Since the 2004 presidential exit polls showed the No. 1 issue in determining a voter's choice for president to be "moral values," media have been filled with voices urging the Democratic Party to claim its own set of Christian values in courting evangelical, Bible-believing Christians. What these columnists and pundits fail to acknowledge, however, is that Democrats have been about the business of trying to do just that long before any "Swift boat vets" appeared on the scene.

		Dianna S. Wentz is a Democratic political consultant and a consecrated diaconal minister in Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. She lives in Ross (dianna15229@aol.com).

Democratic strategist Bob Beckel opined nearly a year ago, urging Democrats to "let God back into" the party. A new progressive think tank, The Center for American Progress, brought religious study into its agenda early this year at about the same time the Clergy Leadership Network was formed for the purpose of speaking faith values to potential voters for the Democrats. Yet, these efforts (and others) failed to bring new evangelical or fundamental Christian voters into the Kerry column.

The reason? A failure to approach the subject on fundamental Christian ground.

As others have pointed out, the means and opportunity to speak biblical faith to Democratic platform values are there. But the question must be asked if this is a road the Democratic Party is willing to travel.

When asked about losing the presidential election because of a perceived lack of moral values, one Democratic icon properly responded that the party was not suddenly going to turn its back on the gay community or become pro-life. Yet, herein lies the quagmire in the Democrats' effort to court a certain segment of devout Christian voters. To claim Judeo-Christian teachings and beliefs as a reason to advance core Democratic principles of caring for the least among us, also means entering into a dialogue that could alienate some key Democratic supporters.

Perhaps this is the conundrum the Democratic National Committee's hierarchy fears. But, as the Scriptures say, we should not be troubled or afraid. For years, Bible-believing Democrats watched as Ronald Reagan (who by his own admission seldom attended church) was heralded by the Christian right which failed to offer a word of acknowledgment Jimmy Carter's way as he taught Sunday school while president.

As one who chose the Democratic Party because I am a Christian, I urge my party's leadership: Bring on this faith debate!

"The devil," wrote Shakespeare, "can cite Scripture for his purpose." So can political parties. But if that Scripture is true, there can be no argument that the Democrats should claim as much of Judeo-Christian values as do the Republicans.

The evangelical voters' arguments often hinge on abortion and homosexual acts as being sins based upon biblical teaching. In response, the Democratic believer frequently counters about not concerning one's self with the speck in another's eye, rather tending to the log in the accuser's eye. If the Democratic apologist is moved enough, he or she will point out how Jesus ushered in a new covenant to put others' needs above one's own, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc. And, true to the current debate, the Republican/evangelical responds by saying this is up to the church, not the government.

Why are we as Democrats who are Christian afraid to take the argument further? Yes, Jesus, the living, breathing, resurrecting Son of God would never advocate a mindset that calls solely for a person to pull himself up by his own bootstraps.

But, if Democrats are serious about tackling the Christian values debate, they will point to the other evangelical concern: faithful leadership, leading a nation as God has instructed man. The Deuteronomic Law given to people by God to establish rules and order, instructs those governing the nation to set aside part of the nation's crops and tithes to care for the poor, the alien, the widows and orphans among them. God does not instruct the tentmakers or the shepherds to care for the poor (they too are called to tithe), instead He places this dictate in the government's domain.

In other words, the same code by which the Christian right passionately votes on "moral values" also tells us that our nations' governments -- if we are God's children -- must establish and enact a policy of giving a percentage of its money and food to the least in the nation.

Bible-believing Democrats should also point to Psalm 72, in which we are reminded that the nation's leader is charged with defending the needs of the poor, delivering them when they call, crushing their oppressors; we even learn that cities are a good thing.

In short, we can say that cornerstones of the Democratic Party platform are exactly what God commands His nations to enact: providing for the least among us and caring for the forgotten souls in our city. In essence, opposing tax cuts for the wealthy is following God's instructions and enacting them is disobeying God. For a government to provide entitlement programs -- health care and food and shelter to its most needy citizens, etc. -- is to follow God's orders, to do otherwise is to directly disobey God. That's fundamental Christianity.

Gaining a portion of the evangelical Christian vote will help the Democrats win the 2008 presidential election. Democrats ought not fear entering into a fundamental discourse about what Christian policy should look like in our nation. The issue of whether it will alienate key supporters within the party who support abortion or who advocate an alternative lifestyle should not prevent this debate.

God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican. By the standards given to us in His word, both parties sin by failing to meet His direct commands and criteria. (This is where the forgiveness of Christ enters in.) Yet, currently, only the Republicans seem to care to speak the fundamentals to America's "moral voters."