Centerfield

America's Religious Right (and center and...)

The Economist this week have a wonderful overview of the Religious Right and politics. Leave it to someone outside of the US to leave the rhetoric behind and take a dispassionate look at the interface between the Religious Right and US Politics. Key Points:

Above all, the Schiavo and filibuster battles were mere skirmishes before the all-out war, which will erupt when Mr Bush nominates a new Supreme Court justice (or two). That could happen as early as June 27th, when the court's current session ends and the ailing chief justice, William Rehnquist, may announce his retirement.

And

Why is the religious right as powerful as it is? ...Their country, as a whole, is not getting more religious.

And

Born-again Christians are no longer rural hicks; they are richer and better educated than the average American. ..Nor, to lose another stereotype, are all the righteous white...The religious right also represents more than just evangelicals.

And

Religious America's switch to the right is rooted in two things: liberal over-reach and conservative organisation.

And

On abortion, social conservatives have had much more success now they have stopped screaming for the practice to be made illegal (which few Americans want) and tried to limit it (which most want).

And finally, a political key

The religious right's organisational prowess is impressive. But it still leaves a movement that represents a minority point of view on many issues and is just as capable of over-reaching as liberal judges are. “Some leaders of the religious right think they are far more powerful than they actually are,” argues one Republican veteran. “As religious as this country and this president are, neither wants a theocracy.”...Yet the right's opposition to embryonic stem-cell research is not popular. And when it comes to the question of overturning Roe v Wade, the ruling that legalised abortion, American public opinion is still against social conservatives; so Mr Bush, when asked about abortion, always waffles about appointing judges who respect the constitution. Having pushed American a little closer towards a Republican majority, Karl Rove, the president's chief strategist, does not want to throw it away on one issue.

This is such an insightful article and it points to what I see as the present dynamic in America between religious political activism and politics as we know: There is a strong undercurrent in America for "values" issues. It generally remains silent but it can occasionally rise up. Right or wrong, gay marriage was such an issue. While the majority of Americans felt "ok" with a laisse faire approach ("after all, Mr Jones at work is such a nice man and I don't really care what he does in his own house"), a certain discomfort and, maybe comfort in "traditional values", came forward when the question was pointed confronted by the push for gay marriage.

The Religious Right IS a minority in American Politics (and probably America's religious communities). However, the Republican party has done a much better job of bridging that gap between the Religious Right (and its strong grass-roots organization and it's comfort with "public morality as politics") and the larger majority of "religious Americans" (or "traditionalist" to use the Economist's jargon)

So far the Democractic Party has been awkward in using the language, let along accepting the issues, of these "traditionalists." If I were a Democratic strategist, I would see a distinct opening. The bridge the Republican Party has built between the Religious Right and the the larger community of "religionists" in America is fragile. By speaking their language, appealing to their innate distaste for the "judgers" (and sense of "fairness") and subtly building off their quiet acceptance of "alternative life-styles" (see above reference to gay Mr Jones), the Democratic Party could IMHO increase its votes (already substantial) from this bloc.

A final aside. Today's seemingly mixed decisions on the Ten Commandments in public places shows us an example of "the way in". Justice Breyer in his swing opinions spoke of America's "civic religion". That resonates with "traditionalists" and (hopefully) doesn't offend those non-church goers. Follow that path and don't sound to "wishy-washy" and the Democratic Party could see a loosening of the ties between the two "R's": Republicans and Religion.

Posted by c3 at June 27, 2005 11:46 PM