Texas Democrats eye religious voters

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/legislature/stories/040405dntexmoraldemscont.9b8e5.html


House Democrats are seeking guidance from the Bible and "progressive clergy" as they work on the business of the current Legislature. And Texans are helping lead a national effort to mobilize a fragmented legion of Democratic evangelicals who think the Bible leans left, not right.

Democrats say that while Republicans have long stressed issues such as abortion and homosexuality, they want to turn the values debate toward social justice. In many ways, that means using religious imagery to sell their economic and social policies.

A recent moral message from Mr. Martinez Fischer states: "Jesus was not with the landowners, merchants and nobles. He was with the poor. ... Your job is to frame the issues and make it clear that Jesus always stayed close to the poor."

<snip>

Dean Grodzins, a history professor at Medville Lombard Theology School in Chicago, said Democrats could look to history for guidance, including the role played by black churches during the civil rights movement. Since then, he said, "Democrats have not talked about values as much as issues. ... People want to vote their values, and there is a huge realm of religion that's been neglected."

It is our own fault that we do not appeal to the faith based voter. We should have learned how to talk to them a long, long time ago.

Any good salesperson knows that being successful requires making whatever you are selling attractive and desirable to the buyer.

Voting has to do with country, and community. And the people's relationship with civic leaders. Make voting about values, yes, but moral values do not have to be religious.

Using your analogy, I prefer a salesman tell me about the value of the product, and not try to distract my attention with marketing tricks. This country already has one party putting lipstick on the pig they're trying to sell. The Dems don't need to emulate them.

The simple fact is that for a very large number of voting Americans religion has an awfully lot to do with making voting and political decisions. And faith based decisions are made for faith based reasons. Mere human rationale becomes irrelevant.

That is not how I make my decisions but I can assure you from living in crazy red f*cking armpit of the Bible Belt JOklahoma that there are many, many people who do make their decisions regarding voting just this way. Point is we don't have to understand their faith based "thought" process or agree with it or endorse it to appeal to them. And we can appeal to them.

Dems too often can't talk and appeal to those outside their own circle. I fear we will continue to be a minority party until we learn to do that.

Community is an inclusive concept that requires that the needs and desires of all be considered. Scripture does indeed have much to say about community, relationships and political leadership. It is our failure when we do not communicate to a particular group and show that our vision is entirely consistent with their needs and desires.

Politics is inherently pragmatic. So is salesmanship. You may be interested in value - but there is someone else who also values aesthetics, and another who values resale value and another who values service and another who values company reputation, and another who values portability, etc. We can buy the same thing for different reasons.

the religious needs of the community. There is no need for civil leadership to minister to religious needs. It is not a betrayal of religion when politics doesn't overtly discuss religion. Even Jesus said "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's".

I think a politician can say "I am a moral man" without having to say "I am a religious man". And I think the Dems can find a way to communicate that to voters without taking the Republicans' shortcut, which is "I am a religious man," period.

to speak to the needs and desires of those who vote based on faith based reasons. The question isn't whether they are religious or whether they can minister to those who are.

The question is whether they can effectively communicate their vision and desires to those within the faith based community - and communicate in such a way that they can appeal to the needs and desires of those in that community. The Bible has a great deal to say about social and economic justice - and about what makes a good national leader. Political candidates and politicians don't have to preach or minister in order to use images or phrases that allude to those principles.

Faith permeates all aspects of the lives of the faithful and devout among us. Many of them view their faith as a lifestyle. As such it is something they take with them into their mundane everyday lives. They use the principles of their faith to make political decisions - and that, simply, is why we must be proactive and use faith as a tool to communicate with these voters.

The fact is that here in the United States there is a sizeable group of people that decide how to vote based upon their own peculiar faith based reasons. That makes it is incumbent upon those who want those votes to communicate a vision that is consistent with the needs and desires of those within that community.

We are wrong to try and make reason and faith completely and mutually exclusive. Faith has a significant role in our communities and our history. We would do well to respect that and use it as a tool to gain political support. As much as I despise religion I know it is not simply goling to go away. It will continue to play a role in our society and in our politics. There is simply no reason - aside from our own ignorance and pride - that Dems should not be proactive in using faith as a tool to get political votes.

And, IMHO, faith and morality cannot be equated. There is a whole bunch of stuff that happens in Scripture under God's direction that I do not find particularly moral (e.g. preference given to one group of people, prohibition on heterosexual marriage to others outside that group which could be viewed as a form of ethnic purity, lying for self-prtection as when Abraham was instructed by God to say that Sarah was his sister rather than his wife, the offering of one's son as a sacrifice, etc.)

Politicians don't need to be religious to appeal to voters, but they should use faith as a tool--Biblical images and phrases--to communicate and get votes. Democrats are being too proud and ignorant to use faith as a tool to get votes.

Those are your words. What I understand them to say is:

If Democrats would just quote the Bible, or allude to what the Bible says about certain principles (like social justice), then "faith-based voters" would vote for them. It is ignorant of the Democrats to talk about things like social justice without using religious images and phrases. The Democrats don't have to BE religious, they just have to talk as though they are; using religion this way is actually respecting people's faith.


That's what the hypocritical Republicans do. I ain't buying what you're selling.

and I won't be surprised when the faith based fundies keep voting based only on the issues of abortion, gay marriage and freedom of religious expression. Never mind that social and economic justice is a primary Biblical admonition that we Dems seem to be completely unwilling and unable to marshall in our support. The devout among us will never vote for dems until the dems are able to make their message relevant to them.

Faith based decisions require faith based rationale. We can be as reasonable and as rational as we want to be - and never relate to them. It doesn't matter whether I buy it or whether you buy it. If you want their vote then ***they*** have to buy it. Plain and simple.

People are subject to multitudes of persuasive messages everyday. That is true in entertainment, political, educational, religious, financial and advertising fields. Caveat emptor, let the buyer beware. But just because you or I wouldn't buy it doesn't mean that the sales technique is necessarily flawed. This is not an ideal and perfect world. And the business of politics and political messages is dirty and pragmatic. Personally I do not think the it is at all deceptive to suggest that a political agenda that seeks social and economic justice is entirely consistent with Scripture.

I won't buy a kitchen appliance or a car or anything else just because of its color. But there are people who will. If I happen to be selling a particular widget then I want everybody to know and see my widget in all its available colors. But I will, nonetheless, continue to advertise all of the features and benefits of acquiring the widget. Why should I choose another course of action if I am selling a political agenda or candidate?

If somebody is shopping for a political candidate or agenda and I know their decision will be based on their faith then I am more likely to be successful if I address their interests and desires.

"Faith-based decisions are made for faith-based reasons", and we have to address their "needs and desires".

You sound like an junior account exec with only one idea to show the client. You've spent the entire presentation using the same pitch. You seem to understand that advertising is about features and benefits, but you just keep showing me the same campaign that my competitor uses. As a client, I know that copycat campaigns are a weak way to get new customers and usually fail, so I'll just end this meeting with a polite thank you for your presentation and if you come up with anything new I'll be happy to give it a look.

And You Just Want to Buy Value and Reason. Fine. But other shoppers want something else. By all means don't make the pitch to the religious right. But don't condemn those who do. You will never understand or approve what resonates with faith based voters because you don't understand them or share their peculiar values and rationale. You don't have to. And, frankly, I don't care if you are offended by a democratic candidate or clergyman who does make that appeal. The vision and agenda that dems have for this country should be big enough to include and appeal to folks that we neither like nor understand. And if we cannot or will not do that then perhaps that liberal elitist label has at least a bit of merit.

I live in crazy red f*cking JOklahoma. I studied for seven years at Six Flags Over Jesus. Some of my professors wrote some of the inspirational tomes of the religious right. Just because you don't get it or you find it hypocritical doesn't mean they will. Remember, they think shrub is on a mission from God. Do you understand that? Would you be surprised to learn that they think that every political leader is appointed by God and that every person is imperfect and to some extent hypocritcal?

We can attract the faith based voter by promoting an agenda of social and economic justice, a theme which is predominat throughout Scripture. An agenda that focuses on social and economic justice is very different from one that focuses on a few sensationalized issues that the Repukes have rather successfully portrayed as moral issues. There is, after all, a distinction between justice and morality. Justice is systemic, conforms to fact and reason, and focuses on fairness and equity. Morals on the other hand refer almost exclusively to the frequently sexually oriented and often subjective goodness or badness of personal character and conduct. Which of these concepts would seem to be the more natural fit for a political agenda and which would seem to have a broader appeal? Personally, I have no problem saying that justice trumps morality. But then perhaps others do not make the distinciton and believe that selling justice is the same as selling morality. Its not. The goods are very different.

This whole exchange has pretty much confirmed my suspicion that dems will never make the effort to try to earn the faith based vote. Fine. But if we don't make the effort then we should not whine about losing the next election and remaining a minority party. Of course, that makes me a passenger on a ship that weill sink unless our leaders make an effort to patch the holes. And that is an action I will continue to urge - with or without your understanding or approval.

God did NOT tell Abraham to say that Sarah was his wife. That was his own idea. Nor was it a lie. Sarah was his half-sister. In that time and culture it was not uncommon to be married to a sibling. Among the some Egyptian dynasties, total sibling marriage was often the rule.

who relied on the assertion that Sarah was Abraham's sister clearly thought the statement was deceptive. But you are right, Scripture does not specifically record that God instructed Abraham to make the statement.

stump speeches and his rousing Convention speech. He was ahead of the curve...as usual.

I saw him here in JOklahoma. And I was delighted to hear him take on the nutcase fundie leaders by name. And that takes guts here in the armpit of the Bible Belt.

shd be sent to iraq. if all the fundies obliterate themselsves, the rational can go on w/ their lives.

If the Terri Schiavo Jesus freak show didn't scare away moderate or religious Republican voters, nothing will!

:headbang:
rocknation

thanks to a strategy of reliance on quasi Republicans (like John Sharp and the late Lt. Gov. Bullock) for leadership. There are some bright spots but there is no coordination and dissemination of message. Texas Democrats also have the same problem that plagues National Democrats-- they don't know how to operate in opposition. I don't think there are very many votes to be picked up by pandering to the religious right in the churches. It would be better to make issues out of declining infrastructure, education policy wackiness, and environmental degradation that is occurring in the growing urbanized areas of the state. That and try to prepare for the coming demographic bomb which has already manifest itself in that old right wing bastion of Dallas County. It wouldn't hurt to hang Social Security privitization around the necks of the Texas Delay Delegation either.

would position the democrats to pick up on the demographic bomb.

You could run a preacher on this ... there are the good guys in the pews and pulpits.

The Right wants all of our institutions, and it's making disturbing progress toward that goal.

the hell back into your churches and teach your congregation some morality and ethics.

I think the message should be "You vote for us, great, glad to have you. But if you're expecting to get 'special favours' because of all the votes you allegedly brought us, think again. We're here for ALL the people, both UN-churched and churched, and if you can't hang with that, there's an American Taliban party you can go join..."

Are people getting paid money to come up with these lame strategies? Geez, Louise, "Hey! the GOP jumped into bed with the Religious Right and won it all. I know, We'll find a Religious LEFT and climb into bed with THEM!"

Grodzins got it backwards. WE talk about "Values", crap that doesn't get much press, like living wages, international respect, education for everyone, care for kids that are ALREADY born, etc.BORING!

The GOP goes on ISSUES, like Gay marriage, Women's right to choose, "How did OUR oil get under THEIR sand?", TERRA! TERRA! TERRA!, etc.

The GOP spins these talking points around until the Sheeple adopt them as their "values".

why not work on a educating people instead of feeding into their fears...

Educated people know that the best government is a secular government. They know that a secular government doesn't mean that they can't go worship as they see fit...it just means their worship can't run the country.

Why not promote the separation of church and state...granted, it will have to be in baby-talk terms so as to not scare those off who have been warped into believing that the separation of church and state equals communism, satanism, infertility, dishpan hands, and moon worship. ..oh, and the Sponge Bob Agenda. Mustn't forget that ev'ell Sponge Bob.

Yes, they'll have to be treated as if they are just now beginning their education all over again. Think of it as writing on a blank slate...and it really will be just like that in many cases.

Support the Constitution.
Defend the Bill of Rights.
Promote the common good through secular law that protects the rights of all people...instead of embracing any religion in government.. under any description by any terms...which limits rights and always has...

Think of it in the long term..and don't be on the wrong side of history. History will either judge America as a country that gave in to a scam...and it is a scam set up by repukes to herd the Democrats to moving into the direction the repukes want the Democrats to move...or history will say America went through a crisis and came out of it stronger....still free. still secular. still thriving...because Democrats in America stood up to the Republican threat to democracy and refused to bow down to fear and ignorance.

People rise to the expectations held of them...if you expect the lowest from them...you'll get the lowest....instead of playing to religion...play to something higher(and yes, there is something higher) people are higher...the preservation of democracy is higher....don't play the religious card...you can't win democracy with it.

and I don't give a fuck if you get mad about what I just typed. I don't care what your religion is or isn't...you can still worship in a secular society...but it gets pretty damned hard to be secular in an increasingly religious society...proving a secular society is infinitely more fair and just. The republicans are just using religion as a trap..a scam..to push America more to the right...and many in the Democratic Party are breaking their necks trying to climb over each other to get there (to the right)

Instead of taking offense to what I typed, you might want to take offense to how the repukes are using and distorting your religion to move America to the right...because if right wins, we all lose.

There will be NO "liberal" Christians in a right wing theocratic America. Embrace(fight for) secularism in government and save liberal Christianity. It's the only way.

Hear Hear!

I tell you, in the eighteen years growing up in a Presbyterian church, I can't remember a single time that 'gay marriage' or even if homosexuality was ever an issue. We did occasionally discuss abortion, but it was always a very sensitive topic and was never the center of our concern. I'm not saying that these aren't important issues....it's just that they were never things that my church emphasized growing up.

However,

We DID focus on issues of social justice.
We DID have clothing drives to help provide decent clothing for those in need.
We DID spend hours volunteering at the local food bank.
We DID go to New Iberia, LA and Albuquerque, NM to build houses with Habitat for Humanity.
We DID discuss the death penalty at length.
We DID talk about racial discrimination, and discrimination of all sorts.
We DID spend time on trash cleanups to help make our environment look better (and generally, as a church, took steps to care for our environment).

I'm glad to see our Texas Democratic party reaching out and trying to get in touch with local Christian communities. Back home, my father was just recently ordained as an Elder of our church. It really bothers me that he has also recently become more and more of a Wingnut (only watches FoxNews, and reads the DrudgeReport)...when we talk specifically about politics, he's always on the Republican side and is always trying to defend Republican policies.

However, when we just talk about issues, I generally can get him to agree that we should push for Universal Healthcare, that we should care for our Environment, and for people who are living in poverty. Last time that I was home for Easter, he started asking me why I didn't support privatizing Social Security...when I reframed the issue as an issue that personally, I believe is based on social justice, an area where most of the values that I have right now was instilled by my church, I think he started to actually 'understand' the other side of the argument.

When I consider WHY I support the Democratic party, it's primarily because this party shares more of the values that I was taught by my church while growing up.