‘Raw Politics’: Religious right leaning toward Democrats?
Which should immediately start your head to spinning seeing as how much spinning is done in the article itself:
For decades, evangelicals have been seen as solid supporters of the Republican Party. That could be changing.
The religious right, a cornerstone of the so-called Reagan revolution — the battle over abortion law, and gay marriage — wants a change.
At least some evangelicals do.
A group of influential Christian leaders are declaring they are tired of divisive politics, tired of watching fights over some issues trump all the good they could be doing.
“Our proposal in [our] manifesto is to join forces with all those who support a civil public square. … a vision of public life in which people of all faiths — which, of course, means no faith — are free to enter and engage public life on the basis of their faith,” said evangelical leader Os Guinness.
~~~Mara Vanderslice of Common Good Strategies is part of that effort.
“I think the biggest thing that we’ve done wrong is sort of say that we just want a separation of church and state and only speak about religion in terms of separation,” Vanderslice said.
So the proof that the religious right will be heading Democrat way? Os Guinness, an angry evangelical who wrote a manifesto tackling both the right and the left for using religion for political purposes.
And Mara Vanderslice, a Democrat and one who helps Democrats with religious issues.
This is the evidence that the religious right will turn to the party who wants abortions legal? Gay marriage legal? Come on.
But they are putting up a good game of it. Pretending to represent a legitimate religious point of view while they utterly despise the people they’re attempting to deceive.
The article then moves onto Obama who did have some religious support but watched it quickly slip away for a few reasons we should all know by now….Rev. Wright:
In both states, frequent churchgoers were more apt to say they were influenced by Wright than were less actively religious voters. In North Carolina, among those who said they attend religious services weekly, nearly six in 10 called Wright important to their vote, almost double the figure among those who never attend services. Even among Obama’s own supporters in the Tarheel state, 45 percent who attend services weekly called the controversy important to their vote; among those, a third who rated it “very important.”
In Indiana, the issue also split voters: About half of those who attend services weekly or occasionally rated the Wright issue important, while only a third of those who never attend services said the same.
Oh, and the little issue of his support for infanticide:
At the federal level, legislation was presented called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) which stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.
BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote and by an overwhelming majority in the House. President Bush signed the bill into law in 2002.
Stanek wrote that, “in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.”
“Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women’s rights or abortionists’ rights. Obama’s clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed.”
He started in the right direction pulling those churchgoers in but when the Rev. Wright exposed his racist head, along with the bitter small towners clinging to guns and religion statement, and his record on abortion became known there is no way in hell the religious right is leaning towards this man.
See author page