There has been increased discussion online of whether it is biblical for Christians to flee Blue States for Red States, most notably fleeing states like California and New York for Red States like Texas and Florida. What is peculiar about this debate is the notion that fleeing is both biblically necessary or, contrarily, that to flee a Blue State is sinful or monastic. Joel Webbon’s recent book Fight by Flight advocates this tactic of strategic retreat from Blue States, very much following his own life journey from California back to Texas. But others have suggested this strategy as a missional approach, which would include Steve Deace, who has posited that the 6 million Trump voters in California distributed to other states would be politically advantageous.
Others like Nathaniel Jolly posited that it is improper to flee Blue States and Christians should instead be “salt and light.” There is also an espoused sentiment that because persecution is not “bad” in America, like other parts of the world, the calls to flee are considered hyperbolic.
To flee or not to flee is a major life decision that requires prayer and time. It should not be treated as anything above a matter of consciousness to the believer. To invoke biblical imperative in either direction is imprudent and unwise.
There is nothing inherently sinful about fleeing to where one’s vote matters most and moving to a Red State to raise one’s family in a more “culturally Christian” county. Yet even Blue States have conservative pockets and even some of their churches are more dedicated than those in traditionally conservative states. There are benefits and drawbacks to each approach which the believer should consider rather than bullishly denouncing the other side.
To Flee
It cannot be understated the depravity of states like California, where ones citizenship is wasted in a state that is increasingly hostile to Christians. The hour is looming where the state will strip parental rights in favor of forced transgenderism. Other states will doubtless follow their lead. Electorally, there is no hope for California and the state’s trajectory will be aided and abetted by illegal immigration.
Parents have the duty to raise their children in the fear and admonition of The Lord, and this duty takes precedent. Lot was morally compromised by his affinity for Sodom and Gomorrah, and he should have fled long before God’s judgment. Because people are products of their environments, it cannot be ignored the moral toll residing in modern Sodom has on the soul. Rather than change the environment, the environment changes them. Even as Americans, many have internalized unbiblical notions that democracy is an ideal form of government despite being wholly absent in Scripture, or the notion that “religious freedom” for paganism is biblical when in fact “religious freedom sends people to hell.” The environment impacts all believers, so if one believes the Blue State environment is going to negatively affect their family, then they are morally justified in fleeing to safer haven.
Additionally, it can hardly be criticized the financial strain that states like New York and California impose on their residents. The downright oppressive taxation of these states is reason enough to flee, which motivated many former residents in recent years. Few would criticize these believers for fleeing states like California for more affordable living conditions yet speak against those who advocate others follow in their footsteps.
There is wisdom in the notion that a mass relocation will benefit America through demographic terraforming of the electorate where the Christian citizen’s voice is more profound and impactful. Yet this can be conflated between moving to red states with moving to “purple” states, which could include Arizona and Nevada on the list of desired relocation states. Through the electoral process, the entire country would benefit from more just laws and policies.
To Remain
The problem with employing Scripture in matters of conscious could have Christians abandon that which they were placed to do. As mentioned, there are pockets of conservatism and more culturally Christian areas which exist even in Blue States. There are vibrant churches in these states. Some might be better than their Red State counterparts because those who are more serious attend genuine churches in Massachusetts where there is little social benefit. Should believers abandon their churches for supposedly greener pastures? Should Christians forsake their regional bonds and perhaps familial connections for a different state they might not have any familiarity with? Proximity to one’s family is an important factor which relocation advocates often downplay when advocating the need to reposition.
Many red states are politically impotent and coasting off previous generations of cultural Christianity. Leaving a Blue State for a Red State just so one’s vote is more potent is placing undeserving faith in the Republican Party. Could 100K Californians dispatched to Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada have drastically benefited this country? Sure, but that also is reliant upon the GOP delivering for its voters, of which one should not hold their breath.
Joel Webbon posits that paying California taxes is feeding the cultural rot and thus fueling the enemy. In this, he is correct, but there is an economic concept called Switching Costs which he has not factored. Moving is expensive. Due to the Federal Reserve’s usury, real estate in America is unaffordable unless one is planning to purchase a house in cash. The housing market has increased over 40% since 2018 and interest rates have doubled and are still increasing. For a $300,000 house with 20% down, the mortgage at the current rate of 7% would be over $1,860. If the interest rate was 3%, then the mortgage would be under $1,300. That is a difference of over $500/month due to usury. Simply put, moving is unaffordable for most Americans and this discussion is rot with infeasibility. Instead of paying taxes to the vile Gavin Newsom, one would be paying taxes to the equally abhorrent, Trump-appointed Jerome Powell. Rather than paying higher taxes to the State, they do so to the Central Bank. For most who lack substantial equity in their homes, relocation would be financially imprudent and an unwise stewardship of their money.
This is without discussing the lack of economic opportunity in many states, particularly the Rust Belt. While conservative migration to Michigan could flip the state, what employment opportunities are there in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Pennsylvania?
Conclusion
Let there be a spirit of grace in this discussion, that believers do not compel the conscious of their brothers over a serious decision that requires prayerful consideration. Wherever one falls on this discussion of relocation, it is not a sin issue, but a pure matter of consciousness. In the spirit of Romans 14:13, “Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this—not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother’s way.”
2 Responses
Ray needs to learn the difference between *conscious* and *conscience*
this is an important idea for this day so thank you for writing on it.
i real terms, voting for impact should not be the reason for a move. reasons for a move to make family better is legit, but as you wrote a quality church in the new place is vital. indeed, to move to a new spot to impact and be impacted by a local church is far more important than an occasional political vote. being missionaries (we are all missionaries) is the central thought i am left with on this topic.
ATEOTD: God will lead.