"…then I'm not voting."

I’ve been told this.  As we approach the 2010 elections, I’m hearing this from some who say they’re on the side of freedom:  “If my favorite candidate doesn’t make it on the ballot in November, then I’m not voting.”  Or worse, they’ve even said they will vote for the liberal candidate. 

Their arguments seem to be either: (1) based on personal moral issue-based conviction, or (2) about allowing their party to fail, so they can send a clear message to “shape up.”  I honestly try to understand all points of view, but at this time in our history it is a stretch that I just can’t and won’t reach. 

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again:  Unless Jesus is on the ballot, we are always voting for the lesser of two evils.  Being human, there is no perfect candidate… anyone we elect will eventually fail us.  Even our favorites.  Which is why we stay actively engaged and keep them all accountable after election day.  

Freedom is hanging in the balance, and it’s tipping to the side of defeat… it won’t take much to topple it all the way over to a crushing demise.  From where it hangs now, it will take a HUGE continued effort and sacrifice to bring it back to the side of victory and keep it there. 

So I ask:  If freedom is purposely allowed to fall into defeat, how realistic is it that we will get it back?  Does history support this “strategy?”  If our founding fathers “stayed home” during the battle against tyranny… would freedom have had victory?

As for me:  I’m voting.

2 Responses to "…then I'm not voting."

  1. Rick February 8, 2010 at 6:17 pm #

    I did have one issue during the last election where, out of conscience, I could not vote for either person on the ticket – the ill-fated HD17 race. Turns out, there were two candidates on the bill that were both pro-choice in the general election. The Democrat, Dennis Apuan, made no bones about his position. Kit Roupe, however, noted her pro-choice position was due to the fact that she felt the government had no right to interfere in the abortion decision.

    Thing is, there are certain things that government is supposed to do, and one of those is protect life. Roupe does not believe in this, but rather, has adopted the libertarian view that it’s the choice of the mother that is not subject to government input. I vehemently disagreed with her position and as such, was forced to withhold my vote for one overwhelming reason – if I used my vote to elect a pro-choice candidate, I would be responsible to God for that choice. So, I abstained from the vote. And there was no write in option.

    Voting is a fundamental liberty that we exercise at our discretion, but voting for someone overly wrong can have greater consequences then that of seeing one person or another get into office. In most cases, we should vote, but there are times when abstaining that vote is necessary and right. Will it prevent a person from getting into office? No. But I’m personally not willing to be responsible for actively electing a pro-choice candidate into office.

    Remember, the fundamental liberties of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are, really, an ordered list. Few things override the right to liberty and freedom – one of those things is the right to life.


  2. Snaggle-Tooth Jones February 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm #

    “Of two evils, choose neither.” C.H. Spurgeon

    As for the Founding Fathers, if they were alive today I’m quite sure they’d be recommending an altogether different course of action than electing the “lesser of two evils” to political office. As blogger Mike Vanderboegh over at the Sipsey Street Irregular notes, correctly I believe,

    “As comfortable and deeply ingrained as they are in all Americans, the conventional political tactics of speech-making, letter-writing and electioneering have brought us to this precipice of defeat. The guttering flame of the Founders’ Republic is within one stiff breeze of going out forever. Both political parties have conspired through malice or incompetence to bring us to this state, yet still people look in vain to the system of party politics for salvation. The Founders were not so stupid as to place all their hopes on a corrupt system.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *