Is Conservativism Dead — Or Just Too White?

By Julie Roys
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn


           Some evangelicals are touting the end of social conservatism following last week’s election. Noting that three states approved same-sex marriage, Ed Stetzer, president of LifeWay Research declared Christians may be losing the “culture war.”  Similarly, Al Mohler of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary lamented the re-election of a president who doesn’t support the sanctity of life or biblical marriage.  “Evangelical Christians,” he said, “must see the 2012 election as a catastrophe for crucial moral concerns.”

            I understand these sentiments, but I’m not so sure 2012 strikes the death knell for social conservatism.  Yes, Maryland, Maine and Washington approved same-sex marriage.  But, these states lean very far Left and don’t represent most of America.  
            Also, liberal social policies didn’t sweep President Obama back into office. Social liberals tend to be either white or Jewish – and both these groups supported Obama less in 2012 than in 2008. In fact, according to exit polls, Obama garnered only 41% of the white vote.  No, President Obama won re-election because he won a huge proportion of the minority vote – 95% of African-Americans and more than 70% of Asian-Americans and Hispanics.  Yet, all these minority groups are overwhelmingly socially conservative.
            So why did a conservative fail to win socially conservative minority voters? Certainly, some voters support more government programs and reject fiscally conservative policies.  On this, conservatives and certain minority voters will never agree. 
            However, conservatives have been unnecessarily alienating large numbers of minorities by holding a hard line on an issue they should be championing – immigration.  Not only is this counter-productive; it’s unbiblical.  In the Old Testament, God repeatedly commands His followers to welcome the alien.  I understand tax-payers resent paying for people who are here illegally.   But, it’s time we forgive, extend mercy, and work toward comprehensive reform that provides amnesty with enforcement. 
            America may still have a moral majority.  It’s just not a white moral majority.  And, the sooner white conservatives forge partnerships with their conservative brothers and sisters of color, the better.

SHARE THIS:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

GET EMAIL UPDATES!

Keep in touch with Julie and get updates in your inbox!

Don’t worry we won’t spam you.

More to explore

5 thoughts on “Is Conservativism Dead — Or Just Too White?”

  1. The first time I remember amnesty being given to illegal immigrants was with President Reagan in the 1980’s. How many times are we supposed to forgive lawbreakers (70×7?)? Is is far past the time that immigration laws need to be enforced, without amnesty.

    I am all for LEGAL immigration, but I am tired of amnesty being given every so many years to illegals. If that is the case, maybe the legal immigrants should be given a bonus for doing it legally.

  2. Also, I do think it is time we possibly consider a work visa program so that many of the illegals would be able to come and work here in a legal and controlled fashion.

  3. There are about 12-million illegal immigrants in the U.S. today. The government can’t possibly deport 12 million people. The most constructive solution is to offer them a path to legitimacy. This will increase tax revenue and provide incentive for illegal immigrants to meet certain standards. It’s really a win-win at this point.

    I like the work visa idea.

  4. I think we are assuming incorrectly about the issue of immigration. pres Obama promised in his first year he would put forth a comprehensive immigration bill, but so far as the evidence for that there isn’t even a hint of a note pad where he even sketched an outline, yet he garnered so much of the Latino vote. Why? I think the answer can be found in Cal.’s prop 30. I suspect that a large number of hispanics voted for that tax increase. Government handout is the selling point; that is the only diiference in the platforms of the two major political parties since both have suggested immigration policies that are almost equal.
    Second, we have a strong history in this country of re-electing incumbant presidents; I believe it is an inherant sense of pride in the American system. Carter is really the only single term president in the past several decades; Bush 1 was elected to carry the reagan legacy as a sort of third term, Ford simply played out the Nixon term, and Johnson Finished out Kennedy’s term. In 2004 there was quite an opposition to Bush 2, remember the “No blood for oil protests”, the media criticism and the constant “exit strategy”/ endless war attacks? He was still re-elected. I think the conservative showing will turn out in 2014, and again in 2016 for this reason, but we will have to get away from the idea that an immigration bill is the key to courting the hispanic vote.

  5. With regard to the comment I made about government handouts being the driving issue, that is not to say that reception of those handouts is due to a mooching mentality. These programs are introduced as “pain medication” administered to offset the pains associated with every societal adversity from migration and trying to settle in and assimilate, to providing for those who can’t work, or struggle to find work. I believe there is an addiction to, and a belief of entitlement to a life free of discomfort; a contraceptive mentality. It is no wonder that free contraception entered into the latest political discussion, it is more pain medication for a struggling society. The struggle to get beyond adversity is the best “pain medication” there is. Unless we learn as a society to get beyond adversity instead of to mask and hide adversity we will all surely die of our addiction.

Leave a Reply