Let's talk about this election...
As a pastor, and particularly in my official role as a pastor, I've made a very concerted attempt to moderate myself and be conscientious about the things I say about politics and this year's election cycle. Folks in my church can tell you (and I hope you can see in many of the sermons that have been posted on my blog) that, while I'll definitely address issues that are political in nature, I have never endorsed any candidate from the pulpit, nor would I ever do that. I have even done as much as possible to avoid even speaking about any candidate, either positively or negatively, in my preaching.
Take note: I'm stepping out of the pulpit for this post. This is not a sermon post. It is not a pulpit post. I do speak as a pastor and out of my own time spent studying scripture and engaging in prayer.
That said...
There's been a lot of people throwing around the Bible in this election - candidates and supporters alike. Perhaps more accurately, there's also been a lot of throwing faith around in this election - conservative candidates especially recognize that the only chance they have to secure a presidential bid is to court the "evangelical" (however loosely defined that term is by polls) branch of the conservative party.
I have a big problem with this, and it directly affects the way I plan to vote in my state's primary today.
I haven't seen any of the conservative candidates demonstrating that they understand the Bible:
All of the leading conservative candidates (and the "leading" Democratic candidate) have rattled war-sabers when it comes to the issues we face in the Middle East. The candidate most closely associated with "evangelical" Christians is on the record as saying that we should "bomb ISIS back to the Stone Age" and has vowed on the campaign trail to carpet bomb ISIS until the desert glows in the dark. The current Republican frontrunner has advocated for not only waterboarding enemy combatants, but has outright suggested that he'd consider war crimes conscionable in ordering soldiers to take out the families of terrorists.
This is scary on its own - Jesus' message throughout the Gospel is one of non-violence and peace. Jesus tells us to love our enemies, to pray for those who persecute us, to turn the other cheek on those who strike us and give our tunic to those who take our cloak. When Jesus says "Blessed are the peace-makers," he's not referring to the Colt .45 pistol.
But these men who hope to be the leaders of the United States go beyond just this. The leading Republican candidate has, so far: endorsed building a wall to separate us from our neighbors and forcing them to pay for it, embraced misogyny throughout his campaign by dismissive and abusive language toward female reporters and women who have dared to challenge his image or question his authenticity, ridiculed persons with disabilities and then gone on to deny even knowing them despite significant evidence to the contrary, refused to immediately disavow racist white supremacist leaders who have openly endorsed him - again denying the fact that he knows them despite significant evidence to the contrary, and openly advocated for religious profiling, registering Muslims, and completely shutting our country's borders to all Muslims, regardless of their situation. Against his opponents in his own party, he has utilized tactics that are no more refined than those a schoolyard bully would use against his classmates.
Those of you who know me know that I am not a Republican - my bias shows in many ways, even as I write this post, and I'm not ashamed on this point. The current positions of the Republican Party go against far too many of the things that my own faith and experience tell me about the world, our responsibilities toward our neighbor, and our responsibility to be good stewards of this earth. But at the same time, I also have significant issues with the current state of the Democratic party, and I can be (and will be) critical about those issues as well. Much as I respect President Obama and admire the near-Herculean task he has had to undertake over the last years of managing what I have felt to be one of the most deadlocked and contrarian Congresses in my lifetime, he has done things I don't agree with. The situation that investment banking created in the mortgage industry and on Wall Street was and is deplorable - even more deplorable is the fact that none of the ones who were the most responsible for creating that situation were ever adequately punished for their actions. Justice has not been done for the people of our nation who have been defrauded by large corporations time and time again, and as long as the heads of those corporations continue to rake in significant profits and evade fair taxation for those gains, those injustices will be committed again and again. Similarly, President Obama has made some fair amount of progress toward creating a more feasible environment for college and graduate students as they seek to manage their student debt, but we still live in a market where a) student loan debt is so ludicrously high that it prevents significant portions of the American work-force from fully participating in the economy as they are expected to, and b) college is pushed to a higher and higher degree of importance and necessity while its costs continue to increase and its overall value continues to decrease as job markets are simultaneously flooded with seekers and outsourced to foreign countries with decreased labor supervision.
So when Hillary Clinton aligns herself so tightly to President Obama's current legacy and seeks to more or less continue from where he left off, I take pause. The fact that she is funded so largely by banks and Wall Street interests, combined with her proposals for less-than-severe financial reform policies, suggest that she will be more interested in maintaining the status quo than in seeking justice for wronged Americans and a struggling middle class. Her support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership further suggests that corporations will continue to benefit at the expense of those who are already being exploited left and right. Her record itself is inconsistent, and her foreign policy too hawkish. And while she promises a great many things to improve the lives of the marginalized in our society, her record often shows support for the very same policies that created some of that marginalization in the first place.
As I engage with scripture - and with the Gospels, in particular - I see a great many themes. The greatest theme is, of course, love. Love for God, love for neighbor, love for self - these are the summary of the law and the prophets, as Jesus says. The witness of the Hebrew scriptures gives us a model of living that places a special emphasis on the downtrodden and the poor - the widow, the orphan, and the alien living in our midst are each afforded extra consideration by the prophets, and when the people of Israel commit injustices against these people in particular, the prophets have very stern words for them in response. Throughout the entirety of the scriptures, any system in which "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is decried as being against the will of God.
So as I consider whom I support in casting my vote, these are all things that are important to me. Needless to say, it's pretty clear who I'm supporting. Is Bernie Sanders perfectly representative of all the things I believe and support? No. Does he fulfill all the things that I hold scripturally important as far as our government? Absolutely not. But as far as qualities go in those that are currently running for President, he's the best option I can possibly see. The one word he's said he wishes to be used to describe him as president is "compassion." Compared to other candidates, whose primary goal is to be seen as a "winner," well... you can imagine where my heart lies.
Bernie Sanders has shown, not just through his policy proposals, but through his incredibly consistent historical record and the actions he's already taking on the campaign trail, that he is the one candidate out there right now that I would say aligns most closely with the scriptural values I believe to be the most important. He has a heart and a passion for the marginalized, calling out not only for massive financial reforms, but also for prison reform and criminal justice reform. He has both learned from and embraced the Black Lives Matter movement and been a life-long advocate for the protection and promotion of Civil Rights. His policies seek to lift up the downtrodden in our society, to create a more level playing field that gives more people adequate and equal opportunities for success and well-being. He's begun incorporating Native Americans into his campaign, even including a Native American advisory position. He is even so far the only candidate to have a section on his campaign webpage devoted to animal welfare issues.
As you vote today (or if your primary wherever you are is still yet to come) I encourage you - whoever you vote for, be prayerful. Deeply consider what values that candidate has espoused in their campaign, in their conduct, and in their past records. If you're a person of faith, don't vote solely on party issues - I know that matters of abortion, homosexuality, and our support (or lack thereof) for Israel are important, and I don't deny that they have implications on which candidates you consider. But the Christian faith and the message of the Gospel are so much more than just single issues and party politics. Consider carefully who the best representative for our country would be - not just from your own religious perspective, but from the perspective of the power we wield as a nation, as well. If our President is a war-mongerer, a bully, a blowhard who cares more about his or her own personal image or about the "bottom line" than about the wellbeing and worth of actual people in this country... is that really a person who should be President? If a candidate can't interact civilly with others who disagree with him or her and resorts at every turn to ridiculing them... is that the person whom you want to have the most direct relations with other countries who have the potential to launch weapons at our own people with little to no provocation? Does the idea of "winning" appeal more to you than the idea of maintaining the dignities of millions of people?
I've dedicated the majority of my life to a person I've come to know in the form of a counter-cultural, rebellious, outspoken, compassionate, and somewhat socialist Jewish man. Is it any wonder, then, that I cast my vote for a similar individual today?
Take note: I'm stepping out of the pulpit for this post. This is not a sermon post. It is not a pulpit post. I do speak as a pastor and out of my own time spent studying scripture and engaging in prayer.
That said...
There's been a lot of people throwing around the Bible in this election - candidates and supporters alike. Perhaps more accurately, there's also been a lot of throwing faith around in this election - conservative candidates especially recognize that the only chance they have to secure a presidential bid is to court the "evangelical" (however loosely defined that term is by polls) branch of the conservative party.
I have a big problem with this, and it directly affects the way I plan to vote in my state's primary today.
I haven't seen any of the conservative candidates demonstrating that they understand the Bible:
All of the leading conservative candidates (and the "leading" Democratic candidate) have rattled war-sabers when it comes to the issues we face in the Middle East. The candidate most closely associated with "evangelical" Christians is on the record as saying that we should "bomb ISIS back to the Stone Age" and has vowed on the campaign trail to carpet bomb ISIS until the desert glows in the dark. The current Republican frontrunner has advocated for not only waterboarding enemy combatants, but has outright suggested that he'd consider war crimes conscionable in ordering soldiers to take out the families of terrorists.
This is scary on its own - Jesus' message throughout the Gospel is one of non-violence and peace. Jesus tells us to love our enemies, to pray for those who persecute us, to turn the other cheek on those who strike us and give our tunic to those who take our cloak. When Jesus says "Blessed are the peace-makers," he's not referring to the Colt .45 pistol.
But these men who hope to be the leaders of the United States go beyond just this. The leading Republican candidate has, so far: endorsed building a wall to separate us from our neighbors and forcing them to pay for it, embraced misogyny throughout his campaign by dismissive and abusive language toward female reporters and women who have dared to challenge his image or question his authenticity, ridiculed persons with disabilities and then gone on to deny even knowing them despite significant evidence to the contrary, refused to immediately disavow racist white supremacist leaders who have openly endorsed him - again denying the fact that he knows them despite significant evidence to the contrary, and openly advocated for religious profiling, registering Muslims, and completely shutting our country's borders to all Muslims, regardless of their situation. Against his opponents in his own party, he has utilized tactics that are no more refined than those a schoolyard bully would use against his classmates.
Those of you who know me know that I am not a Republican - my bias shows in many ways, even as I write this post, and I'm not ashamed on this point. The current positions of the Republican Party go against far too many of the things that my own faith and experience tell me about the world, our responsibilities toward our neighbor, and our responsibility to be good stewards of this earth. But at the same time, I also have significant issues with the current state of the Democratic party, and I can be (and will be) critical about those issues as well. Much as I respect President Obama and admire the near-Herculean task he has had to undertake over the last years of managing what I have felt to be one of the most deadlocked and contrarian Congresses in my lifetime, he has done things I don't agree with. The situation that investment banking created in the mortgage industry and on Wall Street was and is deplorable - even more deplorable is the fact that none of the ones who were the most responsible for creating that situation were ever adequately punished for their actions. Justice has not been done for the people of our nation who have been defrauded by large corporations time and time again, and as long as the heads of those corporations continue to rake in significant profits and evade fair taxation for those gains, those injustices will be committed again and again. Similarly, President Obama has made some fair amount of progress toward creating a more feasible environment for college and graduate students as they seek to manage their student debt, but we still live in a market where a) student loan debt is so ludicrously high that it prevents significant portions of the American work-force from fully participating in the economy as they are expected to, and b) college is pushed to a higher and higher degree of importance and necessity while its costs continue to increase and its overall value continues to decrease as job markets are simultaneously flooded with seekers and outsourced to foreign countries with decreased labor supervision.
So when Hillary Clinton aligns herself so tightly to President Obama's current legacy and seeks to more or less continue from where he left off, I take pause. The fact that she is funded so largely by banks and Wall Street interests, combined with her proposals for less-than-severe financial reform policies, suggest that she will be more interested in maintaining the status quo than in seeking justice for wronged Americans and a struggling middle class. Her support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership further suggests that corporations will continue to benefit at the expense of those who are already being exploited left and right. Her record itself is inconsistent, and her foreign policy too hawkish. And while she promises a great many things to improve the lives of the marginalized in our society, her record often shows support for the very same policies that created some of that marginalization in the first place.
As I engage with scripture - and with the Gospels, in particular - I see a great many themes. The greatest theme is, of course, love. Love for God, love for neighbor, love for self - these are the summary of the law and the prophets, as Jesus says. The witness of the Hebrew scriptures gives us a model of living that places a special emphasis on the downtrodden and the poor - the widow, the orphan, and the alien living in our midst are each afforded extra consideration by the prophets, and when the people of Israel commit injustices against these people in particular, the prophets have very stern words for them in response. Throughout the entirety of the scriptures, any system in which "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is decried as being against the will of God.
So as I consider whom I support in casting my vote, these are all things that are important to me. Needless to say, it's pretty clear who I'm supporting. Is Bernie Sanders perfectly representative of all the things I believe and support? No. Does he fulfill all the things that I hold scripturally important as far as our government? Absolutely not. But as far as qualities go in those that are currently running for President, he's the best option I can possibly see. The one word he's said he wishes to be used to describe him as president is "compassion." Compared to other candidates, whose primary goal is to be seen as a "winner," well... you can imagine where my heart lies.
Bernie Sanders has shown, not just through his policy proposals, but through his incredibly consistent historical record and the actions he's already taking on the campaign trail, that he is the one candidate out there right now that I would say aligns most closely with the scriptural values I believe to be the most important. He has a heart and a passion for the marginalized, calling out not only for massive financial reforms, but also for prison reform and criminal justice reform. He has both learned from and embraced the Black Lives Matter movement and been a life-long advocate for the protection and promotion of Civil Rights. His policies seek to lift up the downtrodden in our society, to create a more level playing field that gives more people adequate and equal opportunities for success and well-being. He's begun incorporating Native Americans into his campaign, even including a Native American advisory position. He is even so far the only candidate to have a section on his campaign webpage devoted to animal welfare issues.
As you vote today (or if your primary wherever you are is still yet to come) I encourage you - whoever you vote for, be prayerful. Deeply consider what values that candidate has espoused in their campaign, in their conduct, and in their past records. If you're a person of faith, don't vote solely on party issues - I know that matters of abortion, homosexuality, and our support (or lack thereof) for Israel are important, and I don't deny that they have implications on which candidates you consider. But the Christian faith and the message of the Gospel are so much more than just single issues and party politics. Consider carefully who the best representative for our country would be - not just from your own religious perspective, but from the perspective of the power we wield as a nation, as well. If our President is a war-mongerer, a bully, a blowhard who cares more about his or her own personal image or about the "bottom line" than about the wellbeing and worth of actual people in this country... is that really a person who should be President? If a candidate can't interact civilly with others who disagree with him or her and resorts at every turn to ridiculing them... is that the person whom you want to have the most direct relations with other countries who have the potential to launch weapons at our own people with little to no provocation? Does the idea of "winning" appeal more to you than the idea of maintaining the dignities of millions of people?
I've dedicated the majority of my life to a person I've come to know in the form of a counter-cultural, rebellious, outspoken, compassionate, and somewhat socialist Jewish man. Is it any wonder, then, that I cast my vote for a similar individual today?
Comments
Post a Comment