When you vote, think on these things

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (BP)--Perhaps like never before, this year’s election season has seen heightened attention to faith voters –- both on the part of the presidential campaigns as well as various organizations seeking to register and educate religious voters. Some Christians –- and many in the liberal media elite -- fret over these developments, with some even suggesting religious voter outreach endangers church-state separation and entangles churches in matters unrelated to their proper mission.

For Southern Baptists, the unprecedented iVoteValues.com initiative -– including a voter education truck rig which has toured the nation -- has raised the profile of evangelical voters. Led by the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the iVoteValues effort later gained the endorsement of Focus on the Family and other pro-family organizations concerned with reversing the trend of voter apathy among evangelicals.

Liberal Christians have not remained on the sidelines during the election season. With the National Council of Churches and other liberal denominations and organizations supporting the effort, progressives have answered conservatives with their Vote ALL Your Values (www.voteallyourvalues.org) effort to register and educate liberal religious voters according to their faith convictions.

Faithful Christians must seek to apply biblical standards of righteousness and justice when they go to the polls. As critical as it is to vote, evangelicals have not fulfilled their Christian duty if they allow the votes they cast to be driven by personal political party preference, family history or issues which should be secondary. Clearly, good Christians can disagree on certain matters of public policy and still be faithful, biblical Christians. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that there are certain fundamental issues of morality and justice which must be primary when making our decisions at the ballot box.

A recent statement signed by more than 70 evangelical leaders helpfully summarizes the primary issues for faithful Christians during this election season. Drafted by Wayne Grudem of Phoenix Seminary, “The Bible speaks to several ethical issues in this election,” has been affirmed by numerous Southern Baptist leaders, including three former presidents of the SBC, Jim Henry, Tom Elliff and Paige Patterson, and three SBC seminary presidents, Patterson, Daniel Akin and Phil Roberts.

When you cast your ballot for president, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives and numerous state and local offices, think on the principles outlined in this statement, which follows in full:

“Many Americans seek guidance from the Bible for important issues of life, while we recognize that many others do not. With thankfulness for the freedom of all Americans to believe whatever they think best regarding matters of religion and ethics, we offer this statement of our personal understanding of the teachings of the Bible for the thoughtful consideration of all who are interested in how the Bible might speak to ethical issues in the current election.

“1. Supreme Court justices: People don’t often think of the appointment of Supreme Court Justices as an ethical issue, but it clearly is now because several decisions of the Supreme Court have imposed on our nation new policies on major ethical and religious questions.

“A small majority of our current Supreme Court, and lower courts that follow their example, have gone beyond their Constitutionally defined task of interpreting laws passed by Congress and state legislatures, and have in effect created new “laws” that have never been passed by any elected body. By this process they have imposed on us decrees that allow abortionists to murder unborn babies (contrary to Exodus 20:13 and Romans 13:9, ‘you shall not murder’), that protect pornographers who poison the minds of children and adults (contrary to Exodus 20:17, ‘You shall not covet ... your neighbor’s wife’; see also Matt. 5:28), that redefine marriage to include homosexual couples (thus giving governmental encouragement to actions that Romans 1:26-28 says are morally wrong), and that banish prayer, God’s name and God’s laws from public places (thus prohibiting free exercise of religion, and violating Romans 13:3 which says that government should be ‘not a terror to good conduct, but to bad’). In taking to itself the right to decree such policies, the Supreme Court has seriously distorted the system of “checks and balances” intended by the Constitution between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government.

“It is unlikely that any elected body such as a city council, state legislature, or the U.S. Congress, would have decreed policies like those mentioned above, for such groups are accountable to the will of the people. Not so the Supreme Court, which is appointed for life. And democratically-elected members of Congress and state legislatures are helpless to change those Court-mandated policies unless the makeup of the Supreme Court is changed. We believe the ethical choice is for a President and for U. S. Senators committed to appointing judges who will follow the original intent of the Constitution and just interpret law and not make it, rather than for candidates who have often voted to block such judges in votes in the Senate.

“2. Defense against terrorists: A fundamental responsibility of government is to ‘punish those who do evil’ (1 Pet. 2:14) and thus to protect its citizens. We now face a unique challenge, because terrorists who will sacrifice their own lives in killing others cannot be deterred by the usual threat of punishing a criminal after he commits a crime. While Jesus instructed individuals not to seek personal revenge but to turn the other cheek (Matt. 5:39), the Bible teaches that governments are responsible to ‘bear the sword’ (Rom. 13:4) and thus to use force to oppose violent evil. We believe the ethical choice is for a candidate who will pursue terrorists and, when necessary, use force to stop them before they strike us, not for a candidate who only promises to respond if we are attacked again.

“3. Abortion: The Bible views the unborn child as a human person who should be protected, since David said to God, ‘You knitted me together in my mother’s womb”’ (Psalm 139:13; see also Psalm 51:5; 139:13; Luke 1:44), and strong penalties were imposed for endangering or harming the life of an unborn child (Exod. 21:22-23). We believe the ethical choice is for candidates who believe government should give protection to the lives of unborn children, not ones who believe government should allow people to choose to murder their unborn children if they wish.

“4. Homosexual ‘marriage’: The Bible views marriage as between one man and one woman, for ‘a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’ (Gen. 2:24; Eph. 5:31). Because our courts have shown a troubling tendency to overturn the laws that have already been passed concerning marriage, we believe the ethical choice is for candidates who support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

“5. Embryonic stem cell research: Creating more human embryos for their stem cells is making the beginnings of little babies for the purpose of harvesting their parts, contrary to the command, ‘You shall not murder’ (Exod. 20:13). There is a good alternative: using adult stem cells for medical research, because this does not destroy the life of the adult whose cells are used. We believe the ethical choice is for a candidate who has decided he will not allow government funds to be spent to create more human embryos just to take their stem cells.

“6. Natural resources: God put human beings on the earth to ‘subdue it’ and to ‘have dominion’ over the animals (Gen. 1:28). We value the beauty of the natural world which God created, and we believe that we are called to be responsible stewards who protect God’s creation while we use it wisely and also seek to safeguard its usefulness for expects human beings to develop and use the earth’s resources wisely for mankind’s needs (Gen. 1:28; 2:15; 9:3; 1 Tim. 4:4). In fact, we believe that public policy based on the idealism of ‘untouched nature’ hinders wise development of the earth’s resources and thus contributes to famine, starvation, disease, and death among the poor. We believe the ethical choice is for candidates who will allow resources to be developed and used wisely, not for candidates indebted to environmental theories that oppose nearly all economic development in our nation and around the world.

“7. Should Christians speak out and try to influence our nation on these issues? God’s people in the Bible often spoke about ethical issues to government rulers. Daniel told the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar to practice ‘righteousness’ and to show ‘mercy to the oppressed’ (Dan. 4:27); several Old Testament prophets speak to foreign nations about their sins (Isaiah 13-23; Ezekiel 25-32, Amos 1-2, Obadiah (to Edom), Jonah (to Nineveh), Nahum (to Nineveh), Habakkuk 2, Zephaniah 2); and Paul spoke to the Roman governor Felix ‘about righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment’ (Acts 24:25).

“As Christian leaders we agree that the primary message of the New Testament is the good news about salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. But the primary message is not the whole message, and another significant part of the New Testament teaches us how people should live. With respect to issues like these we have mentioned, the Bible also teaches us about what kinds of laws governments should have.

“The laws of a nation have a significant influence on the nation’s moral climate, for good or for ill. This is because laws can either restrain evil or encourage it, and because laws also have a teaching function as they inform people about what a government thinks to be right and wrong conduct.

“Therefore we urge pastors and Bible study leaders to teach on these crucial ethical issues facing our nation. We urge all Christians that they have a moral obligation to learn about the candidates’ positions, to be informed, and to vote. We urge all Christians to pray that truthful speech and right conduct on both sides would prevail in this election. We also encourage Christians to consider doing even more for the good of our nation, such as giving time or money, or talking to friends and neighbors, or even serving in office themselves. Such influence for good on the direction of our country is one important way of fulfilling Jesus’ command, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’ (Matt. 22:19).”


James A. Smith Sr. is executive editor of the Florida Baptist Witness, online at www.floridabaptistwitness.com. Copyright © 2001-2004, Florida Baptist Witness.

http://www.bpnews.net/bpcolumn.asp?ID=1596

 

Election day & America’s future
Thursday, Oct 28, 2004
By Rick Warren

LAKE FOREST, Calif. (BP)--Tuesday, Nov. 2, will be the most important election day U.S. citizens have faced in 50 years. How can that be?

Because up to four of the nine Supreme Court justices could retire during the next presidential term, and their replacements will be selected by whoever is the next president. These new justices will affect the future of America for at least the next 40 years. It would be difficult to overestimate the impact they will have on our lives, our families, our culture and the direction of this nation.

U.S. presidents serve for only four years -- at the most eight years -- so their impact is limited. Supreme Court justices, however, serve for life, and they are the ones who decide on issues like abortion, gay “marriages,” human cloning, harvesting babies for stem cell research, revoking the tax exemption of churches, removing “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance and “In God We Trust” from our money. In many ways, the Supreme Court has far more influence and impact on our day-to-day lives. This extremely important fact has been overlooked in most of the campaigning.

President Bush and Senator Kerry have very different opinions about the type of people who should become Supreme Court justices. They could not have more opposite views about these matters, and each man would shape the court in very different ways.

If the members of our congregations fail to vote on Tuesday, we are actually surrendering our responsibility to choose the direction of our country. If we do not vote, we have no right to criticize or complain when unbiblical decisions are made by the court in the decades ahead.

Over the past several months at Saddleback Church, we’ve been urging our members each week to register to vote. We even arranged to have a voter registration booth set up on our church patio because we believe it’s that important that every Christian citizen exercise his or her right to vote for those who will govern us.

During the last presidential election in the United States, there were millions of Christians who didn’t vote or weren’t even registered to vote! To me, that is inexcusable when you consider what the Bible says about our responsibility as citizens and when you consider the many, many men and women who’ve given their lives to provide and protect our freedom to vote.

The U.S. election of 2000 was a clear reminder that every vote counts, and that every voter has a duty to be involved. As church leaders, we know our congregations are not allowed to endorse specific candidates, and it’s important for us to recognize that there can be multiple opinions among Bible-believing Christians when it comes to debatable issues such as the economy, social programs, Social Security and the war in Iraq.

But for those of us who accept the Bible as God's Word and know that God has a unique, sovereign purpose for every life, I believe there are five issues that are non-negotiable. To me, they’re not even debatable because God's Word is clear on these issues. In order to live a purpose-driven life -- to affirm what God has clearly stated about His purpose for every person He creates -- we must take a stand by finding out what the candidates believe about these five issues, and then vote accordingly.

Here are five questions to ask when considering who to vote for in this election:

1. What does each candidate believe about abortion and protecting the lives of unborn children?

2. What does each candidate believe about using unborn babies for stem cell harvesting?

3. What does each candidate believe about homosexual “marriage”?

4. What does each candidate believe about human cloning?

5. What does each candidate believe about euthanasia -- the killing of the elderly and the invalids?

Please, please do not forfeit your responsibility on these crucial issues! This election really counts more than most.

Be sure to vote, and also be sure to encourage every Christian you know to vote on Tuesday. If you are able to vote early, do so. Then ask all your Christian friends on Tuesday, “Have you voted yet?” and pray for godly leaders to be elected.

Rick Warren is the founding pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., and author of The New York Times best-seller “The Purpose-Driven Life” and of “The Purpose-Driven Church.” He also is the founder of Pastors.com, a global Internet community for ministers.

http://www.bpnews.net/bpcolumn.asp?ID=1594

 

Falwell: Issues, not party, are why evangelicals back Bush
Oct 29, 2004
By Jerry Pierce

PLANO, Texas (BP)--Evangelical Christians support President Bush because of his values, and not because he’s a Republican, Jerry Falwell told the 4,500 people gathered at Dallas-area Prestonwood Baptist Church Oct. 26 during the closing session of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention’s annual meeting.

“We couldn’t care less that Bush is a Republican. If (Bush) were a Democrat, we’d still be behind him because of who he is and what he believes,” said Falwell, the pastor of Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, Va., and founder of the Moral Majority -- the organization that mobilized millions of evangelical voters in the late 1970s and early 80s.

Falwell’s sermon drew the two-day convention’s highest attendance, estimated at 4,500. The SBTC registered a record 1,035 messengers and 1,005 visitors.

Contending that “America is on the rebound” and that Christian influence is unprecedented, Falwell left no doubt whom he would vote for in the presidential election.

The next president, he said, will appoint "between two and four Supreme Court justices," thus impacting America for generations, Falwell said.

Noting his “yellow-dog Democrat” upbringing under a father “who would vote for the devil” if he were on the Democratic ticket, Falwell said, “And I’m not a Republican today; I vote Christian. I vote for the man or the woman who follows most closely what the Bible teaches.”

Christians must play the hand dealt them, and that leaves Bush as the only viable candidate, Falwell said, although he repeated several times that he prays for a day when both parties offer candidates who take biblical stances on moral issues.

Falwell said he told a group of wealthy Republicans the week before the Republican National Convention that if the GOP ever decides to “get cute” and “run a pro-choice candidate who doesn’t know what a family is, just put it down: You are going to lose. I’m not making any threats. I’m just telling you the way it is.” Falwell then told the GOP group that ultimately, Jesus Christ is the only hope for America. “And then things got real quiet,” he said.

Regarding the 2004 presidential election, he said: “We need to win this election with all the saints.”

He said if 80 million evangelicals vote, “then everything will be OK.”

Falwell noted David’s question in 1 Samuel 17:29 -- “Is there not a cause?” -- in assessing today’s culture wars.

“I submit to you that America is in crisis," Falwell said. "When our nation is about to expel God from the public square and the Ten Commandments from the schoolhouses and the courthouses and legalize same-sex marriage and take over the culture for a secular cause to create America into something she was not founded to be, that is crucial.”

A preacher for 52 years and a former independent Baptist before joining the Southern Baptist Convention in the mid-1990s, Falwell said he avoided politics early in his ministry.

At Baptist Bible College in Springfield, Mo., his professor taught him that politics and religion don’t mix. Not until he met the noted philosopher and Christian apologist Francis Schaeffer in the 1960s did his views on Christian political involvement change, he said.

“Back in the ‘50s, ‘60s, and ‘70s, of my generation he was the guru of all the evangelicals," Falwell said. "I’d never been to L’Abri (Schaeffer’s learning center in Switzerland) but I’d read everything Dr. Schaeffer had written and his sermons and lessons. And when he called me it just so humbled me that this guy, listening to my television program, would say ‘I want to meet with you.’

“We weren’t together very long until the meeting got a little negative, because he said, ‘You know, Jerry, you’re doing a great job preaching the Gospel but you’re a total failure confronting the culture. I’ve never heard you mention abortion.”

Schaeffer predicted that abortion would lead to infanticide and euthanasia and that the country had entered a “death mode” and “would self-destruct barring prophets of God standing.”

“He convinced me he was right, though I thought he was a little bit overstating as an alarmist the case in America," Falwell said. "Turns out he was right.”

After the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion, Falwell said he began strategizing with like-minded colleagues and in 1979 formed the Moral Majority.

Citing American founders such as James Madison and Patrick Henry, and the first Supreme Court chief justice, John Jay -- who was also president of the American Bible Society -- Falwell asserted that America was founded largely by Christians and on biblical precepts.

“Fifty-two of the 55 framers of our Constitution were members of established, orthodox Bible-believing churches in the colonies -- a Christian nation,” Falwell said.

He quoted Jay as stating, “Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers.” Falwell said Americans Christians are called to be the conscience of the culture, “salt and light.”

“‘Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven,’” Falwell exhorted, quoting Matthew 5:16.

Falwell recalled speaking to the fiscally conservative Council for National Policy in New York last summer.

“[T]hat morning as I spoke to them, I said, ‘Very often I don’t get somewhere twice, so I’m going to say it my first time here today that the Republicans are not the hope for America, nor the Democrats. Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is the hope.’”

Falwell said he also told the group: “I know what you’re thinking ... But you give us a pro-choice candidate and we’ll go fishing. Because we [won't] vote for our mother if she’s pro-choice, if she believes a family is anything but a man married to a woman."

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19438

 

Politics, Jesus and the church
Oct 29, 2004
By Paige Patterson

FORT WORTH, Texas (BP)--Over the past few weeks, I have consistently urged every student, staff and faculty member at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary not only to register to vote, but also to cast that vote.

I have stressed that this year’s vote is not a vote about candidates or political parties, but a referendum on marriage. In so doing, I have underscored both the importance of Christians being involved in the political arena and the serious conflict that exists in America today regarding competing worldviews and the values that underscore them. For all of that, I make no apology and continue to urge the same.

However, the outcome of the presidential election must not be construed by Christians as either greatly abetting the church of God or as sealing its destruction.

The future of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is not in the hands of political parties, courts or, for that matter, businesses or the military. It resides solely in the hands of a sovereign God who has declared that until the end of the age, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Decisions made by voters, politicians, legislators and courts may very well result in serious persecution and difficulties for the church of God or, on the other hand, may provide the freedom of religion that was the most sought-after liberty in the minds and hearts of our founding fathers.

Whichever is the case, the church of our Lord will not be squelched by the machinations of men or the plans of all the demons of hell.

This leads me to an expression of some caution about the involvement of conservative, Bible-believing Christians in the political processes of our world. The point of caution is not that we should avoid joining the fight.

When properly presented exegetically and theologically, the biblical worldview is true regardless of what the post-moderns think about the elusiveness of what Francis Schaeffer called “true truth.” Genuine Christianity certainly calls for responsible action in doing what we can to cure the social and political evils of the world, and it also calls for us to speak prophetically on all such issues.

My concern and therefore my caution to my students and all evangelicals is that we avoid directing so much of our energies to social and political issues that we forget who we are.

We are twice-born men and women whose natures have been dramatically altered by the infusion of the person of the Holy Spirit into the innermost chambers of our lives. This enables the law of God to be written on our hearts whether or not it is accepted on granite blocks in public displays.

It means that the influence of a saintly life and the response of genuine Christianity to a harsh world will forever remain the greatest social and political witness that can be given.

Because we have experienced regeneration, we are called to recognize that the church has one superior mission to which all of its other assignments must be subordinated. The church is to glorify God. It does so by bringing the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ to all the nations. Unlike the secular world, our greatest weapons are invisible weapons of mass construction (WMCs): prayer and the preaching of the everlasting Gospel.

While we call upon the world to join us in practicing righteousness, we must recognize that the unregenerate world, while it can sometimes rise to marvelous accomplishments, essentially lacks the spiritual vitality necessary to do righteousness consistently. That is why the hearts of men and women must be changed by the preaching of the Gospel through the Holy Spirit.

You should vote. You should pray for the nations and our leaders. You should make your position on issues crystal clear. You should work hard to comprehend the biblical worldview and make it viable in the marketplace as it impacts everything from just war theory, to poverty, to racism or to conservation.

But in the final analysis, you should also remember two things:

First, our major assignments are to lay hold upon heaven through vigorous, concerted prayer and to preach the everlasting Gospel that alone can save souls and make for a happy life in a dismal world society.

Second, whatever the lugubrious prognostications of the pundits may be on Nov. 3, and however much pressure evangelical Christians may experience, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can save us. Neither can they destroy us. Our future resides wholly in the hands of a sovereign transcendent God.

Paige Patterson is president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. He was president of the Southern Baptist Convention from 1998-2000.

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19444

 

Hispanic Democratic group in Fla. rejects Kerry endorsement, citing moral issues
Oct 29, 2004
By Erin Curry

MIAMI (BP)--The Democratic League of Miami-Dade County has announced it does not endorse John Kerry for president, mainly because he is part of the current party leadership that has rejected the moral values and ethical principles of the vast majority of Democrats across the country, according to league chairman Eladio Jose Armesto.

With more than 1,000 members and a reach that expands to 100,000 pro-life, pro-family Democrats in Miami, the Democratic League was chartered by the Miami-Dade Democratic Party in 1989 and is primarily led by Hispanic-American Democrats.

The league released a statement Oct. 27, saying the Democratic presidential candidate stands "at a polar extreme of American public opinion" on certain issues, including same-sex "marriage," partial-birth abortion and human cloning.

"Sen. Kerry's voting record and public statements reveal a candidate who has disqualified himself from receiving the endorsement of pro-faith, pro-freedom, pro-life, pro-family Democrats," the release said. "We believe the Democratic Party is rooted in the values of faith, freedom, family and country. If our party is to once again be a guiding light in America, it must do much, much better than extremists such as John Kerry and John Edwards."

The group listed 10 reasons why they cannot endorse Kerry for president, including:

-- Kerry's stance on the definition of marriage. The Democratic League "supports civil marriage and all its benefits as being reserved exclusively to one man and one woman." Kerry endorses homosexual civil unions, the league noted, and is against "protecting American taxpayers from being legally forced to extend government approval, financial benefits and moral legitimacy to sexual relationships other than civil marriage."

-- Kerry's failure to support the right to life. "He has adamantly voted against the right to life in the U.S. Senate and he has sought and accepted the highly dubious endorsement of every major anti-life and anti-family outfit operating in the United States," the statement said.

-- Kerry's attacks on the dignity of the human person. "He is against any and all ethical regulations stopping the National Institutes of Health from funding research on human dignity-degrading 'human cloning.'"

-- Kerry's support of embryonic stem cell research. "He has voted against banning embryo-destructive stem cell research, thereby placing an anti-life political ideology over ethical principles and the common good," the league said.

-- Kerry's failure to support the partial-birth abortion ban. The Democratic League "supports outlawing the barbaric crime of partial-birth abortion where a child is forced partially out of the mother's womb, then murdered by piercing the back of the skull."

Other reasons the Democratic League cited for opposing Kerry include his stances relating to parental notification laws for abortions, euthanasia, school vouchers, assisting families in developing Third World countries such as Mexico, and the appointment of Supreme Court justices.

"We don't check in our consciences, our moral values or our ethical principles at the party hall door," Armesto told Baptist Press. "We refuse to be censored, silenced or discriminated into submission to a political agenda that has been adopted against our consent and our better judgment. We will not read the current party leadership's script nor will we tow a party line which we may find objectionable or contrary to the best interests of the Democratic Party.

"Within the Democratic Party, the league demands respect for our pro-family, pro-life conscience," he added. "Only by tolerating and respecting Democrats such as ourselves will the current Democratic Party leadership be able to win elections and stand before the public and demonstrate that the party is the 'big tent' that they claim to be."

While the league rejects Kerry, who Armesto said "is not a real Democrat," it does not endorse President Bush.

"As a Democratic Party organization we can only endorse or support Democratic candidates," Sara P. Espinoza, a spokeswoman for the league, said in an e-mail to Baptist Press. "However, just because a candidate is a Democrat does not mean we are obligated, under party rules, to endorse or support them. We do not feel compelled to rubber-stamp party candidates because that would not be in the best interest of the party."

Armesto said the league did not endorse Al Gore for president in 2000 because he also had rejected the values of rank-and-file Democrats.

"They have been rejecting the moral values and the ethical principles of the vast majority of Democrats across the country," he told BP. "That's why the Democratic Party has been losing so many elections. That's why we have been unable to endorse a Democratic candidate."

Armesto observed that Democrats “have been losing ground because the party has been taken over by a small cadre of retrograde dogmatists, political extremists, ideological fanatics and social misfits who do not care, sending the Democratic Party to crushing defeat on election day as long as they get their anti-social agenda into the 6 p.m. newscast.”

Espinoza said no party in America should be under the control of individuals who put their extremist ideology above the good of the nation.

"American political parties can disagree on the war, the budget and the best way to get to the moon," she said, "but they should never disagree on faith, life, freedom and family. Faith in God, strong families and hard work is what's right with America, not what's wrong."

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19436

 

Gina, while Peroutka is a better candidate, he has no chance of winning. I would encourage those in safe states to vote for Peroutka and the Constitution Party. However, those who live in battleground states should vote for President Bush.

President Bush is the most openly faith-affirming president since Abraham Lincoln. In this period of cynicism and secularism, it takes a tremendous amount of courage to live out your faith.