Arguing over religion drives the wedge deeper, does Rove's work.

[patcox2]

This is basic political science, cleavage lines and wedge issues. Say you have a group of people, a bloc, bound together by a common interest, say its working people and their interest is in economic security (that would be the democratic party.)

Now if you are opposed to this group or bloc (say for example, you are a republican, its the late 1960s, and your party has been pretty much a hopeless minority for a generation or two), you need to find some way to divide the majority bloc (democrats), get them to split into two smaller groups over some other issue. You want to exploit what is called a "cleavage line." Religion is a cleavage line among the poor and working people, they all share the same economic interests, but, some have opposing religious and morality interests based on strongly held beleifs.

Well, thats what the republicans have been doing for the past 20 years, and it has worked. They have got the poor and the working people, who should be joining together to promote their economic interests, dividing into opposing camps over these religious/values issues. And its worked so well, that among those people who live in what has been called the "bible belt" for over 100 years (so its not new thing that southerners are more religious) this party is known as the gay marriage outlaw prayer in school and bring idiotic lawsuits over fucking irrelevant creches party.

Well, here is the ironic part; when democrats engage in this division, by bickering and arguing and denouncing either the religious or the non-religious, we are furthering our own demise. The answer to the republican use of religion as a wedge is not to beat back against the religious, that only increases the polarization and increases the effectiveness of the republican strategy and it guarantees that the poor and working, but religious people, will never again come back into our coalition which was and should be based on economic interests, and not gun control or feminism or creches or "in god we trust" on coins or gay marriage.

When religious issues come up, the only response that prevents further splintering and weakening the democratic party is "well, we all have our beliefs and in america the tradition is to agree to disagree on issues like that, now lets get back to the real issue, how the republican policies are raping the working men and women and enriching the richest 1%."

Filing lawsuits because their is a creche in the public square is dumb. Arguing like twits over matters of faith is dumb. Don't further the divide, don't polarize and alienate those who disagree with you over matters of faith, make the common bond the issue of economic class solidarity.

And if you think opposition to creche's is a do or die issue, and that its more important to win this one on principal than to just tolerate the fucking creche while finding common ground on the bread and butter economic issues that once united this party and made it the overwhelming majority in this country, than you are way way off in your priorities and you are part of the reason this party is losing, and further, you have been duped by a classic case of a wedge issue being used to divide, you are furthering and deepening the divide.

[DireStrike]

1. I'll agree 90%.

Mostly because of the word "arguing".

If you follow a religious argument to its conclusion in a civil manner, you end up with it coming down to faith. It can no longer be disputed, and you respect what the other person believes in.

Of course, very few people calmly and civilly follow religious arguments until the point is dead.

[patcox2]

6. I have rarely seen a debate here end in "respect."

Saying things like "deluded," "insane," "religiously insane," "beleiver in fairy tales," etc., does not indicate respect. Unfortunately.

But thats not the point; the point is that even having the argument can do nothing but alienate many people who would otherwise, or should otherwise, be democrats. So those who do not believe might want to consider just living secure in the knowledge of their superiority and put up with the huge imposition that their is a creche on the town square.

Also, for perspective, I don't want to hear any slippery slope arguments about this "if we don't fight them on the creche issue then next thing you know they'll be burning witches." Please recognize that the trend for the past 200 years has been from more to less religion in government and in public life. This recent noise from the religious is reactionary, it means they are losing, let them salvage their dignity.

[Az]

12. Its not an easy topic

I mean come on. The two taboo subjects in this society are politics and religion. The state of the various sides are also particularly problematic. In real life circumstances there is not a lot of chances for open expression between the sides. Thus there are not a lot of communication skills to be had when dealing with the opposition.

I can tell you from the atheist perspective that a lot of us feel truly oppressed and we feel oppressed by what we believe to be a lie. Christians like to play the oppressed card but I dare you to name one atheist elected official. When was the last time you heard of a Christian being assaulted for their beliefs in the US?

Yes some atheists refer to god and Christian as myths and fairy tales. Thats because that is what they believe it is. Really. Some have learned to couch their words in more polite veils but the truth is they believe that what Christians believe is wrong. Just as the Christians believe that the atheists are wrong.

Combine all this with the fundamentalists on the right decrying nonbelievers as the evil of the world and you have a difficult mix. And the solution is to stop talking about it? Bad idea. Best to get the topic out in the open and get people to learn to treat each other with respect on this highly volital topic. I don't see this as a possibility in a conservative forum. Do you? Then this is the best place to get this junk out in the open.

I am an atheist. I believe that those that believe in god or gods are wrong. I believe that stories about god and gods are myths. I do not disrespect people for believing these stories but this does not change the fact that I think they are wrong. I am quite willing to discuss such matters though and remain open to the possibility that I am wrong.

[patcox2]

43. The burdens of being an elite, you should be glad.

Hey, 50% of the people are below average in intelligence. If you are in the top 10%, that means 90 of people, the overwhelming majority, will be dumber than you. Elites are always a minority, and minorities, in a majority rule form of government, will suffer lots of disappointment.

By which I mean that there is a huge difference between having the freedom to beleive and/or say whatever one wants, and having the right to have everyone else accept that. You do have the freedom to beleive or say whatever you want. But you have no right, none whatsoever, to have everyone else like it or even accept it.

You are in the minority. And that means as a practical matter, you have to deal with the majority. Like being intelligent, that puts you in the minority, too. And if you act too intelligent in the wrong places (like in an election campaign) that will cost you, sometimes, because the stupid can be mighty tetchy and resentful of people who they think think they are better than them. So even though there are practical limits to my ability to express intelligence in american society (which is and always has been virulently anti-intellectual), I gladly accept those limits because I like being in this minority.

So thats why, even though I was an atheist most of my life, I never gave a rats ass whether any atheists held any public office, couldn't care less that there was a creche in my square, nor that the coins say "In god we trust." Made no difference to me. Didn't impact on me or my ability to hold whatever beleifs I wanted. Took it as kindof a compliment.

Groucho said I wouldn't be a member of any club that would have me. Here its the opposite, I'd hate what it says about me if the majority of americans accepted me or agreed with me.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Raise us above the distinctions and differences which divide

That's a line from one of my daily prayers. I think it is good advice for all progressives to take, whether they are believers or non believers.

I think your analysis was spot on. We need to concentrate on the economic issues, as you say, and stay away from the wedge issues.

[Az]

3. Blinding ourself to the nature of what we face is foolish

Religion is part of our society. Not discussing its ramifications is wreckless.

Religion is a driving force on the right. If we do not come to understand it we will simply be consumed by it. We need to figure out how to disarm the religious right. We are not going to convince them they are wrong but we do need to find a way to take away their desire to support the right.

We are in very real danger of entering a new Dark Age. This will be fostered by religious fundamentalists just as the previous Dark Age was. I for one will not turn a blind eye to religion simply because it makes some uncomfortable.

[Hamlette]

8. I agree with Az

fundamentalism is a real threat and so called religious moderates who believe the Bible is the literal word of God will help fuel the demise, not stave it off.

I agree we need to take the focus off religion and place it on other values, but to ignore it is dangerous.

Isn't the debate in the Middle East right now over how to get the moderates to stand up to the fundamentalists? We will be facing the same question here if we ignore it as the ME did.

Fundamentalism gains traction in times of change. In the US it started with the 60s when people of faith saw their values being eroded. I don't want to go back to the 50s when a woman couldn't get birth control let alone an abortion.

If you think we will find solace in other countries that won't happen either. The US will lead the world into darkness or light. We go back to the middle ages or we keep going forward.

The scariest part is that US fundamentalism has embrased monetary greed. If they can keep that going, we bring the whole world down with us.

[patcox2]

11. Sorry, I disagree, no danger of a dark age here.

I think you msiconstrue a slight pendulum swing in a long series of such as a cataclysm. I get great comfort from reading history, because what I always learn is that contrary to common perceptions, on almost every issue in our society we are not at some unique crisis point, but rather, "it has always been thus." "Anti-intellectualism In American Life," I have forgotten the author, but its a serious work, is a great source on the history of this whole phenomenon. What it told me is that, as ecclesiastes said, "there is nothing new under the sun." The problem right now is about exactly as it has been throughout our history. The backward states are and will remain backward because of their beleifs, but they have not yet and never will bring down the civilized portions of the country. And also keep in mind europe is so much less religious than the US that its shocking. Speak to a german or someone from france about it, its a non-issue in europe. Modern communications and interlinked economies make it impossible for one part of the world to move backward so long as their is a substantial part of the world not in darkness.

At any rate, I don't think the sky is falling.

Finally, as to discussing and understanding, I agree completely, one must understand the facts as they are. So academics should discuss and publish all they want. I am only concerned with politics, religion should not be part of politics, neither for nor against. And people should be wary of the fact that perceiving the current situation as a "battle" between the darkness of religion and the light of science are framing the issue exactly the way Rove wants them too, its a false conflict and pursuing either side of it only hurts the democratic party.

[Walt Starr]

13. I disagree with you completely!

IMO, we are on the brink of a theocratic dictatorship/

[ClassWarrior]

15. By the way, Walt, I sent you several PMs a month or two ago...

...and you never answered. May I ask why?

NGU.

[Walt Starr]

27. Yes, I was engaged in some major projects at work

and had little time. I'll be getting back to that in a couple of weeks.

[ClassWarrior]

34. Cool. Thanks.

NGU.

[Az]

16. This is definately a case where I hope I am overreacting

But I don't think you are giving the opposition the respect it demands. The pendulum of society does not occur by magic. It is the result of osolating social dynamics. And I don't know if you have noticed but the voice for reason has gone quite silent here in the US.

This is troubling because we are due for the swing back to the left. And yet there are no champions for reason standing forward to drive it back. Instead the faithful are rising up stronger than ever before. And yes they are assailing the institutions of reason and succesfully. They have learned new tactics while progressive activists have gone to seed.

Further troubling is the fact that the current state of progressive philosophy contains a potentially fatal flaw. Post Modern systems cannot propogate themself. As tolerance and acceptance of other's views and beliefs represent the height of respect pushing your beliefs onto another is taboo. This is not true of the opposition. Thus while we fade they grow stronger. And if we dare to advocate acceptance and tolerance they turn our own ideals against us and proclaim us hypocrits for trying to deny them their beliefs.

I hope I am wrong. History shows us that the pattern is not always cyclical. Sometimes one side takes the advantage and a major and long term shift is the result. Simple words that mean people suffer and die.

[Jacobin]

19. the sky has fallen

Perhaps not to those who think they will benefit from this cataclysmic shift from the revolution of 1776, but for others, who valued the Age of Enlightment, the sky is upon us

[ChristaElaine]

20. agree, with reservations

Religion is here to stay. The religious are not "losing." The majority of Christian Republicans are not fanatics or fundamentalists, nor are they the lunatic fringe. Ignoring this fact will keep us where we are: not in power.

What surprises me is how many of the religious right's most vocal spokespeople (Ann Coulter, for example, or Bill O'Reilly) are so blatantly unChristian. They are, frankly, vipers posing as prophets. What they do is a fantastic job of making us look like the bad guys. They lie, but they do a good job of it.

But PatCox2 is right. The truth is that our basic (not single-issue) messages--the Democratic Party's messages--more closely align with the teachings of Christianity than those of the Republican Party. They also align with basic United States creeds: freedom from oppression. Liberty and justice for all. These messages, these beliefs, are what make us the good guys. Focusing on them will make us look like the good guys again.

For those foretelling a new Dark Age: vilifying the religious not only makes us look like the bad guys; it makes us bad. Judge not lest ye be judged. If you want them to respect you, respect them first.

We cannot continue to look down on what is and will continue to be the majority of the electorate. We need their votes.

[Az]

22. Not interested in ridding the world of religion

I agree it is here to stay. But it needs to be infused with reason and tolerance or it becomes malignant. I marvel at liberal Christians that somehow manage to embrace their beliefs and tolerance for heathens such as myself. Best case scenario (IMO) would be to find a way to shift the fundamentalists to that state of mind.

[ChristaElaine]

28. agreed

Which is why PatCox2 suggests we focus on issues that we don't want to kill each other over.

Example: abortion. I can easily list five people I know well (including my own parents) who voted for Bush on that issue alone. Pro-lifers and pro-choicers are never going to agree or compromise. Ever. They're arguing about totally different things. Yet--and don't run me out of town on a rail for saying this!--abortion should not have been a primary issue in this campaign. When our country is facing massive deficits, stagnating employment, an ongoing war, species extinction, global warming, and other enormous destabilizers, abortion shouldn't be on the short list for why to vote for one candidate or another. Yet it was. That's because it is what PatCox2 called it: a wedge issue, riding on the clarion cry of Republicans trying to divide our base (and succeeding).

Democratic and Christian ideologies share a common foundation. Let's find that, and exploit it.

[ClassWarrior]

4. Amen, if you'll excuse the pun.

When religious issues come up, say, "Isn't it great that we live in a nation where everyone has the opportunity to worship how he or she wants?!"

(Remember our Progressive values: opportunity, responsibility, caring, and hope.)

NGU.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

5. But it cuts both ways....

By using the issue of religion to divide, yes, they pull in some traditional Democrats, but they have also alienated the moderate Republicans to an ever-increasing degree. By pandering to the zealots, many moderate Republicans are voting for Democrats. States like Pennsylvania went for Kerry, Gore,and Clinton X2 not just because of the Democrat's votes in this state. As this admin./Congress continue to show fiscal irresponsibility and extremism to the far right, more moderate Republicans will vote Democratic. It's like the pre-1964 Democrats who started voted Republican after the civil rights bill...the moderate Republicans will vote Democrat in ever increasing numbers as the evangelicals continue to flex their will.

[ClassWarrior]

7. Not really. Till now, the moderate RepubliCONs have been...

...holding their noses and still pulling the lever for the RepubliCON party, ignoring the muck to get majority rule. But you're right, the cracks are beginning to appear now. We need to find our own wedges to pry those cracks open.

NGU.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

10. "This President never vetoed a bill" from Kerry was a great point.

Why wasn't that played more during the campaign? I didn't know that until the debates.

by they way, I saw the light many elections ago re: the zealot control of the Republican party. I just feel that I can convince more like-minded moderate Republicans to vote for good Democrats by being "one of them". Of course, the radical right will never vote Dem so I don't bother with them.

[ClassWarrior]

14. Good for you Mod...

And you're right - the Radical RW is hopeless. To argue with those freaks is to waste your breath.

NGU.

[Walt Starr]

9. The primary reason I am a Democrat is the Religious Right

so for me, it's THE issue that keeps me a Democrat.

:shrug:

[demon67]

17. A couple thoughts regarding your very thoughtful post

Generally agree with your analysis, but cannot agree with one of your premises -- namely, that "our coalition . . . was and should be based on economic interests." I think the increasingly common view among Democrats that economic interests are paramount and everything else is a diversion and without merit is a losing paradigm and shows a lack of understanding and/or respect for many Americans. There are countless voters on both the left and the right for whom money and economic interests are not a primary motivator. On the right, obvious examples are evangelicals and NRA members; and on the left there are, for example, PETA members or environmentalists. These folks care about their core issues -- call them "social" issues -- more than the fact that unemployment has inched up or the deficit has increased.

I would argue that we not run from social issues, but make them the focus of our movement -- not to create wedge issues, but to pull together various social concerns under the broad tent of freedom, liberty, equality and justice.

[Jacobin]

18. The forces of fundamentalists attempting to merge church and

state have to be battled at every front. They are not going anywhere. Give them an inch and they will take a mile.

This is a fight between going back to the Dark Ages and retaining some semblance of the Age of Enlightenment.

These fundie bastards are out to destroy America as we know it, just as the Taliban wants to take Islam back to the 14th Century. Do not kid yourself.

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and many other of our forefathers battled these pricks and the fight will never be over between those who live their lives based on reason and those who want to control others through the use of mysticism.

A few quotes from those who battled these pricks two hundred years ago:

shake off all the fears of servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first the religion of your own country. Read the bible then, as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The testimony of the writer weighs in their favor in one scale, and their not being against the laws of nature does not weigh against them. But those facts in the bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more care, and under a variety of faces. Here you must recur to the pretensions of the writer to inspiration from god. Examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong as that it's falshood would be more improbable than a change of the laws of nature in the case he relates.... Do not be frightened from this enquiry by any fear of it's consequences. If it ends in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in it's exercise, and the love of others which it will procure you. If you find reason to believe there is a god, a consciousness that you are acting under his eye, and that he approves you, will be a vast additional incitement. If that there be a future state, the hope of a happy existence in that increases the appetite to deserve it; if that Jesus was also a god, you will be comforted by a belief of his aid and love. In fine, I repeat that you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and neither believe nor reject any thing because any other person, or description of persons have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are answerable not for the rightness but uprightness of the decision.... (Thomas Jefferson, letter to his young nephew Peter Carr, August 10, 1787. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, pp. 320-321.)

But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Samuel Kercheval, 1810; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 370)

History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baron von Humboldt, 1813; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 370)

The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man. (Thomas Jefferson, as quoted by Saul K. Padover in Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, New York, 1946, p. 165, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 48.)

In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes.

And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a Virgin Mary, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.... But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 11 April 1823, as quoted by E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 287.)

[BigMcLargehuge]

21. and here's the other side of the street...

you said -

Filing lawsuits because their is a creche in the public square is dumb. Arguing like twits over matters of faith is dumb. Don't further the divide, don't polarize and alienate those who disagree with you over matters of faith, make the common bond the issue of economic class solidarity.

And if you think opposition to creche's is a do or die issue, and that its more important to win this one on principal than to just tolerate the fucking creche while finding common ground on the bread and butter economic issues that once united this party and made it the overwhelming majority in this country, than you are way way off in your priorities and you are part of the reason this party is losing, and further, you have been duped by a classic case of a wedge issue being used to divide, you are furthering and deepening the divide.

How about not putting a creche in the public square in the first place and STARTING the argument? Christians have churches, right? Put the creche there.

I am of the position that giving ground on ANY constitutional infringements is overwhelmingly empowering to the right. We silently let the creche stay... then we silently let them water down evolutionary science in public school with Idiotic Design and Creationism, then we let them put 10 Commandments monoliths in the courthouse, then what? Silently let the establish protestant Christianity as the state religion? Make praying to the president mandatory?

[ChristaElaine]

23. not at issue

Nobody's arguing that we ought to kick back and relax while our Constitutional rights are shredded.

The point is that we are allowing Republicans to dictate the terms of the debate. Huge majorities of people said they voted on "moral values" in the last election. Republicans have claimed "moral values" as their own territory and lauded this kind of survey result as a triumph.

Democrats vote on "moral values," too. Ours frequently differ from theirs, but Democrats were a majority for a long stretch for good reason: our moral values are shared by many Republican voters. They simply don't realize it because we have allowed the more divisive issues to take center stage.

[BigMcLargehuge]

25. suggesting that we don't speak up when the wall of separation is breeched

is rolling over as constitutional rights are violated. It sounds petty and stupid to protest that a display of religion on public land is a defacto endorcement of that religion by the state... but it is a defacto endorcement of religion by the state.

Take out one brick and you loosen the other in the wall.

[ChristaElaine]

30. ...aaand you missed my point completely.

Again, NOT suggesting we don't speak up. Suggesting that the issues we make our own clarion calls be those that can attract voters, because that's politics. Again, we have great values that were not adequately presented in the last election because Republicans were allowed to claim that they were the representatives of "morality." They're not. We are. We just have to sound like it. It's like in chess: don't allow the opponent to dictate your moves.

[BigMcLargehuge]

32. I get your point, but I disagree

you said: Suggesting that the issues we make our own clarion calls be those that can attract voters, because that's politics.

So we should embrace the moral causes that the rethugs championed so we can draw voters? Which ones? How about banning gay marriage, restricting or banning abortion, expanding the death penalty, shoveling tax money into faith based charities...

The argument doesn't wash. People voted on bullshit moral values issues, assuming the votes weren't miscounted or otherwise tampered with, because they are short sighted and misinformed. When their kids start coming home dead and maimed from the Iraqi meat grinder, when they have no job to go to and lose their house, when a bunch of skinheads beats their gay son or daughter to death, when they get sick and can't afford treatment, THEN they will chance their positions, maybe. But I refuse to believe that we are expected to cottle to the middle-right of the American electorate.

If we continue to lose elections, then so be it. The people of America will get the government they deserve. So please, by all means America, keep making the push to Christianize and moralize, the throat you cut via misplaced self righteousness is your own.

I won't mourn.

[ChristaElaine]

40. no, again

Should we "embrace the moral causes that the rethugs championed so we can draw voters?" No. No, no, no.

I'm saying we need to redefine--by making less exclusive--the term "moral values." Yes, gay marriage and abortion are moral values. But so are health care for children, universal living standards, and preserving individual liberties.

I'm saying we have issues that are more unifying than those we have allowed the Republicans to make the center of national debate, and we should focus more closely on those.

You "won't mourn" when America cuts its own throat?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

24. I agree. These people state "We can't compromise our faith"...

That pretty much tells you what compromise will get you.


BEWARE! Give them an inch.....................

[PurityOfEssence]

26. We can't survive without you, and you can't without us

It's as simple as that. Sure, some are very stridently against religion and pick fights, but so do some of the most difficult believers here.

Everyone takes heat in this world, and one of the annoying concepts of the modern, politically correct society is that people feel that they should never get any guff regardless of what they believe or do.

Like it or not, religion is often used as an excuse for abominable behavior and is a smokescreen for lots of folly. It also fosters some serious emotional/mental problems by introducing a supernatural element to things. The clannish nature of organized religions is also used to shield their members from scrutiny, and the idea of penance or absolution gives people a cyclical ability to justify creepiness.

Sadly, religion has encroached so much upon the political system that most future elections and legislation will be fought on religious terms. Those of us who don't believe are constantly reminded of our inferior status, and we have no voice at all in elected government. In society, we're screwed with in numerous ways, and it's only getting worse.

Believers have a choke-hold on this country, and you, as a believer should try to have a bit of understanding for what that does to people.

Finally, this board is a refuge. It's a warm and welcome home for those of us who are buffeted by the storm, and as such, you're going to hear lots of railing against capitalism, racism, sexism and a whole host of other issues. Religion is a huge problem in this country, because organized religion in politics is inherently anti-democratic: the pronouncements don't have to be proved, and the believers are aristocrats, while the non-believers really don't have a right to exist.

Some people will get heated, and the brushfires will continue to go on. Each mother who kills her kids nauseates us all, but for those of us who see religion as a peril to peoples' mental health, we're angry that the media totally glosses over the issue. As a result, people post about it and the cycle continues.

It's better to focus on the vast number of non-believers who are behaving themselves, and it's better for me to read the posts from believers who admit being embarrassed or worried about things done in the name of their god and not boil with frustration.

Keep it in perspective. Personally, I think talking about these things is a much better approach, and I don't think it's "doing Rove's work". Let the right put their fingers in their ears and scream that they're not listening; we're a big tent, and we need to coexist.

There's an unpleasant underlying demand coming from some of the more strident believers here, and it's more or less "how dare you criticize my belief". Well, when people who believe in an afterlife give themselves an "out" for killing, since it's not really killing, that deserves some comment. When the "specialness" felt by those who believe gets them to think they're above reproach, that deserves a few words, too.

You can't win without us, and we can't win (or perhaps even exist) without you, so everyone has to suck it up a bit and carry on. I've cooled off a lot since my early days on the board, but I know I'm still trouble on the subject; I've seen some of the mental ravages of extreme belief up close, and I think it needs to be addressed. Problems left unaddressed or glossed over fester into much bigger problems than if dealt with, and I think religion tends to deny lots of human desires, activities and problems, and causes more damage than it cures. It varies depending on the person.

Try analyzing threads and tallying up how many are strident and how many are level-headed. It generally comes up with a hell of a good balance tilted toward the tolerant on both sides; what makes it seem otherwise is that every one of these threads spawns tussles between a few people who post over and over and over and try to wear their opponent down, as if volume and getting in the last word proves the might and validity of their damned opinions. Reduce the analysis to how many different people post, and list the level of ire or deliberate hostility, and you'll feel much better.

And just because I can't end on such a sweet and conciliatory note, two things: 1) non-believers make good neighbors because we don't believe there's anything out there that's going to fix everything and since there's no afterlife, things have to be made right and good right here and now, and 2) agnostics don't do suicide bombings.

Happy holidays!

[ChristaElaine]

29. "agnostics don't do suicide bombings" like hell

Religion doesn't make one misguided, mentally challenged, or bad. Nazi code was not based on religion. Nor was Lenin's. People are ideological by nature and do crazy things in the name of their ideologies. But not all of these ideologies have to do with God.

I'm not saying there's nothing to criticize, but Christians in the United States do things besides elect bad presidents. They donate enormous amounts to charities, shelter the homeless, feed the hungry, give presents to poor kids at Christmas, run recovery groups for drug and alcohol addicts, give people a sense of community and love and forgiveness. Let's not forget these things in the wake of our anger.

[Walt Starr]

35. Actually, Nazism was extremely wrapped up in religion

Religion has always been used as a tool by fascist tyrants.

Some quotes from Mr. Shicklgruber:

My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech on 12 April 1922



It will at any rate be my supreme task to see to it that in the newly awakened NSDAP, the adherents of both Confessions can live peacefully together side by side in order that they may take their stand in the common fight against the power which is the mortal foe of any true Christianity.
-Adolf Hitler, in an article headed "A New Beginning," 26 Feb. 1925



Except the Lord built the house they labour in vain.... The truth of that text was proved if one looks at the house of which the foundations were laid in 1918 and which since then has been in building.... The world will not help, the people must help itself. Its own strength is the source of life. That strength the Almighty has given us to use; that in it and through it we may wage the battle of our life.... The others in the past years have not had the blessing of the Almighty-- of Him Who in the last resort, whatever man may do, holds in His hands the final decision. Lord God, let us never hesitate or play the coward, let us never forget the duty which we have taken upon us.... We are all proud that through God's powerful aid we have become once more true Germans.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in March 1933



The Government, being resolved to undertake the political and moral purification of our public life, are creating and securing the conditions necessary for a really profound revival of religious life.... The National Government regard the two Christian Confessions as the weightiest factors for the maintenance of our nationality. They will respect the agreements concluded between them and the federal States. Their rights are not to be infringed.... It will be the Government's care to maintain honest co-operation between Church and State; the struggle against materialistic views and for a real national community is just as much in the interest of the German nation as in that of the welfare of our Christian faith. The Government of the Reich, who regard Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the morals and moral code of the nation, attach the greatest value to friendly relations with the Holy See and are endeavouring to develop them.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech to the Reichstag on 23 March 1933


We want honestly to earn the resurrection of our people through our industry, our perseverance, our will. We ask not of the Almighty 'Lord, make us free'!-- we want to be active, to work, to agree together as brothers, to strive in rivalry with one another to bring about the hour when we can come before Him and when we may ask of Him: 'Lord, Thou seest that we have transformed ourselves, the German people is not longer the people of dishonour, of shame, of war within itself, of faintheartedness and little faith: no, Lord, the German people has become strong again in spirit, strong in will, strong in endurance, strong to bear all sacrifices.' 'Lord, we will not let Thee go: bless now our fight for our freedom; the fight we wage for our German people and Fatherland.'
-Adolf Hitler, giving prayer in a speech on May Day 1933




This is for us a ground for satisfaction, since we desire that the fight in the religious camps should come to an end... all political action in the parties will be forbidden to priests for all time, happy because we know what is wanted by millions who long to see in the priest only the comforter of their souls and not the representative of their political convictions.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech to the men of the SA. at Dormund, 9 July 1933 on the day after the signing of the Concordat.



National Socialism has always affirmed that it is determined to take the Christian Churches under the protection of the State.... The decisive factor which can justify the existence alike of Church and State is the maintenance of men's spiritual and bodily health, for it that health were destroyed it would mean the end of the State and also the end of the Church.... It is my sincere hope that thereby for Germany, too, through free agreement there has been produced a final clarification of spheres in the functions of the State and of one Church.
-Adolf Hitler, on a wireless on 22 July, the evening before the Evangelical Church Election



The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism is hostile to religion is a lie.
-Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party (quoted from John Cornwell's "Hitler's Pope"



We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933



I believe that Providence would never have allowed us to see the victory of the Movement if it had the intention after all to destroy us at the end.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech to old members of the Party at Munich on 8 Nov. 1933



The German Church and the People are practically the same body. Therefore there could be no issue between Church and State. The Church, as such, has nothing to do with political affairs. On the other hand, the State has nothing to do with the faith or inner organization of the Church. The election of November 12th would be an expression of church constituency, but not as a Church.
-Adolf Hitler, answering C. F. Macfarland about Church & State (in his book, The New Church and the New Germany)



While we destroyed the Centre Party, we have not only brought thousands of priests back into the Church, but to millions of respectable people we have restored their faith in their religion and in their priests. The union of the Evangelical Church in a single Church for the whole Reich, the Concordat with the Catholic Church, these are but milestones on the road which leads to the establishment of a useful relation and a useful co operation between the Reich and the two Confessions.
-Adolf Hitler, in his New Year Message on 1 Jan. 1934



Imbued with the desire to secure for the German people the great religious, moral, and cultural values rooted in the two Christian Confessions, we have abolished the political organizations but strengthened the religious institutions.
-Adolf Hitler, speaking in the Reichstag on 30 Jan. 1934



It would have been more to the point, more honest and more Christian, in past decades not to support those who intentionally destroyed healthy life than to rebel against those who have no other wish than to avoid disease. Moreover, a policy of laissez faire in this sphere is not only cruelty to the individual guiltless victims but also to the nation as a whole.... If the Churches were to declare themselves ready to take over the treatment and care of those suffering from hereditary diseases, we should be quite ready to refrain from sterilizing them.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech on 30 Jan. 1934



We have experienced a miracle, something unique, something the like of which there has hardly been in the history of the world. God first allowed our people to be victorious for four and a half years, then He abased us, laid upon us a period of shamelessness, but now after a struggle of fourteen years he has permitted us to bring that period to a close. It is a miracle which has been wrought upon the German people.... It shows us that the Almighty has not deserted our people, that He received it into favour at the moment when it rediscovered itself. And that our people shall never again lose itself, that must be our vow so long as we shall live and so long as the Lord gives us the strength to carry on the fight.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech to the "Old Guard" of the Party at Munich on 19 March, 1934



The National Socialist State professes its allegiance to positive Christianity. It will be its honest endeavour to protect both the great Christian Confessions in their rights, to secure them from interference with their doctrines (Lehren ), and in their duties to constitute a harmony with the views and the exigencies of the State of to-day.
-Adolf Hitler, on 26 June 1934, to Catholic bishops to assure them that he would take action against the new pagan propaganda



No, it is not we that have deserted Christianity, it is those who came before us who deserted Christianity. We have only carried through a clear division between politics which have to do with terrestrial things, and religion, which must concern itself with the celestial sphere. There has been no interference with the doctrine (Lehre ) of the Confessions or with their religious freedom (Bekenntnisfreiheit ), nor will there be any such interference. On the contrary the State protects religion, though always on the one condition that religion will not be used as a cover for political ends....
National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary it stands on the ground of a real Christianity.... For their interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life... These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles! And I believe that if we should fail to follow these principles then we should to be able to point to our successes, for the result of our political battle is surely not unblest by God.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech at Koblenz, to the Germans of the Saar, 26 Aug. 1934



So far as the Evangelical Confessions are concerned we are determined to put an end to existing divisions, which are concerned only with the forms of organization, and to create a single Evangelical Church for the whole Reich....
And we know that were the great German reformer with us to-day he would rejoice to be freed from the necessity of his own time and, like Ulrich von Hutten, his last prayer would be not for the Churches of the separate States: it would be of Germany that he would think and of the Evangelical Church of Germany.
-Adolf Hitler, in his Proclamation at the Parteitag at Nuremberg on 5 Sept. 1934




What we are we have become not against, but with, the will of Providence. And so long as we are true and honourable and of good courage in fight, so long as we believe in our great work and do not capitulate, we shall continue to enjoy in the future the blessing of Providence.
-Adolf Hitler, at Rosenheim in Bavaria, 11 Aug. 1935



Only so you can appeal to your God and pray Him to support and bless your courage, your work, your perseverance, your strength, your resolution, and with all these your claim on life.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Frankfurt on 16 March 1936



In this world him who does not abandon himself the Almighty will not desert. Him who helps himself will the Almighty always also help; He will show him the way by which he can gain his rights, his freedom, and therefore his future.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Hamburg on 20 March 1936



Providence has caused me to be Catholic, and I know therefore how to handle this Church.
-Adolf Hitler, reportedly to have said in Berlin in 1936 on the enmity of the Catholic Church to National Socialism



I believe in Providence and I believe Providence to be just. Therefore I believe that Providence always rewards the strong, the industrious, and the upright.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech to National Socialist women at the Nuremberg Parteitag of 1936 <11 Sept. 1936>



So long as they concern themselves with their religious problems the State does not concern itself with them. But so soon as they attempt by any means whatsoever-- by letters, Encyclica, or otherwise-- to arrogate to themselves rights which belong to the State alone we shall force them back into their proper spiritual, pastoral activity.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered in Berlin on the May Day festival, 1937



We National Socialists, too, have deep in our hearts our own faith. We cannot do otherwise. No man can mould the history of peoples or of the world unless he has upon his will and his capacities the blessing of Providence.
-Adolf Hitler, to Nazi leaders on 2 June 1937, as reported by a correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph"



I will never allow anyone to divide this people once more into religious camps, each fighting the other....
You, my Brown Guard, will regard it as a matter of course that this German people should go only by the way which Providence ordained for it when it gave to Germans the common language. So we go forward with the profoundest faith in God into the future. Would that which we have achieved have been possible if Providence had not helped us?
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Regensburg on 6 June 1937



If we pursue this way, if we are decent, industrious, and honest, if we so loyally and truly fulfill our duty, then it is my conviction that in the future as in the past the Lord God will always help us. In the long run He never leaves decent folk in the lurch. Often He may test them, He may send trials upon them, but in the long run He always lets His sun shine upon them once more and at the end He gives them His blessing.
-Adolf Hitler, at the Harvest Thanksgiving Festival on the Buckeburg held on 3 Oct. 1937


This Winter Help Work is also in the deepest sense a Christian work. When I see, as I so often do, poorly clad girls collecting with such infinite patience in order to care for those who are suffering from the cold while they themselves are shivering with cold, then I have the feeling that they are all apostles of a Christianity-- and in truth of a Christianity which can say with greater right than any other: This is the Christianity of an honest confession, for behind it stand not words but deeds.
-Adolf Hitler, speaking of the Winter Help Campaign on 5 Oct. 1937



Remain strong in your faith, as you were in former years. In this faith, in its close-knit unity our people to-day goes straight forward on its way and no power on earth will avail to stop it.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Coburg on 15 Oct. 1937


In this hour I would ask of the Lord God only this: that, as in the past, so in the years to come He would give His blessing to our work and our action, to our judgement and our resolution, that He will safeguard us from all false pride and from all cowardly servility, that He may grant us to find the straight path which His Providence has ordained for the German people, and that He may ever give us the courage to do the right, never to falter, never to yield before any violence, before any danger.... I am convinced that men who are created by God should live in accordance with the will of the Almighty.... If Providence had not guided us I could often never have found these dizzy paths.... Thus it is that we National Socialists, too, have in the depths of our hearts our faith. We cannot do otherwise: no man can fashion world-history or the history of peoples unless upon his purpose and his powers there rests the blessings of this Providence.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech at Wurzburg on 27 June 1937



National Socialism is not a cult-movement-- a movement for worship; it is exclusively a 'volkic' political doctrine based upon racial principles. In its purpose there is no mystic cult, only the care and leadership of a people defined by a common blood-relationship.... We will not allow mystically-minded occult folk with a passion for exploring the secrets of the world beyond to steal into our Movement. Such folk are not National Socialists, but something else-- in any case something which has nothing to do with us. At the head of our programme there stand no secret surmisings but clear-cut perception and straightforward profession of belief. But since we set as the central point of this perception and of this profession of belief the maintenance and hence the security for the future of a being formed by God, we thus serve the maintenance of a divine work and fulfill a divine will-- not in the secret twilight of a new house of worship, but openly before the face of the Lord.... Our worship is exclusively the cultivation of the natural, and for that reason, because natural, therefore God-willed. Our humility is the unconditional submission before the divine laws of existence so far as they are known to us men.
-Adolf Hitler, in Nuremberg on 6 Sept. 1938.





The National Socialist Movement has wrought this miracle. If Almighty God granted success to this work, then the Party was His instrument.
-Adolf Hitler, in his proclamation to the German People on 1 Jan. 1939


Amongst the accusations which are directed against Germany in the so called democracies is the charge that the National Socialist State is hostile to religion. In answer to that charge I should like to make before the German people the following solemn declaration:
1. No one in Germany has in the past been persecuted because of his religious views (Einstellung), nor will anyone in the future be so persecuted.... The Churches are the greatest landed proprietors after the State... Further, the Church in the National Socialist State is in many ways favoured in regard to taxation, and for gifts, legacies, &c., it enjoys immunity from taxation.
It is therefore, to put mildly-- effrontery when especially foreign politicians make bold to speak of hostility to religion in the Third Reich.... I would allow myself only one question: what contributions during the same period have France, England, or the United States made through the State from the public funds?
3. The National Socialist State has not closed a church, nor has it prevented the holding of a religious service, nor has it ever exercised any influence upon the form of a religious service. It has not exercised any pressure upon the doctrine nor on the profession of faith of any of the Confessions. In the National Socialist State anyone is free to seek his blessedness after his own fashion.... There are ten thousands and ten thousands of priests of all the Christian Confessions who perform their ecclesiastical duties just as well as or probably better than the political agitators without ever coming into conflict with the laws of the State.... This State has only once intervened in the internal regulation of the Churches, that is when I myself in 1933 endeavoured to unite the weak and divided Protestant Churches of the different States into one great and powerful Evangelical Church of the Reich. That attempt failed through the opposition of the bishops of some States; it was therefore abandoned. For it is in the last resort not our task to defend or even to strengthen the Evangelical Church through violence against its own representatives.... But on one point it is well that there should be no uncertainty: the German priest as servant of God we shall protect, the priest as political enemy of the German State we shall destroy.
-Adolf Hitler, a speech in the Reichstag on 30 Jan. 1939




If positive Christianity means love of one's neighbour, i.e. the tending of the sick, the clothing of the poor, the feeding of the hungry, the giving of drink to those who are thirsty, then it is we who are the more positive Christians. For in these spheres the community of the people of National Socialist Germany has accomplished a prodigious work.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech to the "Old Guard" at Munich on 24 Feb. 1939

[PurityOfEssence]

36. Talk about selective reading

Yes, religion does all sorts of nice things, but its believers tend to tidily excuse all the bad as the doings of those who aren't true to the faith. That's tiresome selectivity.

Hitler was a Christian, and he used the power of Christian paramilitary groups as well as corporate-sponsored groups and assorted reactionaries to gain power. That thing on a Luftwaffe plane's wing is a cross, and yes, it's THAT cross. Much of what he used to mobilize the people was a hatred of the Atheism of Communism and the decadence of a Western Civilization that was more and more secular. He literally used the evocation of Christian faith as a justification for his actions and a motivator for his people. As they read this, I'm sure many believers are itching to post how he wasn't a "true Christian", but that's beside the point: what matters is the evocation of belief in the public realm; that's the problem. I'm sure that many powerful Evangelists are cold-hearted non-believers who are cynically playing a game to screw people out of their money. I'm sure many also believe it completely.

What people do when they think they've figured out the cosmos gets pretty nasty sometimes, and the assumption that "faith is good" is one that many of us disagree with completely. I don't think "faith is good"; I think it lets people out of personal responsibility, shuts off their thinking and polarizes society into rigid and hostile groups.

To boil down that long and far-ranging a post into one quote, which was pointedly made for effect is just pouring gas on the fire. You're doing precisely what pisses off both sides of this argument.

For sheer reality's sake, the statement is true: you just don't find people who don't believe in an afterlife blowing themselves up on purpose just to kill people with whom they disagree about a guess.

[Walt Starr]

37. Good argument!

I usually let Herr Shicklgruber's words speak for themselves, though.

:evilgrin:

[ChristaElaine]

38. all right...

Forgive me for my massive mistake on Nazi/Christianity.

Still, playing either side of the "faith is good"/"faith is bad" game is polarizing/pouring gas on the fire. Much of what you say is true. That doesn't change the fact that millions upon millions believe in religions because they believe them to be good and to dictate good ways to live. Not all of these have renounced a sense of personal responsibility or shut off their thinking.

Combating religion in a head-on frontal assault--"faith is bad"--is, I think, just as blind, and just as harmful, as a "faith is good" approach.

[PurityOfEssence]

42. Well, that worked out just fine

That was very decent of you to note that.

Yes, it IS difficult, but it's the pernicious bugaboo of civilization: whether religion's caused all the trouble really isn't the point to me; what scares the snot out of me is how valuable it is as a tool of whatever sinister forces really are at play.

We're not going to generally win too many converts, but it's important to keep the discourse open, because it humanizes the other side. Too few people of extreme faith really know any of us faithless fiends, and that just makes us all the more demonizable. Non-believers have a bit of a break on this because we're so outnumbered; we generally know a bunch of believers.

Truly, for some people, faith is necessary to keep them from despair, confusion or whatever other darkness, yet it's like morphine (not in the Marx/Engels sense) in that it's extremely useful for certain things, but if allowed to get out of hand, it's absolutely deadly. Ignoring the extreme inherent dangers of religion is itself dangerous.

Simply put, though, what draws most of us on this board together--and I say this as a grizzled long-timer--is giving a damn about our fellow creatures and world. The points of agreement are much greater than the points of disagreement, and honing our skills on dealing with religion is good for us all. We shouldn't shy away from it.

In the end, what unites us here is hope for economic and social fairness, accommodation of the misfits and an unblinking assessment of the human condition with an eye to making a system that works. The crap about whether you open the egg from the big end or the small end really doesn't matter a tinker's cuss.

Your true friends are ones who share your values, not ones who share your sexual orientation, religious affiliation or even nationality.

I'd like to see more people get more adept at dealing with religion; ignorance is the petri dish of bigotry.

Oh, and welcome to the board...

[Obviousman]

31. The dems get too distracted

n/t
William Donohue

[BillZBubb]

33. Good liberal, roll over, sit, beg...

We are in a war for the basic ethos of our country. As usual it's people on our side who are calling for unconditional surrender.

The reason we keep losing has nothing to do with Christians versus we of the left. It has much more to do with the fact that we appear spineless. There is no fight we apparently won't walk away from, no matter the stakes. We aren't seen as leaders, but appeasers.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. "Bah! Humbug!" To borrow a phrase.

Perhaps you wish to abandon all of the principles that the Democratic Party once stood for and reduce the debate to only "class" but too many have fought (and, some have died), for the very causes that you decry.

[patcox2]

41. What principles that we always stood for? Jim Crow?

The party evolves. Gay marriage, gun control, even racial equality are not "principles the party has always stood for." The only consistent common thread is that this party has stood for economic justice, opportunity, and security for the "have nots."

Again, people ask over and over, why do southerners who are getting screwed by Bush because he is exporting jobs. eliminating overtime, loosening worker protections, and destroying social security, why are they voting against their own interest?"

And the answer is because the democrats lack the balls to stand up to the bullies who scream "class warfare" and take a class warfare stand by saying "if you work for a living, we are the party for you." Instead, we get dragged into sideshow divisive issues like the ten commandments in a courtroom and gay marriage and gun control, and those people who we think voted against their own interest, well in their minds they voted for their own interest because they are for god and guns and fear homosexuals.

And thats how you use wedge issues. And thats why we shouldn't take the fucking bait when the republicans bring up the wedge issues. Thats all, just don't take the bait.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. "The bait"?

I'm all for standing up for class warfare. I'm also for standing up for freedom from religion, abortion rights, civil rights, gun control, gay marriage, affirmative action, the environment, etc.

Because the Republicans capitalize on those issues does not mean that they should be abandoned. If the rednecks and biblethumpers are dumb enough to vote against their own best interests, and they certainly have been, then so be it. They been sold a bill of goods.

As for the Democratic Party evolving, what do you call what's happening today? Devolution? I would, as it succumbs to the rightwing pressure to regress back into the good old days of "God, Guns, and homophobia".

The Democratic Party should, but doesn't, oppose injustice. Economic, religious, racial, sexual, whatever. It should, but doesn't, stand for peace and diplomacy rather than violence and bullying. Even it pisses the hicks off.

And, the Democrats shouldn't have to be "dragged into" those fights that you describe as sideshows. The should be out front fighting for them, instead of the wishy-washy, half-assed, roll-over and "compromise", lip service they pay them.

[Az]

45. Its like fighting pudding

Where ever you are not there it is. They will gain entry to every thing and idea that we do not place ourselves as the champions of. If we do not claim the ground they will simply assume it.

[VioletLake]

46. Another common bond issue to consider:

morals/ethics/values

It's the elephant in the room. The RW has owned this issue for so long - stole it so long ago - that most liberals/progressives genuinely believe that it belongs to the RW. This is arguably the RW's greatest coup: to effectively neutralize progressivism's organizing principle and turn us into economic plan salesmen. While we were struggling to compete with them on their turf, the RW co-opted the values issue entirely and used it with heartless precision to divide the nation and conquer the government.

Now we find ourselves in a situation where the immoral define and represent morals, the unethical define and represent ethics, and the valueless define and represent values. (This is what reality looks like when it's strung out on evil.)

The people responsible for this mother of all "catastrophic successes" have very narrow interests that don't include morals, ethics, or values. As a matter of fact, these things are anathema to their interests. But they know that people won't respect - let alone accept - authority when it's devoid of moral and ethical restraints. This is their big dilemma, and it will lead to their undoing.

The unprincipled choice is to undermine and attempt to redefine values in order to make them practically worthless - which is what they're in the process of doing. The problem is that this only creates a dissonant "reality" that can't be maintained indefinitely because of its inherent unreliability and lack of integrity. The dissonance either fades, or it openly declares war against reality. At this point in our predicament, it can go either way.

The "new reality" hucksters were correct about one thing: values were a deciding factor in this election. We won because of values. We recognize the threat to our values. We're fighting to prevent them from euthanizing our values.

We need to take this issue back. It's ours.