Posted on 07/02/2004 8:36:00 PM PDT by Kerberos
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Bush, seeking to mobilize religious conservatives for his reelection campaign, has asked church-going volunteers to turn over church membership directories, campaign officials said on Thursday.
In a move sharply criticized both by religious leaders and civil libertarians, the Bush-Cheney campaign has issued a guide listing about two-dozen "duties" and a series of deadlines for organizing support among conservative church congregations.
A copy of the guide obtained by Reuters directs religious volunteers to send church directories to state campaign committees, identify new churches that can be organized by the Bush campaign and talk to clergy members about holding voter registration drives.
The document, distributed to campaign coordinators across the country earlier this year, also recommends that volunteers distribute voter guides in church and use Sunday service programs for get-out-the-vote drives.
"We expect this election to be potentially as close as 2000, so every vote counts and it's important to reach out to every single supporter of President Bush," campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel said.
But the Rev. Richard Land, who deals with ethics and religious liberty issues for the Southern Baptist Convention, a key Bush constituency, said he was "appalled."
"First of all, I would not want my church directories being used that way," he told Reuters in an interview, predicting failure for the Bush plan.
The conservative Protestant denomination, whose 16 million members strongly backed Bush in 2000, held regular drives that encouraged church-goers to "vote their values," said Land.
"But it's one thing for us to do that. It's a totally different thing for a partisan campaign to come in and try to organize a church. A lot of pastors are going to say: 'Wait a minute, bub'," he added.
The guide surfaced as a spate of opinion polls showed Bush's reelection campaign facing a tough battle. (Poll: Sending troops to Iraq a mistake; Interactive: Poll questions and responses)
A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll showed Bush running neck-and-neck with Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry among registered voters, 47 percent of whom said they now believed the president had misled Americans about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
The Bush campaign has also been spending heavily on television ads, only to see the president's approval ratings slump to new lows.
Stanzel said the campaign ended the month of June with $64 million on hand.
He had no figures on how much Bush has raised in June.
At the end of May, Bush had raised $213.4 million and spent all but $63 million.
The latest effort to marshal religious support also drew fire from civil liberties activists concerned about the constitutional separation of church and state.
"Any coordination between the Bush campaign and church leaders would clearly be illegal," said a statement from the activist group Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
"I wasn't so certain before, but now I'm absolutely convinced the Republican Party is "the other liberal party".
Welcome to reality. I can certainly use the company. :-)
"Wow, Kerberos, we actually agree on this one."
Hey, keep coming around, there's hope for you. :-)
ROTFLMAO!
So, can we create a party of two. Could we call the party, The Realist Party? We would probably never have more then a handful of members, and we don't need a list.
These civil libertarians need to ask the Democratic party why they keep sending my fiance credit card offers in the mail every other day.
There's nothing wrong with Christians being politically aligned/active as individuals, or in voluntarily formed groups (American Family Association, etc.). And certainly they ought to vote in a way consistent with their morals.
But to have organized church involvement in secular politics is a perversion of what God established it for. We read nothing of Jesus crusading for governmental change in the Roman Empire, even though He knew it would be persecuting His followers. The purpose of religion is spiritual, not secular.
Yep, when churches become an accountable tool of politics, they will no longer serve God, but man. Surprising how many "conservatives" want their church to serve man.
There may be an easier way to do something similar. They could create a website for active Christians to register (with email as well for updates). Quite a number of the online newspapers do this.
"There may be an easier way to do something similar. They could create a website for active Christians to register (with email as well for updates)"
I like that idea, the active participation is on the part of the person who registers, for mailings or whatever. It does not involve the government meddling in churches.
This is just a divide and conquer article by the media trying to hurt Bush. I honestly don't see anything remotely like "theocracy" in it anywhere. I see that churches can accept or reject a request by the Bush campaign to address politics from the pulpit. Are you arguing that democracy is above (or beneath) religious criticism?
"So, can we create a party of two. Could we call the party, The Realist Party?"
Well from my perspective it would be a 100% of the current party I am in, The Lone Realist.
"I honestly don't see anything remotely like "theocracy" in it anywhere"
And that is exactly the problem; people don't see where this has the potential to go.
Just as an example and a tangent - hospitals often ask for one's "religious preference" on the registration form. Granted, that's also voluntary and a private institution. I don't mind telling people when asked that I am a Christian and the specific denomination. There's no problem with a public declaration of faith (in my experience).
There is already a "Catholics Against Kerry" org which (the title) I rather like.
If you can, describe what you mean by "the new theocracy"? What are the specific dangers you see? Try to be as precise and specific as possible ( actual, current government policies). I would be interested and it might inform and improve the debate.
This kind of thing has been going on for quite a while - the Christian Coalition, the Moral Majority, Pro-life groups, school prayer lobbyists, etc. The Reagan-Bush and Bush-Quayle campaigns targeted very specific cultural demographics, including religious orientation. In what sense is campaign support research using those kind of demographics a "theocracy"?
Did you follow this debate? I would de interested in any diversity of opinion from trads, Novus Ordo, or moderate conservative Catholics on this... Is this a "theocracy"?
Any opinion on this debate? Are we headed towards the mediaeval menace of "theocracy"? (whimsical replies allowed)
Not a fundamentalist - not even a member of a church - but if churches aren't going to come down on the side of what's right, who will?
You seem to think people have to be protected with yet another regulation and are too helpless to just "say no" if they are solicited and don't wish to contribute/participate.
That's a very liberal attitude.
This is precisely what Christophobes like Kerberos fear. Encouraging Christians to vote their consciences can only lead to one thing!
sheesh
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.