Is there room for Christians in a Harris presidency?

During an event at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse last week, presidential hopeful Kamala Harris was heckled by a couple of students shouting “Jesus is Lord!” as she began stumping for abortion.

“You guys are at the wrong rally,” the Vice President shouted disapprovingly at the lads, who have since relayed their story to several news outlets.

“I think you meant to go to the smaller one down the street,” she added, to the delight of jeering crowds.

 Harris’ remarks have been interpreted by her critics as a repudiation of Christians and even of Christian belief.

To be fair, it is equally possible that Harris only meant there is no room for pro-lifeChristians at her rallies — though I’m not sure this is a winning message either.

 

icon

Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

Certainly, Harris’ on-the-spot reaction stands in contrast to that of JD Vance, who has since responded to an almost identical shout of “Jesus is King!” at one of his events with a warm affirmation of the same. 

Both Kamala Harris and JD Vance are professing Christians — the former with nostalgic ties to the Black Baptist tradition and the latter being an adult convert to Catholicism.

The parties they represent, however, are much further apart on the religious spectrum. While the GOP has long enjoyed strong support from evangelicals and tends to wear its (largely Christian) faith on its sleeve, the Democrats have in recent decades embraced a stridently secular outlook.

As Mercator editor Michael Cook remarked to me this week, “Kamala, Biden, and Walz are all post-Christian politicians appealing to post-Christians.” It’s hard to argue with this assessment.

The dismay Christians may feel at Kamala’s comments in Wisconsin, in other words, says less about Kamala’s Christianity or otherwise — and more about the fading importance of Christianity in the American body politic.

“I bet if she thought that votes were in the Christian camp, she would be singing ‘Hallelujah’ at every rally,” Michael further remarked to me.

In fact, as though to prove Michael right, that’s essentially what Harris did on Sunday, when she attended New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Stonecrest, Georgia as part of her “Souls to the Polls” campaign aimed at reaching out to black churches. She even spoke at the church service and gave a short reflection from the gospel of Luke about the Good Samaritan. 

Call me a cynic, but I have questions.

Whatever happened to the separation of church and state? I could have sworn we’re supposed to keep religion out of politics. In fact, I’ve been sternly warned that when politicians promote Christian beliefs and values, they are committing Christian Nationalism.

So, just to get this straight, Christian Nationalism is okay when it’s done in furtherance of progressive causes? Politicians are allowed to quote the Bible in support of open borders, abortion and economic redistribution — but not to promote national sovereignty, individual liberties or family values?

That does seem to be the rather tortured message emanating from Kamala’s campaign. Jesus is Lord when it comes to Democratic-voting black churches, it seems, but not when Christian college students care to speak up for the rights of the unborn.

It’s a universal truth that politicians pander. As such, my deeper questions are directed not at the Kamala Harris campaign, but her fanboys over at Evangelicals for Harris (which includes none other than the board chair of Christianity Today, the magazine founded by evangelist Billy Graham) and the assortment of other Christian leaders singing her praise like popular pastor Ray Ortlund and New York Times “evangelical, pro-life conservative” columnist David French.

Granted, Donald Trump has given Christians enough reasons to doubt his profession of faith and fidelity to Christian values. By these parameters, it is understandable that some evangelicals cannot in good conscience vote for him.

But openly supporting Kamala Harris and encouraging Christians to vote for her?

It’s not just a pair of pro-life teenage trolls in Wisconsin to have felt her wrath.

While Attorney General of California, Harris famously persecuted pro-life, Christian journalist David Deleiden for exposing the trafficking of aborted baby body parts. She has called for Roe v Wade to be codified federally, and is the only sitting vice president to have toured an abortion mill. Indeed, the Biden-Harris administration has weaponised the Department of Justice to put pro-life protesters and other political opponents behind bars.

Meanwhile, her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, has presided over the most radical abortion laws in the United States, having made foeticide legal at all stages of pregnancy in his state.

Whether the “evangelicals for Harris” crowd has turned out at her events or are mostly making their case from the safety of a keyboard, her message couldn’t be clearer.

You guys are at the wrong rally.   


Is Kurt being too harsh on Kamala Harris and her evangelical supporters?    


Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate architect, a primary school teacher, a missionary, and a young adult pastor.

Image credit: Kamala Harris at New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Stonecrest, Georgia


 

Showing 25 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • mrscracker
    It’s true Mr. Steven. Whether I’m served up feticide on a Wedgewood plate, Holocaust Denial on Spode, or Mississippi appendectomies on Limoges I’m still sending it back to the kitchen in its entirety. Fancy china & all. You can’t dress up gross human rights violations.
  • Emberson Fedders
    commented 2024-10-25 11:47:21 +1100
    I agree with your comment, Mr Meyer. I would suggest that that uncompromising position is what is so off-putting to women.
  • Steven Meyer
    commented 2024-10-25 08:39:40 +1100
    Peter, Anon Emouse,

    You are not going to change mrscracker’s mind about abortion.

    Arguments about abortions in the third trimester are red herrings . So are arguments about traffickers, coercion or whether abortion has an adverse effect on the health of women.

    mrscracker is uncompromisingly opposed to any and all abortions no matter what the circumstances. Full stop.
  • mrscracker
    It was referencing the reasons given by mothers for all acts of legally enshrined feticide Mr. Mouse. I would differ a bit on that because I know from mothers who come to our local homeless shelter there’s is also pressure & coercion from men, traffickers, & the mother’s family. They had one 15-year-old girl who had been trafficked to men by her own mother.
    Over six thousand lives taken in the final trimester of their development is more than 3 times the population of the county we lived in.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-25 03:01:45 +1100
    mrscracker, i fear you, too, need to brush up on your reading comprehension. I said that the vast majority of abortions are performed before the third trimester (which is true, Peter showed that 1%).

    I said that they were performed for health reasons IN THE THIRD TRIMESTER. Your source doesn’t specify that; I’m guessing they’re talking about abortions performed in the first trimester.
  • mrscracker
    Over six thousand human lives taken surely counts for something beyond a statistic?
    And no, I’ve not seen any data that shows feticides committed are largely for health reasons. Per the Guttmacher Institute, hardly a prolife advocacy group: ‘The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%)."
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-24 21:12:35 +1100
    Peter,

    None of what you typed contradicted what I said. They make up less than 1% of all abortions. Maybe you need to keep up with your reading comprehension?
  • Peter Murphy
    commented 2024-10-24 17:09:49 +1100
    You need to keep up with the science, Anon!
    There are thousands of abortions in the third semester.

    According to the National Institutes of Health:
    “Most abortions in the United States take place in the first trimester of pregnancy. 1 Abortions at later gestational durations are comparatively uncommon: only 1.0% of abortions take place at or after 21 weeks after the first day of the pregnant person’s last menstrual period (LMP)”.

    According to the PEW Report:
    “The last year for which the CDC reported a yearly national total for abortions is 2021. It found there were 625,978 abortions in the District of Columbia and the 46 states with available data that year, up from 597,355 in those states and D.C. in 2020. The corresponding figure for 2019 was 607,720”.

    And, so, in the US, there are approximately 6,260 abortions in late second trimester and the third semester.

    That’s what I’m talking about, Anon.

    Also, read the evidence for what happens to aborted fetuses that survive the abortion. It is gruesome reading!
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-24 13:43:20 +1100
    Peter,

    The vast majority of abortions occur in before the third trimester. Those that have them are almost always for health reasons. These are people who wanted to have children, and have started to build a nursery and pick out names, who are having to make the most difficult decision of their life – it’s never taken lightly. In the third trimester it is never done as a form of birth control, it’s almost always done because of the health of the fetus (eg being born, knowing nothing but pain in a cruelly short life) or the mother. These abortions that are performed are backed by science.
  • mrscracker
    I rely on science and commonsense to tell me what human life consists of and that all lives deserve human rights. Not the UN. It wouldn’t be the first time an agency showed prejudice against a certain population. We’ve been through eugenics and other ideologies based on junk science before. This is just another.
  • Peter Murphy
    commented 2024-10-24 09:04:54 +1100
    Being opposed to abortion is not necessarily a religious belief; it can be based on science. Have you seen an abortion in the third trimester? If not, you should. Then try telling me that the aborted fetus is not a human being!
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-24 08:04:19 +1100
    It’s not rights, mrscracker. The United Nations has deemed access to abortion a human right
    https://reproductiverights.org/un-human-rights-committee-asserts-that-access-to-abortion-and-prevention-of-maternal-mortality-are-human-rights/

    So you’re seeking to limit the rights of pregnant women based on your religious beliefs.
  • mrscracker
    It’s not about religion but about human rights Mr. Mouse. We can all support human rights. Religion is not a requirement.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-24 00:12:59 +1100
    mrscracker,

    Your picking and choosing of what Christian principles you wish the government to enforce on your behalf (e.g. abortion) and ones you say are left up to the individual (feeding the hungry, clothing the naked) just furthers my point in another thread that the unborn are a convenient group for you to advocate for, as it requires no real effort on anyone’s part.
  • mrscracker
    I don’t know the answer to your question Mr. Steven but I suppose we’ll have to wait and see.
    You know, Matthew 25 is directed to each of us, not our government. Christ asks what you and I have done for the least of our brothers. And sisters of course.
    When I make a decision who to vote for I don’t base that upon their personal affairs but on their policies and past performance in office.
    When the rubbish collector contracted by our local government does his job dependably that’s all I’m concerned about. What he does off work is his own business. God can read hearts and minds but we can’t.
  • Peter Murphy
    commented 2024-10-23 17:23:51 +1100
    It’s amazing, and to be expected, that Jurgen Siemer interprets dissenting comments as “angry”!
    Nothing “angry” about these comments at all, Jurgen. Just a different opinion based on facts, unlike Kurt’s article.
    Cheers!
  • Jürgen Siemer
    commented 2024-10-23 16:17:13 +1100
    Dear Kurt, your article is well written and elaborates interesting thoughts. Thank you!

    The fact that you have successfully provoked those angry comments from the usual suspects so quickly indicates to me, that you have hit the nail in its head.

    Congratulations!
  • Steven Meyer
    commented 2024-10-23 09:41:15 +1100
    Is there room for anyone who takes seriously the teachings of Jesus in a Trump Administration?

    What would Jesus say about Trump?

    Mt 25:34-46

    34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.

    35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink; I was a stranger and you welcomed me;

    36 I was naked and you clothed me; I was ill and you took care of me; I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

    37 “Then the righteous will say to him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and give you something to eat, or thirsty and give you something to drink?

    38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?

    39 When did we see you ill or in prison and come to visit you?’

    40 And the King will answer, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brethren of mine, you did for me.’

    41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

    42 For I was hungry and you did not give me anything to eat; I was thirsty and you did not give me anything to drink;

    43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me; I was naked and you did not give me any clothing; I was ill and in prison and you did not visit me.’

    44 “Then they will ask him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison and not minister to you?’

    45 He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you failed to do for one of the least of these brethren of mine, you failed to do for me.’

    46 And they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous will enter eternal life.”

    Trump (paraphrases):

    —They’re sending the inmates of their jails and lunatic asylums to Mexico to cross the Southern Border into the United States.

    —The drop in crime in Venezuela [as if anyone sane would believe Venezuelan statistics] prove they’re sending their criminals to us.

    —Haitian immigrants are eating your pets.
  • Julian Cheslow
    commented 2024-10-23 06:13:28 +1100
    There is a difference between being spiritual in your own life, and using the Bible as justification for laws that effect other people. And that is the difference Evangelicals don’t send to understand.

    Like I don’t care about other people being religious, and if being religious leads someone to do acts of service for others that is great. But as a bisexual person if you start going in about me being sinful and/or advocate laws that effect the LGBT community I will start having issues with you.
  • mrscracker
    I wonder what the response would have been if someone shouted out : “Allah is great”, instead? Mrs. Harris missed an opportunity at the rally to reach out to people of faith & let them know there’s room for each of them in the Democrat Party.
    I don’t think in reality that’s the case, but it would have been a good campaign strategy.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-22 23:23:49 +1100
    Meanwhile, let’s see how Trump handled hecklers at his rallies:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/12/trump-heckler-violence/

    Now, Kurt – that doesn’t seem very Christian to me. Does it seem very Christian to you? But do go on with your breathless pearl clutching and false hoods. It’s quite obvious where your biases lie.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2024-10-22 21:05:08 +1100
    Between Kamala and Trump, who attended church most recently?
  • Peter Murphy
    commented 2024-10-22 20:40:32 +1100
    Same old Kurt!
    Give me Harris over Trump any day.
    There is more to being a Christian than being anti-abortion!
    Enough said!
  • Emberson Fedders
    commented 2024-10-22 17:34:32 +1100
    Rarely does anything that Mahlburg writes stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

    At a political rally, Harris tells some pro-forced birth Christians they are at the wrong meeting. This is a political rally. They WERE at the wrong meeting and she was well within her right to say this.

    Then, she attended a church service and reflected on a story from the bible. Sounds like something a person of faith would do. Then, Mahlburg starts complaining about separation of church and state!

    “In fact, I’ve been sternly warned that when politicians promote Christian beliefs and values, they are committing Christian Nationalism.” And here we have Mahlburg playing his role as professional victim.

    Let’s be clear here, those accused of committing Christian Nationalism are never advocating Christian positions. In fact, rarely do we hear of “Christians” advocating Christian positions. I always laugh when I hear stories now of pastors telling the story of Jesus (looking after the poor, the sick, the vulnerable) to their congregation then having people come up afterwards and ask what’s with all the woke, communist crap?

    Mahlburg’s understanding of Christianity is mostly performative. People like him use the bible as a cover for their bigoted and fearful worldview.

    He then ends his piece by talking about David Deleiden, who famously released videos that were aggressively and misleadingly edited to suggest that Planned Parenthood was selling body parts. Is that the best you can come up with? How dumb do you think the reader’s at this site are? It’s kind of insulting.
  • Kurt Mahlburg
    published this page in The Latest 2024-10-22 15:22:08 +1100