It looks like the Republicans and their buddies, the religious right, have a dilemma. The two candidates currently in the forefront of Republican presidential politics, Rudy Giuliani & Mitt Romney, have some big negatives for religious conservatives. Giuliani is supportive of abortion and gay rights. Romney is a Mormon who at one time was also aggressively pro-abortion rights (although, since he decided to run for president, he claims he’s changed his mind about that). What an ideological conundrum for the morality crowd.
Being pro-life has been a “non-negotiable” litmus test for anyone the religious right has endorsed. And, almost every evangelical who has attended an adult Sunday school class for more than a couple of years has received indoctrination showing Mormonism to be a false cult, dangerous and threatening to anyone holding forth the Bible as the authoritative Word of God. Evangelicals, who make up the largest segment of the religious right, also espouse Biblical authority as a non-negotiable.
The old saying is that “politics makes strange bedfellows.” It will be fascinating to watch which of these two candidates (assuming they continue to be the frontrunners) the religious right will go to bed with. If anyone who has claimed to be pro-life and believes in the authority of the Bible ends up supporting either of these two candidates, they may be rightly criticized as a hypocrite. Their supposed non-negotiables will have been put aside for the sake of winning an election and occupying the seats of power. Never mind what the Bible cautions about those who clamor for earthly power.
I’m all for participating in the political process. But, as soon as one claims to have views that are godlier, more biblical, traditional, or whatever other morally superior label you want to give them, only to later put them on the back burner in order to secure power; they can be sure they are on the road to getting caught in embarrassing hypocrisy. That’s a mistake I hope to avoid making this time around.
2 comments:
The question is, then, what do you do? Is it hypocrasy to vote for "the least of evils"? Is there really any VIABLE candidate out there, on either side of the aisle, that those of the evangelical persuasion could vote for in good conscience? That aside, I guess that's not really the point you're making here, is it? This conundrum is much more the result of spiritual/moral pride against those of a different mindset combined with (dare I say it) a lust for power - not so much the fact that there may not be a truly representative and viable candidate for the "religious right".
Actually, Newt Gingrich is also a strong possibility. He's a great leader who also happens to have been married multiple times (as has Giuliani) and has admitted adultry on Dobson's show. Is that a better option?
Post a Comment