It’s only a week until the election. I still have things to say, but my brain seems to be running on half-power, and when half my brain is tied behind my back, my family gets first dibs on what’s left. Thankfully, two wonderful young men whom I admire very much, Wesley Strackbein and Bob Renaud, have put their sharp brains together* and done the detailed research to counter the claim that a McCain presidency would be a boon to the pro-life movement. I know we all agree that Barack Obama would be no friend to unborn babies, but I have heard many of my friends justify their reluctant vote for McCain because they consider him to be solidly pro-life (you can hear Gary DeMar say as much here). The deal clincher for most of these people is the hope of overturning Roe v. Wade. Perhaps they don’t remember that it was Republicans who appointed most of the judges who gave us that horrific decision in 1973. Here’s more from Wesley and Bob’s paper:

Sen. McCain supports abortion in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, and he has actively campaigned to strike the prohibition of abortion in these cases from the Republican Party Platform. In addition, Sen. McCain has voted to confirm radical pro-abortion judges such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer and has recently affirmed that he would vote for pro-abortion judges under a McCain presidency, so long as they met basic “qualifications.” He also has been outspoken in his support for embryonic stem cell research and has voted in favor of funding for Planned Parenthood.

It is very naive to believe a candidate’s positions solely as given on his campaign website and in debates during election season (though I was shocked to hear McCain defend his support for embryonic stem cell research in his last debate, an angry response to Obama’s attack ads portraying him as being against that practice). If a candidate has held previous public office, he leaves a record which must be examined and judged against his words. Thankfully, there are those who have done the research to show that McCain’s walk and his talk do not match. Is that the kind of leader we can endorse? How can we trust a double-minded man to keep any of his promises?

We are not responsible to put the “right” person in office—that is God’s job, and He will use our faithfulness to His commands as a means to bless us individually and as a nation. As we have voted based on fear the last few elections, the pro-life movement has become weaker and more willing to compromise, letting unborn babies be used as pawns while they are manipulated into electing (mostly) Republican candidates, whom Christians feel obligated to support as long as they mouth some pro-life platitudes. We heard that the last election was the “most important ever,” because Bush would be a friend to our cause and Kerry would appoint pro-abortion justices. Been there, done that.

I wonder if we would be stuck with such a Hobson’s choice now if Kerry had won in 2004. It’s hard to imagine it would have been worse than the massive growth of intrusive government during the last four years, but even if it was, Christians would have been on their guard and even mobilized to get off their apathy and pursue godliness, looking for truly godly leaders, rather than relying on an easy top-down solution from Washington, D.C. Instead, we have evangelicals continuing to support their man in office in spite of his inaction on their issues and his horrible performance. We have the disastrous Bush legacy (and his abysmal 27 percent approval rating) to thank for the current Democrat coup in the nation’s upcoming elections. How long do we perpetuate this farce?

Strategy and pragmatism only go so far. As Steve says, only one vote counts at the ballot box, and that’s God’s. He moves the heart of kings, and the election’s outcome will be as He wills. Our duty is to obey him by not yoking ourselves with ungodly men or following after the humanist/socialist/fascist gods of the people around us.

(F)or God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control. ~2 Timothy 1:7

But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you. ~Matthew 6:33

*One boy equals one brain. Two boys equal half a brain. Three boys equal no brain at all. It’s a good thing Wesley and Bob are grown men now .

We reside in a nation of fools
Manipulated by economic “tools”–
Not conquered by tanks,
But by credit and banks,
And lessons taught in government schools.

Ah God, for a man with heart, head, hand,
Like some of the simple great ones gone
For ever and ever by,
One still strong man in a blatant land,
Whatever they call him, what care I,
Aristocrat, democrat, plutocrat — one
Who can rule and dare not lie.

~from Alfred, Lord Tennyson’s poem, “Maud”

Whenever I talk about the importance of women embracing the wonderful “career” of being a keeper at home, there is usually some snide feminist who interprets my exhortation as an attempt to incarcerate them in their domiciles. For those who have not been keeping house, it may be understandable that such a prospect is unattractive. I don’t know what the future holds, but with the economic instability we are now experiencing, I see signs that the freedom to roam far from home may become restricted for many people who have been accustomed to a lifestyle that is far from home-centered. It may be time to reacquaint ourselves with the charms (or potential charms) of blooming where we’re planted.

I’ve been enjoying the great tips from Crystal’s website, Money Saving Moms, especially as we have been trying to be more careful the last few months while watching the signs of the times tend toward hardship for many. She linked to the frugal blog called “Life From the Roof,” written by a young wife and mother who lives in the Bay Area, just a couple hours from us. She posted a poem that reminded me of the message with which I try to encourage other mothers who sometimes grow weary in well-doing at home. She aptly referred to it as “The Freedom of Limitations.” It’s the sonnet Nuns Fret Not at Their Convent’s Narrow Room by William Wordsworth:

Nuns fret not at their convent’s narrow room;
And hermits are contented with their cells;
And students with their pensive citadels;
Maids at the wheel, the weaver at his loom,
Sit blithe and happy; bees that soar for bloom,
High as the highest Peak of Furness-fells,
Will murmur by the hour in foxglove bells:
In truth the prison, unto which we doom
Ourselves, no prison is: and hence for me,
In sundry moods, ’twas pastime to be bound
Within the Sonnet’s scanty plot of ground;
Pleased if some Souls (for such there needs must be)
Who have felt the weight of too much liberty,
Should find brief solace there, as I have found.

Have you ever felt the weight of “too much liberty”? How do God-given limitations differ from those imposed by a tyrannical state?