Reply #28: I think we are on the same side here [View All]

[slackmaster]

Should the party be identified with gay rights?

The party should be identified with rights for everyone.

Should the party be identified with the secularist "seperation of church and state" movement?

The party should be identified as accepting of all religious and secular viewpoints.

It should just say, "I'm not going to amend the constitution to single out any group for any reason, except to expand Democratic liberty" or "I'm not going to use the government to tell people what they should believe or which church they should attend." Always reply with a negative characterization of the GOP's views on these issues.

That is exactly what I have been saying since I have been posting on DU, though not quite so eloquently.

On the other hand, if you are talking about "national security Democrats," I will accept that the party must be seen as strong against terror.

A strong stand against terror does not require sacrificing the freedom of people who are not terrorists. My own Senator Diane Feinstein lost me several years ago when she and then-FBI Director Louis Freeh proposed a bill that would have outlawed use of strong encryption over the Internet for any purpose, unless the federal government was provided with a key. Is DiFi on the left because she supports public education and strong environmental protection? (And I do agree with her on those issues.) Or is she on the right because she supports police state policies? The answer is she is both. Pushing too far to the left or to the right ultimately takes you to the same place.