Religion
In reply to the discussion: what is the most important aspect of the interaction between belivers and non believers [View all]cbayer
(146,218 posts)I am advocating for an SOP that more clearly reflects the wishes of the members.
If there is a desire for this room to be used primarily to find areas of commonality as opposed to a battle cage where the only point is to prove you are right, why couldn't the SOP more accurately reflect that?
That doesn't mean there aren't going to be personality clashes and I am not suggesting that that could ever be eliminated.
But there could definitely be a reduction in hostilities and in pure flame bait posting.
This is distinctly different than the areas you highlight. In those areas, it would behoove democrats to come to some kind of policy compromises that both sides can live with. Not saying that is going to happen, but it seems that would be the coal.
In the case of religion, it is more about setting religious differences aside and agreeing to respect the differences so we can proceed in working together towards mutual goals. There is no policy, per se, to be determined. We all agree on church/state separation issues, that the religious right is a mutual enemy and that the religious influence in politics is a very slippery slope that should be closely watched. At least, I think we do.
It is the constant attacks on the "other" that is divisive and is constantly used to drive a wedge between otherwise likeminded individuals.
It's not about feeling compelled to vote republican. It's about missing the opportunity to form coalitions that further our goals, a problem found in many areas of the democratic party and not to our benefit.
I'm not so naive as to think it's going to happen, but I propose that it should be considered.
Edit history
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)