??NPR??: “Democrats Learn Lessons on Religion from Kaine Victory”:http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5008695&ft=1&f=1001. Fascinating story on the role of morality and religion in the political dialog. At our church during the election, this debate was palpable: everyone seemed to want a candidate that would hold conservative religious values (as the supposedly “religious right”) and pay serious attention to addressing the needs of the poor. Instead, we were forced into the morally awkward position of choosing one over the other.
Tim Kaine wins the Virginia by breaking all the rules: talking about God openly as a Democrat, opposing the death penalty in a state that supports it, even buying airtime on Christian radio (!). And, according to Howard Dean, this is the direction that the Democrats are looking to go as they open up to the religious conversation. Here are some thought-provoking quotes from the story:
==
@1:34 on the radio ads:
I was stunned, I thought it was brilliant. Not because it was manipulative, but in fact here was a Democrat who was actually going into an explicitly evangelical Christain audience—a Roman Catholic Democrat. And finding a language that spoke authentically about his experience that had some resonance in that community.
— Shawn Casey, Wesley Theological Seminary
@2:32
Morality has been on every Democrats’ mind since the day after the 2004 election when they awakened to find that majorities of traditional Jewish, Catholic, Protestant and other religious people had voted Republican. John Kerry, a Catholic, could not even carry Catholics.
— Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR
@3:50
If the Republicans have been too controlled by a handful of religious fundamentalists, the Democrats have been too controlled by a handful of secular fundamentalists.
— Jim Wallace, Sojourner’s Magazine
@5:04
They saw Democrats anywhere from ambivalent to values and to faith all the way to anti-religious. And, they couldn’t offer a lot of examples for why they saw Democrats that way. It was more a sense that Democrats don’t talk about this and so the Right have been able to define the debate and Democrats and the Left in general have not engaged.
— Karl Agne, Democracy Corps
==
Ken,
Good post.
It’s clear that the Republicans don’t really want to overturn Roe. vs. Wade. They clearly embrace pro-choice people, like Schwarzenegger, who can get elected governor.
The Dems, if they are to wise up, will learn to create room for pro-life candidates who will vote conservative on sexual and “family” issues but can go rather left on economic and social issues.
How about a new party? The Christian Democrats? You would get the working class Catholic vote, the African American vote, and the some of the evangelical vote. In fact, if you read official Roman Catholic social thought, it’s rather left-leaning and pro labor. The Pope (JPII) went on record and opposed both wars in Iraq.
Peace,
ALan
“How about a new party? The Christian Democrats?”
How about NO parties and people vote for the person that is the best choice for leading this country into the future. Someone that can look at what it means to be “free” and realize that laws shouldn’t be passed to ‘protect people’ whether it be from themselves or outside influences, but pass laws to protect our freedom to choose what we think is right and not what the loudest group or the one with the most money believes to be right.
Everyone’s beliefs are different, the people and government of this country needs to realize that and let people live free and do as they wish.
Its interesting to see RNC spin work its way through the media. A different view on that NPR piece:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200511110006
I agree with Alan that as a card carrying member of the political center, I deserve to be courted. However, his description asserts that Republicans are “clearly” inclusive and Democrats are not. Exhibit A: Arnold. This is a standard Republican talking point.
Democratic governors of more conservative states lean right on many issues. Like Kaine.
So let me get this straight. An allegedly right-leaning dem in Va means that the whole party needs to shift right, while a left-leaning GOP in Ca means that Republicans are the party of inclusion?
Ken I think the most telling quote in your post was “And, they couldn’t offer a lot of examples for why they saw Democrats that way.”
Tim Kaine, not Tom. Tom Kean (pronounced the same) was governor of new jersey in the 1980s.
“DMD”:http://kennsarah.net/2005/11/11/democrats-and-religion/#comment-1212, I made the change. Thanks.
“Russ”:http://kennsarah.net/2005/11/11/democrats-and-religion/#comment-1212, thanks for the spin control on the NPR article. It’s good to weigh the diversity of opinion out there about this interesting political character. It appears that Kaine’s position on abortion is quite a bit more nuanced than either media agency was willing to detail. His own “issues page”:http://www.kaine2005.org/issues/abortion.php shows that while Kaine will not criminalize abortion (though he takes a harder line on partial-birth), he’s certainly interested in reducing the social problem of unwanted pregnancy, including “abstinence-focused” (!) education. Media Matters, catching the second misrepresentation by NPR on the Kaine position, would make you believe that the article was solely about this issue, but I think Haggerty was taking a wider view of Kaine’s political stance. My personal interest in the story also stretches beyond this single issue.
Regarding Alan’s description of the Republican party: I don’t think that Alan meant to characterize the Republicans as “inclusive” so much as he meant to expose their platform on moral issues as “diluted” (my words). Alan is actually a card-carrying socialist who happens to swing right on issues of morality. He lives in an inner-city neighborhood that, in his words, “isn’t the ghetto, but it’s definitely the ‘hood” — a place which often sees firsthand the real impact of the Bush agenda on the poor and working-class. So, without putting too many words in his mouth, I don’t think he meant to say that the Republicans were getting anything right in the moral debate — least of all with the Governator.
Regarding your statement, “An allegedly right-leaning dem in Va means that the whole party needs to shift right…”: er, if anyone alluded that in this article, then it was Howard Dean’s very direct statements that Dems are interested in taking part in the religious dialog.
I certainly am not interested in seeing the Democrats become more like the GOP than they already are (highly corporately funded, plagued by their own political scandals, etc.) — I mean, really, what were the differences between Doug Forrester and John Corzine, again? However, I AM interested in seeing some authentic debate in the realm of morality and, in particular, creating a just society. The Republicans, the party that consistently carries the evangelical vote, has given us what many know to be an unjust war, an even greater divide between those with money and those without, and legislation to enable torture where “terrorism” (whatever that means) is the focus of an interrogation.
So, yeah, I want to see some public debate on the role of religion that isn’t framed by what often seems like the rich, white fundamentalist party. If the Dems can do that with candidates that are willing to explore the idea of integration with their own, personal faith, I’m for it.
I also am dissatisfied with both parties.
You’re right, I attributed more satisfaction with the GOP to Alan than I should have. He did, however, insinuate that the Democrats need to “wise up” and get some candidates who will “vote conservative” on sex/family issues.
I like Howard Dean. He’s a representation of the fact that religious people don’t need to be scared of liberals. People whose faith requires state-sponsorship (and predominance in school curriculums) are rightly scared of liberals.
My depression is that this second kind of faith seems to be catching like wildfire. It says: I want America to be a great place for me, but not everyone else.
Howard Dean never said anything about “shifting right.” He said “talk about faith.” Your conflation of the two operates on the kind of unspoken assumption that makes Republicans drool.
Conservative=moral. Faith=moral. Faith=conservative.
I see no evidence for or against any of these presuppositions, but they sure have worked their way into the American consciousness.
I wish I had more time to talk about abstinence and abortion, but I have a paper to write. Bravo for sparking a conversation.
Russ,
Actually, I’m a card-carrying Democrat, who occasionally votes Green. I considered registering socialist, but most parties I knew about then advocated the classic Marxist overthrow of the goverment.
I think the Dems need to make room for classic Christian social thought, which seriously takes the poor and disenfranchised into account as well as does not regurgitate the Hollywood ethos on important issues like marriage, sexuality, the family.
I suppose the greatest problem I find with socialist and statist solutions to our problems is they lack three crucial elements: community, joy and sense of humor. This is more my personal experience.
Peace,
Alan