Comments on: Robbie Sagers’ pithy point about McLaren’s Voting Advice http://carver319.com/archives/493 blog Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:47:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Brady Martin http://carver319.com/archives/493/comment-page-1#comment-161 Brady Martin Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:44:24 +0000 http://carver319.com/?p=493#comment-161 Derek, while I appreciate the political dilemma that you are posing, I don't think it provides the framework for thinking about pragmatic politics. Here's why. I think that you are saying that it is like two sides and you start marking down points on each side. I would imagine you might give 20 points for issue x and 10 points for issue B. One plots those down in line with what one feels the Christian position on those issues are. You tally up at the end and then make a vote. For the most part I'm in support of some kind system like this. The problem comes to be with scoring. There is no "Christian" position on Iraq. There is no "Christian" position on gas holidays. There is no "Christian" position on drilling in Alaska. One might argue that certain policies would be better or worse within a Christian worldview for certain reasons. For example, one might argue we shouldn't drill, because God is concerned with this world and we are to be proper managers of the creation. One could also argue that we should do that to provide a more stable economy because God care about economic equality and not drilling hurts the poor the most. I would even put homosexual marriage in this camp. With that being said, abortion is a clear cut issue. There is a Christian position on it. It stands above the other issues. So again to my point, how do you score these things? I would say that abortion is significantly higher than the rest. However, I do concede your point that it would be theoretically possible that someone who was closely aligned with the Christian positions on 99% of the issues would be a better canddiate to vote for than the pro-life candidate. However, with most political issues being in the group of no clear Christian position on policy issues, I think this makes the hypothetical impossible and therefore not appropriate for us to decide our vote. Heading to Louisville tomorrow, Brady Derek, while I appreciate the political dilemma that you are posing, I don’t think it provides the framework for thinking about pragmatic politics. Here’s why.

I think that you are saying that it is like two sides and you start marking down points on each side. I would imagine you might give 20 points for issue x and 10 points for issue B. One plots those down in line with what one feels the Christian position on those issues are. You tally up at the end and then make a vote. For the most part I’m in support of some kind system like this.

The problem comes to be with scoring. There is no “Christian” position on Iraq. There is no “Christian” position on gas holidays. There is no “Christian” position on drilling in Alaska. One might argue that certain policies would be better or worse within a Christian worldview for certain reasons. For example, one might argue we shouldn’t drill, because God is concerned with this world and we are to be proper managers of the creation. One could also argue that we should do that to provide a more stable economy because God care about economic equality and not drilling hurts the poor the most. I would even put homosexual marriage in this camp.

With that being said, abortion is a clear cut issue. There is a Christian position on it. It stands above the other issues. So again to my point, how do you score these things? I would say that abortion is significantly higher than the rest. However, I do concede your point that it would be theoretically possible that someone who was closely aligned with the Christian positions on 99% of the issues would be a better canddiate to vote for than the pro-life candidate. However, with most political issues being in the group of no clear Christian position on policy issues, I think this makes the hypothetical impossible and therefore not appropriate for us to decide our vote.

Heading to Louisville tomorrow,
Brady

]]> By: Dee Rock http://carver319.com/archives/493/comment-page-1#comment-159 Dee Rock Sun, 03 Aug 2008 10:31:42 +0000 http://carver319.com/?p=493#comment-159 Brady, I am curious and must inquire a hypothetical: A vote between two candidates with the first being anti-abortion with all his remaining policies diametrically opposed to Christianity and the second being pro-abortion but all his remaining policies completely in-line with Christian policies, who do you vote for if you must vote for one? More tersely: Do you in practice hold that the abortion vote is what Paul called "a trump card" vote? It seems you would from "there is no great moral issue...than that of abortion." By corollary with your pro-slavery point, I infer you would hold this to be a trump card issue no matter what other policies are involved? Good discussion. p.s. Reformation Heritage Books has the Calvin500 THEOLOGICAL GUIDE TO THE INSTITUTES on sale for $20. Retail is $35.99. Brady,

I am curious and must inquire a hypothetical: A vote between two candidates with the first being anti-abortion with all his remaining policies diametrically opposed to Christianity and the second being pro-abortion but all his remaining policies completely in-line with Christian policies, who do you vote for if you must vote for one?

More tersely: Do you in practice hold that the abortion vote is what Paul called “a trump card” vote? It seems you would from “there is no great moral issue…than that of abortion.” By corollary with your pro-slavery point, I infer you would hold this to be a trump card issue no matter what other policies are involved?

Good discussion.

p.s. Reformation Heritage Books has the Calvin500 THEOLOGICAL GUIDE TO THE INSTITUTES on sale for $20. Retail is $35.99.

]]> By: Brady Martin http://carver319.com/archives/493/comment-page-1#comment-158 Brady Martin Sat, 02 Aug 2008 04:07:28 +0000 http://carver319.com/?p=493#comment-158 The problem with comparing politics to the ten commandments isn't that we are not going to make dishonoring you father and mother illegal. We are not going to make Sabbath-breaking illegal. Dr. Moore makes a good point on the radio show, - "What would you say to someone that would argue as I would that getting together with abortion rights supporters and saying let’s reduce the number of abortions is something like a previous generation getting together with white supremacists and saying let’s find a way to reduce the number of lynchings." - What I am getting at is that there is no great moral issue of our time that demands our attention more than that of abortion. In some generations it is slavery, in others civil rights. We as Christians should not have voted for pro-slavery candidates nor white supremecist. The problem with comparing politics to the ten commandments isn’t that we are not going to make dishonoring you father and mother illegal. We are not going to make Sabbath-breaking illegal. Dr. Moore makes a good point on the radio show,
-
“What would you say to someone that would argue as I would that getting together with abortion rights supporters and saying let’s reduce the number of abortions is something like a previous generation getting together with white supremacists and saying let’s find a way to reduce the number of lynchings.”
-
What I am getting at is that there is no great moral issue of our time that demands our attention more than that of abortion. In some generations it is slavery, in others civil rights. We as Christians should not have voted for pro-slavery candidates nor white supremecist.

]]> By: Paul Butterworth http://carver319.com/archives/493/comment-page-1#comment-155 Paul Butterworth Fri, 01 Aug 2008 04:56:02 +0000 http://carver319.com/?p=493#comment-155 Christians are called to be balanced people, speaking on behalf of all who are without voices. Thus, we speak for the unborn, for the oppressed and abused in Guantanomo, for the slain in Iraq, for the unreached and impoverished peoples of the world, and yes, for the birds and flowers. Christians are called to be balanced people, speaking on behalf of all who are without voices. Thus, we speak for the unborn, for the oppressed and abused in Guantanomo, for the slain in Iraq, for the unreached and impoverished peoples of the world, and yes, for the birds and flowers.

]]> By: Brother Hank http://carver319.com/archives/493/comment-page-1#comment-154 Brother Hank Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:15:35 +0000 http://carver319.com/?p=493#comment-154 Oh snap! Good point Robbie. Oh snap!

Good point Robbie.

]]>