It's A Thin Line Between Love and H8

...At least that’s the case for Gays and Lesbians who overwhelmingly supported Barack Obama for President. Here is a group who loved the former Senator and had hope that he would be an advocate for their rights, even though he was not an all out supporter of “marriage” as a title or as a matter of Government law.
The dustup over Pastor Rick Warren being chosen to participate in Obama’s inaugural ceremony is the latest sign of discontent among Obama’s base. Here is another segment of Progressives who feel betrayed.

Some believe that this was a good move for Obama, because it will pay off in the long run. By triangulating early to get more evangelical support, he will have more latitude to get the kind of legislation he wants from the House and especially the Senate. I’m not so sure that this was a good move. It’s another example of Obama overcompensating in order to widen his appeal. Does he believe that in 2012, he will be able to count on the support of all those he is betraying…. Progressives, Liberal Democrats, Gays & Lesbians, etc? Does he believe that he will be able to gain enough support from Conservatives and Red State Evangelicals by 2012 to make up for the loss of support from many within his own base? Or perhaps he believes that because of the current economic situation, no one is really paying attention to these other issues of “principle” and the fact that he is already going back on many of the campaign promises he made.

I’m not so sure that he can count on Evangelical Conservatives, and traditional Red State Republicans making up for the possible weakening of his own base. Obama runs the risk of having Gays and Lesbians, Liberal Democrats, and Progressives….even a few independents, staying home in 2012. This is especially the case if he doesn’t fix the economy. If he has a lot of failures over the next 4 years, one thing he could rely on would be the loyalty from his base… but he seems to be cashing those chips in early for a Centrist/Right of Center gamble.

I am no staunch supporter of Gay marriage….at least not as a title. Although I believe that there should be Domestic Partnership rights and Federal laws protecting Gays and Lesbians. Now if Gays & Lesbians want to have private ceremonies of their own…they can call it what they want. But I won’t argue that point here…whether Gay marriage is right or wrong. What I want to point out is that I am annoyed that a man could so easily abandon those who have given him so much support and could so easily & quickly abandon principles for the sake of political expediency. That’s bothersome to me.

Rick Warren is a man who was a strong supporter of Proposition 8, the referendum outlawing Gay marriage in California. But in addition to that, Warren has made troubling comments about the Gay and Lesbian community, likening those in that lifestyle to criminals, and child rapists. I understand Obama’s attempts to reach out….but it’s how far he is willing to reach, and how contorted he is willing to get, for his own political benefit that is so troublesome. Even a man who is willing to reach out should be anchored by at least some core principles. Abe Lincoln had them, and Obama is using (at least in part) Lincoln’s reaching out as a basis for his attempt to build a good Cabinet. Reagan also had these core Principles. As did Kennedy, MLK, Mandela, and FDR. All of the great leaders of the past Century were anchored by certain core values and these values typically weren’t for sale. Is this something that Obama is misunderstanding about great leaders and coalition builders…that there are certain values that you should try to avoid abandoning, as well as people you shouldn’t want to abandon?

From what I understand, there were many other Pastors who could have been considered for the inaugural invocation…. Moderate Conservative Pastors who could have accomplished what Obama wanted to accomplish by placating both of the Constituencies that Obama should have been concerned with. Instead, he offended one…and is perceived by some as abandoning one constituency for another.

Yes, this may help Obama in the long run politically… but at the risk of alienating entire segments of the American populace. He runs the risk of looking like a man who is almost too calculating and someone who few will want to trust. When he needs the Progressive vote in 2012 it may be a harder sell. I doubt that the new Republican voters he is campaigning for now will be willing to vote for him in 4 years.

It’s another Obama gamble… in what is becoming a long list of gambles. I have a hard time believing that all of these moves will turn out as he planned.

Obama and Faith Based Initiatives

Obama has upset some people with his remarks about Faith Based Initiatives.

From Obama's speech today:

Now, I didn’t grow up in a particularly religious household. But my experience in Chicago showed me how faith and values could be an anchor in my life. And in time, I came to see my faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I went out and did the Lord’s work.


There are millions of Americans who share a similar view of their faith, who feel they have an obligation to help others. And they’re making a difference in communities all across this country – through initiatives like Ready4Work, which is helping ensure that ex-offenders don’t return to a life of crime; or Catholic Charities, which is feeding the hungry and making sure we don’t have homeless veterans sleeping on the streets of Chicago; or the good work that’s being done by a coalition of religious groups to rebuild New Orleans.


You see, while these groups are often made up of folks who’ve come together around a common faith, they’re usually working to help people of all faiths or of no faith at all. And they’re particularly well-placed to offer help. As I’ve said many times, I believe that change comes not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up, and few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques.


That’s why Washington needs to draw on them. The fact is, the challenges we face today – from saving our planet to ending poverty – are simply too big for government to solve alone. We need all hands on deck.


I’m not saying that faith-based groups are an alternative to government or secular nonprofits. And I’m not saying that they’re somehow better at lifting people up. What I’m saying is that we all have to work together – Christian and Jew, Hindu and Muslim; believer and non-believer alike – to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

I have written several posts about Obama courting the religious vote. I have no problem with this, mainly because I'm not a secularist. I'm a Christian who has been pissed at the Democrats completely ceding the 'religious' vote and the 'religious' voice to the GOP. Allowing them to narrowly define Christianity on two issues: abortion and homosexuality.

I spent many a Sunday in church, and the pastor I listened to, HIS Jesus was about helping those less fortunate. Helping those in need. Helping those least amongst us. THIS is what I was taught in Sunday school, and in those sermons. Jesus helps not the rich and mighty, but those who need help. I KNOW this is the Christianity that Obama was taught in Trinity UCC. I'm glad to hear him speaking up about this. Is this political? Everything is political, but it's also an important point in taking back the religious discourse of this country. For those of you who are secularists and don't grasp how angry many of us have been about hardcore rightwing evangelicalism being THE face of religion in this country for going on 2 decades, I'm here to tell you that it DOES anger us.

I've waited for a long time for a Democrat to be able to discuss faith with sincerity and believability, and not shirking away from it, as if believing in Jesus was a crime of some sort. I'm glad Obama stepped up to the plate. This isn't a flip-flop. This isn't going ' centrist'; because he has spoken of religion and his support for faith-based institutions for years.

Related Articles:

Obama Will Launch Joshua Generation Project

Religious Right: Leaning Towards Obama

All About Religion; Not Really About Race

Obama Campaign Will Launch 'Joshua Generation Project'

Hat tip:Politicalinaction.com

From CBNNews.com:

The Brody File
EXCLUSIVE: Obama Campaign will Launch 'Joshua Generation Project'
June 6, 2008

The Brody File has learned that in the next two weeks Barack Obama's campaign will unveil a major new program to attract younger Evangelicals and Catholics to their campaign.

It's called the "Joshua Generation Project." The name is based on the biblical story of how Joshua's generation led the Israelites into the Promised Land.

A source close to the Obama campaign tells The Brody File the following:

"The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward."

The official rollout won't be for another two weeks or so, but The Brody File has been told the activities will include house parties, blogging, concerts and more.

Rest of article at link above.

I have discussed the Obama/Evangelical Push in two previous posts:

Religious Right - Leaning Towards Obama?

Obama & The Right Wing: Is it All About Race, Or Not?

Last week, Mark DeMoss, who may be the most prominent public relations executive in the evangelical world, stated that he wouldn't be surprised if Obama got 40% of the evangelical vote.

40%?

I'm not saying Obama would get that much, but does he really need that much in order to tilt this election? No.

Remember the original hypothesis about Obama and Religion was brought forth on Politicalinaction.com

Now, we have Obama specifically outreaching to evangelicals. Evangelicals are to the GOP what Black folk are to the Democrats. What would happen if there was a Republican candidate that could get 40% of the Black vote? Exactly. That's why this is so serious.

And, it is the reason for
a) the Muslim Smears
b) why The Right went apecrazy over Jeremiah Wright

Those were both attempts to marginalize Obama as a Christian.

Obama is trying to rework the electoral map. He's going after voters in states that previously would have been ignored.


UPDATE: Found this at the Time.com, Swampland website

June 9, 2008 5:07
Evangelicals for Obama?

If this Barna poll of Evangelicals* is right, McCain has a LOT of work to do. From the poll’s synopsis:

But the big news in the faith realm is the sizeable defection from Republican circles of the much larger non-evangelical born again and the notional Christian segments. The non-evangelical born again adults constitute 37% of the likely voters in November, and the notional Christians are expected to be 39% of the likely voters. Among the non-evangelical born again adults, 52% supported President Bush in 2004; yet, only 38% are currently supporting Sen. McCain, while 48% are siding with Sen. Obama. Although notional Christians voted for John Kerry in 2004 by an 11-point margin, that gap has more than doubled to 26 points in this year’s election. Protestants and Catholics have moved toward the Democratic challenger in equal proportions since 2004.

Religious Right -leaning towards Democrats?

From CNN.com:'Raw Politics': Religious right leaning toward Democrats?

'Raw Politics': Religious right leaning toward Democrats?
By Tom Foreman
CNN Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- For decades, evangelicals have been seen as solid supporters of the Republican Party. That could be changing.

The religious right, a cornerstone of the so-called Reagan revolution -- the battle over abortion law, and gay marriage -- wants a change.

At least some evangelicals do.

A group of influential Christian leaders are declaring they are tired of divisive politics, tired of watching fights over some issues trump all the good they could be doing.

"Our proposal in [our] manifesto is to join forces with all those who support a civil public square. ... a vision of public life in which people of all faiths -- which, of course, means no faith -- are free to enter and engage public life on the basis of their faith," said evangelical leader Os Guinness.

For Democrats, the timing is good. The party has been pushing to overcome the "faith gap," that many feel has hurt them with church-going voters.

Candidates are appearing in more religious settings, and conversations.

"What I try to do is as best I can be an instrument of His will," Sen. Barack Obama has said.

"I obviously was fortunate to be able to rely on and be grounded in my faith which has been anchor for me throughout my entire life," Sen. Hillary Clinton has said.

Mara Vanderslice of Common Good Strategies is part of that effort.

"I think the biggest thing that we've done wrong is sort of say that we just want a separation of church and state and only speak about religion in terms of separation," Vanderslice said.

Evangelicals are now leading public support for many issues dear to Democrats: global campaigns against AIDS, hunger and poverty. Watch how evangelicals are reaching out »

Even Congressional Democrats can see the power of a partnership, according to the Ethics and Public Policy Center's Michael Cromartie.

"I think there are genuinely religious people, obviously in the Democratic Party, who've said, you know, 'we need to stop toning down how our faith relates to public policy issues,' whether it's the environment or whether it's questions of the economy or war and peace," he said.

"And we need to start framing our concerns in religious language so that it might appeal to religious believers in America."

Now, this is interesting. A couple of months ago, I posted a link to Politicalinaction.com. The blogger there put forth the premise that the GOP attacks on Obama had little to do with race, but mostly to do with religion. This blogger said that the GOP understands that Obama is the first Democrat in decades, that reeks of being a true Christian, and not just one that babbles about it. That though Obama couldn't get the hard right evangelicals, we should remember that a nice slice of evangelicals left the GOP in 2006 because of all the scandals.

That the YOUNGER evangelicals, especially, are not as rigid as their elders, and that someone like Obama could appeal to them. The supposition was - what would happen to the GOP if Obama was able to KEEP the evangelicals that left them in 2006, and just slice off a little bit more?

Game.Set.Match for the Democrats up and down the line.

I wrote this as a comment in a post down below, and but then went to The Daily Dish, which had a link about young evangelicals, which is why I put this forth in a main post.

Money quotes from the article:

Michael Dudley is the son of a preacher man.

He's a born-again Christian with two family members in the military. He grew up in the Bible Belt, where almost everyone he knew was Republican. But this fall, he's breaking a handful of stereotypes: He plans to vote for Democrat Barack Obama.

"I think a lot of Christians are having trouble getting behind everything the Republicans stand for," said Dudley, 20, a sophomore at Seattle Pacific University.

Dudley's disenchantment with the GOP isn't unique among young, devoutly Christian voters. According to a September 2007 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 15 percent of white evangelicals between 18 and 29, a group traditionally a shoo-in for the GOP, say they no longer identify with the Republican Party. Older evangelicals are also questioning their traditional allegiance, but not at the same rate.
...................................................................

But students at a recent bipartisan political union meeting at SPU say there's something more going on with young Christians than disenchantment with McCain.

In an informal poll of the political union, the majority supported Obama.

"I think it's a new movement starting," said Amy Archibald, 19, a sophomore at the evangelical school. "Most of us would never blindly follow the old Christian Right anymore. James Dobson has nothing to do with us. A lot of us are taking apart the issues, and thinking, 'OK, well, [none of the candidates] fits what I'm looking for exactly.' But if you're going to vote, you've got to take your pros with your cons."

Eugene Cho, a founder and lead pastor at Seattle's Quest Church, which caters to a predominantly under-35 crowd, urges young Christians to look beyond the two or three issues that have allowed Christians to be "manipulated by those that know the game or use it as their sole agenda."

"While the issue of abortion — the sanctity of life — must always be a hugely important issue, we must juxtapose that with other issues that are also very important," Cho wrote in his blog on faith and politics.

Polls have shown that young Christians aren't any less concerned about the "family values" issues that have traditionally driven Christians to the Republican camp. (In fact, a study by the Barna Group, an evangelical polling organization, shows young Christians are actually more conservative on abortion than their elders.) It's just that they're also concerned about issues such as social justice and immigration, issues traditionally associated with Democrats.

Judy Naegeli, 25, who works at a Christian philanthropy, says easy access to information about the world via social-networking sites, YouTube and blogs is the reason her generation is more concerned with social justice.

"It's changed our perspective. ... Each generation chooses their cause, and ours is AIDs in Africa, or poverty or social justice," she said.

You know you read stuff, and you go HMMMMMMM and then sit back and think about it, and it seems to make more sense?

Just like that HuffingtonPost.com's 'Obama bankrupted Clinton in Pennsylvania' premise....

This ' Obama can appeal to the evangelicals' premise is something that I think we need to consider, which is the reason for
a) the Muslim Smears
b) why The Right went apecrazy over Jeremiah Wright
The attempts to marginalize Obama as a Christian.

Just some food for thought.

Evangelicals Threaten to Support Third Party Candidate

Per the NYTimes.com:

Giuliani Inspires Threat of a Third-Party Run
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: October 1, 2007


WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 — Alarmed at the possibility that the Republican Party might pick Rudolph W. Giuliani as its presidential nominee despite his support for abortion rights, a coalition of influential Christian conservatives is threatening to back a third-party candidate.

The threat emerged from a group that broke away for separate discussions at a meeting Saturday in Salt Lake City of the Council for National Policy, a secretive conservative networking group. Participants said the smaller group included James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family, who is perhaps its most influential member; Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council; Richard A. Viguerie, the direct-mail pioneer; and dozens of other politically oriented conservative Christians.

Almost everyone present at the smaller group’s meeting expressed support for a written resolution stating that “if the Republican Party nominates a pro-abortion candidate we will consider running a third-party candidate,” participants said.

The participants said that the group chose the qualified term “consider” because it had not yet identified an alternative candidate, but that it was largely united in its plans to bolt the party if Mr. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, became the nominee. The participants spoke on condition of anonymity because the Council for National Policy meeting and the smaller meeting were secret, but they said members of the smaller group intended to publicize the resolution.

A revolt of Christian conservative leaders could be a significant setback to the Giuliani campaign because white evangelical Protestants make up a major share of Republican primary voters, including more than a third of voters in Iowa and South Carolina.

But the threat is risky for the leaders of the Christian conservative movement as well. Some of its usual grass-roots supporters might still back a supporter of abortion rights like Mr. Giuliani, either because they dislike the Democratic nominee even more or because they are more concerned with other issues, like the war.

I have to say that I'm confused about this, because it doesn't make any sense to me. Every GOP Candidate has made the pilmgrimages to kiss their behinds. John McCain has sacrificed the independent spirit that made him so appealing to kiss up to them. They've all done the ' please baby baby please' dance with the Evangelicals.

What do they want?

I ask this seriously, because they're acting like none of the frontrunners is returning their phone calls. They're acting like the frontrunners are ignoring them, when nothing could be further from the truth.

And, it also makes it seem, listening to them, that they look at the field, and they are pretending that nobody has their suitable credentials, which is untrue, because Huckabee and Brownback SHOULD be considered bonafides for them. What would a Third Party do for them than choosing either Huckabee or Brownback to support fully couldn't do?

Now, this could be a power play, but my thing is, they've been puckered up to from Day One, so what else is there to squeeze from these candidates?