US religious Right concedes defeat (Has Dobson Thrown In The Towel? Not Quite (FULL AUDIO LINK))

Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | April 11, 2009 | Alex Spillius

[Schnucki]

America's religious Right has conceded that the election of US President Barack Obama has sealed its defeat in the cultural war with permissiveness and secularism.

Leading evangelicals have admitted that their association with George W. Bush has not only hurt the cause of social conservatives but contributed to the failure of the key objectives of their 30-year struggle.

James Dobson, 72, who resigned recently as head of Focus on the Family - one of the largest Christian groups in the country - and once denounced the Harry Potter books as witchcraft, acknowledged the dramatic reverse for the religious Right in a farewell speech to staff.

“We tried to defend the unborn child, the dignity of the family, but it was a holding action,” he said.

“We are awash in evil and the battle is still to be waged. We are right now in the most discouraging period of that long conflict. Humanly speaking, we can say we have lost all those battles.”

Despite changing the political agenda for a generation, and helping push the Republicans to the Right, evangelicals have won only minor victories in limiting the availability of abortion. Meanwhile the number of states permitting civil partnerships between homosexuals is rising, and the campaign to restore prayer to schools after 40 years - a decision that helped create the Moral Majority - has got nowhere.

Though the struggle will go on, the confession of Mr Dobson, who started his ministry from scratch in 1977, came amid growing concern that church attendance in the United States is heading the way of Britain, where no more than ten per cent worship every week.

Unease is rising that a nation founded - in the view of evangelicals - purely as a Christian country will soon, like northern Europe, become “post-Christian”.

Recent surveys

**************

Has Dobson Thrown In The Towel? Not Quite (FULL AUDIO)

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Well in an odd way, his effectiveness out of the gate sabotaging Palin was a form of fighting.

Problem is: it was, bottom line, for the wrong side.

It infuriated me, and it was obvious for what it was.

But I sure don’t see any of the current batch of Republicans, with that sort of campaign organization.

The entire GOP seems to have been neutered.

There’s no fight left anywhere. They’ve become a lumpy, soft bag of jumbo marshmallows.

And just about as interesting.

[Ron C.]

Wrong, Telegraph...

The religious right is anything but dead - and along with most everyone else in the nation on the conservative side, a great many of its members are mobilizing and gearing up for a protracted fight. This thing has only began a scant five months ago... and this ‘change’ certainly isn’t what the 0 wanted to see.

The problem with many of the ‘churched’ has been an apathy - they ‘aren’t of this world’ - but, despite that sort of detachment that more prosperous times sort of ‘fed’ - they’re waking up in large numbers (it should be greater than it is, though.) Unfortunately, they’re late to the party - but fortunately, once aroused they’ve proven to be very effective at changing things in local districts where it is needed most. That sort of success - feeding the hopper that leads to higher office - is vital to real change.

More than half of the participants in the upcoming tea parties will be those that realize that they can not stay on the sidelines any longer. There have been a lot of new leaders popping out of the woodwork, getting involved for the first time. Hopefully, this is only the beginning salvo... I think most of them now realize, they can ill afford to ‘fade back into the pews.’

[wardaddy]

Unfortunately non-Christian conservatives don’t quite appreciate that kind of thinking... :-)

such a huge group relatively speaking

[Star Traveler]

Yeah, I’ve even had some FReepers tell me that the conservatives ought to dump the Christians so they could win some elections... LOL..

[Leisler]

I agree, and have advocated a generational change. Remember the energy that the Newt era, new Congressmen brought in?

Basically, I feel, we would be way way better off with a new batch of unknowns.

The old guys are too straddle(ish).

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Think about 1994.

It truly was a moment in time, which could have changed America forever. In fact it started to.

Then, democrats identified a weakness. Well, two weaknesses actually.

The first weakness, and the most damaging - was the shameful lack of teamwork on the right. Rugged individualism is one thing, but it’s important to protect the team.

The second weakness, was finding dirt on the one man driving that change: Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

what followed, destroyed that movement, for the next generation:

Republicans ran *away* from Gingrich at the very moment he most needed their support. And then, worse even, ... he quit.

“QUIT”.

And Republicans haven’t stopped quitting, since then. It’s been one giant, slow quit ever since.

That word, has come to define the GOP.

“QUIT”.

Where I grew up, quitters lose.

[Leisler]

Well, I live in Massachusetts, and the Democrats here are rattlesnakes, they don’t let go for anything, and play hardball, so I find wimpy, bipartisan, reach across the isle Republicans as clueless dolts that in the words of Yogi Berra, ‘don’t know how to play the game.’

As flaky as Newt was, compare him to Fat Dennis “Coach” Hastert, whom I believe was the longest ever Speaker of The House, and is remembered, right so, for nothing, other than spending.

Michael’s, pre Newt minority leader. Doormat.
HW Bush. Doormat.
Condi Rice. Doormat.
McCain. Nutter.
Mitt. Flip Floppy.
Lott. Nutter.

Palin, Jindal, Flake.... New Names, New blood.

[broncobilly]

undermining Governor Palin at every opportunity

---

As far as I have been able to tell, this is just anti-Romney rumor spreading. Where are your facts?

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Ah. A teachable moment.

What we have here Campers, is a textbook example of the phrase:

“Plausible deniability”. :)

[broncobilly]

Ah. A teachable moment.

What we have here Campers, is a textbook example of the phrase:

“Plausible deniability”. :)

---

Either that or a case of lieing. Put up the evidence so we can decide which it is.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

No comment, counselor.

We are not in a court of law.

Your rules do not apply here.

[SuperLuminal]

BS!

[broncobilly]

“Thou shalt not bear false witness” is not my rule.
You would do well to observe it.

[Smokin' Joe]

It ain’t over ‘till it’s over, and it ain’t over yet.

[Smokin' Joe]

We may have suffered some tactical defeats, but the war is His...

Exactly. We have already won. We're just working out the details.

[momincombatboots]

Thank you! I have not conceded, I do not think Dr. Dobson has conceded. I hate to see him go because genuinely desires the best for everyone. When you read his books, you can feel his intense love for others as he reaches out. Praise God for Dr. Dobson, you have planted much seed and it may seem as though the enemy has overtaken the field, but the story has a different ending.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

OK. Just this once, I acknowledge in heartfelt respect the superior argument.

On this board, you have played the true trump card. :)

Just understand please, in the real political world out there, this won’t win an argument — and that’s one which is real, real important.

[xzins]

I doubt the salvation of America ever was a matter of politics. It always will be a matter of making Christ the Lord of one heart at a time.

A Great Awakening will do far more than the rise of another Great Communicator.

[broncobilly]

Nice of you to end it that way.
If you run on to any verifyable facts on the issue, let me know. If I see facts< I will back down.

[nathanbedford]

The premise of the article is that the American culture and the American electorate have been exposed to Evangelical political activism and have turned away from it. Indeed, so disenchanted with evangelicals is the culture that their disaffection is actually threatening the viability of the Church. To save itself, the church should withdraw from the political arena where it was ineffectual anyway.

Apply this logic to the National Rifle Association. It has had a mixed record in actually changing laws in this country. We now have an administration in power that is aggressively hostile to the Second Amendment, perhaps comparable to its hostility to the first amendment which protects Evangelical churches. The states are mounting an attack on the right to bear arms by taxing ammunition etc.. Does this state of affairs which demonstrates that the NRA did not achieve all it might have hoped in the last 20 years in terms of broadening our liberty expressed in the Second Amendment-even though it won the DC case and had other success-persuade you that the NRA should withdraw from its political activities and concentrate on conducting gun safety courses?

Does The Telegraph say that American Jews should withdraw from lobbying because AIPAC, may arguably be at the historical nadir of its influence over American policy concerning Israel with this administration?

As one of the most radical newspapers in England, it is not surprising that The Telegraph might have missed some considerations which guide evangelicals. First, as biblically oriented folks, evangelicals take seriously the prediction of Jesus and expect to be persecuted in this world and assume that the political winds will always be in their face. Second, I believe The Telegraph misapprehends the lesson that evangelicals take when they make this statement:

“We are awash in evil and the battle is still to be waged. We are right now in the most discouraging period of that long conflict. Humanly speaking, we can say we have lost all those battles.” (Emphasis supplied)

Evangelicals have even a longer time horizon than do even the Chinese. They expect to lose these battles, "humanly speaking." Protestants have been around since Martin Luther and Christians have been around for a couple of thousand years. The Telegraph has a 24-hour deadline schedule.

Finally, I think The Telegraph conflates the Christians battle for salvation with the telegraph's battle for salvation on earth. The telegraph has its own worldview and his own version of temporal salvation which flatly conflicts with American evangelicals. The newspaper would like Christians to cease their Christian outreach in the sense of giving alms in the broader sense. They think that the worldly outreach of the Church is the animating factor rather than the natural results of its faith. They have it backwards.

Evangelicals, of whom I am one, are about as well organized as a Chinese fire drill. If any one person of the cloth said he speaks for me I would resent his presumption. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that American evangelicals will faithfully continue to pick up their cross and follow.