According to polls 73 percent of WHITE evangelicals will be voting for Mitt Romney.
If the polls are correct here's the question I'd like to ask evangelicals using their own style of language/concerns/theological thinking as applied to their choice:
What's the explanation for the fact that WHITE American evangelicals made the allegedly philandering lying ignorant braggart lapsed Roman Catholic Dinesh D'Souza their anti-Obama hero, embrace a pro-choice Mormon bishop who promoted abortion and Planned Parenthood in MA, are working to elect a job-destroying tax-avoiding lying flip-flopping-tell-anyone-anything-they-want-to-hear Swiss bank account collecting draft dodger running with a disciple of the God-hating, Jesus-mocking hater-of-the-poor Ayn Rand, for their presidential candidate and look the other way as a crazed ultra-Zionist many Israeli Jews fear billionaire casino owner who is being investigated for allegedly making billions off the dirtiest Chinese gambling Communist Party-controlled outfit in the world funds the enterprise, at the very same time as Franklin Graham sold his ailing father Billy's soul and denied core evangelical theology by taking Mormonism off the Billy Graham organization's list of cults in order to help the Mormon pagan-ritual-performing, Trinity-denying, casino-money-grubbing billionaire-coddling, earth-destroying global-warming denying Mormon bishop win respectability for his dead-Jews-baptizing-polygamy-rooted-reality-denying-interplanetary Masonic lodge-embracing faith in an election against an exemplary modest faithful husband good father compassionate smart BLACK evangelical Christian President who's major accomplishments include saving the economy, ending a war, killing our greatest enemy, giving health care to children and the poor and the "least of these" and who has tried to reduce the number of abortions by helping women escape poverty in a reenactment of the lesson of the parable of the Good Samaritan?
Go figure.
Your thoughts please in the comment section...
Frank Schaeffer is a writer and author of many books including Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back .
Follow Frank Schaeffer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/frank_schaeffer
But let's set that aside and here's a guess at why thinking evangelicals would've supported a Mormon over a Socialist revolutionary. The twentieth century. That's the answer. In the 20th century socialism spawned more slaughter, slavery, suffering, oppression and war-mongering than all religions in all the rest of history combined. It particularly enslaved, imprisoned and executed Christians. Perhaps that history might have caused some Christians some concerns for the future of North America. Mormonism on the other hand arguably coerced (or cajoled) its members into long-lasting, loyal marriages (the one man and one woman kind), and these marriages produced stability, wealth and more than the average number of children. I can see how your new readership would be horrified and incensed by that. How outre. How intolerant. How so last century.
So that's my answer to your question. Here's a question I have for you, dear uncle. Why is it that so many historically Orthodox nations fell prey to oppressive communist totalitarian dictatorships? How does that historical fact impact the Orthodox perspective on public policy and governance today? Is the Orthodox voice not compromised by its collusion with oppression last century?
Oh hey and since we're insulting church affiliations here. I've always wondered why so many historically Orthodox nations fell prey to horrifying communist dictatorships. Do you have any explanation for that? What does that historical fact say about the Orthodox perspective on public policy and government today? Isn't it fatally compromised by it's collaboration with dictatorship last century?
It is not "name-calling" for Frank to ACCURATELY describe the behavior and attitudes of the people of whom he wrote. Of course, nobody likes wearing the shoe that fits when it's an ugly shoe.
What has discouraged me this election is the hateful and, quite frankly, juvenile rhetoric that has been taken to new lows. Romney is as moderate as they come--to depict him as some "right wing nut" is not only disingenuous, it is stupid.
So, if you think Obama has done a good job, vote for him. If you think Romney could do a better job, vote for him. Be a grown-up and vote on the issues. But if you buy into the mind-numbing, inflammatory, hateful rhetoric coming from the partisan talking-heads, you're no better than the sheep in "Animal Farm" that march in lock-step to the pig leadership and thoughtlessly repeat, "Four legs good! Two legs bad!"
Quote; I'd like to ask evangelicals using their own style of language/concerns/theological thinking as applied to their choice:
What was said about Romney seems to be pretty accurate from the amount of info one can find on him. Mitt may have change some since he's been Govenor. No I don't think he is a bad man!
From" Obama Wins: So Christians, Will It Be More Hate or Jesus? "
There's no reason that Christians can't distance ourselves from a political movement dedicated to willful ignorance. It's time to put following Jesus ahead of denying other people their basic human rights, their basic humanity and trying to win elections even when it costs your soul.
I love your run-on question.
Uh, that is NOT how WHITE evangelicals, in their own "style of language" would describe Obama. Not exemplary, certainly not modest, compassionate when it serves him, smart especially in his own mind and those of his slobbering syncophants, half-black and liberation-theology President, is more like it.
All that said... I really find Romney and Ryan to be about the two greasiest, unsavory characters I have ever seen. Slow-mow through the last debate and see of you want a president who pulls off facial expressions like those... and tell me how many of them don't look sinister.
Thank you very much for a GREAT article; 5 STARS!!!
Please keep on writing...
Bravo, Frank!