Don't hand religion to the right

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1440525,00.html

The secular left must stop sniping and realise it has Christian allies

Giles Fraser and William Whyte
Friday March 18, 2005
The Guardian

For decades, the political class on this side of the Atlantic has prided itself on the absence of religious culture wars. The obsession with abortion, gay marriage and obscenity, the alliance between the secular and religious right - these are peculiarly American pathologies. It couldn't happen here. After all, we're just not religious enough.

Except it does seem to be happening here. In making abortion an election issue, Michael Howard has prompted the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, pointedly to warn against assuming "that Catholics would be more in support of the Labour party". Elsewhere, the Christian right targets the BBC, and the Church of England is being colonised by homophobic evangelicals with broad smiles and loads of PR savvy. No wonder the cogs are whirring at Conservative central office on how best to exploit the voting power of religion.

In contrast, the left continues to push religion away. They "don't do God", in Alastair Campbell's famous phrase. Even those politicians of the left who "do God" privately have to be effectively outed, as Ruth Kelly was over her membership of Opus Dei. It never used to be like this. There has long been an affinity between the church and the left. The Liberal party was sustained by the so-called nonconformist conscience and the Labour party famously derived more from Methodism than Marx - Keir Hardie once describing socialism as "the embodiment of Christianity in our industrial system". Later both CND and the anti-apartheid movement were inspired by Christian socialism.

Even comparatively recently things were looking up for the religious left. Tony Blair is a member of the Christian socialist movement and in Rowan Williams the Church of England has a self-confessed "bearded lefty" at the top. Yet instead of a renaissance there has been a decline. The Archbishop of Canterbury is now a virtual prisoner of the religious right. And Labour Christians seem silent and impotent. How did we get to here?

(More)

At times I wish 'those people' would keep their big noses in that 'book' they never shut up about. You might think that they had been asked to meddle and muddle universally..Since 'these people' have never proven their philosophy to be true (and never will) I fail to see why their point of view or agenda has to be put forth more than that of anyone else..Nobody said that a 'christian' has to be right-wing..I hope you are right here and a more left of center 'christian' group emerges. That way both of these groups can just keep at each other forever more and finally just leave the rest of us the 'hell' alone with their abuses..

but the secular left keeps telling them to "keep their big noses in that 'book' they never shut up about" and to piss off and leave the secular left to "meddle and muddle universally". Seeing as the left is so full of hatred for Christians a lot of us unsuprisingly support the right instead.

Has been taught and nurtured..You may say what you wish but many of these people who try and play sheepishly meek right-wingers (on church days) have another and truer nature (the rest of the week) which has refused to tolerate anyone different, has been overly unfriendly, selfish, provacative, judgemental, and unwelcomely domineering. One might think that these goody two-shoe people would be able to prove their beliefs beyond a doubt the way they carry on about it and to everyone.

There were a lot of good southern democrats that shared your view in the late 1950s and early '60's, when that trouble-making Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. started upsetting things. They wished he'd of kept that big nose you mention stuck in that book you mention, too. Valid point, well-thought out.

Please don't 'lump' me into a category with James Earl Ray because I never agreed with him (George Wallace) or anyone like that! On the contrary my views and remarks have to do with those who would impose their 'religion' on others for arguably questionable motives..

Do you want to be an ass or do you want to win a blasted election every once in awhile? I want to win.

Convictions do not belong to the right-wingers (and sympathizers) anymore than patriotism or anything else..I have convictions and I believe patriotism too in my own right..One problem is that we don't come at these issues necessarily from the same angle..I like to think that I can give and take both.. I am interested in more from your perspective and am all ears..

Assuming his win was legit, Bush won the popular vote by a measely couple of percentage points. However, if you look at various polls and studies that have been done over the past decade or so you will find that the overwhelming majority of Americans characterize themselves as religious believers of one stripe or another. That means that the problem really isn't with "religion" in general. It is with a specific set of believers. All that is accomplished by bashing religion and religious believers, in general, is to give more fuel to the right wing stereotype machine. Why feed them when you can beat them?

Of course, the media tends to focus on the Falwells and the Robertsons, which gives the false impression that there is a conservative Christian in every cupboard waiting to ban dancing and slap a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other. In reality, this isn't the case. You don't really hear much about all the Christian pastors who came out in opposition to the war in Iraq, for example.

but the "religious right" for (supposedly) warping Xianity into a nice, easy, "do as I say" pre-packaged religion for the masses?

Maybe it's not us secular liberals scaring them away, but the right-wingers attracting them?

Naw, blame the atheists. That always works. :eyes:

...automatically as hateful right wingers, when the reality is very different. As the article points out, stereotyping reigion as for right wingers only is done in order to make it easier to rubbish religion.

The secular left does have to shoulder some of the blame here. Why should we Christians ally ourselves with people like blogbear who hate us on the basis of our religion?

I guess is what it comes down to. Which came first - the mean secular liberals, or the right-wing religious hypocrites? I don't think you should blame people *outside* your religion for corrupting it.

And I do think that it is a mischaracterization to say that secular liberals "hate" religious people - that will do nothing to ease tensions.

This board alone is proof of that. It's hardly a mis-characterization I'm afraid and it would not be hard to name a large number of DUer's who are very fond of expressing such hatred at every opportunity.

so there we are. And religious liberals on DU have posted nasty things about us, too.

Why did you put quotation marks around "liberals"? Do you not think a person can be secular and a liberal?

and who feel the need to make bigoted attacks on religion at every available opportunity cannot be described as liberal. Those who behave in this manner are in fact no better then Jerry Falwell themselves.

It's all bigotry and it's all bad. I refuse to allow bigotry towards anyone to become a principle of the left.

As long as people do you no harm and don't infringe on your freedom then you tacitly respect their freedom to do and believe as they please. Heck, we should even respect the right of the "Religious Right" to exist if they would just agree to do the same. I rarely if ever run across liberal theists who have a problem with atheists believing whatever they like or who judge atheists as deficient because they don't believe in God. However, I do run across an ample number of atheist lefties who have a huge chip on their shoulder in regards to all theists and Christianity in particular and who go out of their way to pick fights and, in a general way, spread bad vibes. They aren't practicing tolerance.

It's really not enough to just long onto the internet a few times a day, bash Bush and spend the rest of the time walking around perpetually angry and scowling. That attitude is not going to change minds or win votes. It's important to live and choose our words in a manner that shows that our approach is classier, better, happier, positive as opposed to negative and will do more good things for more people.

It's a shame that so many people who claim to uphold liberal values do not pratice tolerance. I agree with nyour post 100%. Shame that so many people on here are so keen on showing themselves to be little better then the likes of Ian Paisley.

and you get to define who's liberal, then it's quite clear why we have problems as liberals. :eyes:

Not everyone in the left is an atheist. And second, secular means non-religious. Hence, your car, house, PC, and urine is secular while the Dhammapada, Bible, and the Pali Cannon is sacred as it means to be religious.

It is talking about the section of the left that does not "do" religion. Fair enough, but to constantly attack people of faith and do everything possible to denigrate and alienate people with religious values does not do anyone any good, least of all the left itself. That's the point of the article in case you haven't read it.

by declaring that anyone who isn't as perfect as you apparently are, isn't a true liberal? You'll be a party of one by the time you're through.

I'm religious and don't feel oppressed nor insulted nor left out by the left. It has other groups besides Christians. They won't share the same opinions as you. Deal with it.