Do Elitist Attitudes Toward Religion Undermine Democratic Prospects?

[wyldwolf]

How do religious DUers feel about the following?

From the Emerging Democratic Majority blog:

The current issue of The Boston Review has a series of articles "The Believers," which shed light on the evolving relationship of religion and politics in America. Two of the articles in particular merit a read by Dems concerned about developing a strategy that addresses moral and religious issues in a more effective way. "Taking Faith Seriously: Contempt for religion costs Democrats more than votes" by Mike Gecan argues that Democrats who disparage or ignore religious faith make the party appear elitist to many. As Gecan notes,

the contempt of the progressive elite for ordinary people—for their faiths, their speech patterns, their clothes, their hobbies, their hopes, and their aspirations—has driven scores of millions of Americans out of the Democratic Party and into either the Republican Party or a no man’s land between the two. The willingness of many Republicans to simply show respect for the habits and interests of these mixed and moderate Americans has paid growing political dividends. The Republicans have understood that communicating respect is more important than offering programs or incentives. The Democrats have failed to realize that multiplying programs or policies designed to meet people’s needs is doomed to fail unless and until those people sense a fundamental level of recognition of who they are, not just what they need.

In "Losing Faith: The Democrats called, but they didn’t call back," Ari Lipman describes an incident revealing a clueless disrespect for local religious leaders at the Democratic convention. Lipman concludes,

We transform our private religious values into public action at the ballot box. As the Democrats are now discovering, parties ignore this fact at their peril. Engaging religious Americans does not necessarily mean altering the fundamental values and platform of the Democratic Party...Democrats need more than a pious new vocabulary. Party leaders must drop their thinly veiled scorn for religious Americans and seek to engage them sincerely around common interests, both in houses of worship and on convention floors.

Althought the perceptions Gecan and Lipman discuss may be worse than the reality among most Democrats and their leaders, it is no less destructive to Democrats' hopes for the upcomming elections. Both writers seem to be saying that respect is at least as important as policy in winning the support of religious voters.

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/001143.php

Disclosure: I'm agnostic.

[cestpaspossible]

1. I'm an atheist - does that make me an elitist?

[Tux]

7. No

Means you bring a rational perspective to all of this along with Agnostics and Deists. Atheists really should speak up more.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

19. I'm not sure I agree with that, actually.

I'm likewise an atheist, but I'm inclined to think that the best thing atheists can do for the Democratic party at the moment is keep their heads down and campaign on other issues.

It's a sad fact that an awful lot of Americans regard the fact that the Democratic party believes in rights for atheists as a mark against it - when Bush senior said that he wasn't sure atheists could be patriots, a lot of people agreed with him - and will be more likely to vote blue (my god... that expression makes my head hurt... I'm from the UK, where left is red and right is blue) if left-wing christians make more noise and we make less.

I think that we are one group who can afford to be sidelined a little, at least in the short term - the abuses of right-wing christianity can be combatted more effectively by left-wing christianity than by atheism, or even by a mixture, I'm afraid.

[formernaderite]

20. Me too...and I defintely hang with the blue collar crowd...

The fundies won't vote for us anyway. However, there are many populists who are habitually religious and a populist messenger can garner their votes.

[pres2032]

2. yes, i agree

I see it all the time here on DU, a condesending attitude towards beleivers and anyone from rural areas, esp. the south. I hate to say it, there is a bit of elitism, not just here in DU, but in other places. I see it in some dems at my college. Now, don't worry, i have no plans to jump ship, but i think that there some who desperately need to taste some humble pie and really get in touch with the ordinary person.

[Tux]

9. ?

i think that there some who desperately need to taste some humble pie and really get in touch with the ordinary person.

I have a bachelor's degree in psychology yet I can't get a job since I lived in MI. Isn't that elitist?

I live in the Bible Belt and at one of my jobs, my manager wanted me to help solve her relationship problems with her cousin she was dating. Isn't that a bit rednecked especially for a rural town?

Some of us see this crap dealing with "ordinary people" (no such thing, everyone has some special quality or ability). I also lived in eastern KY. Redneck doesn't describe it.

If the Southerners would ban cousin marriage, let the ministers to allow people to think for themselves, actually read books, stop the "liberals hate Jesus" crap, and focus more on life than NASCAR, we'd be straight.

[SouthernDem2004]

14. Why you can not get a job...

Lol, you have a BS in Psychology. :) There are millions of you....

[Tux]

17. True yet

The reasons I hear from employers include: I didn't attend college in KY, I'm not a southern, I might not support the local college's teams (I didn't support my school's teams, not a sports fan), MI went Dem in 2 elections, and I lack a southern accent.

If that isn't elitist, I need a better dictionary than what Oxford offers.

[Solon]

11. I disagree....

I'm a believer, just not of the same stripe as you, and therefore you are just as "Elitist" and disrespectful of me, by fiat, as you would define how the "Secularists" on this board behave towards you.

[tubbacheez]

3. "contempt for religion" is at most a perception and therefore subject to

spin.


I don't know any Dems on a personal level who hold anything close to "contempt" for religion. Many are solid members of their chosen (or family) faith. Many others are not religious themselves, but have no problem with religion in general.

There is a common thread in that most Dems that I personally know can draw a clear line between personal faith and public policy. And at times, especially during emotional rants, there is considerable hostility toward those who blur the two.



So if there's any "contempt" at all, it's not directed against religion, but rather against those who wish to see their religion become public policy.

The RW likes to frame the discussion as overly polarized. Either you're in favor of religion or else you're against every manifestation of religion in society. They set up a classic strawman argument this way.

And it's simply not factual, at least among the Dems I know.

[Eloriel]

8. Me, Me!! I hope contempt for relgion --

but only when it's hauled out and used to thump me over the head, or I'm made to listen to discussions about it, and forced to be "tolerant" of those who want to violate the spirit of the Constitution by making our thoroughly SECULAR government into something a little (or a lot) less than that. Etc.

I have no problem with your religion -- pretty much whatever it is -- if you'll leave me the hell alone about it. In fact, I can go all the way to, "Gee, I'm glad you find comfort and meaning in your ______ religion," and actually mean it.

But the minute you feel the need to subject me to conversations like THIS one, frankly, I get very, very, VERY UPSET AND WANT TO DO A LOT OF YELLING.

Your religion is your business. Let's keep it that way, shall we?

[punpirate]

4. BS...

... look, the issue is very simple. If one believes in the rule of law, the Constitution, in this country's case, one accepts that religion is both protected and private--that the government is secular in nature.

If one puts one's religious beliefs ahead of the Constitution that defines the nation, that enables freedom of religion, then one's religion is dangerous to the structure of the nation and deserves rebuke.

To respect people whose aim is to destroy the rule of law is to participate in the country's destruction. That is treason.

If the Democrats fall for this, they don't deserve the support of the people. It's not about respect. The key word in this is "elitism." It's a buzzword used to rally the uninformed, the uneducated and the fundamentalist segments of society around a fallacious notion--that religion belongs in government, that it has always belonged in government. It's about the encroachment of religion into the secular affairs of government.

To indulge that view is, plainly and simply, dangerous to the nation.

[Tux]

5. Er....WRONG

From the Dems, I see little to no religion being dragged into politics which is good. From Reps, I see Christianity being forced onto everything and all other religions are "wrong and sinful" (my uncle).

To me, Reps are anti-religious in that they hate non-Christians, claim to be Christian, yet never follow anything Jesus said and use a literal understanding of the Torah to hate everything in existence. Dems are more open to religion but they understand that not everyone has the same religion thus using terms from one may alienate the rest.

It's a hard balance but it could be done. Use more generic terms like Divine, blessed, etc and it should work. Reps really go this shit fucked up but Dems can deal with it.

Why can't they shut up about Dems being elitist when Reps are wealthy elites in every sense of the word?

[Solon]

6. I call bullshit on this article....

First, I have yet to see any leader of any party in this country of significance show any type of scorn towards religious(Christian) Americans. In fact, Democrats seem to be bending over backwards to use faith and religious aspects in their speeches and candidates. Look at Born Again Al Gore, or Religious Joe Leiberman, as well as John Kerry and Edwards as well. Are they secularists? I think not, and they don't have to be. The problem is a false perception that the GOP and the Media perpetuates that makes many Americans think these "Elites" don't respect them. The biggest problem is that Democrats fall for the same thing.

No the Elites showing scorn towards the Middle and Lower classes, along with the religious are the GOP. If anything I would think people will begin to realize that. They use and abuse the Religious in the most atrocious of manners, commiting damn near sacrilege in their pursuit of power, and at the same time, show disdain for the OTHER religious groups that make up this nation, and we're AMERICANS TOO DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!

[salib]

10. Up is now down. And rationality is now elitism.

But, remember, freedom is slavery.

Just like ignorant people calling someone arrogant because that person actually worked hard enough to know something.

[GOPFighter]

12. This is just too damn insulting!

"contempt of the progressive elite for ordinary people—for their faiths, their speech patterns, their clothes, their hobbies, their hopes, and their aspirations"

Bullsh*t! I only have contempt for the behaviors of people when they fly in the face of logic and threaten to seriously impact my life. I don't care if a person worships rocks, likes to bowl, eats grits, and collects velvet paintings of Elvis. I do have contempt for people who insist I must live by their interpretation of the Bible, even though they can't produce a shred of evidence that god exists or, if so, approves of that interpretation.

It's been my experience that people in America used to aspire to becoming more educated and more knowledgeable about the world they live in. Then the freaky fundies realized that the more educated people became the more likely they were to leave the fold. So now we have a large part of our society who now REVELS in being stupid and resisting thinking for them selves and keeping an open mind. As protection, they resort to calling anyone who dares think for themselves an ELITIST!

The best thing the Democrats can do is stick up for what we really believe is true and right and stop pandering to the people who revel in their closed-minded world. Yeah, we may get kicked around for awhile, but the only hope our country has of becoming great again is for those of us who believe in solving problems with logic and facts rather than rely on theocrats to tell us what they want for America.

Wake up America. Learn, read, think, be skeptical, demand proof!

[wyldwolf]

13. "Demand proof!" - that's my philosophy!

:patriot:

[LizW]

15. They're blurring contempt for religion with contempt for willful ignorance

I don't consider myself contemptuous of religion. I was raised in a religious home, attended a Southern Baptist university and have been surrounded every day of my life by highly religious people. I respect their beliefs even if I don't share them.

The people I love most after my husband and kids are all religious, and at least once every few months I listen to family members try to convince me that we should attend church, and that our children need to be baptised. I have never once been anything less than completely respectful.

I vigilantly protect my children from proselytization, but I do it with great care not to hurt anyone's feelings.

Yes, there are certain religious things I make fun of. Television evangelists, the nutty people lying on their faces in front of the Roy Moore Monument, the people with signs outside the Schiavo hospice -- yes, I laugh. But not because they are religious. Because they are NUTS.

The thousands of normal religious people I know get my utmost respect.

Not that they return that respect. They never stop telling me, in one way or another, that I am doing a great wrong to my children by raising them as agnostics. The implication is always there that, although they love us, we are not quite good enough, not quite acceptable. But we could be -- if we would just give up and DO WHAT THEY SAY.

I don't know what the writers of these articles think I should do. I don't recognize the elitist Democrat they describe, the one with the "thinly veiled scorn for religious Americans."

I want a government that uses compassion and honesty and hard work and all the other good qualities that religions promote to make our country and the world a better place for future generations. I know that religious people and non-religious people have much to offer in that endeavor.

But when it comes to what I believe about the greater spirit of this Universe, that is between me and the Universe. I just want to be left alone to hopefully figure it out over the course of my life.

How does that make me an elitist?

[stopbush]

16. A bullshit article.

Where is there a connection between being religious and having morals or ethics? I've yet to see it.

Spirituality is a human trait. Religion is a human construct. There's no connection nor inspiration drawn from one to influence the other.

Why do I say this article is BS? Simple: it's just another "Dems need to act more like R's to win" piece of crap. In fact, the exact opposite is true: Dems lose when they cede ground to the Rs and their two-bit policies and surface-level embrace of "morals" to define themselves. To use the MSM jargon, "some of us" feel that the Dems lose when they adopt the R customs and costume.

If atheists and non-believers made half the noise that the Xtian R does, if they asserted themselves and offered a cogent example to the sheeple to loose the shackles of religion and get in touch with their inner selves, to see the glory of the human condition rather than concentrating on the shit-end of the stick all of the time, things would improve greatly.

In my case, I don't really care what the endeavor is, I'm not going to hang around people nor sign on to a philosophy who/that uses guilt, scapegoating, racism, sexism and negativity as motivators. I won't do it in my personal or business lives, so why should I do it when it comes to my secular government? The fear of the boogie man and the worship of the sky god may offer some their raison d'etre, but not me.

Sorry, but it's the Xtian R that's the elitist class in this country, a class that cuts across social and economic lines. They're the ones who are so sure they're better than everyone else. If I had nickel for every time a RW wack-job or fundie used projection as a defensive tool, I'd be living the high life on the Riviera.

[Benson]

18. "Condescending" attitudes WILL hurt elections.

Treat people with respect, and they will vote for you.

Politics can never fully be removed from religion, the human factor ties them together. An atheist CAN be elected to office in a red state, just treat people with respect. Quoting verses just to reach out doesn't work, sticking to topics and not getting sidetracked DOES work.