We can work together

[greybeta]

Allow me to thank zoethe for inspiring this post. I consider myself a moderate Republican and a social conservative.

The hot topic of choice that has been beat to death has been why the Democrats failed to win an election that they should have won and how they got blindsided by the evangelical vote. In hindsight, it becomes clear why Bush pounded the social issues. They actually mattered more than the economy or Social Security or Iraq.

We owe it all to a college dropout masterminding the Republican strategy.

It has been said that Kerry had more “presidential” qualities, and his plans supposedly made more sense than Bush. After the first debate, I bought into the thinking that Kerry was going to win. But my thinking changed after the third debate, the one where Kerry was supposed to clean up on domestic issues.

As I saw it then, Kerry wasn’t resonating with America. Support of Kerry boiled down to one argument: Change. People desperate for change labored long and hard to bring out the vote in record numbers.

That change will inevitably come in four years.

Shortly after Kerry’s concession, Democrats became saddened and raged at the same time. The two biggest complaints I saw were:
1. Oh my God, I’m surrounded by homophobes
2. Not only that, but I’m living next to a bunch of God-fearing bigots

Curious, I began to question them. I'm proud to say that I found people willing to discuss controversial ideas in a civil manner. I really did learn a lot, and I thank everyone for being patient with me.

As we all have been told, the Left’s current rhetorical strategy on social issues alienates moderates.

For one thing, I noticed that the Left has fallen out of touch with the moderate evangelicals. The Bible or Jesus without fail has the Left conjuring up the image of Jerry Falwell. Arguments that say “God said so” aren't reasonable for the Left. And the Far Left forbids someone to have faith in an incoherent book written by mere men.

As far as I know, Christians would say God’s purpose for their life would be to be more like Jesus everyday. Their life purpose would be to know God and make Him known. Their core beliefs are Jesus is the only way to heaven, Bible is the absolute Truth, and how they behave matters. And the key to making this all work is to have faith in God.

So when a Christian enters an argument, he or she will often use Scripture to back up their claims. Of course, this is usually followed by people attempting to disprove the Bible. That approach doesn’t work because Christians have accepted God’s Word as part of their faith. Calling such a belief bigotry will surely convince Christians to change their views.

So it can be said that reason alone shall not suffice. Yet, it seems that liberals must have the superiority of argument. They can have that if they’re willing to give up the votes of the more centrist Christians.

Liberals have to realize that people can think liberalism is wrong and those same people can still work toward liberal ideals.

Just because I don’t approve of a homosexual lifestyle doesn’t exclude me from supporting civil unions. Yes, there was a time when I couldn’t fathom why homosexuals should ever have the right to be married. But, through discussing that issue with some of my more patient liberal friends, I’ve changed my mind (or flipflopped, as some might say).

Look, I’m going to take the idea that homosexuality is wrong to my deathbed. Nobody is going to change that. But I can become convinced that denying hospital visitation and inheritance rights to homosexuals goes against the ideas of Christianity.

There’s always going to be bigots. There’s also always going to be hope.

Comments

[zoethe.livejournal.com]

Thank you for writing this. It's good to know that dialogue can have an impact. Mind if I link to it?

[miripanda.livejournal.com]

Very much appreciated your post (found you through zoethe).
It's crazy though - I have family in Fort Smith, and I was born in Tulsa. Whoaaa. My dad even taught there for a few years. Do you mind if I friend you?

I think you make a lot of really good points, and I'm so reassured that there are actually rational people out there, because it does begin to feel like it doesn't matter how passionate I am for women's rights or for total equality of everyone everywhere, that nobody is going to change their minds just because I have all these reasons.

Something I've been examining since the election is that somehow, there's this huge divide in America, where part of the population is inclined to help others before themselves (welfare), to allow others the freedoms they don't need for themselves (gay marriage), and to protect the options of others that they don't intend to require for themselves (abortion). It never occurs to me to believe otherwise. I'm glad to see that "thinking otherwise" can occur to people such as yourself with a different background and a difference basis for your beliefs (I'm not religious, and I'm a down-to-the-ground feminist)

I've always regarded flip-flopping, as Kerry said, as a means of seeing complexities.

[ladydiana.livejournal.com]

The reason we bring up Jerry Falwell is because Jerry Falwell and his ilk, including George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, etc, are the ones that are in power.

Look, my friend didn't lose custody of her child this year because she is Christian. She lost custody of her child this year because she is not, and the judge so stated (that she is incapable of being a fit parent), because she is not Christian.

You may feel whatever you like about stem-cell research, homosexuality, non-evangelicals, and what-have-you...but when you vote for the ones who want to deny people the right to exist, you have no right to complain that "I'm not like that".

Because no matter how reasoned you are...you vote for the unreasonable ones...and by doing so you put them in power.

[kimmaline.livejournal.com]

Yes, there was a time when I couldn’t fathom why homosexuals should ever have the right to be married. But, through discussing that issue with some of my more patient liberal friends, I’ve changed my mind (or flipflopped, as some might say).

I hope that I fall into the catagory of "your more patient liberal friends", per our conversation in my journal. :) I tried to be patient...I hope I succeeded.

And I very much appreciate hearing your side of it.

[susitna.livejournal.com]

*hugs* Thanks for this awsome post.

[girliewhirl.livejournal.com]

I'm glad to hear that Zoethe's post was inspiring. And I'm glad to hear that you were able to look beyond your personal religious beliefs and see that the laws in this country have to protect ALL of the citizens, and not just the ones in the majority. Legislating morality is always sticky business.

It's a strange concept to wrap one's head around - we have to have separate standards for our laws and for our religion. Which is why even though you may be morally opposed to abortion, you can still recognize that until there are better health care options for women in America and until the social conditions that lead to epidemic proportions of unplanned pregnancies are cured, there is still a legal need for safe and affordable abortion in America. You may be morally opposed to homosexuality, but still recognize that two people who love each other should not be driven apart by laws that make it impossible for them to care for each other in medical emergencies or in their old age. You may feel that God gave Man dominion over the earth, but still recognize that policies that damage our environment harm our children's future, and our own. And you be personally opposed to the use of fetal stem cells, but understand that millions of lives can be saved by allowing responsible medical use of those cells in research.

I think what bothers me, and many of my "liberal" friends, is that I DON'T have a problem with your religious beliefs. I don't think that they are trivial, or unimportant. But I don't want your religious beliefs imposed on me through the law we have to share - any more than you want my religious beliefs imposed on you. (How about outlawing the eating of meat in America! Egads!) I think that if we could recognize that public laws need to have a rationale that doesn't come from religious dogma, and allow law to be law and religion to be religion, having civil (ha! great pun!) discussion on the issues would be easier.

[culculhen.livejournal.com]

Nice piece, enjoyed reading it. there is much in the bible that could be used to persuede people to back the more liberal policies. In my country (the Netherlands) almost all our famous liberties and our Healthcare was instituted by Christians parties in goverment.

Christians who oppose certain things because of their feelings will not be swayed by arguments but you should engage them were their objections are in there belief. I myself am not a christian but use the bible sometimes to get my point across and found that that works better then just giving factial arguments and statistics.

The Left should not fear the bible because it is the biggest asset they could have. No other thing has such clear examples of helping those who are weaker or have erred and tells people to do the right thing. the left should be overjoyed that there is such a document which has so many thing in common with their viewpoints.