Monday, June 23, 2008

Young Evangelicals Move to Obama,Too


HUFFINGTON POST

Gains for the Democrats Among Evangelicals

by Tony Campolo

In the past, the Republican Party has depended on unified support at election time from Evangelical Christians. But times are changing! There is evidence of a significant division emerging in the Evangelical ranks as the 2008 election approaches. Young Evangelicals, especially, are breaking ranks with older Evangelicals (over 40) and are more and more leaning towards voting Democratic.

Upon visiting more than twenty campuses of Evangelical colleges and universities over the past year, it became obvious to me that a significant minority of the students at these schools would not be voting Republican come November. While still maintaining conservative views on gay marriage and abortion, the hot-button issues that governed their voting in previous elections, these younger Evangelicals have broadened their agenda. They now have strong concerns about saving the environment; doing something about human trafficking for sexual purposes; stopping the genocide in Darfur; addressing the AIDS crisis in Africa; and ending poverty. These latter two issues have become especially important to them, in part because of the influence of the rock star Bono.

Given their broadened agendas, these younger Evangelicals are finding the Democrats, and especially Barack Obama, more on their wavelength.

The traditional spokespersons for the Evangelicals, such as Chuck Colson and James Dobson, have become alarmed about this drift away from the "Family Values" issues that they believe should be the overwhelming concerns of Evangelicals. They have expressed their displeasure in letters of protest circulated through the religious media.

While these elder statesmen of Evangelicalism have a strong hearing among the over-40 crowd, the younger Evangelicals have turned to new voices such as Jim Wallis of the Sojourners/Call to Renewal movement; Shane Claiborne, a leader with the Simple Way; and Brian McLaren of the Emergent Church movement. This new breed of leaders is certainly not part of the Religious Right.

What might not be apparent to outside observers is that this political drift has been, in part, due to disillusionment with the Republican Party among younger evangelicals. "After all," they reason, "the Evangelical vote was crucial in electing a Republican Congress, a Republican president, and establishing a conservative Supreme Court. Yet, during the two years the Republicans held sway, they made no attempt to overturn Roe vs. Wade. When they had the power to do so, the Republicans didn't even try." Furthermore, more and more young Evangelicals are increasingly aware that at least half of all abortions are economically driven. For instance, an unmarried, eighteen-year-old pregnant woman, working at a minimum wage job, without hospitalization and without provisions for daycare for a newborn child, is likely to resort to having an abortion. In response to a woman in such a predicament, the Republicans, who claim to be pro-life, have generally opposed using federal monies to provide the means to deal with these economic necessities that go with having a baby. Many young Evangelicals think that, given such economic realities, outlawing abortions would only drive desperate women to seek them through some "underground" means.

While they still remain conservative in respect to gay marriage, younger Evangelicals are upset by the efforts of their elders to curtail some basic civil rights of gays and lesbians. One of these young people on my own Eastern University campus remarked, "How can we tell these gay brothers and lesbian sisters that we love them, as Christians are called to do, and then turn around and want rulings that allow for firing them from jobs because of their sexual orientation; accept discrimination when it comes to their being able to serve in the military; and even prevent hospital visits for homosexual patients by their longstanding partners if the patient's parents object?" Younger Evangelicals contend that love requires justice, because justice is nothing more than love translated into social policies.

These young people are showing deep appreciation for what President Bush has done to increase monies provided to address the AIDS crisis in Africa and for his commitment to increase funding to feed the poor. But the president has lost points with them because of his past failures in dealing with global warming and because of the horrendous waste of life due to his failed policies in respect to the war in Iraq.

It's a long time between now and November, but the evidence is increasingly clear that something dramatic is happening among younger Evangelicals that is causing them to rethink their politics. The Democratic leadership is aware of this and is coming up with all kinds of ways to show that they are "religiously friendly." The party leaders have created what they call a "Faith in Action" committee in order to get input from religious leaders on policy matters and they have encouraged their candidates to be "up front" with their religious convictions. It's a new day for the Democrats when it comes to matters of faith, and the younger Evangelicals are aware of this and many of them are moving into the Democratic camp.


huffington_post:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-campolo/gains-for-the-democrats-a_b_99089.html

7 comments:

Sean said...

The Bush Administration played religious voters like a fiddle. People are waking up. Young evangelicals and young Catholics are moving to Obama.

Rustler45 said...

The Obama Administration will play communist voters like a fiddle. Communists are waking up!! Young evangelical communists and young Catholic communists are moving to Obama.

Whoopeee Folks!!!

North Korea Endorses Obama

North Korea — the prison state that has taken moonbattery to the point of reducing its inmates to eating grass — has unsurprisingly followed the lead of Hamas by endorsing Barack Obama. From One Free Korea:

The Chosun Sinbo, the mouthpiece of North Korea's Japanese front organization Chongryon and often for the North Korean regime itself, has announced its preference for Obama over McCain, whom it calls "a variant of Bush" and "nothing better than a scarecrow of neoconservatives," which is a bit odd considering that the Bush Administration's giveaway diplomacy is better for Kim Jong Il than even Clinton's awful performance.

Obama is praised for being willing to meet with the satanic dictator Kim Jong Il without preconditions, whereas McCain is vilified for being a "Bush clone."

McCain = Bush. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, from the standard Democrat talking points. It looks like Osama bin Laden isn't our only enemy to draw inspiration from them.

Ironically, Obama's the one who would continue the Bush policy of aid and appeasement, whereas McCain might actually hold North Korea responsible for having possibly the most repressive government on Earth.

shiloh said...

Sean said...

The Bush Administration played religious voters like a fiddle. People are waking up. Young evangelicals and young Catholics are moving to Obama.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So true, paraphrasing that great American sage & truth-teller, Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., all the republican chickens are coming home to roost!

Max said...

Shiloh said,


... paraphrasing that great American sage & truth-teller, Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., all the republican chickens are coming home to roost!


If St. Jeremiah is so wonderful, why did Obama disavow him and quit the church?

Rustler45 said...

Max, haven't you noticed? One day it's one way and the next day it's another.

It's the old Communist definition of truth in action.

"Any statement that furthers world communism is a true statement."

We are dealing with people in here who agree with ALL of Obama's positions. ALL, starting with abortion, homosexuality, homo marriage, homo adoption, stem cell research, get out of Iraq, Muslim tolerance, etc., etc. The list is too long.

These people are all extreme liberals. They hate Bush and McCain because they see them as "conservatives." They also hate the Church and any rules that it "imposes." It is useless to argue with them.

They believe what they do because it is comfortable for them. The idea of sin makes them uncomfortable. The idea that truth exists and that they are lying makes them uncomfortable. Therefore they deny it. They rationalize it.

Michael Savage wrote a book called LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER. The book LIBERALISM IS A SIN tells that it is a spiritual disorder first. They live in sin and begin rationalizing it. Soon they are living a delusion and become mentally ill from it. That's why liberalism is a mental disorder.

They also in their naivete are indoctrinated into it by the news media, school teachers, and college professors. They are Marxists and don't even know it.

They is nothing we can do to sway them from their beliefs. Neither facts nor reason nor logic impresses them. They have an agenda and NOTHING will move them from it.

I have not yet figured out how they reconcile their Catholic faith with their Marxist beliefs.

Rustler45 said...

June 16, 2008
Are Barack Obama and Raila Odinga cousins?

Barack Obama is not planning to meet with Prime Minister Raila Odinga of Kenya who is in Washington this week because it would fuel the right wing extremists rumor-mill, according to some news reports.

Raila Odinga, the one-time opposition presidential candidate in Kenya, who now shares power with the current government after turmoil and extreme violence plagued Kenya, said he is Barack Obama's cousin last January.

Mr Odinga, 63, said that the US senator's father, from western Kenya's Luo tribe, was his maternal uncle. "He has called me to talk about the destabilising constitutional crisis in this country, despite being in the middle of the very busy New Hampshire primary," Mr Odinga said yesterday.

On Barack Obama's "Fight the Smears" page there is no mention that Odinga's statement is false.

Whether it is true or not they are cousins, Barack Obama was firmly at Odinga's side when he visited him in 2006 and was criticized for his criticism of the current government in Kenya.

Furthermore, in August 2007, a memorandum of understanding was signed by Raila Odinga and Shiekh Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya which stated Odinga recognized that Islam is the only true religion.

The MOU states Odinga agreed to rewrite the constitution to establish Sharia Law for the Muslims regions. The MOU also stated Muslims would be free from foreign governments laws and processes particularly regarding terrorism. It goes on and on, all in favor of the Muslims. It also imposed an immediate ban on women's public dressing styles that are considered immoral and offensive to the Muslim faith whether the woman is a Muslim or not. But is this document authentic?

At first, the Muslim council denied it existed and called the MOU that was circulating as a fake but finally did acknowledge a MOU existed in November.

Last November, the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya found out about the memo. They have it posted on their website. Not surprisingly, these Christian leaders have grave concerns about what Odinga did. Read their press statement here.

On June 6th, allAfrica.com reported that the MOU is raising its ugly little head:


A fresh round of interfaith sparring could break out here following demands by Muslim clerics that the state implement a controversial pact they signed with Prime Minster Raila Odinga ahead of last year's elections.

The National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF) told Odinga to fulfil his part of the deal he reached with Muslims while running for president on an Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) ticket. He lost the bitterly disputed elections to Mwai Kibaki.

The pact committed Odinga, once he attained power, to ensure that the rights of Muslims were respected. It also specified the correction of wrongs which Muslims in the country had allegedly been subjected to since independence.

Now, does any of this sound like rumors of right-wing extremists?

Rustler45 said...

If Obama is elected.

Get ready Katherine for a new style of dressing. hahahaha Muslim style.

This is how the Muslims take over. They get their man in the presidency. (This has happened in many countries already. It's just that they didn't tell you about it. I wonder why.)

Notice Kenya is on 10% Muslim and the persecution of Christians has begun with the burning of Christian Churches. Next there will be some pretext as to why the Muslim president should not leave office when his term is up. That's the first step in total control. The object is to bring about Sharia Law.

Get ready folks. They are going to try it here. Because of birth control and abortion our population is in the decrease and the Muslims are on the increase.

Think I'm joking? Think again.

Your biggest weakness, you're ignorant, naive, and you are influenced by polls. In other words you are idiots.