The Chicago Tribune had a letter to the editor in which a woman proudly proclaimed she was voting for Hillary because she’s the first woman. She had tears in her eyes because of a first. I got tears in my eyes that someone would vote on such flimsy grounds. What a terrible insult to the intelligence of women. You see, I’ve been a woman in male-dominated fields my entire adult life and I know how hard it is to move beyond a first…to a second or a third…if the first has been selected for any reasons other than excellence and honesty.
I could have used my opportunity to preach about “girl power” when I was the first woman selected as the featured preacher from the student body in my seminary’s history. I chose differently. I chose better. Yes, I broke a glass ceiling, but that itself wasn’t as important for future generations as HOW I did it.
Here’s what I have joy in the LORD about: I was faithful to the TRUTH. I proved I was the woman in ministry by doing my level best to do ministry with honesty, faithfulness, and excellence. I preached from Revelation 5, definitely not a girl’s text.
Today, we come to the point in A Conversation with Priscilla that explains why many pastors do not want to venture into talking about politics and why many people don’t want to touch this campaign with a sterilized 10 ft. pole. Priscilla wrote:
QUESTION: “I am also skeptical about voting for a woman for President.”
ANSWER: I hear you. There are many reasons we elect a President: (1) to lead us at home; (2) to convey protective allegiance in friendship among our allies, (3) to present strength and resolve in the face of our enemies, and (4) to cast a vision Americans can unify behind to work toward a noble goal.
Perhaps my greatest fear is that some women will vote for Hillary simply because she’s a woman and they’re not concerned with the impact this superficiality will have on those 4 areas.
Regarding (1) It’s hard to lead at home when we know she considers many of us irredeemable and deplorable. Those words cannot be softened to mere disagreement. They’re fundamental. (2) Our allies have learned what she is like from her role as Secretary of State. She has a record here that’s all her own. (3) But it is our enemies that I believe present the greatest danger. The enemies of America do not respect women. We cannot force them to do so. I dread the idea that we will be targeted for destruction because they believe women should not get an education or show their faces in public…and certainly not lead the last remaining superpower. Easy to topple. I would hate to see a day when our military cannot regard our Commander-in-Chief as authoritative and the Selective Service would require enlistment of women and turn back into a draft to fight wars on many fronts against a Legion of Enemies. Why do I fear this? Past experience. Forcing women into the pastorate has split churches. Forcing women into any male dominated institution alters it or destroys it. Regarding the military echelon, I do not believe this is an experiment to be tried at this time no matter how noble in principle it might seem. The innocent days of an honorable Thatcher have given rise to an enemy that beheads. And finally (4) I do not know that I can pinpoint a vision for America with Mrs. Clinton since she doesn’t appear to be leading anywhere other than where we’re already going.
Priscilla followed up with commentary to which I replied:
A couple more points associated with your follow-up, yes, pastors are disinclined to preach into the political (particularly against the status quo) even to display the spiritual. Part of that is fear that they will be punished with revoking of their non-profit standing… [it’s called the] Johnson Amendment, which restricts First Amendment freedoms of all nonprofit organizations by prohibiting political speech… Repealing it would certainly be in the direction of a more faithful Church.
I am presently working on a video (amateur but the best I can do) outlining why American women shouldn’t use their vote as a statement of sisterhood, rather they should consider this vote with the same care and concern with which they’d choose a babysitter, a house painter or a surgeon. We’d never choose a surgeon based upon skin color or gender…or choose a house painter that had done many homes, but whose reviews didn’t convey quality workmanship. If women vote for Hillary based upon agreement with her on the issues, that’s different than choosing her simply because she’s female.
Ironically, this type of frank, biblical discussion is what gets lost when people stray from the issues to talk instead about things that are more like gossip than fact. This is why I’ve been so sad about the debates. I don’t think it would be an unfair exploration to know how she was treated as Secretary of State by leaders of Muslim nations and whether their permitted use of creative lying within Islam (there are 4 different words in Islam takiya and tawriya are the 2 I remember) gave them the freedom to lie to us because she’s a woman, women don’t matter, and the cause was important to them. If so, how much more as president? It’s what Iran did to us… 🙁
The conversation continues…
And the video I mentioned is here: