Gallup Polls makes a strange finding. They measured current Republican Identification and Leaning and then compared today’s numbers to the numbers from 2001. They found a decline in every subgroup except one. People that frequently attend church (meaning, usually, more than once a week) show no change in their political affiliation as a result of the Bush administration and the Congress of Tom DeLay and Bill Frist. It’s hard to believe that malfeasance and incompetence on such an epic scale could fail to result in a decline in support in every conceivable demographic, but something about being extremely religious seems to inoculate people against seeing calamity for what it is. I understand that Karl Rove positioned the GOP as the party of fundamentalist Christianity, but it’s stunning that the Republicans have managed to hold this group considering how little they actually delivered to them.
The problem the Republicans have as a result of these changes in their base is that every Republican primary will now take on the flavor of a PTA meeting in Kansas.
something about being extremely religious seems to inoculate people against seeing calamity for what it is.
It’s not a question of being “extremely” religious. Christian fundamentalism is based on an explicit rejection of reason. Most varieties of Christianity try to reconcile religious belief with reason; fundamentalists in contrast see not taking the Bible what they consider to be “literally” as a threat to the Christian “fundamentals”.
Since the basis of Christian fundamentalism is a sweeping, thoroughgoing irrationality, it should be not at all surprising that the fundamentalists are sticking with the Republican party.
I always wonder what literal interpretation they use. It sure isn’t any interpretation I know.
They in effect try to square the circle, by holding that both the Old and the New Testaments are equally (“literally”) true, and then trying to make them consistent with each other. The normal Christian approach is to take the New Testament (and the Gospels in particular) as giving the “core” of Christian belief, and largely superseding the Old Testament.
right .. because in the Old Testament .. God was one PO’ed Mofo. .. yet Jesus is the Prince of Peace
This is not quite right.
They tend to talk alot about the whole Bible being “literally true”, but their definition of literal leaves a lot of wiggle room. Jesus speaks in metaphors – when he says that it would be easier for a camel to get through the eye of needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, he doesn’t actually mean that rich guys have no chance of getting into heaven. He’s speaking metaphorically. And when he says to give away all of your worldly possessions and follow him, well, he doesn’t really mean that literally, it’s just an injunction to give to the Church. Or something. The “literal truth” of Jesus is that he said all of the things that the Bible attributes to him, not that you need to take what he said literally.
They literally interpret the pieces that they want to interpret literally, and take the rest as figurative, or metaphor and they will jump through goddamn hoops to find metaphorical interpretations for plain phrases that they don’t like. Meanwhile they’ll jump through other goddamn hoops to find crazy-assed “literal” interpretations for phrases that plainly do not mean what they claim they mean based on the surrounding context (see the books of Ezekiel and Daniel, where a lot of post-millennial Apocalyptic mythology is derived from to see just how much you have to twist to get the “literal” interpretation they supposedly have for these books.)
In short, the “fundamentalist Christians” read the Bible just like other Christian faiths do – treating some of it as literal and some of it as metaphor. The difference generally lies in the parts that each sect decides are literal and the parts they decide are metaphor.
It sounds like they don’t believe the “That what you do to the least of my brothers .. that you do unto me” part at all .. I mean .. aren’t the Iraqis … gays .. non-Fundies(in the billions around the world) all God’s children? .. yet they dislike anyone not like them .. just look BillO .. Rush .. et al
Thanks for that: I never understood how they manage to ignore Christ’s teaching so brazenly (as Calvin … observes below).
Still, I think there are basic differences between how fundamentalist “Christians” read the Bible and mainstream sects do: (1) The latter, liberal Protestants especially, are “up front” about engaging in interpretation, whereas, as you helpfully point out, fundamentalists do it on the sly; (2) the normal Christian understanding is that Christians’ covenant with Christ (I’m not sure if this terminology is correct) replaces God’s covenant with the Jewish people (there is one God, but he is everyone’s God: he doesn’t have a special relationship with the Jewish people), whereas fundamentalists (premillenial dispensationalists) consider that God continues to have a special relationship with the Jewish people through the pre-Christian “dispensation”.
I agree, and you well beat me to the post i wanted to make, but point out that any form on fundamentalism rejects reason, not just the x-anity versions.
…and let’s face it, the Republicans have been their (fundies) best shot at power. It must be like swallowing hot glass to realize that they backed a loser.
No, they wont be dumping the R’s anytime soon.
That’s pretty much it. When reality is what someone — God or some preacher — says it is, empirical facts don’t matter. These people don’t entertain provisional beliefs subject to review based on evidence, they pick a belief and stick to it no matter what. They have voluntarily abandoned the ability to learn, and as such, we shouldn’t be too surprised that they do not, in fact, learn.
I understand that Karl Rove positioned the GOP as the party of fundamentalist Christianity, but it’s stunning that the Republicans have managed to hold this group considering how little they actually delivered to them.
Is it really that stunning? I mean, think about it for a moment. They’ll chalk it up to bad luck. Someone(or something) was out to get him(Bush). I could go on. Suffice to say that a fair amount of the group is reality challenged. I mean just look how Palin became a hero to the Religious Right. They celebrate their ignorance. Or looks at Hasselback on The View the other day. Did she not use Teh Google to search Jesse Ventura’s name before he came on? How stupid can she be(Very, apparently)?
I have no idea what a PTA meeting in Kansas could be like.
Mike Huckabee giving a poetry reading? Newt Gingrich demanding the resignation of a Democratic Speaker? The Chaney’s defending torture?
Those that attend church more than once a week are probably a) not all that informed, and b) get walking orders from their nearest authority figure (their priest).
Not a shock they get fooled. And give their money to fools.
nalbar
I think that this is what Booman has in mind (though the decision was by the Board of Ed – not the PTA):
Kansas schools can teach ‘intelligent design’
.
Perhaps church goers fancy lying liars … Bush as an ideal figurehead.
Several years ago we teamed up to test the 40 percent figure for church attendance. Our initial study, based on attendance counts in Protestant churches in one Ohio county and Catholic churches in 18 dioceses, indicated a much lower rate of religious participation than the polls report. Instead of 40 percent of Protestants attending church, we found 20 percent. Instead of 50 percent of Catholics attending church, we found 28 percent. In other words, actual church attendance was about half the rate indicated by national public opinion polls.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Demonstrating clearly the hypocrisy of those particular churchgoers.
They have 2 polls out which they have not connected but should very soon to avoid embarrassment.
So, the republican pro-life count goes up, but the number of republicans goes down, leaving us …. a more pro-life country? No, actually leaving us in EXACTLY the same place as before.
They have not apparently noticed that these two polls contradict each other.
It’s telling me that the extremists are uniform in what they believe, but other than that…
i think it all depends on the tone of the pastor and congregation. i attend church regularly…but then again, have never really fit into those restrictive polling demographics.
“… something about being extremely religious …”
yeah, it’s called “blind faith,” “total loyalty,” “credo ut intelligam …”
An all-too-common conception of being extremely religious … But many others believe God in his wisdom had good reason to give them ears to hear, eyes to see, and a brain to think …
Very well said and I like the “credo ut intelligam” part. I believe that I might understand , which neatly summarizes those of fundamentalist leaning. It’s basically a matter of faith not understanding.
Boo… sometimes your casual observations are pretty deep. Maybe deep enough to be a deep thought.
The most peculiar incident in the New Testament relates Jesus’ trip to Phoenicia (Northern Canaan)in the week after the Sermon on the Mount. A Canaanite woman begs him to cure her sick children and Jesus, before relenting and working a healing miracle,compares her kids to dogs. A very strange remark from the speaker of those inspiring words in Galilee, and a likely source of comfort to bigots in the Christian world.
From http://www.rationalchristianity.net/canaanite_woman.html —
Weren’t Jesus’ remarks mean? Why didn’t he heal her daughter immediately?
Jesus tested the woman with a test he knew she would pass. Jesus treated the people he healed as individuals, and dealt with each person differently based on their level of faith. Some people’s requests were granted when they asked (Mt 8:2-3); some were healed without asking for it (Mk 5:1-13, 25-29); some were asked if they believed Jesus could heal them before they were healed (Mt 9:27-30). Jesus may have done this to teach the woman and the disciples: the woman learned that she could always trust in God’s love and mercy, even when her requests were not immediately answered (something Jesus taught the disciples in Lk 18:1-8), and the disciples learned that God’s salvation and mercy were extended to the Gentiles as well as the Jews.