Religious Right, R.I.P.

Cal Thomas's picture

When Barack Obama takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, he will do so in the 30th anniversary year of the founding of the so-called Religious Right.

Born in 1979 and midwifed by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Religious Right was a reincarnation of previous religious-social movements that sought moral improvement through legislation and court rulings. Those earlier movements — from abolition (successful) to Prohibition (unsuccessful) — had mixed results.

Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren’t anywhere near as successful as those that focused on changing hearts.

The four religious revivals, from the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s to the Fourth Great Awakening in the late 1960s and early ‘70s, which touched America and instantly transformed millions of Americans (and American culture as a result), are testimony to that.

Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

I opt for trying something else.

Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards?

Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others.

What is the answer, then, for conservative Evangelicals who are rightly concerned about the corrosion of culture, the indifference to the value of human life and the living arrangements of same- and opposite-sex couples?

The answer depends on the response to another question: do conservative Evangelicals want to feel good, or do they want to adopt a strategy that actually produces results? Clearly partisan politics have not achieved their objectives. Do they think they can succeed by committing themselves to 30 more years of the same?

If results are what conservative Evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth.

Suppose millions of conservative Evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to “love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans,” not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God’s love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?

Such a strategy could be more “transformational” than electing a new president, even the first president of color. But in order to succeed, such a strategy would not be led by charismatic figures, who would raise lots of money, be interviewed on Sunday talk shows, author books and make gobs of money.

God teaches in His Word that His power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness.

He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow’s mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one’s self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice.

How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior “kingdom”?

Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow.

By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results.

If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics.

[Email Cal Thomas at tmseditors@tribune.com.] ©2008 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

login to post comments | Cal Thomas's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
muddle's picture
Submitted by muddle on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 11:45am.

I think he's just right about this.

Note that he is not suggesting that evangelicals vacate the public square and withdraw to a subjective and "personal" understanding of their religion.

If their worldview is true as they believe it is, then it clearly has entailments of a moral, political and, therefore, "public" nature. As a person deeply influenced by Francis Schaeffer, Thomas no doubt would go on to say that Christians should be in the business of articulating and defending that worldview and engaging in cultural critique from that perspective.

Rather, he is pulling the plug on the sort of "top-down" mentality that has characterized the so-called religious right and alienated so much of our society, including me. I suspect that one of the dynamics of this election was a growing aversion to the political muscle-flexing that has characterized this group for some three decades.

Perhaps rather than attempting to strong-arm copies of the Ten Commandments into public places, Christian people should demonstrate what it is like to abide by them. And, unfortunately, this very group that has argued for "family values" has statistically kept pace with the national divorce rate (see Ron Sider, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience. Show us what it is like for a family really to flourish in light of biblical principles. Evangelical author, Philip Yancey has observed that Christians ought to be characterized mostly by graciousness, but this is the last thing that comes to most minds when they hear the word "evangelical." Rather, it is the various political stances for which they have been known.

Combine the overly-political approach to cultural influence with the anti-intellectualism that has characterized this group, and I think you have a recipe for losing both the mind and the heart of the culture.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Tue, 11/11/2008 - 4:30pm.

Time to bring in Pastor Thomas Muthee to whip up a spell and cast these witches out of the Party.


sniffles5's picture
Submitted by sniffles5 on Tue, 11/11/2008 - 4:25pm.

The great schism has begun! The "country club Republican" faction, led by Cal Thomas, are attempting to bring their fundie brethren to heel.

This ought to be a magnificent trainwreck to watch!


meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Tue, 11/11/2008 - 11:06pm.

Coming from somebody like you who probably has trouble forecasting his own bodily functions, we're not too worried about your "take on the future" of our party.


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 8:00am.

Because it is far easier to snipe at Sniffle's words than address these thoughts from Cal:
"Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards?

Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others."

You remind me of the knight from the Monty Python film who had no arms or legs, yet said "It's only a flesh wound." It's funny that you conservative guys claim this hasn't been a resounding defeat for whatever conservatism is today, yet you couldn't even get the "true conservatives" Thompson and Hukabee out of the GOP primary. So, I guess republicans defeated conservatism in the primaries, and American voters defeated what was left of your party at the general election booths.

Any way you care to look at it, I don't think your beef is with Sniffles. You might want to email Cal.


Fred Garvin's picture
Submitted by Fred Garvin on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 12:42pm.

You mean like the defeat of the liberals from
1980, wher jimmah-boy only received 49 electoral votes because he was such a disaster?

Or perhaps 1984 when Mondale only received 13 electoral votes?

Do you mean that kind of defeat?


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 5:01pm.

I do mean the kind of defeat that has brought at least 57 democratic senators (at least 17 more than republicans), 257 democratic congressmen (82 more than republicans), and the kind of defeat that allowed
YOUR
WORST
FEARS
TO
BECOME
REALITY Eye-wink


sniffles5's picture
Submitted by sniffles5 on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 3:06pm.

Yup. Reagan conservatism is as dead as the Gipper himself.

No more charismatic Republicans waiting in the wings (except perhaps Chuck Norris?) who can convince the robber barons and wide eyed fundies to play nice together. Reagan could do it. Dubya could do it. I doubt anyone else could.

No universal bogeyman like the Soviet Union to focus the Republican hatred upon.

The Republicans are not even a national party any longer, they are a large regional party. And that "seal the border" jingoism that the core component of the Republicans (the bitter aging white gun owners) like to espouse has alienated virtually every Hispanic from sea to shining sea.

Don't be surprised to see Texas turn blue in 2010!


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 3:51pm.

Care to idenfiy who this platfrom belongs to:

Undocumented population is exploding: The number of undocumented immigrants in the country has increased more than 40 percent since 2000. Every year, more than a half-million people come illegally or illegally overstay their visas

He supports additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 5:20pm.

But a reasoned approach to illegal immigration is somewhat different than what is presented to Hispanics by the other side.

Which is why I would strenuously oppose any type of radio “Fairness Doctrine”. What did all those Hispanics hear when they turned on Republican radio?

Limbaugh:

“Mexicans are stupid and unqualified”

“Shut your mouth or get out.”

Michael Savage:

"America is being overrun by an invasion force from Mexico that'll soon take over the country."

"We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. You're telling me they're going to assimilate? They will never assimilate. They come here and they bring their destitute ways to this country, and they never assimilate. It is a disaster. Did you hear what I just said? A disaster."

"And you think the gang-banger with baggy pants is going to pay for your retirement, you liberal fools? You think that they're going to pay for your housing in a senior citizens center? You psychotic liberals don't even know you're digging your own grave and throwing lime in there. All that's missing is the worm from the tequila bottle to go with it."

"Illegal aliens have raped and disheveled the Statue of Liberty. We need to get our troops out of Iraq and put them on the streets of America to protect us from the scourge of illegal immigrants who are running rampant across America, killing our police for sport, raping, murdering like a scythe across America while the liberal psychos are telling us they come here to work."

G. Gordon Liddy

“Obama wants you to be sure your child can speak fluent illegal alien." "Sadly, with every legal and cultural step we take to make our life more immediately convenient for non-English-speaking illegal aliens, we merely feed the beast." Liddy later stated: " 'Round here, let's see, I speak some French, some German as well as English. Franklin [Liddy's producer] speaks fluent French, fluent Italian, as well as English. But none of us here, so far as I know, speak illegal alien."

Neal Boortz

"When we defeat this illegal alien amnesty bill, and when we yank out the welcome mat, and they all start going back to Mexico, as a going away gift let's all give them a box of nuclear waste."

Then there was Pat Buchanan, Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, Brit Hume and on and on.

Then they look at the Republican contenders like Tom Tancredo, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Duncan Hunter and saw McCain wither under the assault and flip-flop on his position.

We can only say thanks!


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 6:30pm.

But a reasoned approach to illegal immigration....

Whatever happen to the existing laws? The laws that are established by this sovereign nation. You know, the laws that President elect Obama will swear to uphold and defend.

I wonder how another Elvira Arellano incident would be dealt with under an Obama administration. How different would be the response as to not upset the Hispanic vote.

As for Limbaugh, Savage, Liddy and Boortz and the rest - simply entertainers that's all. As for the GOP contenders - that's just sad.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Thu, 11/13/2008 - 12:12pm.

I've heard that comment, "As for Limbaugh, Savage, Liddy and Boortz and the rest - simply entertainers that's all" a lot and for a long time.

I submit for your consideration that the Hispanics did not consider themselves entertained. Frankly, neither do I. It's perfectly acceptable to have that attitude and to consider people of my ilk lacking a sense of humor, etc. On the other hand, it's also perfectly acceptable to tie these right-wing demagogues to the GOP and exploit their comments to the Party's detriment.

I gotta work, check ya later.


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 11/15/2008 - 12:29pm.

explain how will an Obama administration deal with another Elvira Arellano incident without upsetting the Hispanic vote? For that matter, how would he enforce any of the immigration laws without upsetting the same?

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Sat, 11/15/2008 - 12:50pm.

Couldn't find it. Just some generic statement:

"Obama and Biden believe we must fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy and increase the number of legal immigrants to keep families together and meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill."


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 11/15/2008 - 12:55pm.

I appreciate the honest reply!!
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Thu, 11/13/2008 - 12:33pm.

Back to my question. How will an Obama administration deal with another Elvira Arellano incident without upsetting the Hispanic vote? For that matter, how would he enforce any of the immigration laws without upsetting the same?

As for entertainment, I don't find that lot entertaining either. Heck, I don't even listen to Dave Ramsey because it so depressing. There's always the "off" option.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by Davids mom on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 9:33pm.

. . have exhibited the behavior of leaders with 'class'. The election is over. McCain's concession speech was marvelous; the Bush's public courtesy to the Obama's is an excellent example of a democratic transition. Limbaugh and 'group' are tearing the Republican Party apart. There is room in a democracy for opposing opinions. This election has shown that 'negative' remarks and 'nasty politics' does not win elections. There is an engaged electorate out there - and they expect transparency in government. If they don't get it - the Democratic Party will be in trouble. . . .the country will be in trouble. The world is watching - and hoping for reasoned decisions towards getting us out of this mess that the citizens of the US and the world have been handed by the most distrusted administration in American history.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 9:43pm.

I'll let you in on a little secret; I find Limbaugh boring because it's the same thing like a re-run.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by Davids mom on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 9:58pm.

Yeah. I'm getting tired of the 'labels' and predictable comments. It's truly time for this country to unite. No more 'red' states, 'blue' states; liberals/conservatives; right/left STUFF!! We're in deep sh___! We need bi-partisan leadership to put an American agenda to work! In the meantime - I'm going to enjoy watching the first family in the White House. The Bush girls turned out OK - and I’m sure the Obama girls will also. Enjoy this beautiful fall!!

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 10:01pm.

Absolutely!!!
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 10:33am.

diva, that is very heartwarming that you feel the need to protect your fellow liberal. Are you the designated "enforcer" for your group? Pretty scary stuff there.

What is it with you and this "pivot" thing? That seems to be a recurring theme with you. Let me make it easy for you. Sniffer chimed in on the article with his two cents. I responded to him that what he thinks will happen to the party is meaningless to us. If someone doesn't want a reply to their take on the subject, don't post here.

You guys are still drunk from your win and you think things have changed forever in your favor. You can think what you want. The Republican Party is not going anywhere. The ebb and flow of politics has been going on forever. It happens to both parties at different points in history. You guys can hope it is different this time and the party is going away, ain't ever going to happen.

All we have to do is let the honeymoon end with Barry. What will people think when they see lots of those promises abandoned?? What will they think when they see taxes go up on so many when he promised tax cuts for virtually all?? What will they think if the military takes the expected cuts and there is another 9/11??? What will they think after they have 4 years of the most liberal senator as president??? What will they think after 4 years of Reid and Pelosi riding herd on a Congress with lower approval ratings that President Bush??? What will they think after 4 years of one party having complete control??

Guess we'll see how it unfolds. Both parties are here to stay. Think what you want. Predict doom for the party all you want. History proves differently.


Submitted by FayetteFlyer on Thu, 11/13/2008 - 5:52pm.

MOC is armed, mad and dangerous! Before you continue this apocalyptical, talk-radio induced rant just take a deep breath and know the only thing the GOP is going to do is revamp its ideology to a more moderate stance and realize that the New World Order, as it was originally coined by Bush, Sr. is here and requires leaders of a global perspective. We don't need anymore elected government officials espousing hatred, fear and isolationism. I don't want the GOP to go away, just to evolve!

diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 5:16pm.

You're a smart guy, MOC. You already know the real issues here.

Sniffles certainly doesn't need protection. That would imply he is under some sort of threat. I didn't perceive a threat. Did you?

I like to point out your "pivots" from the meat or heart of matters to the tertiary. You like to point out misspellings and grammatical errors. I guess everyone has their niche. If you'd like, I'll refer to you as "shifting" to different subjects. Is that better?

Now, you talk about our predictions of doom for your party, but this editorial isn't about democrats' opinions. Have you heard what conservatives are saying about conservatives MOC? THAT'S what we're talking about. Conservatives are trashing Sarah Palin. Other conservatives are trashing "elitists" and "intellectuals" in the GOP. And yet other conservatives are, in this very editorial, scolding religious conservatives.

Don't be mad at us because we can't turn away from the train wreck. Try doing your own little NTSB investigation of the GOP train wreck and figure out what caused it. If you don't, which is FINE with us, I'm sure we will have more train wrecks to observe from your side.

As for YOUR predictions:

"What will people think when they see lots of those promises abandoned?? What will they think when they see taxes go up on so many when he promised tax cuts for virtually all?? What will they think if the military takes the expected cuts and there is another 9/11??? What will they think after they have 4 years of the most liberal senator as president??? What will they think after 4 years of Reid and Pelosi riding herd on a Congress with lower approval ratings that President Bush??? What will they think after 4 years of one party having complete control??"

You know your party's track record on predictions so far. Let's see if you keep your streak going. I'm counting on it. Smiling

ps. I think you meant "lower approval ratings THAN President Bush." I know grammar is important to you, and I'm here to help.


meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 8:23pm.

Thanks for the spelling catch. Not sure how I missed that....

To answer one of your questions, yes I have heard what conservatives are saying about other conservatives. I commented on that last week and will only say this part again. The Republican party is going through what you would expect following a defeat. There is no clear cut leader, but there will be. There are lots of possibilities out there and they will emerge. Do you honestly think we will allow that defeat to happen without a thorough dissection? You guys are like giddy schoolgirls over this. You'd think it is the first time a party has ever had this experience. "Watching the train wreck" must really stimulate the voyeuristic impulses deep inside.

Now, about MY "predictions". Unlike you arrogant guys on the left predicting the end of my party, I know I don't know what the future brings. Have you ever heard of rhetorical questions? That would mean I am posing different scenarios of what could cause people to incur a case of "buyers remorse". Do I think he will fail to deliver on some campaign promises? Uhh, yeah. Sign me up for that one for sure. The point is this. If your exalted Barry has a laundry list like that occur, some people will start getting nervous about their decision. Not the dyed in the wool party loyalists like you and me, but maybe some of those who just voted for "change". That is how the ball might start rolling. I'm just saying.....

Oh yeah, I'm not mad at you schoolgirls. I am just living the bloggers dream here. When someone posts their opinion on my party, they are inviting response. It just amused me that you defended Sniffer.


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Thu, 11/13/2008 - 11:12pm.

Rail against a presidential candidate an entire election cycle and then watch him win? That's your dream. Alrighty then. I'll just add a one cent comment on what you wrote that brought about a chuckle.

"Unlike you arrogant guys on the left predicting the end of my party, I know I don't know what the future brings."

MOC: You've commented of bloggers not screwing your fast food order up. You've blogged of income or perceived income. You've blogged of the types of folks "working your lawn." And We're arrogant? Again I say with no grammatical apology..... Alrighty then. If you say so... Eye-wink


meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Fri, 11/14/2008 - 12:21pm.

I always have to help you with these things diva. My comment was that I was living a bloggers dream responding to opinions about the future of my party. Then your "unique" interpretation takes over. The dream I was referring to was in your mind my candidate losing the election after I had railed against his opponent during the campaign. And you say I come at things from unique angles??? Whatever.

For someone who comes on here blustering at everyone you oppose, trying to bully anyone weak enough to take your crap, you sure have thin skin. Fact, we all railed against each other's candidate. Unlike you though, this election did not and does not dictate my entire "being" and give me reason to go on. It was an election. Am I sorry that Barry won? Yep. Am I waiting anxiously to squeal about every little screw-up like you guys have? Oh yeah. Either way, my life goes on. The winner of the election was not "life determining" as it appears to be for you.

I have seen you belittle so many people here by insinuating how "intellectually inferior" they are to you. And then I am arrogant? Those comments you referred to were part of the back and forth of pre-election blogging. Does that make me arrogant in your eyes? Apparently. Does that matter to me? Apparently not.

Cheers!!


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Fri, 11/14/2008 - 5:04pm.

So, if I'm reading you correctly, you feel that:

"Fact, we all railed against each other's candidate. Unlike you though, this election did not and does not dictate my entire "being" and give me reason to go on."

However, at the same time, you said.....
"Am I waiting anxiously to squeal about every little screw-up like you guys have? Oh yeah."

So, if I hear you correctly, you have a life just like us in which you find yourself "waiting anxiously to squeal about every little screw up" of President Obama. Okay. Clear as mud Smiling

Now, you feel that I'm an arrogant bastage, I believe, because you say:

"I have seen you belittle so many people here by insinuating how "intellectually inferior" they are to you. And then I am arrogant? Those comments you referred to were part of the back and forth of pre-election blogging."

So, just to understand you, if you put someone behind a fast food counter or in your yard pruning the bushes, you are just doing some "pre-election blogging." If I tell someone their an ignoramus for calling me a communist, I'm "arrogant" and not just doing some "pre-election blogging."

Ummm... I think I see where you are coming to.... I mean going from...

And just to be perfectly clear, in your saying, "Does that matter to me? Apparently not." You are telling me that you wrote this passionate reply because you apparently don't care.

Got it! Thanks for clearing this all up Laughing out loud Now you might go help counterfeit fred get a life outside of Obama bashin! Laughing out loud


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 10:27am.

"Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?"

Could it possibly maybe be that they think that because that's the platform the Republicans have been running on for 25 years? Cal and his ilk have been lying to and stringing along the evangelicals for years. Now that they've taken control of the Party he's like, "Where'd these people come from?"


diva's picture
Submitted by diva on Wed, 11/12/2008 - 10:31am.

If someone vowed that they were anti abortion in order to get my votes, I would certainly wonder why abortion was still a legal option 8 years later.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.