As a result, the Democratic Party, including Senator Barack Obama, focused heavily on outreach to religious voters, including white evangelicals who voted overwhelmingly for President Bush, and talked more openly than ever before about faith.
So did all the God-talk pay off?
The verdict appears to be mixed, but Mr. Obama does appear to have scored some significant victories, especially among Roman Catholics, according to nationwide surveys of voters leaving the polls on Tuesday and telephone interviews of some people who had voted early.
How anyone who claims to be Christian much less Roman Catholic can have voted for Obama is beyond me. If you voted by Church teaching and conscience, you did not vote for Obama. He supports Roe V Wade strongly, favors “right” to abortion no matter what the circumstances, will appoint liberal justices to drag down the supreme court and send it further left. As many politicians have taken to saying at the end of their speech, “God Bless America”, we surely will need those blessings in the next four years.
McCain is a Piskie, a creature of the Beltway establishment in his post military career. He really liked the outsider street cred that Reagan had and Bush 43 had. Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Mitt Romney etc. are all DC outsiders and will thus be better positioned to challenge in 2012. Note that each of these persons are culturally conservative, likely to appeal to Roman Catholics. For sociological reasons, I really think Palin has the best shot with the blue collar voters of MI, PA and OH – and I would suspect these will again be the battleground states in the next election.
Truly, backing off a bit from the usual partisanism, why does abortion “rights” have such a strangle hold on this Nation and, in all honesty, both parties?
doh! he “lacked” the outsider street cred, not “liked”
I always remain skeptical about “Roman Catholic” voters because it is never revealed if these voters are actually Catholics who believe all the teachings of the Church and if they actually understand the priority that abortion, embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia have in our social justice teachings.
They are not just part of the building blocks. The are the very foundation of that building. Take those away and the whole structure collapses.
It is a surprise (maybe it shouldn’t be?) to see a VP – elect who has been publicly excommunicated by Cathlic bishops with no ripple of comment. Same for Speaker of the House. Yet Mrs. Palin’s church attendance was publicly ridiculed by the press and just about everyone else. Obama’s 20 year affiliation with a nut minister? Gone. Nothing to see here….
NWlayman: It is a sad commentary on the theological ignorance and disbelief of most in Christianity today.
It’s also a sad commentary on the media.
No. 3 Abortion does not have a stranglehold in either party except the the extent that pro-life folks, including serious Catholics, will vote for a candidate who has a stated postition most closely oriented to their own moral sentiments. That might be a political candidate from any party. Among Christendom, the Roman Catholic Church is the most theologically strict on this matter as their foundational theology precludes slippery slopes . In other words, Catholic teaching views abortion as immoral human intervention in a process that has divine origins and such intervention can and probably will lead to other moral transgressions against life such as euthanasisa or worse. The political take on abortion is completely different as it offers a secular solution to a secular problem. Those not Catholic or highly sensitive to the moral context of abortion will respond politically to that politician who represents the protection of what they see as a political right of higher priority than a church teaching or matter of personal conscience.
People who think Christians who vote for candidates that support the wrong side (in their opinion) of “hot button†issues like abortion are being un-Christian just don’t get it. There are more important issues than abortion rights. If that’s the litmus test, then you better had not voted for George Bush and many other Republicans. George Bush may say he’s pro-life, yet he supports UNESCO and other UN organizations that support abortion. Also, the Republicans have no intention of ending the abortion debate. They need this hot button issue to rally the troops. If Christians were REALLY concerned about voting for the more “theologically†correct candidate, they should have voted for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution party. If Christians were REALLY concerned about voting in a theologically correct manner, they wouldn’t worry about third party viability and they would make that party viable by starting a mass movement!!
America is not a theocracy. America is NOT and NEVER was a Christian nation. Sure, many people claimed it was a Christian nation, but only for rich, landowning, white males. When America was supposedly more “Christian,†it was a terrible time for people of color in this country. I think it was St. John who said if you say you know God yet hate your brother, you are a liar.
I supported Ron Paul during the primaries yet I voted for Obama. For me, he was the better candidate. Yes, I believe that abortion is murder. I also believe sending young men and women to phony for profit wars is murder also. McCain wants us to be in Iraq for another 100 years. Hmmmm…I guess there is a catch 22?!!!
Vincent
Amen,
Vincent, we christians ought not to be the slave of a party’s political philosophy
Two brief comments along new lines here.
First, I was struck by a stat buried in this article. It notes that 16% of the US is unchurched in the sense that this 1/6th of the nation NEVER goes to church (except maybe the occasional wedding or funeral of a friend or relative). And that unchurched 16% went for Obama by a 2-to-1 margin. In a nation of roughly 300 million people, that’s about 50 million (if you count their kids etc.), a whopping, huge number. The harvest truly is plentiful…
Second, this article not only fails to distinguish between mere nominal RCs and actual practicing Catholics, it also doesn’t pay any attention to one factor that probably played an important role in this election. And that is that apparently Hispanics went for Obama by huge majorities. And Hispanics make up roughly 1/3 of the Catholic population now, and the proportion is rising pretty rapidly. With their high birth rate and due to continuing massive Latino immigration, both legal and illegal, Hispanics are going to be an even more potent political force in the future.
And while there may have been other factors at work, it appears that McCain’s hardline stand in favor of cracking down on illegal immigration may have driven large numbers of Hispanic Catholics to vote for Obama. I don’t have poll results to confirm that. It’s just a hunch on my part. But I’d be willing to bet on it.
And that’s a problem the Republican Party leaders better give serious thought to solving.
David Handy+
It just goes to prove how narrow the road is.
bl