Morality and the Presidency

Here are a few excerpts from an article by Dennis L. Weisman at American Thinker:

The recent op-ed in Christianity Today calling for the removal of President Trump from office because he is morally unfit to lead the country renews an age-old debate about morality and the presidency. In a perfect world, we would prefer that our presidents be morally upstanding individuals with principles and values worthy of emulation. Not all of our presidents meet this standard, which invariably forces tradeoffs between the personal attributes that we admire and those that we cannot. This question of morality, however, must be juxtaposed against the first job of government: to protect the citizenry above all else.

. . .

[T]he traits that we value in our presidents, at least the successful ones, are paradoxically likely to be considered flaws in our friends and neighbors. There is a certain timber in these individuals that we may admire at the negotiating table only to recoil from at the dinner table. These individuals must of necessity possess warrior traits.

. . .

Our nation’s history is rife with extremely gifted, but imperfect if not morally flawed individuals ascending to the presidency. The truth is that our presidents are rarely saints, nor should we necessarily want them to be. Tradeoffs between moral character and effective leadership may be necessary and each of us must ask ourselves if this is a price we are willing to pay. In an ideal world, I may prefer a president possessed of impeccable moral character, who is beyond reproach, but when push comes to shove and it invariably will, I would be willing to sacrifice some moral purity to ensure that our national language is not Chinese, German, Japanese or Russian. Because saints don’t win wars — warriors win wars.

Read more: American Thinker

Image credit: