The Religious Right is Wrong Blind loyalty to Bush is causing Religious Right to lose credibility)

Covenant News ^ | 1/4/02 | Chuck Baldwin

[truthandlife]

It is a truism that Christians are trusting to a fault. I must acknowledge my own vulnerability to this weakness. The money I have lost and pain I have suffered at the hands of people I trusted are inestimable. When it comes to politicians, however, one would hope for more discernment. Alas, such is not the case. It could even be argued that modern Christians put more trust in their politicians than they do their preachers.

A recent Washington Post article boldly states that President Bush is the "de facto leader" of the Religious Right. It states, "Christian publications, radio and television shower Bush with praise, while preachers from the pulpit treat his leadership as an act of providence." Former Republican presidential hopeful, Gary Bauer, even declared, "A man of God is in the White House."

Another recent report said, "Conservative Christians say their support for President Bush remains strong, although it's based more on the president's religious beliefs than any of his stands or policies on their top social issues." In other words, it does not make any difference what Bush does; he gives them the talk they want to hear.

Given this foolish infatuation with religious rhetoric, it would appear that conservative Christians owe Jimmy Carter an apology. Remember that Carter won the presidency on the strength of his Christian profession. By the end of his first term, however, conservative Christians enthusiastically supported his opponent, Ronald Reagan. Why? Carter betrayed conservatives on things like gay rights and big government spending. In those days, conservative Christians were more interested in a politician's walk than in his talk. No more.

Today, the president can embrace gay rights, big government spending, and even pagan religion without consternation or criticism. He can ignore the U.S. Constitution and trample the bedrock principles of self-government without even so much as a whimper. He can support embryonic stem cell research, promote unconstitutional trade deals, and call for the creation of a "hemispheric family" and "international order" with Canada and Mexico without the slightest opposition. He can ignore abortion (even partial birth abortion) and even participate in the cover-up of Clinton and Reno's criminal conduct without a peep of protest. As long as he "talks the talk," he remains the darling of the Religious Right.

However, the Religious Right is wrong! Blind loyalty to Bush is causing the Religious Right to lose both its credibility and its clout. It has become just another bought and paid for lackey for the entrenched political establishment. Like the old prophets who had sold their souls to the corrupt kings of Israel, conservative Christians today have sold their souls to the gods and generals of the Republican Party.

The Religious Right was a powerful force when it stood foursquare on the principles of morality, honesty, and constitutional government. Today it demonstrates none of that. "Where are the Jeremiahs and Ezekiels?" you ask. They are inside the palace lying on the soft bed of compromise. They wanted a seat at the table so badly they were willing to eat the leeks and garlic of political Egypt to get it. As a result, the Religious Right is as weak as a shaven Samson.

[truthandlife]

has W had a stem cell bill sent to him by Congress yet?

No he has not. I was really talking about how he "split the baby" on the stem cell issue by rewarding companies federal money that had already been doing research on stem cell research. I know it is politics but his rhetoric did not match his decision.

[tberry]

""Conservative Christians say their support for President Bush remains strong, although it's based more on the president's religious beliefs than any of his stands or policies on their top social issues."

For all practical purposes the Religious Right is dead. All their leadership has vanished and you never hear a word about them in the media . They have lost their credibility for the very reason described in the article and italicized above. If you support a hypocritical promotion you will also be seen as hypocritical.

[Gimlet]

Intereting. Food for thought. This may be true for now but we will be looking for those honest moral principles in action as we move forward. We will not be taken for granted again, not for long at least.

[philosofy123]

The religous right has no other alternatives. I like Pat, but he has no prayers in hell getting into the White House. He was faulsely labeled anti-semitic. The religous right should be different from the right wingers. They are against abortion, and that is it! While the right wingers are for less government, less tax...

[ResistorSister]

The 'religious right' is a media creation to begin with.

Agree!

I think it would be great if FOXNEWS would send out a reporter to find the 'religious right.'

[over3Owithabrain]

Speak for yourself, Chuck - don't be so pompous as to claim to represent millions of Christians. Jesus said to be "cautious as serpents, yet innocent as doves". It's your own damn fault you keep getting taken advantage of financially. I'm a Christian and I manage to read contracts carefully, haggle for the best deal, put all money matters in writing, and avoid throwing bucks at religious snake-oil salesmen. And politically, what's wrong with a Christian being pragmatic? Supporting Bush over Gore and being glad W is of far better character and beliefs is wise. Choosing the "lesser of two evils" and getting slow incremental gains over complete defeat is sensible. Of course, we could keep voting for Keyes and Bauer in primaries then sit out the general elections with our arms folded because our "perfect" Christian candidate didn't win. It's your personal choice, Chuck, but be careful casting stones at others who are thankful for better leadership in Washington.

[pollwatcher]

You you also mean the Millions of Evangelicals who "stayed home" during the last presidential election are now "blindly" following him? Amazing that some of those "core" democratic voting blocks are never described as "blindly" following anyone.

[Moby Grape]

And if we are Christian we should choose Al Gore? Or the Libertarains who want to legalize drugs?....The Christian Right supports Bush because he is the only VIABLE choice (meaning electable). It may be a lessor of evils, but it is a choice based in reality...not it silly idealism that cannot get elected and thus cannot effect change at all.

[RaceBannon]

Almost everyone in my church is extremely suspicious of Bush!!!! And, that's a good thing!

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

1/4/02 | Chuck Baldwin

Would'nt be alec baldwins brother would it?

[truthandlife]

And if we are Christian we should choose Al Gore? Or the Libertarains who want to legalize drugs?

No but we should not stand in lock step about every decision he makes. When he makes a mistake we should call him on it. When Bush and company know that conservative Christians will not call him on bad decisions he makes, he will keep making them without even considering what conservative Christians think.

[carton253]

When Bush and company know that conservative Christians will not call him on bad decisions he makes, he will keep making them without even considering what conservative Christians think.

Why should he consider what conservative Christians think? And what makes you think that he should kow-tow to the religious right? What makes you think that he owes the religious right anything?

You write as if he was an emissary from the Religious Right and somehow he has to answer to us.

If you don't like his decisions... then tell him about it. You have e-mail, a telephone, etc.

[DeweyCA]

And if we are Christian we should choose Al Gore? Or the Libertarains who want to legalize drugs?....The Christian Right supports Bush because he is the only VIABLE choice (meaning electable). It may be a lessor of evils, but it is a choice based in reality...not it silly idealism that cannot get elected and thus cannot effect change at all.

Amen!

[workamania]

I'm not saying we have to agree with everything Bush does, but so many times the so called "Religious right" gets split up on tiny issues and the Democrats come walking. Christians get their denomination mixed up with politics and it kills them everytime. For instance, Christians say "I'm Baptist, or I'm Pentecostal", and they don't agree with other denominations because of one or two doctrinal issues. It's the same thing when they go to vote, they might not vote for the Republican because of one issue they don't agree with and then not vote at all. Then the Democrat gets elected that probably holds no beliefs or issues that the Christian has. For so long us Christians have been split on issues that don't mean anything and politicians pass legislation that is totally against the Bible and Christianity.

[truthandlife]

Why should he consider what conservative Christians think? And what makes you think that he should kow-tow to the religious right? What makes you think that he owes the religious right anything?

This is the reason:

Secrets of the "Reagan Democrats”

Karl Rove: Stayaway Christians Almost Cost Bush Election

Like it or not Christian conservatives are a big voting block in this country (20 million) and Bush does not owe (as you would say) "the religious right" anything. But if Bush wants to get reelected and not go down in flames like Bush Sr. didthen he better listen to them.

[Gophack]

I, for one, support GWB. I think that he has done a very good job and is definitely a conservative. I may not like the speed of his actions or every single thing he does, but he IS a man of God, he IS pro-life, and he IS a good leader.

Someone on this post said, "Trust, but verify" and that is where I am.

The liberals and media coined the term "religious right" and is has a negative meaning.

[tberry]

"But if Bush wants to get reelected and not go down in flames like Bush Sr. didthen he better listen to them"

Then he has a very limited future unless the religious right is as much into conservative hypocrisy as he is.

All one has to do is to "look at what he has done, not at what he says" and you will see a Repubicrat who's actions scoff at the Constitutional prescriptions that he is "supposedly" wanting to "conserve(ative)."

[DittoJed2]

No I haven't. She comes on a station about two hours away and most of the time I can't catch it. It is disappointing to see the stem cell decision lifted up as being a good one. However, it may not be so much blind loyalty as uncharacteristically inconsistent philosophy (or both).

[Texas Gal]

If the religious left (or non religious left?) lost credibility by their blind support of President Clinton, and the religious right loses credibility by it's support of President Bush, perhaps eventually everyone will be forced to think for themselves. This could be good!

[DittoJed2]

There are some assumptions made in this article that I think are untrue. I can not speak for all, but I am not blindly loyal to GWB because I know he is just a man. I think most Christians realize this. I think the loyalty you see is not so much due to the fact that he is a Christian as it is for a couple of other reasons. 1) He is more honest than any politician we've seen at the top in a long long time. Though we disagree with many of his policies, only those who are completely unthinking would have expected him to be 100% right all the time, we can still point to him as someone who is better than the last occupant.
2) He does appear to be someone for whom traditional biblical morality holds some sway. Yes, he is weak in areas, like abortion. However, anyone who studied his beliefs before the election should have realized these inconsistant views from the get go and should not expect quick change outside the Holy Spirit's working.
3) Of course, we are at war. Even liberals are loyal to him now.
4)Finally, because he is a Christian, we believe his is much more open to the Holy Spirit's leading than a non-Christian. The Holy Spirit, who guides into all truth, can guide this President according the principles of Scripture. Therefore, we pray that the Holy Spirit will have his way in GWB's life at all times.

In conclusion, what may be seen as blind loyalty may really be the desire to place some hope in someone that appears to be open to the Lord. Where it becomes blind loyalty is where bad decisions are excused. We mustn't ever do that, or the article is right, we lose credibility. However, accepting GWB for what he is, a man with clay feet, and praying for him daily does give one a certain loyalty in that you are rooting for him that he will do the right thing.