KTVO explains:
The son of evangelist Billy Graham told thousands attending the N-R-B convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, that if Bush is defeated there won't be anyone to stop the media from broadcasting pornography. He ... added that most of the media will "spin" stories against President Bush and for his Democratic rival, so it's up to religious broadcasters to "back God-fearing candidates" who'll stand against what he calls the "moral corruption that is coming like a flood against this nation."
Rhetoric like this, while common and predictable, is still a bit disturbing. Graham is basically saying that this god cares about the outcome of the next presidential election and, moreover, has a strong preference for one candidate over the other. Thus, Graham is suggesting that people who vote for Bush are being faithful and obedient to his god while those who vote for anyone else are being disobedient to his god - and, in essence, they are supporting the cause of his god's enemies, which must include Satan.
Is that the sort of message which any responsible religious leader should be communicating, whether subtlely or overtly? I don't think so. Graham isn't a responsible religious leader. It's one thing to say that there are religious values at stake when it comes to an election and even to point out that one candidate supports particular religious values while another one doesn't. It's quite another, however, to argue or suggest that a vote in an election is tantamount to a vote for or against God - especially when there are so many people who believe in the same god and who sincerely disagree with Graham's and Bush's politics.
Read More: