Skip to comments.Obama, Romney, Other: Who Should Christians Vote for in the 2012 Election?
Posted on 10/10/2012 1:56:42 AM PDT by imardmd1
America is like a train going rapidly toward a cliff. The election of 2012 may determine if we fly off the precipice, or slow down enough to get the train turned around.
So then, who should we vote for this November?
In regards to the upcoming presidential election, I have heard some Christians say they will not vote for Barack Obama since he clearly supports and promotes issues contrary to the Bible, like abortion and homosexual marriage. But, they say, they cannot vote for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon, and they point out the unbiblical doctrines of Mormonism. Their choice then will be to vote for a third party candidate, write in a name,or not vote at all. Should this be the choice of Biblical thinking Christians?
It is very important whom we choose to govern us. When the righteous rule, the people will rejoice, but when the wicked govern they will groan (Prov. 29:2). Our nations welfare and stabilityour continuance (or recovery) as a nation of liberty, justice, and prosperitywill be greatly affected by whom we choose to lead us.
To elect Godly leaders we need to know the qualities of a Godly leader, and here, as in all of life, the Bible provides a standard. In choosing those who govern, we must compare their qualifications to those that the Bible says are of most importance.
As we shall see, Obama is also anti-life, supporting and promoting abortion consistently throughout his public life, is against the Biblical family, recently saying he supports same-sex marriage, and promotes public immorality. The conclusion is that, while a professing Christian, Obama shows little fruit of true Christian faith.
Regarding his actions, Romney is pro-life and upholds the Biblical family, so in these two important matters, unlike Obama, he embraces the ideals of the Christian faith. Romney has also not shown hostility toward Christianity as has Obama.
Under Obamas fiscal and moral leadership, the train is heading toward the cliff at 100 miles per hour. In general, those who have led the nation in recent generations, both Democrats and Republicans, have been going the wrong way on the track headed toward the cliff. Some have slowed the train but what is needed is to turn the train around. There are those currently serving in government who want to do this, and have tried, but we need more servant leaders who adhere to the Biblical qualifications of Godly officials before this is possible.
Since slowing the train down will give us more time to prepare new leaders, Romney seems the best option at this time. In contrast to Obama, he also supports life and upholding the Biblical definition of marriage. Romney certainly does not meet all of the Biblical qualifications for Godly officials, but he comes closer to the standard than Obama. We cannot afford to continue down the wrong track at 100 miles per hour because the cliff is coming soon. Slowing the train to 20 miles per hour may give us time to awaken to our civil duties, and restore Godly leadership to the nation.
To those who say they cannot vote for either and will vote other, this is in reality a vote for the least Biblical guy. By your tacit consent, you are helping put the worst guy in office. At 100 miles per hour, I fear we cannot last long enough to restore America to its place as the most free, prosperous, virtuous, and just nation the world has ever seen.
True, then you say voting for anyone but Romney helps obama win
Wouldn't it just be easy to say I'll tell you what to do, don't follow your convictions.
No true Christian would spend less time than the author of this article did, in considering the alternatives very carefully.
And what is your urge? (of course not guided by thoughtful conference with the Holy Ghost)
(1) The God is in charge.
(2) If Obama wins, God permitted that to happen, as He did in visiting Hitler as a judgment against Germany and their higher-criticism, corrupt-the-Scriptures theologians.
(3) If this is the case, then if you did not vote for Obama, you are flouting God's determined Will.
(4) If Romney wins, that is what God permitted, as He has for other of our Presidents who named the Name of Christ, but did not follow His teachings.
(5) If this is the case, and you did not vote for Romney, again, you have intended to flout God's determined Will.
(6) If you voted for a third candidate, a wholesome Christian opposing those two, and he does not win, that is also what The God permitted.
(7) In this case, both you and the third party nominee failed to discern The God's determinate Will, and are actively opposing Him also.
I, too, have been greatly exercised over this conundrum, and have tended toward voting for a third candidate.
But I also know that the author of this article has effectively summed up the differences between these major opponents, and considered both candidates unfit for a New Testament Christian occupation, yet pretty clearly shows us that The God has already willed through lawful processes, that one or the other of these candidates will obtain a majority electoral vote over the other; whereas a third party is extremely unlikely to effectively challenge. Even if both the two majors die, the successor of the winner will take his place; not any third candidate.
So, I do not believe the author is being a temporizer, but has hit the nail on the head both logically and spiritually.
I can elect to help "slow the train of destruction down" (knowing that Romney ids an engine of destruction in the points you mentioned), or I can assist the worst aggressor to steam full ahead by one of three methods: vote for Obama, vote for a third party, or abstain.
From this aspect, I do not believe that God's determined Will is that Obama be reelected to sink us. I believe that The God is giving us one last chance to start getting active in both evangelism and exhortation to bring the USA back under a better obedience to Him, and so I believe I must also permit Romney to have the helm briefly until we can confirm new leaders of our conservatism and constitutionality.
I have my 19 grandchildren in mind as to the outcome. What about you?
No, all I had to to was read your post.
(It's not a vote against him either...no matter what you say.)...It is--pretty much by definition.
You can tell me that when your guy wins. Otherwise...math wins every single time.
(the answer being Romney, obviously)
I don't depend on government to fill my belly. I will not not depend on Mitt Romney to fill my belly.
I have arranged my affairs so as to limit the damage that any liberal (whether Obama or Romney) can do to interfere with my life. If you think you can depend on Mitt Romney or the government to fill your belly, you will likely be disappointed. I encourage you to reduce your dependency on government.
Tom Hoefling is a proven conservative who doesn't shift like a weathervane when liberal breezes blow.
When the day comes that I can no longer fill my own belly, I'll know that it's time for me to go.
As I said, I’d prefer to be bashing Obama as the greater enemy, so this is sans reference to Romney.
Read 2 Chronicles 17-20, the life of King Jehoshaphat.
Well, taking that a bit further, in whom should citizens loving the values of our forefathers have voted for in the primaries, and that would be neither Obama nor Romney. But we are now faced with distasteful choices in the general election.
However, the title of the article is specifically limited to address the segment of the population who are, within the text, identified as regenerated believer-disciples of Christ -- not just persons who simply practice religious formalities prevalent in Christendom and thus call themselves "Christians." Thus for the constituents addressed, your question is another question, but not a "better" one.
With sincere regard --
The time to bash is at the polls on November 6, and this is not without reference to Romney. AFIK We need to be paying the same attention to other portions of the slate with the same scrutiny as to whether they intend to uphold conservative, limited government or not.
No one is insisting on this, but it is expected that if Romney takes the office, he can better help improve the conditions under which you may operate to fill your own belly.
Getting Obama back will not improve these conditions. In that case, you can expect a more dramatic worsening under his championing of socialism that will likely make you tighten your belt. Not voting for Romney will improve Obama's chances measurably.
But if Romney is elected, we can not only expect some rather favorable improvements, but perhaps also we can begin to whittle at his shortcomings from a better vantage, perhaps bringing the engine of destruction to a standstill -- even moving toward a reversal. Eh?
Again, this topic is directed toward born-anew followers of Christ, not the general public, as to the facts in considering how to vote so as to agree with Scriptural morality and the Evangel. Your choice of a man of character may be one of approval, but voting for him as POTUS only helps the other side.
This is still a somewhat free country--do as you wish. But if Obama gets back in, I hope you are ready to shoulder your portion of the blame.
Ahh--so the outcome of an election determines whether I voted for or against someone?
Do you listen to what you write, or you just throw down words at random?
Yes, you and all the other Einsteins who voted for Mickey Mouse...or whatever.
Another Freeper put it quite nicely, essentially stating; he didn't like Romney, but he would vote for a rattlesnake if he knew it meant getting rid of Obama.
Hmm--show me where I posted in this thread for whom I an casting my vote. And before you jump all over it--Post #26 does not indicate who I am voting for or not voting for. I was making a comment on the statement--not defending anything I'm doing.
I can understand that. Trust me--I despise Obama as much as the next FReeper (or more).
But we do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. Because of the area I live in, it really does not matter who I vote for or against. The Electors who represent me are pretty much a given.
Given the above points, my vote is truly a personal decision.
Well assuming you “vote against” Obama down-ticket, we get both Houses, AND Romney does prevail...you (we) should then be able to beat Romney like a rented mule should he tick us off with his actions or posturing.
For me in Ohio, it’s fairly easy. Josh Mandel is conservative, and I’m from the very conservative 2d district, so any republican candidate is going to be conservative, and ours is.
So far as other candidates in lesser races in our local area, they wouldn’t survive if even hinted of liberalism.
Issues on the ballot are strange with me. Anything with over about a 100 words, no matter who’s supporting it, I generally reject, thinking that lawyers can make great hay out of extended verbosity. (See 2700 page ObamaCare law...won’t know what’s in it until it’s passed.)
I think it is a better one, and for this reason: I don't like the idea of dividing up the vote based on people's religions. If Christians should only vote a certain way, does that mean that atheists & agnostics should do the same? While I recognize that most of my "fellow" unbelievers will vote for Democrats (about 70% of them, according to polls), I'm not about to go along with them, as I'm very conservative on economic and foreign policy issues.
Similarly, I would guess that Obama will win 90% (at least) of the Muslim vote. It's fair to say that they're voting based on their religion far more than Christians do. Is that a good thing? Not in my book.
All God fearing Americans should realize it’s a duty to oust OBOZO. If course Romney is not exactly what we wanted, but Obama has got-to-go
Kinda like sitting out WW2, but whatever.