Was it conservative religious groups, the NRA, the Republican Party, etc., or was it St. Jude’s Children’s Hospitals, cancer research, or the humane society?  It make a difference….
199078
The best I've been able to find is: "Recipients of their charitable donations included George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates for the benefit of the Cardiothoracic Institute, the University of Wyoming Foundation and Capital Partners for Education, to benefit low-income high school students in the Washington area." Apparently when they release their taxes they only release their 1040s, which don't list the actual recepients of charitable donations.
476166
I'm not a republican.  Every day I consider myself more of an independent.  Republicans do not have the corner on blindness.  Labelling is not helping anyone.  My guess is that many republicans truly wanted to improve the lot in life for many in the middle east and elsewhere.  They were frustrated and wanted to confront murderous fanaticism.  They, like many of the majority, were misguided and not well enough versed in history to understand what we were getting into.  The real question is how do we make something decent come out of this horrible situation?  Education,  focus, open discussion, sheer will and avoiding cynicism (like we're doing now).  Merry Christmas!
318191
- Stem Cell Research\n- Abortion Rights\n- Capital Punishment
15238
The legendary Ronald Reagan either (1) didn't know about it, or (2) allowed it, or (3) actively ran an illegal war that had been specifically prohibited by Congress out of the basement of the White House.  Then, he gave a medal to the man who ran the war and called him a "national hero."  I'd say that affected the society.
353784
I do research. During the 2006 elections I went to a website called votersissue.org. Sometimes I just went and type the name of the person and a website detailing their stance on issues has been helpful. The media has pretty much mislabed politicians making one conservative where they were actually moderate. Making someone a liberal but they actually were a little to the right.
406622
The marriage of the current Republican Party to the religious right has done more damage to this country than Fat Man and Little Boy did to Japan in 1945. (Hiroshima and Nagasaki)
78176
Another moral question: Christian Republicans are pro-life, yet pro-war.
145305
Is there such a thing as Christian politics? Yes. And I think it's gone too far. I personally think that the Republican party has become a religious party. People are voting for republicans because they think republicans attend church more and are more faith based.\nMaking decisions based on faith without fully understanding a situation is dangerous in my opinion.
305351
That's simple. The health care and pharmaceutical lobbies are very strong and hold enormous influence over congress. Take a look at the numbers listed in the link, it is to a non-partisan, neutral website. Four of the top 10 organizations lobbying to congress are involved with health care. It is DEFINITELY not in the best interests of these industries to have national health care.
635632
yes there is a difference. The religious named hospitals all have religious names and the nonreligious named all have nonreligious names. What do you mean by "Religions?" If your wanting to know about Christian ideology and its involvement in the nuts and bolts of administration or patient care state it as such. I tend to think you are disturbed that those pesky Christians are involved in every area of life. If I was a Christian worker in the hospital I would give you the care  you needed. Would you in turn refuse to care for a injured christian if it was your job to provide care for the injured?  Love never fails you know
536852
Good question! I think it's a PR move. Shows the voters that they care about the issues they care about. It's more action.
511119
Last week's Newsweek had a wonderful article about Evangelical Christians' impact on laws and government, and developments of the Evangelical movement.\n\nI do believe that the fundamentalist Christian viewpoint is influencing policy a little too closely these days.  I believe firmly in the seperation of church and state, which is a founding principle of this country, despite what some folks will claim.  However, I don't necessarily think that mixing religion and politics is always a bad thing, particularly if it happens on an individual level.  By this I mean, for instance, a lawmaker who, because of his/her religious upbringing, values service to the poor.  Because he/she has this ethical value of helping the poor, he/she sets up a program in his/her district that offers skills training and assistance with job hunting to people on welfare.  \n\nHowever, when the mixing of religion and politics becomes more a matter of attempting to legislate a particular moral code or prohibiting certain things simply because this is part of this religion, then there is a problem.  I think we are seeing this in several areas.  The first is the constant attack on a woman's right to choose, which since Roe v. Wade is being steadily chipped away by legislation such as parental consent laws and the ban on third trimester abortions.  Another is the push and increase in funding to abstinence-only sex ed. programs in schools, which has been shown to be ineffective.  Speaking of abstinence-only, this also applies to AIDS relief funding.  The government requires AIDS-relief programs to spend a certain amount of money on promoting abstinence as a preventative measure, which has caused difficulties in many of these programs to effectively provide adequate preventative care.  There is a continuous push to teach "intelligent design," a theory with no backing from scientists (outside of a handful of Christian scientists), alongside the well-established evolutionary theory in public school science classrooms.  Less succesful has been efforts to re-establish official school prayer, although this issue pops up periodically (even though no-one is stopping students from praying privately in school, or establishing after-school prayer groups).  Funding has been effectively curtailed for stem-cell research, which has the potential to provide cures for several life-threatening illnesses, based on the fudnamentalist belief that human life begins at conception.  And of course, the current debate over gay rights and equal marriage.\n\nThere are also the self-stated goals of several Christian groups, to promote Christian values and the Christian way of life in government.  That doesn't sound so bad, if we're talking about promoting the values of "Love thy neighbor," "Turn thy cheek," "Blessed are the peace-keepers" and "Whatsoever you do onto the least of these, so to you do unto me."  However, when we start talking about things like, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," I get very nervous.\n------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nI got your e-mail, the answer is yes.  I couldn't reply to the e-mail because your e-mail address hasn't been confirmed yet.
517396
I see your point and have wondered that myself.  \n\nI know my 12 step group is more "religious" than my church as far as repeated traditions and regular meetings.  There is a set of beliefs, a text that all use, traditions, etc.\n\nHow about politics.....wouldn't democrats or republicans fit into this as well??\n\nGreat question, my answer is I dont really know when that point is crossed, but I appreciate your logic.\n\nDavid
112178
There are two types of Republicans in my opinion- those who are Republican because they are rich and enjoy the way our economy works, and those who are Republican because of their moral beliefs.  I think that when deciding which party to belong to, many Christians try to pick the lesser of two evils (ah, the irony).  They choose the Republican party because of their moral beliefs and then, with the other side of the Republican party's ideas in mind, spend their money to help the poor through their church rather than through their government.  There's far less bureaucracy if done this way, and you know your money will be going towards its intended use.  I also think there's more emphasis on homosexuality and abortion because for one, the government has many services in place to help the poor and impoverished (redundant?), so their efforts are placed elsewhere.  I also don't think that in the time Revelation was written that abortions were as prevalent as they are now.  It's become a bigger issue, so people have made it a greater cause.  \n\nHowever, you pose an extremely valid question.  I've become increasingly fed up with the way big business works in this country (and others), and I really SHOULD do something about it.  I think you've just indirectly encouraged me to give more to Christian charities and pay way more attention to candidates and stuff.  I might even take up reading the paper again.  :P
523870
The conservatives give way more to their churches and charities. I'll find the link...\n\n"In 2000 [citing 2000 SCCBS data], households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more money to charity than households headed by a liberal ($1,600 to $1,227). This discrepancy is not simply an artifact of income differences; on the contrary, liberal families earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families, and conservative families gave more than liberal families within every income class, from poor to middle class to rich."\n\nGee, I guess the evil conservatives aren't really the rich ones either, huh? More money from less income.\n\nhttp://volokh.com/posts/1164012942.shtml
116273
Ronald Reagan did make a difference, as well as Pope John Paul II (he was into theatre). So I think that yes, you CAN make a difference in people's lives. :-)\n\nPublic speaking, documentaries, news broadcast (www.brightcove.com talks of Internet TV, interesting...), podcasting, etc.\n\nThere are so many channels through which you can reach people's eyes and ears. The main need, however, is for actors and leaders who can reach people's hearts.\n\nGood luck!
379174
Republicans realized it could be a wedge issue and capitalized on it. Interesting definitions of "marriage" given by responders above. They all sound religious. The topic, I believe is civil marriage -- marriage as recognized or performed by the state. \n\nThere are children in US institutions and foster care who need 2 parent homes. Gays should be allowed to adopt such hard-to-place children. This would probably occur defacto. Mothers giving up their babies  and agencies with young, easy to adopt children would continue to choose straight adoptive couples.