Marketing RP to Christians, a different approach than Huckabee

[JustAnotherV]

I saw an interesting bit a bit ago about Huckabee's evangelical support. It said that attacking him on being less of a conservative would do little to erode his base because his supporters are more concerned with what they perceive to be Christian values or character.

I don't really like that religion gets so into politics. It not only causes trouble when linked to state functions, but can also cause some people to hold (what some would claim are) irrational positions on issues no matter what evidence is presented. However our present reality is that the GOP is partly hijacked by religious concerns, and since we are the grass roots, it is within our power to help Ron here without bringing him down by promoting his own religion. We can try to garner more support, and or steal from others (mainly Huckabee), by helping to show the "good Christian" side of Ron.

I have seen a few messages floating around here but thought they may not be targeting the right demographic for Dr. Paul. I doubt we are going to convert ( ;P ) many hard line fundamentalists, the same way we are not likely to convert many hard-line warmongers. The reason is that Ron Paul is not about fundamentalism.

My opinion is that there is a different area of Christian conservatives that is much more highly open to recruitment, either out of the blue, or hopefully from our competitors. This segment is a combination or Christian academics, *pacifists*, moderates, etc. If you want to push the envelope I would even say that we could say he is a "real" Christian, because he follows Christ's peaceful ways more than the pro-war establishment. We need to appeal to those people, the rational, intelligent, actually compassionate (meaning, including Muslims and prisoners...) Christians.

Just wanted to toss that out there. I don't think we will be able to steal the blockheads effectively, nor should we try, but there are enough of the more intelligent breed that might be ripe to turn in our direction.

[Mike S.]

I am a Christian. When I heard about Huckabee I was excited. But when I checked his record and proposal to give instate tuition to illegals and then saw that he would keep us in Iraq for at least 4 more years I decided NO to Huckabee. Part of being a Christian is following the law - giving instate tuition to illegals is blatant breaking of the law. Meanwhile legal out of state US citizens pay much higher tuition than illegals! And then there is the homeschool bill he passed in Arkansas making it tougher for homeschoolers. The Iraq issue is the big deal breaker for me though.

I would recommend the following:

If they are anti-iraq war, stress how Ron Paul is the only republican candidate that will get us out of Iraq and the major Dems Hillary and Obama refuse to set a pullout date in the next 4 years. Also mention that Ron Paul was one of only 6 republicans to vote against the war. If they are pro-iraq war, skip to the next two issues.

For homeschoolers, direct them to http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/v15n3/V15N3AR.asp?PrinterFriendly=True - this tells how Huckabee made it tougher for homeschoolers. You could also mention that Huckabee supports No Child Left Behind.

Also, have them take a look at http://arkjournal.com/2007/11/following-is-from-one-of-my-favorite.html with regard to illegals.

[DeadtoSin]

I'm a Christian and I guess I'm not seeing your point..We shouldn't recruit the hardline Christians?

I'm as evangelical as it gets, and I believe that Ron Paul is the hope for this nation. The dealbreaker for most people is the Iraq War. What we need is a way for Christian supporters of Ron Paul to logically defend Ron Paul's stance on the Iraq War.

When we do that, the other stuff falls into place. If anyone can help me do this on a large scale, please let me know in this topic.

[Throwback280s]

I've written a letter that speaks directly to born again Christians about Ron Paul.
http://files.meetup.com/509308/christian_general.pdf

[shane2]

#1 - In exercising his oath of office duties as President, I want a President that is foremost focused and dedicated to supporting, defending, and upholding the Constitution.

#2 - If he does #1, then my religious freedom to worship as I see fit without interference will be most assured and protected and prone to flourish, regardless of the Presidents own religious beliefs, or lack thereof.

#3 - A candidates religious beliefs and practices are of interest to me only to the degree that they might help illuminate or reveal his character and integrity to be, and remain, steadfastly committed to embrace #1 above, if elected.

- Shane

[Wayne Hammond]

I doubt we are going to convert ( ;P ) many hard line fundamentalists, the same way we are not likely to convert many hard-line warmongers. The reason is that Ron Paul is not about fundamentalism..

I think you misjudge Christian fundamentalists - they are one of the most Constitution-loving groups in this nation, in many ways. Their "hard line" adherence to Biblical principles makes them easy to win over to Ron Paul.

I posted this elsewhere, but... the bottom line with a lot of born-again Christians is that the Bible prophets warned that in the "end times", there will be a tyrannical, one-world government that will control the entire earth, force people to receive a mark (chip) in their hand or forehead (I.D.), or use the number of the beast to buy and sell anything...

BOTTOM LINE with born-again Christians:

RON PAUL is the ONLY Presidential candidate who is actively fighting against this anti-Christ, anti-Bible, one-world government system.

The other candidates have sold out to the beast, or at least have given up fighting against the beast system.

There's all the ammo you should need to win over a true conservative, fundamentalist Christian.

.

[Wayne Hammond]

#1 - In exercising his oath of office duties as President, I want a President that is foremost focused and dedicated to supporting, defending, and upholding the Constitution.

#2 - If he does #1, then my religious freedom to worship as I see fit without interference will be most assured and protected and prone to flourish, regardless of the Presidents own religious beliefs, or lack thereof.

#3 - A candidates religious beliefs and practices are of interest to me only to the degree that they might help illuminate or reveal his character and integrity to be, and remain, steadfastly committed to embrace #1 above, if elected.

- Shane

Good points.

[davidhperry]

I'm a Christian and I guess I'm not seeing your point..We shouldn't recruit the hardline Christians?

I'm as evangelical as it gets, and I believe that Ron Paul is the hope for this nation. The dealbreaker for most people is the Iraq War. What we need is a way for Christian supporters of Ron Paul to logically defend Ron Paul's stance on the Iraq War.

When we do that, the other stuff falls into place. If anyone can help me do this on a large scale, please let me know in this topic.

Agreed completely. What evangelical Christians need is to hear is why other evangelicals support Dr. Paul. The reason many Christians like him is that he's pandering to them like crazy - I know because I'm a Christian myself. He'll telling Christians exactly what they want to hear. If I didn't know better, I would probably be a casual supporter of Huckabee myself.

I have good news though:

1. If all Huckabee has is the evangelical crowd, then that's probably not enough to propel him very far. He's pandering so hard to them that I suspect that he's not getting support from too many others. Remember, just 6 weeks ago he was nowhere in the polls so this is his "hail mary" play.

2. The support for Huckabee isn't very deep and can be reversed with some education and diligence. Many of these folks are former Fred supporters and/or they are just starting to pay attention. They've heard that Huck is a Christian so they're willing to pick him in a quick phone poll. However, the majority of them haven't really bought-in to him yet. This is evidenced by his low fundraising numbers. Ask anyone why they like Mike and they'll tell you something like "he's a Christian, he's a nice guy/funny," and not stuff like "I like his ideas on the economy" or "I think he's got the foreign policy stuff figured out." Just like Fred and Rudy before him, they more people know about him, the more his support will erode.

To effectively reach Christians, give them Ron's statement of faith and info about his abortion views. Those two items alone will compel many to look into Dr. Paul. Share some of the videos on youtube as well.

[stewie3128]

#1 - In exercising his oath of office duties as President, I want a President that is foremost focused and dedicated to supporting, defending, and upholding the Constitution.

#2 - If he does #1, then my religious freedom to worship as I see fit without interference will be most assured and protected and prone to flourish, regardless of the Presidents own religious beliefs, or lack thereof.

#3 - A candidates religious beliefs and practices are of interest to me only to the degree that they might help illuminate or reveal his character and integrity to be, and remain, steadfastly committed to embrace #1 above, if elected.

- Shane

Applause.

[iella]

I wrote some thoughts on Christianity and government that may be useful if you are discussing Dr. Paul with Christians.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=47829

[JustAnotherV]

I'm a Christian and I guess I'm not seeing your point..We shouldn't recruit the hardline Christians?

I'm as evangelical as it gets, and I believe that Ron Paul is the hope for this nation. The dealbreaker for most people is the Iraq War. What we need is a way for Christian supporters of Ron Paul to logically defend Ron Paul's stance on the Iraq War.

When we do that, the other stuff falls into place. If anyone can help me do this on a large scale, please let me know in this topic.



Shouldn't is a judgment call. My point was meant to be about efficiency and who is open to being convinced. There are many flavors of Christianity, and maybe flavors of evangelical. The more fundamentalist things become, the less arguing logical points to validate Ron's stances will work. Some people are following tradition, family, what they have been told, or employing circular logic. If someone has made up their mind already it is highly unlikely that debating will change it. Thus the goal was to target the most receptive people by tailoring the message in a way that appeals to the sensibilities that they hold.
We are not going to out-baptist Huckabee. But we might be able to show more though, care, and compassion in our philosophy. This applies to the others to, because they are all basically talking points and vapor, at least in their political lives. We have truth and reason on our side. I'm suggesting we use them on those who will respond the most to that.




RE: The War

It depends what you are up against, but I seriously do believe that both "Just War" theory and the actual teachings of Christ in the gospels are pretty anti-war.

Put in the spot, I have never heard anyone come up with a good rationale for the Iraq war. It's all excuses. "Saddam wuz bad," "we thought there were WMDs," "the Iraqi people wanted us to," "it was a mistake but the world is better off," etc. It is too bad that you can't turn it around and ask them to find where in the gospels it tells us to wage war on nations or spread our way through force. That would be a stumper.

Some people ask, "what would Jesus do," and I am pretty sure the answer would not be bombs and tanks. What happened to turn the other cheek? Do onto others? Love thy neighbor?

Huckabee quoted "to the least of these" in a debate and yet he's pro war. I think Iraqi civilians qualify for that, but we have caused much pain for them. I think prisoners qualify for that and only McCain is strongly outspoken on torture, although that is a "war on terror" issue more than an Iraq war issue.

Based on its tenets alone, Christianity has many reasons to be pro-peace. It's the flawed side of people that are somehow aligning it with war. I's not about the teachings of Jesus, it's about fear, power, greed, and corruption. I balk every time I see some minister preaching while promoting war at the same time. It's ludicrous, and yet no one in the main stream has significantly challenged that trend.

[DeadtoSin]

That is what I'm saying though! The Christians of the Ron Paul Revolution have to unite and challenge their churches on the Iraq War. It isn't that we love war, it is that some of them have been bamboozled into thinking that its the right thing to do.

What we do is win over the leadership in the churches. The leadership in most churches want whats best for their church, so if you can win them, you'll have won the rest of the church.

[JustAnotherV]

That is what I'm saying though! The Christians of the Ron Paul Revolution have to unite and challenge their churches on the Iraq War. It isn't that we love war, it is that some of them have been bamboozled into thinking that its the right thing to do.

What we do is win over the leadership in the churches. The leadership in most churches want whats best for their church, so if you can win them, you'll have won the rest of the church.


I salute that. I guess I don't know how possible it would be to do, but I definitely support it if it's possible.

[DeadtoSin]

I just wish there was an organized site to really and truly aid in this.

Churches work from a top-down type of perspective for the most part. When you win over the leaders of a church, you greatly sway the other members on important issues as well.

If there was a site where we could organize information and tactics to do so, we could win over the "Evangelical" vote, and the more "moderate" vote as you say.

There are many Christians who could get behind this message, and I think this should be one of our next massive undertakings.

[davidhperry]

That is what I'm saying though! The Christians of the Ron Paul Revolution have to unite and challenge their churches on the Iraq War. It isn't that we love war, it is that some of them have been bamboozled into thinking that its the right thing to do.

What we do is win over the leadership in the churches. The leadership in most churches want whats best for their church, so if you can win them, you'll have won the rest of the church.

I think there are two practical things that we can point out - both have been effective for me.

1. If people are reminded that going into Iraq was a preemptive and aggressive thing to do, it doesn't sit well with many folks. This country shouldn't be provoking wars - how is that following in Jesus' example?

2. Also, the foreign policy is bankrupting this country so being in Iraq is moot anyway. I even go so far as to concede that there may be some good aspects about being in Iraq but it doesn't matter because we're going broke. There are a lot of things in life that I probably should be doing but I just don't have the money. We can't afford to keep borrowing and spending like we are.

What do you think about those?

[iella]

I just wish there was an organized site to really and truly aid in this.

http://www.christiansforronpaul.com/

[DeadtoSin]

Why thank you for pointing that site out. Pretty clear name..heh..

[noztnac]

I would make the following statement:

"I'm Ron Paul. I believe strongly in the separation of church and state because an individual's personal belief system is too important to be dragged into the ugly arena of politics. We live in a nation where we are free to believe whatever we want to believe. It's none of the government's business."

[davidhperry]

I just wish there was an organized site to really and truly aid in this.

Churches work from a top-down type of perspective for the most part. When you win over the leaders of a church, you greatly sway the other members on important issues as well.

If there was a site where we could organize information and tactics to do so, we could win over the "Evangelical" vote, and the more "moderate" vote as you say.

There are many Christians who could get behind this message, and I think this should be one of our next massive undertakings.

I agree totally that this should be a priority. I would definitely try to meet with your church leaders and share Dr. Paul's statement of faith. They probably won't be able to endorse a candidate but they may let you post things around the building and pass out materials.

If you haven't seen it, there is good info at http://www.christiansforronpaul.com/

[Mark Rushmore]

I posted this elsewhere, but... the bottom line with a lot of born-again Christians is that the Bible prophets warned that in the "end times", there will be a tyrannical, one-world government that will control the entire earth, force people to receive a mark (chip) in their hand or forehead (I.D.), or use the number of the beast to buy and sell anything...

You've reminded me of something. For a long time I've been pushing an allegorical article that roughly traces the problems with our fiat money system. At the end of this piece is a bit of editorializing that briefly touches on chipping etc. Now like I said I've been pushing this piece as an educational tool for a long time - so perhaps I'm just excited to give it one more link. I do not know if it is at all the sort of thing that might tie together the monetary policies and a Christian fear of chipping. In the actual article there is no substantive link, merely an allegorical progression - still I wanted to offer it in case someone with a better sense for these things might find it useful.

The piece in question. (http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/hannigan092099.html)

[Alan84]

I've written a letter that speaks directly to born again Christians about Ron Paul.
http://files.meetup.com/509308/christian_general.pdf

Those are great. What about including something about the Iraq war? And not only that it was undeclared and backed by the people through the congress but that it was a direct assault on the Christian Just War tradition?

[peacemonger]

I'm a Catholic. Ron Paul's message is perfect for Catholics because it is PERFECTLY in line with church doctrine and many of his speeches sound a lot like the things John Paul II used to say.

Check out this website too:
http://catholicsforronpaul.blogspot.com/
:D

[peacemonger]

Here are answers to questions about the Christian "just war" tradition.

http://catholicsforronpaul.blogspot.com/search/label/Just%20War

"I have also acted to protect the lives of Americans by my adherence to the doctrine of “just war.” This doctrine, as articulated by Augustine, suggested that war must only be waged as a last resort--- for a discernible moral and public good, with the right intentions, vetted through established legal authorities (a constitutionally required declaration of the Congress), and with a likely probability of success." --- Ron Paul

Here is another link about just wars:
http://www.americancatholic.org/News/JustWar/justwar.asp

[pikerz]

This endorsement article might be useful.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin420.htm
By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
December 18, 2007

The article title is a hook, so dont panic when you see it.

[AggieforPaul]

My approach in discrediting Huckabee has been to expand on Paul's idea that the War in Iraq violates the Just War Theory of Christianity. Here's what I wrote on a Chgristian board I post at (formatted for Word because I dont see an HTML editor on the WYSIWYG)

President Bush has cited his Christian faith as a reason for his respect for the sanctity of life, and his opposition to embryonic stem cell research. He said after vetoing the stem cell bill, "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life…It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect” (1) He attributes his successes to prayer and his Christian faith, and has said he prays to the Lord for wisdom in making important decisions for the country. In this paper, I will attempt to prove that he has not correctly applied Judeo-Christian principles in his execution of foreign policy, and has not upheld a consistent life ethic. The Just War Theory of Christianity was first formulated by St. Thomas Aquinas. His criteria have been restated in modern terms by Dr. James Olson, former CIA case officer, in his text “Fair play”.

Firstly, “The war must be declared by appropriate legal authority; it cannot be waged by individuals or usurpers” (Olson 20-21). Does the war in Iraq meet this requirement? No. The Constitution specifically authorizes the Congress to declare war in Article I, Section VIII of the United States Constitution. In 2003, the Congress authorized the President to use force, which he did. But neither ever actually declared war on Iraq, and the President declared the use of force himself. Texas Congressman Ron Paul introduced a bill declaring war on Iraq, and then voted against his own bill. He is personally opposed to the war, but he wanted those who favored the war to declare it the way the constitution says to. Syndicated columnist John Bonifaz comments, “The founders were clear in their intentions. Thomas Jefferson called it ‘an effectual check to the Dog of war.’ George Mason said that he was ‘for clogging rather than facilitating war.’ James Wilson stated: ‘This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress; for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large’ Several years after the adoption of the Constitution, James Madison would write: ‘In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war and peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department.’” (2)

Aquinas’s second requirement reads, “A just cause is required, such as self defense, recovery of something unjustly taken, or redress of serious injury” (Olson 20-21). The Iraq war fails to meet the criterion as well. The Bush administration laid out two primary reasons for waging war. They claimed Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, and that he was in cohorts with Al Qaeda during the 9/11 attacks. Both of these allegations were proven false. The invasion was pre-emptive, the opposite of self defense.

Aquinas’s third requirement reads, “The state of going to war must have a righteous intention, namely, the restoration of peace or the promotion of some other good. Revenge, greed, thirst for power, desire for territorial gain, and hatred are not righteous intention.” (Olson 20-21) The Bush administration violated all four requirements by invading Iraq. They showed greed by sending the Iraqi oil law, a law which authorizes production share agreements, and increases profits of foreign oil companies, to the Iraqi council of representatives, and by requiring its passing as a benchmark for United States withdrawal. They arguably showed greed. by going after the only world leader who had attempted to assassinate President George Herbert Walker Bush. They inarguably have showed a desire for territorial gain. Despite boldly declaring “mission accomplished in 2003”, they have continued nation buildings efforts in Iraq. Finally, they showed hatred. Dehumanizing the terrorists has been President Bush's main rhetorical trick from the start. One can not win support for a foreign occupation if one can not make his constituents absolutely hate the enemy. President Bush has been very effective on this point with his fear mongering about terrorism. The most egregious instance was when he fabricated the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda to incite hatred, by reminding Americans of a horrible act of terrorism.

Later thinkers have added four more requirements. The fourth requirement reads, “The damage caused by going to war must be proportional to and not exceed the good to be achieved.” (Olson 20-21) This requirement has been violated as well. 3880 United States soldiers have died, according to the department of defense (3). 1.2 trillion dollars has been spent on this war (4).

The next requirement reads, “The war must have a reasonable probability of success. It is morally wrong to cause damage and expend lives in a futile or hopeful war” (Olson 20-21). Despite President Bush’s “mission accomplished” declaration in 2003, he admitted in 2006 that the Rumsfeld strategy had failed after the release of the Iraq Study Group’s findings. This requirement has not been met either. The sixth requirement reads, “Going to war must be a last resort. All nonmilitary means of achieving the same end must be exhausted before resorting to military force” (Olson 20-21). Former U.S. Treasury Secretary stated in his book that President bush had laid out plans to invade Iraq before 9/11 even happened (5). Furthermore, the United States was forced to enter the conflict unilaterally, due to the fact that the United Nations council felt that diplomacy had not been exhausted.

The final requirement reads, “Every reasonable effort must be made to avoid harming innocent civilians” (Olson 20-21) Alas, this criterion has not been met either. The Department of defense keeps no record of civilian deaths. However, the Lancet study (6) has the number over 1 million. More conservative estimates have it at nearly 1/10 that. Either number is wholly unacceptable. CNN recently reported that privately contracted blackwater agents fired unprovoked at fleeing Iraqi civilians. (7) This clearly does not constitute “every reasonable effort”.

It is my contention that the invasion of Iraq violated all seven principles of the Just War Theory of Christianity, and should never have been carried out by a President who claims to strictly adhere to Judeo-Christian ethics.


1: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/
2: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0128-08.htm
3: http://icasualties.org/oif/
4: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/business/17leonhardt.html
5: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/
6: http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html
7: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/22/iraq.blackwater.ap/index.html
|8: "Fair Play: The moral dilemmas of spying" by Dr. James Olson, former CIA Case officer, and current professor of intelligence studies at Texas A&M University, pgs 20-21)

[ionlyknowy]

I think you misjudge Christian fundamentalists - they are one of the most Constitution-loving groups in this nation, in many ways. Their "hard line" adherence to Biblical principles makes them easy to win over to Ron Paul.

I posted this elsewhere, but... the bottom line with a lot of born-again Christians is that the Bible prophets warned that in the "end times", there will be a tyrannical, one-world government that will control the entire earth, force people to receive a mark (chip) in their hand or forehead (I.D.), or use the number of the beast to buy and sell anything...

BOTTOM LINE with born-again Christians:

RON PAUL is the ONLY Presidential candidate who is actively fighting against this anti-Christ, anti-Bible, one-world government system.

The other candidates have sold out to the beast, or at least have given up fighting against the beast system.

There's all the ammo you should need to win over a true conservative, fundamentalist Christian.

.

The above comment is what got me into Paul's camp. I saw Paul mentioned on the news as the internets darling, I checked him out ended up on youtube...

then the anti - one world govt. sealed the deal for me. Now it is obvious that Christianity has been hijacked.

We must remind Christians that the bible says that in the end times there will be many false prophets and many will be misled. And that Christians will be tricked into believing fables. I think that this is pretty apparent of the Bush Admin. And will be of a Huck Admin.

[burningfur]

[QUOTE=davidhperry;662825]
I have good news though:

1. If all Huckabee has is the evangelical crowd, then that's probably not enough to propel him very far. He's pandering so hard to them that I suspect that he's not getting support from too many others. Remember, just 6 weeks ago he was nowhere in the polls so this is his "hail mary" play.
/QUOTE]



I remember watching a documentary about the 2000 or 2004 election

Basically, the GOP lost every major voting bloc. Jewish, Hispanic, African American, almost all of them...except for one.

Evangelicals. With that single voting bloc it more than made up for all the others.





Huckabee will run away with the evangelical vote if we don't do three things.



1. Expose his record (grassroots baby, no official campaign involved) (though I think many of the media outlets are helping dig his grave)

2. Send the 7 reasons Ron Paul Christian flyer far and wide.

3. What would also help would be airing that Jeremiah Black's Christian/Homeschooling commercial. That is an awesome, awesome ad.