Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush

I thought this article was interesting, although it confuses Christians 
with conservatives quite a bit, especially towards the end (gun 
control, a few other issues.)  It's also relevant irt our 3d party 
discussion (although not in my favor :\ I guess I'm too pragmatic.)

http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3114.html

Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush
by Dr. Patrick Johnston
  15 February 2004



George W. Bush professes to be a Christian, goes to church, makes  
references to Bible verses, and says, “God bless America,” but so did  
Bill Clinton, so this alone cannot be sufficient to win our vote.





The Roman emperor Nero didn’t mind Romans calling themselves  
Christians.  He didn’t throw them to the lions or burn them at the  
stake because they believed in Jesus.  He just wanted them to worship  
Caesar too.  They were allowed to add Jesus to their list of Roman  
gods.  Even today in Communist China, Christians are not beaten,  
tortured, and imprisoned in labor camps because they believe in Jesus  
or profess to be Christians.  Not at all.  They’re persecuted because  
they act like Christians.  They’re beaten and thrown in prison because  
they evangelize, because they deny the heresies of the  
government-sanctioned church, because they speak against tyrannical  
government usurpations such as the denial of God-given rights, because  
they refuse to render unto Caesar that which is due only to God. 

  Not every person who professes to be a Christian is one.  Faith  
without works, without tangible deeds of obedience, is dead faith – it  
is the faith of devils. (James 2:10-24)  Jesus asks, “Why do you call  
me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46)  “Ye  
shall know them by their fruits.  Even so every good tree bringeth  
forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.  A good  
tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring  
forth good fruit.  Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is  
hewn down and cast into the fire.  Wherefore by their fruits ye shall  
know them.” (Matthew 7:16-20)

  George W. Bush professes to be a Christian, goes to church, makes  
references to Bible verses, and says, “God bless America,” but so did  
Bill Clinton, so this alone cannot be sufficient to win our vote.  Like  
Clinton, George Bush’s fruit was evident to all with eyes to see during  
his campaign against Gore.  Many Christians were undoubtedly innocently  
ignorant of George W. Bush’s liberal tendencies and so easily  
susceptible to his conservative rhetoric, but far too many were  
willfully blind to his bad fruit.  Pragmatism took precedence over  
God’s Word and the principles of conservatism when conservatives the  
nation over supported and voted for the most electable candidate over  
the only blessable, anointable candidate, and as you will see in the  
course of this article, the roots of tyranny have deepened in America  
as a result.  The guilt for the daily encroachment on God-given rights  
to life, liberty, and property, under President Bush’s leadership, can  
be laid squarely at the foot of the professing church.  If there was  
ever any doubt about the liberal sway of George W. Bush before his  
Presidency, that doubt should be well cleared up by now for all but  
only the willfully naïve.

  Do I believe that sincere, well-meaning Christians can vote for George  
Bush and be right with God?  Sure!  I believe that a sincere,  
well-meaning Christian can vote for Howard Dean and be right with God!   
Having an IQ greater than a slug is not necessary in order to be a  
Christian.  Unintended ignorance can destroy a nation, however, and  
God’s people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge. (Hosea 6:4)  It is  
intentional, willful, or malicious ignorance in the absence of the fear  
of God that brings culpability (Proverbs 9), and of this I fear many  
professing Christians are guilty in their endorsement of George Bush in  
spite of the abundance of evidence of his bad fruit.

  What is this “evil fruit” to which I refer?  Precisely what is it  
about George W. Bush that I believe should preclude sincere Christians  
from voting for him?

I. George W. Bush on Abortion

  On the campaign trail, President Bush professed to be “pro-life,” but  
with exceptions – he believes abortion to be justified in cases of rape  
and incest.1,2  The New York Times reported, “It was the same tempered  
language that George W. Bush typically uses to discuss abortion, which  
he opposes except in cases of rape, incest or risk to a pregnant  
woman's life.”3  As Alan Keyes pointed out in the Presidential debates  
and in various speeches, such pro-life exceptions that allow the  
innocent to be killed in some circumstances disqualify President Bush  
from being pro-life at all.4 If President Bush would justify the  
killing of one innocent person under his jurisdiction, he is  
disqualified from being a good person, much less a good leader.  Having  
a rapist for a dad is not a capital crime, and for President Bush to  
state that innocent children can justly be killed because of the tragic  
circumstances of their conception reveals that he doesn’t comprehend  
the basic principle of the inalienable, inviolable, God-given right to  
life acknowledged in our nation’s founding documents.

  Also, on the campaign trail, George Bush and his wife both admitted  
that they don’t think Roe v. Wade should be overturned: “I don’t think  
the culture has changed to the extent that the American people or the  
Congress would totally ban abortions,” President Bush professed.5   His  
wife reiterated her husband’s sentiments on a prime-time television  
interview on January 18, 2001.  G. W. Bush has the power as the  
President of the United States to overturn this legal child-killing,6  
but refuses to exercise this power, and so is responsible for all the  
child-killing he is allowing.

  During the Presidential debates, President Bush was asked what he  
would say to a raped and pregnant family member.  He said that he would  
tell her that the decision whether or not to kill the child was up to  
her.  That is not pro-life.  That’s classic pro-abortion rhetoric.  If  
his daughter wanted to kill her grandmother to get the inheritance  
early, would he counsel her: “Sweetie, if you want to kill my mom,  
that’s completely up to you!?"  Commenting on abortion on the campaign  
trail, President Bush stated, “good people can disagree on that  
issue.”7  Oh really?  This is manifestly absurd.  Can good people  
disagree on whether or not innocent people should be murdered?  I beg  
to differ: Good people cannot accept the murder of one single innocent  
human being.

  Many conservatives have tried to overlook President Bush’s liberal  
tendencies in hopes that at the least G. W. Bush will appoint a  
pro-lifer to the Supreme Court, and in so doing, help overturn Roe v.  
Wade.  Their hope is not only without evidence, it is plainly contrary  
to evidence.  In his prime-time television debates with Gore, George  
Bush flatly denied that he had a pro-life litmus test for Court  
appointees.8  If a judicial candidate deemed it just and constitutional  
to execute innocent people, that did not exclude him from a possible  
appointment to the Supreme Court according to President Bush.   
President Bush has insisted that he will only appoint “strict  
constructionists” to the Court, or people who will interpret and apply  
the Constitution as the founders intended and not as an evolving,  
“living document,” but according to President Bush they need not be  
pro-life ‘strict constructionists.’  His record as Governor of Texas  
shows that he does indeed appoint pro-abortion judges, so we should not  
be surprised if President Bush were to appoint pro-abortion judges to  
the Supreme Court.

  Frequently displayed as evidence of President Bush’s pro-life views is  
his signing of legislation when he was Texas’ Governor that forbade  
underage girls from getting abortions without parental consent.  The  
pro-life community roared their approval: a 13-year-old girl can’t get  
an aspirin without parental consent, why should she be allowed to  
undergo a surgical or chemical abortion without parental consent?!   
That’s sound pro-life legislation, right?  George Bush must be  
pro-life, huh?  Wrong!  Did you realize that this piece of legislation  
was nullified by a Texas Supreme Court decision that ruled 6-3 that an  
unexceptional 17-year-old could get an abortion without telling her  
parents?9  The New York Times reported, “It was, after all, appointees  
of Gov. George W. Bush who took the lead on the issue…”  You see, it  
was G.W. Bush who appointed four of the court’s nine justices and has  
been a political patron for a fifth, Harriet O’Neill, who wrote the  
majority opinion in the parental notification case.  If this is what  
President Bush means by “strict constructionists,” then any hope that  
he will appoint a pro-lifer to the Federal bench is baseless.

  Also displayed as evidence that President Bush is pro-life was his  
reinstitution of Reagan’s Mexico City policy in the first days of his  
Presidency, which forbade taxpayer dollars from being given to  
organizations that perform abortions overseas.10  However, the pro-life  
façade soon came down.  In a major policy shift, President Bush has  
decided to allow social service agencies in Africa and the Caribbean to  
receive funds from the U.S. treasury under his $15 billion emergency  
AIDS relief plan even if they promote family planning and provide  
abortions.11, 12 The New York Times confirmed, “Ignoring objections  
from his conservative base, President Bush is to make a Rose Garden  
speech on Tuesday in support of a $15 billion bill to fight A.I.D.S.  
internationally that will direct some money to groups that promote  
abortion," and that will do very little to actually prevent AIDS.13  

  Conservative groups also hold forth President Bush’s support of the  
“Partial Birth Abortion Ban” as evidence that he is indeed pro-life.   
Really?  Does that make Tom Daschle pro-life, since he supports the Ban  
too?  Don’t be so gullible, friend.  The Partial Birth Abortion Ban  
won’t save a single life!14 Not one!  Millions of rare pro-life dollars  
and countless hours of precious pro-life energy has been wasted over  
the course of a decade on a bill that won’t save a single life!   The  
same babies that would perish through the “Dilation and Extraction  
Procedure” will die through arguably more painful “procedures” such as  
the “Dilation and Evacuation Procedure,” where instead of being  
instantly killed with a stab to the head, the baby will be slowly  
ripped limb from limb.  Furthermore, the very language of the ban  
encourages the killing of the baby before extraction.  If an  
abortionist injects poison into the full-term baby’s heart, for  
instance, and then performs the “D & X Procedure,” then the Ban would  
not apply.15   Thoughtful pro-lifers should oppose this counterfeit  
pro-life bill, this colossal waste of paper that perpetuates the  
Abortion Holocaust.

  Thanks to G.W. Bush’s leadership, companies such as Planned  
Parenthood, the largest baby-killing conglomerate in the world, will  
get taxpayer funding.  Planned Parenthood was responsible for the  
deaths of 227,385 Americans in 2002 alone.  Planned Parenthood's  
2002-2003 Annual Report shows that 33 % of its income came from federal  
government grants and contracts totaling $254.4 million in the fiscal  
year ending in June 2003, thanks to Medicaid disbursements and  
President Bush’s Title X of the Public Health Service Act in 2001.   
Under Bush, this baby-killing organization has received more tax-funds  
than under Clinton!  Thanks in large part due to government handouts  
under President Bush, Planned Parenthood raked in a hefty $36.6 million  
profit in its last fiscal year.16  

  It is no exaggeration to say that President Bush kills babies.  He  
uses his influence and power to perpetuate the Abortion Holocaust.   
Abortion abolitionists need to look beyond the Republican Party to find  
friends for the preborn.  Those of us who supported George W. Bush and  
elected him to office may be responsible for the bloodshed that he  
perpetuated, either by way of our willful ignorance or our intentional  
refusal to judge righteous judgment, to judge President Bush by its  
fruit.

II. George W. Bush on Sodomy

  Conservatives all over the nation are significantly frightened right  
now about the prospects of Federally mandated “gay marriages.”  The  
Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled this summer that their state  
constitution does not forbid gays from getting married, and they gave  
the legislature six months to change the marriage laws to accommodate  
sodomites who want to marry.  If the legislature capitulates and grants  
homosexuals the right to marry, they will get married in Massachusetts  
and return to their home states to sue to have their marriages  
accepted.  Thanks to a popular interpretation of the Full Faith and  
Credit Clause of the Constitution, those suits may be successful and if  
they are, the social and financial benefits states grant to marriage  
will be minimized and the covenant of marriage in America will be  
crippled.  Under the present judicial tyranny that regularly defies the  
will of the people and spurns the Constitution, the fear of family  
advocacy groups is legitimate.

  Similarly, conservatives fear the judicial activism that is forcing a  
new religion down our throats, namely, atheistic humanism.  We have  
Federal judges like U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruling that  
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore has no right to acknowledge God on the  
job.  Conservatives are in an uproar about the judicial tyranny that  
would cause a democratically-elected, upright man such as Roy Moore,  
who was only following his state Constitution’s precedent in  
acknowledging God, to be evicted from the state bench. 

  Where do these bench-legislating, cultural-marxist judges come from?

  They come from Presidents like G.W. Bush!  And they are rubber-stamped  
to the bench by the so-called conservative Republicans in the Senate.   
Let’s judge this President Bush by his fruit. 

  In an interview with Diane Sawyer on gay unions, President Bush said,  
“The position of this administration is that whatever legal  
arrangements people want to make, they’re allowed to make, so long as  
it’s embraced by the state or at the state level.”17   In other words,  
if state Supreme Court judges want “civil unions” like the Vermont  
statute, that state should be allowed to have it.18   We should not be  
surprised by the judicial tyranny that threatens to force gay  
marriages, “gay civil unions,” and a new state religion, atheistic  
humanism, upon us – we have supported and voted for men such as  
President Bush who appointed these pro-abortion, pro-homosexual  
judicial activists.  The same family advocacy groups that condemn  
statements of President Bush like this that undermine traditional  
marriage supported him in 2000 and will probably support him in 2004.  

  President Bush has stated that he has no qualms about hiring  
homosexuals,20 and he has proven it.  He has appointed open homosexuals  
to high government positions at a rate that makes Bill Clinton look  
like a homophobe!21  In December of 1999, when President Bush was  
Governor of Texas, he appointed a supporter of the Houston Gay and  
Lesbian Political Caucus and also of Planned Parenthood, Martha Hill  
Jamison, to the 164th District Court in Houston.  Very early in his  
tenure as President, G.W. Bush appointed a pro-homosexual, pro-abortion  
candidate to the Federal bench.22  Early in 2000, President Bush  
attempted to purge the Republican platform of planks against homosexual  
marriage and homosexuals in the military.  On April 9, 2001, he  
appointed a renown homosexual activist, Scott Evertz, to the Office of  
National AIDS Policy, which was the first appointment of an open  
homosexual to this federal position.23  On June 18, 2002, he  
transferred Evertz to direct U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS and  
appointed another homosexual activist to take over as new director of  
the Office of National AIDS Policy.24

  On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed a homosexual activist  
to be Ambassador to Romania at the protest of the Romanian government.   
Furthermore, President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an  
“unmarried partner” of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status  
as a married spouse.  So the ambassador’s homosexual lover accompanies  
him to official government functions, travels with and resides with him  
on the taxpayers’ tab.  On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an  
open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts.25  He presided  
over the appointment of another open homosexual to oversee the choice  
of civilian personnel at the Pentagon.26   The Bush administration  
posted a job for a "gay and lesbian program specialist" at the  
Department of Agriculture.  On November 1, 2001, President Bush  
appointed an open homosexual to the State Department as an arms control  
advisor, which was the first appointment of an openly gay person to a  
senior arms control post.  President Bush insisted that openly  
homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent  
speaking role at the Republican National Convention.27, 28  On January  
25, 2002, President Bush appointed many openly gay Republicans to the  
President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.29  

  G.W. Bush hired running mate Dick Cheney’s openly gay daughter to be a  
consultant for him during his campaign.  “The governor believes Mr.  
Cheney has a wonderful family,” a Bush spokesman said. “Being gay or  
lesbian is not a liability in this campaign.  The governor embraces  
both of Mr. Cheney’s daughters and will invite them to campaign with  
him.”30   Dick Cheney openly promotes “same-sex unions.”31

  On Dec. 21, 2001, President Bush and the Republican Congress passed  
historic legislation extending family health benefits to Washington,  
D.C., employee's "partners" and also gave unfettered adoption rights to  
D.C. homosexual couples.  He refused to nullify a 1998 Clinton  
executive order prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals in the  
federal workforce.  He signed a bill allowing death benefits to be paid  
to the “domestic partners” of firefighters and police officers who die  
in the line of duty.32  This was the first time that a federal death  
benefit was granted to same-sex couples.  He has increased funding for  
homosexual propaganda campaigns under the guise of health education  
programs.  He allowed the Office of Personnel Management, the  
Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, and the  
Department of Justice, to openly celebrate “gay pride.”33   On April  
18, 2002, at the annual meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, the White  
House hosted a first-ever policy briefing for gay Republicans,  
featuring senior administration advisors.34  On June 24, 2002,  
President Bush signed the Father Mychal Judge Act, in honor of the  
openly gay fire department chaplain who died at the World Trade Center  
on 9-11.  This act allows public safety officers killed in the line of  
duty to assign federal benefits to designated beneficiaries, including  
same-sex partners.35   It is the first such federal law which allows  
such benefits to be granted.

  President Bush publicly praised the Metropolian Community Church of  
Los Angeles on occasion of its 35th anniversary, a church that performs  
6,000 “gay marriages” annually.36   In his letter of congratulations,  
President Bush said, “By encouraging the celebration of faith and  
sharing of God's love and boundless mercy, churches like yours put hope  
in people's hearts and a sense of purpose in their lives.  This  
milestone provides an opportunity to reflect on your years of service  
and to rejoice in God's faithfulness to your congregation."

  George Bush joined a horde of homosexual activists in maligning and  
mischaracterizing a Christian man, Jerry Thacker, he had appointed to  
the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.  Mr. Thacker’s wife  
acquired the disease from a blood transfusion during delivery, and when  
she and her infant son succumbed to the disease, Jerry Thacker, now HIV  
positive, devoted himself to ministering the transforming love of God  
to those dying of AIDS.  He offered forgiveness and redemption to  
homosexuals through the grace of Jesus Christ and reparative  
counseling.  Presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer said of Thacker, "The  
views that he holds are far, far removed from what the president  
believes."37   Thacker withdrew from the appointment after President  
Bush and the homosexual smear machine began to denigrate and verbally  
assault him for his beliefs.

  George Bush’s home church in Texas is Highland Park United Methodist  
Church in Dallas.38 This church welcomes impenitent homosexuals as  
members.  President Bush said he reads the Bible daily, but he  
confessed to the New York Times, “I don’t necessarily believe every  
single word is literally true.” About the evolution-creation debate, he  
said, “The verdict is still out on how God created the earth. I don’t  
use the Bible as necessarily a way to predict the findings of  
science.”  In other words, Darwinism may be true according to President  
Bush.  When the Bible and a scientific consensus are at odds, whom do  
you think that George Bush believes?

  The church has largely neglected its Biblical duty to judge a tree by  
its fruit, to “judge righteous judgment.”39   George W. Bush is a  
counterfeit conservative.  If judicial activists pervert the covenant  
of marriage to accommodate the homosexual lobby, it will be because of  
politicians like George Bush who appoint them.  The majority of the  
Supreme Court justices who handed legalized child-killing down to us,  
who outlawed Bible reading and prayer in schools, and who refused to  
hear Roy Moore’s appeal were appointed by Republican “Christians” who  
got in office with the support of the conservative Christians in  
America.  The blame for the assault on the traditional family and the  
preborn can be laid squarely at our feet because of our negligence in  
preferring pragmatism over principle, political power over persecution,  
and religious pluralism over Christ.  The Supreme Court has forsaken  
God ultimately because the professing church has forsaken God.   
Thousands of “the least of these” are murdered every day in America  
because the majority of professing Christians voted for it or failed to  
vote against it.  The only truly pro-life, pro-family, constitutional  
candidate for President who was on the ballot in 2000 was the  
Constitution Party’s candidate, but that vote would have required a  
faith that works. 

III. George W. Bush on Other Issues

  There are many other reasons Christians should conscientiously object  
to voting for George W. Bush.  Certainly, many of these acts are not  
necessarily sinful, but together they provide convincing proof that  
George W. Bush is not an authentic conservative.

  *   He demoralized Korean and Japanese Christians by bowing down at a  
pagan Shinto shrine in Japan.40
*   His public profession that Muslims and Christians worship the same  
God, contrary to the plain teaching of Scripture.41, 42 
  *    His endorsement of Ramadan, a Muslim fast, at a White House  
celebration.43
  *    His proposal to increase funding of the National Endowment for  
the Arts by 15 percent, the highest percentage increase in two  
decades.  That's a total of 139 million dollars in 2005 to finance art,  
much of which is blasphemous.  (Recall the taxpayer-financed painting  
of a crucifix in a jar of urine.)44
  *    His support of increased Federal involvement in the education of  
children at the state and local level.  Funding for government  
education has increased billions of dollars under President Bush.45 
  *    His support of Clinton’s 1995 “assault weapons ban” which  
outlawed a host of semi-automatic guns.  The gun ban was due to expire  
in 2005, but according to Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan, "The  
president supports the current law (the Clinton gun ban), and he  
supports reauthorization of the current law."46, 47
*    His approval of federally-financed experimentation on human  
embryos.48
  *    His support of Clinton’s National Monuments Declaration, in which  
millions of acres of western land were seized by the executive  
branch.49, 50
*    His dramatic increase in the size and spending of the federal  
government with a record deficit.  With his $2.23 trillion budget, his  
administration will complete the biggest increase in government  
spending since Lyndon Johnson’s "Great Society."  The budget deficit  
predicted by the House Budget Office will hit a record $306 billion.   
Spending on government programs increased 22 % from 1999 to 2003.  A  
Washington Post report said, "The era of big government, if it ever  
went away, has returned full-throttle under President Bush.”  Former  
House Majority Leader Dick Armey commented that under President Bush,  
the federal government is "out of control." 51
*    Not only did President Bush publicly condemn Judge Roy Moore’s  
actions52, his chief political consultant Karl Rove spearheaded the  
attack against him.53   When Roy Moore was before Bill Pryor’s  
inquisition, about to lose his job for his public stand for God,  
President Bush was in California campaigning for a pro-abortion,  
pro-homosexual Republican, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
  *    His expansion of government welfare programs to illegal aliens  
and his proposals to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.54, 54, 56    
President Bush has demonstrated dangerous negligence in restoring  
security to our borders.
  *    His proposal to increase the budget and the power of the Internal  
Revenue Service: “Bush would give the IRS a 5.3 percent boost to $10.4  
billion for the budget year that begins Oct. 1.  That will include $133  
million dollars for added audits of businesses and high-income  
taxpayers.”58
  *    His increased funding of the National Endowment of the Arts,  
which uses taxpayer money to publicize vulgar and blasphemous “art,”  
such as the artwork depicting a crucifix in a jar of urine.59, 60
*    His endorsement and promotion of the globalist,  
sovereignty-threatening aims of the United Nations.61, 62  He has  
continued the Clintonian policy of sending our soldiers to serve under  
U.N. commanders on U.N. missions.
*    He signed into law a massive expansion of Medicare that, according  
to Ron Paul (R-Texas), resulted in "the single largest expansion of the  
federal welfare state since the Great Society programs of the  
1960s."63, 64
*    In spite of the fact that he campaigned on the promise to veto any  
campaign finance reform legislation that limited Americans’ freedom of  
speech, he signed into law the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform  
Bill that effectively eviscerated the first amendment.65, 66
*    With the so-called Patriot Act and the Domestic Security  
Enhancement Act of 2003, his remedy for terrorism has been an  
ever-growing police state.67  These pieces of legislation read like KGB  
manuals of an all-powerful Leninist state – Janet Reno could only dream  
of serving under such a President!  The government can bug and search  
citizens and their private records without court oversight and without  
suspicion of a crime; they can lock you up indefinitely without a  
formal charge; they can deny you an attorney and a jury of your peers,  
etc.   Our leaders have exploited a tragedy to retire as the servants  
of the citizens and attempt to usurp constitutional limitations to  
become our masters. 

  G.W. Bush is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, he’s anti-gun, and he’s the  
biggest spender in American history.  American conservatives have taken  
the bait at the expense of their cause and God’s glory.

  Rebuttal: (One I heard many times in the year preceding the 2000  
elections.)

  “A vote for Howard Phillips,” (the only pro-life, pro-family  
constitutional Presidential candidate on the ballot 2000) “is a vote  
for Al Gore.” 

  If you are shortsighted, pragmatism will dictate that you vote for the  
least wicked man who will do the least amount of wickedness and destroy  
the least amount of your freedoms these next four years.  I have a good  
friend who can’t stand President Bush’s pro-abortion or pro-homosexual  
leanings or his big-government remedy for every social ill, but he  
voted for Bush in 2000 anyway because the one thing he feared more than  
Bush was Gore.  But if you vote for the lesser of two evils every four  
years, the lesser of two evils will inevitably become more and more  
wicked!  If you vote for the most conservative of two liberals every  
four years, the most conservative liberal will become more and more  
liberal!  Your vision must be greater than the next four years.  You  
need to vote with your grandchildren in mind.  

  If you always vote for the most conservative of two liberal  
candidates, then America will always be justifying the murder of  
preborn children.  Always!  In 2020, maybe the lesser of two evils is a  
pro-abortion homosexual who will charge you only 80% for taxes while  
the greater of two evils is a pro-abortion communist who charges 95%.   
Do you see what I am saying?  There must be some issues on which  
conservatives will not compromise, and the legal killing of children is  
one of those issues. 

  I am going to vote to keep my conscience clean first and foremost.   
That means I’m going to vote for the best man for the job and pray in  
faith (not in unbelief) for a miracle.  If more saints did the same, we  
WILL see our miracle.69   I am praying, "God give us godly leaders who  
will outlaw abortion and govern us in accordance with the laws of  
nature and nature's God."  How can I pray this prayer and not act in  
accordance?  Should I pray in unbelief (as evidenced by my vote on  
Nov.7)?  Or should I pray in faith, and act in accordance to my  
prayers?

  Voting for Bush over Gore was not “the lesser of two evils,” as it has  
often been said.  It was more evil!  When the liberal President Bill  
Clinton tried to shove his socialistic, liberal nonsense down the  
nation’s throat, conservatives in Congress and around the nation fought  
him every step of the way.70   How can so many of those conservatives  
live with themselves as they support and vote with President Bush as he  
does the very same thing they so vigorously opposed with Bill Clinton?   
It appears that conservatives have unconditional allegiance for their  
darling, “Christian” President, regardless of how many babies he kills,  
how many militant homosexual he appoints, how much of our hard-money he  
steals and spends on nonsense to which we would not donate voluntarily,  
how many of our constitutional liberties he rescinds with his  
anti-terrorism legislation, and how successful he has been in four  
years at doing what Clinton was unable to do in eight!  As Alan Keyes  
admitted when George W. Bush was chosen to be the Republican nominee,  
Bush is more dangerous than Clinton!  Voting the lesser of two evils is  
only reasonable when it truly is lesser; but with the Republican  
Party’s capitulation to Bush’s liberal agenda, Bush accomplished much  
more for the left than Clinton ever dreamed! 

  I would be remiss to mention that many Christian Bush-supporters are  
not ignorant or naive about the President's liberal tendencies.  They  
hate government-sanctioned child-killing and the homosexual agenda and  
they are aware of Bush’s grave shortcomings in these areas, but they  
believe that promoting godliness in government is a matter of  
"incrementalism" -- a gradual shifting of policies and legislation to  
the right.  The conservative "incrementalists" condemn my approach as  
an "all-or-nothing" mentality that is doomed to obscurity and failure.   
I have two comments about the philosophy of incrementalism when it  
comes to President Bush.  First, if Bush is "incrementally" taking us  
anywhere, it's to the left.  The same goes with the Republican party as  
a whole: they are "incrementally" taking conservativism to the left --  
we are not taking them to the right.  Under G.W. Bush and a  
Republican-dominated Congress and Senate, there are more babies dying  
at the expense of the taxpayers, there are more homosexual proponents  
of gay marriage being elevated to positions of government leadership,  
the central government is getting larger and Constitutional rights are  
being undermined even more than under Clinton.  Conservatives have been  
betrayed by Bush's rhetoric, and have not judged him by his fruit. 

  Second, I freely admit that political incrementalism has its place.  I  
am not at all against it.  But there comes a time when Christians,  
constrained by conscience, must draw a line in the sand and say, "No!   
I'm not going to compromise anymore!"  If we can compromise to support  
a Presidential or Congressional candidate who supports the killing of  
innocent preborn children in some instances, then what won't we  
compromise on?  Would we compromise to support a candidate that  
supported the killing of Jews, or the elderly and infirmed?  Would we  
compromise to support the "incremental" abolition of kidnapping and  
enslaving blacks?  Would we compromise to support a candidate that  
supported the killing of Christians?  I don’t think we would compromise  
to support a “conservative” candidate who endorsed the killing of us,  
and if not, do we love our neighbor as ourselves if we compromise to  
support a candidate who endorses the killing of our preborn neighbors?   
I fear for the professing Christians who compromise to vote for a  
President whom they know justifies abortion and who doesn't want Roe v.  
Wade to be overturned.  Will they look down at their hands on Judgment  
Day to see them stained with innocent blood?  Will they hear, "Inasmuch  
as ye did it not to the least of these, ye did it not to me"? (Matthew  
25:45)

  Conclusion:

  In George W. Bush, the church has elected a government leader after  
its own image.  Our government and society have descended headlong into  
the sewage of immorality because the church has.  Homosexuals and  
pro-abortion activists fill our government offices because they fill  
our pews and choir lofts.  We have largely ceased to be the salt of the  
United States of America, and Jesus promised that we’ll be cast out and  
trodden under the boot heels of wicked men.71   Judgment must first  
begin in the House of God.  Suffering and tyranny will be our lot if we  
persist in our lukewarmness.  There are many more September 11’s  
coming, America.  The II Chronicles 7:14 remedy for national  
forgiveness and healing includes that we “turn from (our) wicked  
ways.”  If the American church doesn’t repent for tolerating sin and  
leaving our first love, then the Lord will remove our candlestick.72   
However, if we repent of our tolerance of sin and judge ourselves, if  
we put impenitent sinners out of the church as I Corinthians 5  
instructs, the Lord promises that we will not be judged.  If we pray in  
faith for godly leaders and act in accordance, then the Lord, who sets  
up and tears down kings, might restore the Republic.  The future of our  
nation and our liberties depends on our obedience to His law and will. 

  In 1995, James Dobson of Focus on the Family publicly repented on air  
and in his March newsletter for having supported somewhat pro-choice  
politicians.  “Perhaps this explains the statement I made on the radio  
last month, which some of you questioned.  Let me express it once  
more,” wrote Dobson.  “I am committed never again to cast a vote for a  
politician who would kill one innocent baby…  Never will I use my  
influence, however remotely, to support the shedding of their blood.”    
After the election, James Dobson admitted that he voted for Howard  
Phillips, the Constitution Party’s Candidate for President.  

  It’s time that Christians make the same vow: never again will we use  
our influence or our vote or a single red cent to encourage one drop of  
innocent bloodshed.  We will draw a line in the sand far enough to the  
right that no pro-abortion fanatics, homosexual activistss, or  
God-haters can win our allegiance.  Like Gideon’s Army, the Lord may  
dwindle us down to a zealous few before the victorious battle, but it  
will be a few out of whom God can get some glory. 

  As for me and my house, we will support and vote for a Presidential  
candidate that is pro-life without exceptions, who will not capitulate  
to the militant homosexuals, and who will constrain themselves to the  
Constitution upon which our nation was founded. 

Dr. Johnston practices family medicine in Zanesville, Ohio, and is Vice  
Chairman of the Constitutional Party of Ohio. His ministry is Where the  
Truth Hurts.
Email Dr. Johnston

  Send this Article to a Friend

  ENDNOTES
  1. “Bush Abortion Comments Spark Debate”, Pro-Life Infonet, 3-22-99,  
http://www.conservativenews.org/InDepth/archive/199903/ 
IND19990322e.html
   2. Joseph Kellard, “George W. Bush’s Contradictory Stand on  
Abortion”, Capitalism Magazine, 9-22-99,  
http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2371
   3. “Bush Tempers Abortion Remarks,” New York Times, 10-1-00
   4. Alan Keyes on Greenspan at Large (CNN), 8-9-01, Renew America  
Archives,  
Rhttp://www.renewamerica.tv/archives/media/interviews/ 
01_08_09stemcell.htm
   5. Judy Keen et al, “Bush: USA Isn’t Ready for Total Abortion Ban,”  
USA Today, 10-28-03,  
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-10-28-bush-abortion_x.htm
   6. J.P. Johnston, “The Line in the Sand: Siding with God to Abolish  
Abortion”,  
http://www.wherethetruthhurts.org/tractsbooksread.php?w=26&p=1
   7. “Bush, McCain Step Around Abortion”, The Associated Press, 1-27-00
   8. Washington Post, 6-15-99
   9. The New York Times, 7-9-00
   10. “Bush Reinstates Pro-Life Mexico City Policy,” Pro-Life Infonet,  
1-22-01, http://www.texlife.org/docs/bushreinstates.html
   11. Richard Stevenson, "Bush Eases Ban on AIDS Money to Pro-Abortion  
Groups Abroad," New York Times, 2-15-03,  
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/15/
   12. Edwin Chen, "Bush alters stance on AIDS funding restrictions:  
Turnabout on policy affects overseas service agencies," Los Angeles  
Times, 2-16-03, http://www.knoxnews.com/
   13. William Jasper, “The Global AIDS Con Game,” The New American,  
6-2-03,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/06-02-2003/vo19no11_aids.htm
   14. J. Johnston, “The Partial Birth Abortion Ban is a Farce,” Ohio  
Constitution Party Website, http://www.ohiocp.org/pbabanfarce.php
   15. Jim Rudd, “Partial Birth Abortion Ban of No Effect,” Covenant  
News, 11-26-03, http://covenantnews.com/rudd031126.htm
   16. Joe Giganti, “Government Funding and Abortion Income Help Planned  
Parenthood Make a Killing, According to Organization’s Annual Report”,  
U.S. Newswire,  
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=122-12172003
   17. “President Bush’s Interview with Diane Sawyer”, Log Cabin  
Republicans of Washington, 12-17-03,  
http://www.logcabinwa.com/archive/200312171214.shtml
   18. “CWA Warns: Presidential Embrace of Civil Unions Undermines  
Pro-Family Effort to Save Marriage,” Concerned Women for America –  
Media, 12-17-03,  
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/5010/MEDIA/family/index.htm
   19. Allie Martin, “Bush’s Comments Regarding Homosexual Leaders  
Rankle Pro-Family Leaders,” Agape Press, 12-18-03,  
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/182003a.asp
   20. “Confronting the Pride Divide,” The Village Voice, 9-7-99.
   21. Susan Feeney, “Bush’s Openly Gay Appointments Bother  
Conservatives”, The Dallas Morning News,  
http://www.logcabinwa.com/archive/199910221235.shtml
   22. Republican National Coalition for Life, 4-24-00
   23. “President Bush Expands AIDS Policy Team,” Log Cabin Republicans,  
7-18-02, http://www.lcr.org/press/20020718.asp, also  
http://www.lcr.org/timeline.asp
   24. “Post-Election 2000,” Log Cabin Republicans,  
http://www.lcr.org/timeline.asp
   25. “Post-Election 2000,” Log Cabin Republicans,  
http://www.lcr.org/timeline.asp
   26. “Post-Election 2000,” Log Cabin Republicans,  
http://www.lcr.org/timeline.asp
   27. “U.S. Rep Jim Kolbe to Address Republican National Convention,”  
PR Newswire, 8-1-00,  
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m4PRN/2000_August_1/63805205/p1/ 
article.jhtml
   28. “Bush Asks Homosexual Congressman to Speak,”World Net Daily,  
8-1-00, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15435
   29. “President Bush Appoints New Members to HIV/AIDS Advisory  
Council,” Log Cabin Republicans, 1-25-02,  
http://www.logcabinwa.com/archive/200201251620.shtml
   30. DrudgeReport.com, 7-25-02
   31 “Freedom Means Freedom for Everybody,” Independent Gay Forum,  
10-19-00, http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/miller/miller27.html
   32. Mike Allen, “Law Extends Benefits to Same Sex Couples,”  
Washington Post, 6-26-02,  
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44912-2002Jun25? 
language=printer
   33. “Bush Advances Gay Agenda,” Family Policy Network,  
http://www.familypolicy.net/features/bush-gays.shtml
   34. “Post-Election 2000,” Log Cabin Republicans,  
http://www.lcr.org/timeline.asp
   35. Richard Goldstein, “Bush’s Gay Gambit,” The Village Voice,  
7-17-02, http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0229/goldstein.php,  also  
http://www.johncarroll.info/Heroes.html
   36. “Bush Cheers ‘Gay’ Church After ‘Marriage Week’,” World Net  
Daily, 11-12-03,  
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35539
   37. Robert Knight, “Anatomy of a Smear: How ‘Gay’ Activists, the  
Media and the White House Shredded Jerry Thacker,” Concerned Women for  
America, Culture and Family Institute, 2- 6-03,  
http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp? 
id=3266&department=CFI&categoryid=papers
   38. “Bush: Christianity Central to His Life”, Religion Today, 1-26-00
   39. John 7:24
   40. “Denouncing The President Bush’s Shinto Shrine Worship”,  
Christian Council of Korea, Korea Evangelical Fellowship, Christian  
Ethics Movement of Korea,  
http://www.worldevangelical.org/news_japan_22feb02.html, also  
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20020219a4.htm and  
http://www.faithdefenders.com/02-23-02d.html#1
   41. “Bush: Christians, Muslims Worship the Same God,” Maranatha  
Christian Journal, 11-21-03,  
http://www.mcjonline.com/news/03a/20031121a.shtml
   42. I John 2:22-23, John 14:6,
   43. “Bush Honors Islam Holy Month”, U.S. Dept. of State website,  
Nov.19, 2001, http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/01111919.htm
   44. M. Kilian, “Bush Approves 15 Percent Budget Increase for NEA,”  
Monterey Herald, Jan.29, 2004,  
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/politics/ 
7829557.htm
   45. Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of  
Representatives website,  
http://edworkforce.house.gov/issues/107th/education/nclb/nclb.htm
   46. Shannon McCaffrey, “Bush Supports New Extension of Assault Weapon  
Ban,” The Salt Lake Tribune, 4-12-03,  
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Apr/04122003/nation_w/47311.asp
   47. “Bush Supports Assault Weapon/Mag Ban,” Neal Knox News, 4-17-03,  
http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/msg00141.html
   48. “Bush Policy Forces Taxpayers Into Cooperation With Killing  
Embryos,” Republican National Committee for Life Report, Sept./Oct.  
2001, http://www.rnclife.org/reports/2001/sept-oct01/sept-oct01.shtml
   49. “Clinton’s Latest Landgrab: One Million Acres,” Newsmax.com,  
1-18-01,  
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/17/170857.shtml
   50. “Monumental Effort,” Headwaters News, 2-13-02,  
http://www.headwatersnews.org/p.021302.html
   51. “Spending Growth Upsets Conservatives,” The Washington Times,  
6-30-03, http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030630-121947-6635r.htm
   52. “Disputed U.S. Monument Removed,” One News, Aug. 28, 2003,  
http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,216568-1-9,00.html
   53. Chuck Baldwin, “Is President Bush Really One of Us?” 10-25-03,  
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin142.htm
   54. William Jasper, “Bush’s Coming Amnesty Plan”, The New American,  
Jan.12, 2004,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/01-12-2004/amnesty.htm
   55. Mike Allen, “Immigration Reform on Bush Agenda,” Washington Post,  
12-24-03,  
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A25882-2003Dec23? 
language=printer
   56. William Jasper, “Bush’s Coming Amnesty Plan,” The New American,  
1-12-04, http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/01-12-2004/amnesty.htm
   57. William N. Grigg, “Rewarding Lawlessness,” The New American,  
11-3-3,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/11-03-2003/ 
vo19no22_lawlessness.htm
   58. Chuck Baldwin, “Bush: Biggest Spender Ever!” 2-4-03,  
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/bush04feb03.html
   59. “FY 2004 Funding for the National Endowment of the Arts,”  
Association of Performing Arts Presenters,  
http://www.artspresenters.org/advocacy/federalfundingNEA/timeline.cfm
   60.  Almanac of Policy Issues,  
http://www.policyalmanac.org/culture/arts.shtml
   61. “Whose ‘Word’ Was Given?” The John Birch Society, 11-30-03,  
http://www.jbs.org/visitor/rotnol/031130_transcript.htm
   62. “United Nations,” The John Birch Society,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/un/index.htm
   63. “Prescription Drug Subsidies and the Gangster State,” The New  
American, 12-29-03,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/12-29-2003/insider/health.htm
   64. John Goodman, “Why the Medicare Reform Bill is Bad Legislation,”  
Health Care News, 1-1-04,  
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14074
   65. “Bush Signs Campaign Finance Reform Law,” Fox News, 3-27-02,  
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48907,00.html
   66. Jeff Johnson, “Bush Signs Campaign Finance Bill, Lawsuits Filed,”  
CNS News, 3-27-02,  
http://www.aclj.org/news/govt/020328_bush_signs_campaign_finance.asp
   67. “Trading Freedom From Security,” 5-5-03, and “The Un-American  
Patriot Act,” 1-14-02, The New American,  
http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/patriotact/index.htm
   68. “The USA PATRIOT Act,” Electronic Privacy Information Center,  
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/
   69. James 1:5-8, Mark 11:22-24
   70. “The Anybody Other Than Bush’ Test,” The John Birch Society  
website, 12-14-03,  
http://www.jbs.org/student/rotnol/031214_transcript.htm
   71. Matthew 5:13
   72. Revelation 2-3
   73. James Dobson, Focus on the Family Newsletter, March 1995,  
http://www.all.org/communique/cq000211.htm
   74 “To Bolt or Not to Bolt: A Perennial Question for Purists,” Public  
Eye Magazine, Spring 2001,  
http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v15n1/State_of_Christian_Rt-04.htm

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
[email protected]
http://ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/