GOP Shouldn't Take the Religious Vote on Faith

GOP Shouldn't Take the Religious Vote on Faith By Flavia Colgan FrontPageMagazine.com | October 26, 2005

What do the death penalty, the Sudan, Iraq, and the environment have in common? Many of my Republican friends identify these issues with far-left hippies, protesting in tie-dye, singing Kumbaya. While, in fact, these are issues the left cares about, they are also issues of great moral importance to the religious community – the same community that Conservatives argue to have ownership of.

As a progressive and a deeply religious person, I can tell you Republican conservatives are dead wrong.

The lazy reading of the polls by the media, and a lot of spin, is what has led to such simplistic characterizations of religious Americans as ‘Conservative"’ (as an aside, the Democrats haven’t exactly helped themselves by insulting the intelligence of deeply religious voters). A deeper examination of polls finds some interesting results. Yes, for some evangelical Christians, the phrase “moral values” centrally expresses an antipathy to abortion or opposition to gay marriage – issues the GOP plays to the hilt. But to many more voters, polling shows, “moral values” means caring for the poor, safeguarding the environment and expressing kindness to neighbors. You know, those things that some guy named Jesus teaches us are important.

Catholic priests and nuns are more on the forefront of the fight against the death penalty than liberal activists like Alec Baldwin.

Before the Congressional Black Caucus or the left got interested in the Sudan, evangelical Christians were on the ground there, aiding those in need.

The most effective environmental message I have ever seen were billboards in the rust belt calling for conservation that read, “What would Jesus Drive?” It wasn’t the Sierra Club or Greenpeace sponsoring the ad, it was the Evangelical Christian Network.

When Pope John Paul was near death, he called the President to him not to talk about abortion or gay marriage or pornography. The most important issue to the Holy Father was avoiding a war in Iraq.

Conservatives are fooling themselves if they believe they can continue to hold on to religious voters by supporting penny-ante issues like posting the Ten Commandments in public places. It’s not the support for those things that has moved many religious Americans to pull the GOP lever on Election Day, it is that Conservatives are smart enough to sit down and listen to religious leaders, and show them proper respect.

Bill Clinton understood this, and that it why he was the last Democratic politician to effectively reach out to the religious community and bring them into his camp. Unlike President Bush, Bill Clinton didn’t wear his religion on his sleeve. He didn’t brag about all the times he went to church, or claim that he had a direct line to God. What Clinton did, with great mastery, was sit down and listen to communities of faith and let them know he heard them, understood them, and would work with them on the greater issues of our time where they saw eye to eye. On issues they did not see eye to eye on, such as gay rights, he was honest about his difference of opinion and moved on.

I ran into Bill Clinton not too long ago, and asked him about this. He told me that religious communities are telling him that they would like to work with the left on issues like Iraq, the environment, Sudan, and the death penalty, but since Clinton left office, no Democratic politicians are calling them anymore.

The key here is that religious Americans do have more in common with progressives on the major issues of our times than they do with conservative Republicans. If Conservatives were smart, they would begin to open a dialogue with religious leaders on the “liberal” issues above, and begin to show genuine concern on them, before Democrats wise up, take Bill Clinton’s advice, and make a move for this critical constituency by inviting them to the table.

Basically, this is another of those commentaries on how the Left/Dems need to redefine the 'values' debate. They were quite common after all of the hype over the values vote last November, and they pretty much all boil down to the same thing -- religious conservatives must unconditionally surrender on abortion, gay marriage, judicial hostility towards religions, etc, and in return the Dems will give them truly Jesus-like policies on everything else!

Its garbage of course, and I was a bit surprised to see it posted on FrontPageMag. I mean, I can understand offering up constructive criticism about things the GOP needs to be wary about, and indeed there are many things that the GOP should be chided for, but you can't really take the author (Colgan) seriously; she's a Democrat and I'm sure nothing would make her happier than for the GOP to abandon popular positions on social issues.

Front Page Magazine does seem to have lost their grip with this one.

I thought maybe they were quoting some liberal idiot from another source; but no, she seems to have written this specially for them.

Enough to gag a maggot.

The worry the GOP should have is they're doing about as much for conservative religious folks as liberals have, and need to do a lot more to draw strong numbers next time around. People won't vote Hillary but a lot just won't vote.

"Bill Clinton understood this, and that it why he was the last Democratic politician to effectively reach out to the religious community and bring them into his camp."

Hey, Aetius, you been painting the closet again with the door closed? If not then I suggest you post this hoax again on April Fools Day or under the 'comedy' section.

"When Pope John Paul was near death, he called the President to him not to talk about abortion or gay marriage or pornography. The most important issue to the Holy Father was avoiding a war in Iraq."

Right, because the war in Iraq started in Spring 2005. /sarcasm
The Holy Father did speak - strongly- about abortion, traditional marriage, and sexual ethics, but we all know this. The religious liberal seems to forget things like the Vatican document "On Christian Voting," which explained that to vote for a politician who supports abortion when his opponent does not is to be an accomplice to murder. Voting against Catholic teaching on non-negotiables, such as abortion, euthanasia/assisted suicide, and traditional marriage places one in a state of mortal sin.

While, in fact, these are issues the left cares about, they are also issues of great moral importance to the religious community – the same community that Conservatives argue to have ownership of.

The fundamental moral/religious issue, as related to politics, is "What is the proper role of Government?". The fundamantal answer is that it is to wield the sword as a terror to evil doers. In short, the purpose of government is to use force to prevent evil doers from doing harm to the innocent. Out of necessity, that role is strictly limited so that the use of force does not end up as a tool of the evil doers to persecute and enslave the innocent. (As is most often the case in history) The religious community should be VERY wary of turning to the state as the arbitrator of all that is holy and good. For the most part, that is the role of Civil Society. (Families, Churches, etc.) Until the left understand this, I will have a hard time taking seriously their moral pronouncements as they relate to politics.

Bill Clinton understood this, and that it why he was the last Democratic politician to effectively reach out to the religious community

Oh yea, didnt he do great with them? Nobody helped organize them as opponents of socio-liberals like his wife, than his behavior did.

Imagine! A so-called moderate Democrat who got less than 15 % of the evangelical vote! Now, thats remarkable!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.