Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Saturday, January 19, 2008
David R. Stokes :: Townhall.com Columnist
Race, Roe, & Reverends
by David R. Stokes
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


Forty-five years ago this summer Martin Luther King, Jr. gave the address he is best known for – long remembered as the “I Have a Dream” speech. He said things like “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’”

Slightly less than five years later the Dreamer was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

Thirty-five years ago this month the Supreme Court handed down the infamous “Roe v. Wade” decision hastening our societal slide toward a culture far too comfortable and familiar with violence and death.

Both the legacy of Dr. King and the fallout from that 1973 legal bombshell sail very close to each other again over the next few days. This is viewed as an awkward convergence by some.

But it shouldn’t be.

Back in the sixties, while black preachers were mobilizing masses in the pursuit of civil rights, conservative, Evangelicals stayed largely on the sidelines. They weren’t the least bit interested in changing anything. In fact, it was not uncommon to hear white Fundamentalist-Evangelical preachers of the day, with voices animated by indignation, decrying the very idea that preachers should be activists in the streets, mocking them to get back into their pulpits where they belonged.

Many, if not most, some notably, would later change their minds – and eat a lot of words (not to mention erasing a lot of reel to reel tape).

Recently, much has been made of the fact that Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion was, shall we say, a bit behind the curve on race – finally receiving the “revelation” that black men were welcome to participate with other “worthy males” in Temple ordinances in 1978. But, the fact is that social and theological Christian conservatives were every bit as passively-active on the wrong side of that great and compelling moral and social issue in the fifties and sixties. In fact, the largest white Baptist congregation in Detroit did not elect to admit its first black member until nearly a decade after the Mormons received their word from on high.

What was the catalyst bringing change to how conservative, white, clergymen viewed and lived out their roles? What issue convinced these dogmatic men of the cloth to be willing to scramble out of the pulpit-pocket and into a measure of political involvement after decades of silent separation? Well, the winds of change began to blow in the aftermath of the landmark decision on January 22, 1973.

So, here we are again, in another January – decades after a killing and a ruling - still marching about Roe v. Wade and honoring Dr. King - but seldom in the same room. The two constituencies, both fierce about the importance of faith, seldom find, much less look for, ways to reach out to the other choir.

As churches get ready for this Sunday some will highlight “SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE SUNDAY.” Others will talk a lot about Dr. King and his dream. Usually it will be one or the other. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David R. Stokes (davidrstokes.com) is the host of “DAVID STOKES LIVE” heard Sunday Nights from 9:00-11:00 (eastern) across North America on XM SATELLITE CHANNEL 170 – FAMILY TALK, and at wava.com. He is Senior Pastor of Fair Oaks Church in Fairfax, Virginia (fairoakschurch.org).
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: Substitute Away
Nam65-66:
"...you would make a good politician in 1938 Germany,just substitute "Jew" for "baby"."

The only reason I'm replying to this puerile insult is to point out that the word 'baby' doesn't appear in my original posts.

Hmmm, I see that my 1st post was deleted, probably because of some implied profanity. Sorry about that.

Replies To Ken
ken:
"Many people find a miscarriage devastating, because they know they've lost a child. In fact, we often describe a miscarriage as "losing a baby."....You're comparing apples with oranges.

Many people are devastated, many are less-than-devastated. And the longer the pregnancy proceeded before the miscarriage, the more likely people are to be devastated by that miscarriage. This is not a 'straw argument', it's a valid example of how we regard the unborn in circumstances other than Abortion.

Ken:
"A woman who has suffered a miscarriage didn't kill her baby on purpose. The same can't be said about a woman who has an abortion."

You're missing the point, which is that in many cases a woman who has suffered a miscarriage does not even behave as if a baby, a human being, has died at all, and that's perfectly acceptable to the rest of us. The rest of us behave as if the fetus did not yet become fully human.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.