Religious Right vs. Liberalism --some history of Religious Right

Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority --followed by Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition –were two back to back movements which encouraged Christians to use their strength in numbers at the ballot box and in lobbying -- regarding the liberals’ erosion of American morality via entertainment media, their legalization of abortion, (now the gay agenda which was not an issue at first), liberals’ push to legalize drugs and prostitution and tendency to glamorize both; their leniency on criminals, liberals’ weak response to crime, liberals’ advocacy of porn and sex establishments as civil rights (Playboy clubs and the "playboy philosophy" were in vogue then), liberals' taking over our schools with their Planned Parenthood style of sex ed, their value- neutral style of life skills ed., liberal opposition to prayer,and holy book gifts and religious songs at public school graduations (something previously unchallenged and acceptable), liberals' embrace of ACLU agenda re: religious values and prayer exercise, etc. in the public square. (We used to say a little prayer of gratitude for our first grade morning snack 55 years ago --in public school. Didn't hurt anyone to believe in a loving Supreme Being to whom we owed gratitude for our blessings. Just as it never hurt anyone to pray a blessing on the graduates.)

It wasn’t the Religious Right that wanted to PLACE the Ten Commandments and the Christmas crèches where they had never been—they had ALREADY BEEN THERE --since the country’s beginnings. the Ten C’s were on the Supreme Court walls –with Moses and the tablets in the art work –long before the start of the current “religious right.”

It was LIBERALS who wanted to REMOVE the Ten C’s from public squares.

Zion, Illinois, was founded by a religious group of people –and they had a town insignia with religious symbols in it. The liberal ACLU has fought and too often succeeded to remove all such historical remnants of our religious history from public property.

So THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IS NOT THE CHANGE AGENT –they are the status quo protectors of things that make for a nation that is life-revering, wholesome, family-friendly, and respectful of the Golden Rule and Ten C’s.

I don’t know that either Falwell or Robertson ever defended racism (as accused on liberal blogs) –such as would have been practiced at a school that wouldn’t let Afr.-Americans attend or use the same facilities, etc. Bob Jones U. is not a typically evangelical institution –much more fundamentalist/conservative than most evangelical colleges. They had a religious belief that God wanted races to remain distinctive and marry within the race. What happened to them regarding their prohibition of interracial dating will happen to all churches and Christian institutions, including the boy scouts, if liberals control both the courts and legislatures and presidency. We will have to hire practicing homosexuals in religious institutions if liberals prevail, even though their lifestyle is contrary to Biblical faith and practice --whereas equality of races IS supported by the Bible; interracial marriage was never prohibited by the Bible. Homosex is a different issue than race; it's a lifestyle choice influenced by upbringing and sexual temptation just like adultery. IF liberals prevail on this issue, the church will not be able to preach what the bible clearly teaches about homosexual acts. And that would violate both church –state separation, free exercise of belief and the Bible.

It’s absolutely dishonest to say the Religious Right wants to force everyone to be Christian or to even be moral. They are never about coercion of religious belief, as radical Muslims have been. Christians know that Christians are made by repentance and heart’s desire to follow Christ –voluntary faith. There is no conversion with coercion.

And finally, one more issue: the Religious Right was also against policies that caused the erosion of marriage among the poor through LBJ’s Great Society agenda which began to pay single women to keep fathers out of the home and make more fatherless babies --i.e. a welfare mom could get paid more per month for every kid –as long as Dad was not home. It became more profitable for a woman to make kids than to marry or get a low-paying job for which she was qualified. After welfare reform, the low income tax credits helped to motivate the poor and unskilled to work, also giving some kind of aid allowing fathers to be present in their homes. Liberal welfare policy had taken responsibility and value away from the minority dads –giving support for an already matriarchal society whose sons got into gangs and looked to prostitution and drugs to make their livings. Gov't had replaced the fathers.

I went to a meeting of school board members at the Toledo Club –where a national spokesman for Planned Parenthood was speaking. The speaker said we don’t want to tell youth they ought to “wait for marriage” for sex because so many of their parents did not. “Why, I myself am still exploring my sexuality and learning new things” , he said –and that was a man setting a tone for our sex ed policies. It took the Religious Right to turn that around and get a little more common sense into the sex ed approaches. And for awhile, stats were showing delay in sexual activity by youth –and more kids placing a value on virginity –and reduction in teen-age pregnancy rate --but our tv shows like Friends undo all the good of sensible sex ed. –showing young adults sleeping around without any emotional toll or disease --without the reality of casual, promiscuous serial sex relationships.

Abstinence education means chastity before marriage, restoring the preferred value of virginity until one is married –and I certainly don’t mind, myself, if students know that birth control methods are available –but the Religious Right (including orthodox Jews and Muslims ) would resent any sex ed that suggests birth control and condoms make pre-marital sex safe, good , responsible, and free of negative consequences. That’s not true and we don’t want liberals teaching our kids otherwise--but they do when they can get away with it --and TV entertainment with its disrespect for marriage is their best medium.