Who Would Jesus Vote For?

      2008 presidential candidate Dr. Alan Keyes warns of the ubiquitous advance of socialist ideology within both major American political parties when he writes, "...the term "conservative" becomes an inherently shifty concept. Its meaning entirely depends on the nature of present circumstances. At present America is in the grip of a pervasively socialist-minded elite faction. The Democrats represent its risk-taking, "Gordian knot" wing (socialism at one blow); the GOP's elitist leadership represents its more risk-averse "gradualist" wing (socialism one bite at a time.) But, on the whole, the infamous Newsweek magazine cover that announced "We are all socialists now" speaks for this elite faction. Emboldened by Obama's election, it openly declared what has, de facto, been true of America's political elite since Ronald Reagan left office.”(‘How Socialist Will ‘Conservative’ Become?’ By Dr. Alan Keyes. Aug. 16, 2012. loyaltoliberty.com.)

      I would rather see Romney win, but trusting in God I cannot vote for a man who denies the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ from whom all men are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, among these life,…” and liberty.

       Dr. Alan Keyes identifies with brilliantly illuminating light of truth the crystallization of the very essence of the 'inforwar' taking place in America between the diametrically opposed ideological worldviews vying for control of the 'land of the free' once ruled by a government 'of the People, by the People and for the People,' that is to say, the secular-humanist, liberal socialist, "progressive," democratic world view and the biblical worldview, when he writes: "The rule of the Creator supersedes every such human claim. It allows each and every individual to claim the right to determine their own actions, so long as those actions conform to the disposition of right in the Creator’s endowment of their way of being (their nature)." ('Why Obama Didn't Appreciate Chick-Fil-A' Aug. 29, 2012. worldnetdaily.com.)

      Recognition by America's leaders of the 'rule of the Creator,' the Lord Jesus of the Bible, the Christ Immanuel, is an imperative if Americans would hope that God would bless America - as 'We the People' sometimes prayerfully sing.

      If America's leaders do not recognize as Creator the Lord Jesus of the Bible, (not to be confused with the myriad other Jesus's within innumerable cults today), and as Source of the unalienable rights with which all men are endowed - a recognition so plainly seen by the Founding Fathers of this nation that they found it to be a self-evident truth - then it is only a natural political progression for those leaders to attribute those unalienable rights to another source, even 'another Jesus' as the Mormons contend, -- to identify those rights as originating somewhere other than from an immutable, eternal, omniscient, Holy God, Creator of all that is.

      'Big government' "progressive, liberal-socialists will, quite naturally, gravitate towards an ideology which determines those unalienable rights as originating from..., you guessed it, ...the state.

      More insidious - in so far as it is less obvious - is the natural gravitation of the so-called 'conservative,' so-called 'Christian,' right who today generally assume an accommodating, unbiblical ideological position which corresponds to the liberal's substitutionary source from whence all men's rights emanate. They too embrace the liberal's creatively constructed alternative from where the unalienable rights with which all men are endowed by their Creator may falsely be asserted to have originated.

      In doing so, so-called 'conservatives' contribute to the diminishment of the recognition of the unalienable quality of the rights men have been endowed with by their Creator to a level of retractability.

       If the 'creative community' concept of the liberals determines through its purported 'Master Thinker' legislative leaders the rights that men are endowed with to be one thing at one moment in time but another at a later period in time, then no mere man is justified according to the liberal dogma to question the moral parameters which liberal legislator community organizer 'superhero' leaders—their ‘Master Thinkers’ gifted with sociology’s so-called verstehen, have at any given moment determined to be acceptable. To do so—according to them--would be intolerant! Does the immense hypocrisy and insanity of the proponents of delusional liberal 'reasoning' yet stand out in the light for the reader to see?

      Incapable of mounting any rational argument to defend said alternate source to the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, posited by the liberal left, the nominal Christian right, incapable of mounting a biblical apologetic argument for lack of doctrinal acumen--incapable of contending for the faith--turns away from the Bible to the same illegitimately constructed concepts of the liberal left's irrational constant redefining of what they at any given time would like political correctness, tolerance, pluralism, inclusiveness, multi-culturalism, unity, diversity, etc…, etc..., to mean as the constantly shifting moral foundation upon which to attempt to justify their political decisions and laws and qualify--according to whatever contemporaneous position upon the continuum of morally relativistic positions they should at any one time determine that the rest of us should accept as truth--the extension of certain anything-but-unalienable rights unto all men--some men more than others actually--instead of returning to the simplicity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ upon which this Christian nation, exceptional in all of human history, was founded and has been blessed by God.

      Resorting to the morally relative, currently popular and constantly changing liberal versions of the concepts of political correctness, tolerance, pluralism, inclusiveness, diversity, multi-culturalism, unity, etc..., upon which to base one's ideological principles and laws establishes those principles, embraced as beliefs, upon shifting sands of moral relativism and too relegates the pronouncement of just what contemporaneous popular version of said liberal concepts shall be acceptable at any given time in the future to whomsoever within the liberal construct of a "community" happens to be in leadership position - the 'superhero' du jour as it were--to re-define--as they see fit to re-define - said moveable, morally relative standards according to the lusts of their hearts.

The liberal's "superhero" community organizer, legislator leader may at any given moment in time within the "progressive" liberal-socialist "democratic" plan for America, according to their delusional "logic," be extended the authority to dictate precisely what is or is not politically correct; to be tolerated; is or is not sufficiently pluralistic; is or is not adequately inclusive; is or is not acceptably multi-cultural; is or is not appropriately unified or diverse. Nota bene the word "dictate" in the last sentence and its relationship to the word dictator!'

Should ‘We the People’ trust in God or not?

Who would Jesus vote for?

"In God We Trust." "One Nation Under God," "God Bless America"--We the People hold certain truths as self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. There is no mystery surrounding precisely who our Founding Fathers meant by "Creator." The "Jesus" of the Mormons is according to the doctrines and tenets of their Latter Day Saints faith, a creation of God--not the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ. Theirs is another Jesus!

I cannot vote for the 'Manchurian' Muslim from Mombasa, the criminal usurper of the presidency; Mister Barack ‘King Hussein’ Obama, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, but as a Christian and an American I cannot vote for a man who worships the demonic spirits behind the idols of the friendly, sociable cult of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a.k.a. Mormon Church, for I am sincere when I implore God to 'Bless America' and I believe that we should trust in God--as is printed on American currency--not in some other Jesus.

How shall America be 'One nation under God' yet put a man at the helm of our ship of state who worships a false God? How shall ‘We the People’ hope and pray that God would fill the sails of our ship of state with His Holy Pneuma and drive her safely through the dangerous seas of these turbulent times while at the same time effectively saying to God, 'Yeah God, we really want your blessing, but we're going to trust in this man who worships one of Satan's powers and principalities to run the show here.'?

"To say that voters who refuse to support either are somehow responsible for electing one or the other is like saying that people who refuse to submit to the demands of terrorists are somehow responsible for killing the people the terrorists subsequently murder." Dr. Alan Keyes

Thank you for the comment.  Regarding the sources for Romney's views...I did not footnote the article because the quotations are all taken directly from Romney's speeches which are all readily accessible on YouTube.  In fact, in researching for this article I watched several Romney speeches and personally transcribed his words from the video for my quotations.  I did not take someone else's word for it.  I heard/saw him make every comment I quote directly myself.  

As I said in the article, if you spend 5 minutes searching YouTube for "Romney on abortion" or "Romney on homosexuality" you will get literally hundreds of archived videos of him passionately addressing these topics.  His views on these matters are not open to debate.

Now, if you choose to believe that his decades-long views on these matters have changed 180 degrees simply because the Republican talking heads on TV say so that is your prerogative.  I prefer to look at his record, not his recent rhetoric.  

If he truly has had a change of heart on issues such as abortion, for example (including partial-birth abortion), why has he not publicly repented?  There can be no doubt that he has passionately defended the killing of infants for any reason at any time.  See this debate footage for just one example among hundreds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4.

The benefit of living in an age where information is so readily available is that we can see for ourselves what candidates have said, and done, and what legislation they have signed and supported, and what kind of judges they have appointed, and so on and so on.  It is much harder these days for candidates to simply decree that they support a particular position anytime it is politically expedient to do so.  They cannot hide their true worldview.  Romney's record is indisputable and frankly, dispicable.  

If he no longer believes that killing infants is okay, and now espouses a pro-life position as you insist, why has he never expressed deep brokenness and regret for all of the lives he aided in killing through the bills he signed while governor?

I would encourage you to prayerfully read the Scripture passages I cited in my article and search God's Word for additional relevant Truth.  

Ask yourself, "Would God vote for a candidate who supports, as passionately as Romney does, infanticide and homosexuality?"

With all due respect, I stand by my conclusion that no Bible-believing Christian should vote for someone who holds these views.

³We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. ⁴The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him