Moderate Fundamentalists

An Op-ed column in today's Washington Post by E.J. Dionne Jr. discusses the overall move to the center of the political spectrum of evangelicals.

With all due respect to Mr. Dionne, you don't get it. Beltway columnists need to realize that they are not immersed in many of the cultures they write about. Abortion and gay rights, while they are hot button issues in the Christian community, have never been the only issues an evangelical voter considers when choosing a candidate. If you disagree, tell me the last time that an evangelical Christian voter chose a Muslim candidate because they were against abortion and gay rights.

Also, the notion that evangelical Christians have historically chosen those two issues over poverty is false. While it can be argued that Christians fail at their attempts to help "the least of these," they do believe in the cause. Liberals in this country need to realize that helping the poor is not an exclusively liberal cause. Conservative churches have been giving to the poor for centuries.

Personally, I would argue that it is this "new moderate evangelical" movement that has drifted from having poverty as a priority. Even Rick Warren with his purpose driven proclamation that its, "not about you." Go to the Saddleback Church Website. Did you see ways to help others or ways to help yourself? I would take Rick Warren over Pat Robertson any day. But at least Mr. Robertson tries to make a real difference.

Yes, it is true that Rick Warren is much more moderate politically than many of his recent predecessors. But, George W. Bush is much more moderate than Dick Cheney, but trust me, he's still a conservative. If you watched Saturday night's forum, while Warren was decidedly neutral, it was apparent from crowd reactions, where the majority of votes were going.

But, McCain is not winning those votes because of abortion. It is because of the main difference between McCain and Obama. Its McCain's direct stances versus Obama's nuance. Evangelical Christians are taught to pick a side and not to believe anything from the other side. So, when any candidate views complicated issues as complicated, he will not be their choice.

While the issues being discussed in churches may range from abortion to poverty, in either situation, they are told to pick a side. This shows the word that should be used to describe evangelical voters, fundamentalist. In my opinion, few things in the world are as complicated as the Christian religion and the Bible. But, to these people, its the most basic of all principles. So why should any other issue be complicated to them?

Bottom Line? Even if fundamentalist Christians were to maintain extreme left wing beliefs, they'd still likely vote for the candidate who was simple as opposed to complicated. My only hope is that there are fewer fundamentalists than I think.

Rabbit