Fear Tactics 101 (or is that 911...?)

Focus on the Family recently put out a letter from an imaginary Christian in the year 2012, describing what they claim could happen if Obama wins the presidential election. The letter expresses (and fosters) fears about "the protection of human life" (abortion), sexual morality, and the protection of freedom--of religion, speech, and parenting choices. Although the introduction to the letter proclaims that Christians may differ on political issues and that they should respect each other's opinions, the content of the letter is undeniably an attempt to undermine Obama's candidacy. Find the letter here, in pdf format:

http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/pdfs/10-22-08_2012letter.pdf

In a similar vein, a video recently appeared on youtube.com predicting a similarly fearful outcome of an Obama presidency. The video makes claims even more ridiculous than the above-mentioned letter, but is also powerful because it uses image and sound to drive home its claims. Watch the video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bVTE0qEf0o

This strategy implemented by McCain-Palin supporters of resorting to fear tactics seems desperate, but will it be effective? According to recent polls, blogs, and news interviews, many moderate and Republican voters are tired of fear tactics and want to hear specific policy plans from presidential candidates, and thus many are leaning toward Obama. However, it remains to be seen if the fears stoked by the campaign and its supporters will control the day-of, voting-booth decisions of these voters.

Colin Powell speaks out for Muslims

Finally someone is publicly asking the question "Why is it considered bad to be a Muslim in this country?" Of course, you could ask any practicing Muslim in the U.S. and she could probably tell you exactly why and how it is difficult to be a Muslim in the U.S. The same goes for people of Arabic ethnicity, or those who look remotely like they could be from the Middle East. The prejudice that has continued to simmer in this country against Muslims and those assumed to be Muslims has resurfaced on a national level in the past several weeks due to the whisper campaigns attempting to discredit Sen. Barack Obama. By accusing him of being a closet Muslim, they appeal to voters who firmly believe that the U.S. is a Christian nation and therefore its leaders must represent the Christian faith and principles on which this nation was founded. Rather than discuss the historical inaccuracy of this claim about our founders, I'd like to focus on two points. First, Sen. Obama identifies as a Christian. That is the faith that he claims, and as a country that legally stands upon the separation of church and state, we do not have the right to delve deeper into his spiritual life as a judge of his political worthiness. However, we do have a responsibility to ask the question "what defines a 'true' Christian?" The answer is complex, and reveals the difficulty of judging a person based upon his/her religious affiliations. My understanding of Christianity is radically different than that of some of my close friends. Who determines the "correct" way to practice the teachings of Jesus? Second, we should be discussing this conflation of all Muslims with terrorism and anti-Americanism. When JFK ran for president in 1960, his opponents accused him of being a "papist", indicating that he would take his orders from the Pope rather than concerning himself with the well-being of the U.S. Now in retrospect we can see that his religious affiliations did not aid or inhibit his presidential abilities. So why do we assume that a Muslim could not likewise be a capable leader of our nation?

For more on Colin Powell's statement about religious tolerance and his endorsement of Barack Obama for president, see:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/10/powells_words_a_lesson_for_mcc.html

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/10/colin_powell_and_the_american.html

http://www.newyorker.com/online/2008/09/29/slideshow_080929_platon?slide=16#showHeader

http://blog.faithinpubliclife.org/2008/10/colin_powell_stands_up_for_mus.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/21/EDT113L27Q.DTL&type=politics

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/george-will-rush-limbaugh-powells-end

Concealing deep faith, shallow politics

Here's an interesting blog from the Immanent Frame, comparing and contrasting Sarah Palin with Aimee Semple McPherson, a pentecostal evangelist in the first half of the 20th century.

http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/10/16/a-tale-of-two-mavericks/

In this post, blogger Matthew Avery Sutton gives support to the argument that Gov. Palin was chosen by Senator McCain as a sort of token for her religious affiliations. He claims that Palin has demonstrated very little ability to engage with political issues outside of a very small selection, citing interviews with reporters and her "straight talk" performance in the VP debate.

She can lead the country, but she still can't lead a church?

According to the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, the Bible does not prohibit the political leadership of women, even if those women will have some kind of authority over men. However, this does not mean that a woman could become a spiritual leader for a congregation; after all, "the Bible reserves for men the final teaching and ruling authority in the church." The Council argues that a church leader must be held to higher moral standards than a political leader. Check it out here:

http://www.cbmw.org/Blog/Posts/A-Welcome-Dialogue-on-the-Sarah-Palin-Predicament