I’ve seen memes like the one below rattling around Facebook for the last week or so, and the sentiment behind it is nothing new. I hear people asking why people who are Christian would vote Republican — nevermind that a lot of Christians are liberal and vote Democrat exclusively — but the argument is one I have heard so often that, as a Christian, libertarian, and former Republican, I’ve often wanted to answer it, and having this little soapbox upon which to stand, I thought I’d do it.
The United States of America isn’t a theocracy, to begin with. Let’s start there. Our government was founded on, among other things, the freedom of religion. So although many of us are Christian, and try to live out the teachings of Jesus Christ, those teachings are not really foundational to what our country is, or what it stands for. The United States was founded on the principle that all human beings are endowed by their Creator with certain rights, and that any system of government should not infringe upon those rights, but respect the right of the individual to live his or her life as they see fit, provided that said individual does not infringe upon the rights of others.
Because of this, although many of us may be Christian, the only place that this, and our government, intersect is upon the principal that the government cannot, and should not, prevent us from worshiping as we would. That goes for members of every religion. With that said, let’s talk a little bit about that meme, and about the Gospels with regard to government.
Imagine, if you would, that it is December 17th. You stop off at Walmart on your way home from work — you need, say, Orange Juice, socks, and a pair of pliers — and as climb out of your car and into the bracing cold, you are greeted by the sound of a bell, clanging insistently. Clang-clang, clang-clang, clang-clang. Sounds like Christmas. As you approach the door, you see him; Santa hat and safety vest, a kind of red cauldron suspended under a tripod, a sandwich board emblazoned with the red shield of the Salvation Army. Clang-clang, clang-clang, clang-clang.
You have a choice, of course: you can toss some money in the pot on the way by. You can make an elaborate show of fishing in your pockets, coming up empty, and shrugging apologetically as you dash past Safety Santa. You can try to avoid eye-contact and eat the sixty seconds or so worth of guilt you feel when he calls, “Merry Christmas!” after you. Or you can get back in the car and drive to Target. Options.
Of course the right thing to do is to give money. Lot of good reasons why you might not, though. Perhaps you don’t have cash. Perhaps you don’t like what the Salvation Army stands for. Perhaps you’re actually going into Walmart to pick up groceries to take to the homeless shelter and cook supper for the people there, and the money you’re carrying is for that purpose.
Or, perhaps, like Ebenezer Scrooge, you figure that you pay your taxes and some portion of that goes to benefit the poor and destitute, and in this way you believe you’ve done your part. Scrooge shot down the plea of the two men collecting alms, with that exact argument. The point of that wonderful story, of course, is that paying your taxes does not constitute being charitable or merciful. Truly doing good is when you see a need, and you know you can solve that need, and then you do so. The government is bad at solving things — people who can’t pay off their debts end up in jail, for instance, and that’s not just in Dickens’ day, it still happens now. Government is terrible at solving problems. It is, in fact, uniquely inept at problem-solving.
But the point remains, whenever you see Safety Santa or any of his ilk, you have a choice. Choice is freedom, and how you decide says something about the kind of person you are. Either way, if you walk past him into the Walmart, do you know what happens?
Nothing. Nothing happens.
If, on the other hand, you don’t pay your taxes, do you know what happens?
You go to jail.
It is our tax dollars that pay for government programs. And while that’s fine, to the extent that people who need help get help, it doesn’t change the fact that tax dollars are not voluntarily given. This is provable by the above point, that if you don’t pay your taxes you go to jail. That’s not a choice, it’s literally robbery. Jesus didn’t advocate robbery, it’s actually against the laws of God. You’re thinking of Robin Hood, a folk hero whose name literally means, “thieving brigand.”
I think all our mothers taught us the old saying that “two wrongs don’t make a right.” Stealing from one person to pay another doesn’t make everything right, it merely transfers grievance. That isn’t any kind of a real solution. As I often repeat, “responsibility is the price of freedom.” Being truly free means being responsible for your own actions, like any grown adult should be. You are allowed to own weapons, so you must be responsible owners. You are allowed to speak freely, so you must also do so responsibly. It is the responsibility of the individual to be charitable, compassionate, merciful, and kind.
Not that the government shouldn’t be a benevolent presence; merely that government is not in any way CAPABLE of being a benign presence. After all, does not power tend to corrupt? Why then would you give away your own power and freedom to a government that says it will take care of you? Since we started off talking about the Gospel according to Matthew, consider Matthew 7:6: “Do not give to dogs what is sacred; and do not cast your pearls before swine, for they will only trample them underfoot, and turn and tear you to pieces.”
By the basic philosophy of our founding documents, rights are things you are born with. The power of the government is in either recognizing those rights, or not recognizing them; and to that end the Bill of Rights is framed as a bunch of stuff the government can’t take away. Because it isn’t theirs to grant, and therefore it isn’t theirs to take.
Looking back, then, to that meme:
1.) This is the hardest one to defend. Some of us would just as soon end these programs entirely because, again, stolen money. But Republicans worry that food stamp programs, and others like it, are used to help keep the poor people, poor. After all, poor people usually vote Democrat. Why would the Democrats want to get them out of poverty when they’ve cornered their vote? Republicans generally want to help people get out of poverty, not keep them there.
2.) Obviously the goal is NOT to poison the water for the Standing Rock Sioux. Their concerns are valid, of course, but the point remains…nobody is actually planning to poison their damn water supply as this meme suggests.
3.) The travel ban wasn’t meant to be permanent. It was also not applicable to all Muslims.
4.) Nobody is planning to take away anyone’s health insurance. The plan is to try to make it so that the government can’t steal money from people who elect not to buy health insurance. That doesn’t have to mean taking away anyone’s insurance, and the president has said repeatedly that he doesn’t want anyone to lose their insurance.
One last thought, regarding the Travel Ban. Let’s say you live alone. You’re a woman. A man you don’t know comes to your door looking for a place to live. Do you let him in? Maybe you’re a parent, you have small children. Do you let strangers in? Or do you try to find another way to help the person in need? This isn’t unreasonable.
Do you lock your doors at night? Or do you leave them unlocked and wide open, for people to wander in, take what they want, and kill you if they want to?
There’s a difference between voluntarily letting someone in, and letting them barge in unchecked. There’s also a difference between not caring about someone, and choosing to protecting yourself. Indeed, it’s not unchristian to understand that you need to have your own house in order before you are able to truly help others.
Again, Matthew 7, this time verses 3-5:
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t accept refugees, really. But I do think there’s a reasonable case to be made for exercising care and judgment in selecting whom we choose to accept, just as we would when inviting strangers into our home. After all, this land is our home too; and national security is squarely the responsibility of the Federal Government.
Anyway, I don’t know if this was useful to anybody, but I thought I would try to illuminate the thought process a little, in case it would indeed help.
