That Confusing Morality Thing

Are Dems starting to get the morality thing?

TDAXP has a good post on the viability of the message agove, which is appearing on billboards around South Dakota. Fellow Southern California Bloggers Alliance member Bill at Dawns Early Light has added to the discussion.

They've covered two responses I share: First, that Dems turn to government to help the poor, while conservative Christians see it as God's work, not government's. And second, that the liberal churches that appeal to liberal democrats are in such sharp decline they have become irrelevant.

It is interesting to try alternative headlines and see how they work:

• Jesus Cares for the Unborn, so do We.
• Jesus Supported in the Death Penalty, so do We.
• Jesus Healed the Sick without Government Money, so do We.
• Jesus Told the Woman at the Well to Stop Sleeping Around, so do We.
• Jesus Believed He was the Living Son of God, Sent to Die and Rise from the Dead to Sit at the Right Hand of God, so do We.

None of these headlines is an honest one for the current DNP leadership, and they illustrate the problem the Dems have with the morality vote. That is, they only have one option for dealing with Christian morals: To pick and choose what they want to be moral, immoral or amoral about.

Christianity was not designed to be a particularly popular or easy religion, and the continuing evangelical explosion that began in the 1980s has created millions of new American Christian men and women who are willing to accept the difficulty of their faith and be uncompromising in their belief. The Democrat's efforts to marginalize and compromise the tenants we hold dear will not attract Christians to the party.

I don't think the billboards will hurt the Dem base much, though. Religious Dems will relate to the "Help the poor" line as both Christians and Dems. Unbeliving Dems will forgive the party its sins, knowing this billboard is more about politics than beliefs.