Skip to comments.Evangelicals -- A Drag on or Essential to the GOP?
Posted on 11/20/2008 5:24:05 PM PST by lancer256
A good friend of mine (let's call him Bob) is convinced that unless the GOP puts abortion "aside as its focal point, it simply cannot win and regain power." That's especially interesting in light of Kathleen Parker's latest column, which disses the evangelical wing of the GOP.
Bob's point is that "we've lost a majority of women over this issue as they have become one-issue voters." It's not only liberal women but also others who believe it's simply not the government's business.
Kathleen Parker broadens the point considerably beyond abortion: "The evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh." Since the 1980s or so, says Parker, the GOP "has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners. ... The GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. In the process, the party has alienated its non-base constituents."
I'll resist the temptation to respond specifically to Kathleen's uncharitable indictment of us knuckle draggers because I like Kathleen personally and because I want to respond to her and Bob's overlapping contention that certain social conservatives are dragging the party down.
(Excerpt) Read more at davidlimbaugh.com ...
“Kathleen Parker broadens the point considerably beyond abortion: “The evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP”
This woman has done far more harm to the conservative cause over the last three months than any Democrat has.
If the GOP thinks the Evangelicals are a drag, we can go elsewhere. Sayonara.
She has done zero harm because she is absolutely nobody. Those morons are only made important by political junkies.
I dare the GoP to keep moving left.
Ignore them again and see how it works.
Maybe we should all get together and form our own party ...
They said the same thing after the 1992 elections, dubbed by the media as "The Year of the Woman". There was also a Kathleen Parker type pundit that year, though he was a male. His name was Kevin Phillips. He had been a GOP pundit for years, but he became a media darling in 1992 by predicting the GOP would die unless it dumped the religious right, particularly the pro-lifers. Not many people today remember Kevin Phillips. Kathleen Parker should prepare for a similar fate.
I am hardly an Evangelical, but if the GOP abandons abortion as an issue (what’s this “focal point”?) my support drops further.
This woman is a retard and should be ignored.
That being said, her argument isn’t completely without merit. Voting coaltions based on social preferences is not an enduring coalition. Only economic conditions are enduring.
The GOP didn’t lose because of abortion; it lost because it lost credibility on the economy, the tax issue, and on fiscal conservatism.
Still ignoring a voting block that represents 26% of the electorate and breaks almost 3 to 1 towards the GOP is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life.
Maybe we should just give up on the south as well and fall back to conservatism’s last redoubt in Oklahoma and Kansas.
The republican party - agree on anything?
The republican party - come together and vote in a bloc?
It just ain’t gonna happen.
Too many splinters.
Too many haters.
Too many one-issue voters.
It’s like herding cats.
We are therefore doomed.
“We have seen the enemy and he is us.” - pogo
yeah...he was such a Gergen
yeah I’m not going to fight to give tax cuts for people who want to kill babies.
Get a load of this nonsense...
She wants to boot 25-40% of the Party in hopes of gaining a couple percent of the middle. Brilliant!
Right after the election, the gay barbarians are on the rampage again. They are attacking and invading churches and now we hear that the dating service E Harmony was just forced by a judge to offer a website to the homosexuals even though there are plenty of gay dating services already.
The social issues are not going away. It is obvious that the crazies are just going to get more crazy and in-your-face. They will not quit until life is absolutely intolerable.
People who do not understand the importance of social issues are without vision. Man does not live by bread alone. It is not just about the economy. Unfortunely there are too many people in both the Democrat and Republican parties who just don’t get it.
The GOP is a drag on Christianity.
Only somewhat less so than the DemonRATs.
From what I can tell, a majority in BOTH parties disagree with the following.
* Abortion is MURDER
* Euthanasia is MURDER
* Homosexual behavior is a SIN.
* Divorce for any other reason than sexual impurity is SIN.
* If a man will not work, neither should he eat.
This is absolutely correct but it's also a simple fact that the Republican party needs RINOS to win elections.
Ah, I see... It's OK if women are one-issue voters over abortion, but bad if conservatives and evangelicals are.
I'm a pro-life conservative atheist who is disgusted at the cr*p piled on "the religious right" by the media, RINOs, and libs.
Correct. However the the groups that vote Republicans are much closer to each other socially and economically then the factions that vote democrat. The democrat party is made of absolute opposites.
as it was Sarahcuda made it a horse race...
Parker is a traitor, she has no say in what the GOP should do.
Explain how you are different from a dem if you’re for abortion.
McCain being unable to differentiate himself from Obama was why he lost.
The strongest arguments against Obama came from Palin, McCain just made grunting sounds about reaching across the aisle when what we are wanting is someone that will fight, someone that will articulate what conservatism is about.
Yes - there are a lot of women who only vote on that issue and I think they are morons - I, as a female myself, think there are more issues out there that trump whether someone is pro-life or pro-choice - you have to look at all the issues and platforms of the party - plus - as long as nobody is forcing their belief system on you then it should be ok - if we can communicate that we believe in less govt. and that it’s a state issue effectively maybe we can make a difference. I also think that a lot of these young female voters only voting on that issue will wise up esp. after they get married and have children - and some may wise up if this presidency bombs
Evangelicals put Jimmy Carter into the White House.
The Evangelicals sat home for George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole and John McCain.
Those are the facts.
Essential, yes. Dependable, no.
Pity poor Ms. Parker. She’s all aglow at the moment from her recognition and praise from the left. Problem is, they’re through with her and will be discarding her soon. She’s served her purpose. On top of all that, the right doesn’t want her back. Her career is circling the bowl.
Right on, David.
I’m against abortion. Not a result of religion, simple value and respect for innocent life. If an individual wants to end his or her life, ill or not, let him or her do it and wave bye with a smile.
When conservative Christians don’t come out and vote REPUBLICANS LOSE (McCain, 2006 Congress, Dole, Bush Sr 2nd term).
I believe that the democrats have out manuvered the GOP on this issue. Talking to 2 college girls about abortion, they stated they had to vote democrat because they let you keep your baby. I said “WHAT”, they said they let you keep your baby. I asked What does “pro-choice” mean? -they said it means you can keep your baby and you don’t have to get an abortion. I then asked them what the republicans believe,- they didn’t have any idea,- I asked them what Pro-Life means - they never heard of that. I then asked them where they learned this, they both said their high school teachers and their college professors - AND they went to different high schools and different colleges.
We have been out manuvered on our message!
We are not reaching the youth of this country and they don’t understand our message
Now you’re a person who understands the true make up of the party.
“* Divorce for any other reason than sexual impurity is SIN.”
I agree with your entire post except for the above.
Funny how women desperately want to murder their offspring. Maybe this is a sign that the country is in its last days. No sane society would promote the murder of their next generation like half this country seems to.
Name three developed nations that have outlawed abortion.
“Evangelicals put Jimmy Carter into the White House.
The Evangelicals sat home for George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole and John McCain.
Those are the facts.
Essential, yes. Dependable, no.”
Socons (not many of them) are not going to vote against their faith, or their values which stem from it. Not ever.
Are you equating "developed" to "sane"?
No, I’m saying that abortion is not particular to the U.S.
Yet, they would be elect, by default, a candidate who embodies those things they abhor. funny, huh?
“Yet, they would be elect, by default, a candidate who embodies those things they abhor. funny, huh?”
What is worse, voting FOR a candidate such as you describe, simply because it has an “R” following it’s name or NOT taking a pro-active step to further the career of such an animal?
I don’t mean worse politically, I mean worse morally.
Has anyone noted that the Dem party never insults any one of its many groups—some so bizarre and extremist they can be described as mentally ill. The Dems won’t even criticize criminal organizations or gangs. They all vote together come election day. I may be (very) conservative but I accept that a lot of varied groups can vote with my party to win an election. Having a big tent wins because numbers of votes are what wins.
However, you don’t build a big tent by insulting as unintelligent a group of otherwise similar voters. I personally think pro-life is the intellectual high brow position. Regardless, a large set of perspectives is needed to win elections. Why does this writer have to insult so harshly those with a different view. This doesn’t happen in the Dem party. KP’s recommendation is the path away, not toward, victory.
I am glad evangelicals, agnostics, gays, and others are voting with me—even though we may have different opinions on one or more issues. Together we win and when conservatives win, the intellectual high road wins. When conservatives win, the future is brighter for everyone because the govt is less oppressive. Of course we disagree some—that is the nature of humans—but throwing intolerant insults is no way to move forward to victory.
> I agree with your entire post except for the above.
I hope your opposition is based on cruelty or physical abuse.
For these, I can understand a secular government that would make an exception.
Biblically, separation, not divorce, would be required in such a situation.
The issue is quite complex, and involves the vetting process that should occur by parents during the courtship.
One thing I tell my daughters is that, if any boy is interested in them, I will look at how he treats his mother and his sisters, if he has any, or how he regards women who are not subjects of his romantic (or sexual) interests.
I will also look at his relationship to his father and to his boss at work. If I hear, “My boss is a jerk,” the young man will have disqualified himself.
“I hope your opposition is based on cruelty or physical abuse”
My three acceptable reasons for divorce; Adultery, abuse or addiction.
I realize that my views are at odds with the Holy Bible and I would remind you that they used to stone prostitutes to death in the Bible as well....until Jesus stood up with one of the most powerful phrases ever uttered by anyone, ever.
Okay, the R candidate is Pro-life, the D candidate is pro-abortion. By not voting for the R candidate, you have knowingly become an accomplice to the act of abortion. Acts or non-acts have consequences.
Somewhere on FR has been posted, a few times, the breakdown of voting patterns which indicated that socons actually turned out for McCain, it was fiscal conservatives who stayed home. That makes sense, as he has a pro-life record but voted for the bailout.
> until Jesus stood up with one of the most powerful
> phrases ever uttered by anyone, ever.
Yes, but adultery is still sin.
In the very incident you mention, Jesus said to the young woman, “Go and sin no more.”
Most people probably don’t know that.
While the penalty for adultery certainly should NOT be death, at least in this life, it is still a sin.
“Okay, the R candidate is Pro-life.....”
I am not a one issue voter. Look at my home page. Feel free to copy and paste. Where does you rhetorical Republican stand on ALL of those issues?
will read and provide follow up -— thanks