I am often accused of being rigid and/or dogmatic; refusing to be swayed by the arguments of others. I know this not to be the case; I just require a stronger argument than most before I will change my mind. Well, I just encountered such an argument and I thought I would share it: both because it is pertinent to our times and may help others, and because those who think me that rigid in my thinking need to see what it takes to change my positions. The topic at hand is voting for the lesser evil.
As regular readers of my posts will know, I have been torn over being forced to vote for a person I consider to be the lesser of two evils because – to me – I am still voting for evil. I have written about this many times this primary season, and I have often aimed my attacks at Romney and thus – indirectly – at our benevolent host, Utah Prez. Well, I heard an argument on just this subject today, an argument presented by Christians who are actually trying to live their faith in their daily lives. It won me to their position and I now find myself owing Utah and many others an apology.
The argument goes like this:
Yes, we are faced with choosing the lesser of two evils because we are fallen beings living in a fallen world. By definition, this means everything we do in this world is a choice between lesser evils. Therefore, since we can’t chose good, we have no choice but to choose the lesser evil, even when it comes to voting – especially when it comes to voting. We should do everything we can to make sure that, when we face our maker, we can say “I did the best I could to live as close to your commandments as I knew how.” End of argument.
It was that simple, but it was also that powerful. That is why it worked with me: if you are a Christian, the logic in this argument should be irrefutable.
Consequently, I confess that this will force me to change my position on voting for Romney, though there is another point here that was made in the discussion to which I was listening. The reason we have a choice between Obama and Romney is because too many of us have been apathetic to our duties to attend to making sure the best candidates possible run for office. We do this in part by making sure good people do not have reason to view the costs of public service as too high to pay. With the tendency of those who favor smaller government to ‘eat their own,’ there is little reason for a good person to enter the fray. That environment is generally populated by the less scrupulous, and those with personalities that make them bullet proof to personal attack: neither of which are characteristics of a good public servant. So, a large part of our duty is to support and defend good people when they run for office.