John Danforth’s important advice for the GOP

I don’t think it’s likely, but if the Republican Party is going to be saved, John Danforth will help make it happen. He’s offering his party a path back towards sanity; all they have to do now is follow it.

Danforth is not just some Rockefeller Republican from the northeast. He’s an “elder statesman” in the GOP after a career that’s included stints as Missouri’s attorney general, three terms in the U.S. Senate, and time as Bush’s ambassador to the United Nations. Perhaps more importantly, Danforth is not a secularist, anxious to separate Republicans from matters of faith — he’s an Episcopal minister. Indeed, Bush recently described Danforth as “a man of strong convictions, unquestioned integrity, and great decency. He is a man of calm and judicious temperament.”

He’s also a man disappointed by what his party has become. In March, he wrote one of the more important op-ed columns of the year, lamenting the fact that activists “have transformed our [Republican] party into the political arm of conservative Christians.”

[I]n recent times, we Republicans have allowed this shared agenda to become secondary to the agenda of Christian conservatives. As a senator, I worried every day about the size of the federal deficit. I did not spend a single minute worrying about the effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today it seems to be the other way around.

The historic principles of the Republican Party offer America its best hope for a prosperous and secure future. Our current fixation on a religious agenda has turned us in the wrong direction. It is time for Republicans to rediscover our roots.

Apparently, Danforth has been watching the past few months as the Republicans have ignored his advice. To his credit, he returned to the New York Times op-ed page again today, arguing that the religious right’s demands — God is on the GOP’s side and only the far right knows God’s will — are a recipe for political disaster.

It’s a must-read repudiation of the entire right-wing social agenda.

[For moderate Christians], the only absolute standard of behavior is the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. Repeatedly in the Gospels, we find that the Love Commandment takes precedence when it conflicts with laws. We struggle to follow that commandment as we face the realities of everyday living, and we do not agree that our responsibility to live as Christians can be codified by legislators.

When, on television, we see a person in a persistent vegetative state, one who will never recover, we believe that allowing the natural and merciful end to her ordeal is more loving than imposing government power to keep her hooked up to a feeding tube.

When we see an opportunity to save our neighbors’ lives through stem cell research, we believe that it is our duty to pursue that research, and to oppose legislation that would impede us from doing so.

We think that efforts to haul references of God into the public square, into schools and courthouses, are far more apt to divide Americans than to advance faith.

Following a Lord who reached out in compassion to all human beings, we oppose amending the Constitution in a way that would humiliate homosexuals.

For us, living the Love Commandment may be at odds with efforts to encapsulate Christianity in a political agenda. We strongly support the separation of church and state, both because that principle is essential to holding together a diverse country, and because the policies of the state always fall short of the demands of faith. Aware that even our most passionate ventures into politics are efforts to carry the treasure of religion in the earthen vessel of government, we proceed in a spirit of humility lacking in our conservative colleagues.

Danforth reminds us that there are devout, Christian Republicans who have little use for the far-right agenda that dominates today’s GOP. It’s a tragedy that there aren’t more like him.

Danforth will, no doubt, come under fire for his sentiments, just as he did in March. That won’t change the fact that he’s offering advice that can rescue the Republican Party from itself.

I don’t have a problem with anything he wrote – it was spot on. I don’t, however, think it will make much headway with anyone in the GOP or the religious nut jobs that drive the GOP agenda. They are not and never will be moderate or swayed by moderate musings – they are only attracked to writings and people who aren’t moderate.

Also, the GOP of today is not Danforth’s GOP – and they don’t give 2 hoots in hell for him. They just consign him to the “old guy” catagory – you know the group they put everyone who isn’t them is in. They will talk derisivly about him behind closed doors and dismiss him.

  • Maybe his words will resonate louder with the people the real wingnuts have been herding like sheep for the last few years: sincere believers who have been so numbed by the partisan rhetoric that they allow themselves to believe everything they’re told by the lunatic right.

    Maybe now the national fatigue level has grown so high with Iraq and Social Security and Congressional scandals and transparent White House lies and a soaring deficit and scripted meetings and rising insurgencies without any sign of abating and on and on and on…..well, maybe Danforth’s clear and courageous stand will give the general public enough cover to finally step back a moment and ask themselves the simple question, “What exactly has been going the hell on here??”

    Maybe.

  • I second your comment, Memekiller. Why can’t more Dems articulate a message like that? I know there are a few, Senator Obama being a shining example. However, we need more if we want to take back our country and thus save it from the rethugs.

  • Why can’t more Dems articulate a message like that?

    It seems to me all the Dems in the country can stand up and articulate a message like this, but it lacks a certain political salience. A devout Dem is for helping the poor, death with dignity, stem-cell research, respect for diversity, and separation of church and state? That’s not a compelling narrative in this environment. Everyone in the political world expects this.

    That’s what makes Danforth’s concerns so important. This is a Republican — a devout, life-long Republican who worked for Bush — talking to his own, imploring them to move back to the center and reject the radical right.

    Christian Dems have an important role in this conversation, reminding voters that people of faith can find a welcome home with the Dems, but the more we have voices like Danforth’s, the more it reminds wavering Republicans how far their party has strayed.

  • Damn it, he’s an Episcopal priest. How hard would it be for the NY Times to get that right?

    I actually disagree with him on his point about funding stem cell research. I don’t think that Christianity has much to say about funding scientific research one way or the other. I don’t think it would be terribly unChristian if we cancelled all funding for the NIH, bad public policy yes, but not unChristian.

    I think that we should fund stem cell research, but it’s not clear to me that Christianity demands it. “earthen vessels of government” and all that.

  • I can only hope that those left in the GOP in national office, who appear not to be part of the radical right of that party, read this, learn and possibly take action. An exodus to independent status by a number of these “moderate” jokers would send a very strong message. Not likely to happen, though. At some point they have to wake up and realize that the GOP of old is not the same GOP and seek to shake the slime from what’s left of their reputations. But it appears that the ties to money (and the fear of rightous retribution) is too strong. I still think that wealthy demos and moderates would be wise to form a campaign fund/war chest for use by any current Repub who leaves the GOP for Demo or Indy status.

  • Brilliant! A politico who argues that government should get on with the work of running a nation and not our individual lives.

    Why can’t Dems speak as eloquently about this issue as Danforth? We do. This post and the comments that followed prove this. We just need to expose these voices and put them in forums for the broader public to hear.

    Kudos to the Danforths and Christine Todd Whitmans of the Republican party for taking a public stance and trying to steer their party to one that can debate public policy with logic and common sence rather than spouting vitriol and blather.

  • Kudos should not go out to folks like Christine Todd Whitmann until such time as they take a public stance when it means something, like when they actually hold office or are a member of the administration. These folks deserve a large part, if not the largest part, of the blame for their failure to speak up when in office as they empower the nutjobs on the right. Speaking up after the fact, after one is no longer in the game–like Whitmann–does not take that much courage.

  • The Republican Party and the Republicans in the House and Senate are not
    going to repudate the mullahs of the Christian Right (Dobson) because they
    think they are winning. Far from walking away from the Christian extremists,
    they are embracing them, as Senate Majority leader Frist demonstrated. And
    note that Bush has NEVER vetoed a spending bill, despite threats to do so.
    But he has promised to veto stem cell bills and other bills that the
    Christian Right fantatics find offensive. Bush is a man who loves his
    weekends and long vacations. But when it came to signing the Terry Schivao (sp)
    bill, he was on the helicopter to the White House. Far from believing that
    the dedicated ranks of Christian Right zealots are a problem, Rove, the Bushies
    and the Republicans in general think that they are their core foundation. Which
    is why they pander to them.

  • On an interesting note, I’d wager that this is the NYTimes’ most emailed op-ed piece of the year. I’d love to see the numbers, I’ve already received it from two people and sent it to one prior to getting it back.

  • Comments are closed.