Does GOP Have a Future? Maybe not with evangelicals
by Roger Hines
Columnist
April 07, 2013 12:00 AM | 1774 views | 12 12 comments | 9 9 recommendations | email to a friend | print
If national Republicans continue to waver on the issue of homosexual marriage, I predict that by 2016 the Republican Party will be split, having driven away its most loyal conservative base. Split would probably mean dead.

Why? Specifically because of the 16 million-member Southern Baptist Convention (in all 50 states) whose first black president recently warned both the GOP and the Boy Scouts to go easy; because of the National Association of Evangelicals whose members will never support homosexual marriage or candidates that defend it; because of the conservative Presbyterian Church of America; because of many Catholics who support traditional marriage; because of Focus on the Family and Concerned Women for America and their strong following; and because of countless other religious denominations and para-church organizations too numerous to list.

The original leaders of religious conservatives are dead, but Rick Santorum isn’t. Neither are Mike Huckabee, J.C. Watts, Bill Bennett, or The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. There is no shortage of religious conservative leaders like these who have had either executive or legislative experience. My sources tell me that these leaders and others like them are talking to each other.

They should be. A strong voting bloc needs a leader. That leader, in this case, will either have to arrange negotiations with GOP big wigs, or shout “To your tents!” and lead social/religious conservatives elsewhere.

The voting bloc I’ve listed above are people of faith who take their beliefs seriously. I do not speak for them, but I know them, having mixed with them, met many of their leaders, sent them money, and read their books and articles. Believing in absolute truth, they are not into “evolving.” “Evolving” is the practice of elected officials. It is the same old thing as holding one’s hand in the air to see which way the political winds are blowing. “Evolving” actually means waiting for the wind to blow so that one can decide what he or she “believes.”

Commentator Charles Krauthammer recently pointed out that, like the Obama insurance mandate that required religious institutions to cover birth control, the re-defining of marriage amounts to assault on religious freedom. It forces people to stand for their convictions and suffer government-imposed repercussions, or to compromise their convictions and lose their souls. To be placed in such an egregious spot is absolutely contrary to the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment. Ask Hobby Lobby.

Demolition Expert (formerly Architect) Karl Rove says he can imagine a Republican candidate in the next presidential campaign supporting homosexual marriage.

Rove deems polls more reliable than elections. He is unfazed by the fact that more than 30 states, including California, have legally defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. He and national GOP chairman Reince Priebus are spooked by the thought of young voters going Democratic. Do they not know that the conservative megachurches across America are filled with youths and young couples who don’t believe in so called “marriage equality”? Obviously GOP pollsters are not ringing these young people at supper time, just young libertarians.

Within the last three weeks I have become a single-issue voter. In the past I have been critical of single-issue voters for not seeing the whole picture. No more. The traditional family is the whole picture. I now regret not appreciating the perspective of single-issue voters. Let us say that now my ox has been gored.

If in 2016 Republicans nominate a candidate who caves on the definition of marriage, I for one will not vote for that candidate. If there is also no third party candidate who will hold his or her ground on the matter, I will stay home.

A fiscal cliff is one thing, but a social cliff is another, and even far more serious. A fiscal cliff, when it is truly occurs, leads to financial misfortune and hardship, but a social cliff rips the fabric of society. “Marriage equality” will do just that.

Legally sanctioned traditional marriage is thousands of years old. Yes, it is an arrangement, a social construct, and a legal institution, but for millennia it has served the world well, providing for emotional, practical, and societal needs. Even so, scaredy-cat Republicans, relying on phone call responses instead of bonafide elections, say America is changing and we must change with it. Such an argument is the plea of one who knows nothing about convictions and everything about expediency.

“Evolvers” refuse to accept that some things are just not equal. I wonder if our Evolver- in-Chief is ready for the cries that will pop up everywhere when bigamists and polygamists start demanding their equality. I’m betting he will “evolve” for them as well, transforming America all the more.

Roger Hines of Kennesaw is a retired high school teacher and former state legislator.

Comments
(12)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Texas Queen
|
April 10, 2013
I, too, have joined the ranks of the single issue voters. Any candidate of any party that supports legalizing gay marriage will not get my vote -- period. The stakes are simply too high.
East Cobb Senior
|
April 07, 2013
Just as we saw the very strong negative and downright nasty push back on comments made by Sue Everhart for expressing her personal beliefs, be prepared for the barrage from the Liberal Left for your personal beliefs. They will pounce like a school of hungry piranha. To them you have violated the basic tenants of their “Political Correctness” by offending. In their distorted minds, you outwardly demonstrated “bigotry”, “insensitivity”, “homophobic” and “racist” bias. For this indiscretion and frontal assault on their sacred alter of “self-esteem” and “relative equality” the Liberals will condemn you to “journalistic purgatory”.

At the National Prayer Breakfast, Dr. Ben Carson very specifically called out “Political Correctness” as being dangerous. It is my belief that we have long passed the dangerous stage and are now captives of this insipient cultural cancer. It has now metastasized into a total inhibitor of free speech and expression. It has inculcated a fear of offending, resulting in the discarding of traditional values, any absolutes of right and wrong and the establishment of “New Normals”. Relativism and secularism has replaced spiritualism and rationalism and unfortunately our children’s exposure to Liberal ideology and teaching, through the filter of Political Correctness, are now accepting and adopting morally and fiscally decadent standards. Billy Graham expressed very eloquently his disgust with our decline when he remarked that “today’s morality is yesterday’s immorality”. History has taught us that since time immemorial, great empires have collapsed when immorality and fiscal irresponsibility prevailed.

Whether it is Obama or his Liberal Left wing coalition, to achieve their political objectives both are committed to exploiting any schism they perceive in the GOP and berating the moral values of evangelicals and conservatives. Obviously, and in my opinion rightfully, Mr. Hines does not ascribe to this “finger in the wind”, “evolving” ideology and has drawn his line in the sand.

Regardless of political affiliation, ethnicity, race or gender, that which is morally wrong is not politically right. It’s way past time our politicians start realizing the vast majority of Americans are fed up with pettiness, spin, lies, moral and economic decay. We want leadership, honesty, morality and a true commitment to our Constitution and its founding principles.

Too funny
|
April 08, 2013
This phrase, "Relativism and secularism has replaced spiritualism and rationalism" made me laugh out loud.

So believing in talking snakes is the mark of a rational mind is it? haha!

anonymous
|
April 15, 2013
I totally agree with everything you said. Keep your posts coming. Please keep them coming that speak for us. You spoke my words exactly, except you spoke them better. Let's band together to stop the bullying and we are bullied. The bullies speak with such hateful language. You go, and keep on going, East Cobb Senior. Today's children are being taught it is okay to be a single parent conceived from unwedlock. Not identified Baby Daddies are most of our welfare payroll. I blame women that are so desperate, they settle for... Today's children are being taught (and I can't figure out the logic of this one) that they are born from daddy and daddy or from mommy and mommy. Can't be done. Elton John didn't have a child with a man no matter the millions he tried to do this. A woman was there. Argue with that, people. A woman was involved with Elton's child. And I pray Elton teaches this. If God meant for Elton to have a child with his homosexual partner, then why didn't they? And why couldn't they? Answer that one. There is not answer to that one. If homosexuals were created by God to be equal partnerships, then why didn't God give them the ability to procreate?
anonymous
|
April 15, 2013
You continue to STAND TALL as I do. If whoever created life meant it to be continued by same sex, then same sex would be able to continue it. Life is created by relations between a man and a woman. No law in the land can change that. NO LAW. No distorted law or thinking or trying to change or whatever argument thrown out there, only a man and a woman can produce offspring. There is nothing to be argued about that. Absolutely nothing. Totally nothing. That is not about morality, gender, race, or religious affiliation. It is about whoever created us. Nothing can change that. Nothing. Nothing.
Too funny
|
April 07, 2013
Right wing drivel. Let me guess, I bet you believe the earth is 6000 years old too. haha!
Devlin Adams
|
April 08, 2013
@Too Funny: Briliant and insightful response. lol

Thank you for proving East Cobb Senior right.

Liberals only believe in Freedom of Speech, when the speaker has been brainwashed by the liberal loony machine.
Too funny
|
April 08, 2013
Devlin, what are you talking about? I'm not saying Roger doesn't have a right to write stupid stuff. And what is the "liberal looney machine," science? Haha!
East Cobb Senior
|
April 08, 2013
@Too Funny This is a typical response from a Liberal Left Wing Lemming without the intellectual capacity to either make any sense or provide a coherent counter argument. In other words the truth hurts. And, as a low information voter, you'd loose that bet because I don't believe the earth is 6000 years old.
Too funny
|
April 08, 2013
East Cobb Senior, that stings. Getting scolded for lacking in intellectual capacity by someone who doesn't know the difference between loose and lose. Haha!

That said, neither you nor Roger cited anything resembling fact, so you make my refutation easy. You've both written a load of what I'll be using to fertilize my garden in a couple of weeks.

Just so you know, big words so not a coherent argument make; it means you have access to a thesaurus.
East Cobb Senior
|
April 09, 2013
@Too Funny: Pardon my "typographical" error and hitting the "o" one to many times when responding to you emotional diatribe of Liberal Lemming gibberish. Again as is typical of your ilk, you want to challenge both Roger and myself with our facts but fail to offer either a "big word" or "Small word" coherent argument to refute them. Like that incompetent charlatan clown in the White House, you're all talk, no substance or action. And again for your low voter information, I don't use or need a thesaurus to write my comments.

Too funny
|
April 12, 2013
East Cobb Senior, you still don't get it. Hopefully as a former educator, Roger does.

When you make an outrageous claim, you have the burden of proof for supporting that claim, not your reader.

Ex 1. Roger says, "but a social cliff rips the fabric of society. 'Marriage equality; will do just that." Ok, why do you think that? What evidence do you have to support it?

Ex 2. Devlin says, "Liberals only believe in Freedom of Speech when the speaker has been brainwashed." Again, a statement of fact. Prove it.

Ex 3. East Cobb Senior says, "today’s morality is yesterday’s immorality" and is the cause of our "decline." Whose morality and why? And what history book are you reading which suggest gay marriage destroys empires?

You're welcome.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides