Buddhist teacher Ethan Nichtern has an excellent article over at Lion\u2019s Roar, a handy \u201cguide\u201d to the current US election<\/a>. It is a guide indeed, as it gives more than a simple single command or opinion. It takes readers through six options, taking into consideration that swing state voters have different roles and obligations in the election. These options, in brief, are:<\/p>\n While the conclusion is a definite \u201cchoose option 1 above,\u201d the argumentation is aimed at those voters who are either planning to stay home on election day or vote for a 3rd party. The reasoning around option #5 is that this election can be seen as\u00a0an opportunity to not only elect Hillary Clinton, but also to defeat a racist, nationalist, Islamophobic, misogynist demagogue. And the goal here is not just to defeat him by a small margin, but to defeat him\u00a0so soundly\u00a0that it prevents\u00a0future Donald Trumps<\/em> from even trying to rise to power. As Nichtern writes: \u201cThe closer the popular vote gets in this election, the more emboldened fascism will become. In 2020, or 2024, with the media\u2019s current business model, we are in huge trouble, unless we give fascism a decisive defeat right now.\u201d<\/p>\n While many Buddhists may be skeptical of Clinton, noting her ties to spreading fracking, violence in the Muslim world, and Wall Street, informal surveys here (the latest will be reported on Oct 12) suggest a steady move toward supporting her and national polls show\u00a0very slow<\/em> but steady move<\/a> in her direction as well. Nichtern also points out the misogyny inherent in many of our judgments of Hillary Clinton. This is something all voters should keep in mind.<\/p>\n ~<\/p>\n Last May, Zen Buddhist teacher Brad Warner also shared his views<\/a> on Buddhism and politics, writing:<\/p>\n I am definitely not a \u201cconservative Buddhist.\u201d<\/p>\n But I am concerned whenever I see any mixing of religion and politics. When I was a youngster I was aghast at seeing Christianity mixed with conservative politics, with the implication that Jesus himself wanted you to vote Republican. If we respond to that with the equivalent of, \u201cNo! Buddha wants you to vote Democrat!\u201d I don\u2019t see how that\u2019s any better.<\/p>\n I understand when Buddhists are concerned with issues like militarism and global climate change. These are urgent matters that affect all of us. It\u2019s just that it\u00a0rankles me to see people representing themselves as the \u201cleaders\u201d of Buddhism and presenting their views as if they are the consensus views of all Buddhists.<\/p>\n \u2026<\/p>\n What bugs me is when it appears that liberal, left-leaning Buddhists are trying to mix Buddhism with their political agenda in precisely the same way people like Pat Robertson<\/a> mix Christianity with their conservative political agenda. This just makes us all look bad to everyone except lefty types who already agree with whatever cause is being espoused. Nobody is going to be convinced to change their views on militarism or global warming because they saw a photo of a bunch of weirdos in costumes they associate with cult members holding a banner outside of the White House. It\u2019s\u00a0an exercise in vanity, which can only serve to help entrench people\u2019s previously established views.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n On this issue I side with Nichtern, who wrote that, \u201cI don\u2019t buy the strange\u00a0premise that spiritual thinkers should stay silent during elections. In fact, I believe the opposite. Living in democracy requires us to participate in shared decisions of leadership.\u201d<\/p>\n This necessarily means some mixing of religion and politics is necessary, but in a very particular way. Religion \u2013 in the form of religious people \u2013 can and should be involved in politics \u2013 the work of governing our democracy. This requires discussion, the art of pondering, exchanging, and challenging\u00a0reasons<\/em>.<\/p>\n However, religious argumentation (e.g. Buddha said\u2026 therefore we should\u2026) can be fairly ineffective insofar as it presupposes a particular orientation (e.g. willingness to follow whatever the Buddha said). However, religious\u00a0thinkers and leaders do no service by spending years or decades cultivating moral sensitivity and then simply bottling it up when it comes to issues beyond their own sense of well-being. While the Pat Robertsons out there garner political power, there are also<\/a> the Jimmy Carters, Fr. Daniel Berrigans, Fr. John F. Kavanaughs, Stephen Colberts (who is\u00a0a Sunday School teacher among other things), Cornel Wests, Gene Robinsons, and others who have little problem mixing their faith and their liberal \u201cpolitical agendas\u201d to borrow Warner\u2019s words (look up \u201cChristian Left<\/a>\u201d \u2013 or see a handly list of leaders here<\/a>). The comparison is imperfect, of course, as Robertson is a preacher first and a political activist second, while many of those I name have other primary positions; but all are people \u201cof faith\u201d on the liberal end of the political spectrum.<\/p>\n It\u2019s true that the Christian Right has a brighter spotlight and has for years, but does this mean that the Christian Left (and lefties in other religions) should hide in the shadows?<\/p>\n As an educator and lover of wisdom, I hope Nichtern\u2019s\u00a0points spur debate and draw out some conservative Buddhists to share their views. I\u2019d rather have them and others put forth their ideas for scrutiny, where they can possibly change our minds<\/em> or in turn be changed by better arguments,\u00a0than to likewise hide in shadows.<\/p>\n Speaking of one of those mentioned above, ordained minister Stephen Colbert reacts to the latest Trump video (warning, some very un-Sunday School teacher language):<\/p>\n\n