AFTER the 2004 elections, religious conservatives were riding high. Newly anointed by pundits as “values voters” ”” a more flattering label than “religious right” ”” they claimed credit for propelling George W. Bush to two terms in the White House. Even in wartime, they had managed to fixate the nation on their pet issues: opposition to abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research.
Now with the 2008 race taking shape, religious conservatives say they sense they have taken a tumble. Their issues are no longer at the forefront, and their leaders have failed so far to coalesce around a candidate, as they did around Mr. Bush and Ronald Reagan.
What unites them right now is their dismay ”” even panic ”” at the idea of Rudolph W. Giuliani as the Republican nominee, because of his support for abortion rights and gay rights, as well as what they regard as a troubling history of marital infidelity. But what to do about it is where they again diverge, with some religious conservatives last week threatening to bolt to a third party if Mr. Giuliani gets the nomination, and others arguing that this is the sure road to defeat.
As a pro-life Democrat, I feel their pain. Within a generation, the pro-life position has been drummed out of the party leadership. Remember that Al Gore used to be pro-life? And it seems that gay rights are just about [i]de rigueur[/i] now. It’s hard to remember that it was President (Bill) Clinton who signed into the law the “Defense of Marriage Act.” It is inconceivable that President (Hillary) Clinton would sign such legislation.