“God, country, family” expresses three loyalties that should stand above political convenience. There is no clearly established single author of the phrase. One documented version appears in Ezra Taft Benson’s 1974 book, God, Family, Country: Our Three Great Loyalties. The wording varies, and so does the order.
Among those who embrace this religious formulation, God’s place at the top is generally taken for granted. The disagreement concerns whether country or family comes next. Navy SEAL Chris Kyle placed country before family; his wife, Taya, reversed them. Their disagreement became painfully practical: after repeated combat deployments, did his duty require continued military service or a return to his wife and children?
Political party should come after all three. A party deserves support when it advances our principles, protects our families, and serves our country. Its nomination does not entitle a candidate to our vote regardless of conduct.
Putting God first does not mean claiming that God endorses my ballot. Nor does a candidate’s religious identity establish fitness for office. It means applying moral standards even when doing so costs our preferred party a seat. Honesty, compassion, restraint, and respect for other people must matter more than the letter beside a candidate’s name.
These are the choices I would make, alternating between Democrats and Republicans:
Texas Senate: James Talarico, Democrat, over Ken Paxton. The corruption allegations surrounding Paxton’s treatment of a political donor and his own whistleblowers should outweigh Republican loyalty. His former senior law-enforcement official, David Maxwell, who reported him to the FBI, has endorsed Talarico. Paxton was acquitted in his impeachment trial, and the federal investigation ended without charges, but voters can still judge his fitness for office. His wife’s divorce filing alleging adultery adds a separate challenge for voters who emphasize family values: she said remaining in the marriage would not honor God or serve her family.
Michigan Senate: Mike Rogers, Republican, over Abdul El-Sayed. As I explain in El-Sayed Is No JFK: A Question of Judgment, my concerns involve his judgment and worldview. His past support for Mohamed Morsi’s expansion of power, his responses concerning Iran, and his opposition to supplying Israel even defensive weapons form the core of my objection. His decision to campaign with Hasan Piker compounds those concerns. Democrats should examine that record rather than treat retaining the seat as an overriding obligation.
Kansas Senate: Adam Hamilton, Democrat, over Roger Marshall. Marshall’s record of pursuing gynecological patients over unpaid medical bills is beyond the pale. Reporting describes more than 700 patient lawsuits and arrest warrants issued against 81 patients for missing related court appearances; one couple spent two days in jail following litigation over an emergency hysterectomy bill. The distinction matters: the arrests concerned missed court appearances, rather than debt alone. Nevertheless, choosing to pursue patients through a collection process with such consequences raises a basic question of compassion. Reporting on the lawsuits and arrests supplies ample reason to put conscience above party.
Maine Senate: Susan Collins, Republican, over Troy Jackson. Jackson’s generalization about Jewish Mainers’ views of the Gaza war, followed by an apology, raised serious questions about his willingness to hear constituents who disagree with him. Telling Collins to “shut up” during their debate reinforced my concern about his temperament. Democrats need not agree with Collins on every issue to conclude that she is the better choice. Control of the Senate should not excuse conduct they would condemn in a Republican.
Ohio governor: Amy Acton, Democrat, over Vivek Ramaswamy. Ramaswamy’s campaign used Acton’s estranged mother to attack her character while omitting the childhood abuse and family history underlying their separation. This account explains what the advertisement left out. When challenged, Ramaswamy initially doubled down, defending the advertisement and announcing plans to spend millions promoting it. Exploiting an opponent’s childhood trauma—and defending that choice—is disqualifying. Republicans who place family and basic decency above party should vote for Acton.
Minnesota Senate: Michele Tafoya, Republican, over Peggy Flanagan. I disagree with Flanagan over Israel and am underwhelmed by her record as lieutenant governor. My case against her was bolstered by her failure to join prominent Democrats in condemning Hasan Piker as members of her party welcomed him to Minnesota. The issue is her response to a political ally whose rhetoric demands a clear boundary. Read the report on the rally and this account of Piker’s statements and the objections from Amy Klobuchar and Angie Craig.
Georgia Senate: Jon Ossoff, Democrat, over Mike Collins. Collins’s extreme statements go well beyond ordinary partisan combat. A CNN investigation of his past remarks and posts documents jokes about pushing Nancy Pelosi from an airplane and comments suggesting the hanging of American leaders. Republicans should demand better from someone seeking to represent them in the Senate. My choice is Ossoff.
I realize that our political environment is deeply polarized and intensely partisan. But something more important than party is at stake: our basic morality. Voters should consider whether the conduct they are willing to reward is consistent with the values they claim to hold.