October 20, 2006
Democrats, so I was told on NPR last night, are trying to reconnect to religious Americans who vote overwhelmingly for the Republican party. So, how are they doing that? By trying to suppress the vote of religious Americans.Last night I went down to the church where I regularly attend for a small group meeting. I was early. When I got to there, I found a flyer from Americans United for Separation of Church and State taped to the door.
The flyer had "pastor" written on it. It warned that churches endorsing political candidates could lose their tax exempt status. Here is a copy of a similar letter. The version of the letter I got, which also bore the Americans United for Separation of Church and State logo on it, also cited court cases in which churches were prosecuted.
The rather thinly veiled threat was that churches that endorse political candidates or even distribute values based voter guides, might be held to account. If you talk about politics in your church, we will take you to court.
I wonder how many of these flyers were taped to the doors of churches with largely African-American members? The kind of churches which routinely invite Democratic candidates to speak from the pulpit.
Now, my church never endorses political candidates. It is official church policy. I've personally never felt like talking politics was appropriate anywhere in church, not even during our monthly potluck dinner.
But, even so, there is a general consensus among the members that any party that can't take a stand against gay marriage or abortion might not be exactly what you'd call 'Christian'. The feeling isn't shared by all, but talking positively about Democrats, even at potluck, is a sure way to get a dirty look or a scowl.
And this is in a very theologically liberal church. As I mentioned, we are eschatological universalists in our core doctrine.
But I do not respond to threats kindly. And since my voice carries a bit of weight with the other congegants, I can promise you this one thing: I will no longer be silent about making my political preferences known.
Not only did the local Democratic party activist who taped this to our church just ensure that I will vote, but that of most of my fellow church members. And I have a feeling that the local Baptist ministers will also not be amused. And there are a lot of Baptists around here.
Posted by: Rusty at
10:07 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.
In private, they refer to them as "those nuts".
http://www.amazon.com/Tempting-Faith-Inside-Political-Seduction/dp/0743287126
By David Kuo.
David Kuo was Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and Deputy Director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.
The book hits the stands today.
Posted by: Greg at October 20, 2006 11:16 AM (/+dAV)
Posted by: SeeMonk at October 20, 2006 11:19 AM (7teJ9)
Posted by: Greg at October 20, 2006 11:44 AM (/+dAV)
Posted by: cory at October 20, 2006 12:43 PM (+pzHI)
Posted by: tbone at October 20, 2006 02:23 PM (HGqHt)
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 20, 2006 03:15 PM (rUyw4)
church. right now a liberal church in
california that doesn't like President
Bush's policies are being investigated by the
IRS. If you really want to talk about voter
supression, check out the case in California
where a GOP congressional candidate sent out
15,000 letters to people with Spanish names telling them that illegal residents and nationalized citizens could not vote. One person who received the letter is the current congresswoman of the district, who has a spanish surname
Posted by: harryo at October 20, 2006 03:41 PM (vXE/Z)
You also ignore overt efforts by Republicans in Ohio and else where to purge Democratic voters by the tens of thousands, as they did in Florida/Ohio and elsewhere in 2000, 2002, and 2004.
You're silent about that yet have the temerity to pretend what you're writing about is worthy of a second thought.
Posted by: Professor von Nostrand at October 20, 2006 05:33 PM (e3GJ1)
I will vote, I will vote republican, and I will PRAY that the democrats lose bigtime. ( I guess I'm just going to hell!)
Posted by: Codekeyguy at October 20, 2006 06:51 PM (+WuRB)
There's nothing wrong with a church saying that a particular issue is right or wrong (war, gay marriage, abortion, etc.). These are issues that used to be addressed in the church (no matter the denomination or religion), and this is where the American people dealt with these issues (where they were close to their maker(s) through their own relgious tradition). But now such issues have moved from moral issues to political issues. And as such political battle insues within the walls of religion.
The problem faced now on these issues is that when a priest says something to his congregation carries far more weight than when a fake politician says something to those same people. This makes the more secular political hacks nervous because a non-politician is talking about an issue that is important to their favorite candidate. And so you get suggested threats of litigation against religious institutions to keep them from talking about such important issues.
Posted by: Edward Stewart at October 20, 2006 08:48 PM (Eta76)
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 20, 2006 10:38 PM (rUyw4)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 20, 2006 11:40 PM (AP2ro)
And, really, Democrats have no room talking about "vote suppression" when they make a habit out of manufacturing voters. Fake voters suppress the votes of real people; stop the fraud, and I'll start worrying about a handful of idiots frightened out of voting.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at October 21, 2006 08:12 AM (bH9q3)
The Bush Admin. are playing the Christian voting block.
In private, they refer to them as "those nuts".
I know. One day, according to Dem talking points, the evangelicals are manipulating Bush, and the next day they tell us Bush is manipulating them. So which is it? The stoy keeps changing. Let me know when you get the final draft of the memo.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 21, 2006 09:20 AM (8e/V4)
Conspiracy politics is for retards.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 21, 2006 09:21 AM (8e/V4)
about the hispanic vote says that only a small portion of the nation's total Hispanic population votes. There's never been any evidence of any organized voter fraud by illegal immigrants because if there was any evidence wouldn't the attorney general or other law enforcement officials investigate such allegations the way the FBI and California's attorney general jumped over the attempt by a Republican in Orange County CA to supress latin voters by sending out letters say that regardless of citizenship status, Latin Americans would be arrested if they try to vote.
And what's wrong with letting released felons vote. The purpose of prison is to reform criminals to become productive, respectable members of society; and what better way to become
respectable members of the community by participating in the political process.
On another note, should non-citizens, ex felons and other people who don't have the right to vote be exempted from taxes since they don't have a say, via the election box, on who should pay taxes and how they are spent.
Posted by: harryo at October 21, 2006 10:33 AM (vXE/Z)
Anyways, I wanted to ask if there was any evidence that Republicans get an "overwhelming majority" of the religious vote, because from everything I've seen, that isn't the case.
Posted by: JohnJ at October 21, 2006 03:13 PM (h/wKi)
Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 22, 2006 04:15 AM (2OHpj)
various lefturd visitors, who make a far better case than I ever could
for the extermination of their kind. I save all their comments in a
text document which I call the "evidence file", which I'll read while
they're waiting in line for their turn at the rope. Gregturd and
Nostril Von Retard have to wait at the back of the line so they have
longer to consider their sins.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 22, 2006 05:13 AM (v3I+x)
34 queries taking 0.1156 seconds, 174 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
