And so the pendulum swings. It has been said Histry does not repeat itself, but it does often rhyme. So it seems here. Perhaps in the seismic shifting of denominational politics we will see overlaps in some causes which allow for an easing on others – i.e. the Baptist “Unity” event.
Here’s to HOPE!

Speaking as an outsider to Christianity, it’s hard to see why two issues Jesus, I believe, never addressed, abortion and gays, have been emphasized by “Christian” leaders, while issues I believe he is supposed to have mentioned, like helping our poor, and issues vital to us all, like the environment, were ignored or indeed opposed by these leaders.
Perhaps it’s time for a newer, better set of leaders.

““We are broadening the discussion,” said Melissa Roberts, a junior at Jesuit-run Boston College and chair of the College Democrats faith caucus. “People are realizing we can define our political beliefs by more than two issues. We can reach beyond abortion and gay marriage.””
Wow, their political beliefs extend beyond abortion and gay marriage. It is good they point this out….for, it is not alway obvious.
I do thank Pres Bush and his allies for keeping gay marriage front and center for so long. They have inadvertently done more to move the country towards equal-rights for lgbtqi people than all the gay activists could have done in the same amount of time.
Peace!

“Poverty, immigration and the environment are not issues that are isolated to one party or the other.”
Then why did they wait until just now to bring it up?

If you want to follow Jesus, you need to follow the “Golden Rule” or the 10 Cammandments. Do not murder, do not lie, do not slander, etc. As I see it, the Democrats are not following Jesus. They want POWER, I suggest that our young people study more history and economics to find out what has and hasn’t worked in the past. To understand what God expects of his people and what his justice is like when we do not follow his plan for ourselves or our country.

nnmns,
You’ve got to look at the history of modern American evangelicalism to understand why it has taken so long for many of them to throw political support behind certain causes. For one thing, evangelicalism itself was originally fairly non-political; it grew up as a response to the Social Gospel movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which fundamentalists and evengelicals believed placed far too much emphasis on salvation being achieved by human political effort, something the conservatives thought had caused mainstream Protestantism to lose sight of the role of God in the whole thing. Unfortunately, a lot of evengelicals overreacted and become completely unconcerned with political efforts to make the world a better place.
The advent of legalized abortion shocked them out of their political complacency, as leaders like Falwell convinced many that abortion was something too horrible for them to just stand aside and watch. Further, some of the other consequences of the sexual revolution, like the increased openness of culture towards things like homosexuality, were perceived not simply as political issues but as issues that were weakening culture and making more difficult for the Gospel to be communicated to society. These concerns drew a lot of evangelicals back into a political mindset and gave rise to the so-called Religious Right.
The renewed political consciousness of American evangelicalism is gradually being extended to other political concerns as well, like the environment, war, and poverty issues; the growing number of evangelical Democrats is, in a strange way, something of a continuation of the trend that Falwell et al. started a couple of decades ago. Beyond that, there have also been some important theological trends that have spread like wildfire through younger evangelical theologians and, by extension, through the recent evangelical student bodies being taught at evangelical colleges and seminaries, and the ministers that are being put out and filling the vacancies in the congregations. Theological critics of American politics and “Constintinianism”–the wedding of the church to political ends, or “civil religion”–have put forward the notion of the church as more of an “alternative politics” to American liberal democracy. These ideas have spread through younger evangelicalism to the effect that younger evangelicals are very wary of being “used” by politicians for political ends, so it effectively means the weakening of party loyalties and more acknowledgement that the aims of both parties are often at odds with the politics of the church. This means that younger people are floating more fluidly from party to party, refusing to identify with the goals of either one, but willing to vote for either (or neither) party based on a more balanced consideration of all the major issues currently at stake.

Well, I would say that all politicians—or the vast majority—are really after power, and I must admit, some of the GOP’s recent actions have been a bit galling to me…so I do applaud the movement by the orthodox to a more well-balanced politics, but I ain’t changing to the Dem’s side anytime soon. (Put Zell Miller on the ticket and we’ll see.)
God bless.

NKW, thanks for that informative posting. Let us hope these younger Evangalicals show a lot more sense than a lot of their elders have.

The basic problem for progressive evangelicals (and Catholics as well) is that we are forced to make a devil’s choice between flawed and troublesome alternative. The emphasis on the Presidential race helps to underscore the problem. Many of us are pro-life, pro-poor, pro-environment, pro-labor, and pro-social justice at the same time. We have no candidate. Christians need to stop reacting to secular conservatism and liberalism as if those are the only choices available to us. Traditional Catholics and evangelicals need to develop our own consistant politics and issues. We need to develop our own candidates. These candidates may run as Republicans or Democrats or independents. But these candidates must reflect the breath of our Christian views on politics and justice.
In a political sense Christians need to grow up. We need to be leaders in our own right.

My enthusiasm is, shall we say, restrained. As a short-term political tactic, what was good for the Republicans may be good for the Democrats as well. However, the current crop of Democrats (spineless, shapeless lumps that make me feel like scraping my shoe off on something) is almost as bad as the current crop of Republicans (posturing, pandering demagogues hypocritically wrapping themselves in the flag and the Bible).
I don’t mind anyparty or any candidate reaching out to any segment of society; but after years of Republicans sucking up to self-appointed kingmakers like James Dobson, who seems at least as eager to trash the Constitution as anyone currently in the White House, the single most important political-religious message is that America must remain a secular nation, which means that is must not become a theocracy. Christians have as much right as anyone else to have opinions about what is good for society — but the justification must be factual and logical, not “Because the Bible says so.”

To lump together that the democrats “just want power” is a ruse. I think as a Christian we should really pause before making such bold assertions. If they just wanted power, why would they be so willing to sacrifice their wages for to ameliorate the poverty, health, and welfare of the most disadvantaged. After all, isn’t that the model that Christ pursued?
Certainly, all government assistance programs are not good. Hence, the role of both parties is to create public policy thats accountable.
Why did **who** wait? The democrats have had a pretty consistent stance on the issues of poverty, the environment, and immigration.

I cannot believe people are horrified that folks seeking to enter the political system want power. That is the drug that keeps them juiced and functioning! Without it they are simply another well intentioned, rudderless, ngo whose opinions are filled in the large upright can. So lets see what they do with power. Can they be just – ask King David – and read his last words – or better listen to the piece of music by Randall Thompson (I think). The bold chorus adds weight to his message, “Those that ruleth over all must be just, must be just, must-be-JUST” (I bowlderized the text to make it inclusive. Don’t like it? Eh! Find your own)
By the way, someone up the list mentioned, and I araphrase, the path of righteousness means following the !0 commandments and the Golden Rule. David broke all but 2 or 3, some in one afternoon! And he was counted as just. I believe there is more to faithfulness that allegiance to a bunch of rules. Caring beats obediance, awareness survives wariness, and hope knocks fear out of the ring. What’s this have to do with the article? I think the young evangelicals (sound like one of those tacky singing groups touring the country in a flashy bus and RV convoy) may have someting that the young liberals can find in concert with them. Lets hope the theological and ecclesiastical differences that has caused so many other generations to fissure does not do the same to them.

Christians need to stop relating their religion to a political party. Jesus wasn’t a democrat, and DEFINITELY not a republican. These two parties were created to induce conflict. That’s why they are there. If we all just followed the teachings of Christ, there wouldn’t be the need for political conflict, or politics at all. Let’s stop trying to figure out which party is better and which party that “young evangelicals” are going to follow and be defined only by our biblical teaching.