For what it's worth, I take issue with your recent column stating that liberals are not interested in "learning" about the moral values of the red states. It's not that I don't understand their values or that I don't want to learn about them. . . I just don't agree with them.
I take strong issue with the increasingly blurred line between church and state in this country. That's one of my values. All these red staters who want prayer in schools and the Ten Commandments on the statehouse steps need to ask themselves how they would feel if the President signed off every public address with "Allah Bless America." My guess is that they would all have a collective heart attack. They don't get to dictate a national religion just because they are in the majority. The separation between church and state was enacted by our founding fathers because they understood what it meant to be in the religious minority. If those living in the red states would study the Constitution the way that they study NASCAR events, they might have a better understanding of the issue.
Secondly, being a rabid born again Christian does not equate with having values and morals. For me, protecting the earth is a value. I would think that those who believe in creationism would be in agreement with me on that point. However, the mega-church down the block form my house in Aurora has a parking lot full of Hummer and Lincoln Navigators every Sunday.
I believe in the sanctity of human life. However, I don't believe that life only should be protected in stem cell form. I also mourn those executed by the state for crimes that they have committed (or not committed) and the 100,000 civilians dead in Iraq. Where was the moral outrage of the religious right over those deaths? I don't believe that, since this war began, I've heard one mention of the civilian death toll by the President. Oh, and by the way, abortions have tripled under President Bush's watch, due to massive federal funding cut backs for family planning clinics. Red staters ought to be educated as to that, too.
Speaking of the President, while you believe that liberals were not interested in learning, you ignore the fact that a recent University of Maryland study showed that those supporting President Bush were woefully misinformed about the state of the world. I could list all the findings for you, but here are the highlights and the link:
Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.
Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf
So if you want to talk about being educated and learning, I would suggest that those who voted for President Bush have just as much to do as all us godless liberals.
And finally, a word on gay marriage. You said "Most Americans don't much care what consenting gay adults do. But they draw the line at marriage. They see judges deciding the issue, and when they oppose such judicial activism, they're denounced as bigots."
First of all--all of us who are "married" in are engaged in civil unions. That's what our marriages are in the eyes of the state. "Marriage" is in no danger of being co-opted by gays, because the state has no say over what private religious organizations do. We could allow civil unions in IL, it doesn't mean that the Catholic church or any other church will be required to marry gay couples. So basically, we are all fighting over the word "marriage" at the top of our State Marriage Licenses. Too bad most of those God-fearing, moralistic, value-laden red staters didn't understand that. My head exploded every time I heard someone, including John Kerry and the President state that they were opposed to gay marriage but not civil unions. They are essentially one and the same, as far as the State is concerned. And those who voted against gay-marriage don't like being called bigots? Too bad. Neither did those who opposed inter-racial marriage. I call 'em like I see 'em. In light of the war in Iraq, the strengthening of Al-Qaeda, millions of Americans slipping into poverty, corporations outsourcing jobs, and the continued assault on the environment by the Bush administration, I'm glad that the religious right can take heart in the fact that they voted to "stay course" based on the fact that they don't like boys kissing.
I will not apologize for being educated and informed. I will not apologize for believing that this President does not stand for or represent my morals and values. I will not apologize for believing that others have no right to impose their religious beliefs on myself or others in this country. When did being educated and intellectual become a bad thing? I don't believe that my party has to change to try stoop to the level of those who get their information about the world from their preachers instead of a newspaper or the evening news. For God's sake--people in OK elected a Senator who sterilized young girls without their consent, defrauded Medicare, and believes that abortion doctors ought to be executed. Why don't you spend a column writing about those values?
Julie DiCaro
Proud mother, lawyer, and liberal
Aurora, IL