Why Voting Is Worth It
- Thread starter The Penitent Man
- Start date
I like a lot of the theology behind your argument but I'm not convinced on some of your application.
All governments, not some, are indeed ordained by God. There is no authority in the world that has not been permitted to be so outside of God's will. People don't have the faith to accept this, but it escapes their notice that Paul wrote these words, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in the Roman Empire, which was openly hostile to Christianity, just as much as some of our government is, to the church in Rome, just to underscore the point.
Nevertheless, it is not a full endorsement of the law of whichever government you happen to be living under. For example, Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire, it was illegal to not affirm that Caesar is Lord, does that mean you have to bite the bullet and abandon the Christian faith? Of course not. We must obey God rather than men. So the government should be obeyed in so far as it does not impede on our freedom to worship Christ. The government itself has a purpose; to curb evil, to bear the sword against the evil-doer. When the government says that we are not allowed to assemble on Sunday, our duty to God requires us to resist that tyranny.
In our case, God does not demand that we vote one way or the other, or even that we should vote at all. The American law does not even demand that we vote either. We have the freedom to vote or not vote. People will have to act according to their conscience on this issue.
Last edited:
So all those millions upon millions of souls in the Aztec, Incan, Mayan, and other heathen lands in the Americas, murdered in the most grotesque of fashions, who were spawned from God knows where, and lasted in demonic influence until the Christians arrived, where is their final ethereal destination? They paved the way for Christianity by their demonism? For as Christian as these lands are now, full of Churches, missions, and people with faith, all that savagery still remains beneath the veneer of what actually changed the soul of Europe.
Following the law of Caesar in the Christian regard does not say you "must" vote, only that you follow the customs and the laws of the land and not be a murderer, liar, thief, or disturber of the peace or campaign against the state for secular reasons. "Render Unto Caesar" is the social aspect of timeless souls bound to God in their obeisance living in a finite world, just passing through. When there are spiritual conflictions with the law, like voting for an already-rigged election where the chosen sock-puppet will just perform a variety of actions all allowed within the jewish anti-Christian framework, is utter madness to me to partake. My prayers are revealing that the answer lies not within a political solution, but a spiritual revolution back to God en masse that will produce a physical solution that may not even be political. It may just be a dispersal like at Babel. No governments were formed to replace Nimrod's old "new world order" the people just went their separate ways and the devil had to start all over again. It took the bastard until now to get the pieces in similar positions to try again to reach the heavens and attempt his futile move against God.
If anything, on the subject of choosing the best option to allow stalling for time, so that more people can come back to God before the appointed era, a dissolution of the jew-run governments would enable this much more so than a continuance of them.
If voting somehow leads to the dissolution of these governments, I am willing to listen to that claim. I cannot advocate for someone to choose to vote or to choose not to vote in the USA, I understand some of you want to vote local and I don't see the point in arguing with you about that, but the major scam elections are completely corrupted by the enemies of Christ. The European and Oceanic elections are no different, worse in some cases, marginally better in rarer ones. Overall it is not the most effective strategy with the current methods of fraud available to the jews.
If the plight of Donald Trump is real, these yids will just fake another election to put their pagan hindu whore in top puppet spot. If it is not real, then he may be given the role of President while the bankers and NGO heads continue to run their genocidal siphoning schemes on the life force of all the races unabated. I do not believe in clairvoyance or foresight being practiced by any believer, but the enemy has clearly stated their goals and are hellbent to reshape reality (and even attempt to tamper with prophecy) if it suits their agenda.
In less than 4 years, this thread will be the catalyst for how right or wrong our minds were.
Following the law of Caesar in the Christian regard does not say you "must" vote, only that you follow the customs and the laws of the land and not be a murderer, liar, thief, or disturber of the peace or campaign against the state for secular reasons. "Render Unto Caesar" is the social aspect of timeless souls bound to God in their obeisance living in a finite world, just passing through. When there are spiritual conflictions with the law, like voting for an already-rigged election where the chosen sock-puppet will just perform a variety of actions all allowed within the jewish anti-Christian framework, is utter madness to me to partake. My prayers are revealing that the answer lies not within a political solution, but a spiritual revolution back to God en masse that will produce a physical solution that may not even be political. It may just be a dispersal like at Babel. No governments were formed to replace Nimrod's old "new world order" the people just went their separate ways and the devil had to start all over again. It took the bastard until now to get the pieces in similar positions to try again to reach the heavens and attempt his futile move against God.
If anything, on the subject of choosing the best option to allow stalling for time, so that more people can come back to God before the appointed era, a dissolution of the jew-run governments would enable this much more so than a continuance of them.
If voting somehow leads to the dissolution of these governments, I am willing to listen to that claim. I cannot advocate for someone to choose to vote or to choose not to vote in the USA, I understand some of you want to vote local and I don't see the point in arguing with you about that, but the major scam elections are completely corrupted by the enemies of Christ. The European and Oceanic elections are no different, worse in some cases, marginally better in rarer ones. Overall it is not the most effective strategy with the current methods of fraud available to the jews.
If the plight of Donald Trump is real, these yids will just fake another election to put their pagan hindu whore in top puppet spot. If it is not real, then he may be given the role of President while the bankers and NGO heads continue to run their genocidal siphoning schemes on the life force of all the races unabated. I do not believe in clairvoyance or foresight being practiced by any believer, but the enemy has clearly stated their goals and are hellbent to reshape reality (and even attempt to tamper with prophecy) if it suits their agenda.
In less than 4 years, this thread will be the catalyst for how right or wrong our minds were.
Last edited:
But we are called to love our country, since it directly follows from Loving thy Neighbor. Not voting, which is indifference towards one's country, is therefore a violation of God's law. Indifference is antithetical to love, just like the Pharisee who walks by the stranger bleeding to death on the side of the road.
I've never heard of such a thing in my life, and 100% of the clergy I've spoken or listed to on this subject (which is many) have always said to vote, but rarely who to vote for. In private, they will share their political beliefs, but very few will publicly. Regardless I've always heard and read to vote, including from clergy like St. Paisios.
I would seriously ask how your Bishop justifies such a position in the face of so many saying the contrary. Do you have any links or arguments from such Bishops or Priests to support such a position of indifference?
There is a deep and rich theology on how this works, but it's beyond the scope of the thread. Cliffnote version:
1. God judges people according to what they have; those who have more will be expected of more.
2. Hell exists outside of time and so when Christ went into Hell, he released all souls that did not deserve to be there such as those who never had access to Christ.
This isn't my argument, as stated above my argument is Love thy Country, since it directly follows from Loving thy Neighbor. Not voting, which is indifference towards one's country, is therefore a violation of God's law. Indifference is antithetical to love, just like the Pharisee who walks by the stranger bleeding to death on the side of the road.
The point of resisting evil is because it is the right thing to do, since it shows Love to our Neighbors, the outcome is secondary to this fact.
Loving thy neighbor is blasphemy? How did you come up with this? I'll repeat the argument for the 20th time this thread:
Love thy Country, since it directly follows from Loving thy Neighbor. Not voting, which is indifference towards one's country, is therefore a violation of God's law. Indifference is antithetical to love, just like the Pharisee who walks by the stranger bleeding to death on the side of the road.
The question of who or how to vote is a different subject entirely. I've yet to advocate for voting for anyone except the most Christian candidate possible.
Seems like people's TDS is so strong, they would rather go to hell before vote for Trump, but that's a different subject. I'm not even talking about why to vote for Trump, I'm talking about why it is a sin not to vote.
Not voting ≠ indifference. If the government was taking your neighbors kids, mutilating them and giving them experimental hormonal drugs, then the loving thing to do is to not vote for that government, but to resist it.
Christians are to be in the world, but not of it. Sometimes it seems like some Christians are trying to go outside of the world altogether, which I agree is problematic, but I don't think it's good to try to bind men's consciences on whether they should vote or not.
Hell, unless you have the liberal doctrine of "Invincible Ignorance." Worthy of its own thread, but has already been touched on in the Hell thread.
Just as all pagan societies did, yes.
Not all of us are able to vote in the American elections, but there are parallels to many of the other ones across the world with the same issues with candidates, along with jews and shabbos goys behind the scenes manipulating everything.
What would you say to the reality that for those who love their country to realize that it is not their country anymore? That the literal demographics and representation of the body politic are not their people? That all the electable options are literally voting for your own replacement, one slower than the other? This is not the short term sight, but the long-term view which is coming more into reality with each passing year of continued voting.
I have been a practicing Catholic for nearly four decades, and not once has any Priest or Bishop told me it was a sin not to vote. I understand your fervor but this is pushing it, if no clergy I've ever spoken to, who has taken their holy rites and has been at the pulpit and leads their congregations in prayer and the sacraments, then how can you, a layperson in the faith just as I am, interpret a refusal to vote to be equivalent to hellfire? I would never tell people that if they vote they are sinning by partaking in the system, though that argument could be made.
You are right, we are all sinners, but think about what you are saying here. The idea that Christians must vote as a religious obligation is a modern interpretation and does not have deep historical roots in the teachings of the Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church. Voting as a civic duty is a relatively recent concept, emerging prominently in the context of democratic societies formed during and after the "Enlightenment".
With the rise of these so-called democratic societies the Catholic Church had developed a body of social teaching that addresses the responsibilities of Christians in the public sphere. Documents like "Rerum Novarum" (1891) and "Gaudium et Spes" (1965) emphasize the importance of participating in social and political life to promote justice and the common good. The second document is suspect because it is post-Vatican II. The Church may encourage active participation in civic duties, which may also include voting, but it does not teach that voting is a requirement for salvation.
You are turning the argument into a spiritual mandate, but it doesn't check out this way, only in the secular mode of thinking does this pass.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country" (CCC 2240). However, this is framed as a moral obligation in the context of civic responsibility, not as a requirement for salvation.
The Orthodox Church, from what I have learned from those who are Orthodox, also teaches the importance of being active and responsible members of society. The Orthodox Study Bible denotes the importance of Christians participating in the political process to promote justice and the common good, but again, this is not framed as a requirement for salvation.
Voting may seem like one way to participate in civic life, but it is not the only or the primary way to love one's neighbor. Acts of charity, kindness, and direct service to others are more central to this commandment than voting ever will be.
The Pharisee's indifference in the parable is about ignoring immediate, personal suffering. This is not directly analogous to the act of choosing not to vote, especially if one is actively engaged in other forms of community service and compassion. There are other times in Biblical history that represent this immediate assistance, in the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), Jesus emphasizes active, personal compassion. The Samaritan helps the injured man directly, showing mercy through immediate action.
The New Testament even places significant emphasis on the freedom of the Christian conscience. In Romans 14:5, Paul writes, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Salvation in our theology is based on faith in Jesus Christ and living according to His teachings, not on specific civic actions like voting. Ephesians 2:8-9 states, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Please do not be so condemnatory of those of us who do not vote, while others may condemn you for voting, I am not doing so. God knows our hearts brother. No one will ever stop you from voting for who you personally believe is the most Christian candidate, but the integrity of the concept of voting is certainly a debatable topic.
Last edited:
Some of your arguments are sound. But you always exaggerate with your narrative when it´s related to Trump. Always.
Maybe the exagerations comes from hearing too much of that orange snake oil salesman speeches.
You don´t go to hell for not voting. I don´t know orthodoxes but in catholic cathecism not voting is considered a small offense. The catholic cathecism says people should vote. But the reason behind it is more related to laziness or indifference. As a civic duty. Not because you don´t agree with both candidates. You don´t go to hell for not voting. Not voting doesn´t stop you from receiving grace.
In fact voting for a candidate who defends vg abortion might be considered a material cooperation. Ratzinger had a text about it.
The fact I´m not voting doesn´t mean I´m indifferent. It means I believe my vote has zero value. I know I have to do more. And voting is not one of them.
But if you want to chose the soap opera you want to see in the next 4 years. I would rather see Trump Vance (christian) than Kamala (newsom or whoever she is going to pick).
Hearing Kamala everyday speech in the news would be a nightmare. Voting to me is just changing channels.
We need to gets our hands dirty (legally). Create a PAC and start influencing the programs. Fund the candidates you think are worthy.
Set a common base of values. But there will be backlash. This is real talk. And this place is a good recruitment ground. Because people here are all good hearted. Some are more retards other less. But all good people. This would have to be done in a stealth manner. Trump is a retard. He had incredible human material to work with and only selected utter SHIT.
Politicians sell to the people what elites who paid them decided. This is my take on politicians.
The justification is simple. The level at which a Christian wants to engage in the world is fundamentally up to them. No one is going to chastise a hermit on Mount Athos for not coming down to vote. Many monks and lay Orthodox do not find their conscience troubled by not engaging in it. Nor is it bad if someone does want to. Its a matter for the individual. I'm not saying we shouldn't consider the decision prayerfully, but if one arrives at the conclusion to not vote, they are not acting against God.
I've never heard anyone say, or read in any guide for confession or whatnot that not voting is sinful.
And if there are candidates who resist such things, not voting for them shows indifference and therefore it's a sin not to vote for them.
Okay, this is an exaggeration, lol. I'm not saying YOU'LL GO TO HELL if you don't vote. I'm merely stating it's a sin, which, is pretty normal.
All of us are sinners. We all fail at some vices, and are strong in other virtues.
God weighs them all and depending on the cumulative effect of our sin to virtue ratio will enable one to make it into heaven. Those who are generally good can be forgiven of their sins. Hence why the Lord's prayer reads, "Forgive me of my debts..." All of our sins add up like debts.
So, no, I do not think not voting is a mortal sin which sends someone directly to hell. Very few sins are in such a category.
But, indifference to one's country is a sin, and, why add such a sin to one's rap sheet when it's such an easy sin to avoid? Get off the couch and cast a vote in 15 min. Why is this such a big deal???
Sure, but do any of the current candidates actually resist such things? "Whoever is unrighteous in little things is also unrighteous in much."
If the current candidates cannot even speak against little things such as abortion or gay marriage, then how can I trust them to do anything against the big things such as child mutilation and the gay school system?
Finally, you give me a real response.
This is a good question, and I would answer you should still vote, but probably 3rd party.
For example, look at Hitler. Did he stop voting because the Weimar Republic was a joke? He became his own party, and, despite the elections probably being rigged as hell, Hitler still played by the rules. Once he got some power, he most likely organized the Riechstag fire (I'm not 100% sure though), and managed to acquire emergency powers.
Once he had levers of rule under his control, his true popularity was revealed, and it was well over 80% of Germany. Had there been fair elections in Weimar, Hitler probably would have gotten well over 1/3 of votes, perhaps 50% in his first election.
Now, none of the above is central to my point. My point is that even Hitler voted because it was still the right thing to do, even when in a clown world beast system. In Hitler's case, he put all of his energy into a third party, and made it work.
Regardless, if we go with the "not voting" philosophy, then you wouldn't have voted for Hitler's party back in 1933 because of [[[insert Blackpill reason here]]]. But if Samseau was there, he would have voted for the 3rd party alternative, even if the system is rigged, because of a chance something good may happen in accordance with the Will of God.
Because it's not a huge sin. There are generally worse sins. I think today, however, the "not voting" phenomena is becoming a real problem, one that is damning us, and so it's important to remind people it's a sin.
It's not that the vote is a requirement for salvation, it's that the spiritual state that leads one to vote, which is Love for the Neighbor, is a requirement for salvation. If one loves thy Neighbor, they will always have tremendous civic values and vote 100% of the time, which was always the case for a majority of Catholics in the 20th century.
Great job pulling up the Catechism:
In both cases voting shows one is in a grounded spiritual state. Conversely, not voting is a sin. One sin is not enough to damn someone, just as one virtue is not enough to save someone, but, it always adds up and often times if one starts to sin in little things it will not be long before they are sinning in big things.
Thus something as small, yet significant, as voting, should always be done.
I am not stating that the indifference shown by not voting is the same as the indifference shown by walking by a dying man. I'm simply stating that they are along the same lines of sin, of being indifferent to our Neighbor's suffering. I understand there are vast degrees to sufferring.
All true, and that's why I do not say one must vote Trump or be a sinner. I do say that it's a sin to vote Democrat, but not voting Trump is not a sin. There are 3rd parties and I am not against them on principle.
I apologize if I am being too harsh, it's not my intention and often times text can sound far harsher than if I were to speak these same words.
But, I absolutely stand by the statement that not voting is a sin, although an easily forgivable sin. It's still better to avoid such a sin because voting is very easy, and show respect and care towards one country and Neighbor.
This is a good question, and I would answer you should still vote, but probably 3rd party.
For example, look at Hitler. Did he stop voting because the Weimar Republic was a joke? He became his own party, and, despite the elections probably being rigged as hell, Hitler still played by the rules. Once he got some power, he most likely organized the Riechstag fire (I'm not 100% sure though), and managed to acquire emergency powers.
Once he had levers of rule under his control, his true popularity was revealed, and it was well over 80% of Germany. Had there been fair elections in Weimar, Hitler probably would have gotten well over 1/3 of votes, perhaps 50% in his first election.
Now, none of the above is central to my point. My point is that even Hitler voted because it was still the right thing to do, even when in a clown world beast system. In Hitler's case, he put all of his energy into a third party, and made it work.
Regardless, if we go with the "not voting" philosophy, then you wouldn't have voted for Hitler's party back in 1933 because of [[[insert Blackpill reason here]]]. But if Samseau was there, he would have voted for the 3rd party alternative, even if the system is rigged, because of a chance something good may happen in accordance with the Will of God.
Because it's not a huge sin. There are generally worse sins. I think today, however, the "not voting" phenomena is becoming a real problem, one that is damning us, and so it's important to remind people it's a sin.
It's not that the vote is a requirement for salvation, it's that the spiritual state that leads one to vote, which is Love for the Neighbor, is a requirement for salvation. If one loves thy Neighbor, they will always have tremendous civic values and vote 100% of the time, which was always the case for a majority of Catholics in the 20th century.
Great job pulling up the Catechism:
In both cases voting shows one is in a grounded spiritual state. Conversely, not voting is a sin. One sin is not enough to damn someone, just as one virtue is not enough to save someone, but, it always adds up and often times if one starts to sin in little things it will not be long before they are sinning in big things.
Thus something as small, yet significant, as voting, should always be done.
I am not stating that the indifference shown by not voting is the same as the indifference shown by walking by a dying man. I'm simply stating that they are along the same lines of sin, of being indifferent to our Neighbor's suffering. I understand there are vast degrees to sufferring.
All true, and that's why I do not say one must vote Trump or be a sinner. I do say that it's a sin to vote Democrat, but not voting Trump is not a sin. There are 3rd parties and I am not against them on principle.
I apologize if I am being too harsh, it's not my intention and often times text can sound far harsher than if I were to speak these same words.
But, I absolutely stand by the statement that not voting is a sin, although an easily forgivable sin. It's still better to avoid such a sin because voting is very easy, and show respect and care towards one country and Neighbor.
This is not the first time I find your judgement to be off.
The only one who I vote for is Jesus Christ (instead of satan). That's the only democratic vote that I make.
And Christ also says the opposite, "One who is capable of a little faith is capable of great faith."
Trump may be a shitty Christian, but he still has a little faith and that could count for something much bigger down the road. Meanwhile Kamala celebrates Kwanza and glorifies abortion, sodomy, and war.
When it comes to monastics, the rules of civic engagement and Neighborly love become different, and they lower their involvement with the world, but in exchange their increase their devotion to God.
They are the exceptions to the rule. It's fine if one wants to forsake the world, but if you're just doing so because you want to get high, and blackpill all day, don't expect to make it into heaven.
Conversely those who forsake the world and repeat the Jesus prayer 5000 times a day are among the holiest of men. Of course it does not matter if these men vote, although, it is notable that many of such men have voted and do encourage others to vote, such as St. Paisios who've mentioned at least 10 times already. I do not know why you keep avoiding St. Paisios on this subject.
So sure, if one is a monk, they do not need to vote, but if one participates in the world, and takes from this world which God has provided us, I think it only makes sense to love the world back in a Christian way, by showing love, care, and sensitivity to the plight of others. Otherwise it becomes indifference, a sin.
That's a good vote and even back on RVF I told people it's better to write-in Christ than not to vote. The topic of this thread is not, "Why you should vote for Trump," but, "Why you should vote."
If one believes they can only vote for Christ, then that's the vote they should make.
I think if even 15% of the votes came in for Christ, it would make a massive change in society.
In our current system. Voting is a deal with the devil. It´s faustian. You are bargaining your soul for better returns. And people have been doing that for too long. Voting might one day become relevant again. But as for now. You are just empowering jews and their sect. Just voting is the real sin. To me that´s the real indifference. Voting is not enough.
There are 63% christians in US. There´s no reason for them to concede an inch. Unless being manipulated. Or not having real saying.
There are 63% christians in US. There´s no reason for them to concede an inch. Unless being manipulated. Or not having real saying.
Last edited:
I would support all third position politics as long as they are truly independent of the banks. Time and time again, in European countries, an alleged third party is revealed to be just another waste of time. That's the EU for you But not all are like this. Greece had a real chance to change their country if it was not for the constant vilification of the Nationalists by the establishment hacks in Athens. The suppression of Golden Dawn and its successors, and its similar parties, will lead to a violent overthrow of the Greek parliament at some point. They thought they could put everybody there on jewish SSRIs, Afghani weed, and Albanian coke to pacify them, but more are breaking free.
Yes voting was still real when the NSDAP began gaining seats in the Reichstag in 1928, the reason why it may seem like it was rigged in Hitler's favor is a theory but cannot be proven, but the reason why it may seem like this was because there were literally 32 political parties in Weimar trying to each push for their own exclusive little niche of society to be supreme over the other. It was a civic mess, and so many political parties were allowed to flourish because it kept any real solution from arising. The NSDAP from 1919 to 1923 were constantly in street fights with KAPD (Kommunistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands) and many times men who joined the party would be ostracized from jobs, similar to the persecution going on now with the unhealthy miasma of liberal globs against anyone who opposes them, not just right-wingers.
The Reichstag fire was not an inside job. It was under intense investigation at the time and remember Hindenburg was still the president, the office of Chancellor and President were not combined into one yet. The SA was investigated, the Gestapo, the SS, every single outfit of the party and the government were looked at by the SD (Sicherheitsdienst, the internal affairs organization, which had a notorious record of finding men in the party unfit for work for pretty good reasons), not just outsiders. Some of the authoritarian decisions Hitler made after Hindenburg's passing like banning all other political parties proved to be correct, and the amount of appeasement Hitler had to do to the German army (by disarming the SA) and then to the German industrialists by putting down Rohm and his attempted Leninist-style coup in 1934 only brought the nation together and whittled away the influence of the communists. I don't know if the Dutch communist they found was the real arsonist, but there were still vengeful communist street gangs in German cities well into 1934 and 1935 until they were mostly incarcerated in labor camps, or shot. If there were NSDAP orders to start the Reichstag fire, it would have come from Rohm, who often operated outside of Hitler's orders and was the last obstacle to unity in Germany, and thus these orders would have been illegitimate, and no different than the communist jews who are the more likely culprits.
In regards to this, don't forget that in 1933 when Germany refused to surrender, mind you, to the World Conference of jews in Amsterdam, they broke up and Mr. Untermeyer came back to the United States -- who was the head of the American delegation and the president of the whole conference -- and he went from the steamer to ABC and made a radio broadcast throughout the United States in which he said: "The jews of the world now declare a Holy War against Germany. We are now engaged in a sacred conflict against the Germans. And we are going to starve them into surrender. We are going to use a world-wide boycott against them, that will destroy them because they are dependent upon their export business." And it is a fact that two thirds of Germany's food supply had to be imported, and it could only be imported with the proceeds of what they exported. Their labor. So if Germany could not export, two thirds of Germany's population would have to starve. There just was not enough food for more than one third of the population. The precedent has always been set by jewish communists, they were burning government buildings down before Hitler, and when they tried to do it so soon after he became Chancellor they were surprised by his quick retribution on them.
80% was only the beginning, the Anschluss referendum from the Austrians delivered a whopping 99.73% vote from the people to join Germany in a united Reich. Those numbers were not fake, they desired the economic freedom and quality of life their German brothers had won for themselves. The jews did not like the idea of plebiscites because people will always vote against the interests of the bankers. So something had to be done about this after the war.
Voting also would have kept America out of the 2nd World War as everyone was tired of Rosenfeldt's New Steal, but they killed Huey Long specifically because they (the Brain Trust behind FDR) knew he would never commit America to such aggressive actions that lead to war nor commit to a war itself on foreign soil. So we can trace the integrity of voting and elections to at least most elections prior to WW2. Anything after that is suspect given the victory gluttony of the new world order.
One of the issues I am raising is not to harp on the intellectual/enlightenment preference of democratic voting over Monarchical or feudalism or vice versa, but how the process became corrupted as technology advanced and jews got sneakier, not just the accurate and honest readings of the vote counts themselves, but the choices of candidates, and the long-term survival of a grass-roots third position to make it to an electable state in order to bring change in the "democratic fashion".
I would be interested, if you so choose to, to go talk to a Bishop and bring your arguments to him, citing all your reasoning why you think not voting is a sin, and I will go and do the same, though it may be a week or two before I can get a reply to you on that one, to get an absolute modern take from a high-ranking member of the cloth. Then we can discuss the verdict of the church on whether or not it is a sin to not vote, and to what level this sin is if it is at all.
Last edited:
*quoted post numbered to address line by line*
1) You didn't even answer my first question, let alone all of them, So i'll repeat, "Self opinion and pride is good on a spiritual level?" By assuming that voting is a moral good, you're also assuming that
A) Politics is something that everyone can and should be involved in
B) Each persons education on political matters doesn't matter, and each vote should weigh the same
C) What the majority wants is what is good for society
D) That the majority of people are rational actors (or is that only while voting?)
E) That the voting campaign is an accurate representation of the the candidates behaviour when in office
F) That the candidate's behaviour will not be influenced by lobbying groups
G) That the candidate has autocratic control and will conform the existing bureaucracy to his view
H) That the voting is an honest process, and those in power will graciously accept the results
2) AFAIK There is no law requiring people to vote, so those not voting are obeying the government.
3) If it's power politics you're playing, and voting truly is power politics, what did the 2020 election show you?
4) "Rationally" is downstream of presuppositions, and you're being emotional enough for the both of us.
Yes, the establishment wants you not to participate in the ritual from which it gains it's legitimacy, that must be it.
If you are voting, you're legitimizing the system, and being in part responsible for who gets in thus in part responsible for the decisions they make, However, I still have contacted elected representatives on issues that have bothered me, because that's what you can do in a rotten system without supporting it.
@Samseau
Is Maduro's government in Venezuela ordained by God?
Are the people protesting disobeying authority and by virtue have a rebellious spirit?
It's not gotcha questions, what you're saying is not consistent. Your neighbourly love philosophy can very easily be extended to illegals who Trump is apperently against. This is the reason I don't even try to rectify anything I post with scripture. I just hope with time I will be blessed with more wisdom by God to allow me to make better decisions and perceive the world as intended.
The world is very grey. I lean towards nationalism because I believe blood is real therefore self-determination of a people is a non-negotiable. I also make no qualms that such political ideology is not perfect and it's not unusual for nationalists to be retarded and potentially engage in some form of cruelty down the line, due to the decadance that slowly creeps in with unopposed authority and power.
I also understand that ideology has lost a lot of its relevance in the modern world and trying to uphold it is archaic. Similar to the jewish work on Sabbath dilemma. Am I suppose to care if some particular policy is socialist if it works and is beneficial?
While I have a visceral disgust for the left I also understand that liberalism and its offshoots at this point have a long European tradition, that influences everything. Their positions are understandable although no longer relatable. In fact democrats/liberals in some cases would hypothetically be more suited for the ranks of a ultranationalism movement than kosher conservatives, this reiterating the greyness of our paradigm.
I unfortunately can not advocate for a political party or revolution because none exists that is to my liking. What does concern me is human dignity, especially my own, and where it can be upheld.
Is Maduro's government in Venezuela ordained by God?
Are the people protesting disobeying authority and by virtue have a rebellious spirit?
It's not gotcha questions, what you're saying is not consistent. Your neighbourly love philosophy can very easily be extended to illegals who Trump is apperently against. This is the reason I don't even try to rectify anything I post with scripture. I just hope with time I will be blessed with more wisdom by God to allow me to make better decisions and perceive the world as intended.
The world is very grey. I lean towards nationalism because I believe blood is real therefore self-determination of a people is a non-negotiable. I also make no qualms that such political ideology is not perfect and it's not unusual for nationalists to be retarded and potentially engage in some form of cruelty down the line, due to the decadance that slowly creeps in with unopposed authority and power.
I also understand that ideology has lost a lot of its relevance in the modern world and trying to uphold it is archaic. Similar to the jewish work on Sabbath dilemma. Am I suppose to care if some particular policy is socialist if it works and is beneficial?
While I have a visceral disgust for the left I also understand that liberalism and its offshoots at this point have a long European tradition, that influences everything. Their positions are understandable although no longer relatable. In fact democrats/liberals in some cases would hypothetically be more suited for the ranks of a ultranationalism movement than kosher conservatives, this reiterating the greyness of our paradigm.
I unfortunately can not advocate for a political party or revolution because none exists that is to my liking. What does concern me is human dignity, especially my own, and where it can be upheld.
- Is it dignified to be ruled by outsiders?
- Is it dignifed for women to be treated as prostitutes [with their consent]?
- Is it dignified to be forcefully pacified by the government with an ever increasing level of danger?
- Is it dignified to have liberty eroded for the sake of an ever increasing power of the elites?
- Is it dignified to live without tradition and norms, constantly in cultural limbo?
- Is it dignified to have to question the nature of my identity while experiencing hostility towards it?
Equating not voting to not having love for your neighbour or indifference is absurd, as is the implication of the opposite. Indeed voting is often an excuse for indifference; "I voted for the guy who wanted to help the homeless, not my fault he didn't get in" and simply see that as their having done the minimum required of them.
I don't suggest that people should just not care and not even consider their position on the matter. But if someone looks at the world and says: these are all Zionist, anti-Christian, abortion and LGBT promoting war mongerers and I don't want to vote for any of them, then I don't see how they have sinned. Its a separate question as to whether or not they are loving towards their neighbour.
Democracy is basically a religion these days, where its adherents look down on those who don't participate in the ritual. I absolutely do not agree that with this idea that you've sinned against anyone for not going to the "temple" and putting your little bit of paper in the box. If you want to vote and think its worthwhile, it says nothing whatsoever to me about your moral character, neither does the opposite.
Democracy is fundamentally an inversion of God's order wherein the people rather than God decide who is at the top of the pyramid. On that basis alone a Christian is entirely justified in not engaging with it based on their principles
As for Saint Paisios. I don't agree with everything he says. He was a great and holy man, but he wasn't infallible. He also apparently thought we went to the moon. I disagree with him there. Although to be fair in this instance he doesn't appear to be addressing "is not voting a sin?" but rather "how should we decide who to vote for?" which is a separate question, and he may have answered the former differently.
Again, I've never heard or read anywhere anything that suggests not voting is sinful. The question isn't even present in the Holy Fathers because contemporary democracy is a modern political system that arose as an undermining of the patriarchal Christian order that stood previously. Lets stop pretending that engaging with it has anything to do with Christian morals. If you want to vote go ahead, it does not make you morally superior.
The government allows for no-fault divorce and for gay marriage. As an option. Like how voting is an option.
If you guys don't all divorce your wives and immediately get gay married, I join Samseau in condemning you as sinners and clearly in defiance of ALL saints, priests, puppies, and spring flowers.
Render unto Caesar, whooooooo!
If you guys don't all divorce your wives and immediately get gay married, I join Samseau in condemning you as sinners and clearly in defiance of ALL saints, priests, puppies, and spring flowers.
Render unto Caesar, whooooooo!