In Defense of the Religious Right, by Patrick Hynes - Oct 12
This book is written by a Republican political consultant who is not an evangelical but believes evangelicals get a bad rap from those around them, including other Republicans. He argues that the Right is the lifeblood of the party and terrifies the Democrats. The bulk of the book is an argument that the Right does reflect in terms of values and views where the majority of the country stands. He shows this by data and anecdote. He also argues that Democratic efforts to use God language also come across as insincere as when Howard Dean called Job his favorite New Testament book. He contends that the 2004 election was in part a values reaction (a point denied by many writers on that election looking to devalue the role of values) to recent efforts by the court to support the gay agenda, which led to many ballot initiatives in that election. He reminds people that evangelicals are not as monolithic as some claim. The book is a pragmatic look at politics as a numbers game. The book does not address certain issues. The sense of it is that the majority should rule. This does not take adequate account into the fact that the USA was also set up to be sure that minorities were not simply overtaken. This I why the USA is a republic and not merely a democracy. Where Hynes treats Jesus’ view of the poor, there is a sense that he has understates the case when he argues Jesus merely taught to love all the creation, even the poor. The poor were more than an afterthought or sidebar for Jesus as his ministry to those on the fringe shows. However, what the book does show is that there is a great deal of inconsistency and inaccuracy in how commentators present the Religious Right and critique it. Hynes key premise is that evangelicals are very much, your neighbor next door.



Welcome to the Homeland
I am just finishing up a very interesting book, Welcome to the Homeland by Brian Mann, in which he surmises that that the US senate and electoral college inappropriately and unfairly favors ruralists over against the clear majority of urban liberals. Of course, this is all music to my ears inasmuch as it seems to me that a proper blance of power has been struck throughout American history, and even if "equal" representation wasn't actually the intent of the Founding Fathers, as least America has remained faithful to its Republican values in assuring that all are represented.
Having said that, I also read in today's Boston Globe that a Pew Poll indicates that 69 percent of Americans think liberals have gone too far (school prayer, etc), but 49 percent fear Evangelicals imposing values.
That sounds about right to me, which tells me Evangelicals should pick their battles wisely. For instance, even if Roe-Wade were overturned, wouldn't it be likely that it would eventually go the route of Prohibition? Right now there is some opportunity to deal with same-sex marriage before public opinion slides in its favor.
Now, I still vote on pro-life issues. For instance, I am not voting for our pro-choice Republican governor but will vote for a pro-life Dem for Congress (The Elephant is pro-choice). I just think that unless a whole lot more people than Evangelicals and Catholics find abortion repugnant, attempts to overthrow it will do for Evangelicals what the war in Iraq has done: pull all other initiatives off the table.
Just some food for thought. Being in Massachusetts and alinated from the mainstream, what do others think?
Defense of the Religious Right
Nothing worse than blog without reader comments. Nice post. Support fellow bloggers and keep it free @ patnox.com
Post new comment