Friday, October 17, 2003
FYI, I reside in California and am a California native. The recent recall of Gov. Gray Davis generated quite a bit of controversy between Christians regarding their options on the Republican ticket. Nearly every Christian I spoke with (and, interestingly enough, many non-Christians) felt that Tom McClintock was the more qualified candidate (vs. Arnold). Yet it was clear that McClintock was not only a distant third in the polls, his presence in the race would potentially prevent Arnold from securing the win. Herein was the issue between Christians: should I vote pragmatically (indeed, "compromising our beliefs" as I was told) for Arnold, or should we vote our conscience for McClintock. I opted for Arnie. I think that Christians need to understand that we are called to make an impact on society and not to simply make a statement. Standing firmly for one's beliefs is admirable, but if the result is a greater evil than voting pragmatically, what have we gained? (except the good feeling that we didn't compromise our beliefs). Anyway, the election is over and, as it turned out, McClintock's portion of the votes cast did not prevent Arnold from winning. For an interesting rundown on whether Christians should vote to make a statement or vote to make an impact, please visit the Stand to Reason website and checkout their September 28th broadcast.