Kevin Spidel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-08-09 02:37 PM
Original message |
| Evangelical Movement Within The Democratic Party - Good or Bad? |
|
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 woman’s 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 woman’s 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 woman’s 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 it’s home?
Do we want to not support this opportunity for a moderate Democrat in a moderate District?
Curious your thoughts?
|
| -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 |