Article VI Blog

Here’s the lede from today’s Washington Post story, entitled “Huckabee’s Religious Support in Iowa Grows:”

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee appears to have consolidated Christian conservative activists in Iowa who had not already signed up for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s campaign earlier this year, picking up the endorsements of dozens of pastors from the Hawkeye State today.

I am struck by the bald-faced nature of Huckabee’s appeal to religion as a basis for supporting him. Apparently Huck has the enthusiastic and “official backing” of evangelical author Tim Lahaye, who wrote the Left Behind series:

The Lahayes had been quietly backing Huckabee for weeks, even helping organize a conference in Des Moines this week where the former Arkansas Governor was the only candidate who spoke.

“I urge all Christians…to go to your caucuses on Jan. 3 and vote for Mike Huckabee,” Tim Lahaye declared, calling him “the most electable who shares our values.” Tim Lahaye, who has co-written a series of best-selling fictional novels about the coming end of the world, said the former governor would help “restore on [sic] nation’s commitment to biblical values.”

I am sorry, but I am sick of this stuff. John’s in a better position to complain, I suppose, because he’s an Evangelical himself. But this will be my little rant moment of the week.

Here’s another charming bit from the same story about the Great Religious Hope:

In an event earlier in the day Huckabee had declined to answer when asked by reporters if Mormonism is a “cult,” saying he preferred to speak about his own faith. He was asked by a reporter at the endorsement event about his views on intelligent design. He said how the origin of the world should be taught is a matter that should be determined by states and not the federal government, but offered his own thoughts.

“I believe in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” he said to loud applause from the pastors.

Also, Politico’s Mike Allen told Hugh Hewitt yesterday (the December 4 show) that Huckabee was asked in a town hall-type campaign meeting whether Mitt Romney’s prayers “get through” to God. Huckabee declined to answer.

Here’s a question that needs an answer: Would it really hurt Huckabee all that much to stand up like a man and say what he really thinks? Romney has been pilloried for supposedly “running away from his faith” because he does not want to talk about religion and invite all the bile-filled Mormon haters, the MSM religion-haters, and the simply ignorant to make sport of his beliefs. And yet Huckabee gets away with playing cute about the Romney religion issue by saying he’ll explain his own faith and that other candidates should explain theirs. (Huckabee knows very well that Romney does not want to explain his faith; that no candidate should have to; and that it distinctly advantages Huck, in this primary, at this time, to talk about his faith. Never mind what this means for the future.)

But back to that question: What if Huckabee said this:

“I don’t think it’s fair to call Mormonism a cult, and in America no presidential candidate should be expected to expose his religious conscience to the country. I think God loves all His children and listens to their prayers. And, to vote for me just because I’m a Baptist, or to vote against any candidate because of his religion, is simply wrong.”

He won’t say those things, of course. And why not? Because it will cost Huckabee votes. A major bloc of his supporters will be angry with him for going easy on the Mormon candidate.

On the other hand, if Huckabee really thinks Mormonism is a dangerous cult and no Mormon should be president, or that God doesn’t hear the prayers of Mormons, he won’t say that either, because he knows that would hurt him too.

Such a profile in courage and character.

That is the disgusting, slimy underbelly of the current Huckabee effort in Iowa.

And one more thing: I had a conversation with a friend who is a deeply experienced Republican activist and former high-level federal officeholder in the Bush administration– and who happens to be, yes, a Mormon. He said something like this:

If the hard-core Evangelical bunch in the party succeeds in knocking Romney out of the race over the religion issue, I’m done with them. They seem to want Mormons to be like African-Americans in the Democrat party: “We’ll take your money and your votes and all your hard work delivering votes in various parts of the country, but don’t ask for a place at the table and don’t even think about running for high office.” Mormons everywhere are going to ask: Why do we ally ourselves with these people on issues like same-sex marriage and the family, when they are going to stab us like this for no reason other than that they disagree with us on religious doctrine?

I do think that kind of anger will build and possibly boil over if efforts like Huckabee’s succeed. Sure, Mormons are a relatively small group within the GOP, but how many votes do the Republicans have to throw away these days?

And all political considerations aside, isn’t the Christian slice of America supposed to be a better place than that? As people who seek to follow Jesus Christ, each in their own way, shouldn’t we all aspire to nobler behavior than to take advantage of a man or a group over matters of religious conscience?

Just a few thoughts. Comments invited.

John comments: Needless to say, I am inclined to agree with the points Lowell is making, although the source of my energy is somewhat different. This is self-destructive in terms of a genuine political voice for Evangelicals. When we leave behind the issues and just focus on the identity, we expend political capital, and that is precisely what is happening here. Mormons are different than creedal Christians, just as black people are demonstrably different than white people. The key question is not difference – The key question is does the difference matter?

In matters of eternity the difference matters, but this is politics, not salvation or damnation.

Consider football. Suppose you had three wide receivers, a creedal Christian, a Mormon, and a Jew. Now suppose there was three seconds left on the clock in the Super Bowl and you are Peyton Manning (Yes, my bias has just shown through), the Mormon is open, and the others are covered. You score, you win. Do you not throw to the Mormon because then he will get the glory and that might lead to Mormon converts? Well, if you so choose you can bet you will not find yourself QB’ing a Super Bowl team again anytime soon.

No, the fact of the matter is you throw to the open guy, and both of you then win and both of you go on to use whatever credibility can be garnered from the victory to compete for souls in a different arena at a different time.

These religion games have gotten way out of hand. The press is fanning the fire because it makes great press, but Huckabee and those who are behind him that have played this very slick game (which is not all his people by the way, just some) started it.

Lowell is right – Huck needs to end the “Huck duck” and stand up like a man. Otherwise he is going to end up sharing a lot more in common with Bill Clinton than just where he grew up. Reputation for slickness comes to mind. Does anybody besides me see any parallels between “religion should not matter” and “I did not have sex with that woman”? Just wondering.

Posted in Political Strategy, Religious Bigotry | 1 Comment » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

Recently Posted:

• The Animal Takes A Swipe Through The Cage Bars
• Dennis Prager Addresses The Question
• The Animal Is Caged, But Very Dangerous
• What Everybody Is Thinking And No One Is Saying
• We Interrupt The Serious Blog…