The Advocate

Arise, ye Christian Leftists!

Thurman Hart

For many Americans, the result of the recent Presidential election is, quite literally, an answer to their prayers. For almost as many, that result is a striking example of the dangers of religion and why religion should be banned from politics, if not shunned altogether. For another significant group of Americans, it demonstrates again that they are truly wanted by neither political party nor church.

For the last twenty or thirty years, some conservative political organizations have chosen to organize around a central theme of Christianity. Mostly due to a lack of other voices in the christian community, or of too much tolerance for this intolerant group, these conservative Christians have become the de facto face of Christianity for most Americans. This politicization of the church is, I believe, one of the primary reasons why church membership rolls have declined so precipitously. When extreme voices from the religious Right continue to say, “To be a Christian, you must be like me,” many moderate and liberal Christians feel they have no place in the church and slink out the door.

Polls tell us that Christians overwhelmingly supported George W. Bush for President. In fact, one of the best predictors of a Bush voter is the frequency with which a person attends church. However, going to church does not make one a christian anymore than going to a dairy barn makes one a cow. In a highly politicized church, it reflects more accurately the level at which a person affiliates with the extreme religious and political message that is given.

Polls also tell us that there are more people who identify themselves as Christians yet never attend church than there are those who do. These are the Christians whose moral values simply do not allow them to tie themselves so strongly to the conservative church. Polls indicate further that this group’s lack of community activity will likely extend to voting as well. In short, these non-church-going Christians are likely to stay home on Election Day.

It isn’t hard to understand why. In the last few weeks, I’ve heard the word “christian” used in the same tone that Rush Limbaugh reserves for “liberal.” When a person feels unwelcome in their church, they stop going. Is it a stretch to believe that they will not vote if they don’t feel welcome in the Democratic Party? Perhaps if some issue touches them personally – say, their son is serving in Iraq - they might vote, but where have we given them a moral argument, a christian argument, for pulling the lever for the Democratic candidate?

More often than not, when I see a Democratic candidate speaking in front of a church, I know he is looking at nothing but black faces. Just as likely, if you see a black face in the crowd, you can be sure that it is at church. Why is it that Democrats feel comfortable professing faith before a black crowd, but not a white one? Doing so reeks of pandering.

Democrats appear to believe it is hopeless to honestly engage Christians. Since the election, pundits in print or broadcast media alike have argued that Democrats simply have no moral ground for their position. This is tantamount to saying that Democrats are morally bankrupt. This is not only untrue, but offensive to anyone who is proud to be a Democrat. Worse, it only supports the religious Right’s argument that a person can simply not be both liberal and christian.

If Democrats want to compete in a national election, they have to break this perception. Christians within the Democratic Party need to find their voice and take back their churches. Secularists within the Party need to give them room to do so. Liberal Christians, by and large, support the idea of separation of church and State - not because they fear the church gaining control of the State, but they fear the effect of the State gaining control of the church. Unlike Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, liberal Christians have much to give and little to take away from moral secularists and political liberals.

I categorically reject the idea that Democrats must back away from the liberal agenda to gain christian voters. Rather, we must be more forceful. We must allow liberal Christians to make their argument based on faith and scripture. We must let those among us who speak the common vernacular to do so, and trust that they are working faithfully toward the same goal. In fact, we must insist that they do so.

At the very least, we need an open and honest dialogue between secular and religious liberals. These two camps will not agree on everything. However, they can join forces in support of those issues on which they do agree.

Thurman Hart is a PhD student in the Political Science Department.