THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, January 14, 1996 TAG: 9601120603
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY RALPH REED JR.
LENGTH: Long : 131 lines
Not long ago I appeared on a national television news program to discuss the agenda of religious conservatives. I fielded questions on the usual subjects: abortion, pornography, church and state, education, and crime. My basic message was simple: People of faith represent one of the largest segments of the electorate (24 percent according to 1992 exit polls), and they want a role in society commensurate with their numbers. During a commercial break, one of the journalists quizzing me leaned over and asked in a hushed whisper, ``What is it you people really want?
The question presupposed an agenda very different from the mainstream ideas I had outlined. I answered, ``I would like to see a day when an evangelical Christian could stand next to the president of the United States and oversee his transition into office - in the same way that Vernon Jordan as an African American led Bill Clinton's transition - and never have his religion become an issue.'' A look of disappointment crossed the journalist's face; it was not the answer he had in mind.
What do religious conservatives really want? They want a place at the table in the conversation we call Democracy. Their commitment to pluralism includes a place for faith among the many other competing interests in society. For too long, we have left politics to the special interests. It is time for the values of middle America to have their place at the table. For decades religious people have been on the sidelines watching everyone else play the game. They want to be on the field, if not always to win, then at least to participate. If they should win, they do not want to have victory denied them because of their religious beliefs.
There are problems with our democratic system of government - voter apathy, corruption, influence peddling, the prevalence of special interests. But the answer to democracy's ills is more democracy, not less. Religious conservatives have launched massive voter registration drives across the nation similar to those undertaken by the civil rights movement in the South in the 1960s. The purpose of these voter education efforts is to empower a constituency that has been disenfranchised not by literacy tests or poll taxes, but by their failure to participate in a level commensurate with their numbers in the electorate.
We do not advocate electing officials by depressing voter turnout or taking advantage of historically low citizen participation. Some have inaccurately charged that religious conservatives hide their religious affiliation, conducting ``stealth'' campaigns in which they eschew public forums and campaign exclusively in churches. The opposite is true. The Christian Coalition, for example, distributes millions of nonpartisan voter guides every year that inform voters on where all the candidates stand. . . . We want a more open airing of who the candidates are and what they believe.
Pro-family candidates win at the ballot box because of their views, not in spite of them. They are elected precisely because of who they are and what they stand for. Despite the efforts of some to marginalize religion in the public square, faith is still an asset to most candidates and is considered an admirable character trait to the average voter.
The religious conservative movement begins with the proposition that the government that governs best governs with the consent of the greatest number of citizens. Since 1960 the number of Americans going to the polls and participating in the political system has gradually declined until barely half vote in presidential elections and little more than a third go to the polls in congressional elections. We want to raise the number of people voting to around 70 to 80 percent, a figure roughly equal to that prevailing in other Western democracies. Initiatives and referenda will give voters a larger voice in government, term limits will restore the ethic of a citizen legislature, and the distribution of millions of legislative score cards will inform people how elected officials are really voting. Society will be more open and participatory.
The conventional wisdom that religious conservatives seek to legislate a radical agenda is not borne out by the facts. In fact, the agenda of religious conservatives seems quite minimalist and mainstream, particularly when compared with the radical ambitions of other great social movements in history.
In terms of economic policy, the most expansive reforms advocated by people of faith involve tax relief for families and requiring a balanced federal budget - hardly frightening prospects. School choice is an idea that many liberal Democrats such as Wisconsin state representative Polly Williams advocate. One need not hold to a theologically conservative religion to believe that parents, not bureaucrats, should choose where their children attend school. Even the constitutional amendments advocated in recent years by religious conservatives are measures of last resort, defensively pursued in reaction to sweeping and liberal judicial decisions, such as Roe v. Wade.
This is not to suggest that the agenda of religious conservatives is unambitious. People of faith frankly and forthrightly seek to restore the centrality of the two-parent, intact family as the foundation of our democratic society. This alone is a remarkable undertaking given the trauma suffered by the institution of the family in recent decades. They seek to replace the bureaucratic welfare state with a culture of caring characterized by acts of private compassion and faith-based charity. They wish, in short, to repair the damage and bridge the breach in our social fabric that has been caused by the breakdown of the family and a decline in civility.
Religious conservatives want to move forward, not backward. They believe that many of the social advances of the past thirty years can and must be acknowledged and preserved. Those who suggest that people of faith look nostalgically back to the 1950s and Ozzie and Harriet are mistaken.
Yet there is much work to be done. The civil rights movement secured the right to vote for minorities, but has not solved the problems of intergenerational poverty or black-on-black violence. The women's movement won the right to pursue careers for those women who wanted them - but it has not adequately addressed the victimization of women through divorce and pornography. Policy failures and cultural excesses since the 1960s must be redressed if we are to move forward. The seeds of cultural and moral decay have now flowered to full bloom, with social consequences that can no longer be ignored: illegitimacy, divorce, drug use, abortion, violent crime, pornography and illiteracy.
People of faith hold many of the answers to these problems. For that reason alone, they must not be treated as second-class citizens whose faith may be practiced on Sunday but never in the public square.
The religious conservative movement must provide a voice for that marginalized constituency, the only group in America whose role in government is almost inversely proportional to their numbers. Even those who disagree with their politics should wish them well, for if faith wins its place at the table, we will be richer for its contribution. Society is the loser when their unique contribution to building a better America is lost. Before their voice can be heard, we must make attacks on religion as unacceptable as slurs against race or gender. ILLUSTRATION: Color photo
FILE
Ralph Reed Jr., executive director of the Christian Coalition, will
be the featured speaker Thursday for the President's Lecture Series
at 8 p.m. in the auditorium of the Mills Godwin Jr. building at Old
Dominion University. Reed is the author of ``Politically Incorrect:
The Emerging Faith Factor in American Politics,'' from which this
piece was excerpted. His lecture is free and open to the public. For
more information, call 683-3100.
by CNB