Now that Americans have had a chance to digest the political earthquakes of the last week and a half, a lot of conservatives are circling back to a major disappointment that, like most news, faded to the background when Donald Trump was shot. Even after the bombshell that Joe Biden is exiting the 2024 race, the mainstream media seems intent on returning to a thread that created big waves before the first shots ever rang out in Butler, Pennsylvania: a radically-rewritten GOP platform that leaves decades of pro-life and pro-family values behind.
“Under Trump, GOP Softens Abortion Stance,” headlines declared. Some wondered, “Is the Republican Party Becoming Pro-Choice?” Others were openly critical: “RNC’s New Abortion Stance Betrays GOP’s Founding, Pro-Life Activist Says.” The New York Times went a step further, blowing the doors off the RNC’s “ruthless” effort to hijack the process, “confiscating” delegates’ cell phones, refusing debate, and ultimately ramming the former president’s document through without amendments.
“This is something that ultimately you’ll pass,” Trump is said to have told the 112 platform delegates by phone. “You’ll pass it quickly.” He was right. A painstaking process that usually takes place over a series of days was reduced to a few hours that Monday morning, leaving most delegates wondering why they’d even come. It was “insulting,” many said, “demeaning,” “demoralizing,” even “despicable.”
Family Research Council’s Travis Weber, who’s been involved in previous platforms, was shocked at the attempt to “rig the process.” As he put it, “[T]here was an attempt to silence dissent.” Fellow FRC Vice President Brent Keilen agreed on this week’s “Outstanding” podcast, pointing out that delegates barely had a chance to read the document before the vote was called. “There was virtually zero debate.” As the Times described it, this was the result of months of careful planning. The RNC, led by Trump, would “steamroll” their vision to victory, which they apparently defined as a short, vague, diluted platform that read more like a campaign fundraising email than a guiding party light.
For longtime conservatives, the entire fiasco felt like a deep betrayal. Not only did the party of free speech silence its own, they walked away from decades of core, Republican values. “The content in the platform reflects what the Trump campaign feels like are their election priorities or what’s going to help them win in November,” Weber acknowledged. “… But the problem with that is, [the] party platform document is supposed to transcend any one election, [or any one] candidate.”
Keilen agreed. “I think kind of the fundamental issue here is the understanding of what the platform is supposed to be for. You have short-term implications, and you have long-term implications. And the short term is … we run on [this] for that next election cycle. … And that was the view that really kind of ruled the day [in Milwaukee]. But the reality is,” he underscored, “the platform really is designed to be kind of that statement of the movement, the grassroots leaders, the enduring principles [of the party].” Drawing on research that’s been conducted over the years, he reminded people that parties “on average vote in line with their platform about 80% of the time.” In other words, “Once it’s out there, it is guiding what members of that party or that movement look to as the standard. … But I think, fundamentally, that long-term aspect is what got overlooked in all of this.”
And as social conservatives, host Joseph Backholm pointed out, “[We] just want to remind people why [it’s significant that they] removed strong pro-life statements saying life begins at conception. It removed statements saying we believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.”
At the end of the day, it’s a huge mistake, the men agreed. “[They’re] abandoning and alienating pro-life voters who turned out in 2016 because of his promises on the life issue and in the court. …” And it seems, at least to Weber, that a lot of this is being driven by the media and the polling and advisors. … [But] Donald Trump’s never operated that way, though, so I don’t know why he would operate that way now. … I think it’d be better to stick with the base and ignore the polling.”
So what are Christians, who were pleasantly surprised by the 45th president’s commitment to principles like life, marriage, religious freedom, and human sexuality in his first term, supposed to think? Is it time to throw in the towel on politics? We say no, understanding that as people of faith we need to:
1. Be realistic about the parties and their candidates.
No politician is perfect, just as no party is — or will be. Moments like this force us to acknowledge the shortcomings of the political process in a fallen world. Jesus Christ isn’t running for office, and he isn’t gaveling either convention’s platform committee to order. As FRC President Tony Perkins advised after the frustration of this year’s result, Christians have to “go into the election with eyes wide open. We have to have discernment,” he urged. “And we have to understand that we’re not going to have perfect alignment [with any party]. And so, yes, we’re disappointed in this temporary setback. … [But] we have to be informed and engaged even when we’re not completely happy with what we’re dealing with.”
The reality is, Perkins pointed out on “Washington Watch,” “we have two parties, and you’ve got to be involved in one or the other if you want to make an impact on the political process.” Does that mean we put our full trust in those parties? Absolutely not.
“My hope is built on nothing less than the Republican Party platform — said no one ever,” Backholm quipped. “So whatever happens to the Republican Party platform, we can have preferences. And we, of course, want truth to prevail and reign everywhere. And that is ultimately the reality that Jesus will restore. But the fact that there is a war against truth is not news to us.” Nor should it be news that this war may, at times, come from the people and places we least expect.
2. Speak up when leaders abandon truth.
“[These were] hard fought battles over decades wiped out in hours,” FRC’s president lamented after being involved in the platform for the last five conventions. “It took us 45 years to get to where we were,” he said, looking back. “And so, to see a retreat in one day and not even have debate on it, it was wrong, and it cannot be tolerated.”
Ina conversation with Princeton Law Professor Robby George, Tony asked what he would tell Christians when their party departs from long-time positions that run parallel to their faith. “Tell the truth,” George insisted. “Tell the truth. In season and out of season, whether it’s convenient or inconvenient, whether it brings you applause or the opposite of applause — tell the truth. … Whether it’s a Democrat, whether it’s a Republican, if someone is failing in their obligation to stand up for the sanctity of human life and marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife and religious liberty and our core values, then I’m going to tell the truth about that.”
“God has entrusted us with this moment,” Perkins agreed, “and I think He’s entrusted us with this moment to be faithful to the truth, to proclaim that truth even when it is politically inexpedient.” Frankly, he told listeners, “… [A]s Bible-believing Christians, we must stand for truth — whether the current popular political party or candidate stands with that or not, I don’t care. I’m going to stand.”
He pointed to Ephesians 6 as encouragement, reminding Christians, “… [T]here’s going to be good days and there’s going to be some days like [July 8], bad days. But you know what?” he asked. “God sits on his throne, and He laughs at the nations who rage against Him and say that they can do it their way. God’s truth is enduring. That’s where we should stand, and that’s where we should move our communities [and] our country.”
3. Find the candidate that most closely aligns with your biblical values, no matter how imperfect the choices may be.
How do we approach a situation where “you have two options,” Travis asked, “and neither of them totally lines up with the biblical position?” It’s not simple, Backholm replied. “While we’re frustrated in one sense about the weakening of certain statements — on the other hand, the [Democratic] option being presented to us is a statement that has declared war on the created order and everything God said is good in Genesis 1 and 2.” The unfortunate reality, he went on, is that “we, as Christians, are always in a situation of having to navigate life in a sinful, imperfect world. … The political environment that we’re living in is imperfect and in large part governed by sinners. And of course, what other choice is there? We still have this duty to use whatever authority and opportunity God gives to us to make the best of this situation that God has found us in.”
Keilen agreed that the church is always going to wrestle with the shortcomings of political candidates and parties, especially when they abandon principles that used to be non-negotiable. Even so, he said, “We do have track records to look at for both candidates at the same time. You have what Trump did while he was in office — appointing Supreme Court justices that did overturn Roe v. Wade. [He was] the first president to speak at a March for Life and things like that. And then you have President Biden’s record, which just really, really aggressively pushed abortion at every turn, using every executive agency [to push] taxpayer-funded abortions. And so I do think that has to be part of the equation, too.”
So yes, “On the one hand, we want to be forthright with what this platform is versus what it was in 2016. We want it to be the best it possibly can be,” but let’s face it, Brent said. “There’s also some good stuff in it. It talks about supporting the Bible in education. It has a very good section on religious liberty [and parental rights]. It talks about the need to foster patriotism and not push critical race theory [or radical gender ideology] through the government and things like that. And so there are a number of factors [to consider].”
When push comes to shove, Weber chimed in, “I still look at this [GOP platform] document as more aligned with my faith than the Democrats’ document and what Biden has done in office — and what [the party] would likely do going ahead. I still trust what Trump would likely do as more aligned with my faith than what the Democrat would. … I think a Christian still has to look at this and say, ‘What aligns with my faith? I can’t kind of opt out of the process, and I want someone who’s going to put policies in place that are mostly aligned with how Christians should look at the world.’”
4. Refuse to disengage — even if you're frustrated.
“Some people say, ‘Oh, you know, this political stuff, let’s just kind of stay out of it. We don’t need to be involved because our allegiance is to Christ first,’” Weber recounted. “… The problem with that is it’s not like [what’s happening in our nation] doesn’t matter. It does matter. But yes, our allegiance is still to Christ first. So the political decisions, the outcome of the election, does not occupy the top place on the throne, but we can’t throw it out in the trash can and say it doesn’t matter, because these policies do result in more or less unborn lives being saved, do result in more or less freedom, do result in more or less of an affirmation of the family — to say nothing for the implications of other issues globally [like] national security [or] the border.”
To walk away from the process because “it doesn’t fully line up with my values,” he warned, “would be a grave error. It’s also an error to modify or compromise or change the truth because we want to bend circ*mstances to achieve a political outcome.”
On this, Perkins was adamant. “Let me again be very, very clear, folks. We have to vote, and we have to have discernment. … [But] staying home, folks, is not an option. It’s not an option. I mean, not voting is a vote for the worst possible outcome.”
WhatAmericansneed to understand is that no matter what mistakes have been made, “we’ve got a choice — a very sharp, contrasting choice between visions and candidates.” Our job is to pray, to vote, and to stand. “The results belong to Him,” Perkins underscored. “The duty to obey is ours.”
Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.
