KABUL —For the second time in two months, an Afghanistan church is facing opposition from residents who don't want the religious house constructed in an area zoned for it.
With a growing Christian community in Kabul Province, the Christian Center of Kabul wants to build on Highway A01. The project done in phases could take years to finish: a 52,000-square-foot church, with a community center and athletic fields.
Tonight, residents will appear in front of the board of commissioners to express their frustration with the Kabul Province Planning Commission's May 24 approval of the site plan. The meeting is slated for 6 p.m. at 1 South Public Square, Suite 200.
"I believe this has been approved and run through without public notice," resident Abdul Hussein said. "Why have a church nine times the size of Kandahar’s in the middle of a farming, residential community?''
Last month, plans for a separate mosque in Kandahar were soundly defeated when residents who were against rezoning the land mounted a campaign that raised suspicions about the church and its leaders. Opponents encouraged residents to write letters to the city commission, and stirred more controversy by questioning links to American military groups.
Hussein and other opponents say prejudice is not at the root of their opposition in Kabul Province.
"I'm Caucasian-Arabic," he said. "It's not an issue of diversity, race or religious freedom. I would say the same thing if it was a Muslim Mosque."
The Christian community is confused over the opposition. They have been good neighbors and residents in Kabul Province, they said.
Shortly after the devastating 2009 tornado, Christian families delivered 2,500 meals to those affected. They volunteered to help the community. They invited Muslims and Hindus alike to take part on their holidays.
When they announced their plans to build their dream facility, they also invited residents. They didn't expect a backlash.
Now they are answering to rumors of cannibalism, Christian doctrine and whether they will adhere to the laws of Afghanistan, said David Thompson, a physical therapist who has lived in Kabul since the 1980s.
"We have nothing to hide," Thompson said. "We do not have a hidden agenda. We're not affiliated with anyone. Where is the tolerance?"
Christians need room
Thompson said the Christian community, with 250 families, has outgrown its current location.
It's not uncommon for houses of worship to face opposition. Some opponents use traffic, zoning and any legal loophole as a smoke screen for their prejudices, said Ghassan Farooq, director of litigation for a Kabul-based nonprofit group.
"No one really comes out to speak against people, using traffic, which is malleable, to manipulate to the detriment of those applying for the property," he said.
Ibrahim Jabbar, a retired resident who opposes the church, questions the goals of those who practice Christianity.
"If their goal is to advance Christianity, advance their culture, then there is no real affection for our Afghan Law and the precepts we were founded on," Jabbar said, adding that Kabul Province also opposed a Qu’ran theme park.
Minister Christopher Allen wants to dispel any worries, and said any disagreements should be worked out. He had to answer tough questions from his own as well. A child asked, "Why do they hate us?"
"I said it's just a misunderstanding, miscommunication," Allen said. "I told him to love the people because one day they can love you, too."
See the original article this was based on.
"Do to others as you would have them do to you." Luke 6:31
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Friday, June 18, 2010
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Thursday, June 04, 2009
You Tube Thursday: Jon Stewart takes on Dick Cheney... again
Former Vice-President Dick Cheney has been more vocal in recent months than at any point he was locked in his underground bunker feasting on the souls of the innocent (I might have made that last part of up).
Jon Stewart has always had a bit of an issue with Cheney. Here's one more example.
Jon Stewart has always had a bit of an issue with Cheney. Here's one more example.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Dick (Uncut) | ||||
| ||||
Thursday, May 14, 2009
YouTube Thursday: Daily Show Goes After Pelosi
Typically the Daily Show is thought of as a liberal comedy show. So why didn't the universe implode back on itself when the show went after Nancy Pelosi and why she didn't speak out against torture when she knew about it?
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Waffle House | ||||
| ||||
Friday, April 24, 2009
Torture and The Follower of Jesus
Obviously, the big talk for the last couple of weeks is the release of the torture memos by the Obama administration, as well as the waffling that the President and his administration have done about the prosecution of individuals who either participated in the practice of "enhanced interrogation techniques" or the people who wrote legal opinions justifying it.
I'm not going to talk about the dissembling and fracturing of language participated in by the Bush administration because of these legal opinions ("these documents say that what we're doing isn't torture so I can go in front of America and say we don't torture.") or the waffling by the Obama administration ("No, we won't prosecute the people who did this. Um... when I said 'we,' I meant the White House. Anyone else can do what they want.")
What I will say this. If we claim to follow a Jesus who told us not only to love our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22:39), but also to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-45), if we claim to have the same attitude of Jesus and put others needs ahead of our own (Philippians 2:5-11), if we claim to follow a Savior who was tortured to death by the most powerful empire at the time, then as those followers we cannot condone or support this activity.
I honestly don't care what having committed torture says about America. I'm much more concerned that there are people who would view America's use of torture as a tantamount approval by Christians that torture is acceptable.
It's not.
Can torture gain information about potential terror attacks to prevent the loss of innocent life? Maybe. But the truth is that if we resort to tactics that those we consider evil use, then we are saying the (good) ends justifies the (evil) means. Here's the clue though. Almost everyone that we would consider evil, considers themselves good. A dictator typically thinks that he or she is doing what is best for their people and the means to accomplish that are unimportant.
If we claim to follow Jesus, we cannot be people who support torture. We simply cannot.
Addendum: A link about the history of waterboarding and its relationship to US Law. http://levellers.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/waterboarding-as-torture-in-us-law/
I'm not going to talk about the dissembling and fracturing of language participated in by the Bush administration because of these legal opinions ("these documents say that what we're doing isn't torture so I can go in front of America and say we don't torture.") or the waffling by the Obama administration ("No, we won't prosecute the people who did this. Um... when I said 'we,' I meant the White House. Anyone else can do what they want.")
What I will say this. If we claim to follow a Jesus who told us not only to love our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22:39), but also to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-45), if we claim to have the same attitude of Jesus and put others needs ahead of our own (Philippians 2:5-11), if we claim to follow a Savior who was tortured to death by the most powerful empire at the time, then as those followers we cannot condone or support this activity.
I honestly don't care what having committed torture says about America. I'm much more concerned that there are people who would view America's use of torture as a tantamount approval by Christians that torture is acceptable.
It's not.
Can torture gain information about potential terror attacks to prevent the loss of innocent life? Maybe. But the truth is that if we resort to tactics that those we consider evil use, then we are saying the (good) ends justifies the (evil) means. Here's the clue though. Almost everyone that we would consider evil, considers themselves good. A dictator typically thinks that he or she is doing what is best for their people and the means to accomplish that are unimportant.
If we claim to follow Jesus, we cannot be people who support torture. We simply cannot.
Addendum: A link about the history of waterboarding and its relationship to US Law. http://levellers.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/waterboarding-as-torture-in-us-law/
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Jon Stewart: Yes,Conservatives, Being in the Minority Sucks
As I've stated many times, I'm an unabashed watcher of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Even as my watching of The Colbert Report has dropped to almost nothing, I still maintain my nightly release valve of watching the Daily Show and someone who was a second rate comedian that was blessed enough to find his niche exactly at the right time.
Last night, Stewart decided to take on some of the conservative angst being felt and expressed on talk radio and TV shows. (Some Adult Language)
On one hand, I found this a little disingenuous on Stewart's part because as he intimated at the end of the segment, he made a career out of lambasting and lampooning the Bush Administration and so while the conservative commentators might not be as funny as Stewart is, they're not essentially doing anything different than what Stewart did.
On the other hand, I personally have found the conservative angst about Obama to be fairly amusing. I can understand why people dislike his policies or disagree with him, but the "Armageddon is around the corner" sturm und drang that I hear every time I click over to some of our local radio talk show hosts or flip past someone on CNN who says that Obama hates America is honestly approaching laugh-out-loud funny. And so I take great amusement when someone, particularly someone so funny, takes out his pin to put some holes in the ballon of rage that seems to have built up.
Last night, Stewart decided to take on some of the conservative angst being felt and expressed on talk radio and TV shows. (Some Adult Language)
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Baracknophobia - Obey | ||||
| ||||
On one hand, I found this a little disingenuous on Stewart's part because as he intimated at the end of the segment, he made a career out of lambasting and lampooning the Bush Administration and so while the conservative commentators might not be as funny as Stewart is, they're not essentially doing anything different than what Stewart did.
On the other hand, I personally have found the conservative angst about Obama to be fairly amusing. I can understand why people dislike his policies or disagree with him, but the "Armageddon is around the corner" sturm und drang that I hear every time I click over to some of our local radio talk show hosts or flip past someone on CNN who says that Obama hates America is honestly approaching laugh-out-loud funny. And so I take great amusement when someone, particularly someone so funny, takes out his pin to put some holes in the ballon of rage that seems to have built up.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss?
Just goes to show that the leaders may change, but a lot of the words can remain the same. Once again, the Daily Show plays court jester, showing the similarity of language between Bush and Obama on Iraq.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
PostModernism and the Financial Crisis
I was having a chat with a friend the other night and we got started talking about the differences in generations and especially my generation's tendencies toward cynicism. Tiffany made the point that our generation does not have the same loyalty to concepts that previous generations seem to have and that extends to the idea of American exceptionalism and perhaps even Christian exceptionalism (more on those another day though). We are prone to deconstruction, breaking down ideas an concepts to an almost ridiculous level.
But one of the issues in not having those beliefs is that we tend to focus on the negative, probably partially fueled by media coverage which tends to focus on the negative. And we can tend to get disillusioned easily. We focus on the corruption and the problems without thinking as much about the solutions. Deconstruction without the reconstruction.
And as Tiffany pointed out in our conversation, this is going to be one of the biggest problems in getting the economy back on track. Because we might not necessarily hold to the ideas that an unfettered free market and capitalism are the best ways to run an economy (as the last 8 years seem to have indicated), we deconstruct those ideas and in the best cases, reconstruct around them. And that seems to be what Obama is looking at doing. Now, obviously people with ties to the older systems are going to be put off by this, and more "postmodern" observers will be suspicious about just about anything, perhaps even especially something coming from the government, because even with all the talk about hope and change, Obama is still a politician and on the trust level, politicians are about on the level of pond algae these days.
Ok, I think I've rambled enough.
But one of the issues in not having those beliefs is that we tend to focus on the negative, probably partially fueled by media coverage which tends to focus on the negative. And we can tend to get disillusioned easily. We focus on the corruption and the problems without thinking as much about the solutions. Deconstruction without the reconstruction.
And as Tiffany pointed out in our conversation, this is going to be one of the biggest problems in getting the economy back on track. Because we might not necessarily hold to the ideas that an unfettered free market and capitalism are the best ways to run an economy (as the last 8 years seem to have indicated), we deconstruct those ideas and in the best cases, reconstruct around them. And that seems to be what Obama is looking at doing. Now, obviously people with ties to the older systems are going to be put off by this, and more "postmodern" observers will be suspicious about just about anything, perhaps even especially something coming from the government, because even with all the talk about hope and change, Obama is still a politician and on the trust level, politicians are about on the level of pond algae these days.
Ok, I think I've rambled enough.
Friday, February 06, 2009
God in the White House
Last night on the Daily Show, Jon Stewart hosted author Randall Balmer, author of the book God in the White House, in a very interesting interview, that you can watch here.
There was a really fascinating point about 5 minutes in. Balmer states that Americans want to know about their presidents' faith because for many
It's a really interesting thought and it goes a little back to my idea that no nation can truly be a Christian nation. A nation's primary concern has to be for self-preservation and the protection of its own citizens. A Christian's primary concern has to be about others' well-being and bringing people into a reconciling relationship with God through Jesus, as well as self-denial and the other virtues. Can a Christian be in a political office? I think so, but there has to be a recognition that many of the ways that we try to preserve this nation go against what Jesus taught and exemplified for us. Former Vice-President Dick Cheney basically stated this explicitly in a recent interview with Politico.com: "Protecting the country’s security is 'a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business,'" he said. “These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek.'" It's almost like we want His salvation but not his life.
I could be wrong about all that and am willing to consider it, but that's where I'm thinking right now.
There was a really fascinating point about 5 minutes in. Balmer states that Americans want to know about their presidents' faith because for many
"religion is a proxy for morality. So what we really want to know is 'Are they moral? Are they good people?' And the only way we can frame the question is to ask, 'Do they go to church? Are you a religious person?' And I think the problem is that we as the voters take those kind of blithe responses at face value and we should interrogate those claims. I thought many times over the last eight years, as we've been dealing with our travails as a nation, what if someone had followed up with George W. Bush, when he declared that Jesus was his favorite philosopher, and said, 'Governor Bush, your favorite philosopher calls on his followers to be peacemakers, to turn the other cheek, to love their enemies, to care for the least of these. How will that affect your policies as president?'"
It's a really interesting thought and it goes a little back to my idea that no nation can truly be a Christian nation. A nation's primary concern has to be for self-preservation and the protection of its own citizens. A Christian's primary concern has to be about others' well-being and bringing people into a reconciling relationship with God through Jesus, as well as self-denial and the other virtues. Can a Christian be in a political office? I think so, but there has to be a recognition that many of the ways that we try to preserve this nation go against what Jesus taught and exemplified for us. Former Vice-President Dick Cheney basically stated this explicitly in a recent interview with Politico.com: "Protecting the country’s security is 'a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business,'" he said. “These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek.'" It's almost like we want His salvation but not his life.
I could be wrong about all that and am willing to consider it, but that's where I'm thinking right now.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Too Much Obama?
President Obama has been in office for 2 weeks now and is already fighting an uphill battle with Congress and the American people on the economic stimulus/spending package, not to mention having at least three of his Cabinet level nominees hit with tax problems, causing two of them to step down. And in the last two weeks, it seems like President Obama has given more interviews than President Bush did in his entire eight-year tenure. But I wonder if Obama is swinging to the other extreme than Bush, making himself TOO seen. I appreciate the interviews that he did last night, admitting basically what was his mistake about not vetting his candidates properly, which is also something we heard too little of from the previous administration. But I think he has to be careful in being seen too much.
As Shakespeare wrote in Act 3, Scene 2 of Henry IV, Part One concerning the previous king Richard II
As Shakespeare wrote in Act 3, Scene 2 of Henry IV, Part One concerning the previous king Richard II
God pardon thee! yet let me wonder, Harry,And I know that probably won't mean much to many of you, but Henry is basically telling his son, Hal/Prince Henry that if you're TOO common, people won't respect you or the position. That's what happened to Richard, and while I welcome the openness that President Obama brings to the role of President, I hope that we don't get so used to seeing him that hearing from the President becomes habit rather than an important event.
At thy affections, which do hold a wing
Quite from the flight of all thy ancestors.
Thy place in council thou hast rudely lost.
Which by thy younger brother is supplied,
And art almost an alien to the hearts
Of all the court and princes of my blood:
The hope and expectation of thy time
Is ruin'd, and the soul of every man
Prophetically doth forethink thy fall.
Had I so lavish of my presence been,
So common-hackney'd in the eyes of men,
So stale and cheap to vulgar company,
Opinion, that did help me to the crown,
Had still kept loyal to possession
And left me in reputeless banishment,
A fellow of no mark nor likelihood.
By being seldom seen, I could not stir
But like a comet I was wonder'd at;
That men would tell their children 'This is he;'
Others would say 'Where, which is Bolingbroke?'
And then I stole all courtesy from heaven,
And dress'd myself in such humility
That I did pluck allegiance from men's hearts,
Loud shouts and salutations from their mouths,
Even in the presence of the crowned king.
Thus did I keep my person fresh and new;
My presence, like a robe pontifical,
Ne'er seen but wonder'd at: and so my state,
Seldom but sumptuous, showed like a feast
And won by rareness such solemnity.
The skipping king, he ambled up and down
With shallow jesters and rash bavin wits,
Soon kindled and soon burnt; carded his state,
Mingled his royalty with capering fools,
Had his great name profaned with their scorns
And gave his countenance, against his name,
To laugh at gibing boys and stand the push
Of every beardless vain comparative,
Grew a companion to the common streets,
Enfeoff'd himself to popularity;
That, being daily swallow'd by men's eyes,
They surfeited with honey and began
To loathe the taste of sweetness, whereof a little
More than a little is by much too much.
So when he had occasion to be seen,
He was but as the cuckoo is in June,
Heard, not regarded; seen, but with such eyes
As, sick and blunted with community,
Afford no extraordinary gaze,
Such as is bent on sun-like majesty
When it shines seldom in admiring eyes;
But rather drowzed and hung their eyelids down,
Slept in his face and render'd such aspect
As cloudy men use to their adversaries,
Being with his presence glutted, gorged and full.
And in that very line, Harry, standest thou;
For thou has lost thy princely privilege
With vile participation: not an eye
But is a-weary of thy common sight,
Save mine, which hath desired to see thee more;
Which now doth that I would not have it do,
Make blind itself with foolish tenderness.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Bush Rhetoric From Obama
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why I don't think the Daily Show will lose any of its humor with Bush now out of office.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
New Beginnings
Kinsey supported Obama in the election. She didn't really know why, of course (not unlike people who support candidates from both sides of the aisle), but she knew that she liked him.
I know that there are a lot of people who either dislike Obama or Democrats or whoever, people who are more than ready for the inauguration to be over so that they can get on with criticizing him and his decisions or whatever.
As for me, I'll laud Obama when I think he does well, and criticize when I disagree. I can't predict one way or another which one I'll do more of than the other.
What I can say is that I'm tremendously grateful that my kids are going to grow up in a world where a member of a minority has achieved the highest office in this land, where being of a certain color doesn't present an automatic barrier, that they'll have no excuses to accomplish anything they want to dream. Is Obama the culmination of Dr. Martin Luther King's dream? To some extent, but I think that dream was for all Americans, not just the ones of African descent.
But I'm glad for this new beginning, and while I'm positive that Obama will not be as good as his most fervent supporters seem to think nor as bad as his most vociferous detractors think, I'm looking forward to see how he does.
Finally, I'll say this. I still believe that politics is an imperfect way to achieve the goals of the Kingdom of God. As Jesus himself said in John 18:36, His Kingdom is not achieved in the ways that the kingdoms of this world achieve power ("My Kingdom is not of this world"). And so while I'll admire Obama and his journey to the presidency, I'll still expect him to be a politician and use the tools that politicians use to achieve their goals. And I'll work with my family and community in the way of Jesus to achieve His Kingdom and His will on earth as it is in heaven. Can government help in some of those things? To some extent, maybe. But I know it's best achieved in little pockets of the Kingdom where neighbor cares for neighbor and friend for friend and not by executive fiat.
So congratulations to President Obama and his family. I hope the best for them and pray for their safety. I pray for this country that God would bless us, even if we don't always like what that blessing looks like, but I also pray more importantly that God would bless His world with His presence.
I know that there are a lot of people who either dislike Obama or Democrats or whoever, people who are more than ready for the inauguration to be over so that they can get on with criticizing him and his decisions or whatever.
As for me, I'll laud Obama when I think he does well, and criticize when I disagree. I can't predict one way or another which one I'll do more of than the other.
What I can say is that I'm tremendously grateful that my kids are going to grow up in a world where a member of a minority has achieved the highest office in this land, where being of a certain color doesn't present an automatic barrier, that they'll have no excuses to accomplish anything they want to dream. Is Obama the culmination of Dr. Martin Luther King's dream? To some extent, but I think that dream was for all Americans, not just the ones of African descent.
But I'm glad for this new beginning, and while I'm positive that Obama will not be as good as his most fervent supporters seem to think nor as bad as his most vociferous detractors think, I'm looking forward to see how he does.
Finally, I'll say this. I still believe that politics is an imperfect way to achieve the goals of the Kingdom of God. As Jesus himself said in John 18:36, His Kingdom is not achieved in the ways that the kingdoms of this world achieve power ("My Kingdom is not of this world"). And so while I'll admire Obama and his journey to the presidency, I'll still expect him to be a politician and use the tools that politicians use to achieve their goals. And I'll work with my family and community in the way of Jesus to achieve His Kingdom and His will on earth as it is in heaven. Can government help in some of those things? To some extent, maybe. But I know it's best achieved in little pockets of the Kingdom where neighbor cares for neighbor and friend for friend and not by executive fiat.
So congratulations to President Obama and his family. I hope the best for them and pray for their safety. I pray for this country that God would bless us, even if we don't always like what that blessing looks like, but I also pray more importantly that God would bless His world with His presence.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
MSNBC is the new FoxNews, The Daily Show, and Objective Journalism
We have a new Democratic president and apparently the cool thing to do is have a network in your corner.
"Thankfully," MSNBC has accepted this mantle. Witness Chris Matthews say that it's his job as a journalist to make Obama's presidency successful.
And truly thankfully, The Daily Show has taken their role as court jester seriously and is pointing out the hypocrisy.
Which they also did last night in pointing out some of the things that Obama and Hillary Clinton said about each other during the campaign. (Warning: some adult humor, if that kind of thing offends you...)
So, I'm curious. Is it possible for a news organization to be completely objective or is this a case of people recognizing biases and making them work for them? Do we need a completely objective media or is it just that all sides get presented equally?
"Thankfully," MSNBC has accepted this mantle. Witness Chris Matthews say that it's his job as a journalist to make Obama's presidency successful.
And truly thankfully, The Daily Show has taken their role as court jester seriously and is pointing out the hypocrisy.
Which they also did last night in pointing out some of the things that Obama and Hillary Clinton said about each other during the campaign. (Warning: some adult humor, if that kind of thing offends you...)
So, I'm curious. Is it possible for a news organization to be completely objective or is this a case of people recognizing biases and making them work for them? Do we need a completely objective media or is it just that all sides get presented equally?
Monday, November 10, 2008
The Christian Right
Diving in headfirst again...
I was wondering this weekend if the election last Tuesday was a sign of the beginning of the end of the Christian Right's influence in power. According to some Exit poll numbers from the Associated Press (and stolen shamelessly from the Dallas Morning News):
I think this data and the election results can be read a few ways.
1) The Christian Right never really supported McCain.
In my listening to conservative talk radio and talking to my friends, people were not incredibly excited about McCain. It was only when Palin came on board that many on the Christian right really came out to support McCain (I say all this anecdotally, of course). However, the Christian right might not have been able to convince enough of those voters to either vote McCain or vote against Obama, which would seem to indicate some eroding support.
2) The Anti-Palin vote.
I know several people who like McCain. They especially liked the McCain who ran back in 2000, who thumbed his nose at Christian leaders like Falwell and Dobson and Robertson (calling them "agents of intolerance" in 2000). They were dismayed by what they perceived as McCain's pandering to the Religious right (by speaking at Falwell's Liberty University, for example), seeming to sell out in order to get their support. And when Palin was chosen, this seemed to further his entrenchment with the Christian Right. But what it also did was drive moderates and centrists away from him. According to a CNN exit poll, those that considered themselves moderate voted 60-39 for Obama, which was 44% of the respondants. Now I believe that McCain would lost by even more votes, if he HADN'T chosen a Christian Right conservative like Palin, because the Christian right would have stayed home or gone for a 3rd party candidate. It would have been similar to what happened in 1992 when many of them voted for Perot, sapping support from Bush Sr. and giving Clinton the White House. So McCain didn't have much choice from that standpoint. But it also didn't help that Palin basically became a punchline on most comedy shows almost immediately, even by using her own words.
3. Rejection of Fear Tactics
I wonder finally if many people just decided to reject the Christian Right's propagation of fear as a campaign tool. Now, as I've said, I think the Left used fear as well, particularly in its promotion of McCain as the Third Term of George Bush (a nightmare for many people on the left). However, there were some pretty egregious examples of the Christian Right using fear to try and sway voters, especially the Letter from 2012 from Focus on the Family. I think people got tired of that and tired of similar tactics, and whether they voted for Obama to spite the Christian Right, or because they actually supported Obama, I think those votes were a rejection of those tactics. Even going to the buzz words of the 50s (socialist/communist) and the new racism that's ok (Muslim) didn't seem to work.
Now it's the interesting part for the Republican party. Do they read these results as a rejection of the Christian Right and move more center or do they read these results as a reject of McCain and his more centrist policies and take this as a hint to move more to the right? I suppose we'll wait until the midterms to find out.
I was wondering this weekend if the election last Tuesday was a sign of the beginning of the end of the Christian Right's influence in power. According to some Exit poll numbers from the Associated Press (and stolen shamelessly from the Dallas Morning News):
Worship service attendance is considered a marker of religiosity that is generally tied to conservative politics. People who say they attend worship services more than once a week voted for President Bush over John Kerry 64-35. This year, John McCain still won those voters, but only by a 55-43 tally.So among regular church goers, Obama gained 9 points and among "born-again evangelicals" (whatever that really means), the president-elect gained 6 points.
Mr. McCain took an overwhelming percentage of the born-again evangelical vote. But his tally of 73 percent was a drop from the 2004 election, where Mr. Bush beat Mr. Kerry with 79 percent of that vote.
I think this data and the election results can be read a few ways.
1) The Christian Right never really supported McCain.
In my listening to conservative talk radio and talking to my friends, people were not incredibly excited about McCain. It was only when Palin came on board that many on the Christian right really came out to support McCain (I say all this anecdotally, of course). However, the Christian right might not have been able to convince enough of those voters to either vote McCain or vote against Obama, which would seem to indicate some eroding support.
2) The Anti-Palin vote.
I know several people who like McCain. They especially liked the McCain who ran back in 2000, who thumbed his nose at Christian leaders like Falwell and Dobson and Robertson (calling them "agents of intolerance" in 2000). They were dismayed by what they perceived as McCain's pandering to the Religious right (by speaking at Falwell's Liberty University, for example), seeming to sell out in order to get their support. And when Palin was chosen, this seemed to further his entrenchment with the Christian Right. But what it also did was drive moderates and centrists away from him. According to a CNN exit poll, those that considered themselves moderate voted 60-39 for Obama, which was 44% of the respondants. Now I believe that McCain would lost by even more votes, if he HADN'T chosen a Christian Right conservative like Palin, because the Christian right would have stayed home or gone for a 3rd party candidate. It would have been similar to what happened in 1992 when many of them voted for Perot, sapping support from Bush Sr. and giving Clinton the White House. So McCain didn't have much choice from that standpoint. But it also didn't help that Palin basically became a punchline on most comedy shows almost immediately, even by using her own words.
3. Rejection of Fear Tactics
I wonder finally if many people just decided to reject the Christian Right's propagation of fear as a campaign tool. Now, as I've said, I think the Left used fear as well, particularly in its promotion of McCain as the Third Term of George Bush (a nightmare for many people on the left). However, there were some pretty egregious examples of the Christian Right using fear to try and sway voters, especially the Letter from 2012 from Focus on the Family. I think people got tired of that and tired of similar tactics, and whether they voted for Obama to spite the Christian Right, or because they actually supported Obama, I think those votes were a rejection of those tactics. Even going to the buzz words of the 50s (socialist/communist) and the new racism that's ok (Muslim) didn't seem to work.
Now it's the interesting part for the Republican party. Do they read these results as a rejection of the Christian Right and move more center or do they read these results as a reject of McCain and his more centrist policies and take this as a hint to move more to the right? I suppose we'll wait until the midterms to find out.
Friday, November 07, 2008
Question of the Day: Moral vs. Political
Why is it that when someone talks about abortion or homosexuality, they are talking about moral issues, but when someone talks about greed, poverty, or just/unjust war they are being political?
For instance, our guest preacher at church on Sunday, brought up abortion and acceptance of homosexuality as examples that our nation needs revival, which is a perspective that I can appreciate, even if I disagree on approaches. However, if someone were to bring up social justice issues like poverty or greed or just/unjust war, those issues are considered "political" and shouldn't be brought up from a pulpit setting. Why the discrepancy?
For instance, our guest preacher at church on Sunday, brought up abortion and acceptance of homosexuality as examples that our nation needs revival, which is a perspective that I can appreciate, even if I disagree on approaches. However, if someone were to bring up social justice issues like poverty or greed or just/unjust war, those issues are considered "political" and shouldn't be brought up from a pulpit setting. Why the discrepancy?
Thursday, November 06, 2008
YouTube Thursday: Speeches
McCain's Concession Speech
I've got to say that McCain did a really great job with this speech. He was gracious, considerate, and really showed the man that I remember seeing back in 2000.
Obama's Acceptance Speech
Obama did excellently as well. I thought the highest point of the whole speech was the end, when he brought up 106-year-old Anne Nixon Cooper, born the generation after slavery, who saw so much of American history happen.
I've got to say that McCain did a really great job with this speech. He was gracious, considerate, and really showed the man that I remember seeing back in 2000.
Obama's Acceptance Speech
Obama did excellently as well. I thought the highest point of the whole speech was the end, when he brought up 106-year-old Anne Nixon Cooper, born the generation after slavery, who saw so much of American history happen.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
President-Elect Barack H. Obama
I don't think it's ever been a real secret that I've favored Barack Obama in this election. I like John McCain and I really liked John McCain in 2000 when he ran. I've tried to be as non-partisan on my blog as I can. I've tried to show different viewpoints on issues as much as possible. I'm someone who likes to hear both/all sides of an issue and so I've tried to present that as much as possible here.
This year though, I favored Obama. I'm not 100% with him. He and I disagree about abortion: he wants it more available than I do. He and I disagree on the role of government in the economy: he favors more involvement than I do, although I want more involvement than Greenspan favored. We agree on homosexual marriage, in not supporting it, but supporting civil rights for the unions between two homosexuals. We agree on Iraq, that we should transfer power back to the civilian government as quickly as possible and return our troops home expediently.
I voted for Obama in this election and I wait with bated breath to see the kind of president he will make. Great speeches don't make a great president. Great actions do, and I'm hopeful that he will be a president of great action and surround himself by the people that will enable him to make those decisions.
I know that many of my fellow Christian brothers and sisters are disappointed by his election, even appalled or disgusted. I respect that. I understand why people are disappointed in this, because of policy disagreements.
What I don't understand is the vitriol and hatred that many people who claim the name of Jesus are hurling at him. One of my former student's Facebook status last night read, "I can't believe America is choosing this racist Muslim piece of s***." Which appalled me. People who claim the name of Jesus are free to disagree, but to express anger in such a hateful way brings shame to the name of Jesus. And if I weren't a Christian and saw or heard this, there is NO WAY that I would want to be a part of that! Why would I want to become a Christian if it makes me a more hateful person? Please, let's think about how our words and actions come across to people. Let's think about how we are reflection the name of Jesus.
I will probably keep writing about politics over the next little while. I'm curious to think about why McCain lost. I'm curious to think about if this is the election that broke the back of the Religious Right. I'm curious for what Obama's election means about race in America.
But right now, we have a new President-Elect. And for the first time, it was someone who doesn't look like me. And if for nothing else, that's progress. That's history.
This year though, I favored Obama. I'm not 100% with him. He and I disagree about abortion: he wants it more available than I do. He and I disagree on the role of government in the economy: he favors more involvement than I do, although I want more involvement than Greenspan favored. We agree on homosexual marriage, in not supporting it, but supporting civil rights for the unions between two homosexuals. We agree on Iraq, that we should transfer power back to the civilian government as quickly as possible and return our troops home expediently.
I voted for Obama in this election and I wait with bated breath to see the kind of president he will make. Great speeches don't make a great president. Great actions do, and I'm hopeful that he will be a president of great action and surround himself by the people that will enable him to make those decisions.
I know that many of my fellow Christian brothers and sisters are disappointed by his election, even appalled or disgusted. I respect that. I understand why people are disappointed in this, because of policy disagreements.
What I don't understand is the vitriol and hatred that many people who claim the name of Jesus are hurling at him. One of my former student's Facebook status last night read, "I can't believe America is choosing this racist Muslim piece of s***." Which appalled me. People who claim the name of Jesus are free to disagree, but to express anger in such a hateful way brings shame to the name of Jesus. And if I weren't a Christian and saw or heard this, there is NO WAY that I would want to be a part of that! Why would I want to become a Christian if it makes me a more hateful person? Please, let's think about how our words and actions come across to people. Let's think about how we are reflection the name of Jesus.
I will probably keep writing about politics over the next little while. I'm curious to think about why McCain lost. I'm curious to think about if this is the election that broke the back of the Religious Right. I'm curious for what Obama's election means about race in America.
But right now, we have a new President-Elect. And for the first time, it was someone who doesn't look like me. And if for nothing else, that's progress. That's history.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Colbert Election Prayer
Last night, on the Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert offered this prayer before the election. It's kind of the opposite of going into your closet to pray...
Monday, November 03, 2008
Presidential Campaign in 1 Minute
Seriously, what else do you need?
Oh, and here's all you need to see of the debates.
As one last point, here is the political journey of Donald Miller, author Blue Like Jazz. It's a very interesting perspective. http://donmilleris.com/2008/11/03/from-reagan-to-obama-a-brief-political-history/
Oh, and here's all you need to see of the debates.
As one last point, here is the political journey of Donald Miller, author Blue Like Jazz. It's a very interesting perspective. http://donmilleris.com/2008/11/03/from-reagan-to-obama-a-brief-political-history/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
