My Letter to Jeffrey Overstreet

(This response is now listed as Exhibit W.)

I have recently become a regular reader of your blog and have really enjoyed it.

When you asked for feedback on why people were voting for whom I was busy and expected someone else would say it better. It may be too late to influence your vote--as a Washingtonian I've already voted and you may have too. But I feel I must speak out based upon the responses you received.

I like John McCain for a lot of reasons. But I think the main reasons a Christian should vote for him in this election have more to do with Barack Obama than anything else. So I'm going to start with the two major issues I see why a Christian should not in good conscience vote for Obama:

Abortion: I know. So obvious. Tired of the subject. But life is important to God and we can't forget about it. I think there are political reasons to not want Roe v. Wade overturned but as a Christian I have to support life wherever I get the chance.
Obama is fiercely pro-abortion. He has lately talked a more moderate talk, but his voting record is clear. He will ALWAYS support abortion rights. He will not vote to restrict abortions. He hasn't done it before. He claimed in the last debate that if there had been a provision of the life & health of the mother, he would have supported the ban on partial-birth abortion. This is a smokescreen. Physicians testified in committee and on the Senate floor that it is NEVER necessary to conduct a partial-birth abortion for the health and life of the mother. If the baby has reached the point of this procedure, it is easier on the life/health of a mother to conduct a live birth. Obama FULLY supports this horrific procedure.
This is how he really feels about life: "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." (emphasis mine)
Here is his voting record on abortion.

Charity/Concern for the Poor/Taxes:(It all runs together)
The Bible speaks a lot about the obligation of Christians to help the poor. It never speaks about a government taking on this responsibility. The Democratic platform has eschewed any notion that this is a "Christian nation" and yet (in an effort to pick up evangelical voters) act as if our Christian obligation to give to the poor is that of a Christian government. In fact what we have been charged with is giving as churches and individuals.
Sociology 101: If you come across a person being robbed and you are the only one around, you are more likely to act on behalf of the victim than if you come across someone being robbed and there are 20 people standing around. It is human nature to think someone else will take care of it. The rhetoric I've heard from Democrats is that the rich should do more for the poor. But the rich are always someone else. (Even to Obama who while in the top 2% of US household incomes managed to give less than 1% to charity. He started giving a little more when he started thinking about the presidency.) He has absolutely failed to provide any support to his impoverished family members, even while using them for political gain.
While as a group, conservatives make less than liberals, they still give about 30% more. Talk about hypocritical. We have one group that talks about helping the poor and another that is actually doing it.
The Founding Fathers largely agreed that charity begins at home; they also threw off a nation that taxed them excessively (and without representation). They wouldn't be pleased with our current rate of taxation and they would be disgusted with what we use that money for.
Freedom includes economic freedom. That means that as a Christian I should be able to give to the poor in the name of Christ and to the causes I believe in and not have my money taken from me and given to causes I don't support. Government welfare is anything but charity; charitable giving should affect both giver and receiver in profound ways. Taxing me to death so that I'm limited in what I can give personally decreases my interest in the poor; it removes me having to meet needs proactively. It ends initiative.
Now I know Obama has promised a tax cut to most American families. Again, his rhetoric is completely different than his voting record. He has never voted for tax cuts. His economic plan doesn't allow for tax cuts; it calls for a vast expansion of government spending.
I suspect that Obama will win on Tuesday (though I still hold out hope). My consolation beyond a deep and abiding knowledge that ultimately God is in control, is that it is 1976 all over again. Frustrated with a less-than-stellar administration, with a country in recession and tired of war, everyone looks to the bright hope of a new party leader, of promises of peace. If Obama wins, he'll be just as disappointing as Jimmy Carter, and perhaps finally some will begin to think and usher in REAL change. It was Carter's naive foreign affairs policies that brought us Ronald Reagan, who had the nerve and the knowledge to end the Cold War. The political side of me says let Obama win. It is a guaranteed way to clean my party up and bring about some much-needed reform. But as a Christian I have an obligation to vote for the best candidate, the one who doesn't make me leave my Christian values at the door. And there is no doubt that is John McCain.
If you managed to read all this. Thanks.