Voters have a right to judge Obama

According to an April 8 Fence post letter, it is wrong for people to judge Barack Obama. I disagree.

Judging is an appropriate and rational method for citizens to decide which political candidate is best suited for president.

To judge means "to form or hold an opinion, decide upon critically, to infer, to think, conclude about or assess." How can this be a wrong way for one to make a decision?

The prophets (definition: truth teller) from Old Testament scripture would most definitely not have shied away from confronting Obama on his views that do not fall in line with Biblical teaching -- exactly because he professes to be a Christian.

The apostle Paul indicated in 1 Corinthians that Christians are most definitely to judge (in truth, not condemnation) fellow Christians on behavior is not in line with Biblical teaching.

I, as a citizen and a Christian, must weigh all aspects about Barack Obama as a political candidate, including his lack of good sense in staying in a church where the leader spouted racism and took God's name in vain from the pulpit.

Because Obama is an anti-life politician, it is appropriate to judge him as a Christian not following the pro-life teachings of the Bible (Psalm 139). When he has voted to support the slaughter of innocents, he has not "acted justly or loved mercy" (Micah 6:8).

Political candidates must know and should expect that when they step into the limelight and run for president, they are most definitely going to be judged in many ways by many different kinds of people.

Thankfully we have this right. Barack Obama is no victim. By judging him, I am not causing him to "suffer" as the April 8 writer insinuated. If she feels that she must protect her candidate from this type of scrutiny, then I suggest that her candidate is not fit for the job.

Dana Albers

Arlington Heights