Compassion Campaigns and Antigay Politics: What Would Arendt Do?

2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Burack

AbstractCompassionate conservatism is usually dismissed on the American political left as an empty slogan intended to mystify the real roots and aspirations of conservative politics. However, conservative Christian organizations and churches now conduct well-coordinated compassion campaigns on contested social issues such as sexual and reproductive rights. Through compassion campaigns, the Christian right also disseminates particular forms of political pedagogy regarding sexuality and compassion for followers who are subject to the movement's influence. Here, I turn to Hannah Arendt to analyze the politics of compassion at work in the ex-gay movement and in antiabortion projects such as Silent No More. This article presents evidence for a turn to compassionate pedagogies on the Christian right, analyzes these projects, and suggests ways that Arendt's political thought can inform our readings of conservative Christian compassionate discourse and political practices.

Author(s):  
Andrew R. Lewis

Conservative Christianity’s alignment with the Republican Party at the end of the 20th century is one of the most consequential political developments, both for American religion and American party politics. In the proceeding four decades, what has been the nature of this relationship? The inclusion-moderation thesis suggests that once religious movements are integrated into political parties, their interests are often co-opted by broader party interests and their positions moderate. For the Christian right in the U.S. there is mixed evidence for the inclusion-moderation process. Considering all the evidence, the most apt description is that conservative Christianity has transformed the Republican Party, and the Republican Party has transformed conservative Christianity. With its inclusion in the Republican Party, the Christian right has moderated on some aspects. The movement has become more professional, more attuned to the more widely accepted, secular styles of democratic politics, and more engaged in the broader goals and positions of the party. Conservative Christianity has also failed to fully achieve some of its most important goals and has lost some of its distinctiveness. In these ways, the party has changed the Christian right. At the same time, the Christian right has altered Republican politics. National candidates have changed their positions on important social issues, including abortion, gay rights, and religious freedom. The party’s platforms and judicially strategies have been strongly affected by movement’s interests, and conservative Christian activists have come to be central to the Republican Party. It’s stability and strength within the party have given the movement power. In these areas, the Christian right has evangelized the Republican Party rather than moderated. A fair assessment is that for the Christian right there has been partial but quite incomplete adherence to the inclusion-moderation process.


2021 ◽  
pp. 172-193
Author(s):  
William V. Trollinger

For the past century, the bulk of white evangelicalism has been tightly linked to very conservative politics. But in response to social and cultural changes in the 1960s and 1970s, conservative white evangelicalism organized itself into the Christian Right, in the process attaching itself to and making itself indispensable to the Republican Party. While the Christian Right has enjoyed significant political success, its fusion of evangelicalism/Christianity with right-wing politics—which includes white nationalism, hostility to immigrants, unfettered capitalism, and intense homophobia—has driven many Americans (particularly, young Americans) to disaffiliate from religion altogether. In fact, the quantitative and qualitative evidence make it clear that the Christian Right has been a (perhaps the) primary reason for the remarkable rise of the religious “nones” in the past three decades. More than this, the Christian Right is, in itself, a sign of secularization.


Reflexão ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Da Silva Lopes

Christopher Douglas is one of the most prominent scholars who has studied the rise of the conservative Christian Right in the American political arena and the links of this complex movement to American culture. Prof. Douglas taught at the University of Toronto and, for five years, at Furman University, South Carolina before transferring to University of Victoria in 2004. He teaches American literature, particularly contemporary American fiction, religion and literature, multicultural American literature, postmodernism, and the Bible as Literature. In the interview below, Prof. Douglas talks about his research and the idea behind his book “If God Meant to Interfere”, published in 2016; the explanatory concepts of Christian Multiculturalism and Christian Postmodernism; the spread of fake news, conspiracy theories, and alternative facts among Christian fundamentalists; the American political context. Prof. Douglas also offers interesting comments on the current Brazilian situation. His critical insights provide interesting and new perspectives that give fresh vitality to the debates about Christian fundamentalism. Prof. Douglas is committed to “public-scholar engagement” that is, research-based critical writings for non-academic audiences.Links to his public academic activity are inserted throughout the interview.


2017 ◽  
pp. 118-147
Author(s):  
Sukhwant Dhaliwal ◽  
Sukhwant Dhaliwal

This article considers two streams of Christian Right mobilisation in the UK – the Christian Peoples Alliance and the Conservative Christian Fellowship – in the context of neoliberalism and resurgent communitarianism. The article notes their roles as moral swords of justice in challenging a lack of local democracy, the weight of multi-national corporations, racism and hostility towards migrants. Conversely this article also shows how that same morality underlines an assault on women’s reproductive rights and enables the perpetuation of Christian supremacy and anti-Muslim sentiment within the context of a national turn to communitarianism and a discourse about British values and cohesion. The article concludes by highlighting the conditions within which these Christian Right organisations garner political space and legitimacy, the registers they utilise to make their claims and the specific aspects of their interventions and ideology that make them fundamentalist formations. 


2021 ◽  
pp. 209-240
Author(s):  
Kristy L. Slominski

As Chapter 5 argues, conservative Christian abstinence-only advocates learned a great deal from the liberal Protestants and comprehensive sexuality education they rejected. This phase of sex education, often defined by the struggle between competing versions of sex education, began with the emergence of abstinence-only education in the 1980s. After years of opposing sex education, conservative Christians like Tim LaHaye developed their replacements. Supported by—and supporting—the newly developed Christian Right and the evangelical pro-family movement, these programs espoused chastity before marriage and omitted information on contraceptive benefits and the diversity of sexual behaviors and identities. It was no longer a question of whether sex education belonged in schools, but rather which type would be taught. Conservatives, too, had learned how to translate religious values into secular spaces in order to gain a bigger audience for their concerns and values.


Author(s):  
Michael J. McVicar

The phrase Religious Right refers to a loose network of political actors, religious organizations, and political pressure groups that formed in the United States in the late 1970s. Also referred to as the Christian Right, representative organizations associated with the movement included Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority, Tim LaHaye’s Council for National Policy, Beverly LaHaye’s Concerned Women for America, and Ed McAteer’s Religious Roundtable. Leaders and organizations associated with the Religious Right made a broad-based religious appeal to Americans that emphasized traditional family values, championed free-market economics, and advocated a hardline foreign policy approach to the Soviet Union. They also criticized secular and materialistic trends in American culture that many in the Religious Right associated with the moral and economic decline of the nation. The organizations of the Religious Right had a major influence on the 1976 and 1980 presidential elections by directly affecting the political fortunes of Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Although many of the organizations declined and disbanded in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s, some of the organizations of the Religious Right persisted into the 2000s and continue to shape policy discussions, drive voter turnout, and influence religious and political life in the United States. Even though actors in the Religious Right appealed broadly to the conservative cultural sensibilities of Americans from Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, and Jewish backgrounds, the movement most capably mobilized white evangelical and fundamentalist Christians. The decentralized nature of white evangelical Protestantism means that organizers associated with the Religious Right mobilized coalitions of activists and rank-and-file members from large conservative denominational bodies such as the Southern Baptist Convention, the Presbyterian Church in America, and the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church, while also drawing support from independent churches associated with Reformed, Pentecostal, charismatic, and nondenominational Protestantism. Further, the term Religious Right has also been used by scholars and journalists alike to identify a broad ecumenical coalition of activist Catholics, Mormons, Jews, and other cultural conservatives who have made common cause with Protestants over social issues related to sexual morality—including resisting abortion rights, combating pornography, and fighting against rights for homosexuals—since the 1970s. Scholars often trace the roots of the Religious Right to the Fundamentalist-Modernist controversy, a series of theological and institutional disputes that split conservative Protestants in the early 20th century. In the intervening decades between the 1920s and 1970s, conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists developed an institutional subculture of churches, colleges, and voluntary societies that created a popular perception of their withdrawal and isolation from mainstream social and political culture in the United States. This institutional separation, however, did not stop conservative Protestants from contributing to many of the most important political controversies of the 20th century, including debates over cultural change, economic theory, and foreign policy during the Cold War. By the late 1970s, a unique convergence of social changes and new developments in law, politics, and media led to the emergence of a distinct coalition of special interest political groups that have since been labeled the Religious or Christian Right. These groups had a profound effect on electoral outcomes and public policy debates that has persisted well into the 21st century.


2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-149
Author(s):  
Kimberly H. Conger

AbstractEvangelicals form the core of Republican constituencies in many states. This has been particularly true in Iowa, where the Christian Right has held significant influence in the Republican party for almost 20 years. However, recent scholarship has suggested that evangelicals, particularly younger ones, may be changing their candidate choices and partisanship due to dissatisfaction with Republican policies. Based on a unique study surveying caucus-goers' opinions after the January 2008 caucuses, I examine respondents' candidate preferences in light of their religious beliefs, issues preferences, and demographic identities. The results indicate that while evangelicals remain more conservative on social issues than their co-partisans in both parties, issues seem to make little difference in candidate choice. This conclusion suggests that Republican evangelicals remain committed to the importance of social issues – or at least to their evangelical identity – in their voting choices.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 161-174
Author(s):  
Leslie Dorrough Smith

Abstract The concept of “code-switching” is often used to designate the communicative transgression of some sort of symbolic boundary of identity, often for various social purposes. Progressive activists and scholars alike have used the concept to point out the contradictions and idiosyncracies of groups like Concerned Women for America (CWA), a longstanding member of the Christian Right, as it portrays itself as both anti-feminist and pro-feminist simultaneously. Using CWA’s various positions on feminism as a case study, this essay considers not just how this instance of code-switching rhetorically operates, but also examines how the concept is used in the critiques lodged by progressive voices against conservative Christian groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document