I appeared on Kevin McCullough’s radio show yesterday afternoon to talk about my blog and the election. While discussing the moral divide, I suddenly remembered something Star Parker told me: Republicans can make inroads into the black community through the evangelical churches.
I didn’t give it much thought at the time because I don’t like skin color targeting. But I was looking at it the wrong way. If Republicans concentrated on evangelicals, who come in all colors, they may be able to appeal to more of the evangelicals who happen to be black.
This morning, coincidentally (no such thing, of course), I saw Gregory Kane’s latest column (reg. req. — use member name: bugmenot; password: startribune). He writes about this very issue:
The first inkling I had that Sen. John Kerry would lose the election came exactly a week before, when I participated in a telephone conference call that the Massachusetts senator had with about 350 black clergy.After former President Bill Clinton introduced him, Kerry told the group that the issue of gay marriage was a red herring.
“I ask you not to be diverted from the real issue in this case,” Kerry told the ministers. “Fifty percent of the African-American men in New York City are unemployed. There are more black men in prison than in college.”
As if blowing off the moral issue that would eventually cost him the election weren’t enough, we have to look at what else was wrong with the picture: When you’re telling clergy that things many Christians regard as sins don’t matter, you might not want an admitted philanderer to introduce you.
Earlier in the campaign, Kerry shared a stage with the Rev. Jesse Jackson, another fella not yet bitten by the monogamy bug, who said moral issues were a diversion.
While I blame Kerry, a supposed Christian, for downplaying morality for the sake of politics, the fault lies with Christians in these churches who were persuaded by his racially-charged rhetoric. Last month I briefly discussed this issue in John Kerry and Jeremiah.
I wrote:
“John Kerry “preached” in another black church yesterday and pandered about jobs and healthcare.Tell me, what reasonable person isn’t concerned about his livelihood and his health? Even pagans are concerned about those things. But the Christian should be focused on so much more.
Despite the fact that some black churches are ignorant of why they are exempted from paying taxes, it is doubly sad that most black churchgoers will be voting for an irreverent huckster like Kerry while lending an ear to his discredited sidekick, Jesse Jackson.
Kerry, who stood before these men and women as a wolf while the “shepherd” watched, told them to cast off (their sins?) concerns about the degradation of the culture and vote for him so they could have someone-else-pays-for-it healthcare. Instead of kicking Kerry out on his rear end, Pastor Smith follows up with this…
My ire was raised because instead of hearing a sermon about how to avoid sin, Pastor Smith’s “sheep” got to listen to Kerry assert that socialized medicine and oppressive taxes on other people were much more important to them. If I ever meet Pastor Smith, Kerry’s “sermon” will be the topic of conversation unless he changes the subject or ignores me altogether.
Check out the whole Scary Kerry category in the archives, by the way. I’m thinking of changing the name to “Liberals” now that Kerry’s been kicked to the curb.
Back to Kane. He mentions Kerry’s “more black men in prison than college” campaign tactic, breaks it down and places it in proper context — morality — something liberals hate to do:
And how, exactly, do we separate that disproportionate number of black men in prison from the moral issues of our time?Aren’t most of the black juveniles committing crimes — who will go on to become those black men filling our prisons — from single-parent households where the mother is too poor and too young to raise children? How is that not a moral issue? What Christian church shouts “amen!” to poverty-stricken teen mothers having children out of wedlock?
That was a no-no in the Roman Catholic Church I grew up in, as were abortion, adultery, “living in sin,” drug use, prostitution (either on the consumer or provider side) and, at the risk of sounding homophobic and woefully out of step with political correctness, homosexuality.
As Kane notes, it also didn’t help that Kerry had a couple of adulterers (one with an out-of-wedlock child) trying to get him elected.
One issue that didn’t get much play during Kerry’s campaign was the fact he had his 18-year marriage to the mother of his children annulled! (See Kerry’s “Immaculate Deception”) Is there any other word besides “despicable” that comes to mind? Why Christians, black or white, would vote for a man of such low character…well, he’s gone for now so I won’t expend energy complaining.
Back to my original point. As a Christian I believe I have a duty to reach out to other Christians who fail to comprehend the importance or morality over any other issue, including healthcare, unemployment, prison or anything else. By ignoring morality or relegating it to the sidelines, these other things flow. For instance, loose or reckless living can lead to poor health. Pride (too good for that job), laziness, anger, etc., can lead to unemployment or more precisely, being unemployable. Prison is the result of criminal behavior. It all comes down to right or wrong living.
Stressing the importance of morality in the black community just might benefit Republicans and harm Democrats in upcoming elections. Republicans won’t have to resort to pandering about “black issues.” Leave that to Democrats, who do it very well. Morality is universal.
I feel a renewed sense of mission, and I have liberals and their homosexuality-is-normal mantra to thank for it. God really does work in mysterious ways!
Addendum: Star Parker has new indepth policy reports available for purchase: The Effects of Abortion in the Black Community, Economic State of Black America: 2004 and Social Security Reform.
You also might be interested in A Cultural Wasteland.
Update: I don’t want the divorced/annulment issue to obscure the point I’m trying to make, so I’m opting not to post comments taking me to task for being “anti-Catholic” or even implying it. Regardless of those teachings, I believe declaring a marriage null and void, especially one that produced children, so that one can marry again in the church is…confusing, to put it in politically correct terms. That’s all I’ll say about it today. If you insist on discussing it, please e-mail me.
————————–
Links: Joe Carter’s Evangelicals in America, Part II
