Political Debates

After watching and reading about the current presidential kerfuffle, I am struck by the reporters' aversion to plain speaking. The media consistently describes both Senator Jerry and President Bush as being "harsh, attacking, mean, bitter and cruel". I have several observations:

1. Political debates need to be hard hitting and truthful challenges based on ideas, facts and a search for truth. These things may hurt the other person's feelings.

2. Many reporters do not want truth and factual debates but a harmonious love fest that obscures reality.

3. Christians have guidance on this issue from scripture. It tells us that by "Speaking the truth in love we can grow up in every way... (Eph 4:15) This is the very best approach to a good debate for it balances facts and reality with compassion and unselfishness.

The biblical standard is not easy but we can, with the Holy Spirit, get close. In Matthew, Jesus discusses in detail how we are to handle difficult issues that can cause anger, bitterness and revenge.

5:21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.'

22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment.

Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin.

But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

The Great Teacher lays out a well defined, three step approach to public and private disputes.

Step One, anger is dangerous, so be careful. However, it can also be helpful if it energizes us enough to clean up a relationship and speak the truth in love with a personal COMPLAINT that goes something like this: "I do not agree with my opponent's position on abortion. Here is my position and why."

Step Two, if we don't handle anger it will get worse, enter the yellow zone and turn into accusations and personal attacks. At step two Jesus uses the term; Raca, stupid, dumb or mentally deficient and will lead us to be judged ourselves. "My opponent is just ignorant about abortion and is not smart enough to understand its outcomes."

Step Three the red hot zone of a character assassination that leads to hell either figuratively or actually. "My opponent loves to punish women by denying them abortion rights for he is a racist woman hater." Or, "My opponent enjoys killing babies and is a racist who is trying to eliminate African Americans."

As you watch the debates and listen to the candidates, learn to distinguish among these three approaches. Sometimes the challenge is a Complaint that says, "I disagree with ___." That is legitimate even when reporters do not like it. However, when pols say things like, "He is a liar, a cheat, a coward, a malcontent or a deserter" they have stepped over the line.

23 "Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

One of the highlights in the current election came when President Bush was asked about Senator Kerry's war record. The President answered by saying, "Mr. Kerry was more courageous than I. He served honorably and put himself in harm's way and I never did." A low time came when VP Cheney cursed out a member of the Congress.

Comments on this or any article?