When Political Neutrality Becomes Idolatry
Choosing "neither side" isn't the holy flex you think it is.
Got a little spicy in this article. But I have the freedom to say what I really think because people like you support that liberty, even if you don’t always agree with my takes. I deeply appreciate that. Keep it going by becoming a paid subscriber today!
One of my biggest frustrations with evangelicals and politics is boldly declaring that “neither side” represents your views and using that as cover to avoid the real and important differences between Republicans and Democrats.
I posted this notion on social media and put it this way…
Many evangelicals have been discipled for the past 40 years to believe that the only truly “Christian” way to vote is Republican.
This came from the Moral Majority and the rise of the Religious Right. It came from major evangelical pastors, publications, and conferences. It came from radio show hosts, and these days, from podcasters, YouTubers, and social media influencers.
But now this group of evangelicals has seen the corruption of Donald Trump and others on the Right. They have decided that voting for him in 2024 may not be an option.
Not voting Republican is a disruptive reality for many evangelicals because they have always tended to vote for the “pro life” party. But this man and the MAGA movement has made what used to be a simple choice much more distasteful.
But they could never, ever, ever vote for a Democratic candidate.
They remains the party of “baby killers.”
Abortion is a critically important issue. There are also other critically important issues—immigration, healthcare, voting, rights, environmental protections, and more. And there are also other issues that impact the rates of abortions.
All of these should factor into one’s political calculus.
There’s also the crowd of Christians who believe that if neither Democrats or Republicans perfectly embody their brand of Christianity, then they are bound by their religion not to vote for either one.
But is a “Christian” party even desirable? After all, whose Christianity are we talking about?
And in a nation that enshrined the principle of “separation of church and state” from its founding, a Christian party would not even be strictly constitutional.
People are within their rights as citizens and as believers to vote third-party, write-in a candidate, or not vote at all.
But refusing to vote for one of the two major parties ends up working to the advantage of one of those parties. So the third party or abstention stances still have partisan consequences.
The reality is this…we have a two-party system right now. A Republican or a Democratic candidate will be the next President of the United States.
Neutrality is easy in the abstract. But when you look at a party’s actual stances, words, and actions, the false equivalencies should fall away.
Both presidential tickets have released their policy statements.
Read Trump’s policy platform HERE. And Project 2025.
Read Harris’ policy platform HERE.
Are they each the same? Are they both equally wrong in opposite ways?
Move from the realm of abstraction to specifics.
Third way politics is one option, but it does not offer the moral absolution many wish it would.
I prefer Frederick Douglass’ approach.
In a letter responding to a question about race and politics in 1873, he wrote,
Tell your wants, hold the party up to its profession, but do your utmost to keep it in power in State and Nation."
Douglass encouraged voters to hold their party accountable to its promises and to progress—but to first keep that party in office.
Only the most extreme ideologues approve absolutely everything a party or candidate says and does. Your vote should not be considered tacit agreement on every action that a politician takes or every statement they make.
That being said, voters still have a responsibility to hold their preferred candidate and party to a high standard of behavior.
Instead of saying “neither side”, another option is to pick a political side and press them to represent your beliefs and interests as best as possible.
Which party or politician you vote for is a calculated choice in a field of limited options.
As Christians let’s recognize these constraints and actually live into our freedom in Christ and as political participants to make a choice and take a side.
It is not automatically more holy or virtuous to stand outside of politics and declare your principled neutrality. That stance may be an indication that you are more concerned about avoiding conflict than promoting justice.
Neutrality can be an idol, too.
How would you describe your approach to politics as a Christian in a two-party system? Share in the comments!
If you want to know why I think about politics the way I do, I learned it from studying history. You can read about a lot of Black Christians who chose a political side and got a lot of good done in politics while maintaining a vital faith when you read “The Spirit of Justice.”
Voltaire said “Perfect is the enemy of good.” The Democratic Party is not perfect, but it is good in many aspects, and its candidates seem to at least be open to hearing where they can do better. Project 2025 scares the living daylights out of me. How can you be neutral in the face of such a horrific platform?
To profess neutrality is to commit what John Calvin calls a sin of omission...It is to be Lukewarm Laodicians...