Don’t trust the secular media or their commercials. Just because something is said on television doesn’t make it so. Political ads are rife with half-truth and innuendo. No wonder they call it “mud-slinging.”
You wouldn’t want to drink muddy water. So you ask, “How would you clear the muddy water?” You run the water through a filter to catch the particles that cause the muddiness.
Run every candidate through the three-fold filter of common sense on these issues:
1. Is this candidate an advocate for the sanctity of life? Those of us who believe life is a sacred gift from God have learned over the course of decades that it is not enough for a candidate to state he/she is pro-life. We want to know if a person is determined to be an active voice to protect children in the womb and with end-of-life issues.
There are plenty of candidates who will say they are pro-life and then waffle on important votes. It is time we had candidates that we elect to office who are on the frontlines of advocacy for innocent children, the ones yet-to-be born, the ones who need protection from predators and the ones who are born with significant physiological or psychological impediments.
2. Is the candidate an advocate for the sanctity of marriage between one woman and one man? The advocates for alternate forms of marriage and family are aggressively seeking legitimization. They want and are willing to pay for candidates who will give their agenda a platform for articulation. What they despise are candidates who believe that the biblical standard for a marriage, the only legitimate standard, is a life-long relationship between one man and one woman.
Every time people deviate from that standard, that choice generates huge problems for people and for cultures. If a candidate begins with excuses about marriage and family, how can he/she be confident advocates for the basic element of society, the family?
3. Is the candidate an advocate for Constitutional religious liberty that accommodates faith in the public square? After thoroughly reading many of the documents by the Constitutional framers (not reading what others have said they say), it is clear that their idea was never a government sterilized of expressions of faith. The majority of the framers were men of deep faith and they expressed their faith. However, they emphatically did not want a government faith, a particular church. It was beyond their comprehension that this form of government could survive under the dominion of a hierarchal church or a secular worldview.
So we must ask, “Does this particular candidate stand on the side of defending the right of conscience for every person? Or does political expediency outweigh this precious freedom?”
Filters help us see things more clearly. Some of the political noise simply muddies the landscape. So before you step into the ballot box check out every candidate on these three non-negotiables