There has been at least one call on DKos for folks to lighten up on religous progressives. The argument is simple: That not all religious americans are right-wing or want to impose their beliefs on others, and that religion is a constructive force in politics and society. This call is ultimately a call for progressives to tolerate and accept a place for religion and faith in our politics.
I think this argument, even when made with the best intentions, is not a strong one. And I think that faith and religion are private affairs -- but generally when they enter the public or political arena, their effects -- even if well intended -- are detrimental to our society and our poltical institutions.
So, while I'm happy to respect that people of faith hold their faiths, I'm not going to welcome faith or religion into the public sphere. Let me explain a bit about why.
First off, faith is antithetical to reason. It is. That's its definition. Now you can be a perfectly nice person with perfectly nice beliefs. But they are just that: beliefs. So the effect of basing public and political positions on faith is to reject what our minds at their best and sharpest tell us. It is to elevate the irrational and the unprovable.
Second, whether you like it or not -- or care to admit it or not -- bringing faith and religion into politics and public affairs dishonors and denigrates others who do not share your faith or religion. Religions and faiths that are not exclusive or claim to have some priority on truth are few and far between. So generally, by making faith a public or political basis for action or policy, you are priortizing the irrational, unprovable belief that you hold over the beliefs or rational positions of others. You have a monopoly on the truth, or so you think.
This is not just hypothetical. I'm Jewish -- by birth. I'm also gay. I'm also an atheist (in that I don't think there is a god or deity, and don't run my life according to the belief that there is one). I can tell you that as an atheist, I'm probably unable to run for any federal political office in this country in most jurisdictions. Not because of anything I have done or might do, or because of any explicit legal bar, but because as a person without faith or religion I am suspect to many people who do believe in god or a deity and base their ethical systems around that belief.
Second, as a gay man, I am subjected to legalized discrimination on a daily basis because I am not allowed to have civil marriage rights either in the state where I live or under federal law? It doesn't matter that I have been with my husband (married in Canada) for more than 15 zyears; that we have been together since college; that our families accept us; that we take responsibility for each other's well-being. Why? because many people of faith and religion confuse civil rights with religious rights -- and have enacted their confusion into law.
And as person of Jewish background, I can only say that my forebears were persecuted for centuries by Christians, based on the Christian belief that Jews were responsible for their god's death and so deserved punishment.
The argument that religion has generally been a positive force in politicws is simply mistaken. Religious fervor has been a basis for certain positive political movements. The civil rights movement in the US is one example -- and the anti-slavery movement in Europe in the 19th century is another. (Of course, one could debate whether the reliance of the civil rights movement here in the US on religious institutions has not also had deleterious effects -- in raising up churches over other institutions in African American communities, such as schools, or labor organizations -- and one should not forget that critical figures in the civil rights movement were atheists or socialists, such as Rosa Parks.) But the vast majority of movements based on religious belief have been destructive, not constructive. Persecution of Jews. Persecution of mystery cults in Rome; the wars of religion between Muslims and Christians; the wars of religion between protestants and catholics; the wars of religion between muslims and jews and so on and so on. The denial of science; the denial of religious toleration; the denial of evolution; and on and on.
So on balance, I don't think that the entry of religion into politics is a good thing; and I don't think there is a strong argument for respecting faith as faith. I can respect actions that are based in faith if they are no different than an action that is based on reason -- and can be universally applied, such as a respect for human dignity because all people are equal under law. Or a respect for privacy, because all people deserve to conduct their intimate affairs outside of the glare of public scrutiny; or support for the environment because we all live here on earth. But none of those activities or actions is necessarily grounded in a religious view.
So, while I will and do respect all people -- whether they are religious or not -- as fellow human beings, who have or should have equal rights under law, and equal ethical status as sentient beings, I do not and cannot respect religion or faith as a basis for public or political action.