What is the purpose of religion in the Democratic Party?

[MisterLiberal]

I've been gone for a few weeks but as soon as I sit back down to read some good posts, I start hearing about "god" and churches and it makes me wonder what was the starting point that the Repukes lost control to the fundies.

What purpose does mentioning religion, "god" etc have in our party?

Personal question; do any of the religious people here really believe the bible? That a man resurrected himself?

That's just so irrational to conceive.

[swag]

1. "That a man resurrected himself? That's just so irrational to conceive."

And that's the least of the insanities in the absolutely insane book you reference.

[MisterLiberal]

3. And yet

there are those in our party that believe things like that.

This is quickly becoming a taboo subject, even among fellow Democrats.

:scared:

[merwin]

22. I'm one of those that believe things like that.

The difference between Republican and Democrat is that Democrats are perfectly happy to let others express their religious beliefs without intereference or prejudice.

[MisterLiberal]

25. yeah

well repukes used to be like that before the fundies got to them, too.

Used to be that republicans were just people who didn't think things through. NOW they are people who might as well believe in martians.

So how do you believe a man can raise from the dead?

SPECIFICALLY?

[merwin]

37. I believed that it happened.

Not necessarily that it can/will happen again anytime soon.

You can't lump all Christians in with Republicans. That's a very flawed point of view. The majority of Christians do not believe in fundimentalism. It's just that the fundimentalists are the loudest.

[MisterLiberal]

44. Then answer this

WHY do you believe that it happened?

I'm trying to see why a rational person (being a Democrat automatically gives you a higher common sense value) would WILLINGLY believe stuff like that?

And no offense intended, but isn't a fundamentalist someone who literally believes that the stuff in the bible (like Jesus raising himself from the dead) literally happened?

[merwin]

55. I take it on faith.

Believing in something that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago is very different than living a fact-based life today. They aren't mutually exclusive. I believe it because I believe it.

For the same reason that people believe in the ancient portions of evolution. There is no record of this world ever being created, so how do you know it ever was, evolution or not? Before you snap at me on the evolution front, I personally believe that God created the earth and evolution as well, and that a good chunk of the Old Testiment was symbolic and not meant to be taken literally.

And it's not fundamentalist. Fundamentalist is strict and rigid adherance to the fundamental principles of the religion as they believe it, usually with intolerance of other views and secularism.

[Lost-in-FL]

57. Someone answer that please...

Cause this book its being going around and we do not know how many fundamentalist Christians got rid of some pages maybe because he did not liked how they sounded.

[Lost-in-FL]

2. Religious freedom...

Religion to me is like race, we should not discriminate but we should not have politicians "shoving" religion on us such as the GOP has being doing for the past 5 years. I don't care if Dean talks about a man that resurrected himself as long as he keeps it like that, just the talk.

[MisterLiberal]

4. But

that's how they infiltrate. Friendly, always smiling at you.

Then they pull out the "good ole book" and condemn you to Hell.

How do you think the GOP got the way it did? By accomodating people who believe like that. How can anyone expect anything rational to come from people that believe a man walked on water and turned wine into water?

[Lost-in-FL]

5. I'm with you...

But I trust "liberals" on matters of religion just the same way i distrust "Neo-cons" on financial matters. I'm not "paranoid" about liberals and religion, they are just trying to welcome those who believe in God from a party that seems to be abundant with pagans...

[MisterLiberal]

6. I'm not paranoid, either.

I am just questioning whether we should respect the political judgment of people who believe a man can raise the dead.

[Lost-in-FL]

9. Well...

They believed also that Bush speaks to God... but they now just realized that it is not true since Bush did not had a clue about Katrina and that Bush does not walk on water. And they are mad at Bush for that. Hey... I'll welcome their votes.

[notadmblnd]

40. it's ok for people to believe that bush talks to god

I have trouble believing that god talks back to bush though.

[MisterLiberal]

45. lol

they think Bush IS god!

[notadmblnd]

53. Well all I know is that Jesus was a jew

and it was basically Paul/Saul that created the christian religion. Jesus wasn't alive to be converted. I believe that God talked to Paul as much as I believe that god talks to bush, which is pretty much nil.

[CarbonDate]

8. Pagans are a lot more fun than Christians.

I've been a Christian, and I've been a pagan. Between the two groups, you can guess which one, when told that I'm an atheist, will gasp in disbelief and which one will say, "oh, okay; you up for some drinks?"

[notadmblnd]

16. not believing in any god doesn't make one a pagan

maybe what a christian would define as a heathen.. but certainly not a pagan. One would have to worship some sort of god to be a pagan.

[Lost-in-FL]

20. You are right but I don't see the big deal...

We are trying to get to the Christians who voted for Bush right? What it is so bad about that. We have Hindus, Muslims, Wiccas, any religion in the democratic party. There's still democrats and liberals that belive that a non Christian would not go to heaven (or wherever they are supposed to go). That has nothing to do with politics. Some are NASCAR fans, some love Boxing, etc.

[MisterLiberal]

23. the problem?

I don't see hindus muslims and wiccans trying to take over control of the national parties like I see christians doing.

I don't see NASCAR fans and boxing fans trying to take over parties and force their beliefs that everyone should drive at 150 mph or punch other people like I see christians doing.

Look at the repukes! They weren't always fundies! This somehow happened in the last twenty years!

Is there anyone here who literally believes this stuff and can explain it to me? Just curious, do NOT try to convert me!

[Lost-in-FL]

26. I don't...

but I guess I'm tolerant.

[notadmblnd]

32. one should not bring their religious affiliation to

the political table with them. Sure, you can be a religious person and buy into democratic principles without having to thump your bible at every political gathering. We all know inherently what is right and wrong. We don't have to read the bible to know that killing is wrong, we just know it. Some people attribute that to their religious training but I think it goes beyond that.

[merwin]

63. Exactly. Religion and politics are like beer and liquor.

Great seperate, but forget about mixing them unless you want a lot of smelly vomit everywhere.

[CarbonDate]

7. The purpose is the same as it is in the Republican Party:

To pander to the religious.

The actual belief systems of Christianity, Islam, etc. are completely incompatible with a free society, so one would think those religions would have no place in either political party, but one would be wrong.

Buddhism and Wicca might be compatible with a free society, but only atheism will truly set you free.

[MisterLiberal]

12. As another athiest,

does it chill you when you see "god" and the bible being touted here on DU?

Do you wonder what the party will be like five years from now? Ten?

I'm especially afraid that the DLC will connect up with the religious fanatics in our party. There wouldn't be a national party other than the Republican Christian Party, and the Democratic Christian Party.

:cry:

[merwin]

28. I completely disagree.

The actual belief system of Christianity is to follow Christ (hence the name). He taught that you should not kill others, should not judge what others do, should not discriminate, should love everyone, should give as much as possible.

In fact, that's completely compatible with a free society.

It's the distorted versions of Christianity that aren't compatible with a free society.

[MisterLiberal]

33. that's the PHILOSOPHY of Jesus

I'm talking about the RELIGION.

I'm asking about it because I'm seeing it creep in our party, even here at the DU!

This is going to be a crossroads question in a couple of years.

[merwin]

43. That is the religion.

For many people (myself included) being a Christian means simply believing that Christ was the son of God, that he did a lot of great things, and that my job is to live my life like he would.

Just like politics, Christianity also has a left and a right wing.

[MisterLiberal]

48. okay I think I can see that

but again, isn't a fundamentalist someone who believes that the impossible stuff in the bible LITERALLY happened? If Jesus is the son of GOD then that means that you literally believe GOD exists, right?

Help me out here. What's the difference between the left and right wing?

Does the left wing believe that it didn't happen literally and the right believes that it did literally happen?

[merwin]

60. That is only a portion of what a fundamentalist is.

Fundamentalism also includes a radical intolerance of other views and religions, as well as strict adherance to the religion as it is written.

Southern Baptists are a good description of fundamentalists (See Westboro Bapstist Church for a great example)

[MisterLiberal]

65. okay now you confused me

you're only "partially" fundamentalist?

DO you see my quandry here and why I am concerned?

There is a portion of our party that believes a man could literally perform magic and I'm not talking Harry Potter.

They at least KNOW it's fiction.

[merwin]

72. That's not at all what I said.

I was saying that you were only describing a portion of fundamentalism. Not that I'm 'partially fundamentalist'. Just like you having 2 arms and 2 legs doesn't make you a monkey.

Christianity definatly does not define men performing magic as one of it's beliefs. Jesus was/is God, and not just 'a man'. I don't think there's any Christian who believes that any man on earth could perform magic.

Just because you can't see something or understand something doesn't mean that it never happened. Thinking that a human being came out of a single cell organism is a pretty wacky thought as well if you stop and think about it. Random mixing of cells created humans over millions of years. (yes, i believe that too).

[MisterLiberal]

79. I wasn't trying to take you out of context

but you said that you held a portion of fundamentalist beliefs.

I consider walking on water something David Blaine would do...magic.

Jesus claiming to be god...THE GOD who created everything is beyond even a claim to magic.

My main point is separation of church and state; do we believe in it or not?

And while I have your attention, answer this; if you had to choose between your church and the state, which would it be?

Again, I only ask because that's the justification that those on the right use to do whatever they want.

[merwin]

90. I will never have to make the choice between just church and state.

What I believe religiously has abolutely nothing to do with politics. It's apples and oranges. It's like asking to choose between going to school or owning an electric car. There is no logical connection between those two in my mind.

Democrats believe in separation of church and state. Period. That doesn't mean that church can't exist. It just means don't bring it into government.

[Usrename]

76. They belive in a whole lot of crap that they pull out of their ass.

What is all this about "THE RAPTURE". This crap scares the hell out of me when their leader has his finger hovering over the big red button. These are psyco nutjob idealogs and they will probably never abandon * and the televangilists. If any DUers believe this stuff please let me know. I can take it. And I don't mean to offend, but that stuff seems pretty wacked to me, and plenty scarey.

[MisterLiberal]

80. My point exactly

These are not rational beliefs but we're supposed to welcome people who believe like that in our party.

***IF*** I were paranoid, I'd say that this was an attempt for the christians to corner both parties and since we're a two party system, we become the Religious States of America.

[Lost-in-FL]

49. Yup...

[baron j]

10. What irritates me more than the lack of separation of church and state

is that religion in this country and our government means mostly "Christianity." There are so many beliefs, including secular humanism. I'm so weary of always having to worry about how Christians want to interpret laws, rights, morality, etc.

[Lost-in-FL]

13. I don't remember...

things being like this, with this religion frenzy before. Hell broke lose after 9/11 and this Christian crusade.

[MisterLiberal]

17. Where does it stop?

Where do we draw a line in our party?

Do we practice separation of church and state on this POLITICAL board and set an example?

[notadmblnd]

73. it happens at the end-beginning of every millennium

people think the second coming is at hand, try to make it happen and after 25-30 years when it doesn't happen, settle down again for 50 or 60 years. I think it's cyclical, just like the seasons.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Read some US History

this is just another revival and when all is said and done it will be referred that way, a Revival. It has classic elements of one... just that this time a miscreaant used it to get power.

[Cocoa]

11. here's the scariest Christian of them all

:scared:

[MisterLiberal]

14. Dr. King's message

was about equality, not a man raising people from the dead.

Let me ask you this, mr sarcasm; do you believe this jesus junk?

[Lost-in-FL]

15. Oops...

:popcorn:

[Cocoa]

29. I'm not a Christian

so no I don't believe it.

But I don't think it's "junk" (and I would call a statement like that bigoted), and I think the values of the democratic party are consistent with Jesus's teachings, especially about poor people.

And I'm planning to vote for a Jew in 2008. Go Russ Feingold!

[MisterLiberal]

38. BIGOTED?

Because I don't believe a man can walk on the water?

I would call that statement COMMON SENSE!

[Lost-in-FL]

35. Why is he scarry?

Cause he used religion to unite African Americans and fight for human rights? That will be an example of the "Good side" of being religious.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Read the bible especially sectiions such as

and the poor shall inherit the kindgon of god, turn the other cheek, things like that.

That is the kind of religion taht belongs in progressive thought for it was and is progressive... work for the poor, heal the sick, visit the prisoner...

We need to learn how to speak the langauge again to reach out

Oh and as to a man resurrecting after three days, that is why that is a matter of belief... not one I will argue... even if I don't, but it is not one of my principles of faith

[MisterLiberal]

21. That's the bait

accept just the good parts of the bible and ignore the rest.

Well, after it's brought in, IT'S IN and the rest of the wackiness comes out.

And out of curiosity, nadinbrzezinski, what makes you a christian? I thought you had to believe that jesus came back from the dead and symbolically eat his body and stuff.

[Lost-in-FL]

24. So?

I don't believe in the Bible and Mr nadinbrzezinski do... what is the big deal? Are you now discriminating?

[MisterLiberal]

27. what?

We've already got a national religious party; we don't need to turn OUR party into another one!

Discriminating? You mean, don't want fundies to take over control of our party and platform?

Then you're damned right, I am!

[Lost-in-FL]

30. Why worry so much?

If we are already doomed... just enjoy the freedoms that are left.

[MisterLiberal]

36. But that's it

I *don't* believe we are doomed.

I believe if we make a stand that our party won't be taken over by the fundies.

Worse case scenario: Think about it; the DLC starts losing control as the base wakes up. Enter the "sleepers" in our party: the christians.

The DLC appeals to their issues and gets momentum. The party takes a hard shift to the right, either gaining a firm majority control of the party or fracturing us down the middle, giving control to the Repukes for a decade. Don't think the DLC wouldn't do it, either!

Best case scenario: We tell christians that we respect them but their religious viewpoints have no valid reason to be mixed in our political areas (separation of church and state!). So then we are actually PRACTICING separation of church and state instead of talking about it.

No Democrat who BELIEVES in separation of church and state should be offended!!!

[Lost-in-FL]

42. But...

This is the PRO-CHOICE party, the sinners party like we are called by the Repubics. Believe me, there's no fundies on the DNC (or I hope that is true).

[MisterLiberal]

50. again, trying not to be offensive

but if someone LITERALLY believes that a guy raised himself from the dead...LITERALLY BELIEVES THIS, that would make him or her a fundamentalist.

There's no rational way to believe something like that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. So god craeted the world in seven days

and there is only one god with no form and no texture and no physical presence.... these are articles of fatiht for judaism, does taht make me a fundie? And if this does, believing in an article of faith you really need to learn what a fundamentalist is...

(for the record no the wrold was not formed in seven days, at least not the way most think, we had a wonderful discusion on this matter not so long ago with a COSMOLOGIST) and try to prove or disprove the existence of god... good luck...

[Lost-in-FL]

59. Intelligent design?

:eyes:

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. no, not at all

how long does it take the arm of the galaxy to go around the center? Around seventy million years...

We have been around long enough that we could quite possibly be on that seventh day, and has nothing to do wiht ID. We just went amazing coincidence...

And yes, it is just that a coincidence, when yuo look at extinction patterns, well they don't match a "day" if you get my drift

We were having one of those strange days talking string theory and physics

[Lost-in-FL]

67. Just being myself...

Sarcastic... ;) :silly:

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. still this day and age

one has to clarify...

;-)

[MisterLiberal]

58. The bottom line is

Do we REALLY believe in separation of church and state?

Are we willing to PRACTICE it? Cause if we can't even practice it, we can't do it.

[merwin]

62. Religion and State are best served seperate, for the preservation of both.

Mixing Church and State leads to fundamentalism.

[MisterLiberal]

70. My fear exactly

So when I start seeing religion mixed with politics, I start getting worried.

So, what do we do? WHere do we draw the line? Would you christians be offended if we actually PRACTICED separation of church and state and kept religious discussions off political boards and political messages off religious boards?

If you would be offended, do you BELIEVE in separation of church and state? Again, this is what I fear, but I'm asking you to your face not behind your back.

[merwin]

77. I do not believe in mixing church and state.

Neither did Jesus, BTW :-)

If this were a state sponsored message board designed to discuss politics, then religion has no point in it. However, this is a board for democrats in general...

The whole concept of what Jesus taught is not at all compatible with being worked into government. Those are two completely seperate entities, that cannot work together.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. Render unto caesar

what is Caesar's

I have used this one when fundies go how religion belongs in the state... usually makes their heads explode.

:-)

[MisterLiberal]

84. That's a good one

I'll have to remember that!

[Lost-in-FL]

78. I think...

The reason why mixing politics and religion is so sucesful is because church is a big community forum. You have to realize that maybe, ** is not really a born again Christian and he sucesfully managed to kidnap religion to his advantage just the same way Osama bin Laden. My guess is that atheist should form a church or something... the non believers church... I don't know. The way is not bashing Christians or other religions either.

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. DING, DING, DING

there was an excellent Front Line Special where they made exactly that point

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Yes we do

and here is where Jefferson and the rest come to play

The Church is more properly understood as part of the private sphere while the State is far more proper in the public sphere, but there are places whhere they do intermingle, look at your colonial and early American history... the place where they sometimes met was the Church, on Sunday... after all our politicos went to church, not all but most did...

Am I in favor of having the Congress work on December 24th, as they used to? Maybe taht is a practice we should look into reviving. Should all receive a copy of the Jefferson Bibble? Maybe, but what about a copy of the Constitution and have a test on it.

[merwin]

34. Not every version of Christianity is a cult.

There are churches that believe in walking in the image of Christ, as opposed to others who look at the Old Testiment for what they believe in.

It's not about 'symbolically eating his body and stuff'.

[Lost-in-FL]

39. I understand that...

I used to be Catholic but I am now awake. I also understand his point but I guess I stopped worring.

[MisterLiberal]

41. Forgive me for not being up on your beliefs

but don't you symbolically eat Jesus's body and symbolically drink his blood?

Isn't that kinda gross?

[Lost-in-FL]

46. It is just symbolic (like choice and elections)...

Actually the blood is actually wine... pretty good stuff. Too bad we just get a little.

[merwin]

61. LOL.

[merwin]

47. I personally don't.

I'm not much for symbolism. As George Carlin says, I'll leave symbols to the symbol minded.

Just like I don't believe that living my life like Jesus doesn't mean that I should go and get myself crucified.

I am part of the very liberal wing of Christianity though.

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. I am not christian, I am Jewish

see the resurrction IS a matter of belief an article of faith

And by teh way, the good parts were used by people like MLK, who spoke the language very effectively.

what they have done is tell yuou this is a christian country, bull hokey it is not, but we need an ecumenical aproach and preach to the people why we can and will help them... read MLK for ideas, or Ghandhi for that matter... protecting the poor is not a christian value, it is a human value... but yuo need to talk the langauge that the people will understand, and if this is the language of faith, you are surrendering this to them if you are not willing to use it.

Now that does not mean religion belongs in shcools or government, but I will use any thing I can to aproach the people. Oh and you too can have fun with fundies by the way.

[Usrename]

19. Faith based equality?

If you understand the teachings of our lord and saviour then you must recognize that, yes, the USofA might very well be a nation founded on these teachings. I think reading the Bible was expected (they didn't watch TV) in the days that the country was founded. They must have understood the dangers of state sanctioned religion by way of recent history in the old world.

I think that Americanism might be a religion in itself. By that I mean a belief system based on equality and basic human rights. I don't think this is inconsistant with the gospels at all. To the contrary. If this equality and basic human rights aren't given by divine providence, then by whom? I like the idea of something greater than man or the state. The current adminstration want's to be the ones who giveth and taketh away. It sucks totally.

[MisterLiberal]

31. okay I dont mean to offend you

but if you believe all of this stuff, why are you a Democrat and another fundie a Republican?

Tell me why I should welcome religion into our POLITICAL PARTY? Don't you see how it gets twisted once religion gets into power?

And I am very curious how someone who sounds intelligent can believe these things. You say "our lord and saviour" and it just rolls off your tongue! How can you call someone who is dead "lord"?

The biggest question: If it came to choosing between "your lord and saviour" and the Democratic Party or a particular platform issue that you would find religiously offensive but is totally legal, which would you choose?

The reason I ask this is because that's the "justification" the fundies use to do whatever they want.

Thanks for answering my questions.

[merwin]

86. You do not have to welcome religion into the party.

You should welcome people who have a variety of religious beliefs into the party.

You can be a democrat and not be pro-abortion. Very easily actually. I don't believe that abortion is a good thing. I think that it shouldn't ever happen. But I'm not going to stop someone from having one or make anyone feel bad about it, because they have a very good reason for doing what they chose to do.

Freedom to choose is a core belief of the democratic party, and that doesn't just include freedom over your body. It also includes freedom over your mind. If someone wants to believe something that has nothing to do with politics, even when you don't agree with it, the fact is that it is their choice. As long as it doesn't start mixing in with politics, it falls completely under the democratic beliefs.

[Usrename]

96. It's the name of a book. The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour

Jesus Christ Authorized King James version. It rolls off my tongue like gone with the wind or breakfast of champions. I did not mean to be cryptic or offensive in using that phrase. I was trying to identify a specific topic in the Bible, the meme of Christianity if you will. There's a lot of stuff in the Bible. A whole lot of stuff. I was trying to distinguish from say, stuff like the Ten Commandments. My reading of the Ten Commandments is that you shouldn't make graven images of them and put them in the public square. It would violate the Commandments themselves. But I digress.

I sin all the time and break the law occasionally. There is a difference. I don't think the two should have anything to do with each other if that answers the question. Laws should reflect the values of society, without imposing, or superimposing religeous views.

But now my original question again. If not something greater than man or the state, then whom.

[AntiCoup2K4]

51. Oh yay, it's another rabid anti-theist thread!!

As if God or Jesus Christ were your enemy? Or Democrats who believe in God are the problem.

Yes I believe Jesus Christ rose from the dead. But unlike Bush and the Freepers, I also believe in His teachings and do my best to live by them. Which is admittedly easier some days than others.

There's no danger of losing control of this party to the "fundies".

Yeah, there's a right wing element trying to take over the Democrats, but they're corporatists in nature, not religionists. And mentioning their name on this board will get you targeted instantly, but their initials include a "D", an "L", and a "C".

Trying to drive God out of the Democratic party isn't going to solve a damned thing. Rather, all people of faith, and even those of no faith should be openly welcomed, so the fundies can no longer use the excuse of the Democrats being a "godless party" and steal away the rural votes who would otherwise never consider voting Republican.

[MisterLiberal]

54. Then assuage my fears and

tell me that there ISN'T any kind of movement in the Democratic Party to move us to the right on religious issues.

That it's all of a sudden "okay" to hear things about prayers and god and the bible (conveniently only CHRISTIAN religious stuff) during our political discussions.

Tell me that the DLC wouldn't take advantage of whatever religious people they can in the Democratic Party to move the party even FURTHER to the right!!!

I'm just freaking out because more and more posts on this POLITICAL board are becoming religious in nature. And after awhile, that becomes accepted political behavior.

How can we say we believe in separation of church and state when we don't PRACTICE IT?

[Lost-in-FL]

64. Check this web site...

<http://liberalslikechrist.org/index.htm> This will give you an idea of the Christian values of the Right vs Left (Cons vs Libs). It might give answers to some questions. Like someone said earlier, it is to live the way Jesus lived his life with peace.

[Lecky]

71. I consider myself an Agnostic and I have to ask you...

What in the hell are you so scared about?

Everything you just said was extremely paranoid and irrational.

[MisterLiberal]

74. I've already told you

I'm sure some Repukes said the same thing before they lost control of their party, too.

"It'll never happen"

***IF*** we believe in the separation of church and state, why can't we PRACTICE IT?

That's all I'm asking.

[merwin]

81. The Republicans who believe thatneed to be shown that they were wrong.

It is the job of the people in our party to keep church and state seperated.

The fear of losing control is completely rational, and should exist, but it should not distort the beliefs of our party. Namely, the freedom to believe whatever the hell you want to believe without interference from the government.

[Lost-in-FL]

91. At least we know who wrote the constitution...

We can belive in what it is said about the separation of church and state...

[Lecky]

85. So are you saying that Democrats should all become Atheists

or at least refrain from talking about their religion on these boards?

Surely you can tell the difference between sharing one's relgious beliefs on a political forum vs. having one's spiritual beliefs influence federal government.

You know what...I sometimes find some Atheists to be just as annoying as some religious nuts...they never shut up about their beliefs/nonbeliefs and are always complaining about people with different beliefs from their own.

[Lost-in-FL]

88. Popcorn...

:popcorn: popcorn? anyone?

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. hold the salt

:popcorn:

[merwin]

92. Religious debates are fun to watch. I usually don't participate, but

I figure what the hell, why not? :-)

Speaking in terms of democratic political beliefs, what someone believes religiously doesn't matter, as long as they don't force it upon others or bring it into the government.

You could believe that aliens came down to earth 10,000,000 years ago and planted life, and still be a democrat.

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. but, but, but they did

what you missed the memo?:tinfoilhat: so tell my buddies at Area 51....

And yuo have no idea how much fun aliens can be in fiction

;-)

[Lecky]

98. You are right about that...

I've learned my lesson about religious debates...they are pointless, and it's best to just respect each others differences.

I just thought it was a bit extreme that the OP thought our party was going to start pulling Schiavo-like stunts in the future.

[merwin]

99. If that ever happened, it would no longer be our party.

It would be neo-dem :-)

[nadinbrzezinski]

100. Uggh, now I need to take a shower

paging joe lieberman...

[Lecky]

94. Did I say something bad?

:shrug:

[Usrename]

102. Make me thirsty - think I need a drink

:popcorn:

[AntiCoup2K4]

87. You are absolutely correct in identifying the TRUE problem in this party..

....that being the DLC. And if the DLC tries using religion as a tool, then the counter message to them, just as it is to the Falwell/Robertson crowd, is that the "values" they represent are not compatible with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Or insert any other religious foundations which may apply here. And atheists could always point out the secular failings of the DLC ways (i.e. would Thomas Jefferson pander to corporations?)

The values of Jesus Christ, Ghandi, and Martin Luther King are all compatible with each other, and with the Democratic party. I don't have to be a Hindu to support what Ghandi did, any more than you need to be a Christian to support MLK. But somehow the Robertsons and Falwells of the world have hijacked the name of Jesus, and that's just wrong. If the question is asked "What Would Jesus Do?", I can guarantee that the answer would NEVER be "bomb the living shit out of Iraq" let alone "allow thousands of Americans to live (and die) in third world conditions for 6 fucking days while I play golf in Arizona and pretend to be a country singer"

Even the atheists on this board have more "Christian values" than George Bush Jr. And that's the reality that needs to be out there in terms of "framing the issues"

[merwin]

93. Hear, hear! On that note, I'm retiring for the evening :-)

I couldn't say it any better than that.

[MrBenchley]

75. It's your own business....

You know, "render unto Caesar" and all that crap....

[applegrove]

101. There have always been many religious ones on the DU. Many Dems.

are religious. I know for a fact that the atheists can get pretty intolerant of those who believe in some explanation. Perhaps they feel like speaking up more? Perhaps people are going through hard times so are talking more to their god. Who knows. I notice it too.

Accept it. A good part of the world believes in something and like anything done right - if they are humble and have good intentions with it - it makes them stronger.

[RiDuvessa]

103. So exactly what is your solution?

Kick all the Christians out of the Democratic party? That sounds like you're shooting yourself in the foot.

You are talking about keeping religion and politics separate, but you are the one who started this discussion. How is that keeping politics and religion separate?

If you want to ban religious discussion from this site, (Not very liberal of you) then send your suggestion to Skinner and let him make the decision.

I would prefer myself to be more inclusive, and just be on my guard for any signs that the Democratic party is being overrun by fundies.

You are probably just going to have to deal with the idea that people (even liberals) will make some political decisions based on their religious beliefs. There are many religions in this world that have beliefs that are just as irrational as the Christian religion. Many people's moral values are based on their religion. I don't judge people based on their religious views, and I prefer that others don't judge me on mine.

[cleveramerican]

104. One orients himself through religion.....

Millions of Americans are comforted by Religious teachings and thought. What are you afraid of? If you are comforted by religon, good for you ,if your not thats okay too. Some are comforted by Yoga or soap operas, or rock music or a walk in the park. This is a free country, your free to be as freaky as you please, but you can't expect us not to notice.

I always thought liberals came to enlightenment through exploration of ideas. To be curious is to be alive.I'm not worried that overzealous christians will hi-jack our party and its a little silly to wring your hands over such things.

" I do not wish to expiate,but to live. My life is for itself,and not for a spectacle. What I must do is all that should concern me, not what the people think.You will always find those who think they know what is your duty better than you. It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion. It is easy in solitude to live after our own. The great man is he who in the midst of the maddening crowd is able to keep with perfect sweetness, the independence of solitude"
Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Moderator]

105. Locking

Flamebait and religion bash. Both not good.