and to do so in love, but unfortunately because we now live in a culture of moral relativism that no longer knows God, we are going to be both loved and hated for standing in The Truth. We must love and only love but we must also accept that we will be hated or rejected and because we are is not necessarily a bad thing….Jesus experienced the same kind of trials for teaching ‘the way’.
    I also agree that really everything is a ‘moral’ issue. I am also tired of the ‘moral’ issue always linked to abortion, homosexuality etc. As Rob Bell says, ‘Everything is Spiritual.’ This makes sense to me. But where it gets hard is on policies like the war, the environment, economics etc……I’m not sure any of us know which policy is best so you do the best job you can trying to understand the issues and what you think makes the most sense. You can debate this stuff forever…..I can find myself going back and forth between what each party says trying to figure out what sounds best. However, I do think there are moral truths and values that Eric H. talked about where God’s position is known. For example, I think we would all agree that God values life and that to take a life hurts His heart. I’m with JLee that ultimately the only way to change a person’s position on this is for them to know God and that comes through relationship, but I also believe that we have the responsibility to elect people that will value what God values so that God’s heart will be made known. And like JLee said, this needs to be on all the issues.
    Gretchen raised a question that I would like to conclude with: what is more effective trying to change something through legislature or through the hearts of people by people reaching out? I say both are effective and important if the legislature aligns with the heart of God. Historically and biblically, nations that honored God (you do this on a personal level and on a national level (laws of the land), have always been blessed. I do not think this is a coincidence, it is how God works. On the other hand, nations that moved away from the heart of God fell apart…..when we do it our way, we reap what we sow…….when we submit and humbly follow God, we reap His blessings. I see the state of our nation and culture today to follow into this same pattern. As our laws and ways move away from God’s heart, we find ourselves in the condition we are in today.
    Like Jerm said, I think we are saying the same thing at this point…..we need God and God alone to change the hearts of people far from Him but we are called to join His story and to reflect Him in our world…..it is just how we bring God back to the center of our culture that is so hard to figure out.

  34. jermtech Says:

    JB, you bring up a good point about the judgement of the nations, though. That IS in the Bible, whether we’re comfortable with it or not. One of the future judgements will be God judging the nations and how much we have honored him.

    Something to think about…

  35. Adam Says:

    a small point here: in Lk 20 the trick is that everything belongs to God. once you give to God what is God’s, there is nothing left for Caesar.

    second point: Jason, I agree what you are getting at. I’ll say it again: consistent ethic of life -> not only are all the issues important, but they are all connected

  36. jermtech Says:

    Just to be sure, I went back and looked at Luke 20 in the Greek (I have a Transliteration). I don’t think I agree with your interpretation. The point is not that everything is God’s. Christ even asks them whose inscription is on the denarius. Then he says give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s.

    So there are two points here. One being, the things of the world have their own hierarchy which have little to do with the spiritual plane. The second implication is that God has his inscription written on the human heart – and lays claim to it. Pretty cool if you ask me.

  37. Eric H Says:

    Wow, this post continues to have some buzz. Well I have to chime in once again.

    First off, I am really not trying to offend anyone or call anyone names (JLee, I don’t believe you are a relativist — that label WAS however intended for Mr. Obama).

    JLee – The point I was making about ‘natural law’ is really outside the scope of Christianity. Or to be more accurate, I would say that natural law is a superset of Christian morality. In other words, it is more universal than the morality held by Christians. You should totally read Frederic Bastiat’s “The Law”, it is VERY short and I think it would help you understand this natural law idea I’ve been trying to espouse. I can even get you a copy of the audiobook if you’d like.

    Gretchen – I agree with you. Being a partisan drone (committing to a party) is a terrible idea. However, a good party should have some underlying ideologies associated with it. Typically, people tend to vote within one party or another based on these ideologies. This I think is okay. The problem comes when the ideologies change and people continue to support the party based on old ideologies.

  38. Eric H Says:

    Don’t know if anyone is still following this, but I found this podcast from the Acton Institute might be of interest to anyone following this thread.

    Here’s the link to the podcast. The episode I would point out is “Obama and Religion, Part I”


  39. jermtech Says:

    38 comments is getting a little hard to keep track of…my next comment on this topic will be a new post in a few moments.

  40. deb hearn Says:

    WOW! This was awesome to read even at this late date! Jermtech….you have a great blog!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: