Religious differences between political parties

Posted By Jeff on March 7th, 2007

After having just returned from Washington D.C. in a whirlwind trip that included tours, meetings, and even a confrontation with FEMA, I was rather interested in discovering this entry when it popped up on my Bloglines column. It details a recent Barna survey about religious differences between Democrats and Republicans. What think ye?

I’ll post a follow up to this later.

On this day...

Kris Allen t-shirt winner! - 2009
It's snowing... again! - 2008

16 Responses to “Religious differences between political parties”

Mark W.
March 7th, 2007 at 7:42 pm

Perhaps my take on this comes from my experience growing up in a much more liberal state (Washington), but these statistics are not all surprising. Naturally, members of a party who are more politically conservative are also likely to be more conservative in other aspects of life as well. In my experience, Christian morality is much closer to that expressed in the Republican platform than in the Democrat platform, which flies in the face of Christian values so often. Yet, I continue to be surprised at how many “Christian Democrats” live in the South…to a northerner, that is the definition of “confused”, or “ignorant”, or even “paradoxical.” At the very least it demonstrates a disconnect between ones moral values vs. ones political agenda.

Jerry James
March 7th, 2007 at 10:53 pm

I agree with Mark.
I can’t remember what the word is, but there is a line in “Princess Bride” . . . “I don’t think that word means what you think it means”.
I think that statment is true of many who use “religious words” like, Bible, God, Christian, Born Again, etc. I am not sure those words mean what they think they mean, so their answers screw up the whole poll and in the end, we don’t really know who thinks what.
I don’t know what I just said, but I think it was what I meant.

TJ
March 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pm

Jerry – the word is “inconceivable” (love that movie!)

What the shame is, they both have it so stinking wrong. I wish a strong candidate would come up from either side who would stand for all things that are right. To stand up for life issues, and then do practically nothing about children going to bed hungry in this extremely prosperous nation is quite hypocritical.

What’s also sickening is that two Democratic presidential candidates are allowed to give political speeches in a couple of churches last Sunday – yet if these were Republican candidates in churches that are more welcoming to a conservative agenda, the ACLU would be all over that. Something is wrong with the entire political system – if it’s wrong for one, it should be wrong for the other.

Richard Pool
March 8th, 2007 at 12:59 am

When you get polarised politics (having to choose one party over another) and polarised faith (conservative over liberal) you always have a recipe for misunderstanding! In the UK some might think that we’ve avoided such a state of affairs, but we haven’t. We have folk who can’t imagine how a Christian could vote for a left-wing agenda and vice versa.
It seems to me that what we have to do is to remove from our thinking the concept that one party is any closer to a “Chritian perspective” right across the board of political questions than any other.
For me I’ll confess that I am left-of-centre on most issues. That means that I see the manifesto of the Labour party here in the UK as more broadly in line with how I want to see politics worked out from a Christian perpsective. But i don’t agree with everything they do. In truth I’ve always thought been left-of-centre, even before I came to faith.
I’m guessing that if I were in the US, I’d vote Democrat most of the time. It’s an ethos thing not a religious thing.
Interestingly my local MP (Member of Parliament) is a Christian, but he’s from the right of the political sphere (a Conservative). I like him, I get on well with him when we meet, but I don’t vote for him because I’m not convinced by his party’s overall policies. It’s nothing to do with his personal convictions, Christian or otherwise. I don’t think I’d ever vote for a candidate just because of their faith position.
And even now this raises some interesting questions in my mind.

Jim
March 8th, 2007 at 7:34 am

Welcome Home!

Mark W.
March 8th, 2007 at 8:42 am

I think Richard needs to read the last sentence of my comment again because he’s just demonstrated the kind of “disconnect between ones moral values vs. ones political agenda” that I described. To deny any significant moral differences between the political parties in this country shows a real lack of familiarity with those parties. I wonder what his stance is on abortion and gay marriages? To say one would vote Democrat because “it’s an ethos thing, not a religious thing” is the same as saying that the dictates of religion are meaningless and you really have your own constructed system of ethics: Christianity being just a convenient cover for it…albeit, in this case, not a very convincing one.

TJ
March 8th, 2007 at 9:12 am

Mark –
for years I have been trying to figure out the best way to say what you just said so well!

AMEN!!!!

K.T.
March 8th, 2007 at 11:07 am

Any other democrats read this blog?LOL

Jeff
March 8th, 2007 at 11:22 am

Great comments from all of you so far. Let me throw myself to the lions and just say this…

I don’t think a follower of Christ can identify which party is more “Christian” or “moral” by selecting a few favorite issues to use as a litmus test.

For instance, Christians who vote Republican tend to point to abortion, the homosexual agenda, and the sanctity of marriage and life as being indicative of the Democratic Party’s moral vaccum.

However, Christians who vote Democrat are equally disgusted by the Republican Party’s ignorance and tardiness to address moral issues such as concern for the poor, environmental stewardship, financial stewardship, war, health, and starvation.

It appears that the Republicans have staked out the high ground on extremely sensitive and inflammatory issues, while the Democrats seek to claim moral authority in systemic issues.

A Christian cannot in good conscience support either party wholeheartedly.

By selecting the issues you think are worth fighting/voting over in one party, you ignore the evil that your preferences tend to overlook in that party.

Abortion may very well (and I think it is) a greater evil than poverty, but one’s silence on one issue just to massage your guilt on the other is not a holistic way to integrate one’s faith into politics.

I don’t have the answers, but I certainly don’t think it’s as cut and dried as the political pundits would like to portray it. Please remember that it benefits an established power base and status quo to be able to paint an opponent or alternate viewpoint as the extreme of one’s own position.

Christ followers cannot allow themselves to be swung to the extremes. We must seek to apply a balanced, loving, and Christ-centered response to problems, issues, and evils in this present world system.

Richard Pool
March 8th, 2007 at 11:49 am

Sorry, I think I’ve misrepresented myself a bit. I am bothered about ethical and moral issues, and my faith does affect my political position. They’re not disconnected at all.
Enough said.

Mark W.
March 9th, 2007 at 11:17 am

Jeff,
For the record, I wasn’t pointing out the issues of abortion and gay marriage simply because those are the Republican “high ground.” I asked about Richard’s position on these as a way to point out that personal morals and political preference ARE inextricably entwined whether we like it or not…one often cannot make a political statement without simultaneously making a moral claim (or uncovering a moral assumption at least).

Not to get testy, but the slippery, non-committal posturing as a way to escape “coming out” with a political stance was very evident in your comment. I still feel the oil dripping down my screen…

…and BTW: You grossly misrepresent the Republican when you write that “Christians who vote Democrat are equally disgusted by the Republican Party’s ignorance and tardiness to address moral issues such as concern for the poor, environmental stewardship, financial stewardship, war, health, and starvation.”

Tardy? You couldn’t be further from the truth. Republicans are very clear in how they deal with such things…unfortunately the Dems will keep accusing them of being “tardy” and “ignorant” until they get the response they WANT. How ignorant is that?

Nice term: “environmental stewardship.” It smacks of PC-meaninglessness. The Republicans are environmental stewards as well; they just have very different ideas concerning how to balance the environment with society.

In short, I agree that neither party is ideal…but it is still a moral choice to decide which politcal platform to forward when one is in the voting booth. To say that Christians can dissociate their personal faith from politics is simply wrong. Either such a person doesn’t really believe political ideas are meaningful, or he doesn’t believe that professing Christianity entails adhering to certain universal moral commands. Either of these positions, I believe, is insupportable.

Sorry for not oiling this down, but sometimes a little partisan banter is necessary to spur on thought and progress…that is, after all, the purpose of a democracy (and a republic). :)

Jeff
March 9th, 2007 at 11:41 am

Mark, the oil on your screen is caused by your Windoze machine leaking. You wouldn’t have that problem if you’d bought a more enlightened product. Simply use a soft, dry cloth, and you can remove that grease.

I just noticed some oil on my screen too, but then I realized it was from my forehead. I fell asleep reading your comment since it was so trite and PC itself.

I’m not going to read between any more lines in your comment and just take it as a non-oiled, off the cuff response.

My ultimate point, I believe, still stands:
Christ followers cannot allow themselves to be swung to the extremes. We must seek to apply a balanced, loving, and Christ-centered response to problems, issues, and evils in this present world system.

I believe it was an incredibly wise and well-respected blogger I know who recently stated, “My goal is to rave less and, instead, to approach each subject with more wisdom and maturity than half-wit and cynicism,” and “Playful eloquence is more inspiring than a tirade.”

I think that’s a laudable goal for all of us.

K.T.
March 9th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

Hmmm
I think some people live their lives in Christian faith but do not necessarily feel the need to force the same beliefs on the general population(hence the way they vote).Free will is a very popular concept…although not firmly accepted by all….After much consideration,I would have to position myself as more independant leaning to the left than sway severely either way….on the fence is the worst place to be.But I position myself there because of my faith,not in spite of it.I love everyone,plain and simple,enemies,friends,homosexuals,abortionists,sinners and saints.I believe that is “What Jesus would do.”
Of course these are all matters of my opinion and worth nothing more than that…..

Mark W.
March 9th, 2007 at 12:43 pm

In what way was my comment trite and PC??? I’m sure you have absolutely NO evidence for such a statement. Perhaps I’ve just pushed a sensitive button a little, hmm?

Nice try at throwing my words in my face, but I’m not tirading here…trying to justly balance the underhanded anti-republican nature of your first comment. Talk about reading between the lines….clever boy! I saw it plain and clear.

Jeff
March 9th, 2007 at 1:53 pm

Actually, Mark, I’ve voted Republican for as long as I have voted. Not straight ticket, but because I have genuinely felt that that party aligns most closely with my leanings and convictions. However, I in no way, consider myself a “Republican” and would vote Democrat or Green for any candidate that better expresses a cohesive Christian worldview.

Saying that environmental stewardship smacked of “PC-meaningless” is trite. We are called to be good stewards of Creation as Christians. It was part of Adam and Eve’s original mandate. Don’t evoke tones of something being politically correct simply to deflect the accuracy of what I was saying.

No sensitive button pushed. You’ve just got the whole gist of this pegged wrong.

Richard Pool
March 20th, 2007 at 12:10 pm

Hi Jeff

Ik now this is an old trial, and I don’t want to stir up the waters too much, but I came across an interesting article by Gordon MacDonald that might interest you.

You can find at:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/leaders/newsletter/2007/cln70305.html

Richard