Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Seismic Moral Shift and Presidential Politics (Aug. 3, 2016)


          Words cannot begin to describe how tragic the 2016 Presidential election cycle has become and we have not yet even entered the fall campaign!  It is tragic for a number of reasons but no reason is as shocking as the fact that voters, and when I say voters I mean the American people, have created their own reality.  The candidates did not get to the place where they now stand without enormous help from average Americans.  These Americans have, for the most part, learned to overlook what previous generations were not able to see past.

          It is shocking, yet somehow completely believable, that America has sunk to the level in which it has sunk.  But is it really that surprising that people entertained by reality television night after night year after year would be inclined to not really have a moral conflict when it comes to the Presidential race of 2016?  The race is highly reflective of life in America in the middle portion of this decade.

          In 1974 as the Watergate Scandal escalated Richard Nixon was finally abandoned by members of his own Republican Party.  They had largely supported/defended him, but there came a point where he was shown to be lying and even his most staunch allies began to withdraw their support.  Even Gerald Ford, who made speeches around the country supporting his boss reached a point where his honesty and integrity would not allow him to speak on his behalf any longer.  It took moral courage, but Ford took the high road; the way of integrity.

          In 1980 Ted Kennedy was presenting a formidable challenge to incumbent President Jimmy Carter, but in an interview with CBS News’ Roger Mudd, Kennedy fumbled with a question about his moral character and shady activity at Chappaquiddick one night a decade earlier where a young woman mysteriously died.  Many people already suspicious of Kennedy’s moral character withdrew their support at that point.

          In 1988 Democratic Presidential candidate Gary Hart had to withdraw from the race after a sex scandal involving Donna Rice with whom he had been having an ongoing affair.  That same year another candidate, former Arizona Governor Bruce Babbitt had to drop out when it was discovered he had been plagiarizing speeches. 

          In 1992, allegations of Bill Clinton’s infidelity dogged his campaign as there seemed to be endless questions about his moral character.  In the late 1990s, mid-way through his second term, a huge sex-scandal erupted and Clinton ended up being impeached for lying under oath in the Paula Jones deposition.  But the most damning thing for him politically was his parsing of verbs and laughing about doing so – “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”  Also when he looked stone –cold into the camera lens and pointed his finger and sternly said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.”  It turned out to be a bald faced-lie.  He clearly felt it was a “he said, she said” kind of situation until the infamous blue dress turned up.  When he learned of its existence he immediately admitted that he “did indeed have a relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that was inappropriate, and was wrong.”

          There have been plenty of other Presidential scandals some major and some minor, but they were always weathered with a certain measure of fall-out.  The Iran-Contra affair that came to light in late 1986 placed a blemish on the Reagan administration, but did not hurt his lasting legacy.  But other scandals have been far worse and ultimately fatal to presidential aspirations such as in the case of John Edwards.  People, as they vetted candidates and those already serving, did so with a working standard of moral character in mind.  Most people had an elevated view of moral character that was greater and personally more important than any one candidate, party, or election cycle.

          Over the last 40 or 50 years those wrapped in the moral fabric of America have showed deep concern about candidate’s character, faith, and honesty.  They have not been historically tolerant when it came to such things as lying, adultery, and immorality in general.  Remember when some were concerned about voting for Ronald Reagan because he had been divorced or for John F. Kennedy because he was Catholic or even Mitt Romney because he was a Mormon?  Seems like a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away in a much simpler time.

          What I truly believe has happened is that, in Presidential politics, just as in America at large we have become comfortable with sin to the point, that while it still may be “a” factor, it is not the major factor.  Our culture can now, for instance look past serial lying, or commission of federal crimes, that is if the liar shares the person’s overall worldview, or if they will keep abortion legal, or stand for gay rights, or promise to help a certain race or class.  Both outrage and support are for sale and are marketed to would-be buyers like marketeers at a trade show.

          Individual Americans have become the standard by which we measure all things.  What I mean by that is that, the standard is no longer outside ourselves (biblical values, a fixed standard of morality) it is now what I judge to be ok or not ok.  Or, it is also true that many will look past gross immorality, shady dealings, vulgarity, etc. as long as the overall tone strikes a chord that is desirable and expresses the anger they feel over, any number of issues.  

          One of the things I enjoy most about being a Christian is that in a world changing so rapidly that I cannot keep up, I serve a God that does not change (Heb. 13:8).  If sin was wrong in 1990, or 1900, or 1900 B.C. then, according to God’s measurement it is still sin. 

          Consider the change that has taken place this way – In election cycles of the past, people might have been appalled that a candidate had broken 1 or 2 of The Ten Commandments in a gross or forth-right sort of way.  But, when we fast-forward to the present, we see many justifying their support of a candidate by saying my candidate has only broken 9 of the commandments compared to the other person who has broken all ten!  It is faulty, and extremely disturbing reasoning and does not make much of a positive case.

          This is not for the purpose of giving advice on voting in 2016.  That is potentially best covered in another weblog, but the point I seek to make here is to draw attention to the moral slide we are on.  It is virtually beyond belief.  There is a delusion in America today that can only be understood in eschatological terms.  The way people think and reason and act and how quickly this change has occurred is seismic, and our country is shaking uncontrollably.

 

In Christ,

 

Dr. Allen Raynor, Pastor

No comments:

Post a Comment