Am I Morally Obligated to Vote for One of These Candidates?

[Palatka51]

This is from a pastor from the last election -- I think it still rings true today ---

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Romans 13:1

By now you have probably had your fill of the political season. Every four years America has to endure a brutal and bitter time of mud-slinging, and we are left having to sift through the assertions and promises.

In less than two weeks all that will be laid to rest (hopefully!), as the election will be past and our President and other important officials and measures decided.

Some decide that they hate politics and as a result they skip the vote all together. For Americans this is a right, but as Christians we don’t have this option. The Scriptures clearly teach that our place in the government is God-ordained, as it is for our leaders. To not participate in the process is to reject God’s rule in your life as it pertains to your citizenship.

I know, I know – God is Sovereign, so whomever He wants in office will get there anyhow. Yes, God is Sovereign, but He has ordained that you participate in the unfolding of His plan just as He ordains parents to participate in the upbringing of their children (they don’t put them on the streets saying that God is Sovereign and will care for them anyhow, do they?).

For the Christian, one’s peace is that God IS Sovereign, which allays all fear that if ‘he’ (whoever ‘he’ is) gets into office the nation will go down the drain. The nation will go where God wants it, but even our participation in an election in which our candidate of choice is not elected is His will.

Through the years I have heard a lot of Christians complain about their elected officials (okay, I admit that I have too – so sue me), and this too is our right, but to not vote and then whine is unspeakable.

Maybe we as Christians can help the country not be so divided. If we believe in a Sovereign God (and we do), and if indeed our status is ordained by God (and it is), then we can be the gracious ones who demonstrate that there is a higher Authority than a mere mortal (and there is!).

The question is, ‘Is there ever a reason to not vote?’ The answer is, ‘Yes,’ if you find yourself in a moral dilemma because in good conscience you cannot vote for either candidate. That then becomes a vote of conscience.

Finally, let the Gospel be the transparency under which you judge who and what you vote for. This is why I don’t tell you who to vote for or who stands for what – you have the information available from any number of resources and you have the Gospel–– so use it. Vote the Gospel in your vote. In the end God gets the Glory, regardless of the outcome. For this we praise Him.

By the way, I still hope my candidate wins…"

FriendofSpurgeon;

Your post was very thoughtful as well as insightful and I agree with all that you have typed. :godisgood:

 

[just-want-peace]

It is because our people are so far from God that we have the choices we have and praying folks like ourselves are really struggling over the choices we have.

AMEN and AMEN!!!!

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

I must say that I'm disappointed none of our residential Romney guys answered the OP with, "You are morally obligated to vote for both of these candidates!" :thumbs:

 

[JustChristian]

McGovern was NOT a socialist. He is a war hero and a great man (regardless of what you think about his politics, to usurp Sean Hannity, McGovern is a "great American"), but he was not and is not a socialist.

Here we go again. Folks, PLEASE: research these terms before you utilize them to describe politicians.....

Regards,
BiR

McGovern's father was a minister as well.

 

[JustChristian]

Consider the choices of 1972. On the one hand we had George McGovern. He was a socialist who promised national healthcare for all Americans and an immediate withdrawal from Vietnam. On the other hand, we had Richard Nixon who, during the election months, oversaw the Watergate crimes that eventually brought him down. Would it have been morally reprehensible to refuse to vote for either candidate?

In this election of 2008 we seem to be headed for another choice between bad and worse. Either Clinton or Obama will be a choice for bigger government, higher taxes, and international defeat. McCain is, in my opinion, temperamentally unfit to be president; much as Nixon was. I expect the press to begin hammering him on this once he gets the nomination.

I plan to vote in the Pennsylvania primary in April and I hope we can avoid these bad choices. But if not, I feel no moral obligation to vote for any of the current front-running candidates.

So please tell me you didn't vote for the current disaster of a "president."

 

[swaimj]

The current disaster of a president? This is really another topic. I have a theory about the judgement that will be made about this president in the future. Maybe I'll post it soon, but I have to work Saturday and when I get off I have to watch the race from Daytona. Don't know when I'll have time!

 

[saturneptune]

The current disaster of a president? This is really another topic. I have a theory about the judgement that will be made about this president in the future. Maybe I'll post it soon, but I have to work Saturday and when I get off I have to watch the race from Daytona. Don't know when I'll have time!

72 was my first election, and I voted for Nixon. When 76 rolled around, the nonsense made me angry, and voted for Carter. So much for voting for Democrats. When the Republican party gets in the shape it is in now, if you cannot live with the nominee, its time to seek out a third party.

 

[EdSutton]

FTR, you are not "morally obligated" to vote for anyone or any particular party, as I see it. There is no moral compunction to vote for either "the lesser of two evils" or "the evil of two lessers"!

And should any and/or all of the major party candidates not appeal to you, there are usually "third party" and other so-called minor party candidates on the ballot.

If you are still not satisfied, you can stay home or write-in candidates, although in KY, a write-in candidate's vote will not be counted, unless there has been a declaration that such a candidate will 'accept' the votes cast. BTW, by law, this applies only to the general election, as a primary in KY does not allow write-ins (also by law), or 'independants to vote, due to the very nature of a party primary.

Ed

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

If you are still not satisfied, you can stay home or write-in candidates, although in KY, a write-in candidate's vote will not be counted, unless there has been a declaration that such a candidate will 'accept' the votes cast. BTW, by law, this applies only to the general election, as a primary in KY does not allow write-ins (also by law), or 'independants to vote, due to the very nature of a party primary.

I was unaware of this. Thanks for the info.

Btw, you should have been a civics prof.

 

[JustChristian]

Consider the choices of 1972. On the one hand we had George McGovern. He was a socialist who promised national healthcare for all Americans and an immediate withdrawal from Vietnam. On the other hand, we had Richard Nixon who, during the election months, oversaw the Watergate crimes that eventually brought him down. Would it have been morally reprehensible to refuse to vote for either candidate?

In this election of 2008 we seem to be headed for another choice between bad and worse. Either Clinton or Obama will be a choice for bigger government, higher taxes, and international defeat. McCain is, in my opinion, temperamentally unfit to be president; much as Nixon was. I expect the press to begin hammering him on this once he gets the nomination.

I plan to vote in the Pennsylvania primary in April and I hope we can avoid these bad choices. But if not, I feel no moral obligation to vote for any of the current front-running candidates.

Let's see now. Americans and Iraqis are dying by the thousands to gain democracy in Iraq. Right? At least that's what GW Bush says. Democracy includes the right to self government through free elections. I'd say you don't have a moral requirement to vote but not voting is a slap in the face to our soldiers who are dying to give the vote to the Iraqis.