Why one Christian won’t vote for Barack Obama

People keep asking me why I won’t vote for Obama. They figure I’m prone to his side of the agenda. He cares about the poor. He’s a religious man. A family man. I understand all of that. Besides, he is very charismatic and skillful at presentations of the issues. What’s not to like? And he is blessedly different from the status quo.

I’m really most comfortable with the older theological traditions. They seem to have more heft and meat to them. One of the things notable about the historic Christianity that I find most appealing is its steadfast pursuit of human rights and the high value placed upon human life, even before we had terminology for these things. Life is the primary issue.

That’s why friends tend to think that I might be pliable to an Obama shift. Concern for the poor is definitively a historic Christian concern. But we might be passing by these things a bit too abruptly. We can’t care for temporal happiness more than temporal existence. If we think that, for example, the unborn are living human beings, and as the sciences have shown unmistakably that this is the case, it is very difficult to consider them absent normal human valuation in the grand scope of things. I find it very hard to take people seriously as having a concern for the needy when they lightly pass by the weakest and most needful among us.

Many conservatives approach these issues as if taxation were the primary concern in the ideological battle for elective supremacy, but I would be the first in line to accept the “higher taxes” of the Left if the Democrats would adopt a platform that protected human life. If the real issue is taxation… fine; take the money and spare the children. Life issues come before property rights. That is not to be dismissive of property rights, they are very important, but they are not absolute, and biblically speaking, they are a distant second.

But that kind of deal is not on the table. More, the ultimate concerns of those driving these campaigns control what can and cannot be done in the pursiut of compromise. There are fundamental views of life, what it is, and how policies should be implemented that shape the worldviews as a whole. I am not saying the two are diametrically opposed. I tend toward understanding Republicans and Democrats as being much closer together than most in the parties would like to admit. Sometimes it is more an issue of emphases that difference. But still, Barack Obama can say things like this and receive raucous approval from admirers…

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Barack Obama.

This could be the most calloused, inconsiderate statement concerning the prospect of a parent with regard to the extinguishment of their grandchild that I have yet heard. I can’t even begin to imagine its likeness. I understand that there are a lot of possible ways to take a statement like this, but none that is particularly good. How could a person take a child, the offspring of a loving union between two human beings, that would be one’s own grandchild by blood, and consider it a punishment upon their daughter, or something to be dispensed with because the child might cause uncomfortable circumstances. Every child causes uncomfortable circumstances.

What I am saying here is that we need to see things that are deeper than the relatively simple political programs and platforms of the parties or their representatives. I need to see beyond the veil to find out which party is at this time in history most closely aligned with what I think is good, and just, and true. If both of them have some traits that are commendable within a Christian worldview, which ones and how great is their import and emphases? We elect people for this reason only, to re-present, us. When I look at the fundamental divide between the way I see the world and the way that the Democratic candidate for President does, I find that we have very little in common even if on the outside, we might be superficially similar. We can be common on the little things, or common on the big things. On the big things, we are worlds apart.

Christopher Neiswonger

The original title of this blog was “Don’t punish Barack Obama with grandchildren.” But I thought it was too bitey.