Should a Christian support the Democratic Party?

[posthuman]

That's what I don't get, everybody hates the way things are but they vote for more of the same every. single. time. Isn't that the very definition of insanity?

congress had single-digit approval during the Obama presidency.
and then 97% of them got re-elected.

what.
the.
expletive.


voter ignorance/stupidity, extreme susceptibility to partisan propaganda, and profoundly short American attention span have a lot to do with it, IMO.

and so does gerrymandering.
((statistically & geographically rigging voting districts so that even though a majority of voters lean in one direction, a majority of districts will go in the opposite direction))

gerrymandering is something Obama has said he is going to focus a lot of his efforts at addressing now that he is out of office, and i really admire him for that.

 

[posthuman]

a lot of people defend partisan support of the R party by defining the D party as "evil" and justifying their partisanship as their only legitimate response to "evil"

so if the R party is evil, is the same response - supporting the D party - justifiable in the same way?

"no," many will say. "the D is evil so we can by no means support it" - ignoring the evil of the R.

it should be immediately obvious then that there are these choices of action:

support one evil over another
abstain from supporting either evil

there is some percentage of voting population that perceives either R or D as evil and the other not at all evil, so they fall into the first camp. there is some percentage that perceives evil in both and chooses to overlook the evil of one and condemn the evil of the other and also falls into the first camp. another percentage denies the existence of evil and also falls into this camp.

in America a great percentage of the eligible voting population does not vote. some portion of this is apathy and/or issues with access. some ((i think, a majority)) of this abstaining subpopulation does not vote because they perceive all the options as evil and for this reason refuse to take part with any of them.


i've written in terms of 2 parties specifically, but i think a proof by induction on the parties establishes these things for 3 or more.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

a lot of people defend partisan support of the R party by defining the D party as "evil" and justifying their partisanship as their only legitimate response to "evil"

so if the R party is evil, is the same response - supporting the D party - justifiable in the same way?

"no," many will say. "the D is evil so we can by no means support it" - ignoring the evil of the R.

it should be immediately obvious then that there are these choices of action:

support one evil over another
abstain from supporting either evil

there is some percentage of voting population that perceives either R or D as evil and the other not at all evil, so they fall into the first camp. there is some percentage that perceives evil in both and chooses to overlook the evil of one and condemn the evil of the other and also falls into the first camp. another percentage denies the existence of evil and also falls into this camp.

in America a great percentage of the eligible voting population does not vote. some portion of this is apathy and/or issues with access. some ((i think, a majority)) of this abstaining subpopulation does not vote because they perceive all the options as evil and for this reason refuse to take part with any of them.


i've written in terms of 2 parties specifically, but i think a proof by induction on the parties establishes these things for 3 or more.

I think you are on to something there.
Now I only know what I hear in the media about US politics, but I know from our own politicians that sometimes you just want to stick your head in the sand and forget all about the election

 

[RickyZ]

congress had single-digit approval during the Obama presidency.
and then 97% of them got re-elected.

Exactly. I forget who said this, but the old phrase "you get the government you deserve" hits it on the head.

In Los Angeles, a bond was put on the ballot to raise a billion dollars to build new schools. It of course passed, and the school board then decided that instead of new schools they would spend the money buying ipads for all the school children. And of course these ipads came with defects that had them pulled out of service less than a year after purchasing. And the contract with Apple said there would be no refunds. Do you think any of these school board members were held to account for what was a blatant theft of funds? Heck no. Not only did they get re-elected, but the voters, already on the hook to repay a billion dollars over the next 30 years for stuff that didn't even last one year, passed another school construction bond.

I think before you vote you should have to pass an test to prove you are informed on the issues and not just voting based on sound bites. It could be as simple as " The United States is the richest country on earth, true or false". If you answer true, you don't get to vote, because you are obviously uninformed.

 

[RickyZ]

I think you are on to something there.
Now I only know what I hear in the media about US politics, but I know from our own politicians that sometimes you just want to stick your head in the sand and forget all about the election

When you stick your head into the voting booth, vote for an obscure candidate. Sure they have no chance of winning, but if enough people start doing it someone will take notice and finally offer up a viable 3rd party candidate. But as long as people vote for the two evils because they think a third party cannot win, they will be right.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

When you stick your head into the voting booth, vote for an obscure candidate. Sure they have no chance of winning, but if enough people start doing it someone will take notice and finally offer up a viable 3rd party candidate. But as long as people vote for the two evils because they think a third party cannot win, they will be right.

Yeah, I tend to do that.
We have several parties, many of them too small to form a government on their own (so they end up in coalitions).

 

[Huckleberry]

I think before you vote you should have to pass an test to prove you
are informed on the issues and not just voting based on sound bites.

Only married couples (man/woman) who own property
should have a vote, and then only one vote per couple.

 

[SparkleEyes]

It is the democrat party, not the democratic party.

 

[posthuman]

It is the democrat party, not the democratic party.

Lol is it the 'republic party' too then, not the republican party?

Or are you saying that only the republican party is democratic?

 

[Zen]

How many people can you name that are leftists who are saved?

Leftism = liberalism = communism = satanism.

Go ahead and mock me if you insist.

 

[FranC]

I don't believe it's biblical to support any party that is adverse to biblical teaching.

The Democratic party believes in everything I do not.
So I'd never vote for anyone in that party.

A person should make up their mind what they believe on a moral level, and then vote accrodingly.
Many vote for a candidate that they like and do not even know what they stand for.

All parties have their problems. It's human nature to have differing opinions, but I feel the Republican party is more in line with my beliefs.

For instance, I truly don't undersand how any Christian could have voted for Hillary.

 

[JaumeJ]

It is not Biblical to support any political party while we are citizens of the Kingdom of God with Jesus our King.

Why would any subject of the King become involved in affairs of this age other than seeking to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ? After all the Gospel is His platforn.......

I don't believe it's biblical to support any party that is adverse to biblical teaching.

The Democratic party believes in everything I do not.
So I'd never vote for anyone in that party.

A person should make up their mind what they believe on a moral level, and then vote accrodingly.
Many vote for a candidate that they like and do not even know what they stand for.

All parties have their problems. It's human nature to have differing opinions, but I feel the Republican party is more in line with my beliefs.

For instance, I truly don't undersand how any Christian could have voted for Hillary.

 

[FranC]

It is not Biblical to support any political party while we are citizens of the Kingdom of God with Jesus our King.

Why would any subject of the King become involved in affairs of this age other than seeking to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ? After all the Gospel is His platforn.......

I understand you. I know another poster that believes very strongly in your same view.

Two comments:
1.

The N.T. does preach that we are to obey our governing force.
Paul said it and Jesus said it.
Romans 13:1-7 Do these verses not tell us to obey our government?

Mathew 22:17-21
Mathew 22:21

Did Jesus not say to pay our due taxes and to render unto Caeser what is Caeser's ?



2.
The other point I'd like to make is that it would be nice if we could preach the gospel and get everyone to be a part of the Kingdom. I do believe this was Jesus' prime reason and not for salvation as we understand it today. I do believe He died as an atonement for sin.

But we still have to live in THIS world. This world is the world of satan. HE is the prince of the air and has power here.
So we need to deal with that power and fight it as much as possible.
Ephesians 6:12 We fight against principalities, the world forces of this darkness.

We should have fought harder against abortion, gay marriage, the word Jesus being said in films as a curse word, pornography left on magazine racks for all our children to see, and anything else that is against God's moral values. Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today ---

All evil needs to flourish
Is for good to do nothing...

 

[WineRose]

Idk about that, but you know what I support?!

 

[JaumeJ]

When Paul was taken prisoner in Jerusalem he back talked to his interogator.. He was told not to be insolent to the High Priest.

When Paul heard this, Paul immediately apologized. You se although it was obvious the interagator was a man in authority, it was unknown to Paul that the man was the year's High Priest. The law was that one should honor ne's officials.

This law applied to Israel, and its people in power were the priestood and the High Priest.

Paul said he would never have spoken so had heknown hi interragator was the High Priest, yet he did thinking it was a mere man in some form of authority.

You and I should always pray for the souls of our leaders, but never ae we told to pray for any sinful activity.

When you can shoew me how honest politicians are, I will pray for what they do, but until then I do not respect any man for his politics; I do hower pray for the souls of all, as we are to do.

Also, please do not throw out the law from unless you are a lwayer......Are you under the law¿

I do pray for the blessings always of the High Priest, Jesus christ all exhalted and pure,a men.

I understand you. I know another poster that believes very strongly in your same view.

Two comments:
1.

The N.T. does preach that we are to obey our governing force.
Paul said it and Jesus said it.
Romans 13:1-7 Do these verses not tell us to obey our government?

Mathew 22:17-21
Mathew 22:21

Did Jesus not say to pay our due taxes and to render unto Caeser what is Caeser's ?



2.
The other point I'd like to make is that it would be nice if we could preach the gospel and get everyone to be a part of the Kingdom. I do believe this was Jesus' prime reason and not for salvation as we understand it today. I do believe He died as an atonement for sin.

But we still have to live in THIS world. This world is the world of satan. HE is the prince of the air and has power here.
So we need to deal with that power and fight it as much as possible.
Ephesians 6:12 We fight against principalities, the world forces of this darkness.

We should have fought harder against abortion, gay marriage, the word Jesus being said in films as a curse word, pornography left on magazine racks for all our children to see, and anything else that is against God's moral values. Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today ---

All evil needs to flourish
Is for good to do nothing...

 

[JaumeJ]

I should also we are taught to be in the world but not of it.

 

[FranC]

When Paul was taken prisoner in Jerusalem he back talked to his interogator.. He was told not to be insolent to the High Priest.

When Paul heard this, Paul immediately apologized. You se although it was obvious the interagator was a man in authority, it was unknown to Paul that the man was the year's High Priest. The law was that one should honor ne's officials.

This law applied to Israel, and its people in power were the priestood and the High Priest.

Paul said he would never have spoken so had heknown hi interragator was the High Priest, yet he did thinking it was a mere man in some form of authority.

You and I should always pray for the souls of our leaders, but never ae we told to pray for any sinful activity.

When you can shoew me how honest politicians are, I will pray for what they do, but until then I do not respect any man for his politics; I do hower pray for the souls of all, as we are to do.

Also, please do not throw out the law from unless you are a lwayer......Are you under the law¿ I do pray for the blessings always of the High Priest, Jesus christ all exhalted and pure,a men.

Your next post is saying what I am saying:
We ARE IN THE WORLD, but we are not OF THE WORLD.
We still have to live in it.
Our govt has a lot to do with how we live in it.

Don't you think it was better years ago when i wasn't legal for two men to get married?
And adopt children?

Are we willing to do nothing about this because we're of the Kingdom?

I don't uderstand what you mean by these two sentences:


You and I should always pray for the souls of our leaders, but never ae we told to pray for any sinful activity.


Also, please do not throw out the law from unless you are a lwayer......Are you under the law¿

 

[JaumeJ]

With the teaching of being in the world but not of it, it does say we would have to leave this world not to be part of it.

I know where we are in what is called time, that is I know whee i am, the time lefft of this age does not allow for delaying Christ's works by ignoring His Word in favor of pursuing political endeavor, especially knowing politicians are in charge of what is corrupt and corrupting more daily.

After the fire next time, the true stance will be held by all under Jesus christ in the living Kingdom, no longer allied to decay

You continue in your good works of politics.

My true desire is for the salvation of allsouls, and anyone can attest, the work involved for this goal simply cannot be relaxed for something as futile and woldly as man's politics...... Jesus Christ has nothing to do with Herod nor with Caesar. His way is not the way of any earthly politician or royalty.

 

[RickyZ]

So which is worse, the democrats who openly abhor Godliness, or the republicans who claim to be 'christian' but by their actions prove themselves to be liars? At least the Dems are open and up front about where they stand. I personally think a wolf in sheep's clothing is worse than a wolf that openly shows he's a wolf.

And again, I say throw them BOTH out.

 

[RedeemedGift]

Yup. We even have a Labour party like you guys do (though I don't know enough about UK politics to know what they actually do ..... I just know all our politicians lie, and assume all other politicians do as well )

Well, our current Labour party is headed by a Marxist, who has a certain taste for terrorists and anti-semites.

What would a politician say if they weren't able to lie? Lol, granted some places are much worse than others when it comes to corrupt politicians.