Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould one's faith influence a citizen's vote?
Results so far:
| Yes | 60% | 2184 votes | Total: 3638 votes | |
| No | 40% | 1454 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesA person's faith (regardless of their religion or lack of religion) is their fundamental way of life. How can they help but be influenced by their faith in everything that they do, including voting? Everyone who votes does so according to their beliefs and values they will vote for who best represents their values and beliefs. This is no different to a person with faith they will also vote for who best represents their values and beliefs. Just because a person is religion (and faith does not always mean religion) does not mean they should have to set aside their beliefs in voting.
It is impossible for a person to put aside true faith. A person makes judgments every day of their life based on how they see life and how they see the world. They cannot all of a sudden put this away just in order to vote. How else are we to vote, except by listening to the candidates and making a decision based on our own experiences and values?
How is it possible to put aside strongly held morals and values? If a person does not believe in same-sex marriage, they are not going to say to themselves "well, I don't believe in it, but if I don't vote for this candidate it means that I am voting according to my religious beliefs, and we can't have that, so I will vote for this candidate even though I don't believe in their policies." It is ridiculous to say that they should.
Just because a person's moral value can be influenced by their faith does not make it any less important or worthy of consideration than the beliefs of other people. Take for example a person who does not believe in abortion due to their religious beliefs, and another person who does not believe in abortion due to the science behind stage of life. The second person does not have more of a right to vote according to their conscious for an anti-abortion candidate than the religious one. Just because one person is acting on faith and the other on science does not make one's opinion less important than the other.
The trouble comes when a religion tells an individual who they should vote for. All individuals should make up their own mind, and not be pressured to vote for one candidate or party over another, just because their church wants them too. A person's judgment of the facts and capabilities of a candidate should also not be influenced by their religion, just because that candidate is of the same faith. For example, a Catholic should not automatically vote for another Catholic, merely because of the point that they are Catholic. They should take into consideration the policies, professionalism and experience of the candidate as well. As long as a person is acting according to their own experiences, beliefs and values, why should they set aside their religious convictions in order to vote? What makes the opinion of a religious person less worthy than the opinion of someone else?
A person should not have to put aside their faith in order to make a decision based on who to vote for. In fact, not only should they not have to, it would be impossible for them to do so. The sole purpose of voting is to vote for the person that you think will do the best job and your judgment of who that person is solely comes from your beliefs and values. It should not be any other way.
Learn more about this author, Amy P Storms.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Faith should definitely not be the reasoning behind a vote, no matter on what issue. The reasoning behind this is pretty simple. Not everyone has the same religion, and if everyone began to vote based on their religions, a split would most definitely be created in public life between the different groups.
Democratic rule is one of the governing systems which is supposed to bring people together, to create a consensus on issues and fair debate regardless of faith. I think those of us who live under such a rule should be thankful to have religious freedom, and try to help maintain the values that support this freedom, by setting an example.
I don't think that this issue has anything to do with faith, it is not one's duty to uphold one's faith inside government. In fact, it more likely tarnishes a religion to drag it through a political system. I think that the proper arena in which to show faith is in private life, by running one's affairs in a way that is fitting of one's religious belief. When it comes to public life and the affairs of others, to impose an opinion based on one's faith is damaging to one's ties with other faiths.
Of course there is nothing to say that voting out of one's beliefs which stem from one's religion is wrong: this is even advisable. It is voting for the interest's of a religion that is dangerous. I think that one look at Iran (although the situation there was not one which came out of a democracy) should remind people how thankful they should be to live in a free society.
Learn more about this author, Danny Mendel.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
