“…we need to note—and this is what is essential to the Christian worldview—that we should not interfere with anything that would tamper with or compromise a culture’s ability for women to fulfill what is made very clear in Scripture, and that is the primary responsibility in the home and clear patterns of responsibility in the church.” R. Albert Mohler, Februay 3, 2016.
Since the beginning of the 2016 presidential election cycle, Marco Rubio been the candidate of choice for the Evangelical Intelligentsia. Rubio recevied the tacit endorsment of ERLC President Russell More when the two co-authored an op-ed piece in the Washington Post. Celebrity Pastor Rick Warren and prominent theologian Wayne Grudem volunteered for the Rubio Campaign’s “Religious Advisory Board” weeks ago. Apologist Ravi Zacharias and Southern Baptist paragon R. Albert Mohler followed suit by agreeing to serve on Rubio’s “Dignity of Life” board. These men volunteered for these positions despite the fact that Rubio does not hold to a biblical worldview and is, by his own admission,“fully theologically and doctrinally aligned with the Roman Catholic Church.” Although Rubio, given his full agreement Roman Catholic doctrine, is not a true Christian, he is something altogether more important to politically-minded professional theologians: he is perceived as being electable in an ever-liberalizing United States of America which elected Barack Hussein Obama to the presidency in 2008 and 2012. Rubio may not be a true Christian but he is strongly pro-life. Rubio may not be a true Christian but he does strongly oppose “gay marriage.” His electability and right standing on these two bellwether political issues have been enough to garner him the endorsement of evangelical religious leaders such as Moore, Warren, and Mohler. However, his recent support of drafting women for military service in the United States may prove to be his undoing among the evangelical intelligentsia.
During the February 6th GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire, Marco Rubio “indicated support for opening Selective Service up to women in case the draft is ever reinstated.” With regards to the draft and women in combat, Rubio stated:
“I have no problem whatsoever with people of either gender serving in combat so long as the minimum requirements necessary to do the job are not compromised,” Rubio said. “I support that. Now that that is the case, I do believe Selective Service should be opened up for both men and women in the case a draft
Given that Marco Rubio does not have a biblical worldview, this statement should come as no surprise to Christians. (After all, if Rubio had a biblical worldview, why would he need a cadre of evangelical theologians serving on multiple faith advisory boards?) According to Grant Castleberry, writing for the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood:
“The idea of women being conscripted to serve in our armed forces in a time of national emergency is a travesty.”
Rubio advisors Wayne Grudem and Albert Mohler would certainly agree with Castleberry’s statement given they are members of the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Grudem and Mohler would likely find more agreement with Russell Moore’s plain-spoken response to GOP candidates who support drafting women into military service:
One is left to wonder what kind of advisement, if any, Rubio has actually received from Wayne Grudem and company, given his glaring rejection of biblical gender roles. What good is his editorial collaboration with Russell Moore doing? Rubio’s support of drafting women may poll well with a secular society, one that sees him as electable, but it should not sit well with evangelical Christians. Marco Rubio is a man who supports protecting life in the womb and rejects the idea of same-sex marriage. Yet, as the Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful military, he would not be opposed to drafting mothers, daughters, and sisters for military service on the front lines of the battlefield. Only time will tell if the Evangelical Intelligentsia realize that they have put their faith in the wrong politician and withdraw their ill-advised support.
[Contributed by Seth Dunn]
*Please note that the preceding is my personal opinion. It is not necessarily the opinion of any entity by which I am employed, any church at which I am a member, any church which I attend, or the educational institution at which I am enrolled. Any copyrighted material displayed or referenced is done under the doctrine of fair use.
