Skip to content

Voting Pro Greed

January 23, 2008

Maybe I can get some people angry with me today.

Why is it that people won’t vote for a political party because of their support for certain morally sinful issues while voting for another and ignoring their morally sinful issues?

Would someone mind explaining? It seems to me that abortion has become the issue for so many people. They say they would never vote for someone who supported abortion but why vote for someone who supports greed?

He went on: “What comes out of a man is what makes him ‘unclean.’ For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean.’ ” Mark 7:20-23

I don’t know how to break this to you but they make the same list. If I’m not mistaken these aren’t listed on a sliding scale. Murder of innocent children isn’t a ten while greed is a two. Maybe I’m wrong on that and you can explain.

I’m guessing some will explain how one party doesn’t support greed, well maybe you are right and I have been reading the wrong people because in some of what I’ve read that is exactly what they have said.

Anyway, any help on how this works?

10 Comments leave one →
  1. ben overby permalink
    January 24, 2008 1:16 am

    You’re right, Darin (IMO). The whole thing leaves me exhausted with politics. The republicans attempt make their stand on “moral” issues, while democrats make their stand on “social” issues. But since when are the two different categories? Abortion is a moral and social problem. Poverty and racial injustice is a social and moral problem. I don’t respect either way of looking at life.

  2. Jim Sexton permalink
    January 24, 2008 3:14 pm

    I just don’t get politicians. We need to view topics and contenders through the light of God’s word, not through the agenda of this party or that party.

    In my entire life I have been independent, and for many elections have even abstained. I will not cast support for someone that has a track record of doing things in a manner that is in opposition to God’s desires.

    The governments throughout history have failed miserably in their attempts to serve God, largely because they don’t seek His will in their actions and decisions. Today’s politician is more concerned with the next term than the people they are supposed to represent. I wish that politicians wishing to run for President were not allowed to occupy other political offices during their run. How much representation do you think NY is getting from Hillary right now?


  3. January 24, 2008 4:59 pm

    I think all of this politics has started too early. You hear people fighting over race, gender. Will the issues be looked at? Considered? I hope. Or will it be a defining moment for a generation, gender, or race that will be driving force in this election?

  4. January 24, 2008 9:21 pm

    Part of me says, “Hey, might as well vote for the Clinton/Obama ticket!” Fat old white men haven’t fixed anything since… EVER! Might as well give someone else a shot at it.

    I don’t understand why some congregations will disfellowship someone because of lack of attendance, and promote them to leadership positions because of greed.


  5. January 24, 2008 11:03 pm

    Nick, I hear what you are saying.

    So Jesus turns away the rich man because of his money, give what you have to the poor, it seems others would put him in leadership.

  6. January 25, 2008 9:27 pm

    I’m a little late on this one and admittedly out of the loop. It comes from being completely disiullusioned with politics as a whole.

    But I would like to know who it is you think supports greed and why you think that. I’m sure no one has stood and said, “Vote for me. I suppport greed.” Could this be a matter of interpretation or understanding of the issues? I’m not trying to be smart or anything. I sincerely want to know. Before I vote, if I bother, I do want to know who supports greed. (You can e-mail if you don’t want to say here. The link is on my blog).

    Oh, and BTW, the Democrats are greedy too.

  7. January 27, 2008 5:44 pm


    Sorry for taking so long to respond.

    This article would be my starting point. It was recommended by a Christian who is also active in Republican politics. It is from a Walter E. Williams.

    “Wonders of Greed

    What human motivation is responsible for getting the most wonderful things done? I would say greed. When I use the term greed, I do not mean cheating, stealing, fraud and other acts of dishonesty, I mean people seeking to get the most for themselves. One might be tempted to use “enlightened self interest” but I like greed better. Unfortunately, many people are naive enough to believe that it is compassion, concern, and “feeling another’s pain” that’s the superior human motivation. As such we fall easy prey to charlatans, quacks and hustlers.

    Since it’s not considered polite, and surely not politically-correct to come out and actually say that greed gets wonderful things done, let me go through a few of the millions of examples of the benefits of people trying to get more for themselves. There’s probably widespread agreement that it’s a wonderful thing that most of us own cars. Is there anyone who believes that the reason we have cars is because Detroit assembly line workers care about us? It’s also wonderful that Texas cattle ranchers make the sacrifices of time and effort caring for steer so that New Yorkers can have beef on their supermarket shelves. It is also wonderful that Idaho potato growers arise early to do back-breaking work in the hot sun to ensure that New Yorkers also have potatoes on their supermarket shelves. Again, is there anyone who believes that ranchers and potato growers, who make these sacrifices, do so because they care about New Yorkers? They might hate New Yorkers. New Yorkers have beef and potatoes because Texas cattle ranchers and Idaho potato growers care about themselves and they want more for themselves. How much steak and potatoes would New Yorkers have if it all depended on human love and kindness? I would feel sorry for New Yorkers. Thinking this way bothers some people because they are more concerned with the motives behind a set of actions rather than the results.

    This is what Adam Smith, the father of economics, meant in The Wealth of Nations when he said, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interests.” In other words, the public good is promoted best by people pursuing their own private interests. In the case of New Yorkers, enjoying their beef and potatoes, I think they are far more concerned about enjoying those items than the motives or intentions of the suppliers. Smith also said, “I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.”

  8. Brian permalink
    January 28, 2008 3:51 pm

    i have thought about that, too. but when it comes down to it…although sin is sin, and it is the same with God. you can be lost for either.

    would you rather you wife lie to you, or have sex with another man?

    would you rather your daughter get drunk or get pregnant?

    would you rather your son be greedy or commit rape?

    the consequences and damage in this life seem to be worse for some sins than others.

    If I vote, I will probably vote to to save innocent, unborn, helpless and work on greed in other ways.

  9. January 28, 2008 4:33 pm

    Brian, I appreciate your thoughts.

    I think there is a reason that neither party embodies what I would call Christ like values and it may have something to do with King Saul.

    In the end I can’t control my sons choices, to be truthful he may do both, I hope not but I really can’t say for sure, but I can control my choices and so neither works for me and I want to choose neither in my life because I do have that choice.

    Anywyay, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

  10. January 29, 2008 9:40 pm

    I know you’ve moved on and I’ve already read part 2. But since you posted the article “The Wonders of Greed” on this post, I’ll post my reply here for ease of access.
    I’m not sure what to make of this article. Because it was recommended by a Republican and probably written by a Republican are we to assume that this is the official Republican stance and that Republicans are all pro-greed? And is this a prescriptive article, telling us how things ought to be, or is it simply descriptive of the way things are?
    If the author is endorsing greed, I am not in favor of that. But I think “greed” was the wrong term for him to use. I think he was simply singing the praises of capitalism, free enterprise, and entrepreneurship as elements of a system that creates opportunity, as opposed to the failed attempts of socialism to “equal the playing field.”
    To the quote from Adam Smith that it is “not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interests” we might add that nor is it from the benevolence of the politician (either Republican or Democrat) that we expect this—but political parties are populated by people looking out for their own interests.
    Perhaps this is why secular politics cannot possibly “equal the playing field,” but only those working for kingdom interests can really make strides in that direction.

Leave a Reply to Darin Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: