Scott Lohse, pastor of St. Martin’s United Church of Christ in Dittmer, Mo., won our “Five Minutes with a Candidate” contest and will guest blog here through the election.

As this is posted, the final 2008 presidential debate is just a few hours away. I want you to imagine that it will happen with lie detectors - the challenger in the Ninth Congressional District in Indiana has proposed for that debate later this month.

There are three candidates in the Indiana race: Baron Hill, the Democratic incumbent, Mike Sodrel, a GOP challenger, and a Libertarian named Eric Schansberg.
The reason their debate might be a compelling model for debates on a grander scale is that the challengers who aspire to the seat have issued a challenge to debate while wearing lie detectors.

The lie detector debate is not likely to actually take place because the incumbent dismissed the challenge as a “bizarre” idea. The idea is bizarre, but this is precisely why I sort of like it.

Just imagine both of the presidential candidates hooked up to the lie detector while they field questions. Also imagine on the bottom of the screen we would be able to see a graph like the one that the news stations have been showing us lately indicating the approval or disapproval of their focus group as they watch the debate in real time.

Only this time the graph on the bottom of the screen would show the needle on the lie detector quivering as the candidates speak.

If you are still having trouble picturing all of this, let me tell you what got my mind wrapped around the idea. Does anyone remember a Fox TV show which debuted last year called The Moment of Truth? I don’t know if the show has been renewed or not, but if it is, I will think it is awful — and I will also not miss an episode.

The show goes like this: A contestant pre-answers a list of probing questions about his or her personal life prior to sitting in the “hot seat” in front of the camera. The personal questions are then posed to the contestant in front of viewers and their family and friends; and if they lie the lie detector reveals their deception.

Imagine sitting there, all wired up, and having to respond to questions such as: Do you think you will still be married to your spouse in five years? Or have you ever stolen anything from work?

You get the idea. The awful thing about the Moment of Truth show is that people really allow themselves to be raked over the coals in pursuit of a $500,000 cash prize, which no one ever wins because they can’t last in the hot seat long enough. The fact of the matter is, as much as we might like to think we are honest and honorable, no one can stand up to this kind of scrutiny.

The Bible says “and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” (Jn 8:32). The fact of the matter is the truth will likely make us miserable before it makes us free!

Here’s the question: How would your candidate of choice do in the lie detector debate? I’d like to think that I would do ok, but I might be lying to myself. If we all agree that they are not being totally truthful with us then why do we abide it? What could be done to hold politicians to a higher standard of truth telling