SORRY for the length.
About 60 million American citizens claim to have been `born again` and half of these describe themselves as fundamentalists. This largely reflects the fact that from its earliest days America provided a refuge for religious sects and movements wishing to escape persecution. The new Christian right, which emerged in the late 1970s, was therefore a novel development in that it sought to fuse religion and politics in attempting to `turn america back to Christ`.
The new Christian right is a broad coalition of groups that is primarily concerned with moral and social issues and are intent on maintaining or restoring what they see as Christian culture. Two main factors explain its emergence. One in the 1960s the Supreme court against the use of prayers in American schools (contrary to the first amendment, which guarantees religious freedom), civil rights legislation led to employment quotas and the enforced desegregation of schools through bussing, and, particularly as part of Johnsons `Great Society` initiative, there was a proliferation of welfare, urban development and other programmes. The result was that many `God fearing` conservatives felt that their traditional values and way of life were being threatened, and that the Washington liberal establishment was to blame.
Second was the increasingly political prominence of blacks, women and homosexuals, whose advance threatened traditional social structures, particularly in rural and small-town America. The new Christian right movement in the 1970s campaigned for restoration of traditional family values. A variety of organisations grew the Religious Round table, Moral Majority, Christian Voice and American Coalition for Traditional values. Anti-abortion in the 1980s was the issue that mobilised the movement.
Although Catholics were prominent in the anti-abortion movement, the movement drewfrom the Protestants who as the `Bible believers` subscibed to scriptural inerrancy, and often claimed to be `born again` in the sense that they had undergone a personal expeirence of conversion to Christ. Moral Majority provided finance for the Republican party to embrace a new social and moral agenda based on opposition to abortion and calls for the restoration of prayers to US school.
Reagan embraced Moral Majority in the 1980s that formed a key cog in getting Reagan elected as President. The new Republican coalition placed more emphasis on moral issues than foreign policy or the economy. However, although Reagan eagerly adopted the rhetoric of the Christian right and made `pro-life` appointments to the Supreme court, he generally failed to deliver on the moral agenda. As George Bush sr rejected the idea of theChristian right movement, this prompted the organisation to put its own candidate for the Presidency in 1992. Televangelist Pat Robinson`s unsuccessful 1992 bid for the Republican nomination also cost the Republicans the White House. Turnout on the Christian right was low. The Christian right hit a wall in the 1990s, how could they get beyond the white evangelical Protestant community? The extreme Christian right have adopted miliant strategies such as the Christian Patriots exemplified by the Oklahoma bombing in 1995.
However, the Christian right recieved a major boost from the election of George w.Bush in 2000. For Bush to get elected he had to mask his believes by using the phrase `compassinate conservatism` that did get him the votes form the independents and moderate conservatives. Not only are a number of members of Bushs cabinet born again Christians, but the leading evangelical John Ashcroft, was appointed attorney general. It has been argued that this has strenthened the support for Israel in the aftermath of September 11th, based upon the Old Testament portrayal of Palestine as the `land of the Jews`. It has been suggested in Europe that the reasons for the war in Iraq isnt about Terrorism or oil but in fact to secure Israel. This mission will be complete with the invasions of Syria and Iran. Unlike Reagan, Bush has done what the Christian right have seeked from him. Unlike Reagan, Bush is not as popular. Did Reagan realise the dangers of this movement? The Christian right will come out in force to vote for Bush, but will they discover that the policy has alienated the moderate conservatives? i voted for Bush in 2000 and i am very uneasy about this movement. As a women i am a pro-choice. As a moderate conservative, i am concerned with the fiscal and trade deficits. Does this President have an agenda? or am i just paranoid.
I don't think Bush has gone any further than Reagan in adopting the policy of the Christian right, whatever that is. He stands for traditional family values and it's very hard for me to find something wrong with that, or to understand the hysteria and hatred behind the people who do.
The idea that Pat Robertson cost George Bush the 1992 election is a new one on me. It is certainly true that lack of enthusiasm for
Bush among his base was a big part of the reason for his defeat. But that was based on more than just "Christian right" issues. In fact I don't think that the "Christian right" issues played a big part on their own. It was more the economy and the general directionlessness and lack of ideas projected by Bush.
One thing I don't understand about the liberals is that if they are so sure their stance on social issues like abortion is so popular, why are they so hysterical about court appointments. Courts exist to force unpopular ideas (such as busing) down people's throats. If something is popular and approved by the legislature, court backing is not necessary.
