Comments on: Getting Beyond the Language of "Open-mindedness"

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:02:37 +0000

Yes, sorry Bill, we're working on it!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:01:42 +0000

Revevangelist, thanks for contributing the link. I think Democrats would respond that the report you link to ignores other issues important to Christians that fall on the side of the Democrats (similar to the list on the Sojourner's site). If this report had also addressed those other important subjects it would have made a stronger case. I disagree with the assessment of people like those at Sojourners that Democratic policies are better for the poor, and explaining why this is so is also important.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:55:50 +0000

Why does the main page point to July 6? Is the server date wrong?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 13:05:10 +0000

Maybe we should step back and talk about a theology of helping the poor. I never see that enter into the discussion. On the left it's always, the gov't should do this or the church should do this, but I'm not sure I see that in scripture. I seem to recall a couple of times, at least once, Jesus did not feed the crowd. I think it's pretty shallow just to say things like “feed the poor”, “work for social justice”. These seem to be a cover for left wing, socialist and even marxist ideas. To be sure, I rarely see Wallis using much scripture to support his position.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:10:02 +0000

If you compare the Republican and Democratic party's platforms you could clearly see why, I as Christian would go with the Republican party. Examine for yourself:
http://www.probe.org/content/view/1149/88/

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:24:50 +0000

I'm going to let you have the last word on this one, Tyler, but I will take a look at those links. Thanks for the discussion!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:25:25 +0000

"I just want to clear up one assumption you might be making here--it sounds as if you think that Christians vote Republican because they feel strongly about a couple of issues." I do know several Christians and others who vote for one party or another solely based on their feelings of a couple issues -- though in my experience, abortion has tended to be the line in the sand. I don't think it's only Republicans who do this. As Micah has said elsewhere, we all have non-negotiable subjects and thus these voting practices are to be expected. I don't assume that the majority of Christians who vote Republican only care about a couple of issues. What I meant when I discussed Sojourners was that it was one of the only Christian organizations that I was familiar with that discussed political issues other than those I mentioned. I come from a very conservative background and was a Republican myself during my early voting career. I was familiar with the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition and found that the majority of their moral discussion has been about abortion and marriage, which are absolutely important issues. There are other issues, however, that I found their discussion either lacking or nonexistent. In those famous exit polls after the 2004 election, many people said "moral values" were one of the primary reasons for voting the way they did, but those polls listed the war in Iraq, poverty, health care, etc. as separte from "moral values," which probably meant abortion and marriage. I'm encouraged to hear, Amy, that you do not separate these issues from your moral values. In fact, I don't think most people do, it is just that the powers that be -- our politicians, the media, etc. -- have framed the discussion so that matters of foreign policy, health care, and fiscal responsibility are not on the same moral plane as issues of family. I do believe that is changing, but changing slowly. I think this piece by Wallis speaks well about the type of political ideology with which I resonate -- namely the fourth option he discusses. And for peace of mind, Sojourners has responded to questions about the cartoon. You can find that response here. Of course, you may disagree with their explanation, but we should be aware that they are aware that their satire has upset others.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 23:44:27 +0000

They were saying more than “we don't have to vote for Bush”–they were saying we ought not to vote for Bush if we're following Scripture (the video was pretty clear about this). But I suppose people will just have to watch the video and decide this for themselves.
I just want to clear up one assumption you might be making here–it sounds as if you think that Christians vote Republican because they feel strongly about a couple of issues.
I actually voted Republican because of all the moral issues you mentioned–fiscal policies, criminal punishment, poverty, justice, etc. And there are many people who are discussing these issues “in the public arena using the religious tools we have been given by God”–including Jewish people like Dennis Prager and Christians like Frank Beckwith and Greg Koukl–on the conservative side. I honestly think conservative policies will better accomplish a realization of these shared Christian values than the liberal policies.
I don't think Sojourners recognizes that we have considered these things because they're strongly committed to a specific stance on these issues and think all Christians must therefore take their stance; so they assume that those who don't agree on the means of fixing the problems don't care about the problems at all.
I'm not sure if there's anywhere for us to go from here at the moment since I think we just disagree on whether or not there was a problem with this campaign, but I want to say again that I am so glad you comment on our site. I appreciate the challenges and the deep conversation, and I know everyone will come to understand both positions better by listening to us.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 23:13:05 +0000

By the way, Micah, In-N-Out was excellent.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 23:08:38 +0000

I don't think it's necessarily about candidates, but issues. For example, in the cartoon you linked to, I sincerely thought that Sojourners was lambasting the Religious Right and specifically Falwell and Robertson for their rather wide and overarching claims that Evangelicals must vote for Bush. Sojourners main point is to say that Christians don't have to vote for Bush. That doesn't translate exactly into support for Kerry because we aren't playing a zero-sum game. One can vote for a third party or even abstain — and there are writers for Sojourners who have done both. And yes, they do take a position on specific issues, which run counter to the GOP. I would agree that because of their values and exegesis, Sojourners likely supported Kerry.
I actually would have been more upset if Sojourners left their campaign as “God is not a Republican.” Again, they aren't trying to establish the Religious Left — they aren't trying to create a movement like the Christian Coalition but with an emphasis on justice and peace. The goal as of now is for the movement to change the conversation in America so that religion is not relegated to one or two issues — and not relegated to having a specific stance on one or two of those issues.
I'll admit my judgment may be clouded by my sympathies (and my subscription to the magazine), but I can only explain what attracted me to the movement in the first place, and it wasn't because I finally found a prominent Christian group that supported the Democrats. (I'm a registered non-party independent.) It was that this group actually discussed matters of justice and faith that went beyond simply tax cuts, abortion, and marriage/family. Honestly I wish they addressed these issues more as well since I think they have ceded too much ground to the Religious Right. Sojourners said, and rightly in my opinion, that war, poverty, criminal punishment, fiscal policies, health care, etc. are moral and religious issues that need to be discussed in the public arena using the religious tools we have been given by God. I don't always agree with Sojourners, but they offer a point that is necessary in my opinion.