RELIGIOUS RIGHT: WRONG BATTLES?

The failure of the Religious Right (RR) to regulate
the country's sexual behaviour has not stopped them
from trying, but it is costing them in influence and
credibility. At their insistence we have spent nearly
$1 bn. promoting premarital abstinence. That's money
down a rat hole. There's simply no evidence that it
has any effect. And a lot of evidence it doesn't. As
Bristol Palin said, "that doesn't work." It's like beating
a dead horse (an apt simile for much that occupies the
RR).

The culture is celebrating sexual freedom in music, mo-
vies, TV, literature and other media. They are all ex-
tolling sexual pleasure, as is the kids' peer culture. And
all are screaming, "do it!" They are doing it. Forty per
cent of nation's babies are born to single women. The
Bible Belt states that most promote abstinence also have
the highest rates of teen pregnancy. And the most oppo-
sition to effective sex ed. in the schools.

So the RR is losing that battle. They have failed also in a
long-running battle to ban abortion. They have lost the
battle on stem cell research, and will soon give up on ban-
ning same sex marriage.

The Bush years made possible by the devoted support of
the RR have been wasted years for that constituency. And
thanks to them, wasted years for the country as well.
Wasted for a threatened and steadily degrading environ-
ment, and for the lost years of deteriorating neglected infra-
structure, mounting federal debt, failing education, failing
health care delivery, lost time in stem cell research, the
probably fatal deterioration of the Israel/Palestine situa-
tion, the destruction of Iraq for no discoverable reason,
wasted time and futile efforts in Afghanistan and on and on
with lost time to end our dependence on foreign oil, and to
address global warming.

All this and much more during the disastrous reign of the
Bush-Cheney regime and their RR enablers. And for what?
James Dobson has admitted that for them, the big cultural
battles have all been lost. As Kathleen Parker wrote in WaPO
(4/5/09), "Pragmatically speaking, the Christian coalition of
cultural crusaders didn't work." In other words, they sold
their birthright for a mess of rotten political pottage. Too
harsh? How about Pat Robertson's endorsement of Rudy
Giuliani for president? Rudy is pro-choice and marched in
a gay parade. He openly lived with his mistress while still
married to his second (or third?) wife. How's that for family
values?

"Is the Christian right finished as a political entity? Or, more
to the point, are principled Christians finished with politics?"
Thus begins Kathleen Parker's piece in WaPo cited above, en-
titled "Political Pullback For the Christian Right?" We can
hope the answers to her questions are "yes" and "no."

Church people should not attempt, by law, to regulate the
sex lives of their neighbors. That violates the Golden Rule.
They wouldn't want anyone regulating their private behaviour.
That's unchristian, and as we have seen, doesn't work. Chris-
tians should, however, support laws that are communitarian
(seek the common good) or, in the words of our Constitution,
"promote the general welfare." I'll return to this theme in a
later discussion.

For comments, the correct e-mail is:
jgoodwin004@centurytel.net