Questions to Evangalicals/Fundamentalist?????

Question

Why is it that Fundamentalist/Evangalical Christians seem to vote Republican? (Not all do this but most do). I was watching a clip on television, Rev. Falwell was giving a speech and he said that "We determine who is going to be in the White House and who will sit on the Supreme Court." It is a scary thought to think that most Americans vote along a cultural continium.

Probability factors:

If you are white, Christian, middle/ upper middle class and southern, most likely you will vote Republican.
If you are African American Christian poor, middle, and even upper class you are more than likely going to vote democratic.
I know that this is not true of everyone, but I am largely speaking in generalities.
Why is race, class and religious affliation an in effective indicator of how we will vote?

Answer 1

First off, full disclosure: I'm white, middle-aged (46), well-educated (2 bachelor's and a master's degree), and make a mid 6-figure income -- and almost always vote democratic, although NO party tells me what to do :)

Race is the worst of the indicators you mention -- that used to be a better one, but it's changed much in the past 20 years. Class is still a pretty good indicator: poorer people vote more democratic, richer people vote more republican, and the middle-class is fairly well split. However, religion trumps them all: those who identify themselves as "fundamentalist" christian vote over 75% republican, as do mormons and a few other sects. Catholics lean more heavily towards democratic (65%). Most christians who do not identify as "fundamentalist" are pretty evenly split. And those who say they have no religion are heavily democratic.

Why? Because fundamentalist church leaders made huge contributions to the republicans, and "sold their souls" to that party -- at the same time, the republican party "sold their souls" to the fundamentalist christians, giving up many traditional republican ideals, in order to get as much of that block of people as possible.
Power, that's why :(

Answer 2

During the 1960s, the Democrats had control over all three branches of the Federal Government. And the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to have discovered the idea that the 1st amendment protects pornography. And that it prohibits teacher-led prayer and Bible-reading in school. The Court decided that "equal protection of the laws" means that state laws "discriminating" against illegitimate children (and their parents) are prohibited. Basically, the Court went waaaaaay over to the left and took away from Christian conservatives their ability to control the moral environment of their states and communities. So the Christian conservatives (who used to be of either party) decided that they have to gravitate toward the party who hadn't taken away, from the state and local governments, these political powers.

There have always been Christian conservatives who were successful at influencing their state and local governments to create laws that reflect traditional moral values. The Christians were probably Republicans in Utah, Idaho, Iowa, and the plains states, Democrats in the south, and either one in the Great Lakes region and northeast. But they have -- since the 1960s -- unified behind the Republican party at the national level because the Republicans were not trying to use the federal judiciary to take away from the states their ability to "legislate morality."

Answer 3

Religious people tend to lack an element of critical thinking. Indeed, nearly all issues have grey areas. For fundamentalists, this is very confusing as it requires thought. It is much easier for a fundamentalist to have their beliefs spelled out for them. This eliminates the need to ask questions or think for themselves.

Answer 4

because us Fundamentalist Evangalicals believe abortion is murder and the Dems by and large support abortion. and the Dems have lied to the poor/minorities telling them that Reps are keeping them down.

Answer 5

In my experience, people who are fundamentalist in their beliefs (in practically any religion - not just Christianity) tend to be people who are very rule-bound, and who cannot or will not think for themselves; the "rules" of their religion keep them from having to think for themselves, and this makes them feel secure. Similarly, the Republican party tends to operate on a very black-and-white, good-and-evil, right-and-wrong level, and this appeals to those same people who are unable or unwilling to see that there are shades of grey in most issues, and many sides to most arguments.

What I see as the great dividing issue is education. An uneducated person has not learned to think critically and to question the statements of a leader. An uneducated person is one who looks to his leaders for answers, rather than deciding answers for himself. The right-and-wrong stance of the Republican party, in my opinion, appeals to such people. These same people are often attracted by the very black-and-white concepts of fundamentalist religions; ergo, people who are attracted to a black-and-white answers in religion (and other aspects of their lives) will also be attracted to a party that purports to offer simple, black-and-white answers in the political arena.

I firmly believe that the factor is not location, race, or religion, but education and (to a lesser degree) intelligence. I believe that education, whether self-taught or "formal" education, is the true dividing factor. Intelligence without education is naive, and unaware, although at least such a person is somewhat more likely to think for him/herself. Classes that are historically ill-educated seem to be more likely to be prone to following conservative religions due to an inability or unwillingness to decide issues for themselves. Historically, there has been less access to education for poor southern individuals of all races (although that is certainly changing, thankfully). White southerners were certainly the first to have at least some benefits of education, and you see this trend reflected to some degree in the "blue-ing" of the larger southern cities, where people with more education tend to congregate in order to earn a living with their knowlege.

I myself am a white southerner, born in Texas, of middle-class means; however, I now live near Seattle, Washington. I was raised as a Christian, but converted to Judaism about 10 years ago because of what I saw as the inflexibility of much Christian thinking. I am different from many southerners of my generation (I was born in 1955), especially women, because I was raised by educated parents (mother with a B.S., father with an M.S. - both the first generations in their family to have the opportunity to go to college), and because I am well-educated, both formally and through my own curiosity, voracious reading, and personal studies. All things being equal, I tend to vote for a moderate Democratic candidate.

I apologize that this answer rambles a little; this is something I've thought about quite a lot in the past, and I don't really have it in a nice neat package yet - but those are my thoughts on your question; I hope they help.

Answer 6

Forget the long answers it's Abortion