Posted on 09/30/2007 5:50:41 PM PDT by Dubya
WASHINGTON — Palm Sunday two years ago was a glorious day for Christian conservatives.
A president who'd proclaimed Jesus his favorite philosopher was racing back from vacation to sign a bill rushed through a compliant Congress at their bidding — a last-minute gamble to keep alive a severely brain-damaged woman in Florida.
That, however, was the peak of the Christian conservatives' political power.
Today, their nearly three-decade-long ascendance in the Republican Party is over. Their loyalties and priorities are in flux, the organizations that gave them political muscle are in disarray, the high-profile preachers who led them to influence through the 1980s and 1990s are being replaced by a new generation that's less interested in their agenda and their hold on politics and the 2008 Republican presidential nomination is in doubt.
"Less than four years after declarations that the Religious Right had taken over the Republican Party, these social conservatives seem almost powerless to influence its nomination process," said W. James Antle III, an editor at the American Spectator magazine who's written extensively about religious conservatives.
"They have the numbers. They have the capability. What they don't have is unity or any institutional leverage."
The Religious Right never had absolute power in the Republican Party. It never got the Republican president and Republican Congress to pursue a constitutional amendment banning abortion, for example.
But it did have enormous clout in party politics and a big voice in policy, and it's lost much of both heading into 2008.
In the presidential campaign, for example, candidate Rudy Giuliani consistently leads national polls of likely Republican voters despite his support for abortion rights and gay rights, not to mention his three marriages.
Fred Thompson boasts of a strong voting record against abortion, yet he admitted recently that he doesn't go to church regularly and wouldn't support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage because he'd rather leave it to the states.
"He is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians," social conservative James Dobson said sarcastically in an e-mail to fellow conservatives. "Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me."
Yet Thompson's support as measured by polls nationally and in the early voting states apparently hasn't suffered.
And all of the top Republican candidates felt free to skip a values forum in Florida organized by some of the country's top social conservatives, including Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation, Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum and Don Wildmon of the American Family Association.
The candidates will appear at a similar values voters gathering in Washington, D.C., but the snub of such high-profile social conservatives in a politically important state such as Florida would have been unlikely in the 1980s or 1990s.
"None of these candidates are ignoring conservative Christians," said John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron, "but they're not giving them as much attention as occurred in past elections. … There is at least the perception that these voters don't have the influence they once had."
In church, the generation of politically active, high profile evangelists such as Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell is giving way to new preachers such as Joel Osteen and Rick Warren, who shun partisan politics or are willing to embrace Democrats.
Warren, for example, hosted Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois at his California mega-church. He cites AIDS, poverty and illiteracy as top issues, not gay marriage or abortion.
In elections, the organizations that once gave political focus to Christian conservatives and turned their passions into votes have splintered or disappeared.
The biggest of them all, the Christian Coalition, is a shell of its former self. Its budget has crashed from a 1996 peak of $26 million to about $1 million. Its new director wants to expand to issues besides abortion and marriage. And state chapters in Alabama, Georgia, Iowa and Ohio have parted ways with the group they think is now too liberal.
Keith Appell, a Republican strategist, thinks that social conservatives appear less influential only because they're divided over the 2008 candidates and have lost the megaphone they once had in strong groups and high-profile leaders.
"There's a leadership vacuum that has not been filled," Appell said. "The longer it goes unfilled, the more the perception increases that their influence has decreased."
In the country, many people have shifted priorities. Even among white evangelical Christians, Iraq and other domestic issues are now more important than social issues, according to a recent poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
One reason could be that religious conservatives are victims of their own success. They managed to win a ban on late-term abortions and see it upheld by the Supreme Court. They helped drive dozens of states to adopt constitutional amendments or laws against gay marriage.
"Marriage doesn't seem to have the immediacy it had," said Green of the University of Akron, who is also a scholar at the Pew Forum.
Another could be that issues like abortion, which were more prominent in the relative peace and prosperity of the 1990s, have been trumped by war and the threat of terrorism in the 2000s.
"Some of the social issues have receded a bit," Green said. "The rise of the social issues was fairly dramatic toward the end of 1990s and start of the new century. But after 9-11, foreign policy again became a very important thing. People's priorities do change with events."
Many social conservatives themselves are debating their political priorities, with some suggesting that fighting AIDS or poverty is as or more important than defending heterosexual marriage. That could further complicate the political role of Christian conservatives — if Republicans nominate Giuliani.
"They are making a very grave miscalculation if they nominate a pro-choice candidate like Giuliani," said Richard Land, a Tennessee evangelist and the president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
"Most evangelicals have been voting Republican because they were given a bright-line choice between a pro-life candidate and a pro-choice candidate. If that issue were taken off the table, then other issues get oxygen, issues where evangelicals are not nearly as certain that Republicans offer the best answer. Issues like economic justice, racial reconciliation, the environment.
"If the Republicans are foolish enough to nominate a pro-choice candidate, they give the Democrats a license to go hunting evangelical votes."
McClatchy Newspapers 2007
The MSM is working hard to create cracks in the GOP
They hope the Christians fold while the Mooselimbs grow stronger.
Here is my bet ... Conservatives will be around a lot longer than McClatchy Newspapers.
The only change I see is in the Republican Party itself. They don't want the Christian vote.
Christians have a right and a duty to participate in the political process -- even rotten, phony, liberal Christians. If people get mad about it then they need to control their own irrational emotions. No one is calling for legislating theology. The separate spheres are perfectly safe even if we someday win both a life amendment and a marriage amendment.
Hitlery can unite Evangelicals.
We know an antichrist wantabe when we see one.
“Steven Thomma”
Has never taken the time to meet one. He, is writing and causing global warming from a huge lack of knowledge.
They only wish -- we have read the end of the Book and we already know Who wins!
The MSM is working quadruple overtime.
Evangelicals think F.Thompson is a vampire.
Guiliani is Reagan’s love child.
Dobson to run for pope.
Could they be more transparent. They think it is 1970.
Not if Rudy is the alternative.
It only takes one man that is faithful to the Lord, willing to do his will, and to strive to follow God’s word (and that includes in politics) to make a difference- Christian conservatives can easily come back all we need is one to say “Lord here I am, take me (use me)”.
Like the profits of Old..!
Like the profits of Old..!
LOL!
Profits can be prophetic, much like today’s weather is, on average, a better indicator of tomorrow’s than the official forecast. But, when it comes right down to it, much as I like the profits, both old and new, I prefer the prophets of old.
Dr. Land is right on the money.
The only question is whether the religious right is going to take its ball and go home.
Personally, I am not.
But do you believe in Wall Street prophets?
They sure are.
There’s a big difference between merely giving credence to, and belief.
What you said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.