The Washington Post over the weekend published a rather silly column online by Judd Birdsall, managing director of the Cambridge Institute on Religion & International Studies, asserting that opponents of same-sex marriage had reacted gracefully to Friday’s U.S. Supreme Court.
When the Religious Right started to become a prominent force in American politics in the late 1970s, its advocates had a major impact on the country’s largest Protestant denomination: the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC).
Younger readers may be surprised to read that the SBC, which claims 16 million members, used to be fairly moderate on social issues. It strongly supported the separation of church and state, citing historical Baptist leaders like John Leland and Isaac Backus.
The role of the Religious Right in the Republican Party and national political life is under a lot of scrutiny these days.
Everyone from Ralph Reed and Richard Land to Billy Graham and Tony Perkins did everything in their considerable power to steer the election to Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates, and they failed miserably. These folks even lost a string of referenda on issues such as taxpayer funding of religion, reproductive rights and marriage equality.
Notorious Southern Baptist lobbyist Richard Land has announced his retirement. I’d break out the champagne, but I fear that this is a mere change of personnel, not policy.
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) was once a staunch supporter of church-state separation. But in 1979, fundamentalists orchestrated a takeover that moved the nation’s largest Protestant denomination in exactly the opposite direction.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York City was on “Face the Nation” yesterday and managed to pull off quite a feat. He said he agrees with President John F. Kennedy, who in 1960 gave a famous speech calling for “absolute” separation of church and state, and with former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, who says that same JFK speech made him want to “throw up.”
On May 8, North Carolina voters will decide on a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. As you might expect, the drive for the measure is fueled almost entirely by ultra-conservative religious forces bent on imposing their doctrines by force of law.
Poor Erik Stanley.
The Alliance Defense Fund attorney keeps pleading with evangelical clergy to step forward and become political bosses, but the clergy – and the American people – keep saying no.
Stanley and his Religious Right cronies salivate at the prospect of an evangelical Christian voting bloc marching in lockstep under the dictates of rigid right-wing pulpiteers and electing candidates who will tear down the wall of separation between church and state.
Reporters with the mainstream media sure love to write about the presidential horse race, don’t they? And I find it interesting how certain candidates suddenly become all the rage. How many stories about Michele Bachmann have you seen recently?
But the media, so intent on polls and personalities, is missing a huge story: The Religious Right’s attempt to pick our next president.
I spent the day on Friday at Ralph Reed’s Faith & Freedom Conference and Strategy Briefing here in Washington, D.C.
The list of speakers included many presidential hopefuls, congressional leaders and Religious Right strategists who came to stir their base into action.
Religious liberty is a fairly easy concept to grasp: All faiths have the right to exist, meet for worship, spread their ideas and build facilities. All must abide by certain laws, and the government must treat them equally.