Shame on the (neo-)conservative evangelical establishment

Every life is sacred.

That’s what most “orthodox” evangelicals will tell you. That’s why the evangelical establishment is willing to back any political candidate who promises that he or she is “pro-life.” It seems to me, however, that by choosing leaders by this relatively narrow test of character, we often make the wrong choice. We’ve duped ourselves into believing that it’s OK to choose the “lesser evil” as long as at least our most important political appetites are sated.

I generally agreed with this notion, until I really started thinking about the ramifications. We’re given relatively few choices when it comes to choosing our leaders in this country, and recently (at least for the past 30 years or so) the choices have (often) included two proponents of big-government: a welfare statist, or a military statist.

This election is no different. On the one hand, we have a candidate who wants to nationalize health care, among other “entitlements;” on the other hand, we have a candidate who’s all for expanding the United States’ military presence around the world. Given their voting records and comments over the past month or so, both candidates are also in favor of expanding the Federal government’s role in the economy.

I was interested to learn that the Constitution Party’s candidate for president is a graduate of my alma mater, yet despite his political, economic, and social views being in line with many of mine, and, I would assume, many of my evangelical brothers and sisters, I haven’t heard a word about this candidate through traditional evangelical “channels.”

I pondered this, and realized that the reason for the hush regarding someone who will stand up for what is right (not only in the eyes of the Lord, but also in terms of common sense), was that the present-day evangelical establishment is all but married to neo-conservative Republicanism. Exactly why this is, I don’t know. But, as I thought about it, I realized that whatever the reasons, I think we’ve taken a wrong turn in choosing our political allies.

If every life is sacred, that’s all well and good when we’re talking about unborn babies, the elderly, and those who are unable to care for themselves. But here’s the disconnect that I see: what about the lives that end at the hands of the U.S. military overseas as they “police the world?” What about the life that ends as a result of the Federal justice system determining that that life is best put to an end because it’s a “menace to society?”

Please don’t get me wrong, the U.S. should use its military to defend its borders and to protect itself from overseas threats, but sending troops–standing armies–to all points of the globe to “protect America’s interests,” or because some entangling supra-national organization decides we should, is not the same thing. Also, although I believe that the criminal justice system is broken (and the Federal system terminally so), I still think there is a place for such a system in our society.

My urgent plea to my evangelical brothers and sisters is to carefully research and pray about who you choose to lead us.

The lesser evil is still evil. Vote for the “right” person. Don’t let religious leaders or society as a whole pigeon-hole you and make you think that you won’t have a voice if you do the right thing.