Monday, September 1, 2008

Making sure we know the facts.

Sam and I are still diligently doing our research on the candidates running for President. I have heard some good press concerning Palin (I promise that I'm looking carefully at every angle of the candidates for President/V.P.) which have settled some of my concerns. For one, read that Palin changed her stance on a couple of issues while in office. While that may cause some people to point fingers and accuse her of waffling (a call back to the Kerry campaign)I find it admirable that someone can stop and examine all of the facts and then realize that there may be a better way out there. I think that if our current President would have been willing to do this his Presidency would have ended on a better note instead of both candidates trying so desperately to stay away from being identified with him.

Sam has found a good website which looks at the propaganda which tends to float around in cyberspace and shows the quotes in context. If you click on the title of this blog you will be able to get to this link and see for yourself some interesting facts about Obama. I am personally interested in his view on abortion. While abortion is actually one of the platforms that does not sway my vote (considering that with 8 years of a Republican, pro-life President and nothing going on with Roe v. Wade, it seems like we should be more focused on other issues) it is good to see that Obama is concerned with educating our teens on abstinence and making responsible decisions. He is an avid supporter for adoption as an option and is careful not to sign bills that aren't constitutional. I also find it interesting that while he opposes gay marriage, he is in support of civil unions and civil rights for gays and lesbians. He sites his Christian beliefs for why marriage is between a man and a woman, but is a firm believer in equal rights for all. As it should be. Honestly, I know what I stand for. I know what the Bible says and I believe that it is the inerrant Word of God. But, I also know that America has separation of church and state for a reason and that all humans needed to be treated with love and respect.

On another note, I promise our readers (because I'm sure that there are oh so many) that I will give attention to the pros of McCain's positions. For one, I don't want anyone to know which way I'm voting in November (it's much better that way, who knows, I may vote Green Party!). Secondly, I really am still looking at everything and want to be as non-partisan as possible. It's just hard because I'm surrounded by conservative Christians everywhere I go (I work at church and I attend a Theological Seminary). The last election I found people mindlessly voting according to what the "Christians" told them to do. Without any concern for the deeper issues. Because of that, I want to people to be fully educated and I want to be fully educated myself.

*steps off of soapbox*

Please keep the comments coming (as long as they are friendly). I love learning and I love hearing all sides of issues!

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg0darQB7r4

Have you watched the above speech in full? She's not just a nice mom who is also prolife.

Compare to Obama's speech at the DNC the other day.

Also, did you watch the discussions at Saddleback? Obama clearly answers when asked if life begins at conception, that it is "above his paygrade" to answer that question. The videos are also at youtube.

AS for Matthew 25, that IS part of Obama's campaign, and they also worked for Kerry's campaign four years ago. They are there to reach the evangelical vote. I think if you listen to each candidate himself in context, look at their voting record, you will have a picture of what they stand for.

Also, about Matthew 25 and caring for the poor, isn't that a mandate for the church? Or the state?

Thanks for letting me in on the discussion...
Stacie

Cheryl Smith said...

Bravo! You're thinking like a Christian rather than a Republican!

G said...

I want to respond to one of Stacie's points: Is Matthew 25 a mandate for the church or the state? First, the two options are not mutually exclusive. There is no reason it cannot be a mandate for both (or, more accurately, both the church and the state have moral obligations to care for the poor).

Second, suppose you say that the state does not have a moral obligation to care for the poor but the church does. Why might one deny that the government has a responsibility here? If one uses the stereotypical conservative line of blaming poverty on the poor (the poor are poor because they failed to take responsibility, and we ought to let them be responsible for thier actions), then one undercut's the church's reason for fighting poverty (if we have compassion, we are not letting them be responsible). If it is just that the government is ineffective, then why not try to make it more effective? If someone says that we cannot enforce compassion, then by parallel reasoning we cannot enforce family values. Pending a good argument, I don't see why the ethical injunction implied in Matthew 25 cannot be applied to government.

Now, of course, more needs to be said about HOW Matthew 25 is applied to gov't, and it may be that McCain's policies will apply Matthew 25 more than Obama's. However, that is the conversation we should have, and not just recite the party line.

Anonymous said...

Sam, thanks for answering. I think if the church truly did all that we are called to do for the poor, the state would not need to. But that's the ideal. Of course we need some form of welfare in governement.

In Christian charity I think that personal responsibility is part of receiving. But hopefully no coservative (or liberal, for that matter!) thinker would tell you that all poverty is a result of irresponsibility!

So, I don't know who would have better policies to care for the poor. Of course there is the fear that the democratic candidate would raise taxes and increase legislature (more beaurocracy, more $, more unnecessary laws, more red tape) and then there is the typical conservative that will leave welfare off the agenda. But then if the conservative candidate lowers taxes that's always good for the lower income families.

This website is very thorough and factual.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm

You can click on either candidate and read quotes, voting records, and where they stand on any issue.

THANKS Sam and Carrie!
Love discussing!!
Stacie

Lee Jones said...

I consider myself an educated Christian. I don't think being "Pro-Choice" should automatically sway Christians toward a candidate.