May 20, 2004

DEMOCRATS VS. RELIGION II:

In God, and the GOP, They Trust: A belief in free will puts frequent churchgoers in the Republican fold. (David Klinghoffer, May 19, 2004, LA Times)

What is it about the policy positions and cultural attitudes described as Republican or conservative that makes them so attractive to religious voters? What principle links, say, a passionate defense of gun ownership and a strong preference for low taxes? The link can be summarized in three words: individual moral responsibility.

For more than a century, our culture has been divided on the question of whether individual moral actors may justly be held responsible for their deeds. Marx and Freud rocked the 19th century faith in moral responsibility and freedom of will, arguing that human beings are unknowingly in the grip of, respectively, powerful economic and psychosexual forces. Later analysts would discover other latent structures in society that supposedly determine our moral choices.

Today, the ideological struggles of liberals and conservatives mirror the clash initiated by Marxists and Freudians with 19th century individualism. Conservatives encourage individuals to make their own choices, except where those choices invariably harm the innocent (as in abortion) or undermine the pillars of civilization itself (as in gay marriage). Liberals see the function of government as parental, with citizens in the role of children too unaware and irresponsible to cross the street by themselves. [...]

Generally speaking, liberalism distrusts the individual, while conservatism trusts him enough to give him a chance to make the right, or the wrong, decision. If he makes the wrong one, he will have to answer to his own conscience, or to his God.

Looked at this way, it becomes apparent why religious Americans gravitate to conservatism. By far the majority of them are Christians and their biblical religion is premised on the idea of individual moral responsibility. Traditionally, religious faith presumes that God commands us to act in certain ways — which in turn presumes moral freedom. Otherwise, how could God hold us responsible if we refuse to obey?

Not all Democrats fully accept the strictly "liberal" view, of course, but they belong to a party that, of the two main parties in American political life, is the one identified with the belief that moral choices are profoundly conditioned by circumstance and therefore aren't truly free. It may be too much to suggest that God himself is a Republican. Then again, it may not.


God is certainly not a Republican, but the GOP is certainly the party of God.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 20, 2004 9:06 AM
Comments

While I'm tempted to agree with your comment, I'd be wary of the wording, given the literal translation of Hezbollah.

Posted by: Chris at May 20, 2004 9:27 AM

my point.

Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 9:30 AM

The three worst scientific frauds of the
past 150 years (Marx,Freud and Franz Boas) are
essentially discredited in practice.

However their foolish ideas regarding human
behavior still have a quite a strong echo
effect within the academia and in the popular
culture at large.

It is not anti-christianism per se that is the
core of liberalism but residual belief in this
bunk.

Posted by: J.H. at May 20, 2004 10:09 AM

J.H.:

And Darwin and all are just attempts to replace God, so anti-Christian.

Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 10:35 AM

I think Darwin was more concerned with why finches were the way they were on Galapagos island rather than with any desire to abolish God.

Why not criticise geologists and carbon-dating for showing the world has been around for more than 4,000 years?

Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at May 20, 2004 12:00 PM

Ali:

Because the Earth's age is insignificant. Who cares when it was Created.

Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 12:21 PM

OJ:

Who cares whether evolution was the mechanism of creation?

Posted by: mike earl at May 20, 2004 4:51 PM

mike:

No one. The only thing that matters is whether the engine was Created or not.

Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 5:30 PM

Who's to know? And how?

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at May 20, 2004 8:48 PM

we've always known.

Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 8:52 PM

You've always been drinking your own bathwater.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at May 21, 2004 5:48 PM

If they believe in free will, then they cannot have Original Sin. You cannot have that both ways.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 24, 2004 2:19 AM
« THE LONELY MULLAHS: | Main | HANG UP THE BATON: »