Apparently, Tony Perkins and I don't read anything the same way. Not Scripture, not articles in the Washington Post.

The latest example is in today's "Washington Update" which began with an analysis of a piece in yesterday's Washington Post. Perkins claims that the article is evidence of, "how major issues like abortion and marriage are uniting African-Americans and allowing the Republican Party to make potential inroads into this community."

Well, that's true I guess, the article (featured on yesterday's Daily Faith News Reel) does touch on how anti-gay marriage initiatives in 2004 helped Bush win a higher percentage of the African-American vote than Republicans normally do, but it seems a bit ridiculous to suggest that's what the entire piece was on.

In fact, most of the article focused on how African American evangelicals have traditionally, and continue to, give strong weight to a whole range of issues including education, civil rights and poverty, as well as abortion and same sex marriage.

Like in this quote:

"Morality is different in terms of the way we see it and white evangelicals see it," said Pastor Lyle Dukes of Harvest Life Changers Church in Woodbridge, ... who supported Bush in 2004. "What we think is moral is not only the defense of marriage, but we also think equal education is a moral issue. We think discrimination is immoral."

Dukes is looking at candidates in both parties this year.

and this one:

On his way out of the noon Bible study at Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church in the District the other day, Stephen Peagler, 27, said he is a faithful churchgoer who believes that abortion and same-sex marriage are wrong. But, he said, when it comes to voting, he's looking for a candidate who will address issues that are more relevant in his everyday life. And Democrats are more likely to deal with the high incarceration rates of black men and underperforming inner-city schools, he said.

But all this seems lost on Perkins who somehow sees this article as an opportunity to bash Democrats' faith outreach initiatives claiming it is, "ironic is that while some leaders of the Democratic Party have started embracing the language of faith with the hopes of attracting religious voters, most still want to hold the party line of abortion on demand and remain estranged from traditional marriage."

Of course, Perkins has some words of caution for Republicans too, especially if they nominate somebody who has a less than perfect (in his eyes) record on abortion and gay rights (I have not idea who that could be).

According to Perkins (emphasis mine):

While the Republicans experienced the powerful pull of social issues on African-Americans in 2004 because of the marriage issue, they are increasingly distancing themselves from these key issues that speak the true language of faith and bring Christian voters into the fold. If issues that are important to so many Christians, both black and white, are ignored by both parties then ultimately both parties may find they are ignored by many Christians.

Well, kudos to Perkins for "standing up" to Republicans, but he never really grasped the concept that there are other issues important to people of faith which influence voting behavior.

You know, like, poverty. Which is discussed in over 2,000 verses in the Bible. But I guess, to Tony's eyes, that's not enough words to form the "true language of faith."