I am not and never have been a fan of John McCain, his proposed policies, his inconsistent record on many issues, his poor choice for a running mate, his thoughtless economic plan, or of his very negative campaigning against Barack Obama. It was hard for me to bear the thought of voting for him. It was equally hard for me to bear the thought of siding with a campaign for “change” that would passively allow each state to choose whether it would change the definition and legal institution of marriage, and that would not actively seek to change (read: “work for the overturning of”) Roe v. Wade. For me, neither candidate represented change or progress for the country, except on the issue of the country’s readiness to be led by a candidate of color.
How I wish that the first time there was a probable opportunity for an African American candidate to reach the White House I could have cast my vote for such a candidate without any reservation. However, I am pro-life, and President-elect Obama is the most anti-life senator to come to power in my lifetime. I also am pro-conservative justices (who limit legislating from the bench). I am pro-marriage–that is, pro-heterosexual marriage. In the end, I could not overlook these issues as I approached Election Day. But the temptation to justify voting for Obama was strong, for I did not want to be against the side of history–of an African American finally making it to the Oval Office.
However, if I’ve learned anything from my years of ministry in the church, it is these two things. First, it is not virtuous to side with the majority because one does not wish to stand out among friends, or because one is unwilling to examine all information on an issue, or because one wants to dispense dislikes toward current leadership, in spite of righteous reasons to vote against the majority. In fact, under some circumstances, it can be a horrendous evil.
Second, even if one is seeking to be consistent in humility and holiness individually, to abstain from voting on any matter is to allow the majority to speak for you. That same majority, with a victory, might make trouble for the greater populous by enabling the social evil from which you sought to distance yourself by abstaining from voting.
So I made two very difficult choices. First, I chose to vote rather than stay home. Second, I voted for the lives of the unborn rather than for approval from the vast majority of my own ethnic community. The latter choice took the risk of being reproached for the name of Christ, for I only voted for life because of the fear of my Lord (cf. Ex. 1:15-2:12). I know such a choice risks invoking the ire or dismissal of the overwhelming majority of the African American community. Yet, on a most historic Election Day, I could not allow my personal pro-life stance to crumble under the weight of being perceived as a traitor to the African American cause for victory, for that goes against all godly wisdom:
If you faint in the day of adversity,
your strength is small.
Rescue those who are being taken away to death;
hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter.
If you say, “Behold, we did not know this,”
does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it,
and will he not repay man according to his work?Prov. 24:10-12, ESV
I cast my vote in the hopes of rescuing those being taken to the slaughter. I could not vote in such a way that I would have ignored the blood flowing from abortion clinics, for I know that the Almighty would repay my cowardice. My hope in His Word is that He will remember me and graciously and provide for my life, repaying me with mercy.
In contrast, I do not think a recession can be said to be taking people to death unjustly, especially when many in Maryland, where I live, voted to throw their lots in with bringing slots to our state. (The correlation of the recession to the slots-vote should be obvious to the righteous.) I think our soldiers voluntarily sign up to defend our freedom at the risk of their own lives. Lack of health-insurance coverage for all makes life very hard for many, but it does not lead to a denial of all medical care for any one class of people. (Right now, as I’m in between pastorates and paying for my family’s health coverage out of pocket, I understand the value of good insurance and the stress of keeping up with the rising costs of such coverage.)
So the economy, the war in Iraq, and universal health insurance became secondary issues for me–albeit very important ones–because righteousness was not at stake. Even so, the righteous should not now overlook these issues while loving their fellow man. Still, one issue rose to the top for me.
My Duty to Christ and the King
The question for me at this time is this: Can I continue to live Soli Deo Gloria under a president whose moral judgment already is questionable before he takes the oath of office? Yes, I can; for I can be obedient to Scripture, praying for the one in authority (I Tim. 2:1-8), honoring the one in authority (1 Pet. 2:13-18), submitting to the one in authority (Rom. 13:1-7; Tit. 3:1), and seeking righteousness for the entire citizenry (Prov. 14:34). These I will seek to do by grace. I will “honor the good appointment of God.”
Moreover, I can follow the admonition and example of Calvin, who, in the quote above, preached that believers should impute to themselves the ills of government and recognize the common grace given to mankind through human governing authorities. For example, in our day, it is not the governmental regulation that slaughters the innocent; it is the people who chose to end the lives of their children, and the willing executioners who kill for the sake of the monetary gain afforded by the abortion industry. The government only allows this sin to receive legal permission and protection. Nevertheless, that same government provides many laws that allow me to worship in freedom, preach the Gospel freely, vote in an election, and write commentaries like this one without fear of censorship or death. I readily can recognize the retention of “some kind of just government” under President Obama’s rule.
My Dilemma Resolved
My humble proposal of an attempt to be Christocentric rather than Afrocentric will not be received with approval by many African Americans that I know. I hope to live long enough to witness another African American become a candidate for President of the United States of America–a candidate who is pro-life and pro-righteousness. Yet my hope may ring hollow to many other African Americans who are celebrating a Democratic victory that happens to seem pro-African American. To the celebrants, I might be labeled a “sore loser” seeking to justify his reasons for siding with conservative White America rather than with Black America.
In writing elsewhere about “how I have wrestled through the Christian version of the Uncle Tom epithet” (with respect to my embracing of Reformed Theology), I have penned this thought:
If a person would allow himself to be pigeonholed into becoming a person of a nationalistic or ethno-centric thought out of the fear of being viewed as an Oreo or Uncle Tom, then Reformed Theology is not for that person. But neither is the Gospel, for the Gospel calls each of us to stand against an ethnic-centered philosophy of one’s own race, for such a philosophy is naturally conformed to this present world and is in need of redemption. If you cannot stand against your own culture where it does not square with the Scriptures, you are the one who is ashamed of Christ, and such shame has nothing to with philosophical or ontological Blackness; it only has to do with your view of the majesty of the God who calls you to deny yourself in order to follow Christ. (from “Sovereign in a Sweet Home, Schooling, and Solace,” in Glory Road: Our Journey Into Reformed Christianity, ed. Anthony Carter; forthcoming from Crossway Books).
I am fairly certain that if J. C. Watts had been the Republican nominee for president, and if he had been running against Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee, the great majority of African Americans would have found reason to vote for the wife of the “first Black President” and her liberal ideals rather than for Watts and his conservative ideals. In doing so, such a vote would indicate that the great majority of African Americans have feelings about the type of African American who would be deemed worthy of their votes for that seat at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue–who would be worthy of African Americans’ approval as their choice for their representative in the White House.
Seemingly, for the Black Nationalist and the liberal, not every African American would qualify to wear an honor for which our ancestors were stolen, enslaved, whipped, lynched, dehumanized, and killed. Likewise, it is my opinion that my ancestors experienced such suffering and injustices so that it would be possible for any African American to reach the Oval Office, but not so that every African American, regardless of qualifications, could reach the Oval Office.
Those who fought for civil rights for African Americans were doing so out of a moral impetus to see African Americans treated humanely–as human beings rather than like chattel or as 3/5ths-human. I think the best way to honor their work and lives when the office of Commander in Chief is within reach would be to continue that moral quest. That quest is continued by finding a candidate who seeks to see African Americans, even those in the womb, treated humanely–as people rather than as cattle for our labor and experimentation, or as a 3/5th-human fetus.
An earlier version of this article appeared at the blog Between Two Worlds.
I too am pro-life and I voted for Obama. Although I disagree with Mr. Obama’s stance on abortion, and abortion is an important issue for me, I believe that he was the best choice of the two for a number of reasons: character, life experience, and concern for the working class.
I have to affirm your obvious passion for the word of God and for righteous living. I do disagree, though, that righteousness is not at stake in the war in Iraq and in providing affordable healthcare. The theologian Carl F. Ellis in his teachings on the gospel points out that social justice is every much a part of living out the gospel as is personal piety. Thusly, I think that it is problematic for you to rank the sanctity of life in the realm of abortions over the sanctity of life in the realm of a war with a questionable premise.
Additionally, I am also African-American and I think that your portraiture of us as a community in this article is somewhat unhelpful. It is unhelpful because you make certain assumptions (which I don’t believe are correct) about the motivations behind our voting patterns in this past presidential election as a community. I and several other African-American Christians that I know who voted for Obama did so prayerfully. We were not primarily driven by a desire to see this nation’s first Black president. Remember, when Obama first started campaigning for president, he did not attract widespread support of African-American voters immediately.
Brother Edmund,
I would love it if you interacted with larger pro-life thought (as Nadia has alluded). While who I voted for doesn’t matter I have always felt pro-life and party-less because I am greatly influenced by Consistent Life Ethic (aka–Seamless Garment of Life) where all life issues are seen as intricately connected. Thus to vote pro-life is to take into account all the life issues such as abortion, stem cell research, poverty, health care, education, racism, sexism, genocide, AIDS, environmental issues, war, death penalty and euthanasia. In my estimation I have never seen a pro-life candidate…
Would a larger view of pro-life change anything that you wrote?
Thanks for your excellent commentary, Pastor Redmond. I’m glad to hear that there are African American leaders out there who weren’t afraid to vote their conscience. Call me a single-issue voter if you’d like, but saving the lives of the unborn should be a priority. I just can’t see around this very important issue.
We have to consider that there’s been a conservative pro-life president in office for the past eight years. What has this accomplished toward ending abortion? From a practical standpoint, not all that much–at least, anyone who wants to can still get a government-funded abortion at the Planned Parenthood on the end of my block.
To me, this confirms my suspicion that a political answer to this situation just isn’t going to work. As was the case with Prohibition in the 1920s, political legislation against alcohol didn’t really change anything. But during the Welsh Revival, when thousands of people turned to Jesus, many saloons were forced to out of business because people decided they would rather pray than drink. It’s a matter of the heart, which is a job for Jesus, not the President!
In short, we’d do more good by supporting organizations like Caris Pregnancy Center (http://www.caris.org) than by voting for somebody we hope might change some laws. Change what people want to choose, and the laws will take care of themselves.
Also, excellent points above about voting your conscience and praying for those in authority (verses that Paul and Peter wrote when the leader of the Roman Empire was none other than the rather less than exemplary Nero!)
Your article is disturbing, Reverend. As a minister, do you not find it conflicting to support a candidate who categorizes himself as pro-life, but has other policies and ideologies that can be categorized as anti-life? Sure, he professed he wanted to protect the rights of the unborn, but his stances on issues like war and poverty and health care left the already born to rot and die. It’s one of the oldest tricks in the book… play on the emotions and religious views of the ignorant in order to convince them to hop onboard a bandwagon headed in a direction where the end is not pleasant for the majority of people, those living or those waiting to be born.
So while you hope to live long enough to witness another African American become a candidate for President of the United States of America who is pro-life and pro-righteousness, I wonder whether you have eyes to discern, not only what is righteous and what is unrighteous, but what is true and what is not true. McCain has been so inconsistent over the years, I am surprised that any self-thinking voter could have voted for him with good conscious.
McCain:
Voted against MLK holiday in 1983; now calls that a mistake. (Apr 2008)
Confederate flag on top of capitol was wrong; in front is ok.
Leave gay marriage to the states. (Jan 2007)
Hollywood should voluntarily self-censor sex and violence. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
More death penalty; stricter sentencing. (Jan 2000)
Voted YES on rejecting racial statistics in death penalty appeals. (May 1994)
Voted NO on $52M for “21st century community learning centers”. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted NO on funding student testing instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted NO on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction. (Apr 2001)
You can’t deny the inconsistency in his history. My prayer is that in your long living, you will be able to recognize God’s wisdom in the social and political issues that impact God’s people. As a minister, my prayer for the people you influence is that you will be open enough to fight so that all people – not just some people – will have an opportunity to experience the richness of God’s creation and the bounty of living in His will.
Thank you for your article. I appreciate your stance on Obama and his candidacy. I understand others’ comments about life ethic and such, but I also understand your position. For me, since there are many issues up for consideration during political races, I always try to identify, if I can, a threshold issue. Meaning, one that will have the greatest impact on all the other issues. And for me, how people view life, and particularly life as it relates to the unborn, is a threshold issue. Here’s why. Views regarding the weakest and most defenseless tend to shape views about the stronger and more capable. In other words, if I’m unconcerned, or minimally concerned, about how an unborn child is treated and regarded by society, why would I be concerned about someone who is poor and starving? This is why people’s hearts are callous towards those with disabilities, orphans, etc. One look at just about any magazine or newspaper bears this out. As more and more unborn children are killed, we will continue to value all life less and less. In fact, the partial birth abortions that have been happening for years have now turned into infanticide. Babies that are surviving abortions are left to die. Teenagers are being abandoned at hospitals. This line of reasoning is a tough sell for most people. But as we continue to move towards more barbaric ways of treating people, maybe more eyes will be opened.
Thanks again.
Eric,
Thanks for the post. I think it is difficult for any Black person to say they didn’t vote for Obama and I respect your honesty. In regards to African-Americans I think that it is dangerous if we are solely a voting block and there isn’t a noticable diveristy within.
Also, Chandra,I relate a lot to your comments and apprciate your words.
Speaking on abortion, although legislation did not change it is interesting to note that the abortion rate did drop approximately 8% during the Bush Administration (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-01-16-abortion-rates_N.htm). The issue is complicated and I don’t think that anyone should attack anyone for not voting or voting for a particular candidate beacuse of their views on the legality of abortion. As Chandra suggested human rights are expansive and we must look crtically at the entire picture.
Mr. Redmond, I agree with every word of our commentary. I too had reservations about voting for Mr. Obama, and did not vote for him because of his abortion views as well as his stance on the war in Iraq and his association with questionable persons. I, as you wrote, could not vote for him simply because he is black. Dr King died so that we could be judged for the content of our character not the color of our skin. I sometimes think our people have forgotten this.
As many people stated the abortion issue is a very complex issue and to only vote on that does not get to the real issue. In fact based on the latest data (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.catholics16nov16,0,1894003.story), it is the democratic presidents that do a better job with decreasing the abortion rate here in America. Programs focusing on the poor, uneducated and disenfranchised show a greater impact on abortion rates.
As a community organizer, I also find it disheartening for my Christian brothers and sisters to spend time, money and energy in “so-called” fighting the abortion issue but not spending time in their own communities working the poor, uneducated and disenfranchised. We had several large trucks driving in the area with large posters of aborted babies, stating “A vote for Obama is a vote for abortion”. The cost was around $20k. Do you know how many children $20k can feed?
I agree with Nadia and the others on this!
kstan48, I’m curious to know-what do believe is “the real issue”? To a certain extent, I agree with you that abortion is not a standalone issue. That is why in my work with Black Americans for Life, I work to address certain underlying issues that lead women to abort a child. For example, I’ve created a program for Black college women students that combines personal development, health information, and support networks. And sometimes people do wonder why I’m doing a program like this to deal with abortion in the Black community. It’s because I do understand that there are reasons why it happens. But at the same time, I also include as part of my programs: education on the undeniably devastating affect 14.5 million Black abortions has had on our community; support for women who’ve already had abortions and need help; prayer ministry for neighborhoods with high concentrations of abortions, poverty, etc. But I’m not sure it’s quite accurate to decry people who try to educate the public on what abortion is, and how it affects people. That’s all part of dealing with the issue. By the same token, I wonder how many people who focus on poverty, disenfranchisement, etc., work to help people understand how poverty really happens, and that it often has spiritual roots. For exmaple, the Bible says that if people are thieves and steal, poverty will never leave their house (family). So we all need to make sure we’re being comprehensive in our social justice work. In fact, I’d love it if those called to address poverty, crime, health, and education would form partnerships and coalitions to attack these problems together. I’d love to know others’ thoughts.
Chandra,
I think we agree. Your work with educating black college women is important. I believe education is a good route. My point was not to decry people on the education of abortion however with abortion being such a complex issue, how can anyone craft an effective message with a poster board or a 30 second sound bite?
I do agree with you also that poverty has spiritual roots and I have to admit in my opinion the “black church’ has done a disservice on that front, however I digress.
To put it in simple terms, building relationships, treating people with love and respect (no matter how they treat you) and working to solve problems would much more effective than instead of winning arguments or even the mainstream media. Some of the “pro-life” advocates can be mean spirited and I have a hard time seeing their “god” in their actions. I know that is the extreme (as with any issue) however to put a spiritual label on it I just do not agree with.
If a person says there a christian, then they vote for Obama because he is black… They are racist, and a hypocrite…
I have been reformed all of my adult life basically, a person of color and conservative on social issues. I however cannot deny the lack of taking a thorough lens and looking completely at the evangelical reformed church. My husband is on staff at a rather large congregation, one of 4 pastors of color (the remainder white)on a large pastoral staff (10+ pastors) and during our journey and living life and raising children predominately within white evangelical reformed culture I do have one question? Does this standard apply to our white brothers and sisters in their formation of their theology and belief systems concerning ethnocentrism that they have formed and currently are practicing within the church? Because from where I have been sitting for these past 20+ years the statement that was quoted from Anthony Carter’s book seemingly not only reflects a weakness within our community but to a greater extent the white reformed and in particularly evangelical community at large. While I am proud that we have a first in this country of a president of color I mostly do not agree with his social policies. But I would be blind to excuse the very reason why this man has been voted into office in the first place. The main reason being God Himself wanted him there(my theology is apparent). Secondly it does not take a scholar of American church history, in particular Evangelical church history to figure out the church as a whole has become impotent and marginalized and why. Our history of discrimination and apathy to the lack of justice to people groups of color cannot be dismissed any longer. The White moderate/ liberal American community, who helped propel him to the office did not want to listen to a group that has a past rife with right-wing fundamentalist groups (some of which make their intolerance of peoples of color known with little censure from mainstream Evangelicals), a history of the staunch refusal to embrace diverse ethnic groups and at times has shown itself to be borderline on civil rights and equities for those groups (desegregation of public schools). The church is the one institution that has the answers and is supposed to be a place of reconciliation, unity, justice and peace but this last election showed us we were anything but that. I was embarrassed and ashamed of the evil that was allowed by members of the church. The racial expletives, tee-shirt bearing or insinuating Obama was a monkey, that he we not “American” enough. Shouting to kill him, as well as telling church members if they voted for Obama, they were going to hell. These same people make up (more than we would like to admit)some of our pastors, elders, deacons and leaders within the evangelical church and those who did not join and if they sat quietly by were guilty of giving tacit approval by their lack of admonishment to do otherwise. There is a long history of inequities and racial and ethnic discrimination within the Evangelical American church. From the KKK having itself rooted within the Southern Baptists to the denial of people of color to seminaries and mission training centers to some of our most celebrated evangelists promoting and in some cases introducing slavery as “God’s will”. I will not even mention the horrible doctrinal fallacy of the “curse of Ham”, which the remnants of this are still visible to people of color this day. There is not one sin that does not reap consequences, not one and just as abortion grieves the Father’s heart, so does the lack of justice, hate and apathy towards the verbal, institutional and individual acts of hatred towards people of color and the last time I checked that kind of hatred does not chose between the unborn and the living, it just sadly is. And while being reformed and a belief system based upon God’s sovereignty, His sovereignty in no way negates who He is and His laws and the reaping for us when we choose to break or not follow His ways, it only solidifies it. The greatest commandment is stated as being “Loving God with all your heart, mind and soul and the next is loving your brother, Father,make us one as you are one.” The Evangelical church really needs to take a long hard look at itself in the mirror, we are not without blood on our hands, we have withheld justice, we have been judgmental and yes, at times even cruel. We have hated(some secretly, some not so)our brothers and sisters and we have forwarded what has made us comfortable without truly taking steps to confront the demons in our own closet. I am not in any way suggesting these are the only areas where we have been duly culpable, just in my opinion in terms to the article. Again, sin does not happen in a vacuum whether it be abortion or standing up for those both living and unborn who cannot speak for themselves or even the redefining of marriage outside of a Biblical worldview. Neither man was just and both in my opinion lacked the moral character to lead a nation, in terms of what this nation and even more importantly what the church deserves, whether McCain or Obama I believe we truly ended up with much better than we deserve.
Eric: I can think of no other issue which should be a defining issue as to whom to vote for than the sanctity of life. I had Barbara McKulski send me a letter stating that although she saw my point in my correspondence with her on this issue that she disagrees. I have had the abortion conversation with freinds and family through the years and their point is always, well why should anyone bring a child into the world into poverty, or drug addicted parents or a teen mother. I can stand on my own with them and with God, as my family has provided a safe haven as foster parents in P.G. county for 10 years to 25 foster children. I am the mother to 7 and adopted 3. God never said life would be easy, but I believe that it is HIS call, who is born and who dies. As Christians it is our duty to take care of those less fortunate. Having said that, Obama said EXACTLY what he would do if elected president. The problem is that nobody was listening.They didn’t have a clue what “fundamentally changing America” meant. Moreover, the only thing people heard was “Hope & Change”. Whatever that meant. I am a white conservative female, who would love to see Allen West run for president. I like his conservative, family values and his vision for the future of our country. I am learning as is everyone else about Herman Cain. He’s an articulate, straight shooter, pro business candidate. I have been called racist on many ocassions because I do not agree with anything Obama stands for. To disagree with his policies is not racist, but that doesn’t matter to people who think I am against the color of his skin. I applaud your convictions, and the strength for you to take such a public stand for what you know is right. Rasism is the ONLY thing that left leaning people have to sling at us. It’s hurtful to be considered a racist, but I know, as do you that just isn’t so. Keep fighting the good fight, you have God on your side. You can’t lose, by standing up for the precious little lives, you may save by speaking up.
While McCain was a terrible choice for a candidate (the GOP chose him b/c they knew they weren’t gonna win, to give him a chance), and whatever your thoughts on Palin, they are both PRO-LIFE! If ONLY on that issue you voted, as black people, you’d be voting in your own self-interest. Blacks make up about 13% of the American population, yet have 35% of all abortions. 14 MILLION black babies have been killed since Roe v. Wade. (I won’t mention the facts about the 50% dropout rate, the 70% unwed mother rate, or the 13% welfare recipiency rate – all over the last 40 years of being aligned with the Democratic Party (many of which are white racist liberals creating entitlements/government dependency to ensure the black vote). No, if you ONLY voted on the issue of abortion, and for the pro-life candidate, you’d be stating that the black lives lost to abortion MATTER! Democrats EXPECT the black vote…what does that tell you? Think about how black conservatives are maligned…often by other blacks…when all they are saying is that it is the INDIVIDUAL that counts, not the GROUP. As slaves, blacks were NOT individuals, they were part of a GROUP, who didn’t ‘matter’. You may not agree with what I’ve said, but if you’re WILLING to take time to EXAMINE some of the TRUTHS about the Democratic Party (THEY were the party of the Klan, THEY voted AGAINST Civil Rights Legislation, KKK Grand Dragon Robert Byrd was what? Yep, a DEMOCRAT!, and it goes on and on) Also, what’s more ‘racist’ than saying that black people need ‘handouts’ and ‘lower standards’? Challenge the status quo and open your mind…it may not change, but you vote, at least you’ll REALLY know why! God Bless.
p.s., this comment is directed not at you Eric, but at those who are ‘commenting’.