MA State Convention (Oh no! Not more. Yes, more. Much more!)

[TayTay]

I am lucky to have my husband attending conventions with me. He went 'local' and attended all the MA stuff. (That is his natural passion.) I went to the big 'think piece' panels because egg-heady discussions about abstract concepts and wonky thought sessions are my thing. (We have a good marriage. I am a lucky lady.)

There was a two-part panel discussion about what the Democratic Message is going forward from the 2004 election. (Subtitled, 'Speaking Out on Matters of Conscience') The first part of this discssion was held on Friday night, the second part was held Sat. morning. (After coffee, thank The Powers that Be!) Have I ever told you guys that Massachusetts is one of, if not The Egghead Capitols of the Universe? Well, this panel proved it. We had 5 Harvards, a Yalie, an MITer, and some folks from other schools like Georgetown, Tulane and so forth. Lots of candlepower up there at the desks.

All that candlepower was pointed at trying to figure out why the Democratic Party is vulnerable to charges of being hostile to religion and to God. (Bluntly put, that is.) First of all, there was a banner with a statement of what the actual, agreed upon Democratic message is:

* Rewarding Work
* Healthy Childhood
* Freedom to Worship
* Respecting Differences
* Safety at Home
* Justice without Killing
* Revering Nature
* Valuing Minds
* Collective Security
* Equality under Law
* Fearless Retirement

Whew! That is a lot to chew over. And a lot to type. I have a feeling it is going to take a few days to go over all the stuff I learned. (And I am still recovering from my sinus infection and bronchitis. Sorry!)

Chew that over for a minute and feel free to write what you think about that list of Democratic message points.

Nice article on the current Dem turn to address the Religous issue: http://www.berkshireeagle.com/Stories/0,1413,101%257E7514%257E2845899,00.html?search=filter

[TayTay]

1. Muslim-American outreach and the Kerry campaign

Item: 90% of Muslim Americans voted for George Bush in 2000.
Item: 60% of Muslim Americans voted for John Kerry in 2004.
Why the turnaround? Answer: The Patriot Act.

I spoke with Mushtaque Alikhan Mirza who was an Indian-American of Persian ancestry. (They gave out a bio booklet. You know you're in MA Dem-land when panel discussions have background booklets to hand out at political discussions. LOL!) He was a Massachusetts Electoral College member and was VP of the delegation in 2004. (And here I thought Electoral College people were myths. Nope, they are real.) He told me that Muslim-Americans were originally aligned with the Repubs because of the abortion issue. (Abortion is strictly against Muslim law and tradition.) He had worked very hard on the Kerry campaign and was proud of the turnaround. But the turnaround didn't happen just because John Kerry is such a great guy. The Rethugs have burned Muslims with their idiotic provisions in The Patriot Act.

Mr. Mirza related a lot of horror stories, including the one that made him an activist in America. (He had endured the Pakistan-India religious tensions and had had family members involved in a massacre in India in which 25 people were burned alive. These doomed people had hidden in a building to get away from a mob and were easy targets when they were found and burnt alive. He took the lesson from this that people don't run away from discrimination, they don't hide, they stand and fight. He thinks of that now with the Rethugs and their attempt to co-opt God.)

Outrage by Muslim-Americans over the Patriot Act may have moved this group into the Democratic column for the next few election cycles. (At the least.) There were a number of stories about having unreasonable searches at airports, about deportations against people who haven't done anything but be 'brown' people or people of a minority faith. The Democrats can't hide in the sand over this point. Mr. Mirza wants the Dems to stand and fight. We, as Dems, value the civil rights of all our people. We have to stand against blanket discrimination and alerts that only serve to keep the 'fear level' high in the nation without actually doing anything to make the country safer. I was very moved by talking to him. His message is one the Dems need to hear.

[k j]

21. wow

This is so good to hear. TayTay, you've done and awesome job and I've only read a couple of posts and one link. Thank you!

I'm one of those people who see stars when people use Islamic religious terms in negative ways. We either reach out across the religious divides or we lose the war of communication.

[ginnyinWI]

2. religion and the Democrats

There is no need for any Dems to feel wrong or apologetic for not bringing religion into politics before. The only reason this has come up front and center is because of the religious right's pushing their agenda forward through the GOP. The founding fathers didn't want this--they wanted church and state to stay far away from each other. Each to his own beliefs, but let it stop on the steps of the Capitol.

Dems traditionally are the party of the democratic acceptance of all faiths, colors, and creeds, and don't want to follow anybody's narrow agenda. So I hope they only use these references to religion as a way to diffuse the religious right's claim to have ownership of all religious issues. They DO have a narrow agenda: they believe that they are the only ones who know the One True God. They're narrow in all respects: in religious doctrine, in acceptance of outsiders, in acceptance of new ideas. Their appeal is definitely limited, and I think has been strengthened by money and by unsettling times. Hard times and religious extremism seem to have always gone together historically.

[whometense]

3. I'm SO glad you said this.

I still feel resentful that we need to talk about this stuff at all in regards to politics.

I remember hearing some critic comment that when Kerry started to mention the Bible more, and make more religious references in his speeches, he sounded "phony". Well, I thought at the time - and even more so now - that if it sounded "phony" it was because he was uncomfortable bringing religion into a place he knew it didn't belong. And not, as some said, because he was uncomfortable with religion.

[TayTay]

4. Religion and politics: Oh vey!

The various overtly religious topics were raised at this forum for a specific purpose: the Republicans are using religion and their blatantly false and disingenuous interpretation of faith traditions as a club to beat Democrats on the head. In order to combat this powerful and SUCCESSFUL strategy, we have to meet the beast head on. I love this strategy because it involves getting out of defensive mode and going on the offense with actual truth as a shield.

I plan on developing this more fully in other posts, but in brief this turn-around is not: John Kerry believes that abortion personally is wrong. He is basing this on his personal religious background as a Catholic. Should the issue arise in his family or among friends, his faith tradition would counsel an alternative to abortion. However, he does not feel that religious traditions should be written into law. That would be an unnecessary mixing of Church and State. Very good, very legalistic, very low-key.

Okay, that's fine. I know that and agree with it. And it is a position, rightly or wrongly, that Republicans are able to spin into electoral gold. That is simply the way things are. So, how do you fight this?

Turn it around. The expression I heard was not to allow this argument to fester and become, "John Kerry is a bad Catholic." Instead, the argument is "How DARE you tell me that John Kerry is a bad Catholic! He has voted consistently and strongly in favor of programs that would help prevent the conditions that make poor women face this choice in the first place. How DARE you tell me that I shouldn't support someone who is upholding Catholic moral positions in favor of helping poor women get proper health care and medical care that might make abortions safe, legal and rare."

The religious wars are here to stay for the foreseeable future. They are not going to go away; they are going to intensify. We, as Democrats, do not need to go right in order to cede ground to religious extremists. We need to stand up and pointedly and loudly, passionately and angrily demand that those who use religion in the public sphere do so honestly and in a way that honors those faith traditions in spirit and execution.

Health care for all, especially the poor, is a moral value. I was raised Catholic. There is nothing in my 'faith tradition' (LOL!) that tells me that Jesus said, "Cut Medicaid for poor pregnant women, force them into a situation where abortion becomes the only alternative to raising a child you can't afford and then use the money to cut taxes on the rich." This is using religion to lie. Pure and simple. No faith backs this action. A 'bad Catholic' would be someone who upholds this morally and religiously unfounded idea.

Democrats cannot run away from the religious wars. The thing about this is: we OWN these issues. We friggin own them. Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother: Do not deprive them of Social and Financial Security in their old age in order to enrich a few Wall Street brokers. Thou Shalt Not Lie to get America into an unjust war against a people who did not attack us. Thou Shalt not Covet Thy Neighbors Goods: or give tax cuts to those who are already rich at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. That is also the 'religious wars.'

Go back and read Sen. Kerry's speech on the floor from April 21st. Tell me you don't see these themes in his speech. Democrats are beginning to realize that you can't run away from these religious wars. You have to take this particular club away from the Rethugs and reclaim it. We OWN this. Martin Luther King, Jr. knew this and used his faith to inform his public life and shine a light on wrong-doing and a system that oppressed people. We can take this back. It belongs to us, the Rethugs have simply stolen it.

Again, I will not allow the conversation to become: "John Kerry is a bad Catholic." How DARE some rich, spoiled elitist bastard who has voted to deny veterans their just health care benefits and voted to deny just bankruptcy relief to middle class people tell me that I am a morally deficient Catholic. John Kerry is NOT a bad Catholic. He is a Catholic who stands tall in support of the best traditions of Catholic appeal to social justice, ending poverty and taking care of 'the least of my brothers.' This is a tradition that spreads across all major faiths in America. Poverty is a vlues issue. Health care for all is a values issue. Education is a values issue. The wingnuts have another thing coming if they think that we are going to continue to lie down and let them lie to the American public about this. Bad Catholic. Not on his worst day!

What say you?

[whometense]

6. I say I'd sign you up

for the front lines in this war in a nanosecond.

Seriously, that was wonderful. And of course, you are completely correct. John Kerry is a very good Catholic (and, it really need not be added, 100 times the Christian * is.)

I don't claim any special insight into this issue. I'm not particularly religious, and don't see the world in religious terms. I do, though, consider myself a scrupulously moral person, and weigh my own actions every day in terms of whether they are right or not.

This is the source of my resentment. I don't need to get on my knees and pray in order to figure out this war is an abomination, or that children should be cared for, or that you shouldn't steal money from old people, and the hypocrisy of the evil "pray-ers" just makes me blind with rage. Not a particularly useful condition, I grant you.

We do have the moral high ground. Absolutely. I like your frame. We need to keep reminding ourselves that morality and religiosity are not the same thing. (How do these people justify their stance on contraception? That is something I will never understand. How do you loathe abortion and still oppose contraception????)

Hope this is coherent - it's way early in the morning for me to be pontificating. ;-0

[ginnyinWI]

13. quite coherent

:)
I too consider myself a very moral person, primarily because it's the best way to have a happy and fulfilled life. We are the RR's worst nightmare: moral people who are that way because they believe it is the best way to live, not because they are afraid of going to Hell. Because that's their whole thing--fear: do what we say or suffer the consequences of a wrathful God. Moral secular people are not supposed to even exist--anyone without that fear of God is supposed to be amoral, and have no reason not to steal, lie or live a life of debauchery.

There are plenty of so-called "religious" people who have been guilty of the worst crimes, both on personal and public levels, as we know all too well.

[whometense]

15. Wow. That was great.

I especially like this: Moral secular people are not supposed to even exist--anyone without that fear of God is supposed to be amoral, and have no reason not to steal, lie or live a life of debauchery.

Isn't that exactly what sent these same people over the edge in the Vietnam era? When they tried to tar everyone who disagreed with them politically with the brush of "degenerate hippie"? It's kind of hilarious that after 27+ years of faithful marriage that they're still applying that kind of black and white frame to me. I wasn't a drug taker and I didn't believe in free love (for myself, anyway :-)); I was more in the post-hippie back-to-the-earth mode. But even back then they were using the "morality" brush to tar anyone who thought differently. Thery just couldn't compute the idea of a moral hippie.

[ginnyinWI]

16. we were a little young for the first wave of hippiedom

But I also fancied myself a back-to-the-earth, Walden-reading, artist-type in high school. I'm sure by the way I dressed (tattered bell bottomed jeans, love beads, long hair, no bra, etc., that everyone assumed I slept around, but I didn't. I stuck to my own principles. Lol--and I even kept my grades up too (although I admit that my senior year in high school was mostly art classes). I did well enough to get me into the University of Wisconsin in Madison. (had to go there--the coolest campus in the Midwest! :))

Back in high school there were two types of non-conformists: one type was like me, testing out new ideas, and the other type were the druggies who had family problems and struggled in school and were using drugs or sex to escape something. One guy I knew, a classmate of mine was like this. He was a fantastic artist and also very cute and had a lot of friends. One night he got high, climbed a radio tower, and jumped off. So tragic.

Ok, back to the present from my little trip to the past! :) Where was I? Oh yes--people can be moral despite appearances!

[whometense]

17. Very true.

I often think about this when I hear the (cheating, lying, perverted) wingnuts get on Al Franken, who's been married 30+ years to the same woman, and by any standard lives a straight arrow normal American life.

[karynnj]

7. Great

It was so so good to read this because the entire faux religious issue has been so depressing. Kerry was so visibly angry and indignant in the values speech. I only wish I would have not responded to #2 before I saw this - It really sounds like the MA convention was a great experience.

[LittleClarkie]

19. How about this?

Perhaps more simply said, bringing in not just values, but widening what pro-life means, reminding them that it means the post-born as well as the pre-born.

Pro-life means that you don't needlessly go to war, wasting life in the process.

Pro-life means also being anti-capital punishment.

Pro-life means caring about the poor and their quality of life. Jesus cared about the poor. Why are the Republicans making more of them, then claiming to be the more faith-filled (THAT is a definite "how dare they" moment!)

Also, pointing out that we're seeing the effects of NOT keeping church and state separate even as we speak. If you find someone who doesn't think the governement should have interfered with Shiavo (and I did find a staunch Bushie who felt this) you can make the point that this is exactly why John Kerry doesn't force his religious views onto other people though his position in government. He respects those who feel differently than he does.

Eh. Too complex?

[TayTay]

20. Perfect

There was an enormous amount of discussion about what the 'Culture of Life' means and how to fight the lies that the wingnuts use to push it.

Your analysis is dead-on.

[karynnj]

5. I agree with you that religion doesn't belong in politics

Looking at a politician's past actions to predict future actions makes far more sense to me. Whether good actions are motivated by a moral or ethical code, religious guidelines or inspiration or even a cold, unemotional logic that doing good things more often (when Rove is not there)creates the desired result, it really doesn't matter. The actions are far more easily measured, although it will be a subjective evaluation.

It's annoying to me that some people will believe without question that GWB found God (when it was politically useful after a lifetime as a drunken bully), but call Kerry a "phony" when, in reaction to being described as not religious, he talked about religion. Even in hindsight, I can't figure out what Kerry or surrogates could have done differently that would have worked better. Several things posted here did show a very religious or spiritual side to Kerry, but the Democrats had very little control of the news media - so the fact that Kerry acted as a moral, good man his entire life obviously didn't come through, while much was made of Bush turning his life around.

For many people, it may not have mattered as it seems it actually came down to the legality of abortion, rather than the religiosity of the two men. I guess although keeping abortion legal is preferred by a substantial majority, it seems that Rove did a good job in capturing normally Democratic voters who want abortion to be illegal while retaining normally Republican voters who want it to remain legal.

[TayTay]

8. But it's there.

We can't make it go away because it makes us uncomfortable. We have to meet this head on. It is not going to go away. When the Rethugs find a successful strategy, they use it. They are going to continue to use this because it works.

Democrats are not 'getting religion.' They are not trying to usurp a Rabbi or preacher or priest's place. They ae simply trying to remind Americans that their own faiths, their own beliefs are not represented by the right wing religious extremists. Americans are an overwhelmingly religious people (92% of Americans report a belief in God.) The Rethugs are trying to permanently put a religious agenda into the public sphere and legislate according to that interpretation of religion.

We have to fight this by acknowledging that it is going on. We can't run away and hide because we don't want to impose our 'beliefs' on others in the name of separation of Church and State. (And this is a misinterpretation of that doctrine anyway.) We have to disarm these charges as they are hurled at us.

Jewish tradition places taking care of the poor and needy as a top priority. There is no threat to separation of Church and State by having Jews state this. This position informs the personal and presents reasons for actions that happen in the public sphere. I vote for social justice because of who I am and how I was raised. I translate these private religious teachings into the public arena. This is what Martin Luther King, Jr. taught the Dems to do. Don't hide from this. Don't make it into what it is not.

[whometense]

9. Our posts crossed.

You make excellent points, and it looks like we're both coming from the same place on this.

Certainly if I had the power to create the world as I wanted it, women wouldn't be getting lots of abortions. But oh my god, the hypocrisy! Would * force his own daughters to carry to term if they became pregnant out of wedlock? Why the morning after pill ban, if it would prevent abortions? Plus just the whole, um, TOTAL DISRESPECT right wing has for women on this and on every other issue in the universe.

But it's all the same, on any issue you can bring up - and it infuriates me. All I have to do is imagine my daughter in a situation where her options were dictated by these sanctimonious middle aged-to-old white guys, and all my rationality goes out the window...

[TayTay]

10. And you are not a 'godless heathen'

You are a morally upstanding American whose 'values' represent the mainstream of American thought. You look around and see a country where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting shafted. You see a country where abortion is seen as an absolute stand-alone issue, completely divorced from any discussion of why women have abortions or how to make abortion safe, legal and rare. This offends you on a moral level. This is because you were raised to be a socially conscience person and to think of things beyond your own personal interests. We mean to start celebrating that and are not going to allow religious extremists to tell us any different.

You represent, honestly, the mainstream of America. Rethugs have another thing coming if they think that Democrats are going to continue to allow them to lie about 'moral values.' Democratic moral values don't need to be rethought. We don't need to go right in order to attract religious people. We need to stand up and say, with due pride and conviction, "I believe in these values. I believe in an America where eliminating poverty is not a liberal issue but an American issue. I believe that policies that take money from social programs that help lift people out of poverty is morally bankrupt. I believe that veterans have earned and deserve health care benefits and that making those benefits so expensive that vets can't afford them is morally offensive." And so forth.

I have friggin values. And I'm done letting Rethugs or anyone else tell me that I don't or that there is something wrong with me because I support a woman's right to choose. That is not my religious or moral tradition and the Hypocrites free ride on these issues is over.

So, do you like the new and improved 'fighting Democrats' or what? I loved it.

[whometense]

11. I love it too.

It seems to me to strike exactly the right tone. Anger is sometimes appropriate. In this case, it's 100% just.

These people have been lying about us, and they've been getting away from it for way too long. It's great to hear that the Party's on the case.

(P.S. Listening to Stephanie Miller? She JUST mentioned Dean's unfortunate DeLay remark.)

[TayTay]

18. Thanks!

I was going for something more well-reasonsed and well-thought out, instead of my old standby of "Bite Me!" Somehow that just doesn't cut it in every situation.

[ginnyinWI]

14. We can build on what JK said

I liked Kerry's use of the verse from the book of James about "faith without works is dead". That's the main point we can make: "Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do." Then point out, over and over again, how they are talking the talk, but not walking the walk. There is no way for anyone to counter evidence that is in front of their face. We need to amplify and expand on every GOP action that is inconsistent with the values that they pontificate on.

[ginnyinWI]

12. exactly

He's not uncomfortable with religion, and I'd go so far as to say that without it he'd be a different person. He lives his faith and it informs his principles--he shouldn't need to talk about it. Nobody should.

The hypocrites do need to talk, because they aren't living it. They find they need to describe themselves as religious, because their actions don't.

[k j]

22. Really nice read...

:thumbsup:


The whole thread. Thank you!