You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Evangelical Movement Within The Democratic Party - Good or Bad? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Kevin Spidel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 02:37 PM
Original message
Evangelical Movement Within The Democratic Party - Good or Bad?
Advertisements [?]
I was going to post this topic under a specific state as there is a race catching a lot of attention, but I am going to broaden this question and talk about Democratic strategy versus core Democratic values.

That actually brings up a larger question about Democratic values and what are they... really?

There is a growing movement since 2004 of evangelical leaders embracing the Democratic Party. Many feel that Bush used this base to get him elected, then turned on them.

The question I have for the readers of this post today, is:

Is a growing Christian base of leaders and voters good for the party?


In this case, we have Ben Lowe in IL06. I managed the Campaign of Christine Cegelis in 2006. She was the first candidate to run in this very Republican district (Henry Hyde) in decades. Her candidacy in 2004 put the district in play. So much so that the DCCC made it a target seat. They threw Tammy Duckworth into the primary against Cegelis. At this time, this was not the Democratic Party I wanted to build. I wanted to support local grassroots initiatives to strengthen our party. In the end, we lost in the Primary and Duckworth went on to lose the seat to right wing radical Roskam.

Ultimately, I feel we won because now there is existing party structure and organization in DuPage county and townships, where prior there was none. Her candidacy and her activist have built a great organization.

Flash forward to 2010. A few weeks ago it appeared that we had no challenge to Roskam from a Democrat. The local groups have focused on down ballot candidates and it appears there are some strong candidates for these races. Seemingly out of the blue, a young national figure within the environmental justice movement decided to throw his name into the mix. His name is Ben Lowe. His sustainability activism is rooted in his Christian faith. He is from the growing evangelical youth.
His background is not political. His background is rooted in environmental justice, community, and has lived his life on this path. His Christian faith touches on some core issues that many Democrats have an issue with. Specifically on the issue of life.

I say life purposely. I did not use the word choice.

I ran Dennis Kucinich 2004 National Field operations. Prior to his Presidential bid, he was also pro-life. After all, what human is really anti-life?

I am pro-choice. I am male, and should never stand in the way of a womans right to a choice.
Dennis Kucinich, at one time saw this as a life issue. Not a choice issue. To this day, he still views it as a life issue his faith and spirituality guide this aspect on his decision to preserve life in healthcare, in preventive care, in issues of the death penalty, etc.

Dennis changed his view on this issue when he ran for president because someone close to him sat down and said that legislating any prevention to access of issues related to a womans health is an aspect of holistic view of life.

There is a growing movement of Democrats for Life that are anti-choice.
Ben Lowe is progressive on every aspect yet comes from a conservative family and running in a conservative district against a right-wing nut. He brings a voice of moderation, youth, and is part of this growing evangelical movement. His main motivation for quickly building a base to collect signatures in days and qualify for the ballot was his path of community and environmental justice. This is why he is running as a Democrat.

Currently there are a lot of my dear friends and associates from that district wanting him off the ballot. These are good Democrats with passionate views of disagreement with his evangelical roots rested in life.

I understand both sides. I also know this district is a conservative family district and his message would resonate with the families there.

If the issue of a womans right to choose a core value for a Democrat? Should it be a litmus test?

Should the party turn away the evangelical movement looking to make the party its home?

Do we want to not support this opportunity for a moderate Democrat in a moderate District?

Curious your thoughts?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Evangelical Movement Within The Democratic Party - Good or Bad? Kevin Spidel  Nov-08-09 02:37 PM   #0 
  - It's bad. There's a reason why they wrote seperation of church and state.  aSpeckofDust   Nov-08-09 02:46 PM   #1 
  - EXACTLY. Our Founding Fathers KNEW what they were doing when they  southerncrone   Nov-08-09 03:46 PM   #35 
     - Religion and church are two different things  Angry Dragon   Nov-08-09 09:03 PM   #74 
     - Please clarify your point as it applies to this discussion.  southerncrone   Nov-08-09 09:09 PM   #76 
        - Each person has a set of beliefs  Angry Dragon   Nov-08-09 09:20 PM   #78 
           - I think perhaps you are splitting hairs over symantics here.  southerncrone   Nov-08-09 09:33 PM   #80 
              - Perhaps I am spliting hairs  Angry Dragon   Nov-08-09 09:45 PM   #82 
     - Washington's Farewell Address 1796  cark   Nov-08-09 09:21 PM   #79 
  - If you do not support Democratic principles, you are not a Democrat  Sebastian Doyle   Nov-08-09 02:46 PM   #2 
  - Great answer!  get the red out   Nov-08-09 03:40 PM   #33 
  - Damn, Well Said!  OnceUponTimeOnTheNet   Nov-08-09 04:19 PM   #42 
  - I agree with your concept  Angry Dragon   Nov-08-09 09:00 PM   #73 
  - Bad, anytime, anywhere  CanonRay   Nov-08-09 02:46 PM   #3 
  - loaded question...  Ineeda   Nov-08-09 02:47 PM   #4 
  - but do you think choice should be a litmus test? nt  Kevin Spidel   Nov-08-09 03:00 PM   #11 
  - Yes, as should GLBT equality. n/t  Ineeda   Nov-08-09 03:01 PM   #13 
  - I noticed that too.  JNelson6563   Nov-08-09 07:12 PM   #57 
  - As long as they are economically left, I don't mind it at all.  anonymous171   Nov-08-09 02:50 PM   #5 
  - so economically left but socially right is OK? Only missionary sex in your energy efficient home?  ret5hd   Nov-08-09 02:54 PM   #8 
     - Energy efficiency isn't really what I had in mind when I said "economic leftism"  anonymous171   Nov-08-09 03:06 PM   #16 
  - Bad  DJ13   Nov-08-09 02:52 PM   #6 
  - Hmmm...tough one  dmallind   Nov-08-09 02:53 PM   #7 
  - Bad, bad, bad.  Arugula Latte   Nov-08-09 02:55 PM   #9 
  - Keep them the hell out of our party. They don't believe in anything other than advancing their  williesgirl   Nov-08-09 02:57 PM   #10 
  - +1  eShirl   Nov-08-09 03:43 PM   #34 
  - As a woman, I find the idea that my rights are negotiable because they're not politically expedient  LeftyMom   Nov-08-09 03:00 PM   #12 
  - I'm a guy and I agree.  Odin2005   Nov-08-09 03:36 PM   #31 
  - Sorry to say that I am very suspicious. I prefer secular - separation of church and state.  peacetalksforall   Nov-08-09 03:04 PM   #14 
  - African American and Latino Catholic  Kevin Spidel   Nov-08-09 03:05 PM   #15 
  - they're probably inflitrating the Democratic party so they can do their dirty work like so many  notadmblnd   Nov-08-09 03:06 PM   #17 
  - That's what they do - infiltrate (other churches, school boards, local gov't) and take over.  eShirl   Nov-08-09 03:48 PM   #36 
     - Like the communists, back in the day. nt  anonymous171   Nov-08-09 04:27 PM   #46 
        - No, that was a fantasy.  eShirl   Nov-08-09 05:08 PM   #50 
  - As a liberal mainline protestant woman, I will never vote for a "lifer" evangelical  supernova   Nov-08-09 03:06 PM   #18 
  - Bad. They helped sink the (R)'s. Let them form their own party.  Edweird   Nov-08-09 03:06 PM   #19 
  - Wut? The R's sunk because of their economic policies.  anonymous171   Nov-08-09 03:08 PM   #20 
     - The R's are all about money for the barons, but they use fanatics for their votes.  peacetalksforall   Nov-08-09 03:16 PM   #22 
     - Mmhmm. We have enough problems as it is. Adding fundie nutbaggery will only make things worse.  Edweird   Nov-08-09 04:26 PM   #45 
  - It's bad.  LWolf   Nov-08-09 03:12 PM   #21 
  - Thank you for that point - I forgot that one - conversion. I refuse to be converted to Evangelsm.  peacetalksforall   Nov-08-09 03:21 PM   #25 
  - Wonderful post. Thank you. n/t  Ineeda   Nov-08-09 05:37 PM   #52 
  - bad....there is no place for religion in politics imho  spanone   Nov-08-09 03:18 PM   #23 
  - Unavoidable, Sir, Given Their Proportion In the Population At Large  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 03:20 PM   #24 
  - What is their proportion?  Bluenorthwest   Nov-08-09 03:37 PM   #32 
     - Evangelicals By Standard Definition, Sir, Are A Hair Over One Quarter Of the Population  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 03:52 PM   #39 
        - Standard definition? Whose? Their own?  Bluenorthwest   Nov-08-09 04:05 PM   #40 
        - Consult Any Standard Reference On The Demographics Of The United States, Sir  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 04:15 PM   #41 
           - This is hardly the place? You brought it up.  Bluenorthwest   Nov-08-09 04:24 PM   #44 
              - Wear It In Good Health, Sir  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 04:52 PM   #48 
                 - Again with the revisions  Bluenorthwest   Nov-08-09 05:06 PM   #49 
                 - Who are you? Peppermint Patty??  eShirl   Nov-08-09 06:22 PM   #53 
        - Dr. Cornel West  LatteLibertine   Nov-08-09 07:54 PM   #62 
  - BAD, BAD, BAD! I would rather ally with Libertarians than with these people.  Odin2005   Nov-08-09 03:25 PM   #26 
  - American Libertarians also believe that the rights of others are negotiable  anonymous171   Nov-08-09 03:35 PM   #30 
     - I meant actual libertarians, not the Pukes that smoke pot and don't like the GOP label.  Odin2005   Nov-08-09 03:50 PM   #38 
  - I'm going to have to go with Goldwater on this one  MajorChode   Nov-08-09 03:26 PM   #27 
  - Yep. This is one area where we and the Libertarians are on the same side  Odin2005   Nov-08-09 03:27 PM   #28 
  - Choice and equal rights can not be negotiated  Bluenorthwest   Nov-08-09 03:35 PM   #29 
  - It's a tough question, actually  Sinti   Nov-08-09 03:49 PM   #37 
  - I don't see it as so tough  MajorChode   Nov-08-09 05:20 PM   #51 
     - That's why I was saying it's tough  Sinti   Nov-08-09 08:23 PM   #66 
  - Pluralism is acceptance and accountability; Religion is aristocracy and immunity  PurityOfEssence   Nov-08-09 04:20 PM   #43 
  - .  snagglepuss   Nov-08-09 04:28 PM   #47 
  - more responses to this post  Kevin Spidel   Nov-08-09 06:47 PM   #54 
  - Disastrous  Individualist   Nov-08-09 06:48 PM   #55 
  - Answer more complex than you'd like.  JNelson6563   Nov-08-09 07:10 PM   #56 
  - I do believe that a woman's right to choose  JerseygirlCT   Nov-08-09 07:19 PM   #58 
  - Bad Bad Bad... Do we need more Michelle Bachman's?  lib2DaBone   Nov-08-09 07:23 PM   #59 
  - Bad. Religion does NOT belong in politics. It's the reason this county & world is so fucked up. nt  earth mom   Nov-08-09 07:28 PM   #60 
  - Fucking horrid. Forcing your vile, sexist, homophobic ideals upon the rest of society  name not needed   Nov-08-09 07:44 PM   #61 
  - Yes, Kevin. Women's rights should be a litmus test.  madfloridian   Nov-08-09 07:55 PM   #63 
  - but again..  Kevin Spidel   Nov-08-09 08:17 PM   #65 
     - I am not okay with it.  madfloridian   Nov-08-09 08:31 PM   #67 
  - since it is flat-out impossible to build a progressive or Democratic majority without  Douglas Carpenter   Nov-08-09 07:57 PM   #64 
  - Im not saying we should block them from the democratic party..  aSpeckofDust   Nov-08-09 08:38 PM   #71 
  - Reading his "God's Politics" now  Angry Dragon   Nov-08-09 09:37 PM   #81 
  - oh for petes sake the evangelical C street crowd taking over the dems?  Mari333   Nov-08-09 08:34 PM   #68 
  - My Jimmy CARTER started it (within the Dem party). BAD. You asked. n/t  UTUSN   Nov-08-09 08:35 PM   #69 
  - A belief in the supernatural is indicative of either an extremely low IQ resulting in  bluetrain   Nov-08-09 08:36 PM   #70 
  - No thanks to anti-science and flat-earther beliefs in our platform.  AlinPA   Nov-08-09 08:43 PM   #72 
  - One party controlled by lunacy is one too many.  Kitsune   Nov-08-09 09:07 PM   #75 
  - It's pretty simple, anti-choice Democrats can be members of Congress but they can't be President  Hippo_Tron   Nov-08-09 09:14 PM   #77 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC