Consistency, Please
I avoid the topic of politics. This post is not about politics, though it will seem that way. It is about hypocrisy and inconsistency in so many Christians.
A bunch of Christians were backers of Herman Cain, despite the fact that he’s been accused of multiple cases of sexual harassment and an affair. Now that Cain is out of the race, many Christians are jumping on the bandwagon of Newt Gingrich’s campaign. Newt has committed adultery on two of his three wives. Many of the people supporting Newt are the same Christians who screamed for the impeachment of Bill Clinton because of his sexual improprieties. (An impeachment that was driven by Newt Gingrich while he was in the middle of an affair himself.)
Does character matter in a leader? I guess it’s debatable. Some argue that a man can lead effectively regardless of his personal integrity. Personally, I disagree. Given the choice, I’d rather have a man of character and integrity even if I don’t agree with all his policies, than a man who I agree with all his policies but doesn’t have character and integrity.
I guess it’s debatable, and I suppose everyone has to make that decision for themselves, but make the decision and be consistent about it. To demand Clinton’s impeachment, but then support Gingrich’s candidacy is hypocritically absurd.
First, I am not a fan of Newt so don’t read this as a defense of him.
Clinton was not impeached for having an affair. He was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. While having an affair is bad, it is not an impeachable offense. However, lying under oath is.
I do agree about character mattering in a leader. The dilemma that I am faced with is how do I pick from ‘the best of the worst’. Assume for a moment that the primary comes down to Newt vs. Romney (and yes, I am over simplifying this). In this case I would be choosing between someone that has poor character vs. someone that is Mormon. While some say that religion doesn’t matter, I tend to disagree. In this case the candidate was presented with facts about Jesus and God and when weighing those facts they made the wrong decision. A decision that will have eternal consequences if not changed.
So, in this example I am stuck choosing between a person of bad character vs. a person that has proven that, after examining the available information, they cannot be trusted to make the right choice. Unfortunately I do not trust either to do what is ‘right’.
I feel your pain.
When you get to heaven, be sure to let God know that you think that whole “David for King” campaign He had going was totally hypocritical and inconsistent.
I’m not sure how to respond to your comment, because your comment doesn’t make sense.
David didn’t attack someone for committing adultery while he was committing adultery.
And God’s people didn’t support David despite his adultery, but condemn someone else for their adultery.
Sorry you misunderstood. What I am saying is that God clearly laid out His law and His expectations and yet still saw David as someone who was fit to lead. Seems pretty “inconsistent and hypocritical” of God. I think the bottom line with the whole Newt thing is whether there is godly sorrow and repentance (although he sucked, IMHO, at answering the fidelity question in tonight’s debate, it appears in prior interviews and debates that there is a genuine sorrow and recognition of grace – and you know I of all people am sensitive to looking for it.) It will be interesting how it plays out if he is the nominee.
And call me bloodthirsty, but a Gingrich-Obama debate is flat-out dreamy.
I agree that it would provide a great debate, but I’m not so sure I want either of them to be our president. Fortunately, I don’t put any trust in the government to bring real change to our world…
Preach it.