The Religious Right is once again bamboozling the press and the public with a brilliant sleight-of-hand trick.
They're distracting us with the idea that they are becoming a kinder, gentler force, hoping that while we're pondering that happy change, we'll miss the true shift.
What's really happening is that the Religious Right does not control the hefty percentage of voters that it claimed as its own. These evangelicals voted with the Religious Right for a season, but they never were a solid GOP voting bloc. This election, they're the swing vote.
The non-Religious Right, swing-vote evangelicals are three to five times as numerous as evangelicals who toe the Religious Right political line.
Who says?
The evangelicals themselves. Only 20 percent of evangelicals say they are among the Religious Right, according the country's pre-eminent evangelical magazine, Christianity Today. Other surveys show that the great majority of evangelicals don't even know who their putative leaders, those the press goes to for opinions, are. Given a list of their names, they shrug and say, "Never heard of the guy."
These aren't new statistics. They are ignored statistics.
Seventy to 80 percent of people whom pollsters classify as evangelicals don't believe like, don't behave like, and this election, they aren't going to vote like the Religious Right. These evangelicals are pretty much middle America. They like their leaders to believe in God, to pray for guidance, to be good people. They worry about abortion but don't want to make it a crime. They aren't ready for gay marriage, but they aren't calling anybody an abomination in the sight of God. Discrimination of any kind doesn't sit well with them.
They're culturally conservative but not so much reactionary as merely cautious. They act as a storm anchor for a country being tossed every which way by change. Sometimes they go for the Republicans. Sometimes for the Democrats.
Religious Right leaders, on the other hand, still want their kind of God to be the only god allowed on the public stage, everywhere, all the time. They oppose legal abortion and gay rights as fiercely as ever. They still want sex education to be abstinence-only. They still oppose child protective services, teaching evolution, hate crimes legislation, condom distribution to combat AIDS... the list goes on. It hasn't changed.
Religious Right leaders have merely shifted public attention by adding more palatable issues. The environment. The poor.
It's a good trick.
Journalists, many of whom think born-agains and snake-handlers are pretty much on par, have never quite realized that two groups of very different evangelicals exist. Reporters have so often gone after the flamboyant character and the outrageous quote that there hasn't been room in the stories for the rest of the evangelicals, the bulk of them.
Pundits who worry that John McCain will lose the Religious Right vote don't get the picture. McCain has no rivals for the Religious Right vote. A good portion of those voters are convinced that Obama is a Muslim stealth candidate, and Clinton is the anti-Christ in a pant suit. Given such sentiments, McCain doesn't need to woo them. He merely has to keep that 5 to 8 percent of the population awake and alarmed enough that they won't stay home.
But it's only 5 to 8 percent. The other 17 to 20 percent of Americans who call themselves evangelicals are busy prising open the donkey's lips to get a look at his teeth. The Democrats have this vote if they remember to be moderately pious, as they are being, and mainly concerned with bread and butter issues: health care, jobs, energy.
As for the war, nobody quite knows what to do about that. Nobody wants to think about it. It can be safely ignored for now.
Religious Right leaders have stopped talking about their core issues -- publicly, at least -- only because they are afraid of being exposed for what they are. Not hate-mongers. That doesn't bother them. Not un-Christian. That doesn't bother them either.
What they fear is being exposed as the small minority of evangelicals that they actually are.
That is the important Religious Right story this year. So far, the press is missing it.
Christine Wicker is the author of The Fall of the Evangelical Nation: The Surprising Crisis Inside the Church and a former religion reporter for The Dallas Morning News. Saved in a Southern Baptist church at the age of nine, she comes from a family going into its sixth generation of evangelicals. Her mother's grandfather was an itinerant Baptist preacher. Her dad's father was a Kentucky coal miner and foot-washing Baptist. Her blog is www.christinewicker.com.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The Republican party is dying. Good riddance. So what happens to the Republican church? Beats me. But it bears watching. The little white pretend Christians are capable of major mischief.
Fundamentalism follows the primitive rule and make dependable theobots. A single bombing incident in a Middle Eastern Christian section by spooky boogie men could launch the Armageddon of their dreams. All the usual suspects would freely express without even knowing they're controlled by militant socialists.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/auntie_christi_juggles.html
Now check me if I"m wrong but, using the AWOL Coward from Crawford"s own definition, shouldn"t Mike Huckabee now be considered a terrorist by this administration?
What an UNEVOLVED comment Mr. Huckabee.
Neo-cons find assassination funny?
Well, they are the party of Jesus...
Your analysis is spot on from where I stand. I've been an evangelical all my life and your analysis pretty much sums up the majority of folks I've worshipped and served with. I've also seen that 8% lunatic fringe up close, and it's pretty damned scary. But you're right, their biggest fear is losing the "Spokesman for all Christians" status. If only the perpetulally lazy MSM would look a little deeper. But I guess "moderate Americans" make for boring news.
This claim by evangelicals is more of the "rope-a-dope" we saw in an article earlier--This Is '94 In Reverse...--where neo-cons claim their party is weakened beyond recognition and that a Democratic landslide is all but ordained this Fall.
In my post that was seemingly lost, I used the analogy of a pro football quarterback from the '60s who during the week before each game would have some mysterious ailment that would surely affect his performance, maybe even prevent his playing, on Sunday. This forced the other team to practice as though they might face his backups, each with different skills sets and approaches that required more effort to get ready for as well as injecting an element of uncertainty, maybe even thinking they'd won already, that played with their heads.
Worked every time, as the quarterback would take the field looking like death was imminent and then perform like the all star he was! And his opponents never caught on--or if they did, they did not react in a way that was to their benefit and were outplayed before the whistle even blew. This is exactly what we are seeing from the Republicans right now. They are your typical "backs against the wall" voters and will turn out in record numbers for their "team." So this strategy of lulling us into thinking the game is won will disarm us and give their supporters more reason to play hard. Don't fall for it.
Ms. Wicker has some good insights, but she misses the main point. The mission of the Church is not to rally support for any particular political party, but rather to harvest souls for the kingdom of God, and to teach those doctrines that Christ taught his apostles. When that happens, people's natures are transformed, and they will agree with the teachings of Christ and his apostles. That will have an effect on the positions of the political parties as they court Christian voters.
A separation between church and state is necessary to prevent civil strife, but the Church should not be silent when unbelievers and heretics peddle slander and try to degrade the culture.
You see, MuchMadness, there is your problem: you think that your evangelical church is "the" Church, and everyone outside your evangelical bubble are "unsaved" and trying to degrade the culture. (I speak as a former evangelical & missionary with a Th.B. from a well-known Bible college.) And your American evangelical world has had as their MAIN goal the establishment of theocracy in America (via the Republican party), as an "indirect" method of "harvesting souls", as you put it. Your language - "unbelievers and heretics" - still is derived from the Middle Ages, but I thank God that you can't in today's culture burn me and other heretics at the stake!
But I don't believe that the hard-core religious right is as small as she makes out: When your side is losing big time, you call yourself something different so you don't seem such a loser, but your long-term goals are still the same: to get everyone "saved", and for the "saved" to rule the country. My evangelical brother and his wife recently started calling themselves "independents" after many years as Republicans, but they still won't vote for any Democrats, so they are still Republicans at heart!
"When your side is losing big time, you call yourself something different so you don't seem such a loser"
Bingo. I've been saying similar for years. It not only applies to evangelicals, it applies to all republicans. If anyone believes this 28% junk (for the war, pro GWB, whatever), forget it. They've just gone to ground, for the reason(s) you've stated above. They are STILL, & always will be, republicans. Their core values (ha, values. Funny huh?) and thoughts have not changed one ioata. And won't.
I know many people that fit the above. They ARE republican, religious and ......... gone to ground. For the time being. They STILL love the Iraq 'war', no matter what they SAY. And still think the war/occupation was the right thing to do. They are just not vocal about it anymore. They WILL vote republinut no matter what they are telling the pollsters. They are convinced liberals = death to most everything,
Polls be damned.
When it seems as if McCain is out pandering to thin air, think again. There are still a lot of people (with money) that STILL believe in the republican way of doing things. It's not thin air he's pandering to - although it does seem that way - he's out pandering to about 50% of us. The big thing come November is to get 1% to 'switch'. I'll take it. I consider that a HUGE step forward.
Although, 70-30 (B/O or HILL) is still the goal! :-)
No, I use the word Church in the same sense that Martin Luther and other 16th century Protestant reformers used it, the one, holy, universal, and apostolic church, the bride of Christ awaiting the marriage supper of the Lamb, as depicted in the New Testament. You are apparently using the word evangelical is a very narrow sense, as is common in the United States.
I hope this prediction is correct about the right wing swing voteers. I do personally know a few Evangelicals who say they will not vote for McCain, however, when the push comes in church on Sundays in the next few months, who knows what will happen.
Belief is a powerful thing, maybe the most powerful thing on earth. Maybe it is more important than feeding ones' children. I hope the religious right's followers take a good look at where we are financially and morally, and vote against McCain, who is now a mirror-image of Bush. McCain cannot possibly run this country. He is an idiot who lacks the mental ability to reason on his own. It isn't all age, it is the fact that he has ridden the wind of heroism his entire political career. He hasn't had to think for himself, and has gotten away with stupidity in the press and the Senate, with people looking away other than calling him on repeated occasions of malfeasance.
I live in So Cal, an area where the Jewish Cmmty outnumbers the Christian Cmmty which makes the Evangelicals very -- uhm -- Evangelical!!!
in the past few days I have asked every single Evangel I know if the CA lift on the ban of Gay Marriage will affect their vote in November -- in other words, if that scares them enough to consider rushing back to the GOP.
I got a resounding NO WAY!!!!
They feel used and abused and lied to by the GOP
The Religious Right is trying to undermine Christianity. Most peopl in this country believe in God and his love for us. Some of these Religious Right members, ie: Hagee only make the promise of Gods rath and punisment into eternal damnation. I prefer to live my life as one of Gods' children, to listen and respect others, to love all of mankind, and believe in the inherent goodness of people.
Nobody has done more to undermine Christianity than the Religious Right. They endlessly talk the Jesus talk, but they walk the Ayn Rand walk.
"but they walk the Ayn Rand walk"
or the Ted Haggard walk, or, sometimes, the Larry Craig 'wide stance' stride.
One wonders if you have read Rand. Her Objectivism is about ultimate morality, of which Hagee et. al. could not begin to approach. There are aspects of Objectivist philosophy that I question because it ventures into utopist dogma by failing to take into account people are not born with equal ability. She never recognized that providing a social safety net could be an enlightened act of virtuous selfishness.
Comparing the Religious Right to Ayn Rand is comparing a culture based in superstition and prejudice of the worst sort to work accomplished in the best traditions of rationalism, whether one agrees with her or not.
Sorry, but an "objectivist" philosophy that worships selfishness and tells you to look out for #1, screw everyone else and get as much as you can is the penultimate immorality. AND it's precisely the garbage that those "prosperity gospel" preachers push on TV. Osteen, Crouch, Hinn, Robertson and their ilk keep telling you that the more Jesus loves you the more you have. Well, if that is true, Jesus must have a real man crush on Bill Gates!
Even worse than Ayn Rand, they take Jesus' greatest social imperative, to "love your neighbor as yourself" and turn it into "we're always right, you're always wrong, and you're damned to hell if you don't agree with us". And, somehow, they sell that approach.
This has happened before, though - take a look at the state of the Catholic church in which St. Francis of Assisi lived. Unbelievably corrupt, telling soldiers in the Crusades that the church would sanctify them heaven-ward if they died in battle, wealthy and powerful beyond imagining. The story goes that a Pope was counting the church's treasure and ruminating on Paul's miraculous healing of a lame man in the book of Acts in which Paul said, "Gold and silver I have none, but in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, rise and walk", and that's just what the crippled man did. This pope said to one of his attendants, "Well, we no longer have to say, 'Gold and silver I have none'", to which the attendant said, "Neither can you say to a crippled man, 'Rise and walk'".
Sit and be hypnotized by Gordon Robertson who is an adulterer and a fake holyman, then call that toll free number and confess YOUR sins and be sure to send money also.
I recently watched Gordon Robertson as he described how he laid hands on a crippled boy and healed him, then pointed his finger at the boy's mute sister who then shouted "halleluia." This healing occurred, of course, in a far away place.
Think of abortion for example:
You can agree together that any abortion is a tragic end to a serious of bad decisions. So you can support abstinence programs in the hope that young people will take it to heart; you can support contraception and safe-sex programs in the event that some young people will make the mistake of ignoring abstinence; you can support emergency contraception in case young people make the mistake of ignoring contraception; you can support adoption advocacy programs in case young people make the mistake of ignoring emergency contraception; you can support programs that try to convince young people that, if they're going to end a pregnancy, to do it as early as possible in case they ignore adoption as an option; and if they make the final, terrible decision to have a late-term abortion, you can support counseling programs to help them deal with the aftermath and get on with their lives.
That's Obama's way.
Or, on the other hand, one side can wave pictures of aborted children and scream about God's vengence and the other side can scream just as loudly that a fetus is just inanimate tissue until the umbilical cord is cut at birth, and ultimately both sides will poison the conversation and nothing is ever accomplished either way. That's the way it now works in America, and that's the way it'll continue to work until we change our politics and we go to the table seeking solutions, not seeking victory.
The crazy thing about the right's stance is they are getting abortions right and left. End of story.
Image is important.
I attended an evangelical seminary. Not a single professor I had could give me a definition of an evangelical. There are many more than 2 groups of evangelicals out there. The dinosaur denying fundies and the snake handling charismatics are obvious, but not particularly large groups.
Most of the self identified evangelicals are just people who fell into the marketing efforts of the church growth movement. In the past these people would have ended up at a mainline church, but they liked the modern marketing of the evangelicals. I don't think most of them really understand the fundamentalist leanings of the evangelicals. Most of the pastors don't. Evangelical pastors typically have a low level of theological education. So they either depart from the Gospel and preach that God can make you rich (like Joel Olsteen) or follow a movement leader (Like the knowledgeable Rick Warren or the Crystal Methodist Ted Haggard).
The religious right are the hate filled, power driven ones like Pat Robertson, the corpse Jerry Falwell and Mr Hate himself, James Dobson. They used the evangelical mantra of gays and abortion to rally the troops. They overreached when they tried to support Bush on war and global warming - issues where real Christians need tom come down on the other side of.
As a result, now the majority of evangelicals are in play - both theologically and politically.
Marketing - that's the key.
Look at these mega-churches in suburban areas, like Chicago, Denver, etc, - mid-western, but not full bible belt.. Generally new urban people, conservative, white, used to a feeling of community but fearful of people who don't "look" like them.
These church goers are the ones who cannot, generally, be blocked in with the Religious Right. Recent candidates have reflected their values, but the Republicans have been using them like yard tools - very handy, but tools none the less.
Many of these people love their church in the way that people love small towns. It's controlled, familiar and filled with like minded people. That's why they're building malls in some of those churches.
The church is their community, but they'll vote their conscience.
"They overreached when they tried to support Bush on war and global warming - issues where real Christians need tom come down on the other side of. "
Over 70% of this country supported the war (google polls from March 2003 if you don't remember) so let's not just blame the religious right. Major Christians leaders (even a few evangelical ones like the Evangelical Covenant Church of America) came out very strongly against war in 2002-2003 (you can google that one too). The American public wouldn't listen. I remember listening to my co-workers, relatives, neighbors. It was war- war-war. None were right wing christians.
I didn't dream this up. I remember.
Having a right wing christian sister who voted for Bush and supported the war and still does today I beg to differ with you.
What I have a problem with is how these people can take two tissues Gay rights and abortion and chose a party because they thing that party supports there views.To hell with the fact that the party they support represents greed in this country and wars that kill not thousands of people,,not because we were threatened by that country but purely for greed (oil). Forget that Republican's don't subscribe to Christian views on helping the poor ,,in fact some of these so called christians like the Republican parties idea of getting rid of all programs that help the poor and favor the rich . I call these so called christians hypercrites .I don't think they even know what its is they are suppose to believe in because they seem to take scripture out of the bible to support their view and if their view is contrary to scripture they conveniently change its meaning to concur with theirs.
Thankfully they are not the majoriety !
Frankly I think they should be ashamed of themselves for voting for Bush and supporting this administration that has done so much evil in this world .
"Religious Right," "Evangelicals," are still only special interest groups. Albeit, I consider them socially beneficial. Candidates shouldn't show favoritism or perform political favors involving money. The President of the United States, I believe, is the country's chief moral flag barer, and should conduct him or her self as such in a somewhat universal manner.
"....Evangelicals," are still only special interest groups. Albeit, I consider them socially beneficial...."
Huh? In what way?
Pat Robertson has for years gotten away with lying, cheating, and stealing. That hate-filled, meddling fraud has made himself wealthy off of his gullible followers. He uses his tv show to manipulate thoughts and to tell his viewers how to vote AND for glaring self-aggrandizing. He abuses his position of trust by exploiting gullible faithfuls and "healing" them on his tv show, then telling them they should give, then sharing his address and toll free number with them. Pat Robertson helped his son Gordon cheat on his wife and they both continued their holy talk and "healings" and "words of knowledge" during Gordon's extramarital affair. Now this fake holyman Gordon is in his daddy's seat poised to bilk the next generation of gullible faithfuls. They point out who is sinning and who God is angry with, while they themselves are in sin. They smear anyone who asks them a reasonable question about their wrongs.
What has happened to Christianity is gross. What the mainstream media has allowed is gross. Many of those Fox anchors and reporters are guests on the 700 Club and CNN invites CBN reporters to discuss the "Christian" vote on their network. These "Christians" do not represent me. They certainly do not represent Christ.
Thank you for this essay. I wish the press would expose the hypocrisy of the Religious Right instead of giving them a forum. The spitefulness and hatefulness and powermongering I see in the Religious Right has sickened me. As a Christian, I am disgusted.
Ann Coulter says she is a Christian then says she will vote Democrat just for spite....a "Christian" who is spiteful. Out of the same mouth she claims to know Christ and spews hateful rhetoric against anyone who does not agree with her. She seems to have a special hatred for women. It makes me sick to see the way so many male reporters enjoy this vicious woman.
The influence of religion on american politics is sometimes ridiculous, sometimes tragic.
Read here
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/17/science/17einsteinw.html?em&ex=1211169600&en=ce2871d219de27ee&ei=5087%0A
in the NJT what one of our greatest thinkers - Albert Einstein - thought about the belief in god.
Please think also about the fact, that Germany did not participate in the Iraq war thanks to Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. He is two times divorced and an atheist, who never in his life attended any church (and nobody in Germany cares about that)
TheEuropean
Yeah, Schroeder was so loved that he lost re-election to the conservative Angela Merkel. What's your point?
the evangels put bush jr into office enough said.
they are war mongers pure and simple.
most americans are imperialists by calling mc war a war hero for bombing women and children in that other illegal war but evangels are pure self righteous war mongers.
americans so called war hero would have bombed every man woman and child in vietnam to win that illegal war so he could earn the respect of his grandfathers.
that is how insane this country is. pure war mongers and they cant see it for their nationalism and corp brainwashing for 60 years.
My friend (chuckle, chuckle), I am as anti-evangelical as you, and I am totally opposed to McCain. I cannot, however, share your conclusion that evangelicals are war mongers. Nor can I share your conclusion that McCain is called a war hero for bombing women and children in an illegal war. I was in that war although not voluntarily. I opposed that war, but it was not illegal. We were invited in by a lawful government unlike Iraq.
But more importantly, there is no evidence that I know of that McCain bombed women or children. The reason he is considered a hero is that he was a prisoner of war for more that five years. Much of that time he was tortured. He was given the opportunity to leave because his father was an admiral, and he refused to go before his fellow prisoners were released. Would you have chosen to stay a prisoner subject to torture? I doubt it.
McCain is a legitimate hero, but he is not suited to be President.
Posted May 16, 2008 | 10:30 AM (EST)