Skip to main content

'Hispanic Karl Rove' Helps Craft Democratic Party Centrist 'Third Way' Position on Gay & Reproductive Rights

"Progressives and evangelicals have begun to build coalitions on issue like the environment and Darfur, but we believe that we can go even further." - Rachel Laser

"We have radical Muslims. Radical homosexuals. Radical abortionists. We need radical, born again, spirit filled Christians to arise ! Do you follow me ? We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !" - Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, prominent Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda co-author.

As Rachel Laser, Culture Program Director for the Third Way announced during a press conference on October 10th, 2007, "[t]wo years ago, we launched an initiative that few thought could be successful: finding common ground between centrist evangelicals and progressives on the most divisive cultural issues of our times... The Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda represents the fruit of these labors and maps a joint path forward to heal a nation torn apart by the culture wars."

In early 2009, days before the inauguration of President Barack Obama, the 'Come Let Us Reason Together' effort re-launched its 'Governing Agenda' with a flourish, by announcing a press teleconference and sending a letter to the new President-Elect and Congressional leaders from both major US political parties which began, "For the last few decades, through both Democratic and Republican administrations, America has been polarized by an angry culture war, fought over such divisive issues as abortion and gay rights."


One of the touted contributors to the re-launched "Governing Agenda", the Reverend Samuel Rodriguez, purports to represent 15 million Hispanic Christians, has actively incited the culture wars, endorses the militant wing of the antiabortion and antigay movement, is affiliated with top leaders and institutions of the hard theocratic Christian right, and has earned a nickname, the "Hispanic Karl Rove." Rodriguez prayed together with Barack Obama, in a special private ceremony prior to the new president's inauguration.

Billing itself as "the leading think tank of the moderate wing of the progressive movement," the Third Way is a highly connected inside-the-beltway effort that boasts, as honorary co-chairs, eleven members of the US Congress from the Democratic Party: six House members and five Senators.


The Come Let Us Reason Together agenda was created as a joint effort between the Third Way and Faith in Public Life, a 501c(3) organization which according to its mission statement "is a strategy center advancing faith in the public square as a positive and unifying force for justice, compassion and the common good." The Governing Agenda contains four points: " Reducing abortions (reducing abortion through reducing unintended pregnancies, supporting pregnant women, and increasing support for adoption)", "Supporting employment protections for gay and lesbian people", "Renouncing torture", and "Creating secure and comprehensive immigration reform".


The Third Way / Faith in Public Life initiative has provoked considerable criticism from the liberal and progressive left [1,2,3,4] as well as rebuttals [1,2]  of that criticism from Governing Agenda authors.


As journalist Frederick Clarkson and other critics have pointed out, the Governing Agenda approach to reproductive rights seems to derive from a strategy hatched over a decade ago, to reframe the discourse in a way that would exclude, marginalize, and undercut the position that access to reproductive health care is an essential and inalienable right of all American citizens. A decade later, legal abortion is now unavailable across wide swaths of the continental United States. 87% of US counties lack a single abortion provider according to a study from the Guttmacher Institute.


During a January 15, 2009  Faith in Public Life / Third Way press teleconference to herald the Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda, Samuel Rodriguez described an "[e]vangelical agenda that stands committed to building bridges rather than building walls. The 2008 Presidential Elections demonstrate how Hispanic Christians, as the fastest growing religious demographic in our nation, stand poised to facilitate an unprecedented platform for Faith in Public Policy that does not establish camp in the extremes but rather on common ground."


As Rachel Laser noted during the October 2007 press conference heralding the launch of the Third Way / Faith in Public Life "Come Let Us Reason Together" position paper, the phrase "Come Let Us Reason Together" was taken from the Bible's Book of Isaiah. Laser explained that "The title of this paper, 'Come Let Us Reason Together', is a Biblical passage from Isaiah where God calls to his people to reconcile their differences through respectful engagement". It was at best a dubious exegesis; The Book of Isaiah concerns Isaiah's vision from God in which the Lord castigates nations of Israel as sinful, rebellious, and corrupt and promises Isaiah that they will be made pure again but that those who continue to resist and rebel "will be devoured by the sword."


In terms of the American culture wars, the connotations of "Come let us reason together", from the Book of Isaiah, did not suggest evangelical moderation or conciliation at all.


Sammy Rodriguez has been identified as a leader in an allegedly moderate, centrist group of younger Christian conservative leaders dubbed the "new evangelicals." But while the image that the Rev. Rodriguez presents to mainstream media seems much less abrasive than that of leading Christian right culture warriors such as the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or John Hagee, he wears a different demeanor when playing to Christian conservative audiences.


In a November 19, 2006 Utah sermon the Reverend Samuel Rodriguez declared: "We have radical Muslims. Radical homosexuals. Radical abortionists. We need radical, born again, spirit filled Christians to arise ! Do you follow me ?


We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !"


While Samuel Rodriguez could be found, in the lead-up to the 2008 presidential election, praying together in a private service with Barack Obama, he has also described Sarah Palin a "kindred spirit." And Rev. Rodriguez has signed onto a statement, released May 7, 2008 from a group of prominent evangelicals, which lamented the politicization of Christianity. But, Rodriguez is also listed on the advisory board of Lou Engle's TheCall, an effort which is now mainstreaming violent antiabortion rhetoric that was common on the extreme fringe of the militant wing of the antiabortion movement during the 1990's.

Read the rest of this story here

Originally posted to Troutfishing on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 05:31 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm damn sick and tired of Democratic centrists (9+ / 0-)

    Their main function in life is to negotiate away civil and reproductive rights in a failed effort to "reach out" to evangelicals whose minds are already made up because God and the pastor told them so.

    If the Third Way manages to overturn the Democratic Party's support of reproductive rights, a lot of Democrats, yours truly included, are heading for the exit.

    "Some people meditate. I go watch baseball."--Keith Olbermann

    by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 05:37:11 AM PDT

    •  Well, I've crammed this piece with quotes... (8+ / 0-)

      Indicating just how hypocritical the "Third Way" effort truly is.

      My favorite, courtesy of Samuel Rodriguez:

      "We have radical Muslims. Radical homosexuals. Radical abortionists. We need radical, born again, spirit filled Christians to arise ! Do you follow me ? We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !" - Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, prominent Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda co-author.

    •  Here's some news: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Front Toward Enemy

      The Democratic centrists are the reason we have a majority.  Without them, we wouldn't have 60 Senators and a huge majority in the House, and we wouldn't have the White House.

      Take it from someone who's done a lot of work with Democratic groups reaching out to evangelicals.  I know a lot of Democrats have this picture in their heads of evangelicals being brainwashed and completely un-persuadable, but that is quite simply not the case.  Younger evangelicals in particular are seeing the Christian Right as a bunch of old white prudes, and are looking for a better way.  If we don't provide it, the Republicans sure as hell will.

      Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

      by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:28:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're not addressing the facts I've cited (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dave925, corvo, trashablanca

        Samuel Rodriguez is not a "centrist". Nor are Randy Brinson and Joel Hunter - both endorsed Mike Huckabee's presidential bid.

        If you don't address the facts I've noted, you'll be relegating yourself to Creationist Theme Park Land.

        •  I wasn't talking about Rodriguez in that comment. (0+ / 0-)

          I was addressing the person above who thought that Democratic centrists are somehow the most terrible thing ever, when the reality is that they're the only reason we have a majority.

          And the sarcasm is wholly unnecessary.  Please be more respectful.

          Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

          by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:48:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I apologize for the misattribution (0+ / 0-)

            But, to be perfectly honest I'm not feeling especially charitable towards your apparent spirited defense of a man who inveighs against "radical Muslims","radical abortionists","radical homosexuals," and "Oprah Winfrey Christians."

            •  I don't agree with everything the guy says... (0+ / 0-)

              ...and I do find a lot of what he says problematic.  Believe me when I say that very few things piss me off more than anti-LGBT Christians.

              But I also don't agree with the members of my party who think that my religious beliefs make me deluded and dangerous, and that the progressive movement needs to start actively working against religion.

              Yet I don't have any problem being in coalition with them on health care reform or climate change.

              Co-belligerency is how coalitions are built... and sometimes, it has to work where co-belligerents hate each others' guts but see the larger goal as more important.

              Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

              by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:26:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Samuel Rodriguez.... (0+ / 0-)

                ...is a key architect of the Christian right's newly emerging strategy. He's the "Hispanic Karl Rove".

                Why not simply let Karl Rove himself script the new Democratic Party platform on gay and reproductive rights ?

                Oops, I forgot - we have principles that distinguish us from the Christian right and the GOP...

                Am I correct in making that assumption ?

  •  Watch out for that guy, Jesus. (4+ / 0-)

    [I think he's a mole]

    Having credibility when making an argument is the straightest path to persuasion.

    by SpamNunn on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 05:57:02 AM PDT

  •  This guy's a piece of work (6+ / 0-)

    We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !" - Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, prominent Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda co-author.

    Come Let Us REASON Together?!?!? "Reason" has nothing to do with it.  Methinks Rev. Rodriguez should read a little Thomas Paine.

    This ain't no party. This ain't no disco. This ain't no foolin' around!

    by Snud on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 05:58:33 AM PDT

  •  Center of what,exactly? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Troutfishing, Dave925, corvo, trashablanca

    This whole Third Way crap infuriates me.

    "You can't have a third party in the United States as long as you have one party operating under two different names." ~~ Prof.Irwin Corey

    by tardis10 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:01:13 AM PDT

  •  One problem with their assessment: (3+ / 0-)

    "...the gay minority agenda may end up indefinitely deterred not by the white evangelical Christian right establishment but rather by ethnocultural minorities. In other words, Blacks and Latinos may end up as the proverbial firewall preventing the advancement of the gay and lesbian agenda... Could same-sex marriage push Hispanics, Blacks and other ethnic minorities into the ranks of the Republican Party?"

    Evangelical Black Democrats are just as religious today as we were when we came flooding into the Democratic Party 40 years ago so any assumption that a simple wedge issue like Gay Marriage somehow causing us to "return" to the Republican party is a pipe dream at the very least. And to suggest that we are the "firewall" to the Gay Community with respect to getting their rights, is appalling. That's nothing more than a divide and concur tactic aimed to pit Blacks and Latinos against the LGBT Community. It's not working.

    The only thing that would cause a mass exodus of Blacks I wont speak for Latinos because I think it's rude to speak on behalf of a group that I'm not a part of from the Democratic Party towards the Republican Party would have to be a perfect storm of Racial reconciliation on the part of the Republican Party simulcast with a noticeable hostility towards Black evangelicals within the Democratic Party.

    Given the hostile and racist behavior of Republicans towards Blacks despite our Evangelical ties to the party in recent years , coupled with a very powerful and growing Progressive arm that embraces and encourages diversity and equality for all, I seriously doubt that such a perfect storm will come into fruition....a small pocket of Democrats notwithstanding. In other words, the Republicans can forget about the Black vote.

    FOREVER !

    "We're the generation We can't afford to wait The future started yesterday and we're already late "~John Legend: If You're Out There

    by WeBetterWinThisTime on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:14:05 AM PDT

  •  Okay, then please tell me.... (0+ / 0-)

    ...given that a pretty large proportion of the country is evangelical, how do you propose to win their votes?

    Also, given that a solid majority of the Hispanic population is either Roman Catholic (anti-abortion) or Pentecostal/evangelical (anti-abortion), how do you propose to win their votes?

    It's an indisputable fact: We need evangelicals as part of our governing coalition, or we won't have a governing coalition.  And if working with people who don't agree with us on abortion or gay rights means we can get things done like climate change legislation or health care reform, that's fine by me.  I'll take coalition over purity any day.

    I also have to say that I find some of the guilt-by-association stuff here really problematic.  You imply that Rodriguez saying he wants to be as effective as Billy Graham - who was one of the most effective evangelists in American history, and is positively regarded by most in our culture - makes Rodriguez an anti-Semite.  To take a single quote from Rodriguez about Billy Graham and then to highlight only one episode from Graham's long career as if that defines his (and Rodriguez's by extension) whole character, is really irresponsible.

    Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

    by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:23:30 AM PDT

    •  Is your organization anti-choice? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, trashablanca

      A simple yes or no will do.

      "You can't have a third party in the United States as long as you have one party operating under two different names." ~~ Prof.Irwin Corey

      by tardis10 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:49:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You mean the Matthew 25 Network? (0+ / 0-)

        We're for common-ground measures for abortion reduction, like expansion of children's health insurance.  We have members who are pro-life and members who are pro-choice.

        Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

        by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:01:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is no common ground on this issue. (0+ / 0-)

          Yes,we can all agree that healthcare reform is good,paid parental leave should be a norm,blah,blah. Yep,we can agree on an array of social justice/poverty issues. But where the rubber meets the road,you are either anti-choice or pro-choice. I think you know this,I am quite certain Rodriguez with his "radical abortionists" rhetoric does.

          Now,I don't believe meaningful dialogue ever happens without honesty. So no,this liberal progressive democrat isn't buying into your "evangelical coalition". Not ever.

          "You can't have a third party in the United States as long as you have one party operating under two different names." ~~ Prof.Irwin Corey

          by tardis10 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:32:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm glad not all Democrats think like you... (0+ / 0-)

            ...or else we'd be a minority party.

            Whether you like it or not, a pretty large chunk of this country is anti-choice in some way or another.  If we're going to declare that nobody who isn't 100% pro-choice has a place in the Democratic Party, we're going to be a permanent minority... and we also lose quite a few of our current Senators, Congressmen/women, and Governors.

            For our Party's sake, as well as for the country's sake, we need to find common ground here... at least, enough to find a way to keep pro-life moderates (like many Roman Catholics) out of the Republican Party.  If we're going to put up a 100% pro-choice purity test, we're going to lose a lot of elections.

            Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

            by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:46:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think you have made the diarist's point. (0+ / 0-)

              I well understand that you are only interested in winning (like this is all a game) & moving your limited agenda forward. The fact that this winning is at the price of someone else's rights means not a whit to you. So you do not support a woman's right to make her own decisions,you oppose legal equality for some citizens,what else? ....perhaps you want creationism taught as science or prayers in public schools? I really don't know what you are and I know I can't rely upon you to tell me. Seems like the same old evangelical claptrap I've been watching for the past 30+ years. Just packaged a tiny bit more slickly.    

              "You can't have a third party in the United States as long as you have one party operating under two different names." ~~ Prof.Irwin Corey

              by tardis10 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 08:14:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm glad you're capable of reading my mind... (0+ / 0-)

                ...so that you can tell me what does and doesn't matter to me.

                For the record, I do believe in the right to choose, and I am for LGBT equality.  The fact that I'm willing to enter into a coalition with people who aren't with me on those two issues, but are with me on universal health care and climate change, doesn't say a damn thing about what I believe, and I resent the implication that it does.

                On your first point: Quite frankly, our agenda isn't served at all by our being in the minority.  We can't do anything if we don't hold Congress and the White House... the last fourteen years have demonstrated that.

                Winning elections precedes the enactment of our agenda.  There is no other way to enact our agenda, other than to win elections.  It's just that simple.  If you want a pure minority party, be my guest.... but I want us to win elections so that we can enact our agenda.  There is no other way to enact it.

                I want universal health care, I want climate change legislation, I want better family leave, I want our economy to work for the people - and the people who are going to make that happen are Democrats, not Republicans.  HR3200 wouldn't have gotten to the floor in a Republican Congress, much less passed... the same thing for climate change legislation or a banking bill.  I want to win because I want a better America, and the only way to move in that direction is if Democrats win elections.  We need more and better Democrats, and if evangelicals are going to vote for more and better Democrats, then I welcome them aboard.

                Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

                by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 08:56:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I wish I could share your faith re: (0+ / 0-)

                  evangelicals voting for "better" Democrats. But I do not. No, rather I see the Democratic Party being co-opted by GOP-lite candidates and offering vastly weakened policies to prove it. HR3200 is a case in point. IMHO,after reading the whole darn thing,I have come to the conclusion that passing this bill will put real reform back at least another 10 years. But it will help some few. That being said,I was the nice neighborly lady at the townhall explaining to a few fearfull seniors that this bill is a good thing & won't hurt them. (Half true,I'd say) See,you are not the only pragmatist on the block. & so it goes.

                  I do apologize for mis-understanding your personal positions. Perhaps you can lure some of your coalitionist coreligionists over to your "dark" side? But,please,be vigilant...there are old proverbs about dogs,fleas,standing for something,falling for anything...all stuff you know. (and I know that you know because of my mind reading abilities)

                  "You can't have a third party in the United States as long as you have one party operating under two different names." ~~ Prof.Irwin Corey

                  by tardis10 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 09:54:14 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Ah, the ol' purity canard. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trashablanca, tardis10

      Or to put it another way, "I don't give a flying fuck about this particular piece of the party platform, and I'm willing to sacrifice it so I. CAN. GET. MINE."

      "If it's a piece of the platform that mattered to you, then Jesus Christ in a jet-pack, you're just a selfish purity troll who expects far too much."

      Regards,
      Corporate Dog

      -----
      Still pissed about FISA, but disgusted by the RNC 9/11 video.

      by Corporate Dog on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 06:58:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Guilt by assocation ? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trashablanca

      look pal, I went light on the Billy Graham / anti-Semitism association. But Graham's words were unambiguous - some undefined portion of Jews, asserted Graham, were part of the "synagogue of Satan".

      Even the somewhat lethargic Abraham Foxman of the ADL was moved to roundly denounce Graham's words.

      That quote from Billy Graham was from the second screamingly anti-Jewish conversation between Nixon and Graham to have recently been discovered amidst the Nixon tapes.

      Early in his career, Graham was persuaded by William Bell Riley to take over three institutions Riley had founded, a Bible institute, a seminary and a college. Riley openly promoted the Protocols of the Elders of Zion anti-Jewish conspiracy tract and was an avowed fascist sympathizer who spearheaded the anti-Evolution crusade that culminated in the Scopes Monkey Trial. Riley was not the first loudly anti-Jewish evangelist Graham worked with or served under.

      As for your characterization of what Samuel Rodriguez said, you're twisting the quote. Here it is again :

      "It's gonna be Billy Graham and Martin Luther King Jr. together in a the blender with a bit of salsa on top. That's the Hispanic evangelical church. It's Billy Graham with MLK, we have a couple of Taco Bells mixed in and that, honestly, is the Hispanic evangelical church."

      Rodriguez has made similar statements numerous times, which are unambiguous - he has declared the intent to mix the message of Billy Graham with the message of Martin Luther King.  

      •  The problem wasn't with the Graham stuff... (0+ / 0-)

        ...the problem was with your taking that one quote of Rodriguez and insinuating from that quote that Rodriguez is an anti-Semite.  Ask someone on the street what they remember about Billy Graham and they aren't going to say "he's an anti-Semite"; they're going to say "he's a really popular evangelist."  To take Rodriguez's citation of Billy Graham as someone whose message or effectiveness he wants to emulate as a sign that he must somehow agree with Graham's anti-Semitism is really problematic.

        Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

        by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:07:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The shoe is on the other foot now (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          trashablanca

          You're reading things into my writing that are not there.

          If Rodriguez wants to throw the messages of MLK and Billy Graham into a blender, it's perfectly valid to raise the issue of Graham's quiet but apparently rather pronounced anti-Semitism which, for the fact that it is now in the public record, is part of his message.  

    •  Bullshit (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tardis10

      We do not need any "coalition" with anyone who would deny the rights of any other American.

      I will not "govern" with the devil and I do mean that literally. To do so is to sell our souls forthwith.

      "Much law, but little justice": Proverb

      by Dave925 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:22:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then you won't "govern" at all. (0+ / 0-)

        If we're not willing to work with people who oppose abortion on reasonable, common-ground abortion reduction steps, if we cast people out of our coalition on things like health care simply because they don't believe in marriage equality, then we'll very quickly find ourselves in the minority.  If that's what you're comfortable with, then fine... but good luck getting any of our agenda passed under the Republicans.

        Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

        by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:31:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who has been advocating that here ? (0+ / 0-)

          You're using a strawman argument.

          •  The above commenter... (0+ / 0-)

            ...says we shouldn't engage in "coalition" with people who "anyone who would deny the rights of any other American" - which I quite reasonably read as anyone who's not pro-choice or anyone who opposes LGBT equality.

            Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

            by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 08:04:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  To mistersite (0+ / 0-)

          Hopefully you believe in equality of all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, skin color, religious belief, etc., etc., and not in the supremecy and superiority of some Christians with alledgedly correct beliefs.

          I'm not assuming u do, but I hope you don't share Rodriguez's Christian-evangelical Supremecy ideology as shown when he declared: "We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !".

          Evangelicals are free to live-style the life they prefer, but many seem to detest those w/ differing moral or religious beliefs.

          •  I do believe in those things... (0+ / 0-)

            ...but I'm more than willing to make coalition with people who don't.

            I'm quite willing to be in a coalition, for example, with people who think that atheism is superior to religiosity, and who are on an evangelical quest to demolish religious faith.  I'm willing to enter into a coalition even with people who think that my religious beliefs make me an enabler of violence.  If they're going to join me in phonebanking for universal health care, I'm quite happy to sit in the cubicle next to them.

            Evangelical atheists are free to live the lifestyle they prefer, but many seem to detest those with religious beliefs.  But if they agree with my religious brethren/sistren and I on health care and climate change, I'm willing to stand beside them on that.

            Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

            by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 09:00:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for the reply (0+ / 0-)

              Your reply was dissapointing though...b/c one of the most vital principles in  any democracy is equality of all citizens.
              Do you believe in the equality of all citizens, including the equal rights of all regardless of sexual orientation, skin color, religious belief, etc., etc., and not in the supremecy and superiority of some Christians with alledgedly correct beliefs??

              •  Of course I do, to an extent. (0+ / 0-)

                I believe in equality under the law for everyone.  Religion, gender, sexuality, and race shouldn't be taken into consideration by the state, except insofar as they're equalizing and righting wrongs that previously existed (affirmative action, etc.).

                But as a Christian, on a cultural/philosophical level, I think Christianity is superior to other religions in some respect (as I think it's more true than other religions or irreligions).  I don't think Christianity should be privileged in our nation's laws, but I do believe Christianity is in some way superior to other religions, just as many atheists believe that atheism is superior to (or more true than) religious faith.

                But like I said, I'm willing to make common cause with people of all beliefs, including with people who think I'm a deluded and dangerous individual who's only enabling fundamentalists by normalizing religious faith.

                Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

                by mistersite on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 09:19:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

                  Your arguement is sensible and you have every right to believe whatever you...only believers who have detest for other Americans' beliefs anger me.

                •  Justify this, please : (0+ / 0-)

                  ""We have radical Muslims. Radical homosexuals. Radical abortionists. We need radical, born again, spirit filled Christians to arise ! Do you follow me ? We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !" - Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, prominent Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda co-author.

                  Are you willing to defend Rev. Rodriguez words ?

        •  Equal Rights (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tardis10

          are non-negotiable. Period. And I think if you read my later post you'll note I am not buying into the influence you think you have.

          And it's not that I will not govern with those who would deny the privacy of the patient-doctor relationship, it's that they've made it clear they would not with me. For what it's worth, on that issue, you are way outnumbered.

          "Much law, but little justice": Proverb

          by Dave925 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 09:21:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I welcome the decent Christians (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      beaky

      ...because the decent Christians would be more attracted to the Democratic party, anyway.  If you read the Bible for what Jesus said, it's a pretty dadgum liberal message he's spreading.  WWJD?  Health care reform!  We've already got a lot of Christians who understand this, such as our friends at Street Prophets.  I'm a rampaging atheist and I still like those folks because they're good people, "faith"-based or otherwise.  Those people, with their approach to religion, belong in the Democratic party.

      The crazy, theocracy-wanting, radicalized wanna-control-your-life, don't-actually-know-or-care-what-Jesus-said right-wing Evangelical jihadis, though?  The ones who just use religion as a power-grab?  I don't want 'em.  Look what they did to the GOP.  Most of the GOP's fracturing is due to these fundies.  They imbeded too deeply, gained too much power over the party, and then they did what religious groups seem to do best:  create schisms.

      My small red-state town has five pages of Baptist churches in the Yellow Pages, because none of 'em can get along.  And they've brought that kind of divisiveness to the Republican party.  They were useful for a while, but now the Republicans are paying for it.

      So, Evangelicals and Christians, yep, bring them on.  Evangelicals with right-wing mindsets, though?  That'd end up hurting us in the end.

      "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

      by Front Toward Enemy on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:24:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Equality for All or Just Certain Christians?? (4+ / 0-)

    In his totalitarian, theocratic statement Reverend Samuel Rodriguez seems to believe much of the right-wing Christian-supremecy ideology.
    Rodriguez's statement is chilling to those of who believe in equality of all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, skin color, religious belief, etc., etc., not just some Christiians with alledgedly correct beliefs.

    Rodriguez sounds like Dobson and Fallwell when he declared: "We have radical Muslims. Radical homosexuals. Radical abortionists. We need radical, born again, spirit filled Christians to arise ! Do you follow me ?
    We don't need any sissy Christians, Oprah Winfrey Christians. We need prophetic, devil stomping, demon rebuking, blood washed, Bible believing, free-from-sin Christians !"

  •  Many evangical, Hispanic churches in Tampa (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trashablanca

    I don't know the politics of the churches, but I have seen tremendous growth in these churches and wondered.  However, like younger people everywhere, it seems the Hispanic youth that I have talked with (admittedly small numbers) are accepting of gays or have come out.  Also, they are not practicing any religion.  

  •  How many ways can you say (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trashablanca

    "Effed up"? Because when it comes to America, I don't think you can count them all.

    What this country has become makes a joke of my admittedly idealistic childhood civics classes. The country is half full of yahoos and magical thinkers, ripe fodder to be directed by sociopathic agents of a venal Plutocracy who believes this is a great way to control people and protect their own asses from the wrath of a people they are on the verge of condemning to virtual serfdom.

    When I think back to what seemed to be the verge of an awakening and enlightenment some 40 years ago, so soon derailed by the yahooism of that time manipulated by Nixonites, I can only think of the long, slow slide it has been to the bottom. We're almost there.

    When will we fight back? For so long now I have asked myself that and still, there is no fight to be had on our part. I ask it still. When will we fight back? Our freedom and perhaps our very lives are at stake.

    "Much law, but little justice": Proverb

    by Dave925 on Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 07:02:47 AM PDT

    •  I think we're almost there... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Troutfishing, tardis10

      but we really need to fight back with our education system, get the fundies off the school boards, create real standards for home-schooling (although I'd prefer home-schooling to be out-lawed).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site