Let's probe a real All Hallows Eve fissure in the popular "crackup" narrative developing on the religious right. Noting the effect of the Giuiliani campaign on this "death," "reconfiguration," or "reformation," of social conservatives, the American Spectator's W. James Antle III prognosticates in The Politico, on the effect a Giuliani win in November would have on the role of abortion in his own party. He writes:

For starters, the media will portray a Giuliani win as a victory for the right to choose [between pro and anti] and the final defeat of the religious right. The GOP is filled with politicians who oppose abortion only because it is the path of least resistance. President Giuliani would alleviate the pressure. Republicans who aspire to the presidency have always been well-advised to become anti-abortion. A Giuliani defeat of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney would advertise that such conversions are no longer required.

If this plays out, Giuliani could be creating a kind of reverse litmus test for future GOP candidates. Antle argues:

It will also reveal whether those who speak on behalf of “values voters” know what they are talking about. Giuliani has previously donated money to Planned Parenthood, praised Margaret Sanger and advocated taxpayer-funded abortion. He remains in support of abortion rights and in favor of domestic partnerships.

It's important to stop here and point out that Pat Robertson is supporting Guiliani, but not conservative Catholics. Now whatever one thinks about the sincerity of Robertson, this raises the deeper question about how this will play out with the Catholic/evangelical social alliance of the past elections. Antle mentions Brownback dropping out, but he fails to note that the majority of Brownback's votes and money came from conservative Catholics. This gets at a deeper problem both in the reporting on the religious right and the "crackup" narrative.

Unless Guiliani starts genuflecting in some churches and on the old social issues, and sans a Brownback endorsement, the cracks may widen between evangelicals who emphasize fighting "terrorism" and antiabortion Catholics who feel betrayed for supporting an unjust war.

On this day that Martin Luther nailed his 95 thesis to the Wittenberg door, it will be interesting to see how some of the major conservative Catholic leaders -- who have carried Protestant culture war water -- will react. Will they feel tricked by a Guiliani-comfortable party, or will they treat everyone to a real "crackup" narrative, aka, a schism?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 02:38 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Yesterday's New York Times magazine article about the fissures and shifts in evangelical Christians' political and theological orientation set off a blizzard of blogging. I saw great posts all over the blogscape, and after reading around ten lengthy posts, I fear I'd meld them together if I tried to comment on all the commentary. (Besides, blog roundups are Alex's specialty.)

So I'll just stick with an out-of-the-way response in traditional media: the editorial in today's Wichita Eagle, whose namesake city David Kirkpatrick used as the anecdotal frame for his NYT story. (You might've seen the Eagle editorial in FPL's daily newsreel today.)

Called "No 'evangelical crackup' in Wichita," it didn't take as much issue with Kirkpatrick's story as the title suggests:

To assess the state of the religious right, the New York Times Magazine came to the right state -- Kansas, and specifically Wichita. The resulting cover story Sunday oversold the idea of an "evangelical crackup," but there is no question that in Wichita and far beyond, Christians are rethinking how and how much to bring their Bible-based values to bear in the public square.

However, they do (vaguely) point out local trends that don't quite jibe with Kirkpatrick's central argument:

Some evangelicals in Wichita and elsewhere in Kansas have not extinguished their agendas, only refocused them locally. Look at the proliferating petition drives to call grand juries to investigate sexually oriented businesses and abortion provider George Tiller.

And the mission work going on among local churches across the ideological and denominational spectrum remains strong and inspiring, meeting needs and lifting up the downtrodden in Wichita and far beyond.

The Eagle also regurgitates some of Kirkpatrick's point about evangelicals' political dissatisfaction and shifting priorities. All told, it's not a very striking response content-wise, but it's always useful to look at local responses to national media attention they receive. Wichita's hometown newspaper's reaction seemed to be that Kirkpatrick got it mostly right, but with a couple of notable (yet small) exceptions.

Posted by Dan at 05:51 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Today the AP reported a John Hopkins study that found 12 percent of America's high schools 'dropout factories' that graduate less than 60 percent of students who enter as freshmen. And according to the report,

The highest concentration of dropout factories is in large cities or high-poverty rural areas in the South and Southwest. Most have high proportions of minority students. These schools are tougher to turn around, because their students face challenges well beyond the academic ones — the need to work as well as go to school, for example, or a need for social services.

Aaron at Faithfully Liberal offers a personal testimony from his experience in a 'dropout factory,' and I'd like to add my own. In 2001, I taught 110 seventh graders in a rural school that was 90 percent African American and 50 percent impoverished. When I returned for their graduation this spring, about 65 kids crossed the stage. The kids who dropped out are effectively locked in poverty, and most of the graduates are academically far behind their peers in more affluent districts, which restricts their opportunities as well. Simply put, America's education system contributes to the trap of concentrated poverty, and that is a moral scandal in a country that prides itself as a land of opportunity filled with people of deep faith.

No Child Left Behind created as many problems as it solved at my school, and vouchers would have done no good because there's only one private school nearby, and it's all white (actually, there are many other reasons vouchers wouldn't work). But what's missing isn't just the right policy fix, it's the sense of urgency. If Americans cared more about poor kids, we'd have taken much more drastic action by now. After all, this problem has been with us in some form or another since the country was founded.

When I was in Teach For America, we talked often about long-term goals, and the most eloquent one I ever heard was that one day we would look back at America's separate, unequal education system as a thing of the past and ask ourselves as a society, "how did we ever let that happen?" To that I'd add "..and may God forgive us."

Posted by Dan at 11:27 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

In August, NOW traveled with an unlikely alliance of Evangelical Christians and leading scientists to witness the breathtaking effects of global warming on Alaska's rapidly changing environment. Though many in the evangelical community feel recognition of global warming is in opposition to their mission, the week-long trip inspired new thinking on the relationship between science and religion, and on our moral responsibility to protect the planet. A breathtaking and surprising journey to find common ground between earth and sky.

This web-exclusive special footage is related to the NOW on PBS program "God and Global Warming" airing Friday, October 26. Watch the episode here.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:27 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

One of FPL's intrepid interns who helps put together the daily newsreel asked me an interesting question on Tuesday:

after doing the newsreel for several weeks now, all of the "romney is a mormon" and "the religious right hates guiliani" stories are getting old/boring...should i still be clipping them?

Says a lot about faith and politics news, doesn't it? Part of my response to the incisive intern:

I include [Romney] Mormon stories if a) it's a fresh perspective, b) it ties into current news, or c) is by a prominent writer...Also, sometimes the duration of a storyline is a story in itself. As much as I want to give subscribers good stories to read, I want to give them a sense of what the dominant narratives are in religion-and-politics news. But that's a good observation; thanks for bringing it up

I think both of us are right. To people who scan dozens of outlets every day, the news about certain candidates gets repetitive and saturated. The pack-animal nature of the press, coupled with the campaigns' sophisticated PR operations, ensures that stories linger longer than most readers would care to read. My interest never tires, though, and I want to make sure that the newsreel reflects what's going on, even if the same stories stick around for weeks.

Yet sometimes these Big Stories peter out just when they should be coming to fruition. For instance, there has been a months-long debate among pundits about whether Romney should give The Mormon Kennedy Speech (a speech analogous to JFK's 1960 speech assuring Protestant Texans that his Roman Catholic faith wouldn't influence his governance). Columnist and editorial boards have said he must do it, he can't do it, he should do it now, he should do it later, he owes it to us, how dare we expect it of him, etc., etc., etc.

Well, Bob Schiefer kind of coaxed The Mormon Kennedy Speech out of him on Sunday, and it hasn't received that much attention:

I'm only halfway interested in what Romney's saying here because the content isn't all that surprising. What's more noteworthy is that he is talking at length about his religion on national television. People have been opining about this for months, and now he talks about it, and no one cares. Granted there were bigger things in the news cycle, but still, the silence is conspicuous.

In unrelated news, my favorite story of the week was William McKenzie's Dallas Morning News column about the theology of empire. After hearing about American exceptionalism from candidate after candidate at last weekend's Values Voters Summit, I needed an antidote to the militarism underlying that worldview.

Posted by Dan at 04:18 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Revolution in Jesusland writes:

Progressives (Christian and secular) have lost faith in humanity’s ability to intentionally manage our economies. I’m not talking about central planning, but I am talking about collectively guaranteeing that everyone in the world has access to means of making a good living that’s sustainable and doesn’t destroy the earth. That’s just not an acceptable goal anymore for respectable progressives.

Sound counterintuitive?. . .then see what happens when a young evangelical reads Rauschenbusch.

On that note, JSpot shows some solidarity with the people of Kansas where about 27,000 people make $2.65 an hour.

Commenting on the recent attacks on Catholics United for putting the poor first, Xpatriated Texan notes:

Thaddeus McCotter doesn’t like Catholics United - in fact, he’s calling them “false prophets”. Their crime?

Catholics United errs by deliberately conflating means and ends. Catholics United claims that any pro-life representative opposing Leftist policies to help the poor also de facto opposes helping the poor.

You really have to twist yourself into a knot to get all scoochy and huffy to say that opposing policies “to help the poor also de facto opposes helping the poor”. Huh?

Not enough economics for you, God's Politics provides a great sermon on the rich man in the gospel of Luke. "He went to hell because he lived side-by-side with poverty didn't lift a hand to help."

Speaking of shared resources, Faithful Progressive notes the climate change connection to the California wildfires and urban sprawl.

Mainstream Baptist writes:

The Campaign for America's Future weblog has posted an outstanding essay on "The Art of the Hissy Fit" that describes the practice of ritual defamation. The essay is about the tactics that conservatives use to manipulate political discussion in American politics, but it also describes a practice that fundamentalists employed to marginalize moderates and progressives in order to take over the Southern Baptist Convention.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 10:09 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Here are some videos on how the Southern California wildfires are affecting congregations and how faith groups are responding.

And of course Fox News find a radical Islamic link:

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:09 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

This week's dispatch from the trenches:

Making a Summit out of a Molehill?
This week's Family Research Council-sponsored "Values Voters Summit" succored the proverbial troops with rations of red meat from several presidential candidates and other well-known culture warriors. The well-publicized debate between Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners and Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention included a culture war high point (or low point, depending on how you look at it) when Wallis was booed for talking about global warming.

Didn't the War on Christmas used to start the Day after Thanksgiving?
In a new take on "Christmas creep," World Net Daily began publicizing its Christmas Defense Kits in early October. Of course, it is never too early to prepare for the greatest battle Western Civilization has ever faced, and these kits offer resources for following the mandate outlined in Paul's Letter to the Shoppers, Book 1, Chapter 3*:

And in pursuit of the the door-buster sale thou shalt get thee to thine local mall, and if at the checkout thou receivest not the greeting "Merry Christmas" but instead receivest the abomination "Happy Holidays" thou shalt shake the dust off thy loafers as you leave the accursed place, never to return [except for a discounted Nintendo Wii], and thou shalt denounce the evildoers on Fox News.

What is this "terrorism" of which you speak? I have been too distracted by global warming to become aware of this phenomenon.
Thanks for the tip, "Islamofacsim Awareness Week!"

Powerful Republican decries partisanship, using religion for political ends, by calling political foes "sinful...false prophets."
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, chair of the Republican House Policy Committee, slammed Catholics United for supposedly using the Catholic faith for political ends. We're still waiting for a similar condemnation of The Catholic League.

What's compassion got to do with it?
In FPL's humble opinion, the "compassion issues," have the potential to reshape the faith and politics landscape due to their ability to bring people together across ideological and faith divides. But don't take my word for it.

Scorecard:
It pains me to say so, but the Common Do-Gooders are looking pretty beat up this week. With all the "values voters" coverage, there was plenty of space to re-hash those old issues. But, all is not lost for the Common Do-Gooders; they've clearly got the culture warriors worried. The new poll showing the shift in Evangelical priorities and Pat Robertson (perhaps inadvertently) acknowledging a broader Evangelical agenda, the Common Do-Gooders show that the Common Do-Gooders have gotten some serious reinforcements.

Posted by Beth Dahlman at 12:07 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

What would you say if I told you Pat Robertson said the Family Research Council only speaks for a faction of evangelicals?

You'd certainly have cause to accuse me of fibbing, but you'd be wrong. In an on-air exchange with David Brody, Robertson said

"I'm not sure that that group in Washington is really representative of evangelicals across the spectrum. This is the Family Research Council and some of the James Dobson supporters, I just think that's just a narrow slice of evangelical thought."

Was he acknowledging the broadening agenda embraced by people of faith, or was it a petty shot at a turf rival? I report, you decide. Check out the video; Robertson's remark is not quite halfway through the clip.

My two cents: He's speaking about "the evangelical spectrum" and "evangelical thought" in the context of a political discussion, so it's fair to infer that he's talking about the spectrum of political beliefs, and I doubt Robertson thinks FRC's agenda isn't narrow enough (after all, how much narrower can it get?). Then again, I can only delve but so deeply into the Right's internal squabbles. But Robertson's words contrasts Richard Land's contention that the latest CBS poll overstates the breadth of evangelical priorities.

Am I losing my mind?

Posted by Dan at 11:39 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (7)

After years of propping up W., the Family Research Council inAction crowd apparently threw their weight behind Huckabee and/or Romney.

A quote from AU's Barry Lynn: “This may be the biggest collection of theocrats in one room since the Salem Witch Trials.”

But that misses what the conference actually revealed, a brewing fight between the grassroots and pundit leaders.

Coming out of the con, Gov. Huckabee was the news as Brody notes, but Marc Ambinder tackles the issue that's been bugging some folks: with all the socon values Arkansas Huck embraces, why is there such tepid support. Marc quote's a Redstate poster who intimates something that anyone watching the nonexistent Christian right support for SCHIP can see:

"Even Tony Perkins, the head of FRC, said he hoped the social conservative candidate would be palatable to the fiscal conservatives out there. Huckabee is not."

Clearly for the religious right, the Club for Growth sets the monetary values.

And this brewing fight between right elites and the rank-and-file is exactly what Amy Sullivan sees a-comin':

the real struggle in the 2008 Republican primaries will be not between Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney or social conservatives and fiscal conservatives but between Christian Right leaders and the conservatives in the pews.

Why? In part because the leadership has become rich, and increased in good relationships with folks like Norquist.

The New Republic's Noam add a Machiavellian layer:

I'd add that social conservative leaders generally prefer to support mainstream, front-running candidates because mainstream front-runners don't usually need much help winning elections. And when they do win, they can turn around and claim to have put them over the top. Low risk, high reward, in other words. But more marginal candidates like Huckabee need a lot of help winning, probably significantly more so than the elites can deliver. Worse, if you get behind a Huckabee and he comes up short, it exposes your movement as relatively powerless. And, of course, even if he wins you can't really take credit. So the crass calculation here is the opposite: high risk, low reward.

For example, Justin's Thoughts "Christian. Conservative. Patriotic." who was live blogging the conference and had this to say after Huckabee spoke:

As a evangelical Christian, I loved everything he said. The Governor didn't make a political speech. It sounded much like a sermon. . . .This man needs our support. I really believe that the resurgence of Mike Huckabee is an act of Providence.

Can't argue W.ith that, as they say.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:02 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (8)

While the Family Research CouncilAction "Values Voters" were praying for someone like Reagan to appear this weekend, their old pal Tom DeLay set up tent, back for some more DC business. The Politico writes:

His new firm, First Principles, had its opening party last night, bringing in the Texas contingent — Sen. John Cornyn, former Rep. Henry Bonilla, Rep. Mike Conaway — and also Rep. Patrick McHenry, Pastor Rick Scarboro of Vision America, former Rep. Bill Paxon and Ken Blackwell (who is rumored to be doing work with DeLay).

Being D.C., things got started at 6 p.m. but went into the wee hours of the night — goers were probably encouraged by the fully stocked bar and cigars. We’re told: “His new office looks like it was decorated by Stephen Colbert and Rush Limbaugh. I never knew you could fit so many elephant and eagle figurines into one space."

You might remember Vision America and Ken Blackwell from the infamous "Patriot Pastors" network that We Believe Ohio moderated.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:39 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Before the announcement, you ought to know that I have a 2nd place bet with another blogger. It was pointless to bet on the winner because we're both sure it's Huckabee. She has Romney for runner-up, and I have the rest of the field. That sums up the weekend nicely.

Speaking of other bloggers, Rob Tice Lalka cranked out some terrific live-blogging over at Faith Democrats this weekend. His ability to simultaneously describe and analyze is outstanding. Take a look.

Poll results:

Top Issues

1. Life
2. marriage
3. tax cuts
4. permanent tax relief for families

Candidates

1. Romney - 1595
2. Huckabee - 1565
3. Paul - 868
4. Thompson - 564

Missed the part about the online polling. Shocking result, but it looks like I still win my bet.

UPDATE: ON-SITE VOTE TOTALS MORE IN LINE WITH EXPECTATIONS

1. Huckabe - 488
2. Romney - 99
3. Thompson - 77
4. Tom Tancredo - 65
5. Giuliani - 60
6. Hunter - 54
7. McCain - 30
8. Brownback - 26
9. Paul - 25

Posted by Dan at 02:42 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Huckabee floored them. He could do no wrong. His third sentence summarizes the natural advantage that guaranteed him adulation and freed him to talk about whatever he wanted to:

"I stand here not as one who comes to you, but one who comes from you."

To varying extents, everyone else here had to sell himself to the audience, which took time and focus away from their platforms. Huckabee just got down to preaching.

Well, sort of. The first thing he did was drop an Al Gore joke (probably the 14th I've heard here) and then make fun of hippies. After that, though, it was a sermon to a swaying choir. Standing ovations were frequent, sharp whistling pierced the dark air, and the audience sounded like the evangelical congregations I remember from my time in Huckabee's Arkansas. It wasn't just "amen," it was "that's right," and "yes", and "come on, Mike!"

The congregants spent a lot of time on their feet, and I didn't always understand why. But it was clear that these people love the holy rolling populist preacher. Beyond abortion, same-sex marriage and war!, he talked about some off-beat issues like rebuilding America's arms-manufacturing base, "feeding ourselves" (agriculturally speaking) and the Fair Tax. No matter what he said, the audience cheered and cheered.

Oh, and he said we might not need so many immigrants if we didn't abort so many babies.

Most noteworthy, though, was his declaration of independence from the Republican Party, which sounded like a warning:

I don't want expediency or electability to replace our vales. We live or die by those values," he said. "I want to make it very clear that I do not spell with 'G-O-D,' 'G-O-P.' Our party may be important, but our principles are even more important."

His exit music?

"This is ooouuuur country"

Posted by Dan at 11:09 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Bill Bennett warmed up the crowd for Rudy by speaking about "preemptive cultural surrender" in the war on terror, using the Screwtape Letters to paint liberals as deceptive devils who would lead us to defeat. Enables Rudy to leave it alone for a while.

Rudy started on an entirely different note: shared values and shared goals. He did a decent job of sticking to this theme while also acknowledging his differences with the audience.

His appeal to religion was fascinating: "We've gotta find a way to be more inclusive. Christianity is built around inclusion...Isn't it?" He appealed to Christianity's early history as a faith that thrived as a result of his message of love, hope, and forgiveness. A mild challenge, and a unique tack.

Think about the implications of the fact that Rudy felt compelled to say "Please know this, you have nothing to fear from me."

He talked about the private nature of faith in his Roman Catholic upbringing. I don't know how effective this will be, but I like that he says it.

Still, when he says "I see clearly the value of people of faith" in politics, he reinforces that he is an outsider here. This became especially conspicuous when he spoke of the Constitutional protection of religion rather than America being a Christian nation.

He was at his best when he spoke extensively about driving the pornography out of public view in New York, and about cutting off funding for a religiously offensive exhibit at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. Very smart, and very well received. His other shrewd move was spending more time on school choice than any other candidate.

Abortion reduction and adoption promotion got plenty of time, but a rather lukewarm response, especially in comparison for other candidates' calls for outlawing abortion. He got better applause when he talked about the conservative credentials of his judicial advisory board.

His security section, saved for last, was surprisingly nondescript. The only distinguishing factors were his focus on Israel and his mention of Darfur.

His discussion of his personal life was so cursory that it barely warrants mention. He went there, he didn't have to, and he probably didn't help himself.

Posted by Dan at 08:32 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Bob Jones III’s endorsement will go a long way in South Carolina, the early primary state in which The Mormon Question loomed largest, but Romney still has everything to gain or lose here in this early stage of his courtship of the Religious Right. Let’s see what kind of response he gets...

A very West Wing entrance, with a side of megachurch. Before any specific observations, I've gotta say Mitt nailed it. Hard. A couple of things worked to his advantage: 1) He had 100 campaigners here, according to a leafleteer I asked. 2) He spoke after dinner, when everyone was rested and ready for another round. Best time slot of the day.

He kicked off saying "I'm pro-family on every level, from personal to political...America's future will not be determined by heads of state, but by heads of households." For some reason he was interrupted by the loudest applause of the day. Everyone said something to that effect, but when Mitt said it people got amped. Then he quoted CS Lewis. From jump, the crowd popped with a boisterousness not seen all day.

And then...family family family family. He hit on the economic, moral and practical advantages of the two-parent, two-sex family, but skillfully slipped in some respect for single moms such as his sister Jane.

He raised some eyebrows on bloggers row when, after citing the Moynihan report, he said "Hats off to Bill Cosby, by the way, for telling it like it is." I'd have felt unfair and shameless going there myself, but I'm not Mitt Romney.

He smartly hit the outrage button on the Maine middle school birth control story. Why did others fail to do this?

Did you know that the "strength and preservation of a civilization" is at stake in the same-sex marriage debate? Me neither.

While Romney confessed to being a pro life "convert," he claimed "I will be a pro-life president, just like I was a pro-life governor." The applause sounded like buy-in.

"By the way, you might've heard that I'm Mormon..."

...Did not lead to The Mormon Speech. Instead of addressing that, he switched gears to talk about how he could keep the Reagan coalition together. Talk about a letdown.

Then it was "We're not going to beat Hillary Clinton by acting like Hillary Clinton." What a zinger.

He wound down by skillfully hammering the family family family message, then backed away to a soundtrack that sounded like hail to the chief with a bass line, looking like a frontrunner.

Posted by Dan at 07:05 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

CBS interviews Wallis and Richard Land on the issues that evangelical Christians care about.

The segment features a new CBS poll which found that the top issues white Evangelicals want to hear candidates discuss are Healthcare (23%) and Iraq (20%); abortion and gay marriage didn't even crack the top 4 issues. Poverty topped the list (at 33%) when Evangelicals were asked, "Which issue should Evangelical Christians get involved in?"

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:28 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

When the MC announced that Duncan Hunter was next up, somebody a few rows ahead of me spoke a whimsical but loud "yeah," and people laughed.

Perfunctory applause as he takes the stage. The lunch crowd is still filing back into the ballroom. In case you're wondering, there was a lovely spread in the media room.

Hunter is the first one to bring up the ACLU. To their credit, the ACLU had a booth in the vendors room. They looked relaxed but determined. Determined to do what, I don't know.

Hunter just spent 3 1/2 minutes talking about how he saved a cross from being removed from a war memorial.

He's concerned that the military-industrial manufacturing base is evaporating, sounds very populist and hawkish. He will make China stop cheating on trade and bring high-paying arms-manufacturing jobs back to America.

We ought to be very very scared of China's military buildup. They are acquiring missiles that could take out American aircraft carriers.

"We are going to leave Iraq in victory."

Hunter is the first to mention Iran. He is the hawk of the bunch by far. "We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear device. Period." Everyone's rattled this saber on tv, but for some reason not here.

People hit their feet for Israel: "They should not give back an inch of their land." Loud flagwaving, whooping, clapping.

On Mexicans: "there are some folks who come across the border to get jobs...but there are a lot that come here to hurt Americans."

854 miles of border fence in 6 months. Bank on it.

"I've come to the conclusion that God still loves this nation." Bold.

Slow rising ovation. Music is hard to distinguish.

Ron Paul observations and quotes :

He's only the second speaker to mention the constitution, and the only one to do it more than a passing manner. If only he didn't have such an exotic interpretation of it.

This dude hates taxes. You know it when you see him on TV, but you feel it in person.

The crowd still responds to calls for overturn of Roe.

He says that rather than waiting for a judicial ruling, Congress can remove the issue of abortion (and others) from the jurisdiction of the federal courts. And you thought Cheney was radical.

UN, WTO, IMF, NAFTA -- we shouldn't be party to any of them.

"I don't like border guards being sent to Iraq" got very tepid applause that sounded like confusion. People are getting dizzy.

No more birthright citizenship, free education, health care, food stamps for "illegal aliens'" children. Removing these "incentives" and "subsidies" will end illegal immigration. This gets solid applause. I am queasy and embarrassed.

"It's not that I'm against war per se, I'm against unnecessary, undeclared war." More confused applause.

The Soviets defeated themselves because they had a poor economic system -- Reagan didn't do it!

Only gold and silver should be basis of currency. Money should not be created "out of thin air." Hunger be damned.

"I don't even think we should have a Department of Education. Period." Loud applause.

One thing I'll say is that he is no way craven.

Posted by Dan at 02:23 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (8)

Several communities have stepped up to offer another vision:

Interfaith Leaders:
Several prominent religious leaders have spoken out to support students coordinating alternatives to "IslamofascimAwareness Week".

National Student Groups:
Interfaith Youth Core's, "A Different Kind of Conversation about Religion" offers several tools for planning alternative actions, including poster templates and suggested film screenings. Students planning events can also register on the site and check out where other activities are happening.

Campus Progress is also offering a tool kit for progressive college students who may or may not have a faith affiliation, but want to contribute to an alternative voice. Campus Progress also has a Crib Sheet debunking the term "Islamofascism."

The Muslim Community:
The Muslim Public Affairs Council's "What you Need to Know about Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week and the Muslim Students Association's "Peace not Prejudice" campaign both offer excellent resources for Muslim students to pro-actively engage their campuses and interfaith partners during Awareness Week.

On Campus:
Don't have time to organize a separate event? You could still make an impact by attending one of the scheduled activities and asking challenging questions in a strong, but respectful manner.

Do you know of other creative responses? We'd love to hear about them. Leave a comment or email us at admin@faithinpubliclife.org.

Below are some examples of student activism across the country:
FPL intern Nouf Bazaz collaborated with some other student leaders at GW University on a great OpEd in their campus paper

Temple University, faculty have organized a teach-in on women in Islam.

University of Michigan at Ann Arbor is hosting "Islam Awareness Week"

UW Madison has a panel on contemporary Muslims in America.

Posted by Beth Dahlman at 01:33 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

...but the intro music is "The Final Countdown!"

Land and Wallis stand behind transparent lecterns, grip them authoritatively, emphasizing their stout builds. I can't recap the entire debate in one post, so I'll just share what caught my interest. [Full disclosure: I used to work for Sojourners, of which Wallis is editor in chief.]

Wallis begins by emphasizing common ground, says "we must make sure our faith trumps our politics." Affirmation of sacredness of human life draws applause. His call for legislation reducing abortion elicits amens, and there's brief applause when he says he's troubled by abortion rates.

Wallis' approach to poverty - "3 legged stool " of government, church and private sector. Not a hint of applause. A little clapping for fatherhood initiatives, none for education, health care, wealth building. Living wages - not a peep from the audience. I infer from their response that they believe marriage will magically undo poverty.

Wallis' line connecting poverty and race, and call for repentance of racial sins, generates light but steady applause. I am genuinely surprised.

Land:

Cites CBS poll saying evangelical voters prioritize health care over abortion. Asks if audience agrees.
"NO!"
Were you included in the poll?
"NO!"
[The sample was 1,282 people across the country, so there's no reason to expect anyone in the room would've been surveyed. This is how opinion research works.]

Says "the transcendent moral issue of our time is sanctity of life given from conception to natural death." Touts need for law: "If we didn't have law against slavery, we would still have it. If we didn't have a law against segregation, we would still have it." Unless we outlaw abortion, "we will still have it."

[Note: We still have segregation, and it didn't take a law to solve slavery, it took a war, a cluster of constitutional amendments, and decades of transition.]

Land on foreign policy:

"I do not believe America is God's chosen nation, or god's chosen people, but I do know that we are most blessed nation in human history."

Later..

"I do not believe America has a special claim on God, but that God has a special claim on us."

A bit of tension there, no?

Just wow: "The only reason there is freedom anywhere in the world today is because of the military might of the United States of America and the willingness of its people to fight for other people's freedom."

Wallis argues for environmental responsibility, warns of climate change. There is a boo in the back of the room. Says we should be hardest to convince, not easiest, and that the war was mistake. Faint gasps whisper through the crowd.

Wallis' strongest applause came when he said "we cannot pit the unborn against the 30,000 children who die in poverty every day."

Land closed with a rift about the virtues of supply side economics.

Posted by Dan at 11:27 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (10)

MC touts Thompson's 86% American Conservative Union rating and 100% pro-life voting record.

Entry music: Johnny Cash! "I've been everywhere, man..." Same as the Southwest Airlines commercials.

Man, is he easing into this. Nothing but intros and platitudes for first two minutes. Fred is third speaker to mention Declaration of Independence, first to mention Constitution. He is a fan of federalism, doesn't mention separation of powers.

"We are steeped in honor and sacrifice for the greater good." It was self-sacrifice that led him to the Senate in 1994. He said that.

Reminds us of his 100% abortion record. Hearty applause, but butts remain in seats. Fred's not the kind of guy who makes you jump. He himself has never jumped.

Says he was always pro-life in his head, but he arrived at it in his heart after losing a child and later seeing a sonogram of his new daughter. Emotional, borderline weepy. He pledges to veto anything that provides funds for abortion.

Keeps the streak of "judicial activism" condemnation alive. This is an absolute requirement.

Gets an "amen" to "marriage is between a man and a woman" line. No one else got that. Fred can really deliver, even if he's not making them jump.

He will "stop judicial activism in its tracks." Pledges more John Robertses, even if it takes repeated nominations of conservatives. "That's a fight we can have with the American people, er, in front of the American people, all day long." Paging Dr. Freud.

"One of the great moral issues of the day is that we're bankrupting the next generation."

Touts economic growth and strength created by conservative economic policy. Greeted by the sound of one hand clapping. Very muddled message, but "I will bring an end to this irresponsibilty" gets some hearty applause.

Hints at Social Security privatization, but ever so gently.

Iraq is the current front in the global war on islamic extremism. It's a long war. What that means exactly is unclear.

I have no idea why people are whistling and clapping right now. (11:21)

Fred is the first to mention 11-year-olds getting birth control. This is surprising.

"I don't know what I'd do in my first 100 days [seriously!]...but I know what I'd do for the first hour. I'd close the doors to the oval office and pray for the wisdom to do what is right."

Loooooooong ovation, whistling, everyone standing. I stand corrected, Fred Thompson can make 'em jump.

Fred's shock troops are cheering "Go Fred, Go!" holding flourescent blue signs as Johnny Cash plays again.

Posted by Dan at 11:02 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

"The latest nonsense - common sense conservatism." Direct quote. I love Tom Tancredo.

LOUD applause for defeating SCHIP. ("It's the camels nose under the tent for nationalized medicine.")

Wow, he compares it with prostitution! In a joke, but still.

He says when conservatives run away from their principles, they lose, and when they run toward them, they win. And he's serious.

"I will never apologize for America" gets big claps too.

First mid-speech standing ovation - reference to "before you were formed in the womb, I knew you."

Second - illegal immigration.

"There is nothing compassionate about giving amnesty." His compassion for those waiting in line. Never mind that thousands of people drop out of the nonmoving line so they can actually get here. Compassion for those who tired of not being able to feed their families while waiting in line?

Third - he would press charges against mayors of sanctuary cities. I love Tom Tancredo.

The future of western civilization is at stake in the War on Terrorism! People believe this.

Posted by Dan at 10:06 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (5)

He enters to big band music. I have no idea what to say about that.

He begins by eulogizing the "giants" of the Religious Right (Falwell, Kennedy, et al), implores us "to pick up the cause and move forward." Not exactly in tune with his references to helping the poor, the imprisoned and the immigrant.

Earlier Perkins said 'values voters' aren't single issue voters. Brownback - "you're right, I care about two issues." [Okay, that's a paraphrase, but he said it. Those issues are abortion and "restoring decency" to America's culture.]

Brownback sure knows how to work a pro-life crowd. He even got applause when he talked about working with Ted Kennedy!

"WHEN we repeal Roe vs. Wade. WHEN we repeal Roe vs. Wade."

Gay marriage "takes the sacredness out of it." In northern Europe, where gay marriage (civil unions, I believe) has been allowed, in-wedlock births are falling. Therefore, gay marriage leads to out-of-wedlock births. News to me, but that's some unassailable logic.

On faith: "it can be misused and abused, and it has been through history."

"I believe in American exceptionalism. I believe this is a special place." Quotes Blair saying "It's your time, and it's your destiny."

"We are great because we are good, and if we lose our goodness we will lose our greatness."

Exits to big band music. I still don't know what to say about that.

Applause: warm, standing, nonvocal, short.

Posted by Dan at 09:43 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

They're running a tight ship, a mix of tight security and flowing efficiency. The convocation included a prayer, pledge and the national anthem. The anthem was beautiful, but I can't say I've ever thanked God for Tony Perkins before.

The master of ceremonies' second order of business after telling us to turn off our phones was to telling a rather lengthy joke about Sean Penn. Really cutting to the chase with the derision.

Perkins' opening remarks... Nothing surprising about the rights of the unborn, "the threat to traditional marriage," and the importance of family.

His words about foreign policy were a curious blend of newfound humility and enduring militaristic American exceptionalism. I could sense that he was speaking to an audience that's weary of Iraq as he called in a gentle voice for "responsible foreign policy," but as he harkened to "peace through strength" I gathered that his views of militarism haven't changed.

They're running a tight ship, a mix of tight security and flowing efficiency. The convocation included a prayer, pledge and the national anthem. The anthem was beautiful, but I can't say I've ever thanked God for Tony Perkins before.

The master of ceremonies' second order of business after telling us to turn off our phones was to telling a rather lengthy joke about Sean Penn. Really cutting to the chase with the derision.

Perkins' opening remarks... Nothing surprising about the rights of the unborn, "the threat to traditional marriage," and the importance of family.

His words about foreign policy were a curious blend of newfound humility and enduring militaristic American exceptionalism. I could sense that he was speaking to an audience that's weary of Iraq as he called in a gentle voice for "responsible foreign policy," but as he harkened to "peace through strength" I gathered that his views of militarism haven't changed.

He had a good joke, which I might have time to relay later.

Posted by Dan at 08:58 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

That's not entirely accurate. I'm actually coming to you live from my couch, but I couldn't resist getting a jump on Summit blogging when I came across an advance excerpt of John McCain's remarks at the Brody File. It'll be interesting to see how faithful to this text his actual speech turns out to be. How much will he adapt to prior speakers' remarks? (Emphasis and bracketed remarks are mine.)

I have been pro-life my entire public career. I believe I am the only major candidate in either party who can make that claim.... You need only examine my public record to know that I won't ever change my position to fit the politics of the day...

I'm a conservative Republican, and proud of it. I'll match my record of defending conservative principles against any other candidate in this race. I know you might not always agree with me on every issue, but I hope you know I'm not going to con you. One of the most important things we have in this life is our self-respect. I don't expect you trade yours for empty promises. And I'm not going to trade mine for anyone's vote. I'm going to tell you what I believe and let the chips fall where they will.

Our founding fathers were informed by the respect for human life and dignity that is the foundation of the Judeo-Christian tradition. They are the self-evident truths proclaimed and defended in our founding documents." [Notice he backed off his Constitution claims from two weeks ago.]

We need a larger military, real intelligence reform, increased contributions from our civilian agencies and a commitment to victory in Iraq. And we need a comprehensive legal and diplomatic strategy that allows us to battle effectively a modern threat without betraying our ideals. The world is watching, and we live in a time when the images we project cannot be easily erased. [Will your detainee policy reflect this?]

I am not naive. I know very well the tools some governments have resorted to when threatened: indefinite detention without trial, torture of prisoners, and a belief that anything is permissible in dark places where power is the only law. But these tools are not American tools, and the easy way is not the American way. [Really?]

War is a terrible thing, not the worst thing, but a terrible thing nonetheless. And our humility, commanded by our faith in our ideals and in a just and loving God, gives us the strength to resist the unnecessary sacrifice of our faith in the necessary cause of defeating our enemies.

I had to have faith in something greater than myself not only to survive but to survive with my self-respect intact: faith in my comrades; faith in my country; and faith in my God. That faith helped me not only to endure but to understand and respect the values it encompassed.

If America stands for anything, it stands for the freedom to follow our own hearts, to determine our own relationship with God. Our Constitution did not establish a national religion but neither did it banish any worship. Religious freedom does not require Americans to hide their faith from public view or that communities must refrain from publicly acknowledging the importance to them of faith.

Wisdom suggests we should be reluctant to change a definition of marriage that has existed for thousands of years, but it takes courage in this day and age to insist that a mother and a father have unique and complementary roles in the raising of children, and that marriage reinforces public support for those roles.

Wisdom suggests that we should be willing to give an unborn child the same chance that our parents gave us, but it takes courage in this political climate to insist on the protection of unborn children who can't vote, have no voice, and can't reward you with support and donations.

Wisdom suggests that when activist federal judges impose their social views on the citizens of every state, the result is going to distort our politics in terrible ways, but it takes courage to insist that the courts have to return to their proper role. [He's talking about Bush v. Gore?]

Posted by Dan at 09:01 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

My weekly news wrap is a Friday feature, but since I'll be live-blogging the Values Voters Summit tomorrow, I thought I'd use a news wrap to preview. Clever, huh? Predictions at the end.

Often, an imaginary subscriber inside my head asks me why I put so many 'Romney vs Giuliani vs the Religious Rightvs the GOP' articles in Faith In Public Life's newsreel. To which I say, "you should see how many I pass up every day!"

Simply put, stories about the Fight For the Right are dominating religion and politics news. Reflecting this, I've included topical articles in every newsreel this month, usually near the top. There's simply nothing bigger going on. For better or worse, it has overwhelmed, subsumed or outlasted the Myanmar crisis, John McCain's "Christian nation" statement, The Mormon Problem, Democrats Get Religion, The Broadening Values Agenda, and SCHIP.

If you're the sort who visits blogs such as this one, you know about the contentious courtship amongst the Religious Right, the GOP, Romney and Giuliani, and need no refresher on the details. So let's look forward to what might happen at this weekend's Summit.

Looking back to polls, news stories, my own take, and insider information (kidding), I'll say the straw poll finish will go Huckabee, Thompson, Romney, Giuliani, McCain. It's a matter of affinity.

Dear reader, please handicap it in the comments. Your besting of my prediction will be forever enshrined in the archives!

(Ron Paul I have no idea about. David Brody, if you're listening, please shed some light on that!)

Posted by Dan at 02:43 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (7)

I just came yesterday afternoon from a powerful and very moving ceremony inside the Capitol Rotunda, where President Bush gave the Congressional Gold Medal to the Dalai Lama.

Seeing the two of them interact in the rotunda, sitting side by side for over an hour, laughing and cajoling, one his eminency the holy messenger, the other his presidency wholly a mess. I tried to imagine what would happen if the roles were reversed, that the Dalai Lama was President of the U.S. and Bush was the Dalai Lama. How would things be different, if at all. Ohh the mindscapes that lead to nowhere.

It was certainly an incredible opportunity for me to be in the same room with these two world leaders, both leaving their legacies in their own right, letting history judge for the long haul, and letting the present define the realities that those impacted by their actions will face tomorrow morning all over the world.

Suffice it to say, the Dalai Lama was a little more articulate on the problem of the finitude of each of the individuals in the room (he's 72) than our President, who gave a marvelous speech in his own right, one good enough that I would have had no problems giving myself, but with words which probably were little more than sounds to him.

Another day in the life here in the frontlines of all that is supposedly virtuous and honorable in our nation's capital.

Rev. Ron Stief is Director of Organizing at Faith in Public Life

Posted by Ron at 01:28 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

While the Frost family dominated many conservative minds and Ann Coulter offended everyone else, the folks at Jubilee USA drew a successful forty-day focus on debt relief to a close. And incredibly Rev. David Duncombe participated for the entire Cancel Debt Fast. That's right he fasted for 40 day and 40 nights. Here's video of Rev. Duncombe talking about the experience about sixteen days into it.

Yesterday, due to Jubilee USA's six week lobby efforts, Representatives Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Emmanuel Cleaver (D-MO), also did a one day fast in support of debt canceling legislation. During the 40 day fast, the Jubilee Act for Expanded Debt Cancellation and Responsible Lending got 20 additional congressional sponsors to:

* Cancel the debts of up to 26 additional nations not currently eligible for debt cancellation, provided that they demonstrate plans to spend the money wisely on poverty reduction; * Cut harmful requirements that are delaying access to life-saving debt relief for countries like Haiti and Liberia; * Call on the Treasury Secretary to address the challenges presented by so-called vulture funds, one of which recently extracted $15 million from impoverished Zambia; and * Establish policies for responsible lending to avoid odious and unjust debt accumulation in the future, beginning with an audit of past odious debts by the Government Accountability Office.

All Africa.com picked up the press release.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 10:27 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (4)

Welcome to a brand-new weekly feature over here at Faith In Public Life. In our work, we constantly hear about the death of the culture wars and the embrace of a common good agenda. But is this really true? FPL will keep you in the know on the epic battle between the culture warriors and the common do-gooders, who's up, who's down, who's in and who's just out of touch.

Full disclosure: We're rooting for the common do-gooders.

With no further ado, this week's dispatch:

Support life! Oppose universal health care!
One might be easily tricked into thinking supporting the expansion of S-CHIP, a health insurance program for low-income children would be a good, even Christian, thing to do. Luckily, the Family Research Council stepped in to clarify things in an email to supporters. (p.s. did you catch the part that says Catholics United "promotes global warming"? Geeze, I thought these people were progressive. Somebody get them a carbon offset!)

Millions Convert to Christianity following Coulter's sensitive, humble articulation of the faith
Last week presented a classic Coulter conundrum: to comment or not to comment? In then end, we decided we couldn't ignore Coulter's statements that Christians are "perfected" Jews and that the world would be better off if everybody was a Christian. Just please, don't buy her new book.

Like an encore of "Imagine," minus the "no religion" part...
Last week's release of the report "Come, Let Us Reason Together" detailing common ground between progressives and evangelicals was a coup for common do-gooders. As was the release of "Pursuing the Global Common Good" a collection of essays pairing religious voices with policy makers on crucial issues such as just war and torture. Culture war Armistice Day? Not quite, but a significant step in the right direction.

This Week's Scorecard:
Due to the one-two punch of the Third Way report (with with FPL had an advisory role) and "Pursuing the Global Common Good" we're giving this one to the common do-gooders. But of course, the culture warriors won't give up easily, and if experience is any clue, they have a lot of fight left in them.

Posted by Beth Dahlman at 02:19 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (4)

Americans United notes that measuring money reveals a Religious Right media situation:

* James Dobson’s Focus on the Family took in $142.2 million in 2006, a $4.4 million increase over the previous year. (In addition, Dobson’s Focus on the Family Action took in $14.6 million in 2006.)

* Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council took in $10.3 million in 2006, an increase of over $900,000 over the previous year. (FRC Action, an affiliated group, took in $1.1 million in 2006.)

* Don Wildmon’s American Family Association took in $16.9 million in 2006.

* Alan Sears’ Alliance Defense Fund took in $26.1 million in 2006, an increase of $4.1 million over last year.

* TV preacher Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network took in $236.3 million in 2005, a $49.8 million increase over the previous year.

Perhaps at some point those donors will want to know what all that support is accomplishing?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:46 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (5)

It is interesting to see who in the the faith community is speaking out publicly on SCHIP funding. With the "pro-family" religious Right not only silent on helping working families afford more than a prayer, they are also very silent on the blog attacks on the Frost family.

On a more hopeful note here's a Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy interview with Glenn Palmberg of the Evangelical Covenant Church on SCHIP

The Roundtable:
What are the moral implications of SCHIP?

Rev. Palmberg:
This legislation means health care, or a lack thereof, for an additional 4 to 6 million children. About 4 million children are covered by SCHIP, and it's been a pretty successful program. This legislation would add 6 million more children who don't have, can't afford, and can't get health insurance. That's a moral issue. We have a responsibility for caring for the poor. It makes a huge difference if they get preventive care and prenatal care. That will affect them for a lifetime.

The Roundtable:
The Senate passed SCHIP with enough votes to override the President's veto. The House also passed the bill, but was 15 votes short of overriding a veto without another vote on Oct. 18. What are you doing to persuade House members to change their previous vote?

Rev. Palmberg:
We have a list of people who have shown some openness to the possibility of changing their vote. We will be approaching them and urging them to vote for an override. There will be pressure put on people to change their minds. We're going to keep track of how people vote. This is not without controversy and opposition within the denomination, so it will be more voluntary on ECC members' part.

More modeling of the evangelical future here.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:36 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

I'm not one to poke fun at people, but this ad for Family Research Council's upcoming values voters summit is too clever by half:

If this month's religion and politics news is anything near accurate, the religious right might find itself all dressed up with no place to go.

I will be live-blogging from FRC's values voters summit this Friday! Stop by for my reports on the political courtship.

Posted by Dan at 12:48 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (5)

As you know, the right has been attacking the Frost family for both being too rich to receive and too poor to pay for health insurance and support their children in school. As others have noted, the bizarre logic lost on many is that making what used to be called a decent wage no longer allows a large family to protect a family from the exigencies of life. Here's middle class Americana are in their own words:

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:21 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Some culture warriors just won't come out of the trenches.

On Friday Tony Perkins sent Family Research Council email subscribers a newsletter titled "No Surrender," which compared the culture wars to the Cold War and misrepresented Third Way's "Come Let Us Reason Together" on multiple counts.

Referring to the supporters of paper, Perkins says "some people want to bring the 'culture wars' to an end by quitting the fight for core moral principles."

None of the statements of support for the paper advocate abandonment of anyone's core moral principles, nor does the paper itself. In fact, the papers' authors and supporters repeatedly point out that the success of the paper rests on the fact that it honors the principles and values of both non-evangelical progressives and conservative evangelicals.

One of Perkins' core moral principles is "the unalienable right to life of every unborn child," and Come Let Us Reason Together describes and supports a comprehensive abortion reduction policy, which advances this principle. Yet for some reason, Perkins feels compelled to distort this fact using artful omission.

Let's compare.

Perkins:

It also suggests uniting around the goal of reducing abortion by distributing contraception -- even though abortion has skyrocketed in the years since the introduction of the birth control pill. [Note the specious logic.]

Third Way:

Among its central provisions, Ryan-DeLauro calls for sex education with an abstinence emphasis and medically accurate contraceptive information, better access to contraception for low-income women, after-school programs for kids, and help for parents on communicating their values to their teens. It also expands Medicaid coverage of pregnant women and S-CHIP coverage of children, addresses domestic violence against pregnant women, helps pregnant women and young mothers stay in school, and expands adoption assistance.

He also takes some liberties interpreting the paper's statement on sexuality issues.

Perkins:

It says that homosexuals deserve the same "public benefits" (i.e., marriage or civil unions) as others.

Third Way:

Protecting the human rights and dignity of all, even for those with whom one disagrees, is not only a consistent thing to do; it is a proud American tradition and a high moral and religious calling. America was founded on the principle that all have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and one of the deepest insights that is common to virtually all faith and moral traditions is that we should want for our brothers and sisters the same protections, public benefits, and opportunities we want for ourselves. No legislation to protect the human dignity of gay and lesbian people should or need abridge the religious liberty of religious communities.

I don't see any mention of gay marriage or civil unions in here, but I can see how Perkins might read it in between the lines. Note however that he didn't ask the study's authors, who are very accessible, what they meant, and note that he excluded the sentence in the report that follows the one he quotes, which directly addresses FRC and the religious right's long-held objection to pretty much any legislation that does anything for homosexual Americans. Perkins' assessment is more self-serving than thorough.

Perkins also has the temerity to say that "civil dialogue is possible" amidst this series of dubious assertions. Yet in addition to shading the truth about Third Way's report, he takes a derisive tone by repeatedly using the word "progressive" in quotes, as if people who identify themselves as progressives use the word as some ruse, or as if the term itself is illegitimate.

Perkins proves himself a resolute culture warrior by attacking Third Way's report, and in so doing shows why the culture wars are bound to produce nothing but division and mistrust. War is inherently destructive, and the metaphorical culture war is no exception.

Posted by Dan at 09:17 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

One of my great pleasures here at Faith In Public Life is putting together the daily newsreel. It is a fun process, and it forces me to take a pretty wide view of what's going in faith and politics news. On Fridays I like to take a look back at the way things unfolded over the course of the week. The week-in-review will become a regular Friday feature here, but next week I'll instead be live-blogging the Family Research Council's "Washington Briefing." (That's the artist formerly known as the Values Voters Summit.)

The past two weeks have been chock full of stories that pointed to seismic activity on the right. Ever since Salon.com's Michael Scherer broke the story on September 30 that religious right leaders were threatening to back a third party candidate if Giuliani got the GOP nomination, stories about the Religious Right's political future (or lack thereof) have surfaced every day, largely by design of Dobson, Perkins, et al. If I were so inclined (and allowed), I could spend an entire day clipping video of Religious Right leaders on cable news and Sunday morning shows.

But by the end of this week, The Great Right Rift started to feel more like a shift in the wind. Stories of the cataclysm that will inevitably follow Giuliani's inevitable nomination shared space with news that the religious right was beginning to take a shine to Romney, and Giuliani agreed to show at the Family Research Council's straw poll next weekend. Turmoil abounds, and a schism is definitely possible, but the situation's beginning to look less like armageddon and more like politics.

As readers of this blog are well aware, there was this paper about "common ground" released this week by some groups called "Third Way" and "Faith In Public Life," but a different story about common ground was my favorite news item of the week. As first reported in Time and Newsweek, 138 preeminent Muslim leaders and scholars sent a letter to Christian leaders appealing to interfaith harmony and peace. (Full text of the letter here.)

Why care? Because getting such a broad and prominent group to sign onto a single statement of peace shows that all that talk about Islam being a religion of peace isn't just a bunch of politically correct nonsense. Says Time:

It points out that both religions are founded on goodwill, not violence, and that many of the fundamental truths that were revealed to Muhammad — such as the necessity for the total devotion to God, the rejection of false gods, and the love of fellow human beings — are the same ones that came to other Christian and Jewish prophets.

Because of this, the letter says, Muslims are duty-bound by the Koran to treat believers of other faiths with respect and friendship — and that Muslims expect the same in return. "As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them — as long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes."

With Christians making up about 33% of the world's population and Muslims making up around 22%, the letter says that finding common ground, "is not simply a matter for polite ecumenical dialogue between selected religious leaders." It is, instead, essential for the survival of humanity.

The New York Times noted that no Wahhabist signed the letter, but that doesn't invalidate this gesture of solidarity and peace. We can all hope that this bears greater fruit, but the statement is a blessing in and of itself.

Posted by Dan at 03:21 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

In Ann Coulter's latest book-hawking tour, she slips up and tells the world what the Christian Right really thinks of Jews. (And America has the right to believe that until they publicly distance themselves from her comments below.)

Trotting out old ideas of supersessionism (right after saying how tolerant her brand of Christianity is), pulling an old reverse discrimination trick (by appealing to a fictional Seinfeld episode