I recently received an email from a dear friend asking for my thoughts on the upcoming election. (I will call her “Elizabeth” for the purposes of this entry.) I have taken a very unpopular stance on this election, and in so doing, I have expended no small amount of the “relationship equity” I have accrued with many of my politically-minded friends; this post, obviously, will expend even more.

So be it.

What follows is the text of “Elizabeth’s” email and my response to it. Her comments are in red, my responses are in black, and my editorial notes are in blue.

Hi John,

I have wanted to email/talk to you about the upcoming election for several weeks now. I have felt a deafening silence from you on this upcoming election. Granted…I may have missed something you have said in relation to the election. And I know it puts you in a difficult place as Pastor of many different convictions in the congregation. But I feel the need for the thoughts that God has given you in all of this. I know you spoke out very strongly before the primaries on the Mormon religion being a cult and I totally agree with you! But now that God has put these two men in front of us as our choices, shouldn’t we be voting our biblical values? I read somewhere that we are not voting for a minister, but a leader. I have been through several elections at my age, but sadly, wisdom does not always come with age! I remember when Kennedy was running and everyone was saying, “But he’s a Catholic!” He wasn’t in office long enough to prove himself but I believe he did fairly well for the time God gave him, even though I was saddened by his personal life! I am ashamed to say that when Jimmy Carter ran for president, I voted for him because he was a Christian! I felt he would be a wonderful president because of that! How naive was I? I really want to encourage you to speak what God lays on your heart for your congregation about this election because this, for all of us, is one of the most, if not THE most, important election I have ever been privileged to vote in. My biggest concerns are for my children and grandchildren and the world they will be a part of if Obama gets a second term!

I love you John, and I will be praying for you!

Elizabeth

Hi Elizabeth!

I’m glad you wrote me an email and shared your concerns. I’ll go point-by-point through what you wrote and explain what I believe God has placed on my heart. While I don’t expect that you will agree with me (very few do), I hope to at least show you that I have reached my conclusions based upon biblical and logical reasoning, not emotion or bigotry. I also hope that you will read this knowing that I love you and everything I state herein is stated with sincerity and is not meant to insult you or offend you. I have the highest respect for you and I treasure you as a friend and a sister-in-Christ. Since that is true, I want to answer your concerns completely and with integrity.

You wrote,

“I have felt a deafening silence from you on this upcoming election…I know it puts you in a difficult place as Pastor of many different convictions in the congregation.”

I would characterize it differently, I suppose. My preaching ministry has always and will always reflect an emphasis on applying biblical truths to the events and issues of the day. I have preached against and written against President Obama’s policies many times, especially concerning his indefensible positions on matters like abortion, the sanctity of marriage, religious freedom, and his disgusting hostility toward Israel.

The “different convictions in the congregation” will never cause me to withhold anything, even if it jeopardized the security of my position at church. If I ever become too fearful to speak boldly and clearly on anything, I will know that the time has come for me to leave the ministry. I am all for unity, but only unity in truth; I would rather we are all divided by truth than united by error.

As far as my political beliefs are concerned, I would dare say that no one I know wants to see the Obama administration out of office more than I do.

With regard to any perceived “deafening silence” on my part concerning this election, I lovingly disagree with you. I have been very forthcoming about my profound distrust of both Willard Mitt Romney and B. Hussein Soetoro-Obama; I have chosen to respond in writing or in person to any congregant, who, like yourself, has asked me where I stand. This is because it would be both impossible and inappropriate to satisfactorily explain my reasoning in the format of a sermon. It is also because – much to the disappointment of some – I’m not going to use God’s pulpit to campaign for Romney. I have noticed a disturbing trend in which many Christians – even famous Evangelical preachers – are behaving as if Christ is somehow going to be deposed from His throne should Romney lose this election. I have read and heard many of Willard’s supporters insisting that preachers like me “should say more about this election” (some are actually meaning, of course, that I should be saying, “Vote for Romney!”). Informed patriotism and ardor for conservative political activism are both fine ideals in my book, ideals to which I myself aspire. But when our passion for these things begins to rival our zeal for the purity of the Gospel, then we truly have lost our way.

Implicit in the idea that Christians are “voting our values” by voting for Romney is the suggestion that we should pragmatically cast our lot with “the lesser of two evils.” Since a lesser evil is still evil, my beloved Sister, I ask you, “What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14) Nowhere does my Bible instruct me to choose the lesser of two evils; it does, however, command me to “Avoid every kind of evil.” (1 Thessalonians 5:22)

While Romney is perceived by some as the lesser of two evils politically, he and Obama compose two sides of one equal evil spiritually. Romney is a cultist, and I encourage you to study the tenets of his cult very closely. Ousting Obama is important, my dear, but not so important that I can, as a Christian, cast my Christ-owned vote for a man who embraces and upholds the same lie Satan used to seduce Eve (Gen. 3:5 – “…you will be like God…”).

Make no mistake: The establishment of an American Mormon theocracy / theodemocracy has always been the highest aspiration of the Mormon cult’s civic agenda. This is a matter of historical record, not my opinion. The election of Willard Mitt Romney to the most powerful office on earth will be a colossal leap forward for that insidious goal.

(Recommended reading)

On election day, I definitely will vote, though I will be writing in the man my Christian conscience will allow me to support, someone I believe is a true conservative and not a cultist. (Hint: It ain’t Willard Mitt Romney and it ain’t B. Hussein Soetoro-Obama!) Now, this is the point where you may be thinking, “You’re throwing your vote away!” First of all, it isn’t my vote, it’s Jesus’ vote. He owns all that I have. My Christian conscience simply will not allow me to cast Christ’s vote in favor of Willard the cultist or B. Hussein Soetoro-Obama. How your Christian conscience permits you to vote is entirely your business – not mine – and it is between you and Jesus, and I want you to know that I fully respect that.

Now you may be thinking, “But a vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama.” To that I can only respond, “If that were true, then a Christian’s public support for Romney is public support for magical underwear, baptism of the dead, the eventual godhood of the temple-worthy Mormon, and a false Christ.” Elizabeth, to my shame, I once was a “temple-worthy Mormon,” baptized in 1988. I know what I’m talking about, and this is what we talk about when we talk about Mormonism. But I’m sure that we can agree that a vote for the man I vote for is a vote for the man I vote for.

You wrote,

“But now that God has put these two men in front of us as our choices, shouldn’t we be voting our biblical values?”

My Sister, I intend to do just that – vote my biblical values. Willard Mitt Romney’s values and biblical values are, in my estimation, far from one in the same, so I cannot vote for him, let alone support him. Many conservative Christ-followers are so obsessed with excoriating President Obama that they’re willing to exalt Romney the cultist as a paragon of “our” values. The true followers of Jesus Christ should be every bit as skeptical of Romney’s Mormon “values” as they are of the Marxist liberation “values” taught to President Obama by his chosen mentors, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Phleger.

Let’s put Willard’s cultism aside and simply assess his record. Consider, for one example, at the biblical value of human sexuality, specifically our Lord’s condemnation of homosexual behavior, comparing and contrasting them with Romney’s “values.”

How does God feel about homosexual behavior, and what did Jesus say about marriage?

Leviticus 18:22 – “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 – Paul wrote, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Matthew 19:5 – Jesus said, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh…”

What was the first state in the Union to legalize same-sex marriage? Massachusetts did it first on May 17, 2004 (Goodrich v. Massachusetts Department of Public Health). Now, who was the highest-ranking member of Massachusetts state government when it was legalized? The answer, of course, is Governor Willard Mitt Romney.

You may be thinking, “Well, yes, but Romney’s hands were tied – it was the Massachusetts State Supreme Court that did that.”

I’m afraid not. In an August 2008 interview with CNS News, Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said this about Romney’s handling of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts: “He could have stopped it, and should have stopped it.”

And Governor Huckabee, of course, is absolutely correct. You see, when inaugurated, Governor Romney swore to uphold the Massachusetts Constitution. It was within his power and it was his sworn duty to ignore the state high court’s illegitimate marriage ruling sanctioning same-sex marriage. That ruling stayed “entry of judgment” for six months “to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of [the] opinion.” And just what action did the Massachusetts State Legislature deem appropriate, in light of the court’s opinion? The Massachusetts State Legislature deemed it appropriate to do nothing, and refused to comply with the ruling. They did exactly what they should have done. What did Romney do? Keep in mind that he could have and should have joined the Legislature in doing nothing and refusing to comply and it would have ended there. But what did he do instead? Romney proceeded to order his executive departments to implement “gay marriage” at the end of the six-month period, even though there was NO legal requirement to take such action! According to the state constitution, the Court had no authority over marriage, had no power to order either the Legislature or Governor to carry out its wish to change the definition of marriage, and had no power to enforce its opinion. It had not even asked Governor Romney to do anything!

And yet, he did. He, Willard Mitt Romney, is the one who PERSONALLY established same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, and he didn’t even have to. And as you know, this was the match that lit the fuse – Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire and the District of Columbia have followed the example that Willard himself set, with many more on the way. In 1994, running for Senate against Ted Kennedy, Willard told a homosexual newspaper he “was even more pro-gay rights than Kennedy.” His actions with regard to same-sex marriage in 2004, needless to say, proved that all too well.

Check these facts. Don’t take my word for it.

(Recommended reading)

Incidentally, who agrees with me? Alan Keyes, for one.

Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, Dean of Liberty University Law School.

Dr. Herb Titus, the founding dean of Regent Law School.

Rick Santorum laid it out plainly in the Republican Primary debate:

Now, how does Mitt Romney feel about the Boy Scouts of America excluding homosexuals from leadership in the Boy Scouts?

‘“I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts, regardless of their sexual orientation,’ Romney said in the video from 1994 recently re-surfaced by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. Romney first voiced support for gay scouts back in 1994 — a position that his campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said REMAINS HIS POSITION TODAY.” (ABC News.Com, August 8, 2012)

Elizabeth, I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that Romney’s suggestion that a homosexual scoutmaster should be permitted to share a pup tent with my son or grandson DOES NOT reflect my “biblical values.”

How does Mitt Romney feel about homosexuals serving openly in our military? It’s hard to know, based on what he says. Watch this video from the 2007 Republican debate:

In that clip, you see a perfect picture of Mitt Romney: He says whatever is politically expedient for whichever audience he happens to be addressing at any given moment. He is not a man of firm conviction; he is, in fact, downright Clintonesque. (Incidentally, this sort of thing is entirely consistent with Mormonism in general: Joseph Smith and Brigham Young mandated the practice of polygamy and fought those who dared oppose them on it. But when Utah wanted statehood and the Federal Government insisted that Utah abolish polygamy first – lo and behold – Mormon leadership suddenly received a “revelation from God” that polygamy was no longer permitted. How convenient! Romney, as you can see, has continued the Mormon tradition of weather-vane ideology, pointing whichever direction the winds are blowing at any given time. When running for governor as a Republican in a liberal state like Massachusetts, he moved left; now that he is running for president in a more ideologically diverse, national landscape, he just bunny-hops to the right.)

With regard to the sanctity of human life and precious unborn babies, ask yourself if Willard’s values are your values:

How does God feel about abortion?

Proverbs 6:17-19: “There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.”

Watch this clip of Mitt Romney explaining his position on abortion in a 1994 debate when Romney was running against Ted Kennedy for US Senate:

Here’s Willard in 2002 on the same topic:

Here he is in a CBS interview in August of 2012:

Romney said, “I’m in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest….”

Elizabeth, I know that you, like me, are fully convinced that God hates abortion. Let’s boil what you and I believe about abortion down to two premises and one conclusion:

Premise #1: It is wrong to murder a person.

Premise #2: The unborn baby is a person.

Conclusion: Therefore, it is wrong to murder the unborn.

Romney, however, stated in that last CBS clip that the baby (whom he claims to believe is a person) can be summarily murdered in the womb solely because of the conditions under which he or she was conceived. Given our two premises and our one conclusion, Willard’s statement is politically untenable, logically fallacious, and entirely unbiblical. It’s not really that different from when Obama said that if his own daughter faced a crisis pregnancy he “would not want her punished with a baby.”

You wrote,

“I read somewhere that we are not voting for a minister, but a leader.”

Many men and women of God for whom I harbor great respect have made that argument. Franklin Graham is one, as was the late Charles Colson. However, there is a glaring disingenuousness in the argument that “we are not selecting a minister, we are electing a president” and it is this: You and I both know that not a single Bible-believing Christian leader anywhere would posit that argument if we were talking about a Muslim rather than a Mormon! Imagine Franklin Graham telling us that we should vote for a politically conservative Muslim because “we are not selecting a minister, we are electing a president.” That’s not going to happen.

In fact, most of those Christians who advance the “we are not voting for a minister, but a president” argument have, at one time or another, declared that our current president is unfit for office because he is actually a Muslim pretending to be a Christian. (I believe Barack Obama is neither a Christian nor a Muslim; Obama is a narcissistic secular humanist who worships himself first and government second. And yes, this “religion” he practices so devoutly IS one of the many reasons he is unfit for office.)

Willard Mitt Romney claims to hold to many ideological and political points of view that are in keeping with the Conservative principles that you and I hold dear. Let me tell you about someone else who did that. He founded of one of our nation’s most Conservative publications, a pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, anti-big government newspaper in Washington D.C. He strongly endorsed sexual abstinence outside of marriage. He was an ardent opponent of communism and socialism. He donated heavily to the campaigns of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and was one of their most vocal supporters. Sounds like our kind of guy, right? The only problem is he was Sun Myung Moon and he founded the cult you and I know as the “Moonies,” a.k.a. the Unification Church. Now, if Franklin Graham and others who applied the “we are not selecting a minister, we are electing a president” argument really meant it, Reverend Moon is theoretically just the kind of fellow they would like to see in the Oval Office! Do you see the problem here?

You wrote,

I have been through several elections at my age, but sadly, wisdom does not always come with age! I remember when Kennedy was running and everyone was saying, “but he’s a Catholic!” He wasn’t in long enough to prove himself but I believe he did fairly well for the time God gave him, even though I was saddened by his personal life!

I am ashamed to say that when Jimmy Carter ran for president, I voted for him because he was a Christian!!! I felt he would be a wonderful president because of that!! How naive was I?

The objections to a Catholic president were grounded in the specious assertion that if the USA had a Catholic president, he would be a de facto puppet of the Vatican. Regardless of what one thinks of the Kennedy presidency, this was not the case. History gives no indication that the Pope was the secret power behind the Kennedy administration. However, I believe comparing Catholics to Mormons is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Catholics, unlike Romney and his fellow Mormons, don’t swear blood oaths to obey their church in secret temple ceremonies. Mormonism’s blood-oaths bind Mitt Romney to obey the Mormon Church in Salt Lake City above the Constitution, above US law, and, yes, above the Christian understanding of God. He has also taken oaths in a Mormon temple to put the Mormon church above all else. His oath in the temple was to “consecrate himself, his time, talents, and everything he now has, or will have in the future, for the building up of the Kingdom of God here upon the earth, and for the establishment of Zion.”

(Recommended reading)

Above all else, I can’t support Romney because his election will do more to promote Mormon evangelism than we can even begin to imagine. Romans 14:21 says, “It is good not to…do anything by which your brother stumbles.” For better or for worse, an outspoken Christian believer is perceived by spiritually-immature Christians (and the lost) as a barometer of the Christian worldview as it relates to politics and government. I believe that the inexplicable willingness of Evangelical Christians to support Willard’s candidacy is giving the Mormon cult the public relations victory of their dreams. I believe it only serves to de-stigmatize, legitimize, and ultimately advance the damnable heresies of the Mormonism in the eyes of biblically ignorant, spiritually immature believers and the unchurched / unbelieving world as well. Mormon missionaries will be welcomed more readily when they come knocking, and they will have undue credibility. My Christian conscience won’t permit me to be involved in that.

You wrote,

I really want to encourage you to speak what God lays on your heart for your congregation about this election…

Thank you. I have done so and I will continue to do so. Anything I believe God wants me to say, I will say, and I will not preach something that I don’t believe he would have me preach. That means, of course, that I will not stand in the pulpit and campaign for Romney. A most recent example is a statement I made in my sermon on Joshua 14. It angered a few people, and I knew it would, but I stand behind it:

“Some of you are so worried about who is going to win the election in November that you overlook who is on the throne forever. Before you put a sign in your yard or on your car or on your t-shirt for some pitiful politician, you need to make sure there is a sign in your heart and your life for the Prince of Peace. Too many are praying, ‘Our Father, which art in Washington,’ as Paul Harvey warned. If we could take the missionary zeal some of us have for our politician of choice and channel it into soul-winning evangelism, we’d be in the midst of a revival inferno.”

I also lovingly disagree that this election is somehow more important than any other. No single man in Washington is going to somehow bring America into a Christian/capitalist utopia, least of all a cultist like Romney who changes his “convictions” as frequently as he changes his socks. I’m already disturbed by how consumed by this election some of us are and I’m not going to add more fuel to that fire. God would not have me do that.

You wrote,

My biggest concerns are for my children and grandchildren and the world they will be a part of if Obama gets a second term!

I know you are a wonderful, loving mother and grandmother, and you have such a heart for them and for other people as well. However, if Obama gets a second term or not, Jesus Christ is still going to be on His throne and He is still going to be sovereign. The same holds true if Romney defeats Obama. My hopes and dreams for my children and grandchildren are not invested in the presidency of the United States, they are invested in the supremacy of Jesus Christ in their lives.

You wrote,

I love you John, & I will be praying for you!!!

Elizabeth

I love you too, Elizabeth! I covet your prayers and you are in mine! I hope I have deepened our fellowship rather than harmed it by what I have written here. I will look forward to your response.

Blessings,

John

So, there it is. I await the pitchforks and torches.

One statement I regret not including in this email is that, as a Christian, I’m not nearly as upset by Evangelicals supporting Romney as I am by people I know to be biblically-literate, spiritually-mature believers who nonetheless appear to have forgotten the admonition of Psalm 118:8-9: “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.” The all-consuming obsession over this election is of grave concern to me.

(The author owes a great debt to Amy Contrada of amycontrada.com for her excellent research and writing on Governor Romney.)