Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nearer, My God, to the G.O.P., NY Times, 1/02/2006

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:22 AM
Original message
Nearer, My God, to the G.O.P., NY Times, 1/02/2006


NANCY PELOSI, the Democratic leader in the House, sounded like an Old Testament prophet recently when she denounced the Republican budget for its "injustice and immorality" and urged her colleagues to cast their no votes "as an act of worship" during this religious season.

This, apparently, is what the Democrats had in mind when they vowed after President Bush's re-election to reclaim religious voters for their party. In the House, they set up a Democratic Faith Working Group. Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader, created a Web site called Word to the Faithful. And Democratic officials began holding conferences with religious progressives. All of this was with the intention of learning how to link faith with public policy. An event for liberal politicians and advocates at the University of California at Berkeley in July even offered a seminar titled "I Don't Believe in God, but I Know America Needs a Spiritual Left."

A look at the tactics and theology of the religious left, however, suggests that this is exactly what American politics does not need. If Democrats give religious progressives a stronger voice, they'll only replicate the misdeeds of the religious right.

For starters, we'll see more attempts to draw a direct line from the Bible to a political agenda. The Rev. Jim Wallis, a popular adviser to leading Democrats and an organizer of the Berkeley meeting, routinely engages in this kind of Bible-thumping. In his book "God's Politics," Mr. Wallis insists that his faith-based platform transcends partisan categories.




Appenders comments --
1. I went to that Jim Wallis-Michael Lerner Conference. It was definitely worthwhile.

2. Go to your library and read some of Michael Lerner's books, some of Jim Wallis' books, some of Forrest Church's books. They have something to say to us "Progressives" and "Faith Based Progressive" is not an oxymoron.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
1. Mr. Loconte, Sir
Seems to fit an old jest defining a liberal as a man who will not take his own side in a quarrel. This thing he deplores here is something we need badly in our politics....

"Can't nobody here play this game?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
13. play the game, yes, but without GOD in politics
it simply has no business in politics or the public sector, especially as a justification for any type of legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. I enjoy reading Jim Wallis.
I'm still getting to know him.

There are many of us who are non-Christian, but who are people of faith and progressives.

Does he see a role for us also?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I can only judge from his book and the Berkeley Conference
And the who thing was very ecumenical and universal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. That sounds good! (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
4. This atheist loves what Jim Wallis has to say
Edited on Mon Jan-02-06 12:33 AM by Warpy
Rev. Wallis is a man who has managed to get the point of Jesus's teachings, and I have a great deal of respect for him for his beliefs and his courage in speaking truth to power.

No, faith and progressivism are not mutually exclusive, although Calvinism and progressivism definitely are.

The problem most people have when they start talking about the religious right is defining them as Christian. They are not. They are Calvinist.

Christianity and progressivism have a long mutual history. There are a lot of progressive movements that have started in the churches, not the least of which were the Catholic Workers' movement and the civil rights movement.

It can be so again, but it's not going to happen at any of those glossy megachurches preaching determinism and the worship of wealth.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Not proselytizing -- BUT
You may want to check out Thomas Jefferson's Bible, and also the works of Rev. Forrest Church (Senator Frank Church's son).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
6. I don't care how a person comes to the truth.
Edited on Mon Jan-02-06 12:50 AM by longship
It's obvious that the rapture right has not found a way to truth, but to delusions.

But if somebody can use theology to bring in some fresh faces to the battle, more power to them. This is altogether a good end. However, there are many of us who are fierce defenders of a very strict interpretation of the First Amendment. I would not want to have my right to *not* believe in any jeopardy by rampant abuse of that amendment. So, although I support these efforts, the mixing of religion and liberal politics is very worrisome, just as it was when it was conservative politics. I think it's wise to keep a jaundiced eye on things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
7. Has the writer criticized Republicans in the past for their
use of religion, such as putting a cross in the lectern at the 2004 Republican National Convention?

Or is the mixing of religion and public policy only a problem for him since the Democrats joined in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. to answer my own question, the writer supports mixing Church and State
when Republicans do it, such as Bush's faith-based initiatives:
http://www.townhall.com/phillysoc/loconte.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MetaTrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. My God, what a turd this Loconte is
Check out what he had to say on Iraq:

The mischief began at least 20 years ago, when the U.S. Catholic Bishops issued "The Challenge of Peace," a pastoral letter redefining the litmus test for war. Not only must military action be a last resort, they said, but "all peaceful alternatives must have been exhausted."

That slippery phrase has reappeared — and muddied the entire debate over Iraq. The Vatican today issued a one-line rebuttal to war plans: "Those who decide that all peaceful means that international law makes available are exhausted assume a grave responsibility before God, their conscience, and history." The American bishops have repeatedly invoked the new standard to denounce a U.S.-led attack. So has the National Council of Churches, which has demanded that all peaceful alternatives be "explored and exhausted." Last week former President Jimmy Carter used the expression like a club to bludgeon the military option. "War can be waged only as a last resort," Carter wrote for the New York Times, "with all nonviolent options exhausted." U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan says war is acceptable "only if we are sure that every peaceful means of achieving Iraq's disarmament has been exhausted."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-loconte031903.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thom Little Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 05:32 AM
Response to Original message
10. Nearer, My God, to the G.O.P.
Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House, sounded like an Old Testament prophet recently when she denounced the Republican budget for its "injustice and immorality" and urged her colleagues to cast their no votes "as an act of worship" during this religious season.

This, apparently, is what the Democrats had in mind when they vowed after President Bush's re-election to reclaim religious voters for their party. In the House, they set up a Democratic Faith Working Group. Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader, created a Web site called Word to the Faithful. And Democratic officials began holding conferences with religious progressives. All of this was with the intention of learning how to link faith with public policy. An event for liberal politicians and advocates at the University of California at Berkeley in July even offered a seminar titled "I Don't Believe in God, but I Know America Needs a Spiritual Left."

A look at the tactics and theology of the religious left, however, suggests that this is exactly what American politics does not need. If Democrats give religious progressives a stronger voice, they'll only replicate the misdeeds of the religious right.

For starters, we'll see more attempts to draw a direct line from the Bible to a political agenda. The Rev. Jim Wallis, a popular adviser to leading Democrats and an organizer of the Berkeley meeting, routinely engages in this kind of Bible-thumping. In his book "God's Politics," Mr. Wallis insists that his faith-based platform transcends partisan categories.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/02/opinion/02loconte.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. What a mischaracterization of Jim Wallis
he is anything but a dominionist. Matching one reference to Isiah with another is completely unfair. Nowhere has Wallis hinted at anything but a clear separation between church and state.

This is a thinly desguised hitpiece coming from a Heritage fellow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lvx35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-02-06 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Good for the Dems!
That's great. I think there's alot of christians who are really beginning to question whether torture is such a christian value when they look at Bush. Its about time the democrats really let their religious base know they care, and made clear that a separation of church in state is to protect the church, in the tradition of the pilgrims, as much as anything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC