Amen. 

This is a very well written entry. And I applaud you for it. However, there are some Christians out there who are pushing their beliefs onto non-Christians (like myself). It's also the same with animal rights activists outside my school trying to make me vegan. And black people who vote for Barack Obama because he's black are racist. It's as simple as that. They are doing a certain thing based on skin color, not what's really important.

However, I do believe Sarah Palin is doing the wrong thing by trying to push some of the Christian beliefs on the American people. For example, I know that Christianity is against homosexuality, but since not all of America is Christian, she shouldn't push that gay marriage should be banned. Also the fact (non-Christian relted) that she really lacks in common sense and experience is why I'm voting for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

That is my two cents.

I think you strike a good chord here. The problem comes in pushing for an agenda that conflicts with national interest and the constitution. That's my take, at least.

"What's wrong with Christians voting for what they believe in"

You and many other people seem to meld moral beliefs together with political ideology. While the two can intermingle at certain points, in no way do they have to be identical. Say, for example, Bob believes idolatry is wrong and a sin. Does Bob have to also believe it is the governments role to use coercive force on its citizens to prevent this behavior? He can believe this, based on his personal moral beliefs, but in no way do the two have to absolutely coincide on everything. The christian right is catching flak for being intolerant because it has been, in the last couple of years, putting forth more and more effort into trying to make the government adopt policies that reflect their personal moral beliefs.

Let's move on to your stated example of the slot machines (i did not read the entry, so i'll try and go read it after i'm done here). Hopefully your biggest reason for voting against slot machines was not that you felt it could potentially act as a stumbling block for, in your belief, a minority of the population, without a thought of what the majority felt on the issue. What you truly vote against it if you felt it had the chance of being a stumbling block to a few, while for the majority it brought joy? If not, then you took your opinion of how you felt slot machines affected the majority as well. If you thought it brought a good deal of unhappiness to many people of the majority, then you were relying prob on utilitarian principles to an extent (and the political belief that the government should act to protect its citizens from potential self-inflected harm) and not just your moral belief system in deciding how you should vote.

And everyone and every group pushes their agenda (whether it be attempted through political means or other ways) to some extent or another.

very well written

there is nothing wrong with a voter expressing his beliefs regardless of what they are.

lawmakers legislating, different story.

there's nothing wrong with voting what they want

Amen!

I have noticed lately that the arguement seems to be that I am not entitled to disagree on an issue based on the fact that I am against it for any reason. Because any reason is not good enough to vote against something at all.

I know that didn't seem clear. It's like children throwing a hissy fit. They are past reasoning with.

I have to have a reason to vote the way I do that makes someone else opposed feel I have made a reasonable choice. Except that they are so mad I voted the way I did that my reason has to be illogical.

Christianity seems to be illogical to the rest of the country. Therefor any thing I vote on based on christian principles is illogical in their mind.

I say if you can't vote your consious because of someone else's lack of consious, they have just got to get over it.

let them throw their hissy fit.

Holy crap! Finally, someone said it! THANK YOU! 

Well written and I agree. You know that Jesus fellow, said people would not like us. so therefore even when we are not the majority we have hidden agenda's and ideas. When we are it is the same thing we are the ones called hypocrites and judgmental but we better not dare call someone else out on that see there is a double standar. I wholeheartly agree with u about slot machines, Gambling ruins people who do not do it responsibly. That being said no were in the Bible does it say Gambling is wrong, I am against gambling for its effects. I would vote against slot machines, not because I am trying to steal Joy as one person seemed to indicate, but against the nature of destruction. Listen I am wholeheardlty against gambling, but there are those who have self control who say this is my 200 dollars onces it is gone it is gone, and if I win good, so I see something wrong with that no, but the problem is not that, it is thosse who can not stop. Good post I enjoyed it

Of course people will discuss and vote according to what they believe! That's democracy. A lot of the issues are messy and personal and seem like meddling. It wasn't long ago that the right to freedom from slavery, whether blacks were even fully human, and whether women were rational enough to vote, were hotly debated issues, with strong opinions and vested interests on both sides.  Believe it or not, the church was one of the biggest advocates for emancipation and civil rights, although it wasn't uniform by any means.

Now we're wrestling with the nature of marriage and family, the lives of the unborn, freedom of religious expression, and other hot-button topics. They aren't going to go away while humans are humans and hold a diversity of beliefs. Dealing with them is messy.

This post and the discussion following it is a case in point: we need civil, reasoned discussion about issues themselves. This is the context in which democracy flourishes. Discussion is stifled when we attack each other's character and when the very act of bringing up an issue is considered a problem. My voicing and voting my beliefs may be considered "pushing my Christian agenda". That would logically make other people's voicing and voting what they believe "pushing their liberal (or whatever other label) agenda". Not a very promising starting point for reasoned discussion. How about if we talk about the issues and not each other?

@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - Well, we show our faith by our works, as James says. God expects our political involvement to be with integrity.

@too_pretty_to_die@xanga - just to be clear... I never state in my entry that I think God will judge us for how we vote, but I do believe that our faith is shown by our works.  The difference may be subtle, but it's crucial.