Gary DeMar is a Christian activist and the President of American Vision. DeMar has long been a critic of third party politics. Here is an article he wrote criticizing the “lesser of two evils” argument:
You’ve heard anti-Republican critics say, “I just can’t vote for the lesser of two evils.” If this is true, then you can never vote since we’re all evil, although some are more evil than others. I have a number of Calvinist friends who use the “lesser of two evils” argument. If you know anything about Calvinism, then you know the acronym TULIP. The “T” in Tulip stands for Total Depravity. It also goes by the names total inability or total corruption. It’s not that a person is pure depravity but that all his actions and thoughts are tainted by evil. Sin has corrupted every part of our being.
Very well stated @ 11! Very well indeed.
There’s one bit of truth at the end of this article: “The establishment leadership in both parties has worked hard to keep competitors out.” Ask Ron Paul. They don’t even follow their own rules in keeping out competitors. The plain fact is that both of the two faces of our national monoparty are so fundamentally corrupt that infiltrating either of them is a fool’s errand. Trying to change the GOP or Democratic party is literally like wresting a hog- all that happens is you get covered with mud and pig excrement, and annoy the pig.
Red,
I concur, thank you for saving me from typing that.
The author is correct in that the movement must be done locally.
He could have added that if all of the tea party people and Christian organizations had supported Constitution Party candidates, they would indeed win on the local level.
Instead, soon my home email inbox will be filled with “We can’t let Obama win, and we don’t like Romney but we all must vote for him or else it could be the end of America…”. If Obama won but the House and Senate were full of Libertarians and Constitutionalists, that would be a sight to see….
the first words of his first sentence “You’ve heard anti-Republican critics say, ” gives him away as a partisan hack worried about his party’s candidate losing votes.
6 A, for me, I vote for the person who best represents my views and who I think is the best exponent of liberty. When I don’t vote, I don’t because even the best exponent is insufficient in his/her approach for me to take the time to go to the polling booth, so I sit it out.
I expect that I’ll feel the best in my lifetime voting GJ.
No need to use a “lesser of two evils” argument at all. One’s vote is only significant to one’s self (No national election will ever be decided by your one vote- if it came to that, the courts would decide, not your one vote). So, vote according to whom you think would best carry out the constitutional duties of the presidency.
Christians can have a theological discussion about voting, but when people make the “lesser of two evils” argument, they are not generally making a theological argument, and I think Mr. DeMar knows that. So bringing up total depravity (which you do not have to be a Calvinist to believe) may be cute, but it does not really address the issue.
DSZ,
I guess it depends on what you mean by “endorsement.” There’s a group of philosophical approaches (theodicies and cosmodicies) which attempt to reconcile the asserted goodness of deity or the universe with the existence of evil, and within that group there are some variants which posit that evil is a requirement of the larger system. So I’d call that at least a lukewarm endorsement.
*serious moral philosophical system. No shock value Satanic satirists may apply.
I would desire to know of a philosophical system which encourages an endorsement of evil.
As a Calvinist, and a Presbyterian who holds strongly to TULIP, the points this guy is trying to make totally baffles me. When did third party activists ever bring the doctrine of total depravity into their reasoning? I’m floored…