O.K., so tell me, exactly what does that mean?
My personal interpretation of the use of this statement by a voter is that it is an expression of ignorance. They are patriotic enough to realize voting is a citizen's obligation, something that is a privilege and a right that shouldn't be wasted, but they're too lazy and uninformed to really know much about the candidates so they are depending on bits and pieces of news media sound bytes, probably a lot of podcasts and private sources, not a lot of reliable journalistic sources, and they know the talking points.
Having been raised in a conservative, Evangelical church and denomination, I was taught that everything, by default, is evil. Yes, that does seem to be a very pessimistic, negative way of looking at the world, I agree. It explains the cultural and social restrictions that constitute what they believe is genuine Christian practice, based on a literal reading of a text more than 2,000 years old, without applying much in the way of historical, cultural and language contexts to the interpretation.
But "evil" is a simplistic way to reject political candidates, particularly on a partisan basis, without having to put much effort into finding out where they stand on the issues or whether or not they are qualified to do the job. It's a dismissive way of deciding for whom one will vote. It's an argument that doesn't leave room for reasoning, since it's personal and subjective. In this way of looking at things, what makes a candidate "evil," by definition, is that they do not see the world, resolve problems or think the same way that the voter does. It has nothing to do with what is truly evil, as opposed to what is truly good.
It's a Figure of Speech, Not a Religious Concept
Much of Christianity, the more conservative branches of it, including Evangelicals, believe that human beings are totally depraved, and therefore are inherently evil. It's a complicated doctrine that rests heavily on the Genesis account of creation in the Bible, so it's not useful in defining a political expression such as the lesser of two evils, primarily because no Bible writer allows for any variation in degrees of evil. Evil is evil, there's not some kinds of evil that is better than other kinds.
Any other definition of evil would be a subjective matter of opinion. I think that inciting an insurrection that led to the attack on the Capitol building in Washington on January 6, 2021 is an example of evil. Rhetoric full of vengeful threats against personal enemies is evil. Lying, which is intentional deceit, and which comes from a lack of respect for one's fellow human beings, is inherently evil. Elevating one's self above others, and seeing one's self as better than others because of acquired or inherited wealth is evil. And since all of those things apply to Trump, I see him as a much greater evil than I do those things which Vice President Harris supports, but with which I disagree.
And frankly, I find it hard to disagree with much of anything she promotes as a political candidate for office.
I have thought long and hard about the issue of abortion, and just what steps government can, and should take, involving the practice. And as hard an argument that many Christians, especially conservative Evangelicals and Catholics, make against the practice, the Bible on which they rely for their information doesn't actually apply the doctrine of the sanctity of human life to every human in the womb. And the practice itself, which often involves a life-saving procedure rather than a birth control procedure, isn't covered in scripture when the decision involves saving the life of a mother.
I do have a problem with the gross misinformation that is spread regarding the practice, in order for those opposed to it to try and convince others they're right, including the lack of ethics involved in making the accusation that Democrats want abortion legal through the entire pregnancy and in the third trimester, which is patently false, and that the governor of Virginia, [medical doctor Ralph Northam, for reference to whom Trump is falsely accusing] never advocated for setting babies aside after birth in order to "decide what to do." That's a known Republican fabrication, and it's evil to make that statement.
Trump is the Greater Evil by Any Standard Definition of the Term
By any commonly accepted definition of the term "evil," it's clear that Trump is the worst. From a personal perspective, I find nothing in Kamala Harris or her campaign that would fit the description. Try to point it out, at least, if the use of the term is to be applied correctly.
With Trump, I can use just about any standard definition. If I take the religious definition, Trump has defined himself, with his refusal to acknowledge and accept any form of Christian conversion. His character, his behavior, all fall within the biblical descriptions of, and definition of, evil, right down to his organization and incitement of an insurrection aimed at overturning a legitimate election, an act the Bible defines as a rebellion against the authority of God.
If I use a personal definition, Trump is a tyrant. He's a control freak, and his lack of humanity bears all of the marks of a sociopath. He is openly stating that he intends to use the power of the Presidency to avenge himself and the perceived wrongs others have done to him, without an acknowledgement of the fact that the others he wants to persecute were being honest, doing their job and following the law.
Trump is clearly the most evil candidate. So those who are supporting him cannot be using the argument that they are voting for the lesser of two evils. There's something else behind their vote, and their position tells me that evil isn't a consideration for them, one way or another, nor is it a real concern.
No comments:
Post a Comment