Home > News > Moderate Evangelical Richard Cizik's Resignation May Not Stop Broadening of the Evangelical Agenda

Moderate Evangelical Richard Cizik's Resignation May Not Stop Broadening of the Evangelical Agenda

Reader Comments
Back to article

LOBBYING THE GOVERNMENT FOR MONEY..THE GOVT. HAS NO MONEY OTHER THAN WHAT IT STEALS FROM ITS CITIZENS..IF YOU WANT MONEY ASK THE PEOPLE FOR IT.DON'T ASK THE GOVT. TO STEAL IT FROM THE PEOPLE FOR YOU.

MR RIGHT of KY 3:39AM November 07, 2009

Related article on Edge -
Evangelicals force out moderate lobbyist
http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=84834
"gay activists say the loss of Cizik will further diminish the political influence of the NAE, believing the fundamentalist movement may be teetering on the brink of political irrelevance."
"Among the things the NAE board found most objectionable were comments Cizik made supporting civil unions - Cizik noted 52 percent of evangelical youth support civil unions or marriage equality - and his own consideration of marriage equality for same-sex couples.
"I’m shifting, I have to admit. In other words, I would willingly say I believe in civil unions. I don’t officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition, I don’t think," he said during the interview."

simpleso of CA 1:30PM January 24, 2009

not whatever any ancient scripture might land on. I applaud Cizik's stand on the environment and his considering support for civil unions is a very large step for someone of this background.
However, those claiming that they want same-sex couples to have legal protections while opposing civil marriage are on the wrong side of history. In the US, marriage is not just a matter of church law; the word "marriage" is included in family and probate law; and since there are so many people in the US who are still determined that same-sex unions will get no recognition nor respect whatsoever, sooner or later same-sex couples who thought their civil union would be good enough will be told in a hospital, workplace or court: "yes, that protection applies to married couples but not to you." And sooner or later one of these couples will have the courage and the legal ammunition to file a lawsuit and the Supreme Court will end it.
And we'll get the predictable howls of outrage that "the people" don't get to vote on civil rights, just as we did in the racially-based civil rights movement of the 1960s. As usual, the churches will get on board at precisely the moment that their doctrines are sufficiently disconnected from the larger culture as to become unreal to a critical mass of the faithful.
It'll happen. After all, even the Vatican eventually admitted that Galileo was right.

"Mary Hays" of MO 11:22AM January 16, 2009

I do believe that the Bible defines marriage as between a man and a woman. What I don't believe is that the Bible completely limits the civil rights of those who commit a personal "sin". I use the quotes because I'm not so sure that our forefathers who lived in biblical times ever dealt with a homosexuality that was monogamous and loving. It seems like what they dealt with was homosexual orgies and purely carnal desires such as older men have sexual relations with younger boys (who may or may not have given consent). Please note that I just used the phrase "such as", implying that was not the only they dealt with.
Anyways, today, I believe homosexuality is different. I'm not sure that it is okay with the Bible. But I don't believe that it's okay to say that one person can not be allowed to see their dying loved one in the hospital when it was that person is the one who had cared for them for most of their life. And to say that they can not have insurance under the other's name simply because they're gay is not right either. It implies in other similar situations, as well, but this is only half the point.
To say that all other cause pioneered by Richard Cizik are all nullified because of this is completely moronic. I have choice words to describe Tony Perkins that I will refrain from using in the public arena. But I believe in telling it how it is and last time I checked, God can be pretty vulgar in his descriptions of the ugliness in a situation (i.e. Eze 23:29-21). The man stems from a group of racists (which included Dr. James Dobson) forged together by the late Jerry Falwell who switched to hating on homosexuals after they got beat up in the Supreme Court over the Bob Jones University debacle with their completely racist admittance policies. This only further serves to prove the hate that fills their hearts. They are not of Christ, but rather of the world.

Pobreza Amada of TX 11:35AM December 19, 2008

As a child in inner Angola seventy years ago with pioneer missionaries, I saw all 10 to 16 year-old Africans being sexually active in promiscuous hetero- and homosexual unions. Marriage was the weakest social link in that animistic society which was going nowhere. Now, here post-Christian American relativists, with no reliable Bible or any other other firm anchor in the rushing flood, are applauding and promoting exactly that same life-style for here and now.
As in most of the Cizik drama comments here before mine, they condemn Biblical Evangelicals as hateful, bigoted "homophobes". God may give them over to the "loving" libertinism they avidly campaign for. If so, seventy years from now, to quote the terrible words of Jesus, "the final condition of that (America will be) worse than the first."
God have mercy.

Peter Muir of GA 1:16AM December 19, 2008

Cizik has been a real force for a broader agenda for evangelicals more consistent with the Gospel message than the typical stereotype of evangelicals. It was very valuable to have him at NAE. Because of his identification with NAE, it was unwise for him to publicly state his Presidential vote or his stand on civil unions. In his position, such statements seem to be speaking for NAE. So NAE had little alternative but to separate from him. I'm sure he'll continue to be an important voice post-NAE, but we will really miss his presence at NAE.

Bill Samuel of MD 8:26PM December 15, 2008

As typical with fundamentalists, they have this overwhelming desire to create a theocracy in this country. They would be wise to remember how much disdain Jesus had for the so called "holy leaders" at the time. These are the same type of people who used the Bible to uphold slavery and deny women the right to vote just to name a few. So it doesn't surprise me they would try every trick in the book to deny gays the same legally protected privilege they themselves enjoy. It's time for the moderates in this country stand up to the continuous browbeating of religious right. We moderates need to get off the fence and stand beside gays in their struggle to achieve equality in this country. Because if gays can't achieve equality what hope do other groups have. It's time for this country to treat "all people" and "protect all people" equally under the law, even it the law bumps heads with religion. Wonder what Prop the fundamentalists are plotting next. Stay tuned...

Michael J of OK 3:00PM December 15, 2008

As typical with fundamentalists, they have this overwhelming desire to create a theocracy in this country. They would be wise to remember how much disdain Jesus had for the so called "holy leaders" at the time. These are the same type of people who used the Bible to uphold slavery and deny women the right to vote just to name a few. So it doesn't surprise me they would try every trick in the book to deny gays the same legally protected privilege they themselves enjoy. It's time for the moderates in this country stand up to the continuous browbeating of religious right. We moderates need to get off the fence and stand beside gays in their struggle to achieve equality in this country. Because if gays can't achieve equality what hope do other groups have. It's time for this country to treat "all people" and "protect all people" equally under the law, even it the law bumps heads with religion. Wonder what Prop the fundamentalists are plotting next. Stay tuned...

MichaelJ of OK 3:00PM December 15, 2008

The fundamentalist reich create an atmosphere condusive to brown-shirted thugs. Post-prop 8 projections are for more gay bashing deaths across the country. Focus on that, family!

Marco Luxe of CA 7:03PM December 13, 2008

http://www.mlive.com/kzgazette/news/index.ssf/2008/12/petitions_target_rescinding_ne.html
This article discusses Christians in Michigan actively passing petitions in their churches to re-legalize discrimination against gay people. Their hatred goes far beyond gay couples and their relationship status whether called "marriage", "civil unions" or something else. The Kalamazoo ordinance which the fundamentalists are attempting to overturn at the ballot box provides limited protection within its city's borders against discrimination in employment, housing, credit, etc. But this is simply too much for John Q. Fundamentalist to bear. Once they gather enough signatures in their churches (and they will), the good citizens of Kalamazoo will be subjected to radio/TV/print ads, flyers, door-hangers and any other medium used in the past by Fundmentalists to whip up anger and build their case for gays as scapegoats for society's problems.
So Mr. Cizik's, the talk of "civil unions", when many fundamentalists are still fighting basic human rights / non-discrimination laws across the country, to them, is so far out in left field, it's damnable heresy. Thanks, Mr. Cizik, for trying. Maybe someday your fellow evangelicals will "see the light", but today isn't the day.

Stephen of CO 8:10AM December 13, 2008