Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or Other: Can Any Believe and Be A Politician Today?

Does "That's not so!" mean someone lied?

What isn't permitted in today's politics?
What isn't permitted in today's politics? | Source

What does the "conduct" of Election 2012 say about the candidates?

"All's fair in love, and war," but does love of elective office make everything fair, even if it runs counter to one's religious commandments?

Let's see what we can gather from Election 2012 to think about in this regard.

For Jews and Christians the Ten Commandments suggest some things we can think about, and Muslims, Buddhists, and other religious persons can join in. There is ample cause for atheists and agnostics to think about these things in terms of what candidates' have expressed as their own religious beliefs which may be relevant to this brief discussion.

Among the Ten Commandments are two which come to mind right away.

One says:

You must not testify falsely against your neighbor.

Another says:

Thou shalt not covet...anything that is your neighbors.

Another says:

Love your neighbor as you would love yourself.

Now we are back to the "All's fair in love and war" concept.

That, of course, is presuming that "no love is lost" in the process of political campaigns.

In the second of the presidential debates in Election 2012 some observers stated that the two candidate almost looked as if they were on the verge of coming to physical blows!

That would lead us to another biblical commandment on love, namely that we should

Love your enemies.

Now it is true that biblical commandments are not commandments in every other religion, but Buddhists, for example, believe in a teaching that its adherents should do nothing that would harm another human being, and teachings similar to that exist in other faiths.

Where does that place political candidates in this realm of commandments and teachings?

It seems unlikely that campaigns which choose their own interpretations of what they call "facts and statistics" are going to always agree with their opponents' interpretations of those "facts and statistics. And candidates may even challenge each other on the truthfulness of those "facts and statistics."

Can they possibly "agree to disagree"?

Possibly----but more than likely only after the election results are final. What seems to happen in the meantime is more like war than love.

_______


© 2012 Demas W. Jasper All rights reserved.

More by this Author


Comments 14 comments

Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

No, they can't agree to disagree. A Politician caught in a lie is like a kid with a hand full of cookies swearing he was not in the cookie jar.

I suspect in some cases, they have told the same lie so many times, they now believe it themselves.

By the time the election arrives, after a full year of smear campaigns, we citizens wonder if we can really trust any of them.

Great job on this hub.


Perspycacious profile image

Perspycacious 4 years ago from Today's America and The World Beyond Author

Old Poolman: How will the last debate in Florida weigh in Election 2012? "Foreign Policy" as the final debate? What "more flexibility after the election" was President Obama referring to in his aside to Medvedev for passing along to Putin? I'd like to see that one clarified. Any chance it will be?


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

No, that subject will not be covered. Just more of the same. It would be so nice to hear some solutions to problems instead of listening to excuses and blaming all those Presidents from the past for our problems.


btrbell profile image

btrbell 4 years ago from Mesa, AZ

Great hub....sad subject! It's funny how some things never really change...new faces, new words, same lies! Thank you for this hub!


MizBejabbers profile image

MizBejabbers 4 years ago

Personally, I think we give our presidents too much credit for the good accomplished in Washington, and we put too much blame on them when things happen that we don't like. I think we can blame some of our problems on past presidents all the way back, but Congress has to shoulder most of the blame. The president influences Washington policies, but is Congress that passes the laws and Congress can override presidential vetoes if the members wish. The presidential debates are little more than two boys playing "King of the Mountain," so why do constituents put so much stock in what they say they will or won't do. We send our representatives to Washington (this includes senators) so if they are not doing what we like, we the voter have to shoulder some of the blame, too. But I also hear a lot of bellyaching from people whose party's candidate lost the election, which means they are in the minority. Then they complain that the president isn't doing what the "people," meaning themselves who are the minority, want him to do.

But I agree that it would be nice to hear some logical and affordable solutions to problems instead of just the parties's lines. You've written a good hub and I voted you up and interesting.


Perspycacious profile image

Perspycacious 4 years ago from Today's America and The World Beyond Author

Old Poolman, btrbell, MizBejabbers: The two major parties both have War Chests from which candidates with party approvals can draw for their campaigns. Once elected, they are beholden to their particular party, just as leading candidates Obama and Romney are beholden to their donors. The "checks and balances" are out of balance because of the size of the checks!


ImKarn23 profile image

ImKarn23 4 years ago

OY!

i'm sooo confused...lol...

Bottom line is - i don't think it matter what faith a person is - a politician can no longer be trusted in any way shape or form.

they brought it unto themselves..lol

Period

Sad but true...

sharing with the hub-munity, P..


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

I say let's give Romney a chance and if he fails we can kiss him good-bye as well. We need real solutions to our very real problems.


Perspycacious profile image

Perspycacious 4 years ago from Today's America and The World Beyond Author

Is the world really better, and safer than it was in 2008? Despite a Nobel Peace Prize award two weeks into Obama's presidency, the "standard" for peace and how to accomplish it still seems ill-defined, national treasure still goes to the U.S. military/industrial complex, our military is still sacrificed for a corrupt allie Karzai who doesn't always seem aligned with USA goals, the Arab Spring seems to have been squandered, radicalism seems invigorated, we still fail to adequately condemn and contest human rights violations, our international standing is battered by our escalating national debt and the limitations it is placing on our future actions and role in the world, and we are not out of danger of a severe second worldwide recession . And, in the process, love (as defined in various religious scriptures) seems to still be taking some savage blows.


kashmir56 profile image

kashmir56 4 years ago from Massachusetts

Great hub loved the way you wrote it very clever ! I agree with ImKarn23 it does not matter what faith you believe in, politician today can't be trusted any more, they will lie just to win or discredit their opponent . They way i see it is you have a banana and a lemon, which one do you want to vote for ?


point2make profile image

point2make 4 years ago

I believe "politics" is a religion and those who choose this path must forsake all other teachings that may have, once, been a part of their lives BP..[before politics]. They reject truth and embrace "political spiritualism, PS for short, where all truth becomes a lie and all lies becomes the truth. It is quite obvious, to me, that during this election cycle the ranks of "politics" has gained many new followers who are more than willing to wrap themselves in PS and acknowledge the rest of us with the one finger salute.........Don't you just love election time and all the PS that surrounds it?? Great hub Mr. P. Voted up and that's no PS!


Jim Cancel 4 years ago

An interesting topic and article. Allow me to interject my opinion as a God fearing Christian, father of 4 children, once divorced 53 year old man. I believe it is possible for anyone to be a politician, except a true "spirit filled" christian-let me explain. A true Christian will be led by the Holy Spirit as the scriptures say. In turn, he or she wii begin to embark on a pilgrimage that wii ultimately lead them to a course of self denial, denouncing of sin, repentance , true worship in spirit and I truth, daily carrying of ones cross and ultimately, the justification of God and His Word over the opinions and wisdom of man. A true believer understand that God has said that the human heart is "wicked" above all else and has therefore acquired an understanding for the need of reliance upon God and renouncing of self. A true Christian will be content with what he has and not "clamor" for more of what the world has to offer (bigger house, fancy cars, etc.). He is able to do this because the Holy Spirit teaches him or her that " we seek a better country with foundations, whose builder and maker is God". A true Christian understands and is Spirit taught concerning what the Bible teaches about the deceitfulness of riches, that it's hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven and one will also see clearly that "the wealthy are not afflicted as other men, therefore pride serves as their necklace"-boy is this not evident today! Lastly and most importantly, a true Christian will earnestly seek to be like Jesus, who made Himself of no reputation, and warned that " the those who rule over you will lord it over you but he would be greatest in my kingdom shall be least and servant of all". No, politics runs counter to the gospel no matter how civil or descent one may appear. No, I don,t believe a true christian could withstand the onslaught of temptation, pride, ego, lust of the eyes, etc. that politics has to offer


MizBejabbers profile image

MizBejabbers 4 years ago

Hey, Jim Cancel, Mr. Bejabbers said something very similar back when our state had a Baptist preacher as Governor. Since all his constituents were not Baptists, or Christians for that matter, he had to compromise on some things, and when he tried to stand his ground on one principle in particular, it was brought to his attention that what he was trying to do was unconstitutional. So, after being under the governorship of this man, I have to say that "Christian politician" is an oxymoron.


Perspycacious profile image

Perspycacious 4 years ago from Today's America and The World Beyond Author

Thanks to all who have commented. The consensus seems to be that fully pradcticing one's faith leaves little room for being a modern day politician, whereas America's founding fathers were seemingly more principled, and definitely more devoted to a religious outlook and practice than many politicians appear to be today. The question remains posed for follow-on commentators....and for change.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working