Is President Obama and the Democrat Party’s support for same sex “marriage” going to affect the vote?
As you’ve probably seen in polls, African-Americans by and large don’t really truck with the notion of gay marriage.
The Daily Caller is reporting that Bishop E.W. Jackson, a minister from Virginia is hearing that many African-Americans are now questioning their allegiance to the party:
“I am now sensing, hearing, talking to people — for the first time in 40 years, the black community is having a discussion about whether they ought to be Democrats, whether they ought to vote Democrat,” the Virginia minister said. “That’s never happened.”
In May, Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage after years of straddling the fence politically.
“Ministers are being questioned by their members: How can we vote for President Obama?” Jackson said. “I’ve even had some ministers who are on the left frankly, politically saying, We gotta figure out how we quiet everybody. We gotta figure out how we get everybody back in the camp, because they sense that people are awakening and saying, now wait a minute: If I have to choose between Jesus and the Democrat Party, Jesus and Barack Obama, then Jesus is going to be my choice.”
I’m thinking that we’re not going to see much party switching in this election. But what I do wonder is if this gay “marriage” issue might have some African-Americans stay home this time and reconsider their support for the Democrat Party in the future.
It’ll be interesting to see if the same sex “marriage” issue has a similar effect that Roe had on bringing evangelicals and Catholics together.
October 22, 2012 at 2:17 pm
I find this election overwhelming in many ways. But perhaps most significantly, I find the conscious, purposeful ignoring of Romney's reality very disturbing. The man served as a governor of a state. He has a very public record. He served both as a pro-choice public official, but also one that had no intention of "constricting" another person's rights (that is to say, he served from a very liberal standpoint. Ted Kennedy once joked that Romney is so liberal that soon he will be voting for him (Kennedy)).
Romney doesn't say that he's against same-sex marriage, his PR team does. Romney doesn't say that he's against abortion, instead he declares that when he is president he will not allow a bureaucratic to come between a woman and her body. It's his election team that walks behind him with a broom and cleans up his verbal messes.
I'm for 53% of the people in this country. No, No, I meant to say 100%. Yeah, that's it.
This self-imposed brainwashing that some people who are desperate to have a president that is both pro-life and pro-heterosexuality is discouraging.
In truth, these two men differ only in economic matters and the treatment of the poor and disadvantaged.
You want to bring up Jesus? Were Jesus put in a position to choose, what do you think he would choose, to oppose same-sex marriage or feed the poor?
It's a tough question, but the Bible makes it pretty explicit where Jesus stood and still does stand: on the side of the poor.
October 22, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Your hope that the black evangelicals will turn against the Demo's in mass is a very faint one. E.W. Jackson and other ministers like him do not have a significant following in the black community. The larger black community despises men like him. They are regarded as 'Uncle Toms'by them. Unless they follow the party line pushed by the other Jackson, and demand more handouts from the government, nobody will listen to them. Frankly, the only way the black community will ever listen to someone like E.W. Jackson is if all the federal and state welfare programs and other subsidies are defunded. Only then will they obey the commandment that if you don't work, you don't eat.
October 22, 2012 at 2:46 pm
"In truth, these two men differ only in economic matters and the treatment of the poor and disadvantaged."
No, they don't. They are very, very different people. And if we want to talk about "self-imposed brainwashing," perhaps we need to discuss people who refuse to look at the candidates we actually have because they wish we had different ones.
We are electing a president, not a messiah. We are electing a man to do a job. I will take the man who has changed his positions before in order to do the job he has been elected to do over the man who doesn't give a crap what his electorate wants. Is Romney going to overhaul the nation's abortion laws? NO. But he is going to run the government. We already know how Obama is running the government. To pretend that Romney would not do it any differently is wrong. And as far as Jesus goes, I am quite sure he prefers that the government not redefine marriage and that YOU AND I feed the poor. God wants the poor to be fed, he does not say the government has to do it or, if we all agree that the government should do it, how that should best be accomplished. We're supposed to work that out ourselves, and not mindlessly say "we have a system to help the poor, who cares whether or not it actually works?"
October 22, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Black skin is what matters the most to most blacks. They have had skin color as the highest priority drummed into them all their lives. The preachers are totally conflicted by this one.
October 22, 2012 at 3:58 pm
@Julia Marks: Obama wants to ruin the economy the poor people live in. Romney wants to fix it. It sucks that our economy depends on an investor class who hire everybody else, but Obama isn't actually planning to do anything about it; he's just going to take more of the investor class's money so they can spend less of it on hiring people.
Before you are allowed to dispute that, you need to define for me the word "capitalism", and then tell me: which is more likely to be proletarian, a software engineer or a plumber?
Economics is a science. You have to know it before you have a right to an opinion about it.
October 22, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Catholics are guided to avoid voting for intrinsic evils. The 5 non-negotiables are 1) abortion 2) embryonic stem cell research 3) same sex marriage 4) human cloning 5) euthanasia. Any Christian can see that evil is at the source of each of those issues, whether you are Catholic or not. It doesn't surprise me that there is confusion among black communities in Virginia. I will pray for more "eyes to be opened". Jesus is our king, no president fits in those shoes. But if we are true to our faith, we are obliged to vote for truth. LIFE comes first, and we also feed the poor. It's NOT one or the other.
October 22, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Gail, if you want to assert that we are not electing a messiah, then you should probably not bring up the reference to the title of this article, which brings up Jesus as part of this election.
In addition, I suggest that you reread the Bible. From the very beginning (Exodus), "government" in the form of Moses and those who follow him are COMMANDED to take care of the poor.
October 22, 2012 at 4:29 pm
Yep, and God gave a few commandments dealing with killing and sexuality. God's purpose for sexuality resides inside a marriage where children can "become". Anything other than that is against God's law. Good Christian people, who do read the bible, can spot lies and hypocrisy in government. It must be very difficult for those black Americans to remain Democratic with a president whose wants abortion and contraception for all, and who promotes homosexuality. This president stands for values that are incompatible with Christianity…the Democratic party is not what it once was.
October 22, 2012 at 4:39 pm
Julia Marks, we're no longer under the Mosaic law. We're under the aw of Christ. The Church is commanded to take care of the poor, not the government. When the government takes care of the poor, the poor become political footballs that can be manipulated by the government. That's what happened in ancient Rome. Besides, the secular government of the USA has no constitutional mandate to be in the taking care of the poor business.
October 22, 2012 at 4:43 pm
Jesus came to serve, not to be served. Obama is a public servant, who serves himself, first, last and always.
October 22, 2012 at 4:49 pm
@Julia: stop selectively quoting the Bible. Nowhere are we commanded to ENABLE the poor. Nowhere are we commanded to hemorrhage money we don't have to keep social programs of dubious efficacy rolling throughout the years. Today's Morning Prayer shares that famous, 'if you don't work, you don't eat.' How many on the dole are held to THAT command?
Why do so many liberals mistake the command to help the poor somehow means liberal, big-budget social programs? By their fruits you will know them. Liberal social programs have been eroding the family unit and, thus, CAUSING most of society's ills. Ultimately, they hurt the poor as no Enron/Halliburton/Bain Capital/Choose-your-liberal-scapegoat ever could!!!
– Colleen
October 22, 2012 at 6:30 pm
There are 2 different ways to criticize someone for not taking care of the poor. One is to say "he doesn't care". The other is "my way is better". The first is a judgment of the heart, the second is a judgment of means.
October 22, 2012 at 6:53 pm
I'm always bemused that Democrats want to eliminate all traces of God and religion from public life, yet drag out the Biblical mandate to take care of the poor in defense of their social programs. I don't think they should have it both ways. Either we have religion in public or really eliminate it. Voting for a republican president who might be amenable to pro-life concerns, especially the appointment of Supreme Court judges who will affect our lives for decades to come in no way contradicts Democrat social concerns. Every Catholic may still care for the poor through MANY personal outlets, even if Republicans were to eliminate every entitlement program, which of course, they won't.
October 22, 2012 at 8:58 pm
I'm always bemused that Democrats want to eliminate all traces of God and religion from public life, yet drag out the Biblical mandate to take care of the poor in defense of their social programs.
Exactly. "Don't impose your morality on me," they cry. But they have no problem imposing their morality when it comes to big government spending programs. But you have Pharisees like Julia above who will selectively cite Scripture in order to defend their viewpoints, while ignoring chunks of Scripture and the Catechism that don't quite jibe with voting for pro-abortion candidates.
October 24, 2012 at 2:02 am
I see Julia is ignoring my demand that she demonstrate she knows Thing One about economics.