Obama, Abortion, and the Younger Evangelicals
10 comments | PermalinkThirty-three-year-old evangelical Steve Knight - a pro-life voter who twice supported George W. Bush - is backing Democrat Barack Obama this election, displaying a mindset that angers and worries older leaders of the movement who call Mr. Obama an "abortion absolutist."Read the whole thing. Brian McLaren and D.A. Carson are also quoted in the article.Mr. Knight and other evangelicals say Republicans have failed to deliver on the abortion issue, and they are weighing their electoral options this year. Sen. John McCain could be dealt a major blow if the liberal evangelical movement expands and persuades voters to embrace Mr. Obama or sit out the election.
"We did what they said to do. We elected all these people, we got conservative justices appointed at the bench, and nothing happened," said Tony Jones, the 40-year-old leader of Emergent Village, a national group that often speaks for more liberal Christians from an evangelical background.
Those evangelicals are suffering from "fetus fatigue" and want to "give up," said Douglas Groothuis, a philosophy professor at Denver Seminary.
posted by JT at Friday, August 15, 2008
10 Comments:
...high-profile evangelicals such as author Tim LaHaye say Mr. Warren is leading his followers astray and giving Mr. Obama equal footing with Mr. McCain, whose voting record is praised by pro-life groups.
"While I respect Rick greatly - we are both Southern Baptists - I think he is naive and influenced by some socialist-minded people who claim to be evangelicals," Mr. LaHaye told The Washington Times.
This doesn't happen every day. I'm in complete agreement with Tim LaHaye
I find it interesting that the emergent/postconservative 'christians' pat themselves on the back for their concern for social justice when they are aloof to the greatest social injustice of our day (the slaughter of 1000's of babies each day). But it is far too controversial to take a stand against abortion and this might drive away the people they are trying to reach. The fear of man brings a snare.
Justin,
Thanks for suggesting my name to the Washington Times for that article. I became the foil for that article -- yet another "Obama attracts young evangelicals" story (not too original) -- and it's probably good that they didn't actually quote me in it ;-) Leave that to the "experts" like McLaren and Carson.
Shalom,
Steve K.
"I've only met one person in my travels in recent months who has said he is voting for McCain, and that was because he was an admittedly single-issue voter," Mr. McLaren said. "Nearly all the vocal people I've met are enthusiastic about Obama. Based on the people I'm in front of as a speaker, I'd never guess the poll numbers are as close as they are."
That definitely says way more about McLaren than it says about the election.
"... displaying a mindset that angers and worries older leaders of the movement who call Mr. Obama an "abortion absolutist."
Raising my hand. Dat's me. I'm not a leader, but I am an older Christian and I'm concerned about the minds and hearts of a younger generation of Christians who would rationalize their support for a staunch pro-abortionist politician like Barack Obama.
In fact, I don't even understand how a self-professing Christian like Barack Obama can be such a staunch pro-abortionist.
Liberals voting for a leftist/Marxist. What a shocker!
I like the "We" statements from Tony Jones. When was he part of "We"?
Looking at Steve Knight's profile (I thank him for posting a comment so that we can see it), this explains a lot. He is emergent.
If young emergents are the typical folks being polled for the "younger" generation voting for Obama than that explains a lot.
Why do I get the feeling they took Carson's comment way out of context? I'm guessing they asked him some leading questions, didn't get the response they wanted, got him to acknowledge what they wanted him to say, completely left out his general emphasis, and left him saying just the thing they wanted him to say. (I've had newspaper reporters do that to me, and the way this is framed is very suspicious along those lines.)
By the way, why is it that the NYT seems incapable of recognizing professors as having Ph.D.s and therefore how inappropriate it is to give them the title "Mr." or some such thing. They should be calling Carson "Dr. Carson". It's bad enough that they call James Dobson an ordained minister or an evangelist, neither of which is his primary job description. But if they can't even bring themselves to call an evangelical professor by his title, something's not right.
Jeremy,
My understanding is that almost all newspapers use the "Mr." title, even if you're an MD or PhD or a Father or a Reverend, etc. I might be wrong, though.
JT
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home