Divided We Stand
The day after the election, the PBS News Hour had an interesting panel discussion, entitled Divided We Stand, on the impact of matters of morality on the electorate. Panelists included Rick Warren, a church pastor who publishes advice to over 100,000 churches, Barbara Ehrenreich, author and essayist, Jim Wallis of Sojourners, a Christian social action advocate, and Morris Fiorina, a political science professor.link to a transcript of the discussion is posted below.
The pastor spoke of the difference between social values like justice, equality and concern for the poor, and personal values, meaning the personal individual morality. He said a candidate who embodied both would have tremendous voter appeal, but then I remember Jimmy Carter seemed to legitimately have both and he lost his re-election bid to Reagan by almost 9 million votes.
The pastor indicated his belief that the character of a candidate always trumps policy and that some issues, such as abortion, are clearly non-negotiable per the bible. The last minute news that Justice Rehnquist has cancer was a reminder to voters that the values of Judges to be appointed to the Supreme Court will be impacting our society for the next 40 years, according to the pastor.
Barbara said, "There is nothing in the bible that supports tax cuts for the wealthy along with social service cuts for th poor." There is a highly organized system of non-denominational churches, Barbara said, that are providing services that used to be provided by the government. She also pointed out that in this election a larger number of people than ever in history have voted against a sitting President.
Wallis echoed Barbara’s sentiments about not forgetting the larger social values in discussions of morality.
I thought the professor was missing the point when he said the impact of morality as an issue in this election is being exaggerated. The fact is, the Republican strategy has been to play to the personal morality card as a means to mobilize the Christian Evangelical vote, and it worked.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec04/divided_11-03.html
The pastor spoke of the difference between social values like justice, equality and concern for the poor, and personal values, meaning the personal individual morality. He said a candidate who embodied both would have tremendous voter appeal, but then I remember Jimmy Carter seemed to legitimately have both and he lost his re-election bid to Reagan by almost 9 million votes.
The pastor indicated his belief that the character of a candidate always trumps policy and that some issues, such as abortion, are clearly non-negotiable per the bible. The last minute news that Justice Rehnquist has cancer was a reminder to voters that the values of Judges to be appointed to the Supreme Court will be impacting our society for the next 40 years, according to the pastor.
Barbara said, "There is nothing in the bible that supports tax cuts for the wealthy along with social service cuts for th poor." There is a highly organized system of non-denominational churches, Barbara said, that are providing services that used to be provided by the government. She also pointed out that in this election a larger number of people than ever in history have voted against a sitting President.
Wallis echoed Barbara’s sentiments about not forgetting the larger social values in discussions of morality.
I thought the professor was missing the point when he said the impact of morality as an issue in this election is being exaggerated. The fact is, the Republican strategy has been to play to the personal morality card as a means to mobilize the Christian Evangelical vote, and it worked.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec04/divided_11-03.html
posted by Tom Blake | 8:02 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home