Obama on Religion
by RonChusidIt is amazing that liberal bloggers who often show distrust of the mainstream media accept the media reports about O’Bama’s speech to a conference of Call to Renewal. The media covered the story by repeating sterotypes beginning with the title, Obama: Democrats Must Court Evangelicals, and subsequently some bloggers have blasted Obama for feeding into typocal stereotypes of liberals and religion. They failed to consider that it is the media’s own stereotypes, and not necessarily what Obama said, which resulted in the media reports being based upon liberal sterotypes.
Before blasting Obama based upon a media report, it would make more sense to read what he actually said, as posted on is web site. There are portions I do disagree with, but Obama has a good point when he warns, “if we don’t reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, Jerry Falwell’s and Pat Robertson’s will continue to hold sway.” He is not calling for all liberals to attempt to appeal to religious voters: “I am not suggesting that every progressive suddenly latch on to religious terminology. Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith – the politician who shows up at a black church around election time and claps – off rhythm – to the gospel choir.”
Obama also tries to give some advice to those who follow the religious right:
While I’ve already laid out some of the work that progressives need to do on this, I that the conservative leaders of the Religious Right will need to acknowledge a few things as well.
For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. That during our founding, it was not the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of this separation; it was the persecuted religious minorities, Baptists like John Leland, who were most concerned that any state-sponsored religion might hinder their ability to practice their faith.
Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America’s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.
Obama applies this to the abortion issue:
Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.
This may be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It involves the compromise, the art of the possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It insists on the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God’s edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one’s life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing.
Filed under: Democrats, In The News | Get Permalink or trackback |
Obama is trying,but the Dems and Conservative Christians are not a fit…..Still Obama has a real shot at high office.
But not all Christians are conservative. Many Christians are nonideolgical or liberal. Others currently vote conservative because they only hear Republicans speaking towards their fundamental beliefs. Obviously Christians (and religious people of any religion) who stress opposition to abortion and desire an increased government role in promoting their religious views are not going to vote Democratic, and it is pointless to waste energy to go after those votes. However there are many others whose religious views lead them toward other priorities.
Darth,
Read about what conservatism has done to our world.
http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/incompetent
[snip]
The idea that Bush is incompetent is a curious one. Consider the following (incomplete) list of major initiatives the Bush administration, with a loyal conservative Congress, has accomplished:
Centralizing power within the executive branch to an unprecedented degree
Starting two major wars, one started with questionable intelligence and in a manner with which the military disagreed
Placing on the Supreme Court two far-right justices, and stacking the lower federal courts with many more
Cutting taxes during wartime, an unprecedented event
Passing a number of controversial bills such as the PATRIOT Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, the Medicare Drug bill, the Bankruptcy bill and a number of massive tax cuts
Rolling back and refusing to enforce a host of basic regulatory protections
Appointing industry officials to oversee regulatory agencies
Establishing a greater role for religion through faith-based initiatives
Passing Orwellian-titled legislation assaulting the environment — “The Healthy Forests Act” and the “Clear Skies Initiative” — to deforest public lands, and put more pollution in our skies
Winning re-election and solidifying his party’s grip on Congress
These aren’t signs of incompetence. As should be painfully clear, the Bush administration has been overwhelmingly competent in advancing its conservative vision. It has been all too effective in achieving its goals by determinedly pursuing a conservative philosophy.
It’s not Bush the man who has been so harmful, it’s the conservative agenda.
[snip]
Incompetence obscures the real issue. Bush’s conservative philosophy is what has damaged this country and it is his philosophy of conservatism that must be rejected, whoever endorses it.
Conservatism itself is the villain that is harming our people, destroying our environment, and weakening our nation. Conservatives are undermining American values through legislation almost every day. This message applies to every conservative bill proposed to Congress. The issue that arises every day is which philosophy of governing should shape our country. It is the issue of our times. Unless conservative philosophy itself is discredited, Conservatives will continue their domination of public discourse, and with it, will continue their domination of politics.
National Catholic Reporter on this subject.
A mistaken identity — or no real identity at all?
By Joan Chittister, OSB
http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/fwis/
Bob,liberals run our cities,they have done a fine job with Detroit and DC
And Conservatives have done a great job with America? You know trillions of dollars in debt and China, South Korea and other nations not so fond of us deep down holding the IOU’s.
As for Obama, I admit I was pissed when I saw the caption on the web because the it looked as if he believes the media’s hype that evangelicals are the holy grail in this country.
The evangelicals need to worry about how they were snookered by Bush and Rove.
Dems need worry more about those who don’t vote a reason to go to the polls.
And yes, I’m a believer in Christ. I have a problem with some of his so called sheperds preaching intolerance of others.
Oh, and a note to Obama, if people don’t wear their religion on their sleeve its okay as long as they try to do what the good lord ask. Dems need to stop chastising the party for not reaching out to evangelicals. That’s a GOP talking point and one would think Obama was smarter but i guess not.