What’s New in the Neighborhood: Unbeliever! edition
Faithful Democrats and Atrios links to Faith in Public Life’s post noting the declining support for the Iraq war even among Bush’s traditionally most loyal base, those who attend church weekly. Atrios‘ is puzzled “why some religious people seem to get upset by more outspoken atheists.”
Noting a recently up tick in bloggers discussion religion at Street Prophets, Pastor Dan notes a problem, yes, “they’re talking about the religious left, rather than, you know, talking to the religious left.”
Commenting on Atrios, Xpatriated Texan is havin’ none of it and in light of the Edwards blogger critique: “Isn’t it possible that there’s something in between 100% pro-life and 100% pro-choice?” Adventus weighs in as well and finds both sides wanting.
kos writes a massive post entitled Religion, Values, and Politics. He states:
“If a candidate sincerely gets his or her values from religion, then that’s fine. The Bible is a wonderfully liberal text. And when it’s sincere it doesn’t come across so grating, so imposing. Compare Obama’s talking about religion to Bush’s “favorite philosopher” b.s.But religious values are no more superior than the values I learned from my abuelita (and most Latinos will get a good sense of what my value system looks like just by referencing the word “abuelita”). They are no more superior than the values Tester learned on the farm from his farmer father and grandfather. Or the values that Webb learned while proudly wearing his uniform. Or the values someone might learn by contemplating the great philosophers. Or whatever.
Values are important, and Democrats must be comfortable talking about them. Voters will respond to those better than any laundry list of issues.
But that doesn’t equal “talking about religion”. We have Democrats who proved their ability to win in tough districts based on values-heavy campaigns. So stop looking at Ford’s losing campaign as a model for the future.”
In the Street Prophets diaries section, M. Scott Lee has a two parter on why secular politics must take religion seriously: one and two.
Over at DailyKos, Frederick Clarkson posts on John McCain’s personal Christian nationalist.
On the Iraq debate, the Rev. Chuck Currie shares his wish: “ideal resolution would have involved sending the president and vice-president to Iraq where they could take personal charge of the chaotic situation they themselves created. But we rarely live in the ideal world.” Amazing Grace Sunday is comin’ up, and his church will be participatin’ in remembering the abolition work and the 27 million slaves around the world these days.
JSpot notes the growing cooperation between Jews and Sen. Obama’s campaign.
Jesse takes on Tim Russert’s repetition of the meme that Republicans talk about religion best.
Jim Wallis is excited that Christian Churches Together finally has happened and that they are talking about poverty.
Fr. Jake talks Episcopal politics.
Thinking about women’s rights and the faith community, dotCommonweal re-views Sisters of Selma and Hand of God.
Faithful Progressive posts on the leak case, Dick Cheney, the CIA, and Bob Graham.
And the NCC blog notes how community organizing helps strengthen synagogues.
And Akram’s Razor notes a recent op-ed that suggests that France actually might be the future of model Muslim/non-Muslim relations.
And finally for V-day, author Sara Miles writes about, Gay Marriage–A Sign of Christ’s Love for the Beatitudes Society.