Follow that logic to it’s conclusion and you get to be a card carrying member of the situational ethics club. And then anything goes.
If you can knowingly vote for a guy that personally funds the Gonsels of the world, then don’t complain about the other guy who does now in office. Same for the gay thing and the rest.
I’m good with Reagan’s 80 percent standard of purity. Did Romney break 50? No. 40? no. So how low are you willing to go? How much evil? Do the words of the founders who specifically said NOT to do that mean anything or do you feel like one freeper told me, ‘that’s just John Wayne talk”?
re: “I’m good with Reagan’s 80 percent standard of purity. Did Romney break 50? No. 40? no. So how low are you willing to go? How much evil?”
I vote for as much good as possible and less evil as possible between two choices.
I’m willing to vote for less evil even if candidate A is only 1% less evil than candidate B. I always vote for less evil and more good.
If I “opt-out” and don’t vote at all, I’ve permitted the greater evil to have the greater chance at winning.
I’m not voting the the evil that candidate A does (and candidate A may be very evil in comparison to God’s standards), no, I’m voting for their “less evilness” or “greater goodness” as opposed to candidate B’s greater evilness and less goodness.
re: “Follow that logic to it’s conclusion and you get to be a card carrying member of the situational ethics club. And then anything goes.”
I think this is crux of the matter. You think that voting for a candidate that supports issues you deem evil, even though it may not be to the degree of the other candidate, somehow makes you complicit in that evil. I think that’s a mistake.
In my opinion, opting out of voting for candidate A (because he supports the same evil of candidate B, though not in the same degree) allows the greater evil the greater chance of winning - and, that DOES make us complicit with allowing the greater evil to win.
On the other hand, if we do vote for candidate A, even though he supports the same evil of candidate B, but to a lesser degree, this gives the greater good, though it a small greater goodness, a chance to defeat the greater evil.
I think our motives are what count with God. We are not supporting candidate A BECAUSE of the evil he supports. No, we support candidate A because he promotes more goodness and less evil than candidate B.
If candidate A wins because of our support, then we work to move him/her toward greater good and away from evil. That may or may not work. But, it’s the only chance we have for good to begin making a come-back in this life. We live in a fallen, sinful world with fallen, sinful people. It stinks but that’s the way of the world we live in. Only God can (and will) fix all the evil one day. In the meantime, we work for all the greater good that we can.