Who would Christ vote for? In my opinion, he wouldn't vote for either one. He would take out a Cat of Nine Tails, and beat the tar out of everyone in government, including the two hot air balloons trying to get our vote. Then he would rule us as only a just and merciful God does rule. Is it the second coming yet?
So, on a more pertinent topic, is it Christ-like to vote Republican or Democrat? From what I understand, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints doesn't take a stand one way or another on candidates. It does however take a stand very strongly on the moral issues. We all have to do our homework on where each candidate TRUELY stands on each issue. Since I can trust both of them about as far as I can throw them, I have to go by a famous and truthful quote..."By their fruits ye shall know them".
What are some of the fruits you all see in these candidates that make you like or dislike them? I'll throw some spice in here... Obama voted several times as "present" when the partial birth abortion was trying to be abolished. Translated, this means he was for it. His reason... probably not because he was REALLY for letting 20% of the failed abortions to die in a closet at Christ's Hospital near Chicago (how ironic eh?). But probably to get liberal support in one way or another. This still shows his lack of commitment to a moral issue.
McCain and his failure of his first marriage.
by Ecumenical News International..When asked about their greatest individual moral failures, Obama spoke of his experimentation with drugs and alcohol as a youth, while McCain said simply, "The failure of my first marriage."
So, will Obama or McCain take a popular stance when in office or a morally upright stance, or does it even matter? Does it even matter having a moral president? Most people I talk to don't bat an eye about the Clinton scandal with ML and his several other mistresses (and rape allegation cases). Everyone forgets JF Kennedy and his "lady friends". What about the acclaimed morally upstanding "republican party" and it's candidate and ex-president R. Nixon (He doesn't deserve to have his first name mentioned). When did our moral nation start the decent to He__ in a hand basket ever so rapidly?
Were our founding fathers morally upstanding citizens? (Brad, you'll have to set me straight here.) From what I remember, they had some personal moral issued themselves. Alcohol, STD's, "other women".
Wow, it's really late. I might be getting delirious.
This I do know... Our worst enemy and his legions are growing stronger and stronger. As Yoda said to Luke regarding his destiny. "Face him you must". Good night! I am delirious!
Oh, by the way, Obama nor McCain are our worst enemy. I was referring to Satan. ...So delirious... Zzzzzzzzzz
14 comments:
Morality has always been a complex issue when it comes to candidates in this country. I'm not saying that it isn't important; instead I am simply saying that it is almost too complex to dissect.
For example, some of our nation's very best leaders (Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Andrew Jackson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, Ronald Reagan to name a few) all had a history of adultery and/or other moral/ethical problems, while some of our worst presidents (James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson, Jimmy Carter) lived extremely moral and ethical lives.
So how do we take morality into account when we vote? First off, I think it would be silly to assign any candidate (in this case Obama and McCain) the burden of living up to the Mormon standards, since neither is a Mormon. However, this does not mean that we should simply ignore morality entirely. After all, our individual values strongly determine what we look for in a candidate.
With that said, I think there will always be some kind of moral/ethical issue with any and all candidates. After all they are just as human as any other.
So who would Jesus vote for? I think that if he were a regular citizen of the United States that he would find the good in each candidate, but I'm with Richard...he probably wouldn't vote.
I agree with Brad and Richard. Although I do think the republican party is not as religious as they are known for. I'm leaning more toward libertarianism each day... But can't quite give up those views of the republicans either. Remember, I was Margaret Thatcher after all.
I've pretty much given up on the idea that one party is somehow inherently more moral/virtuous than another. For me political parties are nothing more than vacuums seeking control and power. It looks like G. Washington's farewell warning is coming true.
Revolting sounds good to me!
For you revolution fans, you may enjoy hearing the words of Thomas Jefferson, which are sure to resonate with your beliefs:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants, it is its natural manure."
As for the differences between the founders and politicians today, I think we need to remember that much of the same political back-and-forth that exists today also existed back then. We have 200+ years of hindsight that has allowed us to essentially promote the founders to the status of demigods.
In the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson endured some of the harshest attacks imaginable. He was branded as a traitor, a tyrant, an atheist, etc. Those behind the Adams "campaign" portrayed Jefferson as a man that would promote anarchy and that American republicanism would degenerate into the terror of the French Revolution, where beheadings, rape, murder, etc. would abound.
Here is a funny Youtube take on the election of 1800:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z1XhqsKpUE
Though I like the zeal behind everyone's REVOLUTION cries, I must admit that I am far from wanting to join your cause.
Let us not forget that Americans have been "doomsday believers" ever since the republic was created. For centuries we have believed that destruction was waiting around the next corner. While I understand that America faces a number of major problems in the immediate future, let us not forget that these problems are FAR from the worst we have faced.
Yes, there are a number of morality issues that concern a number of citizens. Same-sex marriage does threaten our traditional understanding of the sacredness of marriage. On this i will not disagree. However, we have faced a number of moral issues in our past that were FAR MORE SERIOUS than this. Remember that it was only 160 years ago that we kept an entire race of people in the bonds of slavery. In addition, women and minorities (and non-land owners for that matter) have only recently been given the right to participate in the democratic process. Lynch mobs were abundant during the 1900s, causing fear and horror to strike the hearts of many American citizens.
Now, this doesn't mean that we should downplay our situation. To be certain we face some serious trials. but remember the WE HAVE overcome a whole lot worse. The fact that the Supreme Court of the land has ok'd abortion and that state courts are allowing same-sex marriage is a serious concern. However, remember that things were a lot worse. the Supreme Court (for all its problems) is much better today than in the past. Fortunately we are not seeing cases like Dread Scott (which declared that all Blacks who escaped slavery were nothing more than property and were to be returned to their owners, like an animal) or The Indian Removal Act (which caused the deaths of thousands of Native Americans) are hopefully a thing of the past.
So, as for revolution, count me out. I still think America has a lot of life left in it. If and when we start seeing religions forced to acquiesce to the will of the state THEN we can start talking of revolution.
Such well thought out comments!
Yes, our country has been through thick and thin when it comes to ironing out the big issues such as freedom from oppression/slavery and the other freedoms for women to vote and such. I also tend to agree with Sarah and Jenerator with their desire for revolution. You see, we are in the middle of something far more insidious than the overt problem of treating someone humanely. Something that people see as "ah, that's not so bad, after all, Brittany Spears is doing it", can tear our stalwart values to shreds.
I really should have titled my next post..."Sodom and Gomorra, the next step for America". We need to be moral patriots in this world of laxity. Revolting against the loose standards is a good thing. In addition, that's what makes us Mormons a peculiar people. Moral patriots are peculiar people. They are very much not the status quo....
Does this make sense? Not very specific, maybe I shouldn't write at night after a 16 hour day.
I don't know if I fully buy in to the idea that America is Sodom and Gomorra in the making. To be certain, American society is on the decline in terms of moral degradation, etc. However, I think we should remember that American morality is a difficult thing to judge. Sure, we live in the last days and things are going to continue to decay (in a moral sense). However, this does not mean that this is our first "go-around." It could be argued that slavery is a FAR WORSE sin in the eyes of God that same-sex marriage. With that said, I think it is pointless to argue which sin is worse. In the eyes of God, isn't all sin unacceptable?
I guess what I am trying to say is that immorality has, and always will, abound. It is for this reason that I would be 100% against a revolution of some kind. American society has always had a certain level of immorality. After all, for as great a nation as America is, it is, in the end, a TELESTIAL nation. There is still plenty to be happy about when it comes to America, which is why I would not advocate a revolution.
Fight against immorality = YES!
Abandon ship or revolt = No!
***BTW, if you are interested in the religion of the founders, I did a post over at my personal blog on G. Washington for those that want to check it out.***
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
I think that applies not only to freedom from slavery, but morals as well, since we all know that, keeping the commandments of the Lord lead us to GREATER freedom and following the enticings of Satan bring us into bondage. I would gladly take up arms in defence of our morals.
Yes, defense of morals, but Revolution???
One definition of revolution:
A dramatic and wide-reaching change in the way something works or is organized or in people's ideas about it...
Also, a struggle for political change.
If it comes down to it, I'll bear arms...if we still have that right.
But "Revolution" as it pertains to government essentially means (according to Webster’s Dictionary) the following:
an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed
And as the 12th Article of Faith states:
”We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."
I don't want to digress into an argument over semantics, so I will simply say that fighting against immorality does not have to include a coup d' etat.
Let's try to not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
No, there is not a need for a revolution against the government at this time. Our nation is a fabulous one. It still won't allow a single zealot who wants to be dictator able to be a dictator. Checks and balances was inspirational! But a moral revolution against the status quo is a very necessary one. You give up on that battle, and you give up on a country founded on christian/diest/(however you want to put "belief in god") principles.
Yes! I am in 100% agreement here, Richard. Fight immorality, but DON'T REVOLT!
Post a Comment