"Can or should one as a believer-citizen today engage with conviction for their values without doing things that fuel the present cultural war? Is this question worth asking and pondering? The Manifesto simply says, "Yes." So that is the point. "

I agree that the question is worth asking and pondering. As such it behooves us to question the question. It seems that the posed question presupposes that a "cultural war" is bad and anything that Christians do to fuel the cultural war is to be avoided. And that Christians should sternly rebuke and repudiate other Christians who they think are fueling an unnecessary and provocative and alienating "cultural war".

This should naturally lead to the following questions. Does God hate a "cultural war"? Is a "cultural war" glorifying or unglorifying to God? Is a "cultural war" expressly against God's will? If being Salt and Light while fulfilling the Great Commission sparks accusations that a "cultural war" is being unnecessarily originated and waged by Christians, should evangelicals cease and desist so that they are not fueling a "cultural war"?

So then if the analysis turns to, "Well, perhaps a "cultural war" is permissible and arguably one should be waged, but HOW it's being conducted by those claiming to be Evangelical Christians should be re-examined", well that's an entirely different proposition. A "cultural war" may be precisely what God wants His soldier-servants of Christ to engage in, but the tactical campaign may need to be modified (or not be modified at all). And which evangelical Christian or group of evangelical Christians gets to say and determine for the whole indefinable mass of Evangelicalism how the campaign in a "cultural war" should be conducted?

P.S. Would the Evangelical Manifesto embrace the irenic approaches of Athanasius and Martin Luther??