There's been a constant hum emanating out of the commercial media that the Democrats are "anti-religion" or "hostile to religion". Tim Russert, as is his custom, tried to trap Howard Dean on this theme on this past Sunday's
Meet The Press. (Dean deflected the allegation very nicely.) Fundamentalist Christians relentlessly bleat about being "under siege" and employ victimization rhetoric that would make Tawana Brawley blush. A recent diarist here, explaining why he wasn't a Democrat, plunged straight into the Republican frame about the Democrats being "hostile" to people of faith. And on and on.
Of course we know here that the Democrats aren't "hostile" to religion. Some
individual Democrats might be, and they have every right to be if they want to, but that's not mentioned anywhere in the party's platform. What the Democrats
do stand for is
the separation of church and state. And this core concept is essential for both the church and the state to thrive, as our Founding Fathers well understood.
Democrats have allowed the fundamentalist Republican crowd to spin standing up for this core constitutional tenet as "hostility to religion". How do we unspin this?
A few ideas...
First, we must define what exactly is meant by "hostility to religion". We need to ask those who spout this idle phrase some pointed questions:
* Have you ever been denied a job, housing, a scholarship, a promotion, service at a restaurant, or any other public social benefit because of your religion?
* Are there federal agents furtively scribbling the license plates of churchgoers in the parking lot while the faithful worship inside the building?
* Do motorists with fish decals get disproportionately pulled over on the road?
* Would celebrating a religious holiday get you arrested or fired from your job?
* Is the government preventing you from attending the church service of your choice?
* Do you sneak in and out of your church service for fear of being seen and turned in to government authorities?
* Is the government preventing you from marrying the person of your choice? Is the government preventing you from having children if you so desire them?
* Is the government forcing your church to internally adopt measures contrary to its teachings?
* Why do you need the government to validate your faith for you?
We can ask many other questions like these, but the point is that those who wail about "religious persecution" in America need to know what REAL religious persecution is. The Democratic Party obviously does not advocate ANY of the above, in any way.
Second, we need to turn around the "religious hostility" talking point into something that works FOR us. I've heard a few political figures use the phrase religious favoritism (in the context of Dems being against it) and I think it's got potential. We are simply asserting that we do not favor one religion over another -- an idea that one would think most Americans would heartily agree with.
Third, we shouldn't run away from religion in our rhetoric, but instead embrace it when appropriate, in support of DEMOCRATIC values. Tim Kaine actively incorporated religious references into his discourse, but he used his religion to stand up for Democratic principles, not deny them. This is in stark contrast to the DLC crowd's attitude, which seems to be that the answer is (as always) to imitate the Republicans, and that being "religion-friendly" necessarily implies adhering to the fundamentalist tenets of Dominionism while ignoring Christianity's social message. Dominionists have effectively reduced the parameters of public religious discourse ("Christian values") to an unholy stew of anti-abortion and anti-gay rhetoric. Tim Kaine's successful campaign was, one hopes, the first recent instance of reclaiming religion to serve the Democratic principles of social justice, racial equality, economic opportunity, and a definition of "pro-life" that goes far beyond the context of abortion and instead covers the death penalty, health care, war, and other life-or-death issues.
We cannot deny that religion is a powerful force in the lives of millions of Americans. But there is no need to compromise core Democratic values to reach the religious (with the possible exception of the Dominionists, but they don't speak for most Christians). There is no need for liberal Democrats to cower behind a chair whenever religion comes up. And there is no need to throw gay people under the bus in a misguided attempt to "prove" our religious bonafides.
I became a Democrat because of my religion. The Democrats were the party of equal opportunity, war as a last resort, and social justice, values perfectly congruent with those of my church.
I can't be the only one.