Thank you so much for this! It felt a little bit like Jemar was peeking into my brain, as I grew up in the era where abortion was *the* issue for our faith community every election cycle and I do recall the feeling of blinders falling off when I learned more about the nuance of that particular issue (specifically the effect of banning abortion versus other policies that truly and more effectively reduce abortion rates) and recognizing the importance of so, so many other issues too.
Now I'm aligned with a political party for the purposes of voting in the primaries (and have changed that alignment based on which primary I feel more strongly about), and my single issue vote is for democracy. I vote for a mixed ticket every year, and hope to this year as well, but I can no longer support any candidate that doesn't meet the bare minimum threshold of upholding election results, or vote for any candidate who shares and supports authoritarian and retributive politics, and that goes all the way down the ballot.
Yes! This is how I vote, too. But it's getting so much harder to throw my support behind Republican candidates when the party simply continues to enable dangerous rhetoric against democracy. I was looking forward to voting for Governor Cox here in Utah, but his endorsement of Trump has forced me to pause and reconsider. It's so frustrating.
That’s cool that you have legitimate choices for a mixed ticket. I wish I did. In MO, our choices are election deniers (not a legitimate choice) or common sense candidates. Unfortunately, the election-denying extremists have been a supermajority for 20 years, and we have no state-wide common sense officeholders. I’m working toward my dream of a mixed ticket someday. Thank you for showing the way! Hope is a choice!
I feel the same way in TN. I will never vote for a denier or someone who will not denounce the horrific events of Jan 6. I do feel strongly about a woman’s choice in rep healthcare issues- as well as education, healthcare availability, child and elder care, and gun violence. I don’t see how I’ll ever be voting on a mixed ticket in this state. We are gerrymandered into a super majority that will not even consider engaging in conversations… I voted for democracy.
Hi Sharon. Thank you for shedding light on an almost taboo subject among many communities. I am anti abortion but take a different approach. Here is something I wrote last night.
I humbly suggest that the church in the U.S., as a whole, has made a terrible mistake.
For decades we've been told that there was one supreme overriding issue that we must base our vote on, which is of course, abortion.
This created a huge and dependable voting block that could be enticed to support any candidate, without regard for other policies.
We were told that the enormous increase in the number of abortions after Roe v Wade, was a crisis calling for immediate and drastic action (numbers at the end).
That was true. Abortions went way up.
But politicians and church leaders only offered one option for that action: reverse the legality back to what it was. Only a law, and one that would punish anyone responsible, would be able to end the crisis.
So the church obediently spent the next 50 years campaigning to support pro-life candidates and telling ourselves that the righteous thing to do was to vote. We believed them.
During this time, we were also encouraged into abandoning other ministries so we could focus on this one. We are easily outraged, so we responded in kind.
When told the stranger wanted to kill and rape us, we believed it.
When told that the hungry were lazy, the poor were mean, the orphan needed discipline, the widow was a welfare queen, and the sick and dying were in God's hands, we believed it.
Jesus told us to not fear, yet fear, along with an easy, new-and-righteous mission to vote, caused the church as a whole, to publicly turn our back on all the other people Jesus specifically asked us to take care of, and focus only on a political endeavor.
Ironically, we were also told that only the church could do the work of God, and that our government should never get involved.
We should ask:
What if all the pro-life money, the campaigning, the volunteering - the efforts of decades - went towards ministering to mothers who were unbelievers instead of pointing the finger of condemnation at them?
If asked to make a choice between a long campaign to create a punitive law, or a long campaign of mercy and love, which do you think Jesus would want us to undertake?
We missed it. We missed the real solution.
And here are the numbers. Before the Dobbs decision in 2021 finally gave the church its long-sought goal, per capita abortions in the US were LOWER than they were in 1972, the year before Roe v Wade.
And somehow we still wonder why unbelievers are repulsed, and our children have rejected the good news we keep telling them about.
You practically described exactly why I abandoned the church. It became increasingly difficult to reconcile what the Bible says with what the church leaders were saying and doing. Now I see today's version of Christianity in America as a total embarrassment.
Sad but true in many ways. I hope you can still follow Jesus even though the mainstream church let you down. There are some people who are doing better. We found a church and we are trying to do better.
After a couple decades I started attending a Unitarian church. I like it a lot, and their beliefs align with mine completely, but "church" just isn't my thing anymore. Nor is Christianity, I just find it far too limiting for such a diverse world. It's complicated. :)
What frightens me is how very few people, if you aren’t a Governerd, have the slightest knowledge of what Democracy means. In this election, I absolutely consider myself a single issue voter, and like most of America, I am pro-choice. It so happens that the side who wants to allow a person to make their own choices, is also the side that believes our world is getting warmer, that voting rights need to be expanded not restricted, that we are a country of immigrants and the amount of melatonin in your skin shouldn’t make you a criminal, that calling the free press “the enemy of the people” is distinctly UNdemocratic, that deportation camps have NEVER worked out well for Americans… I could go on. (And on and on…) Even reading this article, my skin crawls a bit at the 1970, ‘71 religious leaders discussing when they felt abortion was “okay.” That’s not normal. A bunch of men sat down to say, “y’knowwww, maybe we shouldn’t force a women (or child) to have a child if she’s been raped, or the fetus won’t survive or she might die.” Gosh thanks guys. So, hey, I’m a single issue voter. And I am praying that enough women out there, and the men who love them, are too.
Honestly, I'm just tired. Tired of the mountains of irony. Tired of the gaslighting. And sooo tired of the lying. Learned friends who can't look past their own *single* issue. Friends who, yes, are lifelong Republicans, but think that Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are just disgruntled at best, and traitors at worst. And, that 4-star generals who served honorably are now, somehow, easily influenced by the political left. I fear that if Harris does not win this election, that it is simply impossible for a Democrat to win. With the number of disaffected Republicans and independents this election cycle, we will have to ask, "What's it gonna take?!" And, if abortion IS the issue...And *choice* has consistently won on the ballot (even in RED states)...why is Harris TIED with Trump in the polls. I'm just not convinced that abortion is the single issue this year. Then again...I'm not sure that democracy is either. When James Carville was recently asked what he thinks the 'bumper sticker' for Harris should be, he said, "It's democracy, stupid." Unfortunately, however, I think Trump has convinced his supporters that "She" is the one who is a threat to democracy. It's twisted.
I don't trust the polls, they are backed by some people with extreme bias. It keeps us going to the news sites and pages, which keeps them profiting. I think it's going to be a landslide in Kamala's favor. But we'll soon find out for sure.
It is wild how they completely flipped the script and everyone just went along with it as if it made sense. What has Harris said or done to show that she is a threat to democracy? Meanwhile Trump says he will punish anyone who doesn't agree with him. Last night at his rally one of the speakers said democrats should be slaughtered! Somehow this has become okay and it's terrifying!
"It is wild how they completely flipped the script and everyone just went along with it as if it made sense."
Imagine this: Harris was the one holding the rally last night. Her first guest was a comedian, who proposed joke so off-color that her team made him axe it*, but who still went onto the stage to say that Puerto Rico was an island of trash, that Palestinians are violent and Jewish people are greedy, that Black people carve watermelons on Halloween, alluded to a football player killing his girlfriend (a Pro-Trump singer), and included a joke about Latin-American immigration made with a crude sexual metaphor.
Another guest said, of the Republicans: "The whole f*cking party, a bunch of degenerates, lowlives, Jew-haters and lowlives. Every one of them. Every one of them."
(And let's be real: some of the comments *can't* go the other way. Grant Cardone referred to Harris as "Her and her pimp handlers." Tucker Carlson said that she might be "the first Samoan-Malaysian, low IQ former California prosecutor ever to be elected president" and this was after he floated, yet again, the Great Replacement Theory.)
But let's just pretend this was the Democrat's night...
So, after that illustrious lineup of guests, Kamala Harris takes the stage. She says, yet again, that Republicans are "the enemy within" and then she says: "We gotta get the congressmen elected and we gotta get the senators elected, because we can take the Senate pretty easily, and I think with our little secret we’re going to do really well with the House, right? Our little secret is having a big impact." Then, appearing to point at Hakeem Jeffries, the Vice President added, "He and I have a secret. We’ll tell you what it is when the race is over."
I think we know how different the reaction would be...
Honestly. ALL of this. And that “little secret” doesn’t seem like it’s getting enough attention. We’re barely over a week away from the most important election in our (or at least my!) lifetime and the head election denier and his obedient election denier lackey who was KEY to trying to turn over the election, notably with false electors, have a little secret?? Someone please call the DOJ!! (Also, helllllp 😆)
Gah! Put in one place like that, it's terrifying. And yes, if it had been Kamala's rally, Congress would already be subpoenaing Mr. Jeffries for an internal investigation, and the FBI would be raising the alarm. Certainly, I would agree that they should. It's not like "her emails". This is a real threat. And I want to know what that secret is. I know that the use of that phrase isn't just a one-off to live rent-free in our heads. Johnson mentioned it separately.
This is what’s so insidious about making the false equivalence between “Well, they’re both bad” or “Oh, they both lie” because if Harris made even half of the threats that Trump has made, his supporters would suddenly have a much clearer-eyed view of the threat to democracy.
Grant Cardone, and he was speaking about election results: "It needs to be a landslide. We need to slaughter this other people. We need to bring a 100 million votes to Donald Trump."
Personally, while I think Cardone was using metaphoric language that could be *interpreted* as a call to violence, I'm far more concerned about Trump doubling (tripling?) down on the fact that he definitely means American citizens, and specifically the people he is running against, when he says that they are "the enemy within" upon which he might unleash the military. It's also concerning that this threat is being brushed off because he might not actually do it, or even be able to do it, rather than it being an appallingly disqualifying thing for any Presidential candidate to threaten whether they can do it or not.
"It's also concerning that this threat is being brushed off because he might not actually do it, or even be able to do it, rather than it being an appallingly disqualifying thing for any Presidential candidate to threaten whether they can do it or not."
THAT PART. Even if I did agree with Trump's policies more, I just can not see myself getting over his character and the fact that he says these types of inflammatory and threatening things so often. It boggles my mind that so many people are okay with that. I know some of his supporters actually love that he does it, and that just depresses me.
Yeah a lot of people start to say that when election day is getting close, trying to hope it into existence I suppose.
I do not think that if Trump wins it will be a landslide though. I think it will be more like 2016. I haven't seen much evidence that he's gained enough "extra" support since then to put him into landslide territory.
I also think voters confuse morality with government involvement. Many of the “single issues” are moral ones and people think they are voting for or against the morality of the thing, rather than what we want the govt to do about it. I.e. when we vote about abortion, we’re not voting about whether we approve of it or not, or, as it is often presented, if we care about women more or unborn children more. We’re voting about the government’s involvement & who should be making this life or death medical decision. But that’s a less emotional question, and so it doesn’t “sell”.
While I believe that Harris is a better candidate on every issue, I could not vote for someone who was anti-choice. It may be a single issue, but that issue can put the life of my daughters in danger, and that is more important to me than anything else.
It seems to me the over-turning of Roe v. Wade explains why so many Democrats have become single-issue voters since 2020. For 50 years the Supreme Court allowed Roe to stand. Suddenly those protections are gone and the results have been nothing short of horrific.
This issue is deeply personal for me. At age 19, my mother was a single mother of a six-month old baby and became accidentally pregnant a second time. Had she not had access to a safe abortion, unready to become a 20 year-old mother of 2, she and my father never would have married and intentionally conceived a few years later. And I would not exist, nor would my children. There are millions of people who exist BECAUSE their mother chose to have them when they were ready, after choosing abortion for an earlier unplanned pregnancy.
And, yet there is someone and possibly children and grandchildren that didn't get the chance to exist because your Mother "accidentally" got pregnant...
It may shock you to learn that you and I are likely of similar personal opinions on that procedure, but unlike you (?) I don't believe that gives me justification to be callous.
All of my friends and family members (pro-choice and pro-life alike) are happy I and my children exist, and NONE of them, if given the choice, would go back in time and force my mother to have the baby she wasn’t ready for if it meant she would never marry my dad and have me. NONE. For my children and I to exist, ALL of our friends and family who care about us must therefore be content with the choice my mother made.
That was never my point…that you wouldn’t have been born! I would never suggest such an awful statement. My point was strictly regarding her accidental pregnancy and the choice to abort the child vs carrying it.
I appreciate your clarification. And a point I am trying to make is that there are millions of people who would not exist if their mothers hadn’t had safe access to earlier abortions. Whether you are aware or not, chances are there are people you know and care about that this is true for, so if you are happy they exist, you must also be content with the earlier choices their mothers made that allowed them to later come into existence.
No woman is excited to have an abortion. It is decision women agonize over. But abortion is not always just about the loss of potential life, sometimes it paves the way for future life.
If you’ll allow me one further example… Another loved one of mine became pregnant at the age of 16 by a persuasive but irresponsible boyfriend. As soon as he found out she was pregnant, he broke up with her. She ended up having an abortion. A few months later, the ex-boyfriend robbed her family’s house when no one was home. He was very clearly NOT father material. At 18 she became pregnant again, but this time with a kind and loving stand-up guy. They chose to have their baby, married soon after, and went onto have 4 more children. Their children are nearly grown, and are some of the best young people you could ever meet, raised by 2 wonderful parents in a loving home. Her earlier choice not to have a baby with a criminal father paved the way for her to meet her wonderful future husband and bring 5 children into the world in a stable and happy home. It sure seems like she made the right choice, as agonizing as it was.
Not to belabor the point, but I’m not sure how giving birth once, and say putting the child up for adoption would prevent a woman from having future children and a family should she choose. I guess I should have articulated my viewpoint more clearly originally. 😊
Carrying a baby to term is not without risk for the mother. Complications later in pregnancy can eliminate a woman’s ability to have children in the future. Not to mention the financial costs of prenatal care and birth, the interruptions to her education and/or career, and the fact that even with the intention of giving a baby up for adoption, the bond that forms during the latter part of pregnancy makes this decision extremely difficult to follow through with. But of course that possibility exists for some, and those who choose it deserve support for making that choice. Women have extremely difficult personal decisions to make when faced with unplanned pregnancies, with countless variables to consider. Why should the government have anything to do with this? Those who are morally opposed to abortion can choose not to have abortions, but forcing women to carry pregnancies to term is not okay.
Perhaps this option would be the correct choice for you or your daughter but not one that other women would choose. The point is that it's a right to health privacy and family planning.
I have a client (religious Catholic in NYC) who forced her daughter to carry and put up for adoption when she was 17. The young woman was taken out of school and sent away so the family didn't have to face the shame. This turned out to be a disaster for the young woman who has had several suicide attempts, hospitalizations, drug addiction, etc. Is this a better outcome because an unwanted child was born? Also should this woman's pregnancy history been public knowledge? Should her reproductive health history be public information? If not, why?
I don’t know. I read this and think it’s not tracking with what’s happening on the ground right now. Why? Because I think you have a bunch of 20-something voters missed by pollsters who are so angry about the current administration’s “handling” of the Israel/Gaza conflict that they will either stay home in protest or vote “other” (write-in, Jill Stein, etc.). The single issue moniker doesn’t fit them. They are protest voters. And they will weaponize their voting power to make a point. I also think Jemar doesn’t give enough credit to the power of wallet issues over EVERYTHING else. It’s inflation and the economy - period end of story. And second to that? It’s immigration. If abortion was a lightening rod issue polls wouldn’t be so tight. Men from every walk of like have one thing they care about. And it’s not abortion. It’s the economy. I hope I’m totally wrong because if I’m right say hello to Trump term 2.0
I completely agree with your points. This also outlines another great irony in the electorate this year. The fact that many young people will either vote for Trump, or indirectly support Trump by voting for a 3rd party candidate rather than Harris. Based on Harris's and Trump's statements regarding Israel/Gaza, I'm completely baffled by 20-somethings. I understand their conundrum--but it really boils down to (for them) a lesser-of-two-evils. And which candidate would be the greater evil on this issue? Trump. By far.
This. I absolutely understand their concerns and how repulsive it feels to vote for someone that you feel is condoning genocide. And if they're in a solidly red or blue state, I will give them a pass to not vote on the presidential candidate. But we WILL have one or the other between Trump and Harris. and if they're in a swing state, it's baffling to me that they'd opt out.
I am seeing single issue voters or non voters for sure on Palestine. I understand and share their horror and like Jemar mentions, I am voting for a wider picture .... There are also single issue voters whose issue is apparently Vaccines.
I have children who are in the 18-30 age range that a lot of posters and the parties are trying to convince that their lives would be better if their (political) “side” is in power. We as parents, as aunts, uncles, grandparents, mentors to this younger generation we have to do better in sharing our stories and values AND the history of our ancestors and country. Unfortunately we’ve dropped the ball and allowed their phones to shape their views and tell the stories instead. We’ve abdicated our civic responsibility to social media which can be a tool for good use but not without checks and balances. My kids tell me that politics is discussed at their gatherings and parties which is great. Gen Zs and millennials aren’t stupid and they can think for themselves if given a chance but they need our wisdom and attention. They don’t want our lectures they want leadership. I’m hopeful for the future no matter who is in the White House not because of who occupies it but because our kids are smart, resilient and engaged. They will figure things out with or without our help but I think it will be less painful for all of us and a much stronger country if we become more engaged with our younger generations and share our wisdom with them honestly and openly. My kids have said that their friends discuss and understand democracy is on the ticket and it’s important to them so I have faith they will show up and vote their conscience.
Thank you for sharing Jemar Tisby again Sharon! His words always make me stop and think about things differently. And I just really enjoy Tisby’s writing as well.
I realize I will be in the minority in this space by stating who I'm supporting and why it's way more than a single issue..
I am voting for pro-life,
pro-Israel because my belief in God says He will bless those who bless Israel and curses those who do not,
I am voting for protection of our borders (from drug dealers, rapists and other violent offenders) and FOR vetting all others who wish to enter our wonderful nation. We have a procedure in place for a reason.
I am voting for freedom to speak and freedom to worship. For freedom of girls to be protected in our bathrooms, locker rooms and women's sports.
I am voting for the candidate/party that will stand firmly for this nation in foreign affairs.
I am voting for the candidate who is not a career politician and who understands how a successful economy actually works.
As an Independent voter, I have read, researched, listened to any and everything I can to fully make my decision in this election. This is strictly my reasoning, not trying to tell anyone else what they should or should not do. Thankfully, we all have this right and privilege:) Regardless of who wins this election, I will support and pray for them. I will strive to show both grace and mercy to all those around me whether we may or may not agree politically as this is but one aspect of life...
I doubt that most, if any, governerds are single-issue voters.
As for the rest of this, I just don't have time to refute any of it, but you don't actually sound informed about policies of both candidates if you think most of those things are only on the republican agenda.
I am voting for the person who won't make us the laughing stock of the world (again), and who doesn't talk about slaughtering or punishing people who don't agree. That doesn't feel very pro life to me.
Policy comparisons are a luxury that I will happily indulge in once we have two (or more!) viable candidates and NOT ONE of them has mused about turning the military on American citizens. Unfortunately, we're not getting that luxury this year...
You never actually said who you support but I think it’s obvious from each of your points:
1. Pro-life. Harris is the choice here since she wants more access to birth control, pre and post-natal healthcare, expansion of the child tax credit that lifts huge numbers of children out of poverty, elimination of draconian abortion laws that are driving women’s healthcare professionals away from areas where they’re needed most, help with child care so more families feel like they can afford to have children and support of early childhood education.
2. Pro-Israel. Harris again. She has vowed to always support Israel’s right to defend itself. But consistent with her pro-life views, she has pushed for a ceasefire in Gaza to stop the killing of thousands of innocent women and children. She understands the Israel of the Bible is not the same Israel run by Netanyahu, a prime minister who is using war to try to avoid going on trial for corruption.
3. Border Security. No brainer here, Harris. She prosecuted trans-national criminal gangs, she has experience in tackling the root causes of migration and she will sign the bi-partisan immigration reform bill that Trump killed, which will provide thousands more border patrol agents, more border security measures, more asylum officers and more immigration judges to strengthen the entire system. And again, consistent with her pro-life beliefs, she will not rip immigrant families apart by hunting down and rounding up millions of them to put in camps.
4. Freedom of speech and religion. Harris is the only choice since she has the toughness and character to withstand criticism and differing opinions without calling the free press the enemy of the people, threatening to cancel licenses for media outlets who don’t say nice things about her or calling for the military to go after her political opponents. She would never try to institute anything like a Muslim ban. And she believes that science, medicine and children’s families should guide decisions with respect to transgender care, not ignorant myths and fear mongering around girls’ locker rooms; yet another aspect of her overall pro-life sensibilities.
5. Foreign Affairs. Harris clearly understands America is stronger and better off both economically and with respect to national security, when we stand with our allies and do not give in to isolationism. She will not abandon Ukraine and under the Biden/Harris admin NATO has welcomed two new nations and more members than ever before are paying their requisite share of defense dollars in support of the alliance. She would never threaten an ally with withholding promised defense aid unless the ally comes up with dirt on her political opponents.
6. Economy. Harris hands down on this issue. She was the Attorney General for a state with the world’s fifth largest economy. She is the VP for an admin that has taken us from a recession to record high stock markets, historically low unemployment, record family wealth and, more pro-life props here, record numbers of Americans with access to affordable healthcare. Scores of economists praise her economic platform. Unlike her opponent, she has not endured multiple bankruptcies nor had her charitable foundation and numerous businesses shut down for fraud and she is not staring down hundreds of millions of dollars in civil and criminal damages.
So it seems from all of your independent research and carefully laid out reasoning you’re not in the minority on this site at all! The only part of your post I take issue with is the last line. I think it’s clear, from all of Sharon’s posts and from all of the discussions that follow, that politics touches just about every aspect of our lives, in ways both major and minor. That’s why this election is so vitally important, for all of us here now and all of those who will follow.
Thank you for doing the work of spelling it all out like that! I doubt her mind will be changed but there may be others reading this who will appreciate that.
I am a Gen X parent of a Gen Z and also a teacher. I agree that many of them are well informed. Unfortunately there are also those who get their education and history lessons from TikTok. Just like my generation there are brilliant, well-informed people and those who are not so brilliant and informed.
Abortion rights have always been important to me but Dobbs made abortion rights a life or death issue. Voting for DEMOCRACY will hopefully restore this right.
Thank you. I have never understood "single issue" voters. I have many in my family. The world is not all or nothing - so why are we voting for a candidate based on one stance?
Thank you so much for this! It felt a little bit like Jemar was peeking into my brain, as I grew up in the era where abortion was *the* issue for our faith community every election cycle and I do recall the feeling of blinders falling off when I learned more about the nuance of that particular issue (specifically the effect of banning abortion versus other policies that truly and more effectively reduce abortion rates) and recognizing the importance of so, so many other issues too.
Now I'm aligned with a political party for the purposes of voting in the primaries (and have changed that alignment based on which primary I feel more strongly about), and my single issue vote is for democracy. I vote for a mixed ticket every year, and hope to this year as well, but I can no longer support any candidate that doesn't meet the bare minimum threshold of upholding election results, or vote for any candidate who shares and supports authoritarian and retributive politics, and that goes all the way down the ballot.
Yes! This is how I vote, too. But it's getting so much harder to throw my support behind Republican candidates when the party simply continues to enable dangerous rhetoric against democracy. I was looking forward to voting for Governor Cox here in Utah, but his endorsement of Trump has forced me to pause and reconsider. It's so frustrating.
That’s cool that you have legitimate choices for a mixed ticket. I wish I did. In MO, our choices are election deniers (not a legitimate choice) or common sense candidates. Unfortunately, the election-denying extremists have been a supermajority for 20 years, and we have no state-wide common sense officeholders. I’m working toward my dream of a mixed ticket someday. Thank you for showing the way! Hope is a choice!
I feel the same way in TN. I will never vote for a denier or someone who will not denounce the horrific events of Jan 6. I do feel strongly about a woman’s choice in rep healthcare issues- as well as education, healthcare availability, child and elder care, and gun violence. I don’t see how I’ll ever be voting on a mixed ticket in this state. We are gerrymandered into a super majority that will not even consider engaging in conversations… I voted for democracy.
same here in texas!
Hi Sharon. Thank you for shedding light on an almost taboo subject among many communities. I am anti abortion but take a different approach. Here is something I wrote last night.
I humbly suggest that the church in the U.S., as a whole, has made a terrible mistake.
For decades we've been told that there was one supreme overriding issue that we must base our vote on, which is of course, abortion.
This created a huge and dependable voting block that could be enticed to support any candidate, without regard for other policies.
We were told that the enormous increase in the number of abortions after Roe v Wade, was a crisis calling for immediate and drastic action (numbers at the end).
That was true. Abortions went way up.
But politicians and church leaders only offered one option for that action: reverse the legality back to what it was. Only a law, and one that would punish anyone responsible, would be able to end the crisis.
So the church obediently spent the next 50 years campaigning to support pro-life candidates and telling ourselves that the righteous thing to do was to vote. We believed them.
During this time, we were also encouraged into abandoning other ministries so we could focus on this one. We are easily outraged, so we responded in kind.
When told the stranger wanted to kill and rape us, we believed it.
When told that the hungry were lazy, the poor were mean, the orphan needed discipline, the widow was a welfare queen, and the sick and dying were in God's hands, we believed it.
Jesus told us to not fear, yet fear, along with an easy, new-and-righteous mission to vote, caused the church as a whole, to publicly turn our back on all the other people Jesus specifically asked us to take care of, and focus only on a political endeavor.
Ironically, we were also told that only the church could do the work of God, and that our government should never get involved.
We should ask:
What if all the pro-life money, the campaigning, the volunteering - the efforts of decades - went towards ministering to mothers who were unbelievers instead of pointing the finger of condemnation at them?
If asked to make a choice between a long campaign to create a punitive law, or a long campaign of mercy and love, which do you think Jesus would want us to undertake?
We missed it. We missed the real solution.
And here are the numbers. Before the Dobbs decision in 2021 finally gave the church its long-sought goal, per capita abortions in the US were LOWER than they were in 1972, the year before Roe v Wade.
And somehow we still wonder why unbelievers are repulsed, and our children have rejected the good news we keep telling them about.
You practically described exactly why I abandoned the church. It became increasingly difficult to reconcile what the Bible says with what the church leaders were saying and doing. Now I see today's version of Christianity in America as a total embarrassment.
Sad but true in many ways. I hope you can still follow Jesus even though the mainstream church let you down. There are some people who are doing better. We found a church and we are trying to do better.
After a couple decades I started attending a Unitarian church. I like it a lot, and their beliefs align with mine completely, but "church" just isn't my thing anymore. Nor is Christianity, I just find it far too limiting for such a diverse world. It's complicated. :)
This is so excellently written and so true. Many of us millennial age and younger would probably still be in the church if this had been the case 💙
This is excellent, thank you for your words.
What frightens me is how very few people, if you aren’t a Governerd, have the slightest knowledge of what Democracy means. In this election, I absolutely consider myself a single issue voter, and like most of America, I am pro-choice. It so happens that the side who wants to allow a person to make their own choices, is also the side that believes our world is getting warmer, that voting rights need to be expanded not restricted, that we are a country of immigrants and the amount of melatonin in your skin shouldn’t make you a criminal, that calling the free press “the enemy of the people” is distinctly UNdemocratic, that deportation camps have NEVER worked out well for Americans… I could go on. (And on and on…) Even reading this article, my skin crawls a bit at the 1970, ‘71 religious leaders discussing when they felt abortion was “okay.” That’s not normal. A bunch of men sat down to say, “y’knowwww, maybe we shouldn’t force a women (or child) to have a child if she’s been raped, or the fetus won’t survive or she might die.” Gosh thanks guys. So, hey, I’m a single issue voter. And I am praying that enough women out there, and the men who love them, are too.
Honestly, I'm just tired. Tired of the mountains of irony. Tired of the gaslighting. And sooo tired of the lying. Learned friends who can't look past their own *single* issue. Friends who, yes, are lifelong Republicans, but think that Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are just disgruntled at best, and traitors at worst. And, that 4-star generals who served honorably are now, somehow, easily influenced by the political left. I fear that if Harris does not win this election, that it is simply impossible for a Democrat to win. With the number of disaffected Republicans and independents this election cycle, we will have to ask, "What's it gonna take?!" And, if abortion IS the issue...And *choice* has consistently won on the ballot (even in RED states)...why is Harris TIED with Trump in the polls. I'm just not convinced that abortion is the single issue this year. Then again...I'm not sure that democracy is either. When James Carville was recently asked what he thinks the 'bumper sticker' for Harris should be, he said, "It's democracy, stupid." Unfortunately, however, I think Trump has convinced his supporters that "She" is the one who is a threat to democracy. It's twisted.
I don't trust the polls, they are backed by some people with extreme bias. It keeps us going to the news sites and pages, which keeps them profiting. I think it's going to be a landslide in Kamala's favor. But we'll soon find out for sure.
It is wild how they completely flipped the script and everyone just went along with it as if it made sense. What has Harris said or done to show that she is a threat to democracy? Meanwhile Trump says he will punish anyone who doesn't agree with him. Last night at his rally one of the speakers said democrats should be slaughtered! Somehow this has become okay and it's terrifying!
"It is wild how they completely flipped the script and everyone just went along with it as if it made sense."
Imagine this: Harris was the one holding the rally last night. Her first guest was a comedian, who proposed joke so off-color that her team made him axe it*, but who still went onto the stage to say that Puerto Rico was an island of trash, that Palestinians are violent and Jewish people are greedy, that Black people carve watermelons on Halloween, alluded to a football player killing his girlfriend (a Pro-Trump singer), and included a joke about Latin-American immigration made with a crude sexual metaphor.
Another guest said, of the Republicans: "The whole f*cking party, a bunch of degenerates, lowlives, Jew-haters and lowlives. Every one of them. Every one of them."
(And let's be real: some of the comments *can't* go the other way. Grant Cardone referred to Harris as "Her and her pimp handlers." Tucker Carlson said that she might be "the first Samoan-Malaysian, low IQ former California prosecutor ever to be elected president" and this was after he floated, yet again, the Great Replacement Theory.)
But let's just pretend this was the Democrat's night...
So, after that illustrious lineup of guests, Kamala Harris takes the stage. She says, yet again, that Republicans are "the enemy within" and then she says: "We gotta get the congressmen elected and we gotta get the senators elected, because we can take the Senate pretty easily, and I think with our little secret we’re going to do really well with the House, right? Our little secret is having a big impact." Then, appearing to point at Hakeem Jeffries, the Vice President added, "He and I have a secret. We’ll tell you what it is when the race is over."
I think we know how different the reaction would be...
_____
*https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trumps-shock-comic-was-set-to-call
Honestly. ALL of this. And that “little secret” doesn’t seem like it’s getting enough attention. We’re barely over a week away from the most important election in our (or at least my!) lifetime and the head election denier and his obedient election denier lackey who was KEY to trying to turn over the election, notably with false electors, have a little secret?? Someone please call the DOJ!! (Also, helllllp 😆)
Gah! Put in one place like that, it's terrifying. And yes, if it had been Kamala's rally, Congress would already be subpoenaing Mr. Jeffries for an internal investigation, and the FBI would be raising the alarm. Certainly, I would agree that they should. It's not like "her emails". This is a real threat. And I want to know what that secret is. I know that the use of that phrase isn't just a one-off to live rent-free in our heads. Johnson mentioned it separately.
This is what’s so insidious about making the false equivalence between “Well, they’re both bad” or “Oh, they both lie” because if Harris made even half of the threats that Trump has made, his supporters would suddenly have a much clearer-eyed view of the threat to democracy.
I also don't trust the polls. Interesting, some on the right say it will be a landslide in Trump's favor. Can't wait until it's over!
Which speaker said that democrats should be slaughtered?
Grant Cardone, and he was speaking about election results: "It needs to be a landslide. We need to slaughter this other people. We need to bring a 100 million votes to Donald Trump."
Personally, while I think Cardone was using metaphoric language that could be *interpreted* as a call to violence, I'm far more concerned about Trump doubling (tripling?) down on the fact that he definitely means American citizens, and specifically the people he is running against, when he says that they are "the enemy within" upon which he might unleash the military. It's also concerning that this threat is being brushed off because he might not actually do it, or even be able to do it, rather than it being an appallingly disqualifying thing for any Presidential candidate to threaten whether they can do it or not.
"It's also concerning that this threat is being brushed off because he might not actually do it, or even be able to do it, rather than it being an appallingly disqualifying thing for any Presidential candidate to threaten whether they can do it or not."
THAT PART. Even if I did agree with Trump's policies more, I just can not see myself getting over his character and the fact that he says these types of inflammatory and threatening things so often. It boggles my mind that so many people are okay with that. I know some of his supporters actually love that he does it, and that just depresses me.
Yeah a lot of people start to say that when election day is getting close, trying to hope it into existence I suppose.
I do not think that if Trump wins it will be a landslide though. I think it will be more like 2016. I haven't seen much evidence that he's gained enough "extra" support since then to put him into landslide territory.
I agree Nerdular
I also think voters confuse morality with government involvement. Many of the “single issues” are moral ones and people think they are voting for or against the morality of the thing, rather than what we want the govt to do about it. I.e. when we vote about abortion, we’re not voting about whether we approve of it or not, or, as it is often presented, if we care about women more or unborn children more. We’re voting about the government’s involvement & who should be making this life or death medical decision. But that’s a less emotional question, and so it doesn’t “sell”.
While I believe that Harris is a better candidate on every issue, I could not vote for someone who was anti-choice. It may be a single issue, but that issue can put the life of my daughters in danger, and that is more important to me than anything else.
The issue I care most about right now is preserving democracy. ❤️🤍💙
Same here. I never used to be a single issue voter, but lately it feels like I have drifted that way.
It seems to me the over-turning of Roe v. Wade explains why so many Democrats have become single-issue voters since 2020. For 50 years the Supreme Court allowed Roe to stand. Suddenly those protections are gone and the results have been nothing short of horrific.
This issue is deeply personal for me. At age 19, my mother was a single mother of a six-month old baby and became accidentally pregnant a second time. Had she not had access to a safe abortion, unready to become a 20 year-old mother of 2, she and my father never would have married and intentionally conceived a few years later. And I would not exist, nor would my children. There are millions of people who exist BECAUSE their mother chose to have them when they were ready, after choosing abortion for an earlier unplanned pregnancy.
And, yet there is someone and possibly children and grandchildren that didn't get the chance to exist because your Mother "accidentally" got pregnant...
The use of scare quotes here is breathtakingly uncharitable.
Abortion should take our breath away…🥲
It may shock you to learn that you and I are likely of similar personal opinions on that procedure, but unlike you (?) I don't believe that gives me justification to be callous.
All of my friends and family members (pro-choice and pro-life alike) are happy I and my children exist, and NONE of them, if given the choice, would go back in time and force my mother to have the baby she wasn’t ready for if it meant she would never marry my dad and have me. NONE. For my children and I to exist, ALL of our friends and family who care about us must therefore be content with the choice my mother made.
That was never my point…that you wouldn’t have been born! I would never suggest such an awful statement. My point was strictly regarding her accidental pregnancy and the choice to abort the child vs carrying it.
I appreciate your clarification. And a point I am trying to make is that there are millions of people who would not exist if their mothers hadn’t had safe access to earlier abortions. Whether you are aware or not, chances are there are people you know and care about that this is true for, so if you are happy they exist, you must also be content with the earlier choices their mothers made that allowed them to later come into existence.
No woman is excited to have an abortion. It is decision women agonize over. But abortion is not always just about the loss of potential life, sometimes it paves the way for future life.
If you’ll allow me one further example… Another loved one of mine became pregnant at the age of 16 by a persuasive but irresponsible boyfriend. As soon as he found out she was pregnant, he broke up with her. She ended up having an abortion. A few months later, the ex-boyfriend robbed her family’s house when no one was home. He was very clearly NOT father material. At 18 she became pregnant again, but this time with a kind and loving stand-up guy. They chose to have their baby, married soon after, and went onto have 4 more children. Their children are nearly grown, and are some of the best young people you could ever meet, raised by 2 wonderful parents in a loving home. Her earlier choice not to have a baby with a criminal father paved the way for her to meet her wonderful future husband and bring 5 children into the world in a stable and happy home. It sure seems like she made the right choice, as agonizing as it was.
Not to belabor the point, but I’m not sure how giving birth once, and say putting the child up for adoption would prevent a woman from having future children and a family should she choose. I guess I should have articulated my viewpoint more clearly originally. 😊
Carrying a baby to term is not without risk for the mother. Complications later in pregnancy can eliminate a woman’s ability to have children in the future. Not to mention the financial costs of prenatal care and birth, the interruptions to her education and/or career, and the fact that even with the intention of giving a baby up for adoption, the bond that forms during the latter part of pregnancy makes this decision extremely difficult to follow through with. But of course that possibility exists for some, and those who choose it deserve support for making that choice. Women have extremely difficult personal decisions to make when faced with unplanned pregnancies, with countless variables to consider. Why should the government have anything to do with this? Those who are morally opposed to abortion can choose not to have abortions, but forcing women to carry pregnancies to term is not okay.
Perhaps this option would be the correct choice for you or your daughter but not one that other women would choose. The point is that it's a right to health privacy and family planning.
I have a client (religious Catholic in NYC) who forced her daughter to carry and put up for adoption when she was 17. The young woman was taken out of school and sent away so the family didn't have to face the shame. This turned out to be a disaster for the young woman who has had several suicide attempts, hospitalizations, drug addiction, etc. Is this a better outcome because an unwanted child was born? Also should this woman's pregnancy history been public knowledge? Should her reproductive health history be public information? If not, why?
Robn, I suggest you show more concern for people who are here on earth rather than the hypothetical people who are not.
Please see my clarification…
Maybe you should care about those “hypothetical” people that would have been here if allowed to live…
I don’t know. I read this and think it’s not tracking with what’s happening on the ground right now. Why? Because I think you have a bunch of 20-something voters missed by pollsters who are so angry about the current administration’s “handling” of the Israel/Gaza conflict that they will either stay home in protest or vote “other” (write-in, Jill Stein, etc.). The single issue moniker doesn’t fit them. They are protest voters. And they will weaponize their voting power to make a point. I also think Jemar doesn’t give enough credit to the power of wallet issues over EVERYTHING else. It’s inflation and the economy - period end of story. And second to that? It’s immigration. If abortion was a lightening rod issue polls wouldn’t be so tight. Men from every walk of like have one thing they care about. And it’s not abortion. It’s the economy. I hope I’m totally wrong because if I’m right say hello to Trump term 2.0
I completely agree with your points. This also outlines another great irony in the electorate this year. The fact that many young people will either vote for Trump, or indirectly support Trump by voting for a 3rd party candidate rather than Harris. Based on Harris's and Trump's statements regarding Israel/Gaza, I'm completely baffled by 20-somethings. I understand their conundrum--but it really boils down to (for them) a lesser-of-two-evils. And which candidate would be the greater evil on this issue? Trump. By far.
This. I absolutely understand their concerns and how repulsive it feels to vote for someone that you feel is condoning genocide. And if they're in a solidly red or blue state, I will give them a pass to not vote on the presidential candidate. But we WILL have one or the other between Trump and Harris. and if they're in a swing state, it's baffling to me that they'd opt out.
I've been thinking about this, too. I believe Gaza will be the single issue for young voters who either won't vote or will protest vote.
IMO there isn't a way that any administration could have successfully handled the Israel/Gaza conflict.
Good points. I see this with my nieces (22 and 24) who are likely not voting at all.
I am seeing single issue voters or non voters for sure on Palestine. I understand and share their horror and like Jemar mentions, I am voting for a wider picture .... There are also single issue voters whose issue is apparently Vaccines.
I have children who are in the 18-30 age range that a lot of posters and the parties are trying to convince that their lives would be better if their (political) “side” is in power. We as parents, as aunts, uncles, grandparents, mentors to this younger generation we have to do better in sharing our stories and values AND the history of our ancestors and country. Unfortunately we’ve dropped the ball and allowed their phones to shape their views and tell the stories instead. We’ve abdicated our civic responsibility to social media which can be a tool for good use but not without checks and balances. My kids tell me that politics is discussed at their gatherings and parties which is great. Gen Zs and millennials aren’t stupid and they can think for themselves if given a chance but they need our wisdom and attention. They don’t want our lectures they want leadership. I’m hopeful for the future no matter who is in the White House not because of who occupies it but because our kids are smart, resilient and engaged. They will figure things out with or without our help but I think it will be less painful for all of us and a much stronger country if we become more engaged with our younger generations and share our wisdom with them honestly and openly. My kids have said that their friends discuss and understand democracy is on the ticket and it’s important to them so I have faith they will show up and vote their conscience.
I do think the wisdom sharing can be reciprocal. The younger generations are so much more aware of the world and issues than I was at their age!
Thank you for sharing Jemar Tisby again Sharon! His words always make me stop and think about things differently. And I just really enjoy Tisby’s writing as well.
Thank you for writing this. So powerful ❤️
I realize I will be in the minority in this space by stating who I'm supporting and why it's way more than a single issue..
I am voting for pro-life,
pro-Israel because my belief in God says He will bless those who bless Israel and curses those who do not,
I am voting for protection of our borders (from drug dealers, rapists and other violent offenders) and FOR vetting all others who wish to enter our wonderful nation. We have a procedure in place for a reason.
I am voting for freedom to speak and freedom to worship. For freedom of girls to be protected in our bathrooms, locker rooms and women's sports.
I am voting for the candidate/party that will stand firmly for this nation in foreign affairs.
I am voting for the candidate who is not a career politician and who understands how a successful economy actually works.
As an Independent voter, I have read, researched, listened to any and everything I can to fully make my decision in this election. This is strictly my reasoning, not trying to tell anyone else what they should or should not do. Thankfully, we all have this right and privilege:) Regardless of who wins this election, I will support and pray for them. I will strive to show both grace and mercy to all those around me whether we may or may not agree politically as this is but one aspect of life...
I doubt that most, if any, governerds are single-issue voters.
As for the rest of this, I just don't have time to refute any of it, but you don't actually sound informed about policies of both candidates if you think most of those things are only on the republican agenda.
I am voting for the person who won't make us the laughing stock of the world (again), and who doesn't talk about slaughtering or punishing people who don't agree. That doesn't feel very pro life to me.
That last line really hits the nail on the head.
Policy comparisons are a luxury that I will happily indulge in once we have two (or more!) viable candidates and NOT ONE of them has mused about turning the military on American citizens. Unfortunately, we're not getting that luxury this year...
You never actually said who you support but I think it’s obvious from each of your points:
1. Pro-life. Harris is the choice here since she wants more access to birth control, pre and post-natal healthcare, expansion of the child tax credit that lifts huge numbers of children out of poverty, elimination of draconian abortion laws that are driving women’s healthcare professionals away from areas where they’re needed most, help with child care so more families feel like they can afford to have children and support of early childhood education.
2. Pro-Israel. Harris again. She has vowed to always support Israel’s right to defend itself. But consistent with her pro-life views, she has pushed for a ceasefire in Gaza to stop the killing of thousands of innocent women and children. She understands the Israel of the Bible is not the same Israel run by Netanyahu, a prime minister who is using war to try to avoid going on trial for corruption.
3. Border Security. No brainer here, Harris. She prosecuted trans-national criminal gangs, she has experience in tackling the root causes of migration and she will sign the bi-partisan immigration reform bill that Trump killed, which will provide thousands more border patrol agents, more border security measures, more asylum officers and more immigration judges to strengthen the entire system. And again, consistent with her pro-life beliefs, she will not rip immigrant families apart by hunting down and rounding up millions of them to put in camps.
4. Freedom of speech and religion. Harris is the only choice since she has the toughness and character to withstand criticism and differing opinions without calling the free press the enemy of the people, threatening to cancel licenses for media outlets who don’t say nice things about her or calling for the military to go after her political opponents. She would never try to institute anything like a Muslim ban. And she believes that science, medicine and children’s families should guide decisions with respect to transgender care, not ignorant myths and fear mongering around girls’ locker rooms; yet another aspect of her overall pro-life sensibilities.
5. Foreign Affairs. Harris clearly understands America is stronger and better off both economically and with respect to national security, when we stand with our allies and do not give in to isolationism. She will not abandon Ukraine and under the Biden/Harris admin NATO has welcomed two new nations and more members than ever before are paying their requisite share of defense dollars in support of the alliance. She would never threaten an ally with withholding promised defense aid unless the ally comes up with dirt on her political opponents.
6. Economy. Harris hands down on this issue. She was the Attorney General for a state with the world’s fifth largest economy. She is the VP for an admin that has taken us from a recession to record high stock markets, historically low unemployment, record family wealth and, more pro-life props here, record numbers of Americans with access to affordable healthcare. Scores of economists praise her economic platform. Unlike her opponent, she has not endured multiple bankruptcies nor had her charitable foundation and numerous businesses shut down for fraud and she is not staring down hundreds of millions of dollars in civil and criminal damages.
So it seems from all of your independent research and carefully laid out reasoning you’re not in the minority on this site at all! The only part of your post I take issue with is the last line. I think it’s clear, from all of Sharon’s posts and from all of the discussions that follow, that politics touches just about every aspect of our lives, in ways both major and minor. That’s why this election is so vitally important, for all of us here now and all of those who will follow.
Thank you for doing the work of spelling it all out like that! I doubt her mind will be changed but there may be others reading this who will appreciate that.
What?!? You don’t think Robn laid all that out to support Harris? Boy, did I read all that wrong. 🤪
Thanks for sharing, Robn. I agree with many of your points. We may be in the minority but we aren’t alone :)
So true. Thank you 😊
I am a Gen X parent of a Gen Z and also a teacher. I agree that many of them are well informed. Unfortunately there are also those who get their education and history lessons from TikTok. Just like my generation there are brilliant, well-informed people and those who are not so brilliant and informed.
Abortion rights have always been important to me but Dobbs made abortion rights a life or death issue. Voting for DEMOCRACY will hopefully restore this right.
Thank you. I have never understood "single issue" voters. I have many in my family. The world is not all or nothing - so why are we voting for a candidate based on one stance?