The National Rifle relationship explains their potential endorsement of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv) based on political mono-vision; the only criteria they use to rate candidates is their voting article on gun issues. Their choice of whom to endorse and which campaigns Nra member dollars enrich is based on only one issue - guns.
Single-issue politics is wrong.
2010 Tax Brackets
The majority of the Nra membership base is conservative. Harry Reid is their arch-enemy. Regardless of which side of the aisle you are most drawn to, this is a kick in the teeth for Nra members. The Nra is reasoning of biting the hand that feeds it and using an excuse of one-issue politics.
Tough Decisions
Experience and character are required to make difficult choices. Politics in 2010 presents nothing but tough decisions. There is no choice out there that will furnish a rosy reality for everyone.
One-issue politics requires no perceive and no character. A light switch is either 'On' or 'Off.' Not too tough a call there. A computer binary ideas identifies everything as either a '0' or '1.' No judgment needed there. I'm not sure the binary ideas even qualifies as 'artificial intelligence.'
Who Wins Here?
Politician "A" voted 100% pro-guns; is pro-choice; a self-avowed Marxist; and wants to raise the highest income tax bracket to 95%. Politician "B" voted 90% pro-guns; is pro-choice; a self-avowed socialist; and thinks that no one in the city limits of a town larger than 5,000 should own a pet. Politician "C" voted 80% pro-guns; is pro-life; a self-avowed Christian; and thinks that Americans pay enough taxes already. Politician "D" voted 50% pro-guns; is pro-life; is an atheist; and believes in a flat tax.
Which of these politicians should the Nra select to endorse? agreeing to their one-issue method there is no seminar required: Politician "A".
Horse Show Judges Make More involved Decisions
Every applicant for a judging card doesn't get one. There are standards to be met. One is the ability to make tough choices backed up by reason. The following scenario is real. Again, who wins?
When judging a Western satisfaction class:
Exhibitor "A' failed to do the gaits required. Exhibitor "B" approximately got bucked off but did all the elements of the class. Exhibitor "C" did the elements, but had to pull on the reins with all their might as their horse ran off with them.
So, which exhibitor wins the class? One who is given the accountability of judging or evaluating is startling to apply knowledge, character, truth, and discretion to make the best choice among the options available. It seldom happens that a excellent choice exists among the possible, so a weighing of each flawed possibility must be made. A single-issue voter does not fully accept their accountability to be discerning before voting.
Single-issue voters are either lazy, fanatical, opportunistic, or ignorant. One of these will apply to any who endorse a candidate or cast a vote based upon only one issue and nothing more.
What is the Christian Viewpoint?
How should a Christian look at their accountability as a voting citizen? Some Christians say that their votes must agree with scripture. However, when selecting a someone who job will be to relate an electorate, will such a uncomplicated method work? No.
Human beings are contradictory. Has there ever been the excellent Christian candidate? I can't name one. So, what is the someone who strives to be truthful to his or her walk with Jesus Christ to do?
The method for selecting candidates is the same one used to study the Bible:
Be informed. investigate the topic. recognize context. gawk the issue from different sides. Discuss the point with others whom you trust. Use discernment to reach your decision.
Contradictions in the Bible
When taken verse by verse the Bible seems to contradict itself. More mature Christians know that the Bible is a perfect work and to cherry-pick one verse or another usually drops you into the land of error.
No serious Christian will make your mind up one Bible verse and make it the sole foundation of their faith. No worthy voter will make your mind up one issue and use it as the only factor in selecting a candidate.
Voters who bind themselves by invisible chains to single-issue candidates are fanatics, ignorant, lazy, or accept being used by opportunists. No sturdy 'platform' will long stand upon a particular leg. Balance may be achieved momentarily, but as soon as the weight distribution changes slightly, the platform topples and all who stand on it will be dashed on the rocks below.
There aren't many completely one-issue voters. As a citizenry we are great than that. I guess the examine becomes, "Is the Nra great than that?" They say not.
I was reading this One Issue Politics is Wrong For Christians and the National Rifle relationship - selecting Candidates
No comments:
Post a Comment