Does America Need a Christian Democratic Party?

tonygill — Sun, 12 Mar 2017 08:00:18 +0000

The American political landscape appears in chaos, and Christians are seemingly under assault in both the legislative arena and judicial system, or so says Hunter Baker, an associate professor of political science at Union University. Based upon these reflections, he began wondering whether the United States was in need of a Christian Democratic party to defend religious liberty and promote other Judeo-Christian values in the polity. To this end, Prof. Baker organized a symposium of scholars to write their thoughts on topic. The results were published in the Winter 2017 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Political Science. We pick up this debate here with Prof. Baker and two additional scholars — Bryan McGraw (Wheaton College) and Micah Watson (Calvin College). Prof. Baker argues that a Christian Democratic party represents the best means of defending Christian interests in the public arena considering that lobbying attempts by religious organizations have not been entirely effective in convincing either the Democratic or Republican parties to protect religious freedoms and promote Christian values. Tony questions Hunter as to how effective such a partisan effort might be given that CD parties have not been able to hold back the tide of aggressive secularism in Europe, though Prof. Baker counters with evidence from Germany that shows how their CD party has favored traditional definitions of marriage and has been open to refugees. Prof. McGraw provides additional historical perspective in his segment of the debate, noting that CD parties were crucial in a number of European countries — most notably Belgium — during the late 1800s and early 1900s, and were also important in helping promote policies that favored religious interests such as funding for religious education. Nonetheless, Bryan points out that the political structure of the United States lends itself to a two party system wherein third parties have a hard time making any headway, and with Christianity much more diverse than in Europe, the chance for any one party to coalesce around a religiously-based platform would be very difficult. Prof. Micah Watson responds to all of this arguing that irrespective of whether a CD party could be successfully created in the U.S., it is nonetheless a bad idea because associating Jesus’s name with a variety of mundane policies that could divide citizens is not the proper use of the Christian mission. Tony asks if this even applies to potholes. Micah notes that while it may be acceptable to pray for pothole relief, building a political party around a single Christian identity would be difficult (echoing Bryan McGraw’s concerns) and bad for the long-term evangelization agenda of Christianity. Tony adds his own perspective to the debate with an intellectual appeal to public choice theory. (Those interested in reading Tony’s paper can request it via our Facebook or Twitter pages.) Prof. Watson shares some of his ideas for how Christians may engage the world politically based upon the ideas of C.S. Lewis. Recorded: March 3, 2017.

Laura Olson on Attitudes towards Religious Free Exercise

tonygill — Sun, 18 Sep 2016 08:00:41 +0000

In light of several recent Supreme Court cases — most notably Hobby Lobby and Obergefell — the issue of the First Amendment’s free exercise clause has come to the public’s attention, particularly as it pertains to public employees. When Kim Davis, a county clerk in Kentucky, refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples based upon her religious beliefs, a debate arose about how religious freedom applies to government officials. Anticipating potential conflicts that might arise in a public school setting, Prof. Laura Olson from Clemson University, began a research project with several colleagues to survey the opinions of public school teachers around the country. She was interested in discovering what teachers thought about a variety of free exercise issues in the classroom including: 1) the ability of teacher’s to opt out of certain duties based upon religious belief; 2) facing penalties for expressing religious beliefs in the workplace; 3) supporting “unnamed officials” who were refusing certain job duties based upon conscience; 4) support for practicing religious activities on the job; and 5) support for teachers who want to provide clear moral direction on controversial issues. Laura provides us with historical background on how all of these issues became so salient since the middle of the 20th century. And while the results of her collaborative project are still being tabulated, Laura shares the rationale for the study, the research design, and some of the initial, topline findings. Interestingly, political ideology (i.e., conservative versus liberal) tends to be a more salient factor than partisan affiliation (e.g., Democrat, Republican) when it comes to these attitudes, with more conservative individuals supporting greater religious expression in the public school workplace. She and her colleagues also discovered that it was “orthodoxy” in (or strength of) religious belief that mattered more in determining one’s response than denominational identity and weekly attendance at religious services. All of this prompts Tony to ask Laura whether or not we might be seeing a new partisan re-alignment in the electoral landscape that is mediated by attitudes towards religious liberty. We discuss this and Laura also provides some thoughts on how the religious-political landscape has changed over the past several decades and what we might likely see in the presidential election of 2016. Recorded: September 12, 2016.

Research On Religion » Obergefell v Hodges

Does America Need a Christian Democratic Party?

Laura Olson on Attitudes towards Religious Free Exercise