Democrats Eye Evangelical Vote (they don't get it)

Focus on the Family ^ | January 18, 2005 | Keith Peters

[DBeers]

The party of abortion has tapped a leader from the religious left to help it get back in the good graces of the red states.

Democrats are looking for ways to tap the evangelical vote that went so strongly for Republicans and President Bush in November, so they've enlisted the leader of Sojourners, Jim Wallis, to help improve their party's poor image in the eyes of Christians.

Wallis, one of the leaders of the evangelical left, told The New York Times that Democrats have a problem: They are being perceived as secular fundamentalists.

Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association, said they're perceived that way because that's, in large part, what they are — thanks to the Hollywood elite, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other secular interest groups.

"It's a very secular, very humanist philosophy that they embrace, and it's very hostile to evangelical Christianity," he explained. "So until that changes, Democrats are not going anywhere with evangelical voters."

Wallis also said Democrats must better explain the moral and religious foundations behind their policies designed to help the poor. Wildmon doesn't buy it.

"Democrats traditionally have favored big government programs," Wildmon said, "and the Republicans supported by a lot of evangelical Christians have been in favor of free market ideas or private charity ideas or people getting jobs who are able to work."

Dr. Janice Crouse, who heads the Beverly LaHaye Institute at Concerned Women for America, said Wallis and the Democrats seem to think all the solutions to what society needs can be found in government.

"Anybody who has looked at history," she said, "will understand that you cannot change social structure and change people's hearts, you have to begin by changing people's hearts, thereby changing the social structure."

Wallis was not available for comment.

[DBeers]

LMAO - they still don't get it....

From: Sounds Like a (Liberal) Theocracy to Me

-snip-

"The big lie is on its way. The rhetoric will shift to moral values of another type: the environment, helping the poor, health care, and war and peace issues. For decades, liberals have been saying that religion must be kept separate from politics, unless, of course, the Bible can be used to support a liberal agenda. Last night, I heard Cornell West of Princeton cite the passage from Amos 5:24 that appears on the civil rights memorial in Montgomery, Alabama: "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." For him, "justice" is using civil government to take money from "the rich" and give it to the poor. Theft, even if it's done by politicians, is not justice. In reality, the poor are hurt by high taxes. It's spending, saving, and investing that makes an economy grow. There would be no shortage of jobs if taxes were reduced by at least 50%."

"Just prior to the election, I debated Jim Wallis, editor of Sojourners magazine. Wallis took the position that the Bible addresses more than just abortion and homosexuality. He claimed that there are 2000 verses that speak to poverty. This may be true, but he never said how the Bible actually describes how the poor should be helped. Like Cornell West and Jesse Jackson, who's using the same post-election moral rhetoric, his solution is to give civil government more authority to confiscate wealth and redistribute it to the poor. As Gary North writes, liberal "values are about sticking a gun into a successful person's belly, taking his wallet, removing an unstated percentage of the money, and handing the wallet back. 'See you at the next election.'""

-snip-

[hiredhand]

SHHHHH! Don't tell them anything! Let them spend their money, and expend their efforts!

In the end, they'll simply have less money, and be frustrated.

You're correct. They do NOT get it.

[MisterRepublican]

"Wallis, one of the leaders of the evangelical left, told The New York Times that Democrats have a problem: They are being perceived as secular fundamentalists."

Well, now see that's just wrong. Most Democrats are atheists.

[GOP_1900AD]

They probably sensed some of the frustration on the parts of cultural conservatives with the Center Right, current majority faction in the GOP. However, how can leftists win those who are to the Right of the current GOP controllers? Of course they could only do it by trickery.

[bray]

BTW, how did that Roundy Rounder vote go for the Rats??? This strategy seems about as likely!

Pray for W and Our Troops

[steplock]

He's a "evangelical left" ???

Well, in that case, I am the best COMMUNIST republican you can find! If you want to know anything good about communism, socialsm, fascism - I am your man!

I am the pre-eminent authority on all things tyrannical!

[PistolPaknMama]

very hostile to evangelical Christianity," he explained. "So until that changes, Democrats are not going anywhere with evangelical voters."

Do they want to change the Demoncrats to fit in with the Evangelicals or do they want to change the Evangelicals? Somehow the National and World Councils of Churches came under this secular dogma. Some of their web pages look like thier lift right off the UN website...the antithesis to freedom and Christianty.

[ViLaLuz]

I'm a liberal Democrat and I believe in God.

I AM GOD!

[umgud]

I believe that DU represents a good cross-section of the far left. I also believe that the far left is in control of the dem party. I go to DU for kicks and also to see their thought process. I've seen their threads on Michael Nudow and his fight against prayer, the evolution threads and many others. Trust me, those in control of the dem party are never gonna get the evangelical vote.

[bilhosty]

I think this is one thing that actually galvanized the religious right in the 1980's. these people had actually took over many main line and other church's and alienated everybody causing a reaction.

I give it about a zero chance of working. I grew up in a church on a college campus where about half of the congregation were from the campus and half were ordinary people from the community. We were blamed for poverty, racism, the Vietnam war etc. We were told that when we ate something somebody in India starved and on and on an on. I found out that the people from the congregation who were not affiliated with the campus completely saw through them and while they stayed quiet they were totally unmoved.

That won't deter liberals. They are good arguers and very verbal. That is one of their strong points and also their weak point. They think they can just talk people into accepting their point of view by persuasion and debate. They of course thought we could persuade the Soviets to give up their arms by just appealing to the goodness that exists in every bodies heart etc.,etc. Of course they lost 7 out of 10 elections which just goes to show about how their persuasive powers are.

The weak point of this is, people who are good talkers are poor listeners. And listening is the crucial skill of a politician, The Republican's are better listeners.

[xJones]

Let's see, um, first they could haul Michael Moore around to a few Full Gospel churches, and after the deliverence (which might take weeks) he could attend a few Southern Baptist, Church of Christ, Nazarene, and Assembly of God churches. And if Evangelicals could film all that and make a movie of it, we might even love him.:)

[DBeers]

Wallis, one of the leaders of the evangelical left, told The New York Times that Democrats have a problem...

Yes, their problem is they have the same modernist immoral values as Wallis...

LOL! -the blind leading the blind...

[holyscroller]

"Wallis, one of the leaders of the evangelical left, told The New York Times that Democrats have a problem: They are being perceived as secular fundamentalists."

Uh, wrong Wally. They're perceived as hell-bent heathen baby-killers. You can put lipstick on this pig, but it's still gonna be a pig.

[carlr]

"Do they want to change the Demoncrats to fit in with the Evangelicals or do they want to change the Evangelicals?"

Neither.What they wan`t is the Jimmy Carter trick.Fool people into believing that they support a evangelical religious life when in truth they have no use for it past the voting booth.
Carter ran as an evangelical but his cozying up to some of the worlds most anti-Christian monsters would indicate something other.

[hiredhand]

Good points! I "think" the issue here is one of the heart. The leftists have a goal, or "agenda" to appeal to us evangelicals. Although some of us might even smile and talk to them, they are easy to spot, and soon give themselves away and show their vile personalities.

To them, this is a strategic endevour. They have no real desire to actually spend THEIR money, or time helping those in need. THAT sort of action takes a correct "heart" which only comes from the Lord.

God's Word is indeed correct when it states that you can tell a tree by it's fruit.

It's just ironic that they lack the ability to be sincere....which is exactly what they must be to win evangelicals.

[DBeers]

well said!

[bilhosty]

Their view of biblical literature is that whatever is left is the biblical way. And what is not left is not biblical. Just like their lawyers whatever is left is the constitution and whatever is not is against the constitution. They seem to have no passion for anything that is not on their political agenda. No wonder they love the constitution and the bible so much. You can see straight through them.

[joesnuffy]

The only benefit democrats will ever get from Christian Evangelical conservatives...is that moderate conservatives may cause them to stay home next election day...

-broken promises on social issues

imo

[PistolPaknMama]

Fool people into believing that they support a evangelical religious life

The libs may own whorleywood and the main scream media, but the conservatives own the internet and the radio. If the internet had been as big in the Carter days, he would ever have won. Voters today are more savy and educated and certainly have access to more information than CBS, NBC and ABC would like you to have.

[FeeinTennessee]

Funny...ROTF! Desperation in the democrat camp has turned to full blown insanity!

[Safrguns]

What they fail to realize is that the democratic party has traditionally shared a very fair share of the evangelical/christian vote... and that just within the past decade they have been losing those voters in droves. (Thank you God for Bill Clinton!) It's a massive hemmorage of their arteries, and they act now as if it is a new demographic group to pursue... not one that they are losing. I personally know that there are christians who supported Kerry... one lives just across the street from me, which of course I REALLY find odd. However, as more and more christians WAKE UP, the parties will become more and more polarized, and the dems will become even more confused about why their tactics aren't working.

[Ethyl]

evangelical left

Isn't that an oxymoron???

[Raycpa]

Preaching the social gospel is not new. In fact its been preached since the 60's. What is new is its being rejected by evangelicals.

[mowkeka]

Hey, as long as they distance themselves from the ACLU and the Hollywood elite, I'm happy.

[AZ_Cowboy]

"Wallis, one of the leaders of the evangelical left, told The New York Times that Democrats have a problem: They are being perceived as secular fundamentalists."

That kook Wallis was on the TV last night, pushing exactly what was suggested above using the ubiquitous left-wing codeword of "social justice". While it is true that the Bible has lots to say regarding the poor, nowhere does it say, "goeth ye to the palace to request they taketh the gold of thy neighbor."

Being part of the Evangelical Left is sort of like being part of Jews for Hitler.

[gitmo]

Isaiah 5:18

Woe to those who drag iniquity with the cords of falsehood, And sin as if with cart ropes; Who say, "Let Him make speed, let Him hasten His work, that we may see it;

And let the purpose of the Holy One of Israel draw near and come to pass, that we may know it!"

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

[hiredhand]

It's just ironic. I believe that this year more than I can ever remember, pastors, elders, and church leadership made sure that the truth of the left was exposed from the pulpit. There's a very good reason why we came out in droves against the leftists.

They believe that by changing their rhetoric, they'll win our hearts. They are just too easy to spot. Far too many people of faith now associate liberals, leftists, and communists all together as one. It's not something that the left is likely to overcome anytime soon, try as they might.

:-)

[chuckles]

....."nowhere does it say, "goeth ye to the palace to request they taketh the gold of thy neighbor".......

It does say "Thou shalt not steal.", however. And that is what liberals "feel" makes them "good" people. The Bible specifically adresses "His" sheep, not the government. "We" are the ones instructed to give to the poor, not have the government steal from people and distribute it.

I have a lot of problems with churches that have multi million dollar building programs, but no soup kitchen. If a begger comes to me, I'm expected to deal with the person, not direct him to the government agency that might help him. Sacrifice is how we glorify our Father, not showing him the welfare office.

One of the reasons we have abortion and gay marraige at the top of the left's agenda is to make the line so bright for Christians, we dare not cross over. We as Christians have accepted adultry, fornication, lying, stealing, and many other sins in our own flocks. Somebody, somewhere has to say "NO FURTHER!" The left is counting on the rednecks from the red states to be easily fooled into thinking God wants them to steal from Bill Gates to give to the poor. It's still stealing, no matter how you feel about Bill Gates. What was the 10th commandment again?

When Jesus told the rich young ruler to sell all his stuff and give it to the poor, He didn't say give it to the government. I am happy when people make money, I hope I get some some day. But I believe it is given to test the person as to their service to God. Most fail because the money becomes their idol and they cannot have 2 masters.

All this is called "Christian fundamentalism". These are principals that are not taught to many today. If the Church is going to let pop culture dictate "What God really meant when He said, so and so", then we are in big trouble as a religion. Many of us need to get off the "milk" and on to the "meat", ASAP.

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

This is just another chapter of subverting Christian values to promote a strictly secular, utopian, and perverted agenda. It's been going on for a long time, e.g.,

The War for Righteousness: Progressive Christianity, the Great War, and the Rise of the Messianic Nation
by Richard M. Gamble
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1932236163/qid=1106191017/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-4164284-3976918?v=glance&s=books

From the Publisher

"They died to save their country and they only saved the world."

This line, the final one in G. K. Chesterton's poem, "The English Graves," serves for Richard Gamble as an interpretive key to a peculiarly important moment in American history: the time of the First World War, when progressive Christian leaders in America transformed themselves from principled pacifists to crusading interventionists. The consequence of this momentous shift, says Gamble was the triumph of the idea that America has been destined by divine Providence to bring salvation to the less enlightened nations of the world.

In The War for Righteousness, Gamble reconstructs the inner world of the social gospel clergy, tracing the evolution of the clergy's interventionist ideology from its roots in earlier efforts to promote a modern, activist Christianity. He shows how these clergy eventually came to see their task as world evangelization for the new creed of democracy and internationalism, and ultimately for the redemption of civilization itself through the agency of total war. World War I thus became a transcendent moment of fulfillment. In the eyes of the progressive clergy, the years from 1914 to 1918 presented an unprecedented opportunity to achieve their vision of a world transformed--the ancient dream of a universal and everlasting kingdom of peace, justice, and righteousness. American sacrifice was necessary not only to save the country, but to save the entire world.

Vividly narrating how the progressive clergy played a surprising role in molding the public consensus in favor of total war, Gamble engages the broader question of religion's role in shaping the modern American mind and the development, at the deepest levels, of the logic of messianic interventionism both at home and abroad. This timely book not only fills a significant gap in our collective memory of the Great War, it also helps demonstrate how and why that war heralded the advent of a different American self-understanding.

[zert_28]

I read Doofus Underground too and there is a segment of the left that hates Christianity and wants nothing to do with Christians.

Instead of getting evangelical to vote Democratic, my belief that the atheistic left is going to drive Christians out of the party.

[dandiegirl]

I wonder if Hillary has ever read this passage?

[Tall_Texan]

"Okay, lithen up you Jethus freaks! We tolerant Democrats want you to vote for uth becauth we're thenthative and we rethpect everyone. Just don't bring any thnakes, okay?"

"And ferchristhakes would you PLEATHE cut out that praying! We hate it when you do that! Who the hell do you think you're talking to with that crap anyway?"

[still_learning]

"Wallis also said Democrats must better explain the moral and religious foundations behind their policies designed to help the poor."

Oh, I remember the second part of Luke's Gospel "Acts of the Bureaucrats".

[Clintonfatigued]

If the 'Rats were to drop their support for or take a neutral position on the social issues (abortion, gay marriage, gun control, religious displays, bioethics), they could win back some of the Evangelicals with economic issues. But they would have to do some MAJOR restructiring in both the leadership and grass roots, and such a thing couldn't be accomplished in a single election cycle.

[umgud]

Agreed