Republican presidential candidates and the Religious Right (revisited)

I blogged on this recently, but now, more on Republican presidential candidates and the Religious Right-- from Kathleen Parker at TownHall.com (hat tip: C-J)

Evangelical Christians never had it so good, but they seem not to know it. Instead of supporting the candidate who most shares their values -- Mitt Romney -- they seem hell-bent for the proverbial cliff.

Meeting recently in Salt Lake City, conservative Christian leaders almost unanimously approved a resolution to support a third-party candidate if neither major party nominates someone who is pro-life....

James Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family, explained in a New York Times op-ed Thursday that Christian leaders believe any presidential candidate has to commit to traditional moral values, including the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage and other pro-family principles.

Minimally, that means anti-Roe v. Wade, no same-sex marriage, no government funding for destruction of human life at any stage and no pro-sex education. These weren't controversial ideas a generation ago, but today they can make or break a candidate in a party whose political base is 30 percent evangelical Christian.

[But] perfection is a tough standard and hardly anyone is just right....

Parker than goes through the parade of top-tier Republican candidates, rejecting McCain and then blowing up Fred Thompson:

Thompson, upon whom many had pinned their hopes, has turned out to be a disappointment, not to mention a cure for insomnia. In Iowa recently, Thompson had to prompt his audience -- their faces masks of ennui -- to applaud. Freight trains have sparked more animation.

Thompson also doesn't support the FMA...

Then, Parker turns to Mike Huckabee, who would seem to have the traditional Religious Right pedigree-- if not the most biblically coherent worldview of government (see: Ron Paul).

And then there's Mike Huckabee. If Dobson really meant what he said in his op-ed -- that winnability shouldn't be the deciding factor in supporting a candidate -- then Huckabee should be receiving bouquets of Ben Franklins with his morning beignets. A southern Baptist preacher, the former Arkansas governor is a human checklist of conservative values, as well as being personable, likable and funny.

What Huckabee doesn't have is the golden coffer, which means that electability is, in fact, a Christian concern.

Parker than turns to Romney:

That leaves just one person -- Romney -- as the obvious pick for the values party. If anything, the golly-gee guy is too perfect....

His resume otherwise has perfect creases. As governor of Massachusetts, he fought same-sex unions and embryonic cloning. He's pro-life, even if he was previously pro-choice....

The only hitch: He's a cultist. Or so some Christians think. Even though Romney shares their belief in Jesus Christ as God...

Not exactly. Mormon doctrine dictates that Jesus was created by God. Whether any given Mormon is a Christian-- believes in God's grace [as most obviously personified in the person and ministry of Jesus Christ]-- Mormon doctrine is significantly different than orthodox Christianity.

Parker also notes, ironically, that Romney (in a religion which one prominently featured polygamy) is "the only leading Republican candidate who has had just one wife."

Then, she wraps up...

Ultimately, Christian leaders (some of whom make off-the-record, supportive calls to Romney, I'm told) most likely will back the Mormon. But their actions meantime have hurt Romney as he tries to close the deal nationally.

If they were smarter, they'd embrace Romney as the one who can beat Hillary because he, more than anyone else, unites all wings of the party -- economic, security and social.

If.