I don't get it Alex. What's stopping the SDAs from voting?

It seems to me that there is absolutely no discrimination over commitments to conscience here.

The Adventists in Nevada have a choice, and they are freely exersizing it, by choosing not to participate.

Seems to me that their consciences would be discriminated against, if they were forced to paticipate. As it stands now, they are free to exersize their religion and their conscience as they see fit.

I fail to see this as a problem.

Randy

Ditto. Is voting to protect our rights as a republic somehow inimicable to observing Sabbath? Please give us a Bible text that prompted this response.

Would the be voting on Sabbath if there were a proposition to prevent their worshiping on Sabbath? Cuts both ways.

How exactly does this _not_ create a situation which preferences those whose religion does not worship on Sabbath?

"Nevada constitution prohibits legislation respecting establishment of religion or free exercise thereof. There is no question but that framers of Nevada constitution recognized the import of U.S. 1st amendment and in constitution provided that free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed in this state. Thus Nevada constitution, aside from U.S. 14th amendment, prohibits legislature from making any law respecting establishment of religion or free exercise thereof." AGO 320 (3-3-1954)

This isn't a Biblical problem- it's a civil rights problem. The citizens of Nevada deserve to not be discriminated against because of their religious beliefs. The state finds it relevant to schedule simple things like GED tests on Sundays to enable full participation by Sabbath keepers. How much more important then is the highest responsibility of a citizen, the act of voting?

Please read my post carefully as it is not an endorsement of skipping a Sabbath vote.

Elaine, have I been with you so long. . . ?

True, there is no bible text against voting but neither is there a bible text against playing sports on Sabbath, although most academies pull their students from Sabbath games. The fact is that a majority of Adventists, like observant Jews, would not vote on Sabbath.

But even beyond that conscience issue lies the most important point of my post, (Michael) to wit: the timing of the voting is a problem as it occurs during the time when church happens.

As I read the First Amendment's "free exercise clause," Adventists and Jews should not have to choose between voting and worshiping. Click on that link to the Jewish org. I believe in Sabbath solidarity.

Some comment here without noting that the GC employs a good crew of lawyers who deal with this sort of thing, especially when employees face conflicts over working on the Sabbath. Sure, plenty of Adventists do work (and vote) on Saturday, but if an Adventist would rather not, I'm happy to support their freedom to act in accordance with their conscience. In this case, not voting means being shut out of the democratic process, due precisely to the timing. Democracy can do better.

Randy, while Adventists are free not to participate, some are not free to vote and since voting is a basic right in a democracy, freedom must run both ways.

It still seems to me that the Adventists in Nevada are free to choose.

If they choose not to vote on Saturday, they are exercising their right to choose that option.

Many I am sure will choose to vote, just as they would choose to vote in church officers on a Saturday morning.

Alexander, the basic right of democracy is to practise your religion freely. You are doing that by choosing not to vote a on Saturday.

Johnny, I fail to see that having the vote on a Saturday morning in anyway challenges the religious freedom of Adventists or Jews. Certainly the paragraph you posted doesn't disallow such a vote.

I find it ironic that this discussion is even happening, given the "light" the "pen of inspiration" suggests about voting.

Something about wanting your cake, and eating it too...

Randy

The headline is in error: No one is "shutting out" Adventists from participating in the primary. They can FREELY choose either to participate or not. No one is preventing them from voting.

Is there a day that is convenient for all religious groups? If someone chooses not to vote, he is exercising his freedom NOT to, but he also loses his right to speak against the decisions made by others.

If someone's church attendance prevents him from voting, that is an option freely chosen, isn't it? I don't see any religious or other discrimination involved. Life is always a trade-off. You can't simultaneously participate in two desired options: attending church or voting.

Yes, I too, support anyone's freedom to vote or not to vote. In this country we have a lower voter turnout than nearly all the industrialized nations, where voting is often mandatory and it seems only right if someone wants to participate in the benefits of a nation they should also participate in the privilege of expressing their opinions through the ballot box.

The theoretical question: if a vote for or against religious liberty was set for a Saturday, would SDAs choose not to vote on Saturday to protect the right to worship on that day? We here in America should cherish the freedom to vote: many nations have no such freedom, or have no opportunity to choose between candidates.

It makes one wonder if there was any intentionality in this scheduling; maybe not as regards the 3,000 Adventists, but 65-80,000 Jews is a sizeable chunk. I know I wouldn't feel right about voting on Sabbath, whether it was during church service or not. Another question - have any Adventists protested, either to the state election board or to the union religious liberty director?

Perhaps I should have titled the post: Seventh-day Adventists who cannot be two places at the same time and prioritize church, or who feel, like observant Jews, that voting on the Sabbath is not right, find themselves shut out of the NV primary by both parties.

Frankly, I don't like government messin' with my Sabbath and I'd be happy to protest against both idiotic political parties, employers, or the state when they disenfranchise faithful voters.

Call me old fashioned.

Randy, I'm not a lawyer, but it appears that your statement of religious freedom misses a significant part of constitutional thinking, namely that government cannot come between a citizen's religion and his or her civic duties.

Let me illustrate that with reference to the Sherbert Test, which actually comes from the 1963 Supreme Court (Sherbert v. Verne) case between a Seventh-day Adventist and her employer. It modifies the First Amendment's clause that government cannot "prohibit the free exercise" of citizens, especially in light of Brennen's notion that a constitutional right is violated when 1. "the person has a claim involving a sincere religious belief" and 2. "the government action is a substantial burden on the person’s ability to act on that belief" (emphasis supplied).

Also, "ironic" means that there is incongruity between what is stated and what is meant. It often gets misused -- like this case -- when a person really means something else, such as coincidental. Just a pet peeve from my English Lit. days. : )

Ellen White v. voting: while dwindling numbers of Adventists think that Ellen White discouraged voting, that's a simplistic reading of that pen. While early in her caeer she wrote about staying away from political questions the following is her last words on the subject, one year before she died.

In our favored land, every voter has some voice in determining what laws shall control the nation. Should not that influence and that vote be cast on the side of temperance and virtue?" Review and Herald, Oct. 15, 1914.

I appreciate everyone's comments, and hope that mine do not offend anyone.

Carrol, you have suggested that you would not be comfortable voting on Saturday, period. That is a choice that you have made based on your beliefs, and your constitution allows for. That is good. I am just curious, on what you base that decision.

If a candidate is running on the platform of providing better access to healthcare, more compassion for the less fortunate through programs to that effect, improved protection for the rights of minorities, protection of the environment, increased access to education for the underprivilaged.....it seems to me that it would going against all the things that Christ and being a Christian stands for, not to vote.

It seems to me that Jesus would vote on Saturday, as all these things are good things. It seems to me that this would be doing good on the Sabbath, and the very least that a Christ follower would do.

Somehow, some feel more comfortable and appropriate voting in who will be in charge of the church flower arrangements or the Church chorister than who will be directing the govermental programs that serve our fellow man.

Seems like a curious difference to me.

Elaine, I always appreciate your thoughts.

Tom, where are you?

Randy

Alexander,

thank you for your comments. Like you, I am not a lawyer, Constitutional or otherwise.

I apologize for the misuse of the word ironic. I should have run it by my daughter first, after I went to the trouble of paying for her English degree.

I am curious as to which opinion of Ellen White regarding voting was more inspired?

I do appreciate the irenic tone of the conversation.

Thank you,

Randy

Well I certainly don't think this is a ridiculous concern or topic. And I'm not sure what's ironic about the discussion.

There are of course other days that would alleviate some of these conflicts of schedule and/or conscience. And no doubt Sunday would be avoided for the very reasons that are being ignored by scheduling on Saturday. There is a pattern of respecting one set of religiously driven traditions over others.

But my opening snide little comment was offered only partially in jest. What was I really jabbing at? Not you Alex (you know that) -- but the tenacity with which many observers grip their proscriptions. And a polar concern: the ease with which many observers surrender their power over their Sabbath. There is no golden spike holding church services to the 9:15-12:00 time slot. And the Sabbath will not collapse when we are willing to spend some of it giving voice to our non-religious values.

As I read the free exercise clause it doesn't ensure that SDAs won't have to choose between the caucus or the song service. It ensures that they can choose.

Because there are established religions with well-known practices being set aside here I agree that Democracy can do better. But so can the method of Sabbath observance.

During the battle for Prohibition, EGW told the saints that, if need be, load up the wagons on Sabbath and go to the polls.

Please

Does anyone know if it was the State Government of Nevada that chose the day or the two political parties. We should be sure who we are damning or praising.

Next qestion--what are christians doing living in Nevada in the first place?

I bet it is skiing and boating--which are probably done on Sabbath if the weather is just right.

It issue is important to Clif. He has a strong background in religious liberty. I bet he will make an effective protest.

The principal issue is that other states may see that Sat. allows more people to assemble for the caucus. Which could "lock" out a sizable block of serious thinking voters.

So it should be nipped in the bud. Tom

Randy, your thoughts are similar to what mine initially were. For some reason, I just don't see Jesus distancing himself from such an important community event.

However, for those who don't see it this way, this whole discussion does make some interesting points about religious freedom.

This has been bandied about as though it were the final election for choosing a president. It is only a caucus; and although important, none of the candidates presented might be on the November ballot.

If a national presidential election were held on Saturday, then there would be sufficient reason to protest. But, the Democrats and Independents would never allow it, as by far the majority of Jews (mostly secular in this country) would, theoretically be disenfranchised.

Personally, I vote absentee, and have for many years and gives one more time to study the issues and simply mail in. There are more and more voters who are choosing this easier method today.

Tom--the states choose when the vote happens, not the parties.

Great, this concern for democracy. Reminds me of one rather ostracized reporter by the name of Greg Palast. He calculated the number of (mostly black) 2004 voters who by dirty tricks were excluded from voting. Close to a million. Caging lists, check it out. Voter ID's, how droll. Since 2004, when 300,000 citizens lost their right to vote because of ID challenges, the number of states that have passed voter ID laws has quadrupled. Ever heard of an adventist complaining? It apparently takes "voting on sabbath" to get worried. Imagine, 3000 adventists in Nevada excluded from voting. Bless you, they are probably republicans anyway.

Henk

It is great to hear from you again. Missed you. This is a great post. Dry wit and to the point. Tom

I just found out this week that the SC primaries are on Sabbath, as well. The Republican primary is on the 19th and the Democratic is on the 26th. Thank the Lord the polls are open until 7pm.

But I've never been faced with voting on Sabbath before - it seems strange to me that they scheduled it that way. I think I would feel uncomfortable voting on Sabbath - but if that were my only choice, I think I would. ..I think.

It is disturbing to me that the chosen times are so *conveniently* church service times, tho I couldn't sy that they were chosen deliberately for that reason. As for voter suppression - I am against any and all kinds. I'm thankful that [as far as I know, having used electronic means for the last 5 or so years] my votes have been allowed and counted. And my hope is that the suppression of the last two presidential elections does not continue to disenfranchise minorities around the country.

jen*

That voting times were so "conviently" during church service smacks of a paranoia or conspiracy. How could that be imagined when there are so few SDAs in Nevada, and maybe fewer Orthodox practicing Jews?

This is only for the caucus. If it were for the primaries, it would not have happened.

Randy, I don't judge anyone who votes on Sabbath. I can see their point of view. But, just as I personally don't like traveling on Sabbath or eating out on Sabbath (but would do it in an "emergency" situation), I would find it difficult to vote on Sabbath because, for me, Sabbath is a day to put aside worldly concerns and activities and spend in worship of God.

In my state, Washington, I can vote by absentee ballot, and I suspect in many other states one could do the same, but a caucus is different (and seems vaguely "undemocratic to me!) because you must be there in person.

The Wshington State Democratic Caucus is Scheduled for 1:00 p.m. Saturday February 9 and the primary on the 19th. We have an unusual situation here in Washington state in that the primary results may or may not be used by the party for choosing delegates to the various local and state conventions including the National convention.

Basically, if you want your voice heard, you need to go to your local precinct caucus. Four years ago I attended my local caucus and was able to make a resolution on mental health care parity that was then considered up the chain during the subsequent conventions. This year, from the legislative district, to county, to state level conventions, all will all be held on Saturdays.

All this is by the decision of the state party. No government involvement in the state caucus process.

Needless to say, if the Nevada caucuses were held at the same time on a Sunday morning, there would be a huge outcry.

I believe it is a bit undemocratic to force a person to go against his or her conscience in order to fulfill his or her duty - both as a citizen or as a religious being. When one is forced to choose between the two, everyone loses and democracy is not being practiced.

Here's a brief article on the subject from today's New York Times.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/a-day-of-rest-not-ballotin...

Could someone explain how caucus members are chosen? Do they volunteer, or what? The article title says that they are "shut out." If I do not choose to benefit from Saturday sales, am I "shut out" of saving money? Or, is it a choice I freely choose? Do athletes who choose not to compete on Saturday, complain that they are "shut out"? As long as there is free choice, there doesn't seem to be any reason to complaian, as no one is being forced.

Thanks for the NY Times link Heather. I have to admit that while I certainly would go vote on Saturday myself and have no issue with those who chose to do so, it rubs me the wrong way that an important part of the democratic process would be planned on a day that 65,000 of the residents of the state (according to that NY Times link above) consider their Sabbath. I do admire their attempt to get as many folks involved as possible (always an issue).

It's interesting to note that Tuesday was originally chosen as the day to vote because it allowed rural folks to attend church on Sunday before they had to set out to head to town.
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/electionday1.html -- so the history that Nevada is trying to change actually had as part of its original intent allowing people to worship on their Sabbath and still participate in their democratic rights.

And Elaine, I don't see how an athletic event compares--certainly choosing your candidate for president is of a bit more impact?

Caucuses have not been all-important in eventual candidates outcomes. If so, why were the most recent two quite different? I live in California, the largest state, and we don't have our chance to express a preference of candidates until the 5th of Feb.

If they truly were ultimately choosing the eventual candidates, we should, rightly, be more concerned. Until then, I am not convinced of their dire importance in the electoral process.

BTW, I doubt that one-tenth of the Jewish population in Nev. are religious, Sabbath-observing Jews. The majority of Jews in this country are "secular" (as was Cliff Goldstein).

I appreciate the comments, although I remain unconvinced by the arguments that significant NV voters are not being shut out of the political process.

I understand the angle that some here are pushing, using this as an opportunity to ask about Sabbath-keeping. And I would vote in almost any circumstance. However, some Jews and Adventists would not, and I respect their choice and think that the most important act in a democracy should include too.

Elaine, questioning the value of any number of fellow citizens in the electoral process seems a particularly extreme position. On what did you base your statement about 10%?

Additionally, the numbers are significant. The Times blog undercounts the population, assigning 60,000 to the state when the 2000 census counted 75,000 just in Las Vegas with 77,000 in the whole state. And a 2006 article estimated 600 Jews a month coming to the greater Las Vegas area during the first half of this decade. In fact, the Las Vegas Jewish community is the "fastest growing Jewish community in North America."

http://www.jewishlasvegas.com/section.html?id=31
http://www.hadassah.org/news/content/per_hadassah/archive/2001/nov01/tra...
http://www.jewishdatabank.org/AJYB/AJY-2001.pdf (see p. 259 and p. 267).

And according to this nation-wide report about 26% are Conservative, 10% Orthodox, and 35% are Reform, while only about 20% consider themselves "just Jews" which usually means secular. Thus, it appears that only 10-20% are secular Jews, not the other way around.

http://www.ujc.org/local_includes/downloads/4983.pdf

In addition, here's an article from 2002 in which Adventists called quotes the UN Declaration of Human Rights and calls upon the Kenyan government to end: "three decades of "discrimination and oppression in the private and public sectors of employment, [and in] public and private schools, colleges, universities and other institutions of learning. The repeated holding of by-elections on Sabbath days has also effectively disenfranchised the Seventh-day Adventist Church . . ."

I find it a bit troubling that NV is not much better than Kenya. I'm glad that the Adventist church is consistent.

http://news.adventist.org/data/2002/1028040287/index.html.en

Alex, is it your position that the number of Jews: Conservative, Orthodox and Reform are all careful Sabbath-observant Jews? That is also an undocumented assumption, as although they may go to synagogue, that is no indication that they "keep" Sabbath as the Orthodox do.

It would also be an assumption that Adventists might be more observant of Sabbath, as a whole, than are the various groups of Jews mentioned. I won't give evidence nor would we conjecture how many SDAs would avoid voting on Sabbath.

Well, Kenya and the U.S.--quite a comparison. After finishing an article in the latest Time, that seems a stretch to compare Nevada voting with their many discriminatory practices in both employment and education.

Has any thing been done or is it too late to complain? I have known too many SDAs, often in the health professions, who refused to take "Sabbath call" leaving an undue burden on other employees who had to cover for them. One, in particular, neglected to say she was an SDA and only after being hired, did she then refuse to work on Sabbath! Those are the ones who leave a bad reputation for their religion, wanting special privileges.

BTW, not participating in the caucus is NOT being disenfranchised as a voter.

No, that's not my assumption, as you'll notice that I don't make that statement. I actually looked up some documents regarding Conservative rules about voting on Sabbath, but didn't feel that I could draw a conclusion in light of the evidence.

Scroll down the NY Times site and peek at the interchange from 20-22. (The best defense is a consistent life, graciously lived.)

Dear Ken, #18
Nicely stated, and I confess my bias against dogmatic non-analytical fundamentalist religion is what was behind my post earlier.
These people who won’t vote in NV are nothing compared to those actually shut out in Iowa, since IA has a deranged caucus process that shuts out anyone who can’t get the full day off of work, can’t get to the polls by 7:30 sharp, anyone on active duty in the military, and even more. That’s a far worse situation.
With this batch, yes it would be nice if we could accomodate them, maybe by having two days to vote. This would be preferable generally, not to mention having all states have primaries at once.
However, since these groups are technically fundamentalists, I don’t care that they won’t vote (no one is not allowing them to vote, they’re choosing not to). Their views are not relevant to modern times. They’d probably vote for the longest beard, per Leviticus, if any candidates had a beard.
If we could get Christian fundamentalists not to vote by holding elections on Sunday (not sure if it would work), I’d be all for it.
— Posted by Dan Stackhouse
• 21.
January 15th,
2008
7:46 pm
Dan Stackhouse,
I am one of those “Sabbath groupies.” In fact, I am studying at a Seventh-day Adventist theological seminary. I am also an active member of Amnesty International, and have marched in LA with dozens of other Seventh-day Adventists for Immigrant Rights. Most recently, I canvassed for Barack Obama in Iowa (despite Obama’s lack of facial hair!). Good to meet you.
— Posted by Geoffrey Blake
• 22.
January 15th,
2008
9:10 pm
Hi Geoffrey Blake,
I sure am a preposterous jerk sometimes, right? Thanks for joining in. I apologize for mocking your religion as part of mocking these 65,000 specific complainers in NV. You sound like a much nicer person than I am. I’m glad you can overlook Sen. Obama’s habit of shaving.
I’m somewhat of a Buddhist, but I try not to speak for Buddhism and shouldn’t be taken as such. And I am instinctively ticked off by dogmatism in most forms.
So, how hard could it be to accommodate these traditionalists? From what I understand, the Sabbath is sundown Fri. - sundown Sat., and this minor issue shouldn’t be tough to work out. Maybe if they had a less orthodox buddy drive them to the poll and vote jointly? I’m sure the act of voting, to promote better future secular leadership, could still be considered a religious concern.
Also I still think Iowa’s standard format is more of a problem.
— Posted by Dan Stackhouse

I believe that is called witnessing at the end of (the) Times.

Geoffrey is going to make some congregations very blessed.

Hi! I am a SDA from Iowa who voted in our state's caucus. Just curious as to what you think is wrong with our standard format. No disrespect here, but at least our caucus was not held on Sabbath! I am so concerned about our country that I attended for the first time in almost 20 years-I really felt God's leading. This is an interesting situation you have. I worship the same God that guided the framers of the Constitution. I will remember you in my prayers.

Well said Geoffrey--I glad to have you representing "my" name on blogs and marches ; )

The Washington State Caucuses are scheduled for Saturday February 9, and the South Carolina primaries are on Jan 19 and 26, both Saturdays.

After seeing many national stores about Utah, I am wondering why these other states are not mentioned. States with far higher populations of sabbatarians.

Washington State delegates are all being chosen through the Caucuses system and the Primary will mean nothing. On the Republican side, half the delegates will be chosed by Caucus and half by primary vote.

It is not just Sabbath-keepers who are shut out of the process, but anyone who cannot physically present themselves at the stated day and time.

Some states have a primary election, in which you go any time during the day (or use an absentee ballot, or take advantage of early voting) and cast your vote. Other states, like Nevada, have a party caucus, in which you have to be present at your designated caucus location at a stated day and time.

Clearly, the primary system is far more inclusive, allowing participation by anyone, including travelers, the military, those who work on the day, those who might worship on the day, shut-ins, etc. The caucus system is far more exclusive.

If democracy is about inclusion of the people, then clearly the primary system is the most democratic.

Why exclude anyone?

There are now rumblings in the Nevada legislature - people really want to go back to the primary system as opposed to the caucus system.

I do think, however, that the idea of a caucus is good - it's not a bad thing for people to get together with their neighbors and talk about the issues in a less-sterile environment than you would find in a voting booth.

When I was at La Sierra, Dr. Teel said that society started going downhill with the invention of the garage door opener. After that, you never had to look at your neighbors or even walk on your driveway. Just pop the door open, drive in, and go inside. We forget how important it is to get to know the people living around us and to make friends. The caucuses presented just such an opportunity and I hope they continue so long as faith groups are not squeezed out of the process.

Here is an article about the concerns:

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080125/CARSON/801250346...

In light of this old discussion, I thought that this was an interesting development from East Malaysia.

http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news.cfm?NewsID=56260

Adventists urged to come out and vote
05 March, 2008

Kota Kinabalu: The Committee on Recommended Candidates (CRC) urged the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) members to come out in full force to vote this Saturday.

CRC head Kanul Gindol, in a statement, Tuesday, said "though Saturday is observed as Sabbath Day by SDA members where they abstain from worldly activities, voting on a Sabbath is not an entirely ungodly exercise".

"Voting is worldly exercise, nevertheless, it has heavenly bearing because we are helping to put in place a government that we expect to administer justice and fairness on earth," added Kanul.

He said the election was only held once every five years and as such SDA members should grab the opportunity to give their mandate to God-conscious representatives. "So please do take part in it without reservation and decide the kind of administration you prefer," urged Kanul.

Commonsense for a situation. It is too bad that such privileges as voting (which are not possible in some countries) should not be an activity to engage in on Sabbath.

Unless I missed it, I didn't see any suggestion of an abscentee ballot! Tom

" I don't like government messin' with my Sabbath."

Perhaps I don't "get" that the government is either forcing or prohibiting any action on any day. In the free society which we enjoy here, when folks go to extremes to make a point, it becomes rather ridiculous. How many other activities do you refrain from on Sabbath?

Do you not drive a car (lighting a fire was prohibited in the original Sabbath laws); do you exert such efforts as "picking up sticks (worthy of stoning, also with those same Sabbath laws)?

Please show where in the Bible an interpretation can be made against voting? Where does one get a biblical injunction against such Sabbath activities, or it is man-made, just like bathing after Sundown (anyone here take a Sabbath morning shower); even shining shoes or pressing clothes? Have some SDAs outdone the Pharisees with their added Sabbath laws?

If one's conscience forbids ANY activity on ANY day, that is a very personal decision, and should not be blamed on the government.

Quote "" I don't like government messin' with my Sabbath."

Perhaps I don't "get" that the government is either forcing or prohibiting any action on any day. In the free society which we enjoy here, when folks go to extremes to make a point, it becomes rather ridiculous. How many other activities do you refrain from on Sabbath?

Do you not drive a car (lighting a fire was prohibited in the original Sabbath laws); do you exert such efforts as "picking up sticks (worthy of stoning, also with those same Sabbath laws)?

Please show where in the Bible an interpretation can be made against voting? Where does one get a biblical injunction against such Sabbath activities, or it is man-made, just like bathing after Sundown (anyone here take a Sabbath morning shower); even shining shoes or pressing clothes? Have some SDAs outdone the Pharisees with their added Sabbath laws?

If one's conscience forbids ANY activity on ANY day, that is a very personal decision, and should not be blamed on the government."
Dear Elaine Nelson,
Your points on activities to avoid on the Sabbath would affect the Jewish community (sorry if there are others), but as for SDA's, these points are part of Moses's Law and were nailed to the cross at the time of Christ's crucifixtion, or no longer in effect. The old testament law's are not practiced by SDA's, but are not forgotten either. For me, voting on the Sabbath brings first to mind the fourth commandment: Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. Exodus 20:8. Not to open a whole nother' can of worms, but the Sabbath day is Saturday, the seventh day, the day God rested from His hard work. The ten commandments are still in effect though, which means that as a Seventh Day Adventist I have been given the privilege of having a day of rest, from all of my hard work, once a week. To honor God by using this day honor and study His word, which for me includes going to church. Yes, "I" do have the choice of not going to church on any given Sabbath, but why should my "government" be given the power to make that choice for me? My government should be flexible enough to ensure as many people as possible have the opportunity to vote. Why should it be so difficult to simply add another time slot so that all people can have the opportunity to vote? Especially since sundown wold be rather early at that time of year.......

Voting is the most sacred thing you could do on that Sabbath next to worshipping the Divine Creator.

"Your points on activities to avoid on the Sabbath would affect the Jewish community (sorry if there are others), but as for SDA's, these points are part of Moses's Law and were nailed to the cross at the time of Christ's crucifixtion, or no longer in effect. The old testament law's are not practiced by SDA's,"

That's a most surprising statement for most SDAs who were raised to observe the Jewish Sabbath (there is no Christian Sabbath); but then to declare that some (?) of Moses' laws were nailed to the cross is contradictory. If the OT laws are not practiced by SDAs there would be no Sabbath to observe as there is not a single verse in the NT advocating, promoting, or proclaiming ANY special day of worship for the new Christian church.

Those who continue to observe the OT laws are living by Moses' laws (referred to as "Moses" in many parts of the Bible), are not living by the law proclaimed by Christ and Paul as John says:
"though the Law was given through Moses, grace and truth have come through Jesus Christ," and "we are now rid of the Law....free to serve in the spiritual way and not the old way of a WRITTEN LAW." "Love is the answer to every one of the commandments."

Christ never abrogated the Jewish laws as he was born, lived, and died a practicing Jew. However, unless Paul and the apostles to the Christian church had no authority to administer a new church, we need none of their changes but should remain good Jews. However, the new Christians no longer had to be circumcised (an earlier command than the 10) to be part of the new church; they no longer were given the dietary laws (again, God's instructions to the Hebrews who faithfully followed them); and never given a day of worship--rather every one was to be convinced in his own mind of the sacredness of a day if he wished because "the Law has come to an end with Christ," and "never let anyone else decide what you should eat or drink, or whether you are to observe annual festivals, New Moons or sabbaths." Interesting that this immediately follows Christ "has overridden the Law....done away with it by nailing in to the cross."

Christians later seemingly forgot that their belief originated with the NT Christ and the teachings of the church immediately afterward and regressed to OT doctrines as exemplified by the first settlers to America who had strict sabbath obervances and minor infractions of the law that were punished. The emphasis on Hell and damnation was turned backward rather than reading the NT Righteousness by faith that was so antithetical to their beliefs that they ostracized the female Anne Hutchinson who so fervently advocated it. Most of Adventism relied on the Law as paramount in its teaching and for all intents and purposes, negated and buried the teachings of Paul and the NT writers who advocated a new life and that the old "written letters engraved on stones" brought death while the Spirit gives life. What about "letters written in stone" needs defining?

Jesus is my example & Jesus kept the Sabbath....the true Sabbath as outlined by God as the seventh day of the week, being Saturday in the bible. Look in the concordance of any bible for Sunday, the day the the catholic church has tried so diligently to change the day of worship to......you won't find it at least in respect to the day to be kept holy as instructed by God......nor did Jesus teach his followers to keep whatever day they felt was convenient for them.... Has anyone ever wondered why universally every culture has the same seven days of the week?