"People of Faith" Ask: How Would Jesus Vote?

AP via TheState ^ | August 17, 2004 | Bobby Ross Jr.

[COEXERJ145]

AUSTIN - Just a few miles from George W. Bush's former office at the state Capitol, a panel of religious experts Tuesday weighed a question with relevance to many people of faith: How would Jesus vote?

It's a complex question that can't be boiled down to simple political terms, say religious leaders who attended a Texas Faith Network conference in Austin.

But at least one conference speaker - James C. Moore, co-author of "Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George Bush Presidential" - said he knew exactly how Jesus would vote.

"If ever there were a bleeding-heart liberal, it was Jesus Christ," Moore said. "I think the carpenter from Galilee was the original Democrat."

Moore drew laughter and applause from a moderate to left-leaning crowd of about 250 clergy and lay leaders who met at Congregation Agudas Achim synagogue.

Many at the conference voiced concerns that the religious right dominates discussions of faith and morality in politics. They complained that issues such as abortion and gay marriage seem to take priority over hunger, corporate crime and even the war in Iraq.

Some research has found that white Christians who attend worship services at least once a week are far more likely to vote Republican, while less frequent worshippers and those who are not religious tend to lean Democratic. Many analysts have criticized Democrats for failing to more effectively reach religious voters.

"The sound bites and the headlines have co-opted people of faith," said the Rev. Tom Heger, pastor of St. John's Presbyterian Church in Manchaca, south of Austin. "It would be a surprise to a lot of folks to discover that there are some very faithful, regular church attendees who aren't going to vote for Bush."

[ikka]

Anyone who has read the book of Romans in the Bible knows fer-sure that Jesus would not be on the same side as the Demoncrats when it comes to supporting gays.

[SaveTheChief]

Many at the conference voiced concerns that the religious right dominates discussions of faith and morality in politics. They complained that issues such as abortion and gay marriage seem to take priority over hunger, corporate crime and even the war in Iraq.

I guess these good clergy and lay leaders were too busy thinking about politics to worry about what the Bible says about abortion and homosexuality.

[Rakkasan1]

reminds me of a joke...remember the whole what would Jesus
drive deal?
he drove a Plymouth- it says in Genesis He drove Adam and Eve from the garden in a Fury.

[hflynn]

What do you call a Mexican/Spaniard/Portugesian/Venezuilian with a vasectomy?
A dry Martinez.

[hflynn]

Why did the Mexican become so excited?
He discovered he could use Right Guard under his left arm...

[hflynn]

This Mexican dude was taking a pee on the side of a building and this Texan sees him. After the Mexican is done the texan bloke asks him, "How come you Mexicans don't wash your hands after you pee?"
The Mexican smiles, "Senior, we Mexicans don't piss in our hands..."

[Tanniker Smith]

"If ever there were a bleeding-heart liberal, . . .

. . . Jesus Christ would have healed it!

Jesus would have been front and center at the Democrat National Convention. And he would have told them "Go and sin no more!"
And they would have screamed "Separation of Church and State" and tossed him out onto the street.

TS

[Bommer]

Jesus wouldn't vote... He'd run as a Republican.

Your right....and he still wouldn't get the black vote and definately would not get the Jewish vote!

[fuzzy122]

Come on! Don't hold back. Tell us what you really think.

Stay Strong
Fuzzy

[Caipirabob]

I don't know, but I suspect that Jesus might slap us all silly. He was and still is above all politics.

A house divided against itself cannot stand This term's origin comes from the bible (Matthew 12:25). 'And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand'.

He would probably suggest we continue to reach out to save those in need of saving. Can anyone think of a richer potential and need to be saved than the Democrats?

[MeekOneGOP]

Jesus is an illegal Mexican who shouldn't be allowed to vote.

LOLOL!!

[aft_lizard]

I guess Jesus would have no choice now would he?

[Peach]

Both Kerry and Bush were members of skull and bones and I'm not sure what your point was.

[TommyDale]

If He were in North Carolina, He would vote a straight Republican ticket!

[tomnbeverly]

Of Course Jesus would be pro-abortion give me a break the left have no values...

Besides once Jesus found out that Kerry was a Catholic... who was divorced and remarried, supported abortion, and approved of Homosexual union/marriage... I think even the moderate Democrat Jesus would vote for GW...

[Recovering_Democrat]

It's a complex question that can't be boiled down to simple political terms, say religious leaders who attended a Texas Faith Network conference in Austin.

No, it isn't a "complex question".

[rushmom]

Jesus would never condone abortion.

[ER_in_OC,CA]

Jesus came not for political revolution but for our salvation. Jesus had many opportunities to speak out against the hot political climate of the day and deliberately did not focus on those topics.

I find discussion of how Jesus would vote in the way Mr. Moore did disgusting. Similarly, those who would suggest Jesus would be Republican do no justice to his Glory by suggesting such an association.

Assuming one has the reformed view of theology, one could say that Jesus as God *has* voted, as everything that has unfolded here on Earth is His will as part of a greater purpose and story.

Yes, in some curious way, it was God's will that Carter be president at one time.

[Repub in a sea of idiots]

"But Tutt, board president of Austin Area Interreligious Ministries, which includes Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Muslims and Christians, balked at the perception that Bush is the only choice for people of faith.

"As I read the Scriptures and as I understand faith, God's side is the group that's feeding the poor, caring about children, making sure that people have enough food to eat - not killing others," said Tutt, who opposes the war in Iraq.

As one from Austin, I take offense. When Tutt as a supporter of Muslims condemns terrorism, then he'll have the moral authority to speak. But he hasn't. He can talk all he wants about feeding the poor and caring about children. But he doesn't have a darned thing to say about the murders of terrorists and those very fine Muslim folks that will strap a bomb on a child to blow up a bus. What a crock.

[aruanan]

Just a few miles from George W. Bush's former office at the state Capitol, a panel of religious experts Tuesday weighed a question with relevance to many people of faith: How would Jesus vote?

Such a question is idiotic for a number of reasons, but principally because the WWJD movement is based on an erroneous view of Jesus. Although he was morally blameless, he wasn't the example of "perfect humanity" showing us humans the way to behave--how to vote, what kind of car to drive, whether or not to use air conditioning or aerosol deodorant or one of those deodorant rocks. He claimed to be God incarnate and acted in many situations in ways which would be characteristic of an insane person if what he said wasn't factually true. Because of this, the mental exercise of trying to imagine what "Jesus" would do involves nothing more than people running their own personal Jesus simulacrum through the paces and imagining that the output of what amounts basically to a computer-modeling program is a means of acquiring truth. In reality, it is just a projection of their own moral sentiments into a visual form. They would do better to cut straight to the chase and evaluate those moral sentiments in light of what Jesus actually said with respect to what people's relationship with God, each other, and toward him ought to be (assuming the Gospel accounts to be accurate--and, for reasons it would take too long to go into here, they are).

WWJD is the modern version of pin sticking, a form of divination practiced in earlier centuries in which people would open a Bible and stick a pin to the page at random and read the pin-pointed verse. The assumption was that God would be guiding their hand to show them something he wanted to communicate to them about whatever problem was at hand. At least this had the virtue of limiting outcome to something actually in the Bible--well, to a product of something in the Bible and the imagination of the reader as he tried to shape the import of an isolated verse into a means of communicating something to him about a particular problem or decision he should make.

WWJD skips Biblical content and just goes directly to the imagination part, informed more or less by people's more or less accurate images of Jesus derived from the Bible, Sunday School stories, movies, and other popular sources. The aim of both methods of divination is to shift responsibility for some action to an agent outside of oneself. In the letters of Paul and other apostles, Jesus as an example is referred to, but in very specific ways, not as a plectrum of the imagination to divine the future or to decide what to do.