The Religious Right's Era Is Over

Time ^ | February 16, 2007 | Jim Wallis

[stevio]

Is there an example you can state?

[incredulous joe]

I know I saw TIME and skipped to the posts.

They usually schedule their hit pieces on Christians for Christmas and Easter.

If these people focused on real news and entertainment and information rather than political activism their reader ships probably wouldn't be in such a bad state.

[phillyfanatic]

Wallis and Campolo, two Clinton apologists. When he says that evangelical conserv churches are being left in droves by attenders, he obviously is unaware of the blood-letting and huge exodus of leftist liberal socialist Mainline churches for the last 50 years. They are useless , toothless Kiwanis clubs with no Jesus, no Bible, no Spirit, no concept of good and evil but save the whales and global warming or feed the cons and sanctify Bishop Robinson.

[MACVSOG68]

It wasn't until the post civil war amendments that the bill of rights was applied to state action.

If as I'm sure you believe, human rights such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are given only by the Creator, not by man, then those rights exist period. They are not bound by the limitations of time or place. That the federal courts refused to consider the basic rights of the citizens of the United States until after the 14th Amendment...and then taking another hundred years before the courts recognized their duty did not make it right.

Did the United States have the duty to protect the rights of its citizens with one of the states in the Union? Of course it did. That is the primary duty of any government. That it didn't is ignored by those who want to forget. All was corrected by the 14th Amendment, huh? Oh, BTW, that would include the religious tests.

So the denial of rights to any citizen of the United States is unconstitutional and always has been. It just wasn't enforced. Remember, rights trump powers. And rights are not dependent on man for ratification. They exist independent of time and place, and government is duty bound to enforce them.

[freedomfiter2]

Something the left doesn't begin to grasp...Christianity thrives under persecution.


That's true but Jesus said we should flee it if possible.

[evangmlw]

Could be a good thing. Paul said there would be "a great falling away from the faith," just prior to Christ return. Oh yes, we're waiting Lord Jesus! Everything will be RIGHT then!

[danamco]

The Religious Right's Era Is Over

Nothing but wishful thinking from the left wing drivel!!!

[KantianBurke]

Funny you mention Jim Jeffords as his inclusion in the GOP was due precisely because of those in the Republican establishment who saw holding power as more important than maintaining any semblence of conservative principles. The big govt social democrats are no different and have been more trouble than they've been worth. Cheers for their exit.

[arthurus]

we don't have a perfect candidate to run.

We don't have even a marginally acceptable candidate among those who appear to have a chance.

[dirtboy]

As if slaughtering unborn babies was a form of "social justice".

Hey, the same folks saw the gulag as a necessary evil. I guess they don't have a problem with cracking eggs to make an omlette, no matter how far along the eggs are in their human development.

[PhiKapMom]

Sodomy and abortion - that's what Giuliani stands for; that's what his followers stand for.

For people that call themselves members of the religious right, you all have some interesting ways to express yourselves. Just paint everyone that doesn't walk in lockstep with a broad brush. Amazing!

[madprof98]

The Republican Party is going the way of the Episcopal Church . . . but faster. You guys seem to want the pricey real estate. If you leave us FReeRepublic, you can have the rest of it.

[madprof98]

Funny you mention Jim Jeffords as his inclusion in the GOP was due precisely because of those in the Republican establishment who saw holding power as more important than maintaining any semblence of conservative principles.

BS. Jeffords is an old-line Rockefeller country-club Republican, just like your boy Rudy. (Well, except he has more principles, since he left the Party that wouldn't support his radical pro-abort agenda.)

[Irene Adler]

"If as I'm sure you believe, human rights such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are given only by the Creator, not by man, then those rights exist period. They are not bound by the limitations of time or place. That the federal courts refused to consider the basic rights of the citizens of the United States until after the 14th Amendment...and then taking another hundred years before the courts recognized their duty did not make it right. Did the United States have the duty to protect the rights of its citizens with one of the states in the Union? Of course it did. That is the primary duty of any government. That it didn't is ignored by those who want to forget. All was corrected by the 14th Amendment, huh? Oh, BTW, that would include the religious tests. So the denial of rights to any citizen of the United States is unconstitutional and always has been. It just wasn't enforced. Remember, rights trump powers. And rights are not dependent on man for ratification. They exist independent of time and place, and government is duty bound to enforce them."

From your many posts, I surmise you do not believe in the existence of Original Sin. For Christians, who do, there is no surprise in the reality the people are not perfect and never will be, nor will any governmental organizations they devise. The fact that it took many years for the ideals (propositions as correctly denoted by Abraham Lincoln) written in our Constitution to be made reality should not surprise anyone. People are simply not perfect and will never be until Christ returns.

I have read your posts with interest and do not disagree with some of your points, but the smugness with which you present them is difficult to get past. The impression you give is that same as that given by so many on the left. I would ask you, in all seriousness, to consider, at least, that you, like the rest of us fallen human beings, are not in possession of all the answers. It is those who believe they do have all the answers who are dangerous; any list of murderous dictators proves that. We Christians know we are sinners, and that perfection is God's alone. No Constitution we could ever write would be perfect, nor would any application of such Constitution. Can we make things better? Sure, but perfect, never.

One more small thing: perhaps slavery, which has been practiced all around the world for thousands of years, and is still being practiced in certain areas (with very little outcry on the part of the self-annointed world elites/media) is something that doesn't need to be flogged endlessly in relation to the U.S.

What would happen if you were as concerned with slavery as it is practiced today in Africa? Why not turn your attention to that problem that exists today, rather than cranking about any country's less-than-perfect past?

[Republican Wildcat]

and a whole new denomination has emerged, which might be called the "spiritual but not religious."

Sounds like Oprah rather than Church.

Typical nonsense from Jim Wallis - reducing church to a social club. We are indeed commanded to care for the poor - and guess what? There is not, nor has there ever been, a movement to try and stop us from doing that. There are, however, movements out there to destroy the institution of marriage, kill innocent children before they are born, etc.

Moreover, where is Wallis' concern for sharing the Gospel? I don't see it. It's just supposed to be a social club?

[Republican Wildcat]

Jim Wallis, if you have heared him, lumps tax cuts, etc. all in with the "Religious Right." The "Religious Right" is "pro-rich." He's an idiot.

That means working with the other side to get our main priorities while giving the other side some of theirs. Because Republicans who controlled Congress refused any kind of negotiation, nothing was accomplished. And they paid the price.

The REPUBLICANS refused negotiation? That's ridiculous.

"Why should we come up with a plan? Our plan is...to stop him! To stop him! He must be stopped!" - Nancy Pelosi when asked if the Democrats would put up their own alternative to Social Security reform.

[happygrl]

Thanks for the link.

I thought I knew Wallis, having followed his "career" for several decades.

This was illuminating, even to me.

Any credibility Wallis had, even as a Christian with whom I disagreed, was lost when he refused to take up the issue of the Sudanese Christians (who were also under threat of genocide) during the 1980s and 90s.

Apparently only Muslims in Africa are suitable subjects for his concern.

Let me tell you something else, learned experientially first hand after living in Africa: the problem is not poverty of the flesh, it is poverty of the soul.

Only when the spirit of Christ, and his call for Holiness are imbedded within the African culture will they begin to overcome the devastating poverty of the flesh.

[KantianBurke]

First of all, why are you accusing me of being a Rudy supporter? If anything, I've been quite critical of him. Quit being lazy and look up my previous posts for veracity's sake.

Second, how are the big government Rockerfeller country club GOPers any different than your big government christian socialists?? They both hold views and wish spend spend spend tax payer dollars that run counter to our Constitution. The GOP would be better off without either. Or is your view that "Jesus motivated" spending's a good thing while country club GOP spending isn't?

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Me: "I'm not aware of these amendments being issues to Christians."

You: "Though there are many examples, I'll give you just 3. First, why wasn't the State of Florida empowered to handle the Terri Schiavo fiasco? "

It was. That was a dispute over who had custody over the Terri and the medical power of attorney, her husband or her parents. In the opinion of Christians, Terri's right to life overruled any erroneous opinion of the State court and so they legitimately appealed to their federal government.

"Second, why do Christians want family law issues, specifically marriage, taken out of the jurisdiction of the states which for over 200 years have been empowered by the 10th Amendment to handle? "

I suppose you are referring to the Massachusetts's rule on gay marriage and the DOMA. The problem there is that states do not have the power to change the meaning of marriage. Marriage does not come from the state, but from the Church. The State merely records marriages and promotes them. None the less, the meaning of the MA court ruling is to change the meaning of the common word "marriage". Such a concept is so preposterous it has not existed in our culture for two hundred years, until now. If the people of Massachusetts do not remedy this themselves, and they have not for several years. I see no remedy for this other than a constitutional amendment.

"Third, Why do Christians feel that under the 14th Amendment, all Americans do not have the same rights to due process or equal protection of the laws, which means that some people can have the right to privacy, and some cannot."

I'm sorry, I don't know what example to which you refer.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!