I ran across this Associated Press article about a Christian Coalition event in 1998. I was struck by a few lines:
- “Reed said Democrats will pay in Nov. 3 elections for supporting Clinton. ‘They’re going to get a a wake-up call.’ And he predicted that Amercians, more than ever, will take character into account in November and 2000. ‘We care about the character of our leaders and we will not rest until we have moral leadership on every level of government from the courthouse to the White House,’ Reed said.”
- “‘For nearly nine months, we have seen one man wreak political havoc on our most noble office. For nine months, we have been mocked, demeaned, belittled and lied, to,’ he said to thunderous applause. The Oval office has become ‘the playpen for the sexual freedom of the post child of the 1960s.’ ‘Ladies and gentlemen,’ he said, ‘I say to you today we will be silent no longer.'”
Reed continues to support Trump. So much for “character” and “moral leadership.”
While preachers and moralists have always said they wanted people to value character, have the people ever really cooperated? Evangelicals supported Jefferson, and later Lincoln, despite their theological non-conformity. They over-looked Jefferson’s sex life. Voters put Grover Cleveland in the White House twice, even though he fathered a child out of wedlock–and this was at the apex of Victorianism’s hold over the culture. In 1980 Baptists turned their back on a Sunday school teacher in favor of a divorced actor who rarely went to church, and preachers led the way. Below the ranks of national office Americans have elevated numerous scoundrels and rakes to important positions of power. And in popular culture our long-standing fascination with outlaws and amoral Nietzscheans from Jesse James to James Bond to Jason Bourne is well-known. It’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that–even in the mouths of preachers–“family values” is a lot like “principled Constitutionalism,” a convenient cudgel to use against your political enemies but something only a fool would take seriously when an important position of power is at stake. A practical take-away from that might be that hammering religious conservatives for their inconsistencies in this regard in 2024 is going to have very little effect on electoral outcomes.
Great points, John. Although I do think it is important to show these inconsistencies regardless of electoral outcomes.
Yes, agree with that 100%. It’s an important part of America’s religious history.