God bless the Democrats

Ok, I don’t really have the skills to propose policy, and perhaps these views are a bit naive. It's a little hard for me, since I don't truly advocate either party, but it doesn’t take a genius to identify trends. As an ardent anti-republican I smell trouble brewing.

Primarily I want to bounce off what JDK said at LeftAdvocate. There’s a new war on the winds, it’s not the War on Drugs, nor is it the War on Terror, no I’m talking about the “War on Religion”. Indeed folks, culture war: pre-packaged and brought to you loudly and repetitively by theocons everywhere. And let me give you a hint what’s great about this war: the outcome is known If there is a War on Religion the Republicans will win. Guaranteed. It's a simple matter of demographics and values. Religion is important to religious people. It is something they will fight for. If Republicans make this a primary wedge issue they will be untouchable.

Being the party of religion has a number of tangible benefits. Back in the day the atrocities of kings were supported by their Divine Right. Today it’s ok to be pro-war, pro-torture, and anti-environmental…so long as you’re anti-abortion, you have “moral values”. Having religion on your side is the ultimate moral trump card. When it comes to God, you’re either with us or against us…and who really wants to stand opposed to God? Filthy godless heathens, that’s who. Of course there is a difference between arguing against God and arguing against enforcing Biblical Law, but people are going to spin it that way.

So wherever possible Republicans are going to try to make it look like Democrats are anti-religion. It reinforces their base and gives them moral capital to waste on things like torturing people. A lot of it will be lip-service like the marriage amendment and the Terri issues, but what does it hurt? It certainly doesn’t cost votes, (not any they would get anyway) and Republicans get to trumpet all over how moral they are. Occasionally they can use religion to directly remove barriers. Are activist judges preventing your complete and total power? Sic the people on them. If the filthy godless heathen Democrats try to support the Constitution, well, make them pay for it.

The control in how far Republicans can push the religion issue, is to some extent in the veracity of their demographics. Suppose a church leans right (if they’re centrist here central Philadelphia, I assume they're conservative in most places). Chances are the clergy are farther right than most of the parishioners and maybe they’d like to go further. However there’s only so far a priest (minister, deacon, whoever…) will pull against the will of the congregation. It may be that by radicalizing the religious right it gives the clergy more room to work and still be “only a little conservative”. The more Christian Democrats can be silenced, the more radical it will get, until voting Democrat and killing puppies are morally equivalent. (Upside: You will may yet get to excute criminal juvenilles if we do something about those activist judges.) Keys to the pearly gates will depend on your voter registration.

And why is there no religious left? Is it simply abortion? Let me paint a picture for you. Suppose the Democrats had an official interest group, the religious left who were part of the party, though perhaps a bit fringe. Suppose they were allowed to run their mouths like Dobson or Falwell, and the Democrats could shrug and say no comment. What would they say? Would they want to know why the Pope supported the war in Afganistan but not the war in Iraq? Maybe they would ask why we are spending tax dollars bombing and killing people while some of ours go hungry here at home. I would like to hear the administration respond on "What would Jesus do?" in the context of Gitmo "Persusaion". What would he say about the Iraqi hung from his arms on bars until his lung muscles gave out and he suffocated to death? (switch the bars with a cross and we have a name for that process) Torture memos? Disintegration of the EPA? Bankruptcy bills? Greed and tax cuts for the wealthy? Using churches to recruit soldiers? But alas, Democrats have no such voice. And it costs them dearly.

If I were making Democrat policy, here are a few guildelines I would follow.

1: No more use of the term Religious Right. There is a fallacy of ambiguity there. We would all rather be right than wrong. It is fantastic marketing. Where a view can be construed as one where less than half of religious people believe in it, call it the "religous fundamentalist" view. I read that and say, well I'm religious, but not a fundamentalist. Where the views are more minority get more agressive. Theocrat is a good choice. Republican theocrat if possible, with an occasional theocon tossed in, but don't under any circumstances, use a charged term on subjects with mass appeal. When forcing a wedge issue, generally you want the larger chunk.

2: Decouple religion from Republicanism. An insidious way to to this would be to have a pro-war Dem admit that war is not the religous thing to do, but it mustbe done anyway. Anti-war Dems can point at torture and other things. Trust me, there's tons of material here.

3: Make Republicans pay for their alliance. Taint the word conservative the way liberal seems tainted. Prohibition of birth control is a conservative view, even 70+% of catholics believe in using birth control (at least married). While not necessarily a Republican view prohibition of birth control is undisputedlty a conservative view. Refer to it as a conservative view (not religious, or even catholic, etc...). Refer to the Taliban as conservative. The people who want womens faces cloaked in the mid-East...those are the conservatite Islamists.

4: Find a high profile candidate who can say "God" with a straight face. Imagine hearing this: "I belive abortion is wrong, there are a lot of Democrats who don't like hearing that, but it is what I believe. However, God gave us free will. I'm not about to hold my personal religous beliefs above free will. There are lots of things that are wrong that are legal. It is legal to choose be mean. It is legal to choose to be greedy. And it is legal to choose to have an abortion. Chances are if you're considering an abortion, you've had some trouble. I'm not going to add to those troubles by letting the government impose religous law on you. You have your own values, and a legal right to exercise free will. But please, think and pray carefully on your decision. It's very important." How much would that make secularists squirm? I don't know, but it would make the Republicans pretty damn nervous.

5: Call out hippocrasy. Do it in a flamboyant way. It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a Haliburton executive to enter the kingdom of God. Or maybe point out that for all GWB talks about God, his attendance at church is pretty poor. That might be ok for some religions, but it's sinful in others, and smacks of hypocrasy.

6: As a combination of 3 and 6... would anyone else love to see a seven deadly sins commercial with soundbytes from Tom DeLay?
-Pride: take your pick
-Greed: any fundraising or taxcutting clip
-Anger: the anti-judge quote is good, anger at Shays would be great
-Envy: maybe an anti-judge thing here
-Gluttony: the free trips, when was the last time your family spend 80k on a family vacation?
- Leaves sloth and lust...find examples, or maybe let him off the hook and say he's only 5/7th of a bad person...whatever.

7: Finally, as an obvious correllary of 1: Don't attack religion itself, nor the Bible. At this point don't even attack the religious right. When you have a beef, take it out on "theocons". Most importantly, do not be drawn into stupid fights. Especially drummed up controversy. Here's my Democrat response for the Terri Schivo issue: "We're in the middle of war, X soldiers died this month. We're in the deepest debt we've ever been in, and the dollar is falling. You want my opinion on Terry Shiavo? Very well. I pray for her soul, and look forward to the day when congress cares about its soldiers and the needs of the entire nation as persistantly as those of a single person."

The point is Dems will lose big time in a War on Religion. But the powers that be have the most to lose in a War for Religion.