In Favor of Bush

Since the question of who to vote for is often a very sensitive issue for our faith, I thought I might post some arguments from a faith perspective in favor of Bush. Clearly I don't think this question is as "slam dunk" as some do, but for many Christians these factors are significant enough reason to vote for Bush regardless of all other issues.

1. Bush may very well be a born-again Christian.
I say "may be" because only God can truly see a person's heart. As I've written elsewhere on the blog, I actually think that Bush has good intentions for America and the world. I think that he probably did pray and wrestle with going to war. I think he probably did pray anxiously the night that we first bombed Baghdad.

Indeed, I think that Bush really does want a free and democratic Iraq and means well for the Iraqi people. I don't buy the oil conspiracies of the Michael Moore types. I think Bush really thought he was doing a good thing for the world when he invaded Iraq. Bremer let slip the other day that we didn't go in with enough troops to keep a handle on things like looting and insurgency. Why? I think part of the reason is that Bush really thought they would be overjoyed for us to liberate them and didn't anticipate the kind of resistance we would face. He meant them well.

I think that to some extent Bush operates with some of the same biases that fundamentalists have, and this is a strong reason for fundamentalists to vote for him. He comes closer to evangelical biases than Kerry does, and this again is a strong reason for evangelicals to vote for him.

Of course I refuse to demonize Kerry on the issue of faith. He does not have an evangelical faith. But he may very well have a genuine Catholic faith, although he is clearly not a "party line" Catholic (e.g. his position on abortion). I heard a recording on the radio of him leading a 1992 prayer breakfast in which he read from John 3 with ease and seemed to speak genuinely of the need for faith beyond what is seen. Of course I don't know what he really meant by his comments.

I will say that the urban legend going around about Kerry saying John 16:3 instead of John 3:16 is the typical religious propaganda that circulates this time of election--and that infuriates me. The same story was told about Gore in 2000 and was even on Paul Harvey. Cal Thomas has written the true origin: Bush senior originally said it at a prayer breakfast (you might remember how he sometimes got his words twisted around). Who is it out there that has to demonize every Democratic candidate by making up these stories, preying on the gullibility of their constituencies? Both sides do it all the time, and I find it infuriating.

But clearly Bush is the one who will operate more with evangelical biases in the day to day, behind the scenes decisions and appointments. Kerry will not operate with evangelical biases. Indeed, he won't even operate with Catholic biases. He will no doubt function with a "separation of church and state" model and will appoint liberal Democrat types behind the scenes. This fact alone is enough for many evangelicals to vote for Bush.

2. Bush will try to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court like Scalia and Thomas.
As we just mentioned, Bush will no doubt appoint individuals who will not try to create new law by way of the courts. We have gone a very long time without any new appointments to the Supreme Court, and there is a strong possibility that the next president will appoint several. For many Christians, this fact alone is enough reason to vote for Bush.

With regard to the issue of abortion, clearly Bush and his appointees will work more behind the scenes against abortion. Only Bush would possibly (and I say possibly, not definitely) appoint judges that would vote to reverse Rowe vs. Wade, sending the issue back to the States. I won't say that there will be fewer abortions under Bush, though. But clearly we would not have an anti-abortion president in Kerry. As far as the President is a gateway and behind the scenes influence on this issue, Bush is our man.

I will mention as I have before that some of the Christian rhetoric on this aspect of voting is smoke and mirrors. I don't think enough of us (including myself) are doing the right kinds of things to "win the hearts and minds" of the American people to where they see abortions as the death of a child. God wants us to obey Him, but created a world where we could make the wrong decisions to our detriment. I don't think you can change people with laws.

3. Kerry's voting record doesn't fit with the views of most Christians in our circles.
After Kerry's acceptance speech, Pat Buchanan said that he would vote for Kerry after that speech--if he didn't know how he had voted the last twenty years.

I don't think Kerry is really a flip-flopper at heart (as SNL said last week--he's not a flip-flopper; he's a panderer). His voting record shows his biases just as Cheney's does his. Kerry is a liberal Democrat. Even though he has presented himself more toward the middle, his inclination is no doubt going to be that of a liberal Democrat. Congress and the platform on which he has run will tether him a little, but we know where he basically stands. He protested against the Vietnam War. That says a lot about his biases.

Again, for many Christians this is a strong reason not to vote for him.

4. He tends toward the indecisive.
Whether his fundamental biases are basically the same--liberal Democrat--Kerry does seem to be somewhat indecisive and panders to his audience. I don't know if he would have taken us to Afghanistan, although surely he would have pursued bin Laden. For some this is a weakness in leadership that makes him a bad president to have at this time.

I have no doubt missed many reasons not to vote for Kerry and to vote for Bush. Help me out by making comments below.