http://www.newsweek.com/id/157696

Perhaps there is hope.

There are way more people who feel called into “missions” than the Church can possibly support. This is surely a result of the focus on missions and evangelism as the end-all-be-all of the Christian life in church, totally ignoring the fact that 99% of people are not going to do that sort of thing, at least in a formal way.

The way God primarily grows His Kingdom is through the children of believers, and thus the most important entity in the kingdom is the Christian family, specifically the rearing of children.

Families, however, lack the romantic appeal of saving the pagans of Africa, and have much more complex needs than just donations to a mission fund. Families require very pedestrian things like a breadwinner and societal support.

Politics in particular has great import to families. Immigration is just one example, as we see the last remnant of true Christian civilization (the American Heartland) overrun by illegal aliens from Mexico and legal aliens from around the world. Muslims are building mosques in Houston for goodness sake. What does that say to our children that we would allow such a thing in our country? This is a political problem with political causes. And while spiritual warfare is at its root, ultimately the solution will take a political form of some sort.

There was a period of about 50 years, from the Scopes monkey trials to the late 1970’s, where Christians completely abandoned politics for the “higher calling” of prayer and evangelism. Such a withdrawal provided the enemy with ample opportunity. Oh, how the enemy would love it if we retreated again back to those “higher” callings!

50 million dead babies are a political problem. So I do not accept that politics or any other sphere of life is somehow inferior to another. They are all connected and none must be surrendered without consequences.

On this particular issue, though, I guess I agree. The country at large is without hope and even if Palin were everything some people hope, one person cannot change the system. If there were truly hope for the country at large, then we would see more Ron Paul types in Congress, but we do not. The hope IMO lies in a) the Internet lowering the cost of communication such that motivated constituents have more influence and b) the inevitable Weimar-style collapse of fedgov due to its financial bankruptcy (already a fact looking at Medicare and Social Security) which will provide opportunities for the better parts of the country to break away from the limitations of the Supreme Court, a liberal Congress and ultimately the fatal track of one-man-one-vote democracy in a nation facing our demographic future.

As far as Palin, she seems to be genuine, from all I’ve read. But McCain is such an impostor — scratch that, he’s exactly what he claims to be, a neocon warmonger — that I am pretty sure I’d be more at ease with Obama’s titularly peaceful socialism. Taxes don’t come home in a body bag.

Good luck taking the plunge for McCain. I’m going with either Baldwin, or a write-in protest. (Even Barr is really starting to annoy me)

On a side note, I think that God’s kingdom is still won one soul at a time, which makes ordinary people like you and me Just as important as the president of the US.

Even as great as this nation has ever been or will ever be, it is unlikely it will ever be 100% believers in Christ. So, for me, I would argue that our real passion is walking with Christ daily and allowing others to see our light shine. Also, to be strategic and prayerful for the people around us to know Christ and be strengthened by him.

I hope this makes sense, that I’m thankful for this country and our freedoms; but I don’t think this political race is THE most important subject for Americans right now (more important spiritual warfare). Just my 2 cents…

Palen did a great job last night. Maybe she’s the real deal and maybe she’ll end up being President. That’s enough hope to garner my vote.

I’m just incredulous that someone who described himself as “convinced” about Ron Paul could then encourage others to “hold your nose” and vote for the biggest fraud perpetrated by and upon the so-called “party of small government” in recent memory. No, Paul’s long-shot candidacy has convinced me: I’ll not ever again waste my vote. I will not vote for another pretender to liberty like Bush or McCain, no matter the odds; I’ll not be complicit in their depredations.

In fact, I will vote my conscience and trust that God will honor my faithfulness. Maybe — just maybe — if Christians were to vote for moral, liberty-minded people (or even just liberty-minded people), instead of projecting their hopes and fears upon morally repugnant (by any definition of the phrase) candidates, America could be the republic it once seemed destined to be.

That said, I agree, Tom. Aside from her apparent tinge of neo-con Isrealo-bellicosity, I’d say Palin is a fairly solid pick. Not enough to make me vote for McCain, obviously, but anyone who supports seccession movements can’t be all bad!

As far as “many more years of institutionalization”, I don’t think I’m that much older than you. But I have been around long enough to realize it’s better to set a charge inside the windmill than to charge upon it from without.

Mitch, I will forgive your slip there. You have many more years of institutionalization into the two-party false dichotomy on me. I stand by my assertion that the only wasted vote is one cast for someone in whom you do not believe, and with whom you do not agree.

“Holding your nose” is wasting your vote. Voting for the so-called “lesser of two evils” is wasting your vote. In fact, if the “lesser of two evils” is elected, he (or she) then becomes the greater of two evils, because that is the one that gets realized. I will not be complicit in the election of that evil man, nor of his evil alternative (Obama). If you surrender to the Establishment candidate, you will have an Establishment President. When you vote for the Approved Candidate (TM), you will NEVER get a President of whom you can be proud. I would write in Thomas Jefferson, Lysander Spooner, or Sasquatch before I would vote for either McCain or Obama.

This year’s offerings are about as anti-America as one can get: either would sell out America to the lowest bidder; both would destroy us for his own aggrandizement, Obama by taxing and spending us into oblivion and more wars, McCain by extending us and over-extending us in wars to kill people who never posed a threat to a one of us (and in fact creating more enemies for us to fight); both would usurp our rights (what few are left) and subject us to further intrusion and subjugation.

But let’s stick to your dichotomy, Mitch. Going on their campaign rhetoric alone, let’s compare Obama and McCain. Obama promises programs that will by simple economics require much higher taxes; McCain promises to keep us embroiled in ridiculous foreign wars for as long as it takes. Hmmm. Higher taxes; or countless, needless deaths. (Don’t argue abortion; they both support it) Leave aside the promises of McCain to lower taxes; with the continuing devaluation of the dollar his exploits are sure to cement, raising taxes will become a necessity. And leave aside the obviousness of Obama continuing hegemonic wars into other theaters. These are not part of the rhetoric.

State-sanctioned theft (taxes), or state-sanctioned murder (war)? Which is more moral? Both are immoral, but higher taxes are certainly less permanent. How does a Christian — any Christian — defend McCain?

To coin a phrase, “What would Jesus steal/Who would Jesus kill?”