In central Virginia, in one of the more conservative sections of what is known as one of the most conservative congressional districts in the country, two very rightwingers are running for the Republican nomination for state delegate. Ed Scott is the incumbent. Mark Jarvis is the Christian Right activist challenger.
The big guy upstairs - as in, God - dominated discussion at Monday night's two-hour debate between incumbent Del. Ed Scott and the Rev. Mark Jarvis.
Former pastor at Open Door Baptist Church, Jarvis is challenging Scott, 39, for the District 30 House of Delegates seat in Richmond. The 54-year-old Christian activist has made religion a cornerstone of his bid to represent the constituency of Culpeper, Madison and Orange counties.
Scott, meanwhile, has held fast to a "commonsense" approach to government, "putting people ahead of politics."
More than 120 people packed the Depot meeting room to listen in on the candidates' debate - sponsored by the Republican Women of Culpeper - and to offer their inquiries for the two Republican candidates.
Both dressed in dark blue suits with red ties, Jarvis and Scott engaged in thorough, but civil discussion on a myriad of topics, ranging from the Teri Schiavo case to Hispanic gangs.
Scott defended his two-year record as Delegate, noting that all the legislation he sponsored was signed into law.
"I'm proud of my record," he said, mentioning new legislation that allows towns, for the first time, to take advantage of state revenue sharing funds for new roads.
Jarvis, on the other hand, returned again and again to the topic of faith and the "core values" that America has turned from.
Likewise, questions from the audience seemed most concerned with religious-based issue. Without God and the Bible, one cannot properly govern, said Jarvis, quoting from George Washington.
"Our country's relationship with the true God is what makes us different," said Jarvis, characterizing the recent decision by the Culpeper Town Council to remove invocations from meetings as `terrible.' "My goal is to invite the presence of God back into the public life."
Scott said "core traditional values" has been a priority during his two years as Delegate. He mentioned his support of House Bill 2615, later signed into law, which permits prayer prior to the official start of government meetings.
"I'm not running against Ed Scott," said Jarvis. "I'm running because I think we've gotten away from the core values that made our nation different. The whole purpose of making good laws is a reflection of our relationship with God."
Of the questions submitted by the public at Monday's debate, the single most common inquiry dealt with the issue of same sex marriage and homosexual rights, said moderator Cris Lindsay, Culpeper attorney.
"That's a hot button," said an audience member.
Jarvis was clear on his position.
"Homosexuality, I believe, is wrong," he said. "Like adulterers and fornicators, it is wrong and we are not helping them when we subsidize their wrong living," said Jarvis, referring to health benefits for same sex couples.
He challenged his opponent's voting record on the issue, saying Scott voted in favor of same sex benefits with his support of two House bills.
"Do I hate gays? No," said Jarvis. "I love them and I want to tell them the truth. When you subsidize wrong behavior we just get more of it."
Scott said his support of said House bills was a vote in support of health benefits for "thousands more Virginians" than just same sex couples. His vote, he added, was in support of farther-reaching health benefits offered through small businesses.
"I fully support marriage between one man and one woman," said Scott.
The debate next turned to another hot button issue - abortion. The question, posed to both candidates, was if they would favor a law to abolish abortion in Virginia.
"I don't anticipate seeing such a law," said Scott, referring to recent Supreme Court rulings on the topic.
However, he added, he has voted for a "number of pro-life initiatives" - tighter regulations on abortion clinics, abortion alternatives like adoption and the ban on partial birth abortions - and will continue to do so if re-elected.
Jarvis had a more stringent view on abortion.
"I would eliminate abortion because I think it is wrong," he said, adding that life begins at conception.
Then it was back to God.
"Does your God need your help in order to get into government?" asked Lindsay.
Jarvis agreed that God does in fact work through people.
"Most of us believe there is a God in heaven," he said. "If we're going to get good legislation in Richmond, he will use people like you and me."
Scott wasn't so sure that God needed his help.
"But I think God is alive and well in Richmond," he said, adding that `prayer is an active part' of each session.
Scott went on to say that the founding fathers intended that government should not establish religion, but that all Virginians should have religious expression. He said a very serious debate on the topic is underway in Richmond to amend the state constitution, expanding the freedom of religion "to make it welcome on all public property as well in schools."
Taking God out of government, said Jarvis, is revising history. One of the first acts of the colonists at Jamestown was planting a cross and saying a prayer, he said.
...
The final question, as expected, came back to religion - "If possible to pray in school, what prayer would you add?"
Citizens need to continue to uphold the traditions and heritage of Virginia, replied Scott. "Anywhere on public property, including our schools, folks should have freedom of religious expression," he said.
Jarvis said that everyone believes something. He also noted that studies have shown that churchgoers recuperate faster from illness than non-church goers.
"We're in trouble in America because we've pushed God out," he said. "There's a God in heaven and we need to get back to him."
District 30 voters can choose between Scott and Jarvis in the June 14 Republican Primary Election.
The unfortunate thing? No one else is running so far. Not a Democrat. Not an Independent. These guys are the choices.
So this is what one-party rule looks like. This is the nuclear winter after the nuclear option.