There's a short article in today's Washingtonpost.com about a conference of religious liberals who gathered in D.C. yesterday to wring their hands and wonder aloud how to be more influential. ("Hey! We were relevant once - remember the civil rights movement?")
There is a bit of fingerpointing about how the secular left gives the religious the cold shoulder, but no fucking way do I want to reignite that debate again. I'll just focus on this part:
"We should take back the Bible, take back the theological principles and not just cede them to the religious right," said the Rev. Susan B. Thistlethwaite, a minister in the United Church of Christ and president of the Chicago Theological Seminary. "It's not good enough to talk in vague terms about values. We can do better than that. We can make the theological arguments."
First of all, forget whether secular and religious liberals have common ground, my question is: do conservative and liberal religious people have any common ground? I submit that the reason why religious liberals don't have much traction in the policy area is that conservatives don't consider them religious at all. Look at that quote above - do you think if that female minister makes a theological argument, that your basic white suburban Republican churchgoing conservative man is going to give a rat's ass? You can make arguments all day long, sweetie, you're still a liberal, and that means you're just this side of devil worship. And why aren't you home, taking care of your husband and kids? Run along, now.
Second, I'm a goddless sodomite, so naturally I don't think her argument is very strong, but do any normal people feel a eensy weensy bit uncomfortable with the idea that policy decisions are going to come down to who wins the theological debate? If your political participation is motivated by your religious faith, fine, good, great, whatever - I'm all for free exercise and free expression and all that whoohaa. But if specific policies are determined by the prevailing religious belief, aren't we just turning the whole government over to the clergy and letting them run it? It would be great if we could finally figure out exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin - that one's been bothering people forever - but if what God wants is the beginning and the end of every argument, then democracy will just get trashed. Why even involve politicians in the process at all? We could let the big corporations and wealthy individuals control the economic decisions and the religious control the social policy, and just suspend elections indefinitely. Hey, that sounds like the Congress right now.
I know what you're saying but I think I understand her argument as well. Conservatives like to talk about values a lot. Liberals on the other hand are afraid of the word "values" and try not to use it. I think the left should use the word "values" and we need to start talking about compassion again. The thing about the Civil Rights Movement was that we stood for something then and right now our rhetoric just doesn't show people what we're about anymore.
Taking back the Bible is a fine idea as long as you use it right. Taking it back is better than getting hit over the head with it during every election cycle.
Posted by: | June 10, 2004 at 03:46 PM
Taking back the Bible ... is better than getting hit over the head with it during every election cycle.
Oof. Good point. Forget I said anything.
Posted by: Mithras | June 10, 2004 at 03:57 PM
Hmmm. I wonder what the lingo needs to be to be judged "compassionate" or to have "values". When exactly did the left stop having both of these in spades? And standing for things? While I agree that the leadership is skating a thin line around some things, when it comes to very basic issues there is no question that these are democratic issues. Abortion? Gay marriage? A working wage? Health care? Education? The environment? Human rights? The ongoing battle for civil rights?
These are values, and it seems like they are constantly talked about in democratic circles in that way. It certainly seems as though Kerry has been playing up the whole "values" thing in his latest series of commercials.
Frankly, I agree with Digby that what seems to be more likely is that most democrats seem to have internalized the propaganda of the right. We don't stand for anything anymore? Again, I can list off a dozen without even taking a pause for thought.
But one of our values which kind of gets in our way is the whole diversity of religion thing. The right is solidly behind the Christian ethos and so can speak freely of their values. The left is hamstrung on this issue because it encompasses far more beliefs than that.
Taking back the bible is a fine and worthy goal. It's high time these jokers start sharing. But the case for taking back the bible shouldn't be argued by claiming the left doesn't stand for anything any more, nor does the left speak of "values".
It's simply shooting yourself in the foot to do so. It's framing the entire debate precisely in the way the right wishes it to be framed.
Aren't we the wimpy, tree hugging, bum supporting, global warming worried, metro sexual bunch of people who believe in the dream that government can do positive things for us all?
Posted by: Hal | June 10, 2004 at 09:41 PM
Mithas,
You seen this yet?
"COUP D'ETAT:
The Real Reason Tenet and Pavitt Resigned from the
CIA on June 3rd and 4th"
Bush, Cheney Indictments in Plame Case Looming
by
Michael C. Ruppert
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060804_coup_detat.html
I believe you had a theory a few weeks back that the backlash against Bush could be traced to him pissing off the wrong people. This lends some credence to your theory.
Posted by: Geof Castle | June 10, 2004 at 10:16 PM
I suspect that if today's religious right were around in the early days of the religion they so adore, they'd be carting their kids down to the Colusseum to get the best seats at Christians vs. Lions.
Posted by: Ian | June 11, 2004 at 02:05 PM