« Palin Resigns. What's Next? | Main | Obama to Meet Pope for the First Time on Friday »

July 7, 2009

Christian Left Takes Messages to the Air Waves

Radio waves appear to be the conduit for Christian activism this summer. Christian organizations are running political ads "framing the issue as an urgent matter of Biblical morality," The Wall Street Journal reports.

The American Values Network spent nearly $200,000 placing radio ads advocating action against global warming, according to the report. Previous ads have described the effect of climate change and the need for "redemption."

The Wall Street Journal points out that at least one of the American Values ads supported by name the Waxman-Markey climate bill, which passed the House last week.

Last weekend, radio ads sponsored by Faith in Public Life, Sojourners, and the PICO National Network ran in five states urging "people of faith" to ask their senators to support health care reform.

In each ad, a religious leader from each respective state exhorts constituents to contact their senators. The script for the ads uses Isaiah 65:20 and 2 Timothy 1:7 and provides the interpretation that, "Our love must be a thing of action."

The report suggests that on the other side, Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council (FRC) the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, which opposed the Waxman-Markey bill due to economic concerns. The FRC is also sponsoring a petition to guard against any new health care legislation that would force taxpayers to pay for abortions, and the National Right to Life (NRL) supported a defeated anti-rationing amendment to the bill intended to protect patients who are elderly or disabled.

Comments

Funny. I seem to remember the religious left fretting about wedding partisan politics with theology. How quickly things change.

The reason why less people have health care is because they don't want to be in unions any more. It was the unions that got people good health care, retirement, living wages, etc. and not the government. When the average union member worker made enough money to send their kids to college, the kids got jobs in management and left the union membership behind. As union membership declined so did the benefits (health care, etc.) decline. Management became business people who cut full time staff to part time staff to save on benefits. To help their profit line become higher than a "good" profit, management moved their oompanies elsewhere to where there were no unions to force management to pay living wages instead of got by wages which keep you under the companies control, Like everything that succeeds, unions did themselves out of business and the economy is falling back into having no balance between the man and the boss. As for goverment, my Mother is on medicare and it does not pay for much. You have to have a supplementary policy to pick up what the government doesn't pay for or you go broke. When the unions were in their heyday you only needed one policy because it covered everything. I don't see business or unions coming back, at least not in my area. So, now, we work all our lives so we can retire on the dole (government support).

I am continually amazed at how people stick their heads in the sand regarding the health care debate. People say that Medicare has been a success...yet it's going broke. We're living on borrowed time regarding Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. If they go broke NO ONE gets helped.

And now there's this big movement, aided and abetted by leftist groups (both religious and non-religious) to get government even further involved in health care. But what if doctors and other health care providers are unwilling to accept the low fees established by the government? Will they be FORCED, in Nazi-esque style, to continue to practice and take the low reimbursement?

What if doctors just quit or students stop going into medicine? What if health care ends up getting rationed and people DIE standing in line waiting to get treated? What if the unbelievable spending by this administration results in the government defaulting on payments to providers? What then? If this happens hardly anyone, least of all poor people, will get health care. Things may be bad now, but never forget they could always get worse.

I don't doubt that leftist groups have concern about the health care of the poor. But, based on their actions, they are just as interested in getting power as they are helping the poor. They want CONTROL as much as they want a real solution. That's the dirty little secret.

Regarding global warming, there is scientific consensus that it exists, but there is no real consensus that human activity is the primary cause of it. If you kill the economy based on unproven speculations then the most vulnerable--the poor--will get hit hardest. Most of the proposed "cures" for global warming will hurt poor people more than global warming itself.

Interesting comments, Gregory, some of which I agree with. I would point out a rather salient fact, however: over the course of the last 50 or so years our government has been overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats. Over the course of the last 4 years, again, it has been mostly liberal Democrats who have controlled our national government. Objective analysis yields the following conclusion: conservatives haven't had nearly the chance to govern that liberals have. If you're looking for a scapegoat you may not want to go down that road.