Trading Integrity For "Family Values"?

[demwing]

Found this nifty little article on Sojourners, a site that discusses politics and religion. Written by Berkeleyite Bob Burnett, it offers an take on the Democratic party's seeming desire to lurch to the right, and why it could actually bury us.

The article makes me wonder if the battle for separation of church and state can be waged between the secular and non-secular. As much as the author warns against false religiosity, I am lead to believe that the battle for a secular state MUST be lead by a religious organization. A progressive, liberal, non-secular organization.

http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_archives&mode=point_of_view&article=POV_041208_burnett


<snip>
The ranks of conservative Christians were swelled by the defection of Roman Catholics, who have traditionally voted Democratic. Despite the fact that Kerry is one of them, the majority of Catholics voted for Bush. Conservative Protestants and Catholics shared a commitment to strengthen "moral values," prohibit abortion and gay marriage, and appoint socially conservative judges.

Democrats are struggling to respond to this onslaught. Some centrist party leaders argue that the most effective reaction would be for Democratic candidates to assert their own religious convictions - to become more overtly Christian. This, in effect, was the position of successful Colorado Democratic senatorial candidate Ken Salazar, who "out-Christian-ed" his Republican opponent, Pete Coors.

A logical extension of this line of reasoning would be for Democrats, en masse, to accept Jesus and wade into the Potomac River and undergo group baptism where they repudiate their sinful liberal past and are born again.

As a left-wing Christian, a Quaker, I do appreciate the sincerity of many Christians who publicly proclaim that they have taken Jesus into their hearts. My concern is not with the truly faithful, however much I may disagree with their theology, but with politicians who assume the mantle of piety to further their careers. I believe that many Republican officeholders are hypocrites who pose as devout Christians while they are actually dedicated to serving their own ambitions. I don't want to see Democrats lose what little integrity they retain by pursuing the same self-serving tactic.
<snip>

[demwing]

1. So no one has anything to say about this?

That the Democrats will lose whats left of their integrity if they sell out to false religiosity?

That the battle for a secular state must be waged by a non-secular organization?

hmm...

[demwing]

2. Maybe It's My Breath

Ok. I just chewed up three Tic-Tacs, and washed it down with an ice cold mug of Minty Fresh mouthwash. I've brushed my teeth, and flossed.

Twice.

But I'm not done. I'll suck on a car freshener if I must.

Come on...PLEEEEEAAASSSE???

[demwing]

3. Ok. You've forced me to pull out the flame bait..

Howard Dean's career is over, he is a loser, his teeth are yellow, and he dresses funny.

Abortion isn't about a woman's right to chose, it's a sleazy way to deal with uncontrolled sex urges.

Ralph Nader is right. There is no difference between Bush and any Democratic candidate. There was no fraud, other than Al Gore and John Kerry fraudulently pretending to care about you.

The DLC will save the Democratic party. If we're losing elections its because the liberal fringe are too fucking lazy to vote.

Liberals shoud take their tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show back to France, or where ever the hell it came from.

Now, I dare you not to comment. :)

[shraby]

4. One thing wrong with the whole article...

the Dems didn't lose due to a little thing called ELECTION FRAUD. Since they didn't lose, the integrity, religions, etc. don't even enter the picture.

[demwing]

7. I agree, 100%, and yet you've missed the point!

Regardless of the fraud, the party bosses are responding AS IF we lost a social debate, and now we have to shape up or ship out -regarding family values.

Yet, a man who identifies himself as a Quaker (and yeah, I know that the idea of a writer/activist from Berkeley identifying himself as a Quaker is odd...but the whole town is a little odd. Just one of the things I loved about living in Bezerkeley through the 1980s) says that the Dem Party is making a mistake, that we are trading "what little integrity we have left" for the appearance of "values."

So, instead of fraud invalidating the point of the article, it sharpens the point.

If we truly lost the election, and STILL shouldn't chase the mask of morality, why the hell she would follow that path if we DID NOT lose the election?

Why try to ape the "values" of those who steal elections?

[orpupilofnature57]

5. Your horny for a discussion,Are you sure your a quaker Christian?

[demwing]

6. I'm not, but the author of the article is.

I didn't write the article. I'm sure I said that in the OP.

But, other than that, you're correct. This should be discussed, regardless of election fraud, the party is preparing to move to the right.

Bad idea, and the author acknowledges that, from a Christian perspective.

In other words, there are fundamentalist Christians (Quakers, I believe, are fundamentalists) that support the Democratic, and would not want us to assume a false mantle of piety just to compete with the Republicans and their own brand of false piety.

Yet, off to the right we lurch...

[demwing]

8. I'm stubborn.

The only two people to respond to this article misunderstood the point.

I'm sure that there are people out there who understand that I did not write the piece, I am not a Quaker, and that I am not disputing vote fraud.

I simply see the party bosses acting as if we have lost the battle for the hearts of Americans.

Regrdless of the ultimate election outcome, does anyone agree with that sentiment? Forget about mandates and such.

How does the Democratic party address the growing fundamentalism in America? Ignore it? Fight it? Join it? HOW?

Again, as I said in the OP, because religious fundies so mistrust secularists, I think that the only way to address the decaying wall that separates church and state is through a group better known for its spiritual nature than its political activism.

We need a Martin Luther King Jr to champion the separation, to fight against theocracy.

For one, the Democratic party will lose credibility if it suddenly appears to have undergone a "Road to Damascuss" conversion.

Secondly, Americans must understand that it is not merely to the benefit of the state to remain free of the church, it is of utmost importance for the church to remain free of the state. That message would be most easily presented by a Reverend or a Priest. A holy man.

A Ghandi. A MLK.

Who can fit that bill?

[sadiesworld]

9. How to address the growing fundamentalism in the US?

Cut off its funding. Bring corporations down to size and ditch "free" trade. Adopt an economic populist agenda. Perhaps it will give people something to hope for in this life, leaving them less inclined to focus on their narrow view of the hereafter.

[demwing]

10. You assume that Fundies can be bribed?

provide them with economic populism and they'll be nice to us? I think you may not understand the depths of cult group think. And yes, I believe that the types that watch Swagart, Fallwell, and Robertson are cultists.

I don't believe they'll ever like us, and now that they have power, it's going to take more than money to make them leave us alone.

[talk hard]

11. Ummm, that's Manson Family values.

There isn't anything particularly christlike about their behavior.

[rasputin1952]

12. I always thought Integrity was one oif the "Family Values"...not like the

neo-con version of family valuews, but true family values.

Let's see, what are some ohters, truth, Diginty, Honesty, Fairness, Compassion, Empathy...and how could I forget Love and Forgiveness?

The values the neo-cons posess, are anything but these. I do not wish to be part of their family...:(