First. What patriotboy says.
But, more generally many of the things I wrote in this post have been greatly misinterpreted. I'll assume good faith on the part of those who did so and therefore conclude that the problem was with the writer and not the reader.
Some have reacted to my use as "liberalish" in describing "Christian liberals," thinking that I meant "Christian liberals can't really be liberals, so I'll call them liberalish." That's not what I meant at all. I meant "liberalish" as "representing a wide spectrum of political beliefs from moderate to left." I was aiming at a broad group of people, not attempting to marginalize or denigrate anyone.
Some have also taken my post to mean that nothing good has ever come from Christianity, or that Christians individually never do anything good, charitable, and that Christians have never been a part of social justice movements, etc... I'm not sure where that's in the post, but I never meant to claim or imply that.
Chuck Currie chastizes me for not mentioning, for example, the work of the Reverend Barry Lynn as head of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Fair enough - my initial post should have been more clear that I was aware of activities by him and other people. Partly, the problem is that I incorrectly assume sometimes that people reading this site read and hear every word I say and write. I had mentioned Lynn while discussing this issue on Air America the other night.
My tone generally was too harsh in places, and as is all too frequently the case I painted with too broad a brush - but, on the other hand when people throw a punch they shouldn't be too upset when someone punches back. I think people who read my words charitably, as I would hope people roughly on "my side" would tend to do, would have a clearer understanding of what I meant to write, even if the writing wasn't always clear.
I should have made clear that I think gratuitous swipes at religion for no particular purpose are both unhelpful and potentially genuinely offensive for reasons others have stated. However, I just don't think it's particularly important in the grand scheme of things. If liberalish (that is, from left to moderate) Christians and Jews and others are concerned that such things may scare voters from voting Democratic, then it seems to me that time is best spent pointing out the truly offensive, bigoted, and anti-religious freedom rhetoric and policies coming from the Republican side of the aisle.
That doesn't mean we can't criticize people on "our side," but there's a difference between "I don't like what Marc Maron said on the radio," and "OH MY GOD DEMOCRATS ARE ANTI-RELIGIOUS BIGOTS AND THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM." Democrats are not anti-religious bigots, by and large. Most Democratic voters are religious. Most Democratic politicians are religious. It's just another issue that the Right likes to raise, knowing that some on the Left will play right into it.
In the end, it's all about emphasis. I don't think Democrats pose a threat to religious freedom - in fact, they're our best hope for preserving it. And, nor do I think the comments of one radio host, no matter what we think of them, should lead us to discussing the Big Anti-Religion Problem In The Democratic Party. It doesn't exist. It's time to stop letting the Right tar the entire "Left" with a few random statements and sentiments of a tiny minority. No one will ever ask members of the Right to do 3 weeks of soul-searching after Jay Severin's advocacy of genocide.
And, yes, more generally I wish moderate and liberal Christians would devise a coordinated media and PR strategy to counterract both the influence of the Christian Right on politics as well as its influence on the public face of Christianity. I say both because it benefits my agenda - maintaining the Church/State wall, and because I perceive (though, as a secular person this is less my business) that moderate and liberal Christians are being tarred by the actions of everything done in the name of Christianity. That isn't to take away from the notable actions of individuals and groups who are doing just this, but rather pointing out the obvious fact that it hasn't been a particularly well-funded or coordinated or successful effort. Need someone to talk about religion on CNN? Call Pat Robertson!
While I respect the work of the Reverend Barry Lynn - I think he's an excellent advocate for the mission of his particular group - his reticence to discuss his personal religious beliefs limits his effectiveness in other areas. We need more people who are outspoken about both their religious beliefs and about politics to counterract the rhetoric and political force of the Christian Right. As a secular liberal, there isn't much I can do about this issue.
I think some think that I personally don't pay enough attention to this issue - that I, as someone with a moderately sized megaphone, could bring more attention to the types of issues I'm talking about. There's a reason I don't - there's something not quite right about me as a secular person highlighting the actions of my "favorite Christians." Religion isn't my domain - media and politics are. And, while I of course highlight the political actions of the Christian Right and the Republican Party (one and the same, mostly, these days), I'm not all that comfortable linking to something and saying "I agree with this" when, well, what we're talking about to some degree are Biblical interpretations. I'm fine with people integrating and resolving their politics and their religion, and while I can agree or disagree with the politics, the religion really isn't any of my business.
I would suggest that some of the reason some on the Christian Left feel somewhat that their religion marginalizes them from other liberals is something which impacts us all - Religion Is a Very Sensitive Subject. Unless you are an extreme evangelist or in a group of extraordinarily like-minded people, discussion of deeply held but not universally shared religious beliefs is almost always problematic. Some people just don't consider it to be appropriate dinner party conversation.
...and everyone should read this post by Tristero.
