Feb 12 2008
Politics and Religion: Is there a “Christian” Party?
As the Potomac Primaries are winding down tonight, it raises some questions regarding the assumptions about religion with regard to politics. In this article by CNN it is clear that Huckabee is hoping to draw support from the evangelical Christian base in his bid for the Republican nomination. My question is, what are the assumptions about Christianity based upon this statement?
- Does this communicate that the conservative Republican platform is what all conservative Christians should be voting for?
- If that is what is being communicated, is that true?
- Can a conservative Christian feel the Bible leads them to vote differently than the conservative Republican platform?
- If they can, then why does the media portray conservative Republicans and conservative Christians as synonymous (or at least a major portion of the voter base)?
- Is there another, potentially more accurate classification for those Christians who might find themselves ideologically aligned with the conservative Republican platform?
These are just some questions for thought and discussion, and should in no way reflect negatively on Huckabee (who apparently rocks the bass guitar). I am curious, however, what others’ reactions are to this consistent equation of the “conservative Christian vote” with the “conservative Republican vote.”
Posts
I think the key is the so-called three legged stool of Republican conservatism. It seems to me that the social conservative element is a relatively ideal fit for conservative Christians (barring a libertarian utopia as an alternative that might also be acceptable, but is rather unlikely, despite my admiration of that ideal). Someone like Huckabee seems to make sense from an Evangelical perspective, in that regard. (Disclaimer: I have been volunteering for Gov. Huckabee).
I think the danger is that Christians often take this whole thing too much to heart and assume that a good Christian supports all three legs of the Republican party, and that is not necessarily so. I am a fiscal conservative and a social conservative, but I am dubious about the GOP’s so-called “national security” conservatives (or neo-cons, if you prefer) and what their policies do for our liberties. Moreover, my fiscal conservatism is dictated by my understanding of economics and not by some kind of Biblical mandate, so I must be careful not to mix what I believe I should do because of God’s Word and what I believe we should do because of my own fallible reasoning.
In my opinion Christians should focus on principles (e.g. something like conservatism) and when it happens that such fits well with a party, support it. Just don’t support a party to support a party, however.
What do you think?
It seems to me that buying into any candidate because of their religion is a mistake.
I understand identifying with a candidate, but today in America, being a “Christian” is as much cultural as it is indicative of your political platform. At least in the Midwest I think it is.
It’s like, I don’t go vote for a candidate because they might say they are agnostic. I didn’t vote for Romney because he was Mormon (although I was silently cheering in my heart that a Mormon had hit the national spotlight how he did, even if he didn’t make it far). It is my belief that people need to resist the urge to vote for someone based on their demographic or what have you. Women should not blindly vote for Hillary and black people should not blindly vote for Obama.
On the other hand, if your main push for the presidential nominee IS to get a Christian in the White House, I can see how you are going to go for Huckabee.
But if anyone is voting for anyone to get a Christian, woman, or black man in the white house (without understanding and agreeing with that candidate’s platform), those people should not be voting.
“I understand identifying with a candidate, but today in America, being a “Christian” is as much cultural as it is indicative of your political platform.”
I couldn’t agree more. There are so many out there who DO equate the Republican Party with the “Christian” vote, and that is further emphasized by exactly what you are talking about. I suspect (but am not very informed on this), that it has a lot to do with the pro-life / pro-choice debate. I know a lot of people vote on this issue alone. But that’s a topic for a whole other post.
“But if anyone is voting for anyone to get a Christian, woman, or black man in the white house (without understanding and agreeing with that candidate’s platform), those people should not be voting.”
VERY much agreed. Personally, I really like Huckabee. I would definitely vote for him over McCain, but that is mostly because he actually answers questions, does so honestly, and… I don’t know, the guy just has integrity and seems to not give a crap about the way we usually do politics.
But a McCain v. Obama vote? Obama will probably have my vote (unless he runs with Hilary on the ticket, in which case I would have to hang myself).
John, over at “Common Expressions” is doing a poll of seminary students to see where such a Christian constituency falls. The results so far are pretty interesting, and not quite as polar (in some areas) as I thought.
http://commonexpression.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/covenant-seminary-students-politcal-views/
Wow Brad, I would never have expected you as an Obama supporter. I’m curious: what is it that would make you switch from one of the most conservative candidates (Huckabee) to the most liberal candidate in the field (Obama)? I’ve heard others make similar remarks, which is why I’m so interested in hearing your reasoning.
I’ve actually been rooting for Sen. Clinton on the Democratic side. She’s more moderate than Sen. Obama, and I figure I sort of already know what I’ll get from a Clinton White House! But, my real issue with Obama is that his rhetoric is so void of any actual content. It’ll be interesting to see if he starts talking policy at some point.
“what is it that would make you switch from one of the most conservative candidates (Huckabee) to the most liberal candidate in the field (Obama)?”
That’s only if (when) Huckabee doesn’t win the candidacy. If McCain takes him as VP (doubtful), I MAY still vote Republican…. but yeah.
And I HATE Clinton. She’s a political chameleon and doesn’t have an original thing to say about anything. Her stance is whatever gets her elected, she’s not a leader at all.
At this point it is important to reiterate that our political views are our own and we make no claims that they are the “right” ones.
“and we make no claims that they are the “right” ones.”
Pshaw. Speak for yourself….
Hehe, j/k….
Mike, that’s fine for you to say — I happen to be right 110% of the time, however. Yes, even more often than Rush Limbaugh. Ahem.
Brad, that’s what I’m curious about, though, and what confuses me so much about Obama. He’s harder to pin down on the issues than Sen. Clinton, although to the extent I can, he’s certainly more leftist than Clinton, but that may be splitting hairs — the two candidates themselves admit they are fairly close in policy. Assuming Clinton is out of the picture, though, what is it that you like about Obama or dislike about McCain that would swing your vote from essentially one end of the American political spectrum to the other? Assuming one agrees with Huckabee’s positions, one necessarily agrees with McCain more than Obama on political issues (just by virtue of their positions). Is it a personality issue? Fear McCain will destroy the GOP? Something else?
I’m trying to understand the whole Obama phenomenon.
Hehe well… to be honest, I’m not much of an issues-based voter. Yes, they are important, but I’m not convinced that any single person has the power in the federal government to significantly (or sufficiently) change most of the issues I care about.
What I DO want is a candidate who is not AS corrupted by Washington politics (i.e. Not Clinton or McCain), who for better or for worse is willing to fight to change (I know, I hate that word to) the system. Even if the changes aren’t all that great, significant change will pave the way for others to break the status quo.
I like both Huckabee and Obama because they are real, honest, and are tired of the status quo. Huckabee is DEFINITELY my prefered candidate for this reason, and I’m more comfortable with Obama than McCain because of his stance on the Iraq War (something a single person CAN change as president). McCain scares me in that area a little bit. Yeah, he’s a bonafide war hero, but I’m not convinced that he’s all that empathetic with our troops (beyond political gain).
And Hilary is… (how can I keep this PG-13?)… she’s everything that is wrong with the political machine. It’s sickening. I will definitely admit that my support for Obama is primarily because he’s not Hilary.
If anyone wants to wrap their mind more firmly around the obama phenomenon, watch the “Yes We Can” video orchestrated by will.i.am. you can DEFINITELY find it on youtube, or you can go to dipdive.com. I think that perfectly iterates why people are rallying so hard behind him.
Brad, thanks for explaining, I see what you mean. And Iraq is a substantive difference — although in recent interviews, I notice he is wavering on it. I guess I’m just more of a cynic; Obama to me appears to be the same old political machine (same voting record, same lobby connections, etc.), just younger, so he only has a few scandals under his belt so far.
Kyle: I’ve seen it and it seems just as nebulous as his speeches — he’s no doubt enchanting, though — despite my cynicism, even I get excited when he does his “yes we can” call to worship, er, responsive reading. As an op-ed this morning said, he is building a “messianic” aura around himself. Of course, I don’t trust people who present themselves as messiahs — there is only one of those.
Sheesh, I am only 24 and I have already become a political curmudgeon.