Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

TygrBright

(20,760 posts)
Sun Nov 26, 2017, 03:57 PM Nov 2017

They are "Evangelical Voters" [View all]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by DonViejo (a host of the General Discussion forum).

The root of the term "evangelical" is Greek, ?ὐ???έ???? ('euangelion'), translating roughly to "glad announcement" or "good news." While sharing the gospels and proselytizing have been part of Christianity since the beginning, the "evangelical" movement in Protestant Christianity is fairly recent, subsequent to the spread of Methodism in the early nineteenth century CE. The term "evangelize" reached its first real prominence in the English language in about 1850, declined somewhat in prominence by the end of the century, revived a bit with the revivalist movements of the early 20th century, then declined steadily until the post-WWII era in America, when it began another meteoric rise.

In its broadest sense, "Evangelical" is simply 'sharing/announcing good news'-- with the implication that by so doing, the one sharing/announcing is doing the recipients a service, opening the door to faith, inviting them to join in belief. Gamers evangelize the latest game fad. Fashionistas evangelize the new trouser leg width. Food faddists evangelize the crusade against Demon Gluten.

In that sense, evangelism is annoying, but essentially harmless.

As it was in the early days of Evangelical Christianity.

You know who demanded a "wall of separation" between Church and State?

Evangelicals.

Because mainstream Protestant denominations- predominantly Episcopalian and Presbyterian- tended to dominate lawmaking, government regulation, etc., and the burgeoning Evangelical movements worried that the State might enact laws or regulations to force them to conform, or interfere with their liberty of conscience. They were supported by older Christian nonconformist traditions such as Quakers and Mennonites, and by America's Jewish and Catholic leadership, who'd had more than a bellyful of experience with discrimination by the powerful Anglo-American establishment.

It's hard for me to understand on any level deeper than intellectual awareness why some human beings are so strongly drawn to authoritarianism. I'm not in any sense a libertarian, certainly not an anarchist. I believe a social contract that includes norms and laws is necessary to provide incentives and disincentives that enable peaceful coexistence in diverse communities.

But the key phrase is "diverse communities." Norms and laws focused on enabling diverse groups to negotiate and enforce coexistence are very different from the kind of authoritarian norms and laws designed to eliminate diversity altogether.

People of authoritarian mindset are predisposed to accept the exegesis of those who assume and/or project authority. Combine the irrational nature of religious belief with the vulnerability to having those beliefs interpreted for them by authority that assumes a "divinely appointed" mantle.

Then tell the believers they're "oppressed" by a powerful "them" outside their elite belief group.

Thus the Evangelical Voter. Perfectly poised to support with perfervid rigidity a patriarchal authoritarian agenda defined by their leadership. To evangelize that agenda, regardless of any theological disconnect with the actual teachings of Christ or the New Testament.

And what matters to the Evangelical Voter is, first and foremost, political power and influence. Because that's what matters to their leaders.

It's more important to them to "win" politically, than to accept human imperfections and live the love for those different from themselves that Christ preached.

So of COURSE they see no problem with the condemnation of a man who beat "their" candidate, based on extramarital affairs with adult women making him "unfit to hold public office". And of COURSE they see no problem with supporting a serial adulterer who proudly boasts of sexual assault, and a man with a history of preying on vulnerable women half his age (including legally underage girls), as long as those men are "their" candidates, as anointed by the leaders.

And they think you and everyone else in America should vote exactly the same. And they'll tell you so on Facebook, and around the Thanksgiving dinner table, and in every possible public forum. Because they're evangelizing. Evangelical Voters.

Bleah.

wearily,
Bright



13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
They are "Evangelical Voters" [View all] TygrBright Nov 2017 OP
Brilliant. Comatose Sphagetti Nov 2017 #1
Thank you. Sophia4 Nov 2017 #2
Madison keithbvadu2 Nov 2017 #7
They forgot what they were fighting for... 7wo7rees Nov 2017 #3
In his autobiography, Jimmy Carter says he's baffled that those who claim to be the most "religious" Rhiannon12866 Nov 2017 #4
Evilgelicals they support molestation and pedophelia. boston bean Nov 2017 #5
Political Christians rather than Christians of faith. keithbvadu2 Nov 2017 #6
What you wrote is basically the second stage... JunkYardDogg Nov 2017 #8
+100 for this post ⬆ Duppers Nov 2017 #12
Another good one. cachukis Nov 2017 #9
Well said TxDemChem Nov 2017 #10
These people nowadays are the..... wolfie001 Nov 2017 #11
Locking.... DonViejo Nov 2017 #13
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»They are "Evangelical Vot...