INSIGHT 
How would Jesus vote?
By James A. Haught,     Charleston Gazette, 01-14-2004 

  Various studies show a striking pattern: Americans who 
  attend church ardently, especially fundamentalists,
  vote Republican nearly 2-to-1, while unchurched people 
  vote Democratic by the same ratio.

  GOP strategist Karl Rove and Christian ministers Pat 
  Robertson and Jerry Falwell, among others, work 
  constantly to mobilize this so-called "religious right" 
  for Republican victories. They’ve had significant 
  success.

  But a glaring contradiction exists: Everything that 
  Jesus stood for seems opposed by Republicans now in 
  control of Washington.

  Jesus said, "blessed are the peacemakers" - yet the Bush 
  administration was hell-bent for war in Iraq, using 
  fictitious alarms to rouse public support. A year before 
  starting the war, President Bush swaggered privately in 
  the White House and said: "F- Saddam. We’re taking him 
  out."

  Jesus said, "blessed are the poor" and lived among the 
  lowly - yet the Bush administration showered 
  trillion-dollar tax giveaways on the wealthy, causing 
  record deficits. The White House ignores 45 million
  "working poor" Americans who lack health insurance.
  Why on earth do so many churchgoers vote for the 
  opposite of Jesus? This puzzle was hinted at recently in 
  a commentary by Jim Wallis, editor of Sojourners 
  religious magazine.

  "How a candidate deals with poverty is a religious 
  issue, and the Bush administration's failure to support 
  poor working families should be named as a religious 
  failure," he wrote. "Neglect of the environment is a 
  religious issue. Fighting pre-emptive wars based on 
  false claims is a religious issue (a fact not changed by 
  the capture of Saddam Hussein)."

  Wallis noted that conservative worshippers support Bush 
  because of issues such as "guns, God and gays ... the 
  Ten Commandments in public courthouses, marriage 
  amendments, prayer in schools and, of course, abortion." 
  But he added: "Allowing the right to decide what is a 
  religious issue would be both a moral and political 
  tragedy. ... True faith results in a compassionate 
  concern for those on the margins."

  Charlie Peters, creator of The Washington Monthly, 
  sometimes lamented that the "religious right" is 
  powerful while the "religious left" is toothless. His 
  concern is being addressed today by a coalition of 
  liberal ministers called the Clergy Leadership Network 
  for National Leadership Change, which formed to foster 
  policies helping little people.

  "God is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, and one’s 
  faith in God is not based on what party they belong to," 
  the group declares. Its administrator, the Rev. Albert 
  Pennybacker, added: “The main religious heritage of 
  America is moderate and progressive — and that voice has 
  not been heard in recent years."

  Although they’re evidently outnumbered 2-to-1 within 
  churches, I hope members of this clergy movement can 
  offset the sad pattern of churchgoers voting for the 
  opposite of Christ’s values.

  James A. Haught is editor of The Charleston Gazette in 
  West Virginia. Readers may write to him at: The 
  Charleston Gazette, 1001 Virginia St. East, Charleston, 
  W.Va. 25301