Why I'm a Democrat
A friend of mine has inspired me to write more, so I thought I'd start with an innocent, non-controversial topic such as politics.
Since I've become a born-again, evangelical Christian, there have been many people at my church who have asked me why I am -- and remain -- a loyal Democrat. What follows is the number one reason. There are several others, and I may explore them in later blogs, but for now, this is what is on my heart.
I care deeply about the poor.
In my profile, there is a Biblical passage, Matthew 25:44-46. I believe in those verses with all of my heart. How we, as Christians, treat the poor is a direct reflection of Christ's love and compassion. It is a sign of fruitfulness, and provides some evidence as to whether or not we are actually Christians, as opposed to mere claimants. As Christians, we have an absolute duty and obligation to help the least among us. There are no restrictions on, or qualifications to, that duty.
Some of my fellow brothers and sisters have claimed that the obligation to help the poor rises only to the level of personal conviction, and is not a government issue. I find such claims objectionable only to the extent that these same brothers and sisters might also claim that opposition to abortion and gay marriage somehow becomes a government issue, as opposed to a mere personal conviction.
There are many, many self-professing Christians in the Republican leadership. I find it hypocritical -- Pharisaical, really -- when these self-professing Christian Republicans rail against abortion and gay marriage with conveniently-timed (e.g. shortly before an election, or when the President's poll numbers are down) rants, legislation and referenda, even while they block or defeat minimum-wage legislation at a time when the inflation-adjusted minimum wage is at a fifty-year low.
If a politician professes to be a Christian, his or her PERSONAL duty to help the poor is not magically transformed into a "government issue" simply by virtue of his or her election to high office. Indeed, I would argue that the duty actually becomes even greater, simply because the politician has a much greater power and ability to affect the world. Indeed, the concept of having greater accountability to God based on one's own level of giftedness and/or resources should not be foreign to the vast majority of my Christian friends.
Yet under the Republican party -- which controls both branches of Congress, the Presidency/executive branch, and I would also argue the courts -- we see a lot of lip service (when it suits their political calculations, anyway) to so-called "moral" issues such as abortion and gay marriage, even though the reality of those issues is much more complicated, with opinions being shaped by much more than government, and with the potential for harming our witness to non-Christians being much, much, much greater than when we try to help the poor.
Meanwhile, however, we see a lot of very concrete actions by the Republican leadership, MUCH more than mere lip service, that result in tax cuts for the rich, benefit cuts for the poor, and the stonewalling of basic minimum wage increases. This is, to be blunt, completely unacceptable and completely un-Christian.
Another line of argument I have seen is founded upon 2 Thessalonians 3:10(b), which states: "if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either." The first problem with this line of argument is that the context of the passage makes it very, very clear that the exhortation is specifically directed toward Christians. The verse does nothing to restrict or qualify our Matthew 25:44-46 duty to help the poor, many of whom will be non-Christians. As an aside, this verse also has no application to an increase in the minimum wage, which by definition only applies to those people who are actually working.
The second problem with this line of argument is that despite rhetoric often propagated by the Republican leadership that paints recipients of public assistance as shiftless, lazy, and good-for-nothing, the simple facts are completely to the contrary. Here is a website -- a Republican-controlled government website, and not a "liberal organization" or advocacy group website -- that explodes this primarily Republican myth.
http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/welfare.html
Here is a key paragraph.
"In the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS), the average annual household income for the total population was $30,824, compared to $10,138 for Aid to Families with Dependent Children or public assistance recipients, and $9,732 for food stamp recipients."
No one is on welfare to get rich, and very few are on welfare because they prefer living a dramatically poor lifestyle to working. The largest welfare programs in the United States are the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (formerly Aid to Families with Dependent Children) and food stamps programs! These are not boondoggles, they are critical safety net systems that help keep people alive.
Here is an excerpt from another Republican-controlled government report:
"The study results show that more than 80 percent of the respondents who were still off of food stamps were either working or living with an employed adult. Employment rates were much higher for Blacks than for Whites. More than 80 percent of the respondents who were working and still off of food stamps were working at least 30 hours per week. Among the unemployed who were still off food stamps, the most common reason for not working was the health condition of the respondent."
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/efan03003/
The above study continues to confirm that recipients of government assistance are generally extremely poor, and most often single mothers, elderly, sick or disabled. Many of these people have few or no options. Compare these folks with our duty described in James 1:27: "Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world." We must not let the worldly desire to, for example, pay fewer taxes (see Mark 12:17 and Matthew 22:21 on Christians' duty to pay taxes), influence our duty to help orphans, widows and other vulnerable members of society. And this brings me to Matthew 25:44-46.
"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Our duty is clear and unconditional. And those politicians who claim to be Christian are not displaying any fruit at all when they help rich individuals and even worse, soulless corporations, at the expense of the poor. Quite the contrary, in fact.
I believe these politicians will have much to answer for in the day of judgment.
Since I've become a born-again, evangelical Christian, there have been many people at my church who have asked me why I am -- and remain -- a loyal Democrat. What follows is the number one reason. There are several others, and I may explore them in later blogs, but for now, this is what is on my heart.
I care deeply about the poor.
In my profile, there is a Biblical passage, Matthew 25:44-46. I believe in those verses with all of my heart. How we, as Christians, treat the poor is a direct reflection of Christ's love and compassion. It is a sign of fruitfulness, and provides some evidence as to whether or not we are actually Christians, as opposed to mere claimants. As Christians, we have an absolute duty and obligation to help the least among us. There are no restrictions on, or qualifications to, that duty.
Some of my fellow brothers and sisters have claimed that the obligation to help the poor rises only to the level of personal conviction, and is not a government issue. I find such claims objectionable only to the extent that these same brothers and sisters might also claim that opposition to abortion and gay marriage somehow becomes a government issue, as opposed to a mere personal conviction.
There are many, many self-professing Christians in the Republican leadership. I find it hypocritical -- Pharisaical, really -- when these self-professing Christian Republicans rail against abortion and gay marriage with conveniently-timed (e.g. shortly before an election, or when the President's poll numbers are down) rants, legislation and referenda, even while they block or defeat minimum-wage legislation at a time when the inflation-adjusted minimum wage is at a fifty-year low.
If a politician professes to be a Christian, his or her PERSONAL duty to help the poor is not magically transformed into a "government issue" simply by virtue of his or her election to high office. Indeed, I would argue that the duty actually becomes even greater, simply because the politician has a much greater power and ability to affect the world. Indeed, the concept of having greater accountability to God based on one's own level of giftedness and/or resources should not be foreign to the vast majority of my Christian friends.
Yet under the Republican party -- which controls both branches of Congress, the Presidency/executive branch, and I would also argue the courts -- we see a lot of lip service (when it suits their political calculations, anyway) to so-called "moral" issues such as abortion and gay marriage, even though the reality of those issues is much more complicated, with opinions being shaped by much more than government, and with the potential for harming our witness to non-Christians being much, much, much greater than when we try to help the poor.
Meanwhile, however, we see a lot of very concrete actions by the Republican leadership, MUCH more than mere lip service, that result in tax cuts for the rich, benefit cuts for the poor, and the stonewalling of basic minimum wage increases. This is, to be blunt, completely unacceptable and completely un-Christian.
Another line of argument I have seen is founded upon 2 Thessalonians 3:10(b), which states: "if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either." The first problem with this line of argument is that the context of the passage makes it very, very clear that the exhortation is specifically directed toward Christians. The verse does nothing to restrict or qualify our Matthew 25:44-46 duty to help the poor, many of whom will be non-Christians. As an aside, this verse also has no application to an increase in the minimum wage, which by definition only applies to those people who are actually working.
The second problem with this line of argument is that despite rhetoric often propagated by the Republican leadership that paints recipients of public assistance as shiftless, lazy, and good-for-nothing, the simple facts are completely to the contrary. Here is a website -- a Republican-controlled government website, and not a "liberal organization" or advocacy group website -- that explodes this primarily Republican myth.
http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/welfare.html
Here is a key paragraph.
"In the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS), the average annual household income for the total population was $30,824, compared to $10,138 for Aid to Families with Dependent Children or public assistance recipients, and $9,732 for food stamp recipients."
No one is on welfare to get rich, and very few are on welfare because they prefer living a dramatically poor lifestyle to working. The largest welfare programs in the United States are the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (formerly Aid to Families with Dependent Children) and food stamps programs! These are not boondoggles, they are critical safety net systems that help keep people alive.
Here is an excerpt from another Republican-controlled government report:
"The study results show that more than 80 percent of the respondents who were still off of food stamps were either working or living with an employed adult. Employment rates were much higher for Blacks than for Whites. More than 80 percent of the respondents who were working and still off of food stamps were working at least 30 hours per week. Among the unemployed who were still off food stamps, the most common reason for not working was the health condition of the respondent."
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/efan03003/
The above study continues to confirm that recipients of government assistance are generally extremely poor, and most often single mothers, elderly, sick or disabled. Many of these people have few or no options. Compare these folks with our duty described in James 1:27: "Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world." We must not let the worldly desire to, for example, pay fewer taxes (see Mark 12:17 and Matthew 22:21 on Christians' duty to pay taxes), influence our duty to help orphans, widows and other vulnerable members of society. And this brings me to Matthew 25:44-46.
"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Our duty is clear and unconditional. And those politicians who claim to be Christian are not displaying any fruit at all when they help rich individuals and even worse, soulless corporations, at the expense of the poor. Quite the contrary, in fact.
I believe these politicians will have much to answer for in the day of judgment.
posted by Dennis | 11:03 PM
1 Comments:
Very well said, all of it. I would go even farther and say you cannot be a conservative and follow Christ's teachings at the same time. Conservatives, as far as I can tell, are motivated only by fear or greed — and neither of those are exactly Christian virtues. First, you cannot serve God and Mammon.
Second, the phrase "fear not" appears 175 times in the KJV, and conservatives seem to fear just about everything that isn't like themselves: gays, other races, Muslims, Jews, "secular humanists" (whatever that is), the homeless, the ACLU, on and on.
There is also our responsibility toward the world we live in, to take care of it until the day of His return. Perhaps we were given "dominion" over the earth (Gen. 1:28-29), but that certainly doesn't mean that God gave us the earth to mistreat and destroy as we pleased. Even of the parable of the talents (Matt. 25:14-27) wasn't in the Bible, to remind us that we are to use God's gifts to bear more fruit, common sense should tell the neo-Pharisees that we're not to foul our own nests.
I'm glad to see you posting again.
Post a Comment
<< Home