I haven't been a church goer for nearly fifty years but recently friends invited us to a Christian Church for services. I figured I would go along just to perhaps learn something.
The Pastor was very eloquent and I had to admire him when he urged his parishioners to accept the election of Barack Obama and to welcome even liberal Democrats. I actually went quite a few times.
Recently I emailed him and asked him why so many Christians are Conservatives. The answer was a real awakening!
There are so many incorrect facts, questionable flights of logic and fantasy that I cannot even begin to respond.
I am posting his response here so you can see in their own words how totally they are into what I can only describe as an alternate reality!
I am at a total loss as to how to even begin to comment on this. I have plenty of ideas and it would take many pages but I feel I just cant find the right words to summarize it all. Maybe you can help with some succinct replies that get right to the heart of what he is saying and his total world of fantasy... Not that it would ever change him..
Here is the text of the email he sent me in reply to my question: Why do Christians vote Conservative
- Liberal progressives' tilt towads a socialistic mind-set, which is rooted in an optimistic view of human nature inclined to trust government and "enlightened" experts to manage things for the better. This is a denial of the sin nature. Our founders, informed by orthodox theology, saw the need for checks and balances and limited government as a protection against the sinful tendencies of tyrannical rulers. So Christians tend to favor personal responsibility and limited government, and thus identify more with the conservative platform.
- Liberals and Democrats tend to embrace diversity, including the idea that all moral lifestyles are neutral and should be allowed for. Thus the Democratic advocacy for abortion rights, against sodomy statutes, for homosexual marriage, etc. Because of their commitment to biblical morality, Christians, on the other hand, see the government's Biblical responsibility of "defending society from domestic enemies" and restraining evil (through just laws) as meaning that civil law should have a moral base, and that our country and its laws were founded on the basis of a Judaeo-Christian moral principles. It rankles them that others wish to undo this moral consensus through pro-choice, pro-homosexual laws, etc.
- Liberals and progressives tend to be humanistic in their philosophy, and since the human person is elevated as ultimate, the taking of life in all circumstances is to be avoided. Thus they oppose the military and capital punishment. Christians, on the other hand, value human life highly, but see its meaning as derived from our creatureliness and accountability to God. Thus, capital punishment of murders is viewed as a just (and Biblically authorized) penalty for taking a life. "Just wars" (another whole subject), likewise, are viewed as an evil necessitated by sin and justified by societies' (and their leaders) responsibility to restrain evil, even by force, if necesssary. Armed policemen are respected and appreciated, and military professionals are viewed as a necessary and honorable thing. They are not bloodthirsty, as a rule, but can get "lathered up" when liberals seem to be moral wimps and unwilling to appreciate the freedoms our military has won for us (ex: outraged that recruiters would be driven off campus by liberal progressives and their Democrat friends.) All of this point has an exception: There is a long pacifist tradition that is a sub-group of orthodox Christians. They are consistently anti-war, though similarly suspicious of big government solutions. And some Christians (pacifist or not) oppose capital punishment because they believe it is morally permitted, but unjustly implemented in our legal system.
- Many Christians (in light of the above) do have a suspicion of Obama (that is NOT racially based, though there may be some exceptions) that is based on his known affiliation with liberal advocates of "liberation theology" as per Rev. Wright (which church and theology are not orthodox but rather an example of the "modern" rejecting of orthodox Christianity by many "main-line" denominations.) This has been confirmed by his advancement of "big government" solutions to problems (in contrast to Christians suspicions of the dangers of government control and preference for volunteer-based approaches to charity, anti-slaveryism, women's suffrage, assistance to the poor, etc.) They also tend to be more informed about the real nature of Islamic culture (aware, for example, of the intense persecution of Christian believers in Islamic societies), and thus to be much more likely to suspect a "Manchurian" candidate in Obama, who is the first American leader with any association with Islam.
- Some Christians also believe that the Bible's prophetic prediction of an anti-christ figure that would have political power and global influence has real possibility of fulfillment in our time (accentuated by their belief in the prophetic significance of the re-establishment of the state of Israel) This makes them very suspicious of internationalism and globalism, which the see embody in European liberalism, which they notice tends to like Obama.
- All of those considerations come to bear in the environmentral movement, which is also viewed suspiciously. There are multiple reasons for this. For one, many environnmentalists would reject the idea of human life as unique due to our being created in God's image and therefore distinct from animal life (which we are to manage and use, vs. regarded as our moral equals), and assumptions based on theories of macro-evolution. So when it seems that they are more concerned about owl habitats than employment or other human activities, it strikes them as an example of this wrong theology/philosopy, and makes them tend to be dismissive. (exception: there is a growing Christian environmental movement thriving under the name of "creation care."). Also, there is a further suspicion based on the intertwined network of the enviromental movement with internationalism, state-ism, etc. It is sometimes guilt by association. This make them more readily convinced that the environmental movement is really a cover for tranfer of wealth schemes that are essentially Marxist.
(All of the above can't overlook the association in the mind of many of liberalism/socialism/progressivism with atheistic communism.)
- The torture issue is tortured (sic). Christians would be conflicted about this. They would condemn torture per se, but also be suspicious of those who want to label aggressive interrogation or aggressively prosecute genuine examples of it. That suspicion arises because of the tendency to believe that in reality, the anti-torture crowd actually are opposed to the use of force in all circumstances, want us to disarm, love our enemies, hate free-enterprise system, etc. So, in reaction, they are inclined to give the benefit of the doubt (rightly or wrongly) to public servants who are seeking to protect us from a genuine threat (and less likely to believe the detainees deserve Miranda priviliges, because they believe that such rights are constitutionally based and don't apply in warfare.) So they may believe that terrorist interrogations are a just exercise of the state's legitmate protective military obligation, an unpleasant one though it may be.