Jim Stillman
Nevar
Conservative Evangelical Pastor calls Democrats the “true pro life party”.
August 15th 2008 19:41
Joel Hunter is Senior Pastor at the Northland Church in Orlando, Florida. His congregation is substantial, numbering over 12,000 members. He is a registered and staunch Republican, strongly anti-abortion. He was, for a few minutes, president of the Christian Coalition which has long served as a model for activism for the religious right. After being elected as President of the organization founded by Pat Robinson, Rev. Hunter stepped down, saying the group resisted his efforts to broaden its agenda to include reducing poverty and fighting global warming.
Over the years, he gained a reputation as an evangelical leader seeking to expand the agenda of conservative Christian activists from issues like abortion and same-sex marriage.
The author of several books, Dr. Hunter has argued that a large number of conservative Christians feel that right-wing religious groups do not represent them, because they focus their energies too narrowly on what he calls moral issues, often to the exclusion of economic and environmental concerns.
He has said that many evangelical leaders stuck to narrow moral issues because they were “deathly afraid of being labeled a liberal by other Christians, the media, talk radio.”
In a blog published today, Steve Waldman presents a unique view of this conservative evangelical with a broad and comprehensive agenda.
Democrats have an opportunity with evangelicals in part because these Christians feel they were "used" by Republicans. There is increasing awareness that the Republican line on abortion--the singular focus on banning it--was just a cynical ploy. While many GOP leaders were sincere, but overall the strategy was simply to oppose abortion symbolically while doing nothing to reduce abortions in real life. Moreover, there is evidence from history and from around the world that banning abortion would not even reduce abortions just as Prohibition didn’t prevent drinking.
Pro-life Christians are finally getting this. If the Democrats take Joel Hunter's advice, and stand up as the real "pro-life party," they will not find formerly Republican Christians falling into lock step with them. Many of these Christians are so burned by their experience with the GOP that they will not join another party. However, in their pro-life calculations at the voting booth, many will choose the Democrat.
How many depends on Senator Obama, and if he will take Joel Hunter's advice. If Obama can boldly articulate a pro-life platform to reduce abortion, care for children and families, reduce arms and prevent war then he could bring about a seismic shift in electoral politics that makes the "Reagan Democrat" phenomenon look like nothing.
Some fellow Orble writers have disdain for the argument that abortions should be safe and rare I submit we should follow Joel Hunter’s approach and address all of the economic and social problems in this country. Then we could all claim to be “pro life”.
Over the years, he gained a reputation as an evangelical leader seeking to expand the agenda of conservative Christian activists from issues like abortion and same-sex marriage.
He has said that many evangelical leaders stuck to narrow moral issues because they were “deathly afraid of being labeled a liberal by other Christians, the media, talk radio.”
In a blog published today, Steve Waldman presents a unique view of this conservative evangelical with a broad and comprehensive agenda.
The next surprise was his [Dr. Hunter’s] suggestion that Democrats "could arguably steal the title of the pro life party."
Huh? How is that possible? Obama is just as pro-choice as any other Democratic nominee; critics say he's the most pro-choice candidate ever. Hunter makes a practical argument: providing women with economic help in carrying babies to term can actually reduce the number of abortions more, and more quickly, than focusing on overturning Roe v. Wade. "With eight years of Bush the abortion rates have not declined. Every indication is that with financial support and different forms of supporting pregnant mother and then some post birth help also we could come close to 50% reduction in abortions. That's huge. That's huge."
Continuing with the same culture war paradigm is therefore morally dubious. "If we insist on keeping this an ideological war we're literally not saving the babies we could save. The Democrats have a huge opportunity here to really steal the thunder from those who are seen as traditionally pro life."
This is a shame for Obama, he says, because abortion is the number one issue keeping evangelicals from embracing him. They keep hearing he supports "infanticide" and partial birth abortion. If Obama came out forcefully for an abortion reduction agenda - even one that emphasizes support for women rather than legal restrictions -- that "would go a very long way in establishing trust with evangelicals. That would be huge."
Huh? How is that possible? Obama is just as pro-choice as any other Democratic nominee; critics say he's the most pro-choice candidate ever. Hunter makes a practical argument: providing women with economic help in carrying babies to term can actually reduce the number of abortions more, and more quickly, than focusing on overturning Roe v. Wade. "With eight years of Bush the abortion rates have not declined. Every indication is that with financial support and different forms of supporting pregnant mother and then some post birth help also we could come close to 50% reduction in abortions. That's huge. That's huge."
Continuing with the same culture war paradigm is therefore morally dubious. "If we insist on keeping this an ideological war we're literally not saving the babies we could save. The Democrats have a huge opportunity here to really steal the thunder from those who are seen as traditionally pro life."
This is a shame for Obama, he says, because abortion is the number one issue keeping evangelicals from embracing him. They keep hearing he supports "infanticide" and partial birth abortion. If Obama came out forcefully for an abortion reduction agenda - even one that emphasizes support for women rather than legal restrictions -- that "would go a very long way in establishing trust with evangelicals. That would be huge."
Democrats have an opportunity with evangelicals in part because these Christians feel they were "used" by Republicans. There is increasing awareness that the Republican line on abortion--the singular focus on banning it--was just a cynical ploy. While many GOP leaders were sincere, but overall the strategy was simply to oppose abortion symbolically while doing nothing to reduce abortions in real life. Moreover, there is evidence from history and from around the world that banning abortion would not even reduce abortions just as Prohibition didn’t prevent drinking.
Pro-life Christians are finally getting this. If the Democrats take Joel Hunter's advice, and stand up as the real "pro-life party," they will not find formerly Republican Christians falling into lock step with them. Many of these Christians are so burned by their experience with the GOP that they will not join another party. However, in their pro-life calculations at the voting booth, many will choose the Democrat.
How many depends on Senator Obama, and if he will take Joel Hunter's advice. If Obama can boldly articulate a pro-life platform to reduce abortion, care for children and families, reduce arms and prevent war then he could bring about a seismic shift in electoral politics that makes the "Reagan Democrat" phenomenon look like nothing.
Some fellow Orble writers have disdain for the argument that abortions should be safe and rare I submit we should follow Joel Hunter’s approach and address all of the economic and social problems in this country. Then we could all claim to be “pro life”.
| 56 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
And to Sen. Clinton's credit, after the Clinton's debacle with Mother Teresa's speech at the WH breakfast -- which I caught a little of (a whole lot of fanny wiggling and eyes looking askance from the power couple who were far more liberal during their first few years) -- she and the nuns worked together to start up a special house near Bethesda for unwed pregnant young women. And Hillary stuck with it and saw it opened with Mother Teresa.
Can we or this Orlando area pastor honestly believe Mrs. Obama will display such flexibility? That's God's call as it was apparently through then First Lady Mrs. Clinton. But I think he's wishing on a star and the Pixie Dust from the a famous theme park down your way doesn't produce THAT kind of dust, not for the Obama gang.
I like the pastor's emphasis on social programs and the need to promote workable government programs, too. Far too many conservative evangelical non-denominational pastors of megachurches favor the fiscal and social conservative approaches alone. Yet I simply don't see how that squares up Biblically; and since they don't have a Magisterium to fall back on, they've got to square it with the Bible. A fiscal/social conservative approach simply doesn't cut it unless they're really socked into more OT lessons, etc.
Keep it coming!
Comment by Jim Stillman
Political Certainty
There are so many needs in our country, many of which are resulting from poverty and poor education. Our role models are exceedingly bad, children having children, the lapses in social pressure that allows multiple births to single mothers, and on and on. These needs have to be met and part (just part) of the solution is an activist government.
I really do not think that making abortion illegal will either cure our problems or diminish the number of abortions. Therefore I want our office holders to focus on many issues, not just Roe v Wade.
Again, thank you for your comment.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity