Religion on the stump could add a new dimension to election

[AmyStrange]

Religion on the stump could add a new dimension to election
By Walter Shapiro

FROM: http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040611/6279562s.htm
WASHINGTON -- The banners for Wednesday's forum proudly proclaimed, ''Faith and Progressive Policy: Proud Past, Promising Future.'' Organized by the Center for American Progress -- a liberal group founded last year as a counterweight to conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation -- the conference was squarely at the intersection of religion and Democratic politics.

That explained the buzz from the nearly 500 liberals in the audience when a 29-year-old woman named Mara Vanderslice stood up during the question period and identified herself as the director of religious outreach for the John Kerry campaign.

Vanderslice's question for the religious thinkers on stage was refreshingly direct: ''What do you have to say to us?''

Even though it was hard to imagine that there were any backers of George W. Bush in the hotel meeting room, the partisan tenor of the query made the moderator, Sister Maureen Fiedler, nervous. She explained that under the tax laws, the Center for American Progress could not engage in direct political advocacy. So Fiedler cleverly rephrased the question to ask whether the panelists had any advice for ''progressive candidates'' from either party.

<SNIP>

[PurityOfEssence]

1. My god can beat up your god

No he can't!! My god's super-big, he could beat your god with one of his scary-clawed hands tied behind his back!

Nuh-huh!

Yuh-huh!

Sez who!!

Sez me, ya baby!!

(Yes, the devolution of political philosophy has nowhere near hit its nadir, we can plunge ever-deeper yet.)

I do say that it's great to see Christians not taking it lying down from the right; I still remember Sharpton's great line "we got a battle here between the Christian right and the right Christians", though, and I appreciate the sentiment. Still, though, if all the screaming is done along these lines, it becomes even more of a tacit acceptance that this society is only for the religious, and the rest of us are only tolerated because of some quaint mistakes in a 227 year-old document.