|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: What has happened to the Religious Right?
|
ORGANMEISTER
Shipmate
# 6621
|
Posted
As I looked back over the last election it seems that the Religious Right was almost absent. Yes, there were some Baptists declaring that Romney wasn't a Chrisian and in the glory days of the RR that would have been enough to have derailed his nomination by the GOP. His mormonism doesn't seem to have mattered much.
Falwell is dead. Pat Robertson is still in Va Beach saying off-the-wall things but no one seems to be listening. Dobson and his successor occasionally mutter something signalling their displeasure with anything even remotely progressive but again, no one is listening. I assume Swaggart is in in La. and not soliciting hookers any longer. Tammy Fay is gone and I have no idea where Jim Bakker is.
These people and a few others once had a powerful hold on the GOP and could deliver huge blocs of votes, most of them white, conservative, evangelicals. Am I missing something or has the political power of the RR taken a nose dive? Will it recover? Your thoughts, please.
Posts: 3162 | From: Somerset, PA - USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
I think that the man in the religious-right pew was always more religious than right. My sense is that the leaders were a lot more political than the flock, and my guess is that it just plain wore thin. Recall that the same thing happened to the mainline churches, where the clergy were a lot more leftist than the congregation. Sooner or later, people get tired of being led where they just don't care to go.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
I think there was a political calculation to downplay most of the issues that get the religious right fired up. Notice how little was made of Obama's declaration of support for gay marriage, for example. Romney huge tack out toward the right during the primaries and back in to the center during the general election may have weakened enthusiasm for him.
If I'm being charitable, I like to think the GOP leaders have recognized that a strategy based on mobilizing white, evangelical voters in large numbers is going to lose by a larger and larger margin in coming years.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lawrence
Ship's Grill Master
# 4913
|
Posted
the Religous Right's power is in primaries. The Republican House is probably even more right wing and pro religious right than ever. In heavy republican leaning states the republican senators are more right wing and pro religious right. I agree that the Religious Right did not really put out for Romney and that is why pro religious right candidates kept in the race so long, the republican establishment had a lot of trouble delivering the nomination to Romney and he had to flip flop so bad he probably got whip lash. The religious right is out there and gearing up for the 2014 mid term primaries. They are down but they will be back.
Posts: 199 | From: Where once you could get a decent Brain Sandwich | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
And yet, I heard a snippet on NPR today about the "evangelical" voter -- not sure that's especially sysnonymous with the RR, but pretty sure it's not that far off, either -- forms 25% of the American electorate. Sorry, I don't know who was speaking or even what the show was, but it did seem an unlikely claim in light of the last election.
I think large swathes of people have got pretty fed up with ideology, period. They've been forced to see how it "works" -- or rather doesn't -- in Congress, and have chucked it.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ORGANMEISTER
Shipmate
# 6621
|
Posted
I had always expected that when it became obvious that Romney would be the nominee, the RR would hold their collective noses and vote for him or sit back and not vote at all, all the while waiting for 2014 or 2016.
Posts: 3162 | From: Somerset, PA - USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
These people and a few others once had a powerful hold on the GOP and could deliver huge blocs of votes, most of them white, conservative, evangelicals. Am I missing something or has the political power of the RR taken a nose dive? Will it recover? Your thoughts, please.
I've highlighted the critically important descriptor in your passage. The "Religious Right" was mostly an exercise in cloaking white American's anxieties on racial issues in a more marketable, less hateful-seeming religious mantle. The two intertwined factors involved in the decline of the American Religious Right as a political force are that Americans are less white (as a percentage) and that American whites are, on average, less anxious about racial issues. (Those that still have such anxieties are kicking them into overdrive with the current president.)
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angel Wrestler
Ship's Hipster
# 13673
|
Posted
Oh, the religious right is alive and well where I'm from. Their leaders may not be too relevant any more, but they've imparted their "wisdom" to the next generation, who are currently serving conservative churches. Any time I think they've worn out their welcome, I look at what is forwarded around facebook and all the mis-information and dis-information spouted by the fearful Christian right. There doesn't seem to be any convincing them that Obama is not a Muslim, is not going to appoint a committee of 15 people to decide whether each person with a chronic illness will (at best) be able to obtain his/her medications or (at worst) have the authority to euthanize people because that's what Obamacare is about. Producing his actual birth certificate has not been proof enough for the proofers, who have linked to a YouTube video where Michelle purportedly refers to Barack's home country as Kenya. His agenda is to turn the USA into a godless (or Muslim) socialist government.... and on and on.
The Christian right is alive and well, even if the leaders are has-beens. ... and people still listen to Pat Robertson *shudder*
**disclaimer** I do know and do acknowledge that just because one is a conservative Christian does not mean that one automatically believes all the rumors. I'm referring to the people in the local churches, who are the children produced by the marriage of conservative evangelical Christianity with the Republican Party. ... I seem to be talking in a circle. What I mean is that neither being Republican nor a conservative Christian means that a person has drunk the entire pitcher of kool aid, but
--------------------
The fact that no one understands you does not make you an artist.
(unknown)
Posts: 2767 | From: half-way up the ladder | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
Angel Wrestler, you left out the bit where Obama is coming to get all their guns.
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Jim Bakker is apparently still in the business.
I think that the focus has shifted from conservative evangelicals in particular to rural whites voters in general. I feel that libertarianism is turning out to be a broader target, so it's more popular.
I think that even a lot of evangelicals are embarrassed about gay marriage. Either they concede defeat or admit that they've spent their lives endorsing a monstrous social policy. It's more dignified to quietly exit that particular stage as quickly as possible.
Also, with Obama in the White House, I think the GOP doesn't have to work as hard to promote religious conservative views, since I imagine most conservative evangelicals who are politically active enough to be relied on to vote would vote for a Labrador Retriever before they'd vote for Obama.
I think the institution is gone, but the base is still there, and it's mutating.
For instance, something else that's struck me is that a lot of rural voters feel disenfranchied by major metropolitan areas (southern IL vs Chicago, Western MD vs Baltimore, Western VA vs. DC 'burbs.) They can play on that frustration while thumping the "We want less government*" drum as loudly as they can.
* Meaning we want less government controlled by people who aren't us.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
As often as the case, TClune summed it up quite well.
When the church meets it seems one of the things we are looking for is answers to what's keeping us up at night. The words of Christ and his apostles do it for me but not even the words of Ronaldus Magnus himself will.
To bring politics in to the church goes across about as well as the music show at the halftime of the Super Bowl. A few might be somewhat entertained but it's just beside the point.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ORGANMEISTER
Shipmate
# 6621
|
Posted
Croesos, I certainly agree that the RR represented a large racist factor, but the RR was and is still very much associated with the issues of abortion, gays, and women's rights. I'm quite sure that had Romney been elected he would have attempted to appoint SCOTUS justices who would have either overturned Roe v. Wade outright or in some way moved to virtually nullify it. I haven't heard much screaming from the RR regarding the President's inaugural speech where he very much stated his support for gay rights and women.
Let me ask another question. Both Falwell and Pat Robertson hoped to move their agendas by establishing colleges and especially law schools. I am under the impression that neither Liberty Univ. (Falwell) nor Regent (Robertson) have high reputations in academia. However, I do recall Bush II recruiting from Regent's law school to fill semi-important positions in the bureaucracy. Have either of these schools fulfilled their founder's ambitions?
Posts: 3162 | From: Somerset, PA - USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Both Falwell and Pat Robertson hoped to move their agendas by establishing colleges and especially law schools. I am under the impression that neither Liberty Univ. (Falwell) nor Regent (Robertson) have high reputations in academia.
In case anyone is interested, here is a 1995 article about the Religious Right by liberal theologian Harvey Cox, including a description of a trip he took to Regent in order to give a guest lecture.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lawrence
Ship's Grill Master
# 4913
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
And yet, I heard a snippet on NPR today about the "evangelical" voter -- not sure that's especially sysnonymous with the RR, but pretty sure it's not that far off, either -- forms 25% of the American electorate.
Here is the key about that 25%, they will vote in large numbers in the primaries, they will vote in large numbers in the general election. Primaries usually have an overall low voter turnout and mid-term elections will have a much lower voter turn out than the presidential election. So the RR will get out and vote for their candidates in the Republican Primiaries and they will get out and vote for those candidates in the general election. In heavy Republican areas that will matter and ensure their candidates election. They may have more trouble in electing a President (depends on the Dem's candidate and the ability to turn out that non-white vote in the general election) but they will be loaded for bear in 2016 for the Republican nomination for president.
Posts: 199 | From: Where once you could get a decent Brain Sandwich | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
Croesos, I certainly agree that the RR represented a large racist factor, but the RR was and is still very much associated with the issues of abortion, gays, and women's rights.
I'm not sure I can agree there. The American Religious Right is anti-abortion and anti-gay, but to claim that these are positions with a lengthy pedigree is historical revisionism. I'll grant you that the Religious Right has a legitimate history of being anti-woman. Religious conservatives have been fighting that battle since before women got the vote (and well before the "Religious Right" emerged as an organized political entity).
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
Let me ask another question. Both Falwell and Pat Robertson hoped to move their agendas by establishing colleges and especially law schools.
Falwell actually started with Lynchburg Christian Academy, a segregation academy designed to provide a "whites only" alternative to racially integrated public schools. Liberty University came later.
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
I am under the impression that neither Liberty Univ. (Falwell) nor Regent (Robertson) have high reputations in academia. However, I do recall Bush II recruiting from Regent's law school to fill semi-important positions in the bureaucracy. Have either of these schools fulfilled their founder's ambitions?
Depends on which ambitions you're talking about. Lynchburg Christian Academy (later re-named Liberty Christian Academy) is now a racially-integrated school, so that ambition has failed rather dramatically. As for being a useful ladder into government, it seemed to work for a while but then came the news reports about how most of the big fuckups of the Coalition Provisional Authority were the result of unqualified Liberty University graduates being given positions of authority. In other words, the schools are now regarded as diploma mills, so their ability to infiltrate the U.S. government is dependent on a true believer (like Bush, Jr.) holding the reins of power.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
I had always expected that when it became obvious that Romney would be the nominee, the RR would hold their collective noses and vote for him or sit back and not vote at all, all the while waiting for 2014 or 2016.
Billy Graham actually endorsed Romney! We live in very strange times. We've also seen the Catholic Church in league with the LDS in recent years, and I suspect the role the LDS played in 2008's passing of California's Prop 8 and other similar initiatives in other states helped mainstream the LDS church among conservative Christians, who seem more and more to have defined themselves against those churches that are supportive of LGBT rights and inclusion.
The strangest thing I noticed this past election was how many conservative Protestants suddenly became anti-birth control. It's hard to tell how much of this was a way of securing the partnership of the Catholic Church and how much was "if Obama is for it, I'm against it," which seems to be the official Republican platform in one line.
The conservative Christians in my family and among my facebook friends were very certain that it was a Christian duty to vote against Obama and, really, any Democrats. Same as it's been for a few decades now. The leaders of the Religious Right may be gone or senile mostly, but the effects of their movement isn't gone, in my experience. They succeeded in convincing huge numbers of ordinary people that God wants them to vote Republican (in most cases, all the while claiming to be Independents). And people actually do still listen to Dobson. People I know do, anyway.
Some of the children of the former leaders of the Religious Right aren't as famous, but they are carrying on their parents' work. In other cases, the torch has been passed to one or more second-generation leaders who are still at work, but in a less superstar-oriented way. They know the model of the famous televangelist has been discredited, so that's not how they work anymore.
And, yes, Jim Bakker is back, selling survival kits. He only seems to say, vaguely, that there are "hard times" ahead, leaving it to his viewer to fill in what that means precisely - economic failure? war? the Great Tribulation? persecution by the black president with the funny name? Pick your own conspiracy theory, just buy the overpriced dehydrated food and emergency candles. It's good business, really, and still with a religious patina.
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
Billy Graham actually endorsed Romney!
Maybe.
quote:
Billy Graham’s other regret — his attempt to be a political kingmaker — was a sin of commission, and thus this regret was much more acute. He has spoken many times with genuine horror and remorse over the way he was seduced into partisan support for President Richard Nixon, expressing deep shame for the taped conversation in which he joined Nixon’s anti-Semitic rant against a supposed Jewish “stranglehold” on the media.
Graham has apologized for that lapse in judgment, and he has demonstrated the sincerity of that apology over the years that followed by never again allowing himself to be used as a political tool for one candidate’s partisan agenda, never again inserting himself into electoral politics, never again sanctioning one party and one politician as God’s annointed.
Never again. Until now.
Now, very suddenly, we are being asked to believe that the Rev. Billy Graham, at 93 years old, has completely changed his mind about both of the regrets he has repeatedly lamented over the past 20 years. We are asked to believe that Billy Graham has abruptly changed who he has been for many decades, casting aside everything he has been telling us he learned from his many years in ministry.
Now, all of a sudden, we are being asked to believe that what Billy Graham really regrets was that he wasn’t more actively opposed to civil rights, and that he wasn’t more directly involved as a power-player in partisan power-politics.
Bullshit.
In short, a whole lot of the statements being put out recently by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association under Billy Graham's name sound a lot more like Franklin Graham than they sound like Billy.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I certainly see libertarianism being favoured by many conservative evangelicals in the US. Quiverfullers/Dominionists etc are going more and more isolationist too.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
Oh, thanks, Croesos! That's a little sigh of relief. It does go to show, though, how stealthily Religious Right: The Next Generation is carrying on with the mission.
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
