[Editor: We know anti-Trump Christians are having a struggle over this election.  Some are even contemplating throwing their weight and money behind the Libertarian, the team with a Democrat former Governor from Massachusetts as the VP.  Libertarians of today are, like all other political parties, not the party they started as but many have moved to just this side of anarchy.  They are divided like the two major political parties.  So that is not really a viable option.  Take a look at this article start to finish and see if it makes sense to you.]

Some of my Christian friends tell me they can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump because, when faced with a choice between “the lesser of two evils,” the morally right thing is to choose neither one. They recommend voting for a third-party or write-in candidate. 

As a professor who has taught Christian ethics for 39 years, I think their analysis is incorrect. Now that Trump has won the GOP nomination, I think voting for Trump is a morally good choice. 

American citizens need patience with each other in this difficult political season. Close friends are inevitably going to make different decisions about the election. We still need to respect each other and thank God that we live in a democracy with freedom to differ about politics. And we need to keep talking with each other – because democracies function best when thoughtful citizens can calmly and patiently dialog about the reasons for their differences. This is my contribution to that discussion. 

A good candidate with flaws

I do not think that voting for Donald Trump is a morally evil choice because there is nothing morally wrong with voting for a flawed candidate if you think he will do more good for the nation than his opponent. In fact, it is the morally right thing to do. 

I did not support Trump in the primary season. I even spoke against him at a pastors’ conference in February. But now I plan to vote for him. I do not think it is right to call him an “evil candidate.” I think rather he is a good candidate with flaws.

He is egotistical, bombastic, and brash. He often lacks nuance in his statements. Sometimes he blurts out mistaken ideas (such as bombing the families of terrorists) that he later must abandon. He insults people. He can be vindictive when people attack him. He has been slow to disown and rebuke the wrongful words and actions of some angry fringe supporters. He has been married three times and claims to have been unfaithful in his marriages. These are certainly flaws, but I don’t think they are disqualifying flaws in this election.

On the other hand, I think some of the accusations hurled against him are unjustified. His many years of business conduct show that he is not racist or anti-(legal) immigrant or anti-Semitic or misogynistic – I think these are unjust magnifications by a hostile press exaggerating some careless statements he has made.

Seek the good of the nation

Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (Jeremiah 29:7)

[emphasis added above]

Read more on Townhall by Wayne Gruden because either Hillary or Trump WILL be the next president!

Views: 190

Replies to This Discussion

Isn't it true that we are all flawed?  Isn't it true that we are so flawed that God provided His only Son to be an offering for our sins? 

Mixing politics with the Christian faith can result in some very peculiar voting decisions.  In Christianity, we operate on faith.   We as Christians get into trouble when we try to assign our "faith" to flawed human beings who are running for political office.  Instead of faith, we should be looking at facts about the candidate's position on the particular issues and make an informed voting decision, again based on facts, not faith. And, just because a candidate claims to be a "Christian" is absolutely no justification for giving them your vote without a thorough review of the "facts" that the candidate supports.

A Tea Party neighbor made a comment to me that illustrates my point. My neighbor was concerned that her Christian friend would not support Joe Arpaio for sheriff.  My neighbor commented, "How could she be a Christian and not vote for Sheriff Arpaio?" Here was an example of someone making a voting decision based on "faith" and not on "facts." My neighbor knew nothing about  Arpaio and how he has caused a huge financial tidal wave of legal fines and expenses for Maricopa County taxpayers over the past 24 years as sheriff.  She had no idea that Arpaio is facing possible federal criminal referrals for his actions in federal court. Her decision to support Arpaio was based on her faith, not her knowledge of the facts,  I didn't even get into the discussion that the Bible says nothing about voting for Joe Arpaio to prove your Christianity. 

Yes, Donald Trump is a flawed candidate.  But, he has made a very clear case as to where he stands on the issues facing Americia.  Review the issues. Make a voting decision based on facts and not faith. Hillary Clinton, is not an option.

As a Chrisitan, I will vote for Trump.  I won't vote for Arpaio.               

Mr. "Godlwater:"  I do not want to be disrespectful, but this column is about the presidential election and what is good for the nation.  You have repeatedly inserted your opinion about Sheriff Arpaio where it does not belong.  That just confuses people and the issue. 

I take strong exception of your dismissal of faith in the election process.  It appears to me, and it is only my opinion, that you are confusing faith with foolishness.  Should you read through the column, you will see how faith does, indeed, play a part in making a voting choice.   “Whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin” (James 4:17).  You see, Mr. "Goldwater." the key here is to know, to search, to learn in faith about each candidate.  The Bible does not instruct us to hate, but to forgive.  I would hope that you would pray to be able to forgive Sheriff Arpaio for his transgressions and let go your disdain or hate or whatever drives you to be obsessed with the sheriff.  I have done that but that does not mean I intend to vote for him, for I will do what else I'm told to do: "Whoever knows the right thing to do..." means strive to know, to look, to SEE, to research, to pray to learn the right thing to do.  Please forgive me if this seems to be a lecture.  I do not intend it to be.  It's just my comments on what you said.  Blessings upon us all.

Jan, thank you for your reply.  There is no hate being expressed on my part.  And let's not forget that Donald J. Trump has been endorsed by Joe Arpaio and Trump has accepted Arpaio's endorsement. So, a discussion about Trump, Arpaio, elections and faith are relevant topics. You wrote:"... the key here is to know, to search, to learn in faith about each candidate." I agree with your statement completely, however when a Christian fails to do his homework to know, search and learn about the facts surrounding a candidate or his beliefs, and only acts in faith, the Christian is voting foolishly.  In Hebrews 1 vs. 1, it describes faith:  Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.   Again, if we as believers ignore what is seen and only operate on our faith, in spite of what we know ,(a candidates record, behavior, position on the issues, willingness to debate other candidates, who he associates with, etc.) and we continue to vote for a candidate, having faith that the outcome will be what we hoped for, we will be disappointed, because we voted in ignorance. 

Oh, my.  This is prophetically profound quoting scripture that clearly tells us the moral choice we face.  Those who are true Christians will get a true perspective on this election by reading this entirely to the very end.

This is long and thoughtful.  I particularly like this:

In the history of American politics, candidates who have been elected president have occasionally changed their minds on one or another issue while in office, but no president has ever gone back on most of what he has promised to do, especially on issues that are crucially important in the election. In this election, it is reasonable to think that the most likely result is that both Trump and Clinton will do what they have promised to do. That is the basis on which we should decide how to vote.

Candidates who refuse to discuss or debate the issues should be rejected. That goes for candidates on a local and national level. I understand that Arpaio will not participate in a debate.

True.  Then the voters will decide.  Carping on him makes him into a sympathetic figure.  I'm with Jan, let it go.

Arizona Republic endorses Dan Saban for Maricopa County Sheriff.  (Dan Saban is a Christian.)


That's too bad for Saban.  No one votes for the person the Repugnant endorses.

There is nothing so convincing as a knee jerk reaction and an attack on the messenger.  Sometimes the messenger is correct. I've read why the AZ Republic endorsed Dan Saban.  I agree with the reasons given for their endorsement.  Maybe you would too if you had only bothered to take the time to read their endorsement. And once again, your assumption that "[N]o one votes for the person the [Republic] endorses" is false.  As a conservative Republican, I'll vote for Dan Saban, not because of the endorsement, but because he is the best GOP candidate.  The endorsement for Dan Saban for Sheriff is simply free advertising for the best candidate for the office.         

Well, Mr. "Goldwater" you are right about that knee jerk comment and also about your false assumption that I did not read the endorsement.  You are guilty, sir, of what you accuse others of doing!  You see, even YOU said you would pay no attention to the Repugnant's endorsement.  Neither will I. I do my own research.  It's only free advertising if anyone still read that paper.  They don't. 

But hear this:  I have every intention of voting for Saban and made that decision all by myself!  Joe Arpaio, John McCain, Helen Purcell have outworn their welcome.

Pat J,
Good for you. I'm pleased you are an informed voter and read the endorsement. I had already decided to support Saban prior to the Republic's endorsement being published and based my support on the the same issues that were discussed in the Republic's endorsement. Mr. Saban offers the best credentials of the current crop of GOP candidates. I expect that he will do a great job for Maricopa County. And yes, Mr. McCain would make a better VP running mate for Hillary than a Republican Senator for Arizona. Jeff Flake would make a great court jester for Hillary. Hopefully our votes will make a difference for Arizona.



My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson



The best in books to make every conservative start thinking in new ways about America and the world being controlled by the Obama Administrations AND Republicans and Democrats.  Some surprises are in store for those who look!




Suppose the earth and its inhabitants exist in order to identify just what causes mankind continually to suffer so many troublesome problems and afflictions.








© 2018   Created by Arizona Freedom Alliance.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service