Posted on 11/08/2004 1:05:52 PM PST by NormsRevenge
NEW YORK - Family values, traditional values and now, "moral values." Most American adults would say they have them, and yet that two-word phrase is the focus of an ideological tug-of-war heightened by President Bush (news - web sites)'s re-election, with conservatives declaring principal ownership and liberals scrambling to challenge them.
"We need to work really hard at reclaiming some language," said the Rev. Robert Edgar, general secretary of the liberal-leaning National Council of Churches.
"The religious right has successfully gotten out there shaping personal piety issues — civil unions, abortion — as almost the total content of 'moral values,'" Edgar said. "And yet you can't read the Old Testament without knowing God was concerned about the environment, war and peace, poverty. God doesn't want 45 million Americans without health care."
Many of the advocacy groups that helped mobilize conservative voters for Bush concentrate on a narrow range of issues — notably opposing abortion and gay rights. Conservative leaders say these were the main issues on voters' minds when many, in exit polls, designated unspecified "moral values" as their foremost Election Day priority.
"Those who view the appeal to 'moral values' as mere political manipulation and ideological posturing have a basic misunderstanding of people of faith," said Janice Shaw Crouse of the conservative Concerned Women for America.
"The 'moral values' that were a top priority in this election — abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, same-sex unions — are rooted in deep religious beliefs."
Such statements of moral grounding have frustrated Democratic-leaning activists — in past campaigns and particularly this year. They question the vagueness of the "moral values" exit poll question and contend that their own political priorities, such as fighting poverty and discrimination, have moral weight and popular support.
Proponents of same-sex unions, for example, believe it is moral to afford partnership rights to two men or two women who have committed themselves to each other and, in many cases, are raising children.
"We have a thing or two to say about the 'moral values' involved with permitting a couple who wish to build a life together to enjoy full legal standing as a family," said Ron Schlittler, director of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.
Similarly, abortion-rights advocates believe it is moral to allow the option of abortion to a poor, newly pregnant woman, rather than compel her to bear a child she didn't plan for and cannot afford to raise.
"When the religious right co-opted the term 'pro-life,' that was a coup," said the Rev. Carlton Veazey of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (news - web sites). "Sometimes 'choice' sounds too casual."
"We have to go back and examine what we are we saying, why is it not resonating," Veazey added. "We don't just cave in and say they've got a monopoly on morality."
Asked if their rivals on the left indeed held viable moral values, several conservatives replied with a qualified "yes," suggesting the liberals' social concerns were valid but not as important as opposition to abortion or same-sex marriage.
"We believe in biblical principles; I'm sure they believe in biblical principles," said Roberta Combs, president of the Christian Coalition of America. "But I don't understand how they can defend abortion and homosexuality. That's wrong."
The Rev. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life said poverty was far less urgent a problem then abortion, which he considers genocide.
"The other side has not been deprived of the opportunity to make their case," he said. "Voters can think for themselves."
Some put the issue even more starkly.
"There is no reconciliation between good and evil," wrote Mary Ann Kreitzer of Les Femmes, an organization of conservative Roman Catholic women. "Voters rejected the party of gay activists, radical feminists, the Hollywood elite, pornographers, death-peddlers, anti-Christian bigots and apostate Catholics."
For some moderates, the values debate is less simple — they may oppose abortion and gay marriage yet share liberals' view on other issues.
Mike Allen of Catholic Charities of Trenton, which serves the needy in southern New Jersey, said his organization's mission entails seeking "a more just and compassionate society" on for the disadvantaged.
Regarding partisan promotion of "moral values," Allen said, "Oversimplifying is a technique that seems to win elections."
The Rev. Thomas Reese, editor of the Jesuit weekly America, said John Kerry (news - web sites) could have been more effective at portraying his goals — fairer wages, better health care — as "moral values."
"The Democratic Party seems almost embarrassed talking about family issues or religion," he said.
A future battleground in the values tug-of-war will be for black and Hispanic support. Some conservatives believe wariness of gay marriage will enable Republicans to steadily win more of their votes.
"You're seeing a bridge being built between African-Americans and evangelicals who tend to be Republican," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. "Right now that dialogue is focused on marriage, but as we share and learn, you'll see it broadening."
However, the Rev. Stephen Bouman, a New York-based bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, worries that conservative Christians' definition of "moral values" may be too narrow to accommodate those of different faiths and backgrounds, including new immigrants.
"One thing Jesus was absolutely clear about was helping the poor, and the welcoming of strangers," Bouman said. "Maybe this election was a wake-up call to have a serious conversation about what morality means, to look at what sort of country we're becoming."
The Devil means to change the language to confuse people.
This "Reverend" oughta stick to his neo-marxism and leave God to the believers and the theologians. Sheesh!
One thing to always be aware of is that when any so-called "religious" person talks about making a more "just" society, he is saying that "we believe that no matter how you may have accumulated what you have, you have too much, and we will take it from you so as to conform to our notions of 'fairness'."
Hmmm ... let's see ... the Dems promote the right to kill a fetus and the right to gay sex. One "right" has killed millions and the other "right" ... has killed millions. But they're the enlightened ones.
Kinda like how Jesus threw the lenders out of the temple?
Here is my only question, though the tidal wave is too big to stop anyway: Why do we believe this moral value story, coming as it did from the same EXIT POLLING company that LIED on Nov. 2nd? Why would they tell the truth now? I can't help shaking the feeling that this is part of their plot, to detract from the president's foreign policy mandate and say it was all about gays. I am not sure I believe it, although the social conservatives have eaten it hook line and sinker, since it flatters them. I am skeptical. Either way it's a loser for dems, but I am still skeptical.
Oh - he must be referring to the 45 million aborted American babies currently not receiving healthcare.
Dear Robert,
Please keep believing that it's only about changing what you say and not what you and your supporters preach from your pulpits; that is when you actually use the bible to preach instead of the "I'm ok, you're ok" white papers that your "clergy" use as text.
Until you get the message that there are absolutes that God expects his followers to adhere to, you're going to continue scratching your head and believing that simple language changes and buzzwords will make you seem more palatable.
The left thinks it's moral to kill innocent children because they are an inconvenience to their parents.
The left thinks it's moral to give false hope to thousands of people suffering from life threatening illnesses in order to find an excuse to practice human sacrifice (in the form of fetal stem-cell research)
The left thinks it’s moral to euthanize the sick and elderly because they are an inconvenience to their families.
The left thinks it's moral to give an able bodied person a welfare check instead of helping them understand the importance of hard work, self-respect, education, and high moral character.
The left thinks it's moral to deny school choice to children who are stuck in the hedonistic war zones they call public schools.
The left thinks it’s moral to discourage parents from teaching their children right from wrong, good from evil.
The left thinks it's moral to take away peoples land to protect an endangered insect or to create a swamp.
The left thinks it’s moral to steal from your neighbor as long as their giving the loot to the poor.
The left thinks it's moral to ignore the constitution and take guns away from law abiding citizens.
The left thinks it's moral to force every American citizen to pay into the pyramid scheme called social security, which is rigged to never pay most people anything since they should be dead by the time their old enough to collect it.
The left thinks it's moral to hand out condoms and needles to kindergartners.
The left thinks it's moral to parade mentally disordered homosexuals and other sexual deviants in front of our children and present them as normal.
The left thinks it's moral to remove every reference to religion from the workplace and government.
The left thinks it's moral to cripple our economic system with a crushing tax and regulatory burden in order to promote their failed socialist/communist ideology.
The left thinks it's moral to ridicule and belittle those who believe in God.
The left thinks it’s moral to allow murderers to walk free on technicalities.
The left thinks it’s moral to bestow US Constitutional protections on foreign terrorists.
The left thinks it’s moral to allow convicted felons to vote.
The left thinks it’s moral to discriminate against someone as long as their white.
The left thinks it’s moral to destroy whole segments of our economy with their frivolous lawsuits.
The left thinks it’s moral to give drivers licenses and the right to vote to illegal aliens.
The left thinks it’s moral to be tolerant of everyone except Christians and conservatives.
The left thinks it’s moral for unelected officials who serve life terms to impose their doctrine of death and hopelessness on the rest of us.
^^ By the above, I didn't mean I disagree with you about the injustice of marxist socialism, I'm just saying that the Bible does send some mixed messages, in my opinion.
God helps those who help themselves "Reverend".
"The religious right has successfully gotten out there shaping personal piety issues — civil unions, abortion — as almost the total content of 'moral values,'" Edgar said. "And yet you can't read the Old Testament without knowing God was concerned about the environment, war and peace, poverty. God doesn't want 45 million Americans without health care."
I would say that because "moral values", in his words, are what prevents thangs like environment, war, peace , and poverty from being the overblown issues that they have become. For me, it is about, faith, responsibility, duty, and honor that prevents moral decay which has led us to our current welfare state and appeasment of terrorists debacle.
Evidently, there are many pages missing from Edgar's bible.
To see these libs try to embrace and explain their "morality" while not offending their base is like watching a game of Twister.
Has he read about Soddam and that other place I can't spell?
The God of the Old Testament wasn't exactly touchy-feely.
"The Democratic Party seems almost embarrassed talking about family issues or religion," he said
CAn't imagine why. They have Billy Clintoon and Jesse Jackson....they reek of family values.
Well, they REEK anyway....
I just love to be accused by a neocommunist of being able to manipulate language better then the lefties!
And, "morality" is a two side coin, on one side there are morlities and on the other, an absence of morality. Many folks didn't embrace Bush, they rejected Kerry and his lying, lazy, elitist arraogance. Kerry was a low quality,very poor candidate, a fact the neocommunists are still struggling to grasp.
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.