Democrats Should Oppose Empowering the Pious

[nightperson]

Warning: I'm an overt atheist and this is Tough on the DLC.

"Ms. Lincoln’s prescription for electoral success may make sense for Democratic politicians thirsting for office, but its unstated premise is one that should scare the bejesus out of any nonbeliever, if such a person is willing to so designate himself in a climate thick with assertions of the primacy of faith. Ms. Lincoln is saying, in effect, that if you don’t have faith, you have no place in the public life of the nation.

What’s going on here is intimidating people into uttering religious thoughts they do not mean and going along with the insertion of the religious interest and religious advantage into all and every aspect of public and institutional life...

The phony reverential attitude, the lowering of the eyes, the clasping of the hands in a way which denotes piety and pure living, the formulaic braying and the unarguable deference for any inanity so long as it comes from a religious source—it all follows....

What possesses the Democrats to play this game is beyond understanding. Their lately-come-by piety is not going to fool anyone other than themselves. The Democratic Leadership Council types are saying that Bill Clinton is an example of a politician who was able to talk comfortably about his faith, to use Ms. Lincoln’s phrase, but they’re kidding themselves. The religious people took Mr. Clinton for the lying whoremaster he regrettably was and broke their backs trying to drive him out of office on morals charges. They almost did it, too. If the leaders of the Democratic Party hope that they can fool the holy people by buying themselves white leatherette-bound Bibles and pink plastic Jesuses and turning up to give testimony at church, they’ve got another thing coming. That is going to hoodwink the same number of people who can’t see through it when liberals call themselves progressives. You know the old saying: "Just because he’s crazy doesn’t mean he’s stupid." The same for religious nuts.

When you consider the background of so many people in the Democratic Party, it is bewildering that they would take the risk of encouraging what can so easily become communitarian/sectarian conflict. The parents and grandparents of many of them suffered from the hatreds and violence which sprang from allowing religion the kind of role that the evangelicals are demanding. Now their grandchildren are willing to risk a reprise?"

I supported Kerry in the primaries but here is a quote I feel compelled to praise:

"I want my country back. We want our country back. I am tired of being divided. I don't want to listen to the fundamentalist preachers anymore. I want America to look like America.""-Howard Dean

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Shhh... here are two words that actually

can be brought into the democratic tool set and SCARE the jejeebers out of the Right.....


LIBERATION THEOLOGY....

Look it up....

Why do you think Archbishop Romero was killed?

By the Right WIng Death Squads?

THAT is the kind if theology Democrats should not run from, oh and disclaimer I am Jewish, before you say a think....

Read about it, becuase it is very much in agreement with Liberalism... and it accepts science and is close to the original meaning of Christianity... (and any ohter faith with a moral and ethical code)

[billyoc]

4. I must be hanging around with too many poor people,

those are the only kind of priests I've ever met. I gotta get around more. ;)

[SharonAnn]

6. Sigh, and i thought that was what we were moving towards,

"Liberation Theology". I started reading about it and studying it about 20 years ago and it gave me hope.

Then the right wing started fighting it everywhere, especially in Latin America, at least at first.

It's too much like real democracy, you know, the people have the power.

[Briar]

2. Hear! Hear!

"There are worse things than being accused of humanistic relativism and a proclivity for the rule of reason. Who knows, the D’s may be in for a surprise: On occasion, those who are true to themselves have been known to win an election."

[mazzarro]

3. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party is now more reactive than

pro-active. It is being shoved by the DLC to react to the braying of the mainstream media and I am afraid democrats will continue to suffer more national electoral defeats until the party realizes that standing for and proclaiming, succinctly, the principles of the party is what will engender its comeback. It is obvious that democrats need their own media megaphone - what currently exists as mainstream media does not serve the interests of democrats at all.

[eleny]

5. Calling Clinton a "lying whoremaster" is an attention getting point

One favorite thought in the article was this -
""Religion" and "faith" are pushing ahead on a common front now, but in due course they will fall on each other with mortal fury. History teaches that the one thing religions hate more than secularism is other religions."

And also the point that religion in government has had to be pushed to the corners before in our history. So, while I hand wring over what the halleleuja chorus is going to do with our country, it's a matter of time before they implode on themselves. Meantime, Dems cannot give in to what's being foisted on the majority by a minority block of voters.