Elections

Elections in a democratic society are supposed to select the best candidates to run the city, province or state, or country. In recent years it has become about who is the least scary or the least dirty candidate. Mud-slinging and scaremongering bemoan a ‘win at all costs’ mentality that in the US is fuelled by racism. In the US, hundreds of millions of dollars are spent just to determine who will run against the President. People will kill for that kind of money. Candidates throw mud at each other until all are buried except one. (He then chooses a vice-presidential candidate who could become President without anyone ever having necessarily voted for him).

 Here in Alberta we see the possible end of a 40 year PC dynasty, and they don’t like the idea one bit. Consequently, they are launching accusations of homophobia and racism that boils down to political correctness (that’s what PC stands for today). And they are attempting to stir the electorate up to near hysteria to save the life-long jobs they feel entitled to. 

While it is easy to criticize the absurdity of the American primary system there is considerable absurdity in what the left leaning government and other PC organizations are doing here in Alberta. A former pastor, now candidate for the Wildrose party, wrote on his blog, while a pastor, that practicing gays will go to Hell, and now people are running around in circles with their hair on fire calling him homophobic along with everyone who fails to denounce what he wrote.

Is the leader of a party going to denounce a candidate for practicing free speech before he was even a candidate? Some would, I’m sure, just for the optics but not someone principled. But what about the long-term effects of such a campaign? This over-the-top reaction will ensure that politicians with half a brain (and that obviously includes no small number) keep such beliefs carefully hidden from the electorate from now on. Is it wise to stifle such talk? Doing so will make it impossible to know what a candidate really thinks before he/she is elected.

How can that be better than free speech? Remember this is an election. Shouldn’t the people decide who is acceptable rather than the hair-razing circle runners, after all, what’s an election for? If someone says things that you disagree with, then don’t vote for him/her. If they have truly said something hateful, then have them charged with hate crimes, but don’t shut them up; you’ll never know what they stand for until it’s too late.

The other point I want to make is that the former pastor truly believes that practicing gays will go to Hell if the don’t repent. This has been the understanding of Christians for thousands of years and for many other religions as well. In fact, nearly the whole world since the beginning of history has declared gay sex to be unnatural, immoral, and in most countries, illegal, until just a few decades ago. Here in Canada it was so until Pierre Trudeau decided to change Canada to a ‘just society’. Change it from what you might ask? From a moral society – a society based on Biblical values! Trudeau closed the bedroom doors and opened the closets of Canada making sex nobody’s business but that of the participants. God, history, and more intelligent people than I, will judge him on that issue.

Meanwhile, is it hateful for a pastor to write that practicing gays are destined for Hell? For he who believes that it is true, it would be hateful for him to not share it and warn people. Admittedly, some Christians state such things in a manner that is far from reflecting the love and character of Jesus Christ. Such people are a disappointment to me and to God, and their very Christianity is questionable. But don’t condemn someone for speaking what he believes to be true; he is not judging you, just telling you what the word of God says.

Look at it this way. If you were walking down a railroad track and someone yelled at you from a nearby building to get off the track, what would you do? Would you get off the track or would you yell back at him that he’s mean and hateful and just wants to ruin all your fun? Of course, you would consider whether or not he was telling the truth. You might consider that he can see a train coming from his window, or that he knows the train schedule. If you don’t know the train schedule, wouldn’t it be wise to defer to someone who might?

My point is many people reject Christian beliefs because it doesn’t fit their lifestyle. A wise man once said that morality dictates theology. The misfortune of this is that it is true and so many make decisions about Christianity without doing any real research. Meanwhile, they accuse believers of hatemongering while their very accusations are hatemongering.