3 Unreasonable Assertions for Choosing a Political Candidate

Politics is the dominate headline of our day. It is causing calamity publicly and privately impacting personal relationships and personal consciences. With the republican convention last week and the democratic convention of this week, politics has forced all other news stories into a secondary of unnoticed reports. Not only has it forced people into the position of choosing between political and biblical worldviews, but it has also become apparent that voters are charged with deciding between political and biblical values.

Over the course of months voters have been confronted with the phrase that a non-vote is a vote for the ‘other’ candidate. They have been told that the ‘only’ vote to have is for the ‘lesser of two evils’ even though it means compromising on a few personal convictions. These arguments though should be less than convincing, especially for at least three reasons:

  1. False Tactics: Arguments such as these avoid the issues and do not employ logic and reasoning. Instead it is a matter of promoting guilt or bullying others into making decisions contrary to conscience. The harshness of words and tones used to convey that one must choose the better of two candidates serves as evidence of that bullying. Ultimately it denies the importance of a person’s convictions.
  2. False Truth: The denial of person’s convictions is especially troubling when those convictions are based on the truth of Scripture. Scripture is truth because it comes from God in whom falsehood cannot be found. Denying truth or compromising it carries a weight far greater than merely laying aside personal opinions.
  3. False Tenets: Finally, the arguments being employed suggest that voters have to make a choice between compromising their own political values or their own biblical values. The phrase ‘choosing between the lesser of two evils’ automatically suggests that one is making a compromise in some form or another. The reality is that our political values and biblical values should not be in conflict. How can that be? Because our biblical values should inform our political values. If a conflict exists between the two, it reveals that there is no conflict at all, because one must always side with God.

With politics that highlight of last week, I wrote of our need to remain established in the truth (you can read that article here). It’s the same premise here. We are not loyal to people nor are we about being loyal to ourselves, it is about being loyal to God.

If we compromise here, at what point do we consider compromise too much? Who makes that decision? That’s part of the issue. One compromise will never be enough, but instead causes impact for the future. It will create another conflict shortly down the road in which people will be faced with the same dilemma: Do they compromise or not? Again they can use the same reasoning of ‘just this once.’ In essence it will never stop.

It is this mindset, this continuous compromise that has created our current situation. People, especially believers, are being forced to confront this now because of how the past was dealt with. Every year has been about compromising to the best of two inferior candidates so that moral standards have declined and moral convictions became irrelevant.

We must stand with integrity, an integrity that is rooted in our Lord Jesus Christ for the sake of glorifying God. There can be nothing less. This concept not only guides our political decisions, but every decision we make.

Compromise will always lead to catastrophic consequences. Therefore we must allow our Biblical values to be the basis of all other values without compromise. They must stand with an integrity and compassion that preserves the character of God and the gospel of Jesus Christ.