Platform Integrity Project seeks to preserve a pro-life stand in the GOP

Now that Roe v Wade has been overturned, the Republican party is seeing how unpopular abortion abolition is with the American people. It's a losing political issue. Even solid red states like Ohio overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment to guarantee access to abortions. We'll see how long it remains one of the elements of the republican party.

My prediction is the republican party is going to deprioritize it and eventually remove it from their party platform.

Christians, wake up. The republican party cares about one thing, and it's not your Christian values. Time to unshackled yourself and get off the plantation.

T Howard, do you thus propose that Christians should not try to be salt and light in any of the political parties? To an extent I am a bit sympathetic to that position, since I am not interested in getting involved in the political process other than commenting on it and voting, but I am not ready to condemn those Christians who do show up to the party functions and who do run for office. Based on some of your comments through the years, I am just curious if you think that those Christians are doing something evil.

BTW, it is appropriate to remind us that our hope is in Jesus Christ, not our government, but we must not forget that the scripture reminds us that governments are for the greater good and that a people are better off when there is righteousness in our governments. Therefore, I am thankful when people with Biblical values have an influence in our government even if that makes some here on SI uncomfortable.

>>T Howard, do you thus propose that Christians should not try to be salt and light in any of the political parties?<<

It certainly sounds that way. I’m not sure what that leaves. I’m already an independent, not in any party. I vote my conscience, which means I do end up voting for a fair number of Republican candidates as the best of my available choices. I’m not sure exactly what I could do differently except throwing away my vote by either not voting, or voting for a candidate who has no chance. Either way, my ability to be light and salt (in the political arena) is then completely removed.

Personally, I don’t accept that staying out of politics completely unless there’s a candidate running who is “completely righteous” (I’m not sure what that would be, unless they could pass the test to be a member at my church) is the right action for me. I’m not going to judge T Howard for doing what his conscience demands. I’m going to do the same, with or without his or anyone else’s approval of my implementation of that principle.

...regarding political parties is that yes, this old profession does have a lot in common with the oldest, except that the money on the dresser is power. No doubt.

But that noted, to this topic, it is true that total bans on abortion are not popular, and the pro-abortion party has made hay of this, very often dishonestly presenting the alternatives as abortion on demand vs. a total ban. But that said, I think there is a pro-life position that can win, specifically if it's presented as "given that many of your neighbors oppose abortion, isn't it fair to say that we shouldn't be supporting abortion with tax dollars with direct and indirect subsidies?"

The reason this is key is that if you walk through the economics of abortion--the costs of the gynecologist, nurse/anesthetist, receptionist/insurance specialist, building, supplies, and such--it does not work unless either the workers have a "side hustle", or the clinic is getting direct or indirect subsidies (including Medicaid funds for contraceptives, etc..).

And really, this boils down to subsidies, since a lot of people, even people who otherwise are pro-choice, don't want to go to an abortionist for other care. There is the "ick" factor for starters, and then you've got the question of "do you want that muscle memory to be near your loved ones' private areas, or God forbid, your pre-born child?"

So without subsidies, abortion goes back to the inner city for the most part. That's the argument pro-lifers need to win, IMO.

Based on some of your comments through the years, I am just curious if you think that those Christians are doing something evil.

Is it evil to participate in the political process? You're being short-sighted if you put your hope in the political process or marry yourself to a particular political party to advance the kingdom of God.

The republican party only cares about "pro-life, pro-family and pro-freedom" principles if they will allow the party to gain and keep political power. Political power is the goal, and each party will use whatever means necessary to gain and maintain it.

Is it no wonder that the Dem party has been propping up Biden like a scene out of Weekend at Bernie's? The party doesn't care about Biden or his ability to execute his responsibilities while in office. The party only cares about power. They will surround Biden with handlers to run the country for him as long as he can win the election.

Thus, it was only when the American people saw his complete inability to finish a sentence that Dems started turning on Biden. Why? Because they knew his performance could cost him the election.

It's all about power.

I’m not sure exactly what I could do differently except throwing away my vote by either not voting, or voting for a candidate who has no chance. Either way, my ability to be light and salt (in the political arena) is then completely removed.

Not voting is a powerful choice as is voting for a candidate that is the best candidate regardless if he/she "has no chance." If Christians would refuse to vote for terrible candidates instead of voting for the "best of the worst," you would get better candidates. But, when Christians basically tell the repub party that we'll vote for anyone you put forward just so the dem party doesn't win, you lose any power or credibility you might have to influence the process.

Sorry, no Christian should vote for Donald Trump. Ever. I don't care if "he's better than Biden."

Both Christians and African Americans are treated like chattel in the political process. The parties want and court our votes, but they don't really care about our issues.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-pushes-new-gop-platform-softening-partys-positions-abortion-sex-rcna160730

Yep. Ecce Homo.

“It is fair to say that over 1,000 pastors have emailed, texted and called me about their disappointment over where they saw the platform going,” said Chad Connelly, a former chair of the South Carolina GOP who said he was blocked from the platform committee over "being labeled 'too pro-life.'"

“The words I am hearing are shocked, betrayed, trampled, depressed, deflated,” he said. “Most pastors I know don’t want Biden and will still probably vote for Trump, but this hurts the energy needed for those folks to do the things it takes to help elect a president.”

In a statement, top Trump advisers said the platform represents his vision for the Republican Party headed into the 2024 election cycle.

Christians are fools if they thought and expected Trump to really care about their issues. Trump only cares about himself.

He will use the Bible, gullible pastors, and Christians to get what he wants. Yet these gullible, "shocked, betrayed, trampled, depressed, [and] deflated" Christians will still line up and vote for him this fall.

Brothers, wake up and remove your shackles.

This World opinion article https://wng.org/opinions/how-now-shall-we-vote-1720433720 answer's Dave's question better than I can, especially the opinion that not voting or voting for a 3rd party candidate is somehow throwing one's vote away and negating our responsibility as Salt and Light in the political sphere. And I agree with Tom's comment that "both Christians and African Americans are treated like chattel in the political process. The parties want and court our votes, but they don't really care about our issues." Saw a tweet today about how the GOP leadership is gambling that evangelical voters will still vote Republican even if the GOP platform is beginning to resemble the Democrat platform in the areas of abortion and sexuality/marriage. "One evangelical leader on the platform committee was literally told "where else will your people go?"

I believe that being Salt and Light is also holding the political parties accountable if they turn away from the Christian influenced morals they once held to. And the most prudent and easiest way to do that is the Presidential elections. That is why as an independent I've been voting for The Solidarity Party Candidate since 2016.

That article presents a pretty decent argument, but it also internally admits that some of it may not apply or must be weighed differently, depending on where we live. Let me give a few rebuttal points, in no particular strength or order.

1. I don’t harangue people for not voting or voting 3rd party, but I do ask the same respect from them for my choice to vote in the more “utilitarian” fashion.
2. I do live in a swing state, where just a few votes might make the overall difference. I might choose differently if I lived in either CA or SD, to use the examples they provided.
3. Simply not voting doesn’t do much to “make your voice heard” unless you make it known to enough people or the election authorities. A vote not there could simply be you being too lazy to show up or not caring. It says nothing if no one knows about it or the reasons why.
4. Because my wife is from Europe, I have somewhat followed European politics for a few years now. Most countries there have a multiparty system, and it’s very clear to me that the totally fringe parties never have a big overall effect. (A possible counter-example is the recent election in France, where a bunch of fringe-left parties joined together to defeat what they call the “far right.” It worked, but at what cost? Those left parties don’t all agree with each other, and it’s over issues just about as large as the abortion issue mentioned in the thread above. In other words, in a utilitarian fashion, they banded together with their political enemies to beat a supposedly worse enemy, but in doing so, they gave up a lot of what made them unique). Had they stood alone and on their principles, they’d have had no effect at all.
5. Of course the candidates don’t care about us or our issues, and of course most politics is about the wielding of power. The quote “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force” has often been attributed to Washington, but has never been proven to be said by him. Nonetheless, people understood this principle, and it’s still true, regardless of who said it. We understand that government isn’t out for our good, but we want to use what little power and influence we have to help make it better, even knowing that that power is always ripe for abuse. That’s why we have to be vigilant. Jefferson did say “There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves.” I disagree that the people can be depended on, but in our system of government, we do have input, and should exercise it. However, we might disagree on how to do that.
6. Finally, I do understand the argument of Joel and Tom to not vote for either of the major parties. I just happen to think that for myself I can’t justify voting for someone who would be better than either candidate while knowing they will have absolutely no effect, and could help my state go to the worst candidate. Clearly we judge the factors differently, but I’ve still seen no arguments that make one of those approaches clearly better scripturally.

Finally, I do understand the argument of Joel and Tom to not vote for either of the major parties. I just happen to think that for myself I can’t justify voting for someone who would be better than either candidate while knowing they will have absolutely no effect, and could help my state go to the worst candidate. Clearly we judge the factors differently, but I’ve still seen no arguments that make one of those approaches clearly better scripturally.

Dave, I would argue that because you do live in a swing state, you have more influence with the political parties than I do in Ohio.

Simply not voting doesn’t do much to “make your voice heard” unless you make it known to enough people or the election authorities. A vote not there could simply be you being too lazy to show up or not caring. It says nothing if no one knows about it or the reasons why.

And, that is why we not only refuse to vote for terrible candidates, but we tell the major parties why we will not vote for their terrible candidates. If they want our votes, then they must earn our votes. Choosing to vote for the "best of the worst" is ultimately self-defeating.

Yes, like I noted above, power is the money on the dresser for politicians, yes. And money. But that noted, let's remember what's really going on here. Trump managed to get a horrifically bad Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, overturned, and this galvanized feminists and the like into voting as if they were NRA members. Trump's recent move is simply a couple of bills on the dresser to reduce this galvanization.

So in my view, politics is an engineering problem of how one can obtain the best likely result, not a scientific problem where there is only one right answer. And in that light, I'll take Dobbs v. Jackson and the states that have passed strong restrictions on abortion as a huge advance. Even those in "blue", pro-abortion states are going to start noticing that the dire predictions of pro-abortion zealots are not being borne out there, and that will open up opportunities for meaningful restrictions there, too.

It's a long hard row to hoe, and so was slavery.

I do live in a swing state, where just a few votes might make the overall difference. I might choose differently if I lived in either CA or SD, to use the examples they provided.

I live in SD, so that is why I voted 3rd party.

Clearly we judge the factors differently, but I’ve still seen no arguments that make one of those approaches clearly better scripturally.

Even if I see things differently than other posters on this thread, I still understand each of their positions and I have respect for them. That does not mean that I should have a Bible study on why one of the positions is right and the other is wrong. I often use the example of Fords vs Chevys. We can make a lot of arguments and state a lot of stats and facts, but we cannot say, "thus saith the Lord."

I've heard a number of folks say that if Christians refuse to vote for "bad" candidates (like Trump) that this will force the Republicans to give us better candidates. I see no evidence for this. I think it betrays an unrealistic understanding of how candidates are nominated. It's not because powerful party leaders choose the candidate. It's because those who earn the most votes in the primaries win the nomination. Refusing to vote for someone like Trump does not keep him from the nomination once the primaries are over. The voting public gave him the nomination. The only solution is to have morally strong, wise, and principled rank and file voters. The only way for that to happen is to have a spiritual awakening by the Holy Spirit.

Until that happens, helping elect the "lesser of two evils" is important because the greater of two evils will do far more damage to our country. I would advise you to hold your nose and vote for the stupid party as a way of denying the evil party the ability to continue their calculated effort to destroy this nation by neutralizing its founding principles and destroying our Constitution. They have made a great deal of progress toward achieving their goals. Let us pray they will lose some of the levers of power. Losing the House was a start. Losing the Senate and White House would slow their progress to a crawl.

I've heard a number of folks say that if Christians refuse to vote for "bad" candidates (like Trump) that this will force the Republicans to give us better candidates. I see no evidence for this.

I don't think this has been attempted because evangelical Christians have wedded themselves to the republican party.

However, Trump would not be the nominee if Christians voted for someone else during the primaries. About 8 in 10 white evangelical Christians supported Trump in 2020, according to AP VoteCast, and Pew Research Center’s validated voter survey found that a similar share supported him in 2016. According to other research, protestants make up over 55% of Republicans and Catholics make up about 25%.

So, Trump is the repub nominee because most Christians and Catholics voted for him during the primaries.

Until that happens, helping elect the "lesser of two evils" is important because the greater of two evils will do far more damage to our country. I would advise you to hold your nose and vote for the stupid party as a way of denying the evil party the ability to continue their calculated effort to destroy this nation by neutralizing its founding principles and destroying our Constitution.

This is a foolish and self-defeating position. You will continue to get terrible candidates that don't support your values or positions with this mindset. The repub party only cares that you keep punching 'R' on your ballot.

Holding your nose and voting for terrible and unqualified candidates is what enslaved people do.

Holding your nose and voting for the candidates who, in spite of their many flaws, will keep worse candidates from getting into office is the wise thing to do. It's not the "R" that matters. It's which party, at this particular time in history, is most dangerous to public morality, freedom of religion, and constitutional government. The party that represents the greatest danger should be denied power even if a disappointing candidate is the only possibility for keeping them out of power. Unfortunately, it is often not who you are for, but who you are against because they represent the greatest danger that informs your vote. (And by the way, since when do "enslaved people" get to vote anyway?)