Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice!

Now we begin the final countdown to the November 2016 election which will determine, to a great extent, the future of America.  Basically it boils down to - do I want to see my children and grandchildren have an opportunity to live in an America similar to the great nation I enjoyed when I was starting on my life journey.  

Or do I want to see them live in the kind of America which has been molded by Obama and the Clintons - an America where increasingly we are being told to hide our Christian faith in the closet ~ an America where my wife, daughters, and granddaughters cannot feel safe using a restroom, dressing room, or public shower ~ an America which has replaced Positive Traditional Values with an amoral society's Relativistic Values, i.e., if it feels good to you, it is right.  No, that is not the America I want to leave for my children, grandchildren, and their children.

Today, on Facebook, I found an article from Townhall.com, a leading source for conservative news - and - political commentary and analysis.   The article is titled "Wayne Grudem - Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice" and was written by Dr. Wayne Grudem.  Most people who have attended a Christian school or seminary will easily recognize Dr. Grudem's name.   His book, "Systematic Theology," has virtually become "the" theology text book of choice in most Bible Colleges and Seminaries.   In my personal library I have his "Bible Doctrine, Essential Teachings Of The Christian Faith" which is a condensed version of his Systematic Theology text book.

Dr. Grudem is a prominent evangelical theologian, seminary professor, and author.  He is professor of Bible and Theology at Phoenix Seminary.  He was Chairman of the Department of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School - and has taught for over 35 years. 

So, when a man of Dr. Grudem's credentials, knowledge, and character tells me that voting for Donald Trump is a morally good choice - I listen!

What I am attempting to do in this writing is to give you a synopsis or condensed version of his article.  If you agree with this portion of his article, I pray you will visit the Townhall web site and read his full article.  Yes, I believe the information he gives us in this article is of critical importance for all Americans - for we will soon be deciding with our votes who will lead America into the future.   We will be deciding between a president who will set the course for the restoration of America and American values - or a president who will continue to pull America down into a socialistic cesspool.

In his article, Dr. Grudem offers you a comparison between another Clinton presidency - and a Trump presidency.  I pray you will pay close attention to what he tells us:

Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice

By Dr. Wayne Grudem - Jul 28, 2016
http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/07/28/why-voting-for-donald-trump-is-a-morally-good-choice-n2199564

 Some of my Christian friends tell me they can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump because, when faced with a choice between “the lesser of two evils,” the morally right thing is to choose neither one. They recommend voting for a third-party or write-in candidate.

As a professor who has taught Christian ethics for 39 years, I think their analysis is incorrect. Now that Trump has won the GOP nomination, I think voting for Trump is a morally good choice.

A good candidate with flaws:  I do not think that voting for Donald Trump is a morally evil choice because there is nothing morally wrong with voting for a flawed candidate if you think he will do more good for the nation than his opponent. In fact, it is the morally right thing to do.

I did not support Trump in the primary season. I even spoke against him at a pastors’ conference in February. But now I plan to vote for him. I do not think it is right to call him an “evil candidate.” I think rather he is a good candidate with flaws.

He is egotistical, bombastic, and brash. He often lacks nuance in his statements. Sometimes he blurts out mistaken ideas (such as bombing the families of terrorists) that he later must abandon.  .  .  These are certainly flaws, but I don’t think they are disqualifying flaws in this election.

On the other hand, I think some of the accusations hurled against him are unjustified.  His many years of business conduct show that he is not racist or anti-(legal) immigrant or anti-Semitic or misogynistic – I think these are unjust magnifications by a hostile press exaggerating some careless statements he has made.  I think he is deeply patriotic and sincerely wants the best for the country.  He has been an unusually successful problem solver in business. .  .  But the main reason I call him “a good candidate with flaws” is that I think most of the policies he supports are those that will do the most good for the nation.

Seek the good of the nation:  Should Christians even try to influence elections at all? .  .  .  By way of modern application, I think Christians today have a similar obligation to vote in such a way that will “seek the welfare” of the United States.  Therefore the one overriding question to ask is this:  Which vote is most likely to bring the best results for the nation?

This year we have an unusual opportunity to defeat Hillary Clinton and the pro-abortion, pro-gender-confusion, anti-religious liberty, tax-and-spend, big government liberalism that she champions. I believe that defeating that kind of liberalism would be a morally right action. .  .  .  Some may feel it is easier just to stay away from this messy Trump-Clinton election, and perhaps not even vote. But the teachings of Scripture do not allow us to escape moral responsibility by saying that we decided to do nothing.

I am writing this article because I doubt that many “I can’t vote for Trump” Christians have understood what an entirely different nation would result from Hillary Clinton as president.  .  .  .

The Supreme Court with Clinton as president:  Hillary Clinton would quickly replace Justice Scalia with another liberal like Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan.  This would give liberals a 5-4 majority on the Supreme Court even without Justice Kennedy, and 6-3 when he votes with them.

But that is not all. .  .   A President Clinton could possibly nominate three or four justices to the Supreme Court, locking in a far-left activist judiciary for perhaps 30 or more years.  .  . Judicial tyranny of the type we have seen when abortion rights and same-sex marriage were forced on the nation would gain a permanent triumph.

Abortion:  Voters should not doubt the power of the Supreme Court to abolish all these laws restricting abortions. Think of the power of the Obergefell v. Hodges 5-4 decision in June, 2015. It instantly nullified all the work that thousands of Christians had done over many years in persuading the citizens of 31 states to pass constitutional amendments defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  .  .  .  We lost – not at the ballot box, but because we had a liberal Supreme Court that nullified the democratic process regarding the definition of marriage.

Religious liberty:  The current liberal agenda often includes suppressing Christian opposition to its views. So a liberal court would increasingly nullify rights of conscience with respect to forced participation in same-sex marriage ceremonies or expressing moral objections to homosexual conduct.  .  .

Are my predictions about this kind of loss of religious liberty too grim?  The three Conservative Justices still on the Supreme Court expressed similar concerns just last month.  .   .  .

Christian business owners:  If Clinton appoints just one more liberal justice, it is likely that many Christian business owners will be targeted.  .  .  Step-by-step, Christians would increasingly be marginalized to the silent fringes of society. Is withholding a vote from Donald Trump important enough to pay this high a price in loss of freedom?

Christian schools and colleges:   A liberal Supreme Court would also impact education. Christian colleges would likely be found guilty of “discrimination” if they required adherence to the Bible’s standards regarding sexual conduct, or even required affirmation of primary Christian beliefs. .  .  .Colleges like Biola and Azusa Pacific could not long survive under those regulations.  .  .  Another possible target of the liberal agenda would be laws that allow for home schooling, if the secular/ liberal governmental hostility to home schooling in European countries is any indicator.

Churches:  Churches would not be exempt from the impact of a liberal Supreme Court.  The court could rule that any school district is allowed to ban churches from renting school buildings on Sundays, an action that could severely hinder the work of small churches and church planting in general.  .  .  . And some churches in Iowa have now been told that they have to make their bathrooms open to people on the basis of their “gender identity” if the churches are going to be open to the public at all.

Freedom of speech:  Freedom of speech would be increasingly restricted in the public square. In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that prayers of visiting pastors who prayed “in Jesus’ name” when they opened a city council meeting were allowed under the Constitution, but .  .  . all four liberals (Justices ) who wanted to restrict such prayers are still on the court.

Criminalizing dissent:  Another troubling possibility is that liberal activists, once in power, would further entrench themselves by criminalizing much political dissent. We have already seen it happen with the IRS targeting of conservative groups.  .  .  .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Supreme Court with Trump as president:   Trump has released a list of 11 judges to show the kind of nominee he would appoint to the Supreme Court. A lawyer familiar with many of these names has told me that they constitute a “dream list” of outstanding judges who would uphold the original meaning of the Constitution and would not create new laws from the bench.  .  .  .  Such a Supreme Court would finally return control of the nation to the people and their elected representatives, removing it from dictatorial judges who repeatedly make law from the bench.

Abortion:  Such a court would likely overturn Roe v. Wade and return abortion laws and the regulation of abortion to the states.

Religious liberty:  A conservative court would vigorously uphold the First Amendment, protecting freedom of religion and freedom of speech for Christian colleges, Christian ministries, and churches.

Freedom for Christian influence in politics:  Significantly, Trump has pledged to work to repeal the 1954 Johnson Amendment to the IRS code, which has been used for 62 years as a threat to silence pastors from speaking about political issues, for fear of losing their tax-exempt status.  .  .  .

How can we know that Trump won’t change his mind?   My reply is that we can never know the future conduct of any human being with 100% certainty, but in making an ethical decision like this one, we should base the decision on the most likely results. In this case, the most likely result is that Trump will do most or all of what he has said. .  .  .  And notice how Trump has changed his mind. He continues to move in a more conservative direction, as evidenced by his list of judges and his choice for vice president.  .  .  .  His choice of Indiana Gov. Mike Pence as his vice presidential running mate is an especially significant indication that he will govern as a conservative.

Minorities:  Two of the deepest causes of poverty among minority groups and racial tensions in our country are failing public schools in our inner cities and lack of available jobs. Trump expressed a commitment to solve these problems at several points in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention. He pledged to reduce taxes and regulations, leading to many more jobs.  .  .  . By contrast, Clinton will bow to the teachers’ unions and oppose school choice at every turn, and she will continue to strangle businesses with high taxes and regulations, preventing job growth.

What About Foreign Policy?

The Military:  Trump has promised to rapidly rebuild our depleted military forces, but Clinton would continue the liberal policy of eviscerating them through denying funding.  This is dangerous in light of increasing threats from China, Russia, Iran, and ISIS.

Borders:  Trump has repeatedly promised that he will finally secure our borders, an urgent need to protect the nation from ever more terrorists and drug smugglers.  Clinton will not do this but will continue to allow in what she thinks will be thousands of future Democratic voters.

ISIS and Terrorism:  Trump has pledged to aggressively attack and utterly defeat ISIS.  Clinton will continue the anemic Obama policy of periodic bombing runs and drone attacks, under which ISIS has continued to thrive.

China and Russia:  Trump will not let China and Russia and Iran push us around anymore, as Obama has done, with Hillary Clinton’s support when she was secretary of state.  If Trump is anything, he is tough as nails, and he won’t be bullied.

Israel:  Trump has promised to vigorously defend and support Israel, while Clinton will most likely continue the Obama administration’s criticism, snubbing, and marginalization of Israel.

Energy:   Trump has said he will approve the Keystone oil pipeline and grant more oil drilling permits leading to lower energy costs and providing thousands of jobs.

Executive Orders and Bathrooms:  Trump has promised to rescind many of the most objectionable executive orders given by President Obama, .  .  .  . including orders forcing schools to allow boys in girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms, in defiance of the will of the vast majority of Americans.   But Hillary Clinton would likely perpetuate and expand these policies.

Health Care:   Trump will work to repeal Obamacare, which is ruining the nation’s health care system, and replace it with an affordable free market system in which companies have the ability to sell insurance across state lines, thus substantially lowering insurance prices .  .  .  . But Clinton would continue to work relentlessly toward federal government control of our entire health care industry.

The Unprotected:  Trump will finally begin to recognize and protect what Wall Street Journal writer Peggy Noonan calls “the unprotected” in America -- people in lower income areas who cannot find good jobs, cannot find good schools for their children, do not feel protected from crime, and find their retirement savings are not enough because for years they have been earning no interest in the bank.  .  .  .

These American citizens recognize that Trump has built a business career on listening to experts, solving problems, and getting things done. They realize that Trump didn’t earn $4 billion by being stupid, and their instinct says that he might be exactly the right person to solve some of the biggest problems in a nation that has for too long been headed in the wrong direction and stuck in political gridlock.

They may not have college degrees but their old-fashioned common sense tells them that America would be a much better place if we no longer had to be afraid to say “Merry Christmas,” or that boys are different from girls, or that Islamic terrorists are Islamic terrorists. .  .  .

Does Character Matter?   “But are you saying that character doesn’t matter?” someone might ask.  I believe that character does matter, but I think Trump’s character is far better than what is portrayed by much current political mud-slinging - and far better than his opponent’s character.

To my friends who tell me they won’t vote for Trump because there is a chance he won’t govern at all like he promises, .  .  .  Consider instead the most likely results. The most likely result of voting for Trump is that he will govern the way he promises to do, bringing much good to the nation.

But the most likely result of not voting for Trump is that you will be abandoning thousands of unborn babies who will be put to death under Hillary Clinton’s Supreme Court ~ thousands of Christians who will be excluded from their lifelong occupations.  .   .  And you will be contributing to a permanent loss of the American system of government due to a final victory of unaccountable judicial tyranny.
When I look at it this way, my conscience, and my considered moral judgment tell me that I must vote for Donald Trump as the candidate who is most likely to do the most good for the United States of America.

However you decide to vote - I look forward to seeing YOU at the Voting Booth, literally or in spirit.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill