The choice of John McCain to name Sarah Palin as his Vice-Presidential running mate was both stunning and politically brilliant. While the left wing is still dazed over the thought that perhaps he was choosing her to win over the Hillary Clinton supporters, my guess is that he actually chose her to prevail among the right wing camp; particularly, the right wing, conservative, evangelical camp. And triumph he did.While prior to the Palin choice, I could get away with not supporting the Republican ticket among Christian social conservatives, I no longer have that luxury. I have been inundated with pro-Palin messages via email, facebook, etc. as if she were the Republican candidate for President of the U.S. all of which carry the message that if I don't vote for McCain-Palin, then I'm lined up with a Muslim terrorist who wants to kill my babies and eat them on national t.v.
What is so disturbing to me about this (besides the obvious absurdity) is that it seems to blindly follow partisan politics. Very few and far between are conservative evangelicals who even raise the question of the appropriateness of this choice. In fact, the first public statement I have seen on the issue was raised in an LA Times article just over a week ago.
Here's the point of contention: Is it really a God-centered, biblical family value to support a woman who has a teenager with a "crisis" pregnancy, a baby with Downs-Syndrome and two other daughters living at home, to neglect her role as wife and mother to advance a political career? And without a doubt, if she is going to effectively execute the office of Vice-President of the U.S., she will most certainly neglect the precious gift of being Mom. Perhaps we're seeing a little of that fruit in Bristol (Palin's 17 year-old, pregnant daughter) already at the governor level.
Men whom I greatly admire for their stance on the biblical, complementarian role of men and women have suggested that we compartmentalize and advocate that such roles are good for the church and the home, but that politics is a separate arena. I couldn't disagree more. Just as she cannot incise her home life from her political life, we cannot either. Perhaps Palin could offer glorious public service as Vice-President, but not during this season in her life.
Scripture unequivocally places family relationship as the priority. I am not raising the question due to a chauvinistic belief that women cannot work outside of the home, since Prov. 31 states that the virtuous woman does, in fact, work outside the home, but not at every season. And we are beholding a woman who is making political advancement a priority over her family, which according to Paul "has denied the faith and is worst than an unbeliever" (I Tim. 5:8).
I must caveat this with the fact that I'm not pushing a pro-Obama standpoint as there is much to his political agenda with which I prayerfully struggle. I simply ask, are we blinded more by a cultural expectation to vote Republican, no matter how unbiblical the choice or do we think more creatively (like third party write-ins). Wish I had more answers, but we're in a season where we should be asking tougher questions.
I post this with hesitation as I'm unsure of the willingness of evangelical Christians to dialogue...
9 comments:
I'm glad that you are addressing this issue. I couldn't agree more that the majority of Christians are hopping on board with McCain/Palin by blindly following partisan politics.
However, I disagree with your argument that it is unbiblical to support a woman who has a teenager with a "crisis" pregnancy, a baby with Downs-Syndrome and two other daughters living at home, and that she is neglecting her role as wife and mother to advance a political career.
In my opinion, this view puts God and family life in a very small box that requires a woman to stay at home with her children and a man to be the sole provider for his family. As you know, this picture perfect view of family life is rarely practiced and I don't believe God is hindered by these variations in family arrangements. In fact, I believe that sometimes God requires us to serve him, despite having to sacrifice certain family needs, as has been the case for many missionaries and pastors. It's like I've heard you say numerous times, it's an issue of the heart. Two people can be doing the exact same thing - one is sinning and one is worshiping. It's not our place to judge.
Now, that being said, I could list dozens of legitimate reasons why not to vote for McCain/Palin. Is it a "godly decision" to vote for someone who wants to continue killing thousands of civilians in Iraq? Someone who endorses the destruction of God's creation to put money in the pockets of oil companies, rather than funding alternative energy options? Someone who does not support providing health care for all Americans, when more children die every year in this country from lack of health insurance than abortions?
These are the types of issues I wish more Christians would consider before blindly following partisan politics. You are on the right track in desiring that Christians start thinking more creatively!
Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate the honesty and candor in bringing up a contrasting opinion.
I can agree with the last part of your dissent in that it is difficult to determine whether or not Palin is neglecting her kids for political advancement. While that seems to be the case, perhaps she is motivated by something far more noble. I am simply trying to render "right judgment" based upon fruits, realizing that the same standard will be applied to me.
But, the idea that God is somehow boxed in by gender distinction and role, which He calls good at creation, reaffirms throughout Scripture and expresses the image of God in its unity and diversity is troubling. Granted, there is much repenting due both genders here; men who have not lead with masculine love like Jesus and women who have not comforted and helped like the Holy Spirit.
Based on the language you used ("requires a woman," and "sole provider" and "picture perfect"), my guess is that your opinion is a reaction to a poorly represented picture of marriage and family. I hope that is the case and not a desire to be shaped more by what is "generally practiced" even by "many missionaries and pastors," than by Scripture.
This is an important topic as many men and women are devoted to ambitious business everywhere but in the home in the name of liberation. Women, in particular, have been abused into thinking that the absence of public achievement thrusts her into an oppressive slavery of boredom and confinement. The Scriptures paint a very different liberation for women and we should dialogue more about it in person as this is a terrible medium for this subject.
I think people are blinded by history making than the real problems. People want to see a woman in a high public standind,"vice president" and also wanting to see a first ever black man in office. Politics will always be the same try to out do the other by trying to do something new.
i wonder if either of the following would change the situation at all:
- if Palin didn't have any children at home
- if Palin didn't have a pregnant teenager at home
If indeed we don't want to endorse the McCain or the Obama ticket on the basis of religious or biblical convictions, would it be right to say that Christians ought to opt for the third party write-in?
is it just the "lesser of 2 evils" to vote for the third party simply because we disagree with McCain and Obama. If so, what is the difference between that and not voting at all? if not, how do we use christian discresion in voting for that 3rd party person because they may not be much better than the original two anyway.
well i don't think i've done anything to answer any questions or really argue a point very well, so i'll stop there.
Thanks for your words. You raise unpopular points, no matter which side of the aisle we sit on.
The conservatives are aghast that you would talk down about McMaverick and the Lipstick Pit Bull in the midst of an election season.
The liberals are aghast that you would suggest a woman is in any way different from a man.
When both sides get their feathers roughled, I think you are doing something right. Jesus had conservative Pharisees and liberal Sadducees teaming up to take him out, as well.
Even so, come (quickly) November 4th.
While I understand the concerns you bring up about Sarah Palin and her responsiblities to her family, In this particular instance, I think she has a husband who is supportive of her. She is to "be obedient to her own husband", and if he is ok with it, then I feel she can still be doing right. She is responsible for her attitude and I believe they hold some joint responsibility for their family. Ultimately though, he holds a lot of the responsibility.
Either way, I am encouraged that we have one conservative on a ticket. If she can encourage conservative politics in Washington, I'm all for it.
However, she is only running for VP. I really feel like I am voting for the lesser of two evils in voting for McCain, but that is what I will do. I have a list of reasons, but one at the top would be the Supreme Court Justice positions that must be considered.
I do not want to waste my vote, and that is how I feel about voting third party. If over the next four years a third party can organize, build support and structure, and show itself to be viable, I would consider voting that direction next time.
More than changes in politics, I wish our country would have a change in their view of God. I wish we could see another Great Awakening in our land. I do not want to watch America become completely secularized like Europe.
I know we share a love for the souls in our country. We need to pray that hearts would be moved to the true Gospel of Christ. If we saw a real spiritual change like that, I believe a political change would follow.
I am curious as to how you choose the lesser of two evils? I will throw out there to start that I don't believe either candidate has the super hero powers to whisk away all of our problems. And I feel voting for a third party is almost like not voting at all, as there is no chance they would get elected.
It is a fair assumption that time wise it could be near impossible for SP to give a significant amount of time to her family. (Although, who really knows what a day in the life of VP would be?) If SP is not doing a great job of being a biblical wife and mother (although God forbid we all judge sufficient parenting according to the sin of our kids) yet Obama votes in ways inconsistent with what we would hope for as believers such as the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, Proposition 8, and abortion how do we decide the lesser of two evils?
On a side note to Julienne, I would question where you found statistics on children that die in this country every year because of lack of health care and the number of abortions in the country. There are approximately 3,700 in the US per day. 1.37 million abortions were performed in 1996. I had trouble finding statistics on health care for kids in this country. But I can't imagine that 3700 children in the US are dying each day and somehow we are missing it and doing nothing. On the same hand, I do realize many do not have health care and this is a HUGE problem.
As much as I desire biblical manhood and womanhood, how do we choose that as the greater evil? I am concerned as well about the muslim background of Obama and his ties with Trinity United Church of Christ. Are there not equal concerns there? Really, how do we choose the lesser of two evils?
One last thought. Lets say SP is time wise neglecting her family. There are two things about her family that I think (to a faulted point) speak well of her.
Growing up in a less than ideal family situation, I remember thinking through these scenarios when my dad threatened me that "if you ever get pregnant you are dropping out of school and taking care of the kid." The threat made me question what I would do if I was ever in that situation. Had I been pregnant at that age I would have felt my choices were to run away or secretly get an abortion. Never...ever could I have told my parents. The fact that her daughter is still around, is having the child and that SP doesn't hide her in a closet somewhere says at least something, even if only in a minutely positive way. And the second thought being that many people, even those claiming to be believers, might be first in line to justify aborting a child with Down's. I think it speaks well of her character that she didn't take the easy way out, knowing that a child with Down's will require more time, resources, etc. for possibly long beyond 18 years.
Again, I'm not saying either candidate is ideal. Both have huge and numerous flaws. I guess I just find it frustrating that the only thing addressed in this blog politically is SP's assumed lack of biblical womanhood. I'm all for biblical manhood and womanhood and roles (totally seriously desire this in a huge way for my husband and myself)... is this your biggest point of contention with all of the concerns of the candidates? And why is her possible sin your biggest point of contention? I certainly don't mean this in a mean way, but I am a bit stunned that this would be your biggest problem with the candidates.
I usually would not respond to an "anonymous" post, but since you are asking a question (rather than making a point), and doing so with kindness, I will attempt to answer.
Hopefully it will dilute your frustration to know that this is not primarily a blog on politics, and that the post is not intended to express my "biggest point of contention with all of the concerns of the candidates." Nor is it "my biggest problem with the candidates."
My contention has more to do with Evangelical's initial response to Sarah Palin. I don't feel the need to raise points of contention with the other candidates as they are not being overwhelmingly embraced by Evangelicals.
When issues up for grabs include the possibility of gay marriage and the continued protection for a woman to have the right to an abortion, gender roles are exceedingly important and are not subsequent issues.
There are many other issues, many other points of contention, but because this is not fundamentally a blog about politics, I will remain silent on those issues.
As far as the health care vs. abortion issue, whether or not the statistics can be found, this is not a valid comparison. Health care deals with the inability to provide care while abortion is a calculated termination of life. It is a comparison of apples to sour grapes.
I will withhold my opinion about lesser of two evils and whether or not voting third party has any similarity to not voting. I will also without my opinion as to whether or not it is wrong for a person to refrain from voting.
Thanks for commenting. Now I understand that you addressed this because of the embrace of evangelicals to Sarah Palin. I do wish you had stated that there are many points of contention with each candidate but I am addressing this one because of the embrace of evangelicals to SP.
My frustration wasn't that the post was on politics, but that it was the only thing posted when many of the other candidates had serious concerns as well. I couldn’t figure out why you would specifically pick this one to blog about when others seemed more pressing, or at least as pressing. My concern probably had to do with my sensitivity about the male/female issue. Sometimes I am surprised by the church’s (not Missio Dei per say, but churches in general) quickness to point out the sin of females and yet be very lenient on the sin of males. (ie. I have seen a volunteer in the church that was female asked to step down from volunteering because she addressed her husband in a way some didn’t approve of. Yet, I have seen in the same church a male that was an intern and a male that was a volunteer (they decided to pay) both sleep with women in the church without being asked to step down from their position. They were allowed to continue until the time came for them to return to college/home. So I apologize for my sensitivity to the subject, but I am glad to have the question clarified. Thank you for taking the time to answer my post despite that it is an anonymous post.
Post a Comment