10-3-16<\/p>\n
Ever since as I was a young boy, I heard adults talking about elections, and resignedly saying that they would, sigh, be voting for the lesser of two evils.<\/p>\n
I picked up the mantra when I achieved majority, not as a matter of patrimony, but because the choices invariably were and are crummy. There were exceptions \u2013 I enthusiastically supported Ronald Reagan \u2013 but I frequently have voted for third-party candidates or skipped presidential ballots.<\/p>\n
For a while I would not vote at all, local or national elections, on the premise that doing so would just encourage the scoundrels.<\/p>\n
Eventually I realized that a wisecrack is an inadequate substitute for civic responsibility. Slightly more sophisticated was my objection that illiterate welfare scammers had the same \u201csay\u201d that I did\u2026 but abdication in the game we call democracy only enhances the self-defeating aspects of my inchoate protest.<\/p>\n
Now I am fully engaged, voting and debating and writing columns and drawing political cartoons and glued to C-SPAN like a dog in heat. But, the more engaged I am, the more enraged I am.<\/p>\n
That a nation of approximately one-third of a billion<\/em> people cannot produce better presidential candidates then the two (or four) major candidates we are stuck with\u2026 is demoralizing. With troubling implications for the future \u2013 heck, the present<\/em> state \u2013 of our republic. We have a flawed system, surely; but we also are in a tailspin in almost every sphere of national life. Politics is merely the mostly visible symptom. In this season, the nearest whipping-boy. <\/p>\n As I have evolved to a Christian Patriot, and as an essayist in this realm, the choices would seem to be clearer, the decisions easier to make. We all have checklists and litmus tests, whether clearly biblical or informed by our faith. Even secular voters have criteria, perhaps more so. <\/p>\n So why do so many Christian patriots \u2013 \u201cvalue voters\u201d \u2013 feel seriously conflicted this year? Being on the horns of a dilemma has never been so uncomfortable!<\/p>\n This week the author of books in Christian field Philip Yancey said in an interview that he was \u201cbaffled\u201d that \u201cEvangelicals\u201d (a term of deliberate ambiguity, but that is another topic) could support a Donald Trump. He defined Trump as a \u201cbully\u201d who has taken positions contrary to the Bible and has been thrice-married and has built casinos.<\/p>\n Yancey is correct on the resume of Trump. I do not disagree. Personally, I don\u2019t think I would like Trump as a neighbor, much less as a president.<\/p>\n There was a relative firestorm of response on social media, and Yancey quickly stated that he was not implicitly endorsing Hillary Clinton. In fact, without the clarification, of course the \u201cimplicit\u201d endorsement was inferred by his many followers. To me, his greater offense was pretending to be \u201cbaffled\u201d by \u201cEvangelical\u201d support for Trump. Our angst, our debates, our essays, our, yes, social-media posts are legion. Everywhere. For many people \u2013 many Christians, even many Yancey acolytes \u2013 support for Trump has been discussed endlessly.<\/p>\n For some, support is reluctant. For some, it might be automatic. For some, it is painful and anguished. Two prominent names in Christianity (neither of them ministers, by the way) have reached different positions: Falwell Junior, Yay; Yancey, Nay. <\/p>\n Christians in a democracy must realize the implications of supporting Hillary Clinton. She has also lied, is corrupt, doesn’t act like Jesus in myriad ways. Her hands arguably are dirtier, or bloodier, from her militant support of abortions. Lying to Benghazi parents. Spinning new absurdities about her e-mails, servers, and Foundation shenanigans. Start there. <\/p>\n Any (and every) candidate is going to be flawed. Does Yancey think \u201cEvangelicals\u201d should not vote for anyone? Of course not. He now says he will not vote for any presidential candidate this year. For my part, \u201cbeen there, done that.\u201d I think the only thing that Christian voters can be sure<\/em> of about this election, about the choices facing us, is that there is no easy choice. You will not wake up tomorrow morning, slap your forehead in a V-8 moment, and realize that you have missed the obvious answer.<\/p>\n Another thing I did when I was a kid was to go to Union Square Park in lower Manhattan and listen to the speakers, most of them crackpot and most of them Communist, spout off to ersatz audiences of transients and passersby. A dying phenomenon, really \u2013 maybe the young Obama, on ghetto street corners of Chicago, was among the last \u2013 but I considered them to redolent of earlier days, and London\u2019s Hyde Park. (I honed my debate skills, such as they are, in Union Square. Also my talent for heckling.) Like so many other things, this phenomenon has not so much disappeared as it has morphed into electronic social media. Now, gasbags (save yourself the Comments) float on electrons instead of standing on soap boxes.<\/p>\n \u2026 which is either democracy at work, or a pressure-valve from more serious dissatisfaction and dissent. I think violent days of protest and civil disobedience are coming soon, from sides of the political spectrum. But that, too, is for another time here.<\/p>\n In the meantime, we still are face-to-face with a seething, ugly, menacing dilemma. And we cannot escape it. We are in a horrible place — we Christians in this “democracy” — and nothing will save us but One thing. We know that Person. But other things can guide us, good, bad, and “Mister In Between.” Am I going to vote, once again in my life, while holding my nose?<\/p>\n Yes. I am going to hold my nose and vote. Any well-intentioned Christian patriot wanting to stay home, or abide a Clinton presidency, explicitly<\/em> endorses an extremist Supreme Court, further erosion of Constitutional rights, more regulations favoring abortion and the homosexual agenda, uncountable immigration numbers from Mexico and from terrorist lands. Et cetera. That can sound like my opinion, but Hillary would thank me for stating her positions succinctly.<\/p>\n If Christians stay home, they should be consistent, and withdraw from all government activities and programs; all schools and institutions; all media\u2026 because everything is corrupted. \u201cLet the Supreme Court [a response might say] go wacko. God is in control; He will see us through; His eye is on the sparrow and He watches over us.\u201d<\/p>\n I agree. But He is watching us kill ourselves, too. <\/p>\n Under a sovereign God, Christianity is not a democracy. Conversely, once the Founders accepted pluralism, this is not a theocracy. I hate<\/em> the thought of voting for \u201cthe lesser of two evils\u201d\u2026 because that implies that both choices are evil. Neither Christianity nor a republic are roulette-tables, either. But I will take my chances. <\/p>\n One candidate is certain to continue the secular agenda, the war on believers, and a Frightening New World. The other has, among other things, promised to maintain Constitutional guarantees, restore traditional values, reverse governmental overreach, respect Christian expressions in school, courtrooms, public squares\u2026 If Trump keeps only a quarter of such promises, we will be better off. <\/p>\n One is the Lesser of two evils. + + + <\/p>\n God DOES watch over us. That should bring us comfort! Here is the wonderful Ethel Waters, near the end of her life, singing the great song about God\u2019s Eye on the Sparrow, at a Billy Graham crusade. BUT, as we take comfort from these lyrics, let us remember that He feeds the sparrows\u2026 but as He watches, we are accountable for how we respond to His care.<\/p>\n
\nThe other is the Evil of two Lessers. <\/p>\n