YMI Doing This

This season of Presidential debate is quickly becoming toxic. How are we, as a nation made of up of mostly Christians, supposed to reconcile the notion that a person’s character is not important in these trying times?

I keep hearing and seeing the same thing. “What difference does it make if he cheated on his wife, its his stand on the issues that matters.” This phrase, for reasons I assumed would be obvious, drives me crazy.
Of course it matters. If a candidate for the highest office in the world, can dismantle his own family, what kind of leader does that make him?

As a Christian, I truely believe that if a person is seeking God first in their life, then the rest of the “issues” will fall in line with that value system.

Historically this country has asked repeatedly for God’s blessings. The Bible has always been the touchstone in our society. Our laws and ethics are taken almost directly from its texts. To declare it null and void when electing a leader would be a grave mistake.

I realize it sounds as if I am attacking a particular candidate, this is not my intention at all. What I am attacking is the notion that seems to be overwhelming the public at this crucial time. The notion that a person’s morality should never be considered when deciding who to vote for.

The principals involved in making these decisions are very personal to me. I would never marry a man who had cheated on a spouse, who had advocated the killing of the unborn or who had a long history of dishonesty. So why would I elect a person to the most powerful position in the world who had a record of these things?

I am fully aware that my values are not shared by all, and that is fine, but even if you are a person who tends to lean more to the left, wouldn’t you still want your candidate to share your core beliefs? To be an honest and upstanding individual who practices what he or she preaches?

What good is any candidate if their promises are empty and their word is worthless? If someone’s actions in the past have been devastating to their loved ones, selfish and self serving, and we elect them anyway, what can we say when they turn that same disloyalty on us? How do we not see that sort of treachery coming? We would be, in essence, endorsing it. Asking for it, in plain terms.

I suppose it could be equated to a company hiring a financial executive who had been convicted of embezzeling from a previous employer, because the money they did not steal was used to the benefit of the company. When that person starts stealing from the new company who is to blame for that? The people who HIRED him.

Of course, no one is perfect. We all have things in our past we regret, but to say that those things do not make a statement about our character is ludacris. People do change, and wrongs can be forgiven, in a lot of cases fairly easily, but still, we would be foolish not to question ruthlessly, to test and retest, and to demand some accountability from anyone seeking the office of President. The entire content of a person needs to be considered so we are not blindsided.

Unfair and as unpopular as it is, people in our lives look at our pasts to get an idea of what to expect in the future. A company is not likely to hire even a sales clerk who has a history of being dishonest or unreliable, but so many people today are saying that those traits do not matter for someone seeking the position of the leader of our country.

Damn right character matters. If we say that it does not, and we appoint a person based solely on their ability to do math or give good speeches, whatever decietful things they do once in office, we deserve.