Comments on: Vote Utopian!: The Christian in a Quandry http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:59:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Diane R http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-299 Diane R Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-299 Welcome to democracy. And democracy is NOT theocracy. Therefore, we shouldn't try to cram the two together. A very good blog indeed today and a further example of how we are tending to blur the law and gospel. Welcome to democracy. And democracy is NOT theocracy. Therefore, we shouldn’t try to cram the two together. A very good blog indeed today and a further example of how we are tending to blur the law and gospel.

]]> By: Ryan Cordle http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-300 Ryan Cordle Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-300 Some in the Constitution Party (CP) do seem to think that we need to have a sort of Christian Utopia in America. A lot of the people in the CP are greatly influenced by people like Finney, and it's certainly visible in what they believe about government. And, in a lot of respects, they are naive about the founding fathers. Personally, it's not a matter of whether the CP is the "Biblical Party," or that Chuck Baldwin is a baptist minister, it's a matter of the federal gov't's role in our lives and in this country as established by the US Constitution. I guess I think of them as Libertarians with a sense of morality? Anyway, that's enough ranting from me. I think you make excellent observations. Some in the Constitution Party (CP) do seem to think that we need to have a sort of Christian Utopia in America. A lot of the people in the CP are greatly influenced by people like Finney, and it’s certainly visible in what they believe about government. And, in a lot of respects, they are naive about the founding fathers. Personally, it’s not a matter of whether the CP is the “Biblical Party,” or that Chuck Baldwin is a baptist minister, it’s a matter of the federal gov’t’s role in our lives and in this country as established by the US Constitution. I guess I think of them as Libertarians with a sense of morality? Anyway, that’s enough ranting from me. I think you make excellent observations.

]]> By: bobbie http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-301 bobbie Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-301 thank you, a very wise and helpful post, it is helping me form my perspective come november. thank you, a very wise and helpful post, it is helping me form my perspective come november.

]]> By: BK http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-302 BK Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-302 I am a Christian who is not looking to establish a theocracy, but really want to get closer to the vision of the founding fathers where the society would start with certain assumptions--God, liberty, equality of all men (even though that is now viewed more broadly than the founding fathers viewed it), etc. What I look for is an open playing field--a field that will allow my views to be given open and fair hearing and equal consideration with my non-Christian fellow-citizens. Since voting for third parties that have no prayer of winning (none have won since 1886?) would be a vote for the other party, I have no question that my vote for the party that welcomes people of religious faith is the best and only vote to make. I am voting Republican! I am a Christian who is not looking to establish a theocracy, but really want to get closer to the vision of the founding fathers where the society would start with certain assumptions–God, liberty, equality of all men (even though that is now viewed more broadly than the founding fathers viewed it), etc. What I look for is an open playing field–a field that will allow my views to be given open and fair hearing and equal consideration with my non-Christian fellow-citizens. Since voting for third parties that have no prayer of winning (none have won since 1886?) would be a vote for the other party, I have no question that my vote for the party that welcomes people of religious faith is the best and only vote to make. I am voting Republican!

]]> By: Shannon http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-303 Shannon Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-303 I would be interested in what you think of churches who talk about politics in the pulpit or advertise support of a particular candidate on their signs. All the time around here we see church signs saying 'We support President Bush' and things of that sort. Do you think this is a proper thing for a church to say? What do you think of churches passing out voting guides or of the stereotype that one cannot be a Democrat and a Christian at the same time? I have heard this said/implied on several occasions and I don't really see how one's political views should be a litmus test for their Christianity... I would be interested in what you think of churches who talk about politics in the pulpit or advertise support of a particular candidate on their signs. All the time around here we see church signs saying ‘We support President Bush’ and things of that sort. Do you think this is a proper thing for a church to say?

What do you think of churches passing out voting guides or of the stereotype that one cannot be a Democrat and a Christian at the same time? I have heard this said/implied on several occasions and I don’t really see how one’s political views should be a litmus test for their Christianity…

]]> By: KJS http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/vote-utopian-the-christian-in-a-quandry#comment-304 KJS Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/im.php/?p=67#comment-304 I find the whole logic behind this positively unconvincing, but that's because of my perspective on the two viable candidates in this country: both are leading us in ultimately the wrong direction, with one taking us there at a relatively more leisurely pace than the other (all the while telling us we're really going the right direction). It's not a case of Luther's bad Christian and good Turk; it's a case of a bad Christian and a worse Turk. When neither viable choice is good, what is there left to do? Choosing the lesser evil is still choosing evil. I find the whole logic behind this positively unconvincing, but that’s because of my perspective on the two viable candidates in this country: both are leading us in ultimately the wrong direction, with one taking us there at a relatively more leisurely pace than the other (all the while telling us we’re really going the right direction). It’s not a case of Luther’s bad Christian and good Turk; it’s a case of a bad Christian and a worse Turk. When neither viable choice is good, what is there left to do? Choosing the lesser evil is still choosing evil.

]]>