Clinton Joins Democrats' Values Push

[Freddie Stubbs]

BY LUIZA Ch. SAVAGE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 8, 2005

WASHINGTON - Congress should pass legislation protecting religious liberties in the workplace, and America should help Iraqis write a constitution that will respect freedom of conscience even if it is "against their traditions," Senator Clinton said yesterday.

"Religious liberty is one of the most important issues on the world's agenda today," Mrs. Clinton told the Religious Liberty Annual Dinner of the Seventh day Adventist Church.

Freedom of conscience is often "a bellwether for human rights," she said.

The senator's religiously themed speech comes as Democrats seek to identify anew with the "moral values" that were said to play a role in the Republican victories in November's election.

more: http://www.nysun.com/article/11894

[DemBeans]

1. stop it. STOP IT.

I'm so SICK of our politicians pandering to the religious right.

Clue, Hillary - they'll never vote for you. It's time to start focusing on the people who actually might - and we're tired of religion being crammed down our throats.

[AuntiBush]

65. With ya!

Agreed. And, BTW - :hi: and welcome!

[meppie-meppie not]

76. ditto!!! :)

:hi:

[Seabiscuit]

70. Aw, STFU, Willie, and give Monica a call.

[BobbyinPortland]

91. Isn't it better that they play the game

and pander to the religious wrong? I say they should do and say anything to get back into power then they can start being real democrats again.

Maybe we should support the democrats instead of guessing what's going on.

The rethuglicans stick together and realize that not every promise is meant as anything but a campaign maneuver. We liberals and democrats could stand to think a little more before we speak and act and declare someone wrong just because we don't like what they say.

If we stood together and supported democrats instead of our own ideals we might not have lost the Whitehouse the last two times.

One word-NADER

[niceypoo]

94. The religious right will never vote democrat.

Pandering to them alienates true democrats. The democrats keep alienating their base then wonder why they lose elections. Until the democratic party starts to satisfy their base they will continue to lose. Comprende?

[KittyWampus]

105. This Isn't Pandering To The Religious Right. It 's Addressing Values That

MOST of Americans share... helping families make ends meet, affording health care, RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE in the workplace so, for instance, Muslims can wear head scarves or pray.

Democrats aren't going to lose their base... just the reactionary fools who insist on going into hysterics when Democrats point out that WE are the ones who represent what most Americans care about.

[VegasWolf]

102. The Clintons are as sincere as the Bushes are re "values". n/t

[KittyWampus]

104. Values Do NOT Belong To The Religious Right- Your Attitude Exemplifies

why Democrats have lost so much ground.

AMERICANS of all stripes care about values and it's time Democrats step up and start talking about how OUR agenda embodies the values most of us share.

And working for religious tolerance in the workplace benefits people like say oh, MUSLIMS who want to wear head scarves.

Care to explain how a bill that would help Muslims can be characterized as pandering the Religious Right?

[w4rma]

106. Maybe she's pandering to the religious left. (nt)

[BlueManDude]

2. Earth to Hillary - they hate you, they will always hate you and

you will NEVER be president.

[Toots]

41. She would never be THEIR President but she very well may become America's

President. Stranger things have happened..

[FiveGoodMen]

47. You're serious?

[VegasWolf]

103. Sure. She is absolutely guaranteed not to get 35% of the votes, but

after that, who knows.

[malachibk]

3. Justification #348

For my deciding never to vote for Clinton in any state-wide or (oh how I dread the thought) national election ever again so long as I live.

She and her pandering DISGUST me.

Where is the exceptionally attractive Dem who can speak in short, intelligent, TRUTHFUL declarative sentences? The Dem who will not cater to evangelical voters because he/she knows THOSE AREN'T THE F**KING VOTES WE NEED TO BECOME RELEVANT AGAIN?

[hippiechick]

5. I think you're referring to this man ...

<img src="" alt="image hosting by http://www.iuploads.com/free_image_hosting/" />

[malachibk]

11. No, I'm not.

I like Dean, don't get me wrong but (a) he comes across as a bit too intense and (b) he's too moderate for me.

[hippiechick]

40. Fair enough

:hi:

[AuntiBush]

63. What do you think about Edwards?

Just curious. I rather liked Edwards, and he socked it in the debate against Cheney.

[malachibk]

78. Again, no huge fan

Even more "centrist" than Dean (but who knows what any of those terms mean anymore) and he turned me off big time with that "Son of a mill worker" stuff. Schtick-y. Ladies do love him, though.

I just want there to be a down-to-earth, attractive Dem who can drop all that crap and just speak the plain, honest truth. Succinctly.

Know any?

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. Dean has already given his word that he would not run in 2008

[Marnieworld]

28. Regardless

This was the question:

"Where is the exceptionally attractive Dem who can speak in short, intelligent, TRUTHFUL declarative sentences? The Dem who will not cater to evangelical voters because he/she knows THOSE AREN'T THE F**KING VOTES WE NEED TO BECOME RELEVANT AGAIN?"

And Dean is the answer. Whether he runs or not isn't the issue. He's got a platform NOW. Speak Howard Speak!

[Freddie Stubbs]

35. Dean certainly is speaking

"We are not the pro-abortion party," Dean said, repeating the old Bill Clinton line that "abortion should be safe, legal and rare."

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/11273047.htm

And it ruffling some peoples' feathers. Which is just fine with me.

[Writer]

61. Question

Wasn't Dean a member of the DLC?

[Freddie Stubbs]

77. I'm not sure, but his policies as Governor were in line with the DLC

[AuntiBush]

66. Yes. I agree & like this, but the DLC...

have issues w/them right now... less it's all a ploy to upset our end. These days, one never knows.

[Marnieworld]

27. My thought exactly

I am so glad that Howard has not gone away. May he save us from this insanity.

[BlueManDude]

8. What if the NY Senate race is close?

Her pandering disgusts me as much as it does you - but she's still a very good Senator IMO. I chalk it up to her presidential aspirations. Freed of those, I'm certain she wouldn't be pulling this crap.

Despite what some here think I believe Rudy is gonna challenge her in '06 and this is a tossup race. Part of her problem will her her presidential ambitions which I think will be resented by voters.

[malachibk]

13. It won't be close

Rudy won't run, his top aide so much as said so last week -- 2008 Pres run more likely (though good luck convincing the Rel.Right to back a pro-choice, pro-gay Repub. Hillary will win in a landslide (even NY Repubs have a slightly positive opinion of her now) so I'm hoping there's an articulate, progressive candidate on the ballot.

But, yes, if it's HC 49% and RG 49% I will pick the lesser of 2 evils and choose Ms. Clinton. And take a LOOOONG shower afterwards.

[rodeodance]

95. i do not think she is pandering to those evangelists-but she trying to

be inclusive regarding those more morderate people.

[NewJeffCT]

4. In regards to religion

What we should be doing is having top Democrats going to black churches, and to Hispanic area Catholic churches to make sure they hear our message and keep hearing our message. We lost ground with both black & Hispanic voters in the last election, and we need to make it up!

We can also do more to appeal to Catholics in general - Irish & Italian catholics that used to be solid Democratic votes.

[malachibk]

10. Why?

There are MANY issues that cut across religion and faith. Important issues. The MOST important issues: education, health care, "terrorism", crime, social security, poverty.

The "church" vote covers abortion and gay marriage. People that don't want a woman to have the final say over her body SHOULDN'T vote Democrat. People that hate/fear gays SHOUDLN'T vote Democrat.

Hell, I don't WANT them to vote Democrat. Let Republicans have those ignorant folks. There are plently of Americans (religious or atheist, Black, White, Latino, Asian, Native American, whatever) who do not vote based solely on these "moral" issues. We lost because we have yet to find a candidate who can talk WITH them about these issues. Pretty simple. Re-attract those we've lost and let Repubs keep the zealots.

[NewJeffCT]

26. Yes, there are many issues that cut across religions & faith

The church vote should not just cover abortion & gay marriage. How many times does the Bible mention abortion? How many times does it mention gay marriage? Then, contrast that with how many times the Bible mentions helping the poor, the sick, the downtrodden... (I'm an atheist, but I know that the Bible rarely mentions the first two issues, but mentions helping the poor, etc well over 1,000 times)

And, we need to get out there and talk about these issues - we have taken their votes for granted too often. We're not doing a good job of speaking to minorities and reminding them why they should vote for Democrats. We don't need just our leaders doing that - we need the next tier of Democratic leadership, and then the tier below that to get out there & talk about economic issues, health care, education, etc. We're just not doing a good job of that.

I'm not talking about going into white fundamentalist Southern Baptist churches - I'm talking about shoring up our support in areas where we should be strong, but have lost a little ground in recent years. You can be sure that Karl Rove is going to be hitting these churches with the "gay marriage is ruining society" message over & over again through 2008 and beyond. Remind people that the real issues are helping those that can't always help themselves.

[Marnieworld]

31. We "lost" because of election fraud

theft really. So pander to anyone but if you don't change how people vote and how the votes are counted and WHO counts the votes. All the issues and efforts to get people to listen are great if only we reform the voting. If not more people will vote democrat and then the next day we'll hear that we lost again because of insert whatever Rovian explanation fits the GOP agenda at the moment.

Turning into a Theocracy is the agenda. Clinton and anyone reaching out to religious people are just taking the bait.

[AuntiBush]

67. Couldn't agree with you more! ELECTION FRAUD!

Nothing else matters. And, after Terri circus, many religious folks dropped out of politics. Many.

[dsc]

81. 1 out of 4 of both Kerry's and Gore's voters

were functionally pro life (either in favor of a total ban or a ban with the excepts of life of mother, rape, and incest). Bush would have won something like 40 states had all pro lifers voted for him. I would imagine that the gay issue is even more so. Ohio passed its marriage ban 61 to 39 while Kerry lost 49 to 51.

[Griffy]

87. Bush won Ohio if you believe diebold.. GEEZ.. understand..

we cant talk about what to do if we still have people that cant see what happened. Discussing why we lost like this is like the Generals back in the locker room trying to figure out why they lost to the Globetrotters! Seriously.. you don't trust the companies that built and programmed the voting machines.. do you?


Ask yourself this next.. if we don't have public acknowledgment of the fraud, can we prevent it in '06.. '08?? I don't think so, some knew from 2000 and 2002 that the system was rigged, and couldn't stop the '04 theft... there numbers were to few, but more and more people everyday are realizing that this is in fact true!

I make it a point to correct people when they say bush won... I say, Kerry won, bush was inagurated, and thats the problem!

[dsc]

90. Use whatever precentages you wish

I chose the offical ones but say Kerry really won 52 to 48 while the amendemnt passed 61 to 39, that means that at least 13% of Ohioans and one in four of Kerry's voters, voted for the amendment and for Kerry. Had those voters voted for Bush instead it would have been 61 to 39. Incidently the final figure (61 to 39) is the best Kerry could have done if all anti gay voters had voted for Bush.

[Malva Zebrina]

44. Catholics went for Bush

and it was because of the abortion issue and the gay marriage issue.

Any religion that believes it can , indeed that it should, force others to follow their religious beliefs is, to be frank, plain and simply disgusting in this country. ADditionally, to do so, is immoral.

I have the feeling that Senator Clinton would sell out women and gays, in order to win and would not hesitate to do so. I am beginning to dislike her very much. Much to Kerry's credit, and I have a lot to criticize about him and his campaign, he did NOT make religion an issue ad nauseum as was done in the Gore/Lieberman campaign

We are going down to the religious right in so many ways--Hillary is helping that along and I think her approach is unwise.

[NewJeffCT]

50. yes, I know Catholics went for Bush

We didn't speak to Catholics - nobody reminded them of the Catholic tradition of helping the poor & the needy.

And, I'm not talking about John Kerry talking about it during the election, I'm talking about state level Democrats that are Catholics talking to local & regional Catholic leaders to emphasize the blue collar roots of Catholicism in America.

[Malva Zebrina]

51. Hope so--but you are not mentioning women and gays.

Hope the new Pope is not as reactionary, nor as far to the right for the sake of women and gays.

So you think you can change the attitude toward abortion, or at least the attitude of Catholics toward staying out of other women's bodies? All the more power to you if you can accomplish that. I have nothing against practicing the religion--don't like abortion, don't have one -- but to try to force it on others by religious tyranny is immoral.

and I will say the same for gays and for gay marriage.

I am curious--how does one think that a blue collar person can change the religion if one has no say in electing the leader and no say in determining the policies? I thought all forms and laws of Catholicism emanated from the Pope, and not from the people. Cardinal Law,despised by many Catholics in Massachusetts, is one example.

Catholics did have once a fairly liberal bent in their excellent universities. Why, at one time, even some brilliant feminists were allowed to teach feminism freely in those universities. An end was put to that, and to all liberal scholarly inquiry by the Pope.

Good luck though.

[GoSolar]

6. Two "No Hillary" votes here.

She has really declined lately.

[Freddie Stubbs]

43. You get to vote twice?

Do you live in Chicago? ;)

[GoSolar]

59. Actually,

I meant myself and Mr. Gosolar, who also uses the this DU name...
and feels the same negative way about the junior Sen...

:D

[formerrepuke]

7. Enough, already...Democrats don't need to 'identify anew' with someone

else's definition of 'values.' Democrats' moral values should be: Health Care, Responsible Foreign Policy.. and that's just for starters.

[renaissanceguy]

9. F*** YOU, HILLARY!

Those fundies will NEVER vote for you, and I sure as hell don't want them in the Democratic Party, anyway!


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.20383992

[Mend]

12. If pandering is what it takes to save America, so be it for me...

look at this country now. Sorry, I have to trust Bill Clinton on this, as much as I hate it.

[wakeme2008]

15. They will not vote for Hillary.....

Bill IMHO turned his back on President Carter.... He is just part of the Old boy DLC network....

[HockeyMom]

23. I voted for Hillary

and as much as she has disappointed me with all her religious pandering and voting for Iraq war, I would still vote for her over Rudy (I live in NY and know what Rudy is really like) or any other Republican, be it for Senate or President.

I am a life long Independent, but haven't for a Republican in many, many years. The "Praise Jesus and Pass the Ammunition" crew won't be getting my vote any time soon.

[mmonk]

14. .

:puke:

[OKNancy]

17. Before commenting it would be wise for posters

to read the whole article

For example:

At a time of legal battles over public displays of the Ten Commandments and recitation of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, Mrs. Clinton also called on believers to tolerate atheists.

"Those of us who are people of faith are so aware of what that means in our lives that it is sometimes a challenge for us to understand our obligations to make space for nonbelievers," she said.

[Marnieworld]

33. Tolerate non-believers?

How bout acceptance? How bout equality? How bout consider it a valid viewpoint. F you Hillary. Tolerate this!

[Freddie Stubbs]

46. Perhaps there are some here who just plain don't like religion

and are intolerate of those who are religious.

[mmonk]

49. Seems the religious

don't mind our laws being changed, laws of discrimination, and they stay silent on issues such as torture. Why would we want to be tolerant? By the way, I respect some religion it's just not reciprocated to the public at large that desires to keep a wall of seperation between the state and religious institutions.

[Writer]

62. What? MOI read the entire article?

No! I prefer knee-jerk low-blow name-calling!

Me read the entire article and understand it? Elitists!

;)

Writer.

[HereSince1628]

18. More in the continuing DLC saga called "ME TOO"

The DLC'ers seem to be unable to shake this habit...

I would have thought that a group with "leadership" in their name would realize that "me too" isn't leading, its joining the band.

On the bright side, if they can get this stuff out of their system before the campaigning starts in earnest, maybe they can concentrate on ideas that uniquely identify Democratic leadership as the correct choice for the nation.

[malachi]

19. Fucking insulting. According to Mrs. Clinton the only people with values

are the religously insane repukes that are trying to install a theocracy. She and all those other democrats that feel we have to include religion in our platform to win in this country should be targeted for defeat in the primaries. What the fuck happened to this country? We're finished if the Democratic party is indistinguishable from the right wing wack job religious party.

[skylarmae]

20. These politicians have got to quit preaching!

With all these politicians doing nothing but talk religion 24/7, who is actually doing the business of the people, (i.e. running the government)? Anyone?

Politics is Politics
Religion is Religion
work isn't church and church isn't work

I'm sick of being preached to. Talk is so cheap and they cheapen everything spiritual they touch.... It's really pissing me off.

[Solly Mack]

21. I have my own values. I don't need anyone else's. I don't need others

defining my values for me. I don't need others thinking they have the right to define my values for me. I don't need others imposing their values on me. I don't need others thinking it's for my own good that I adopt their values.

and No, America shouldn't help Iraq write shit until America can fully grasp the concept of separation of church and state...

I don't want to hear what ANYONE in Congress thinks America's moral values should be...because I've got my own and I don't need their input on the subject. I can think for myself. Thank you very much.

[KittyWampus]

107. How Totally Self Absorbed. As A Country, There ARE Values We Need

to share in order to function. It really isn't all about YOU.

How about valuing freedom, democracy, rule of law?

How about valuing tolerance, diversity, community, sharing? You don't think it's appropriate for Americans to collectively care about those things?

How about a living wage, affordable healthcare, clean environment, education, job opportunity?

Yeah, America should just be millions of self absorbed individuals carrying out their lives with no inclinatin to CARE ABOUT THE COMMON GOOD.

Screw identifying oneself as part of a collective whole.

E Pluribus Unum? FUCK THAT.

[pilgrimm]

22. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I think they're intelligent enough to know they're not going to win over religious fundamentalist.

[Mend]

24. Picture this:

We pander, just like they pander, but with Clinton's help, we win back the presidency, the Senate, and state offices. Then the Democratic president gets to appoint supreme court justices, gets universal health care passed, prevents a draft, stops the wars, lowers the price of gas, protects the environment, etc. etc. I don't have a problem with any of it. This country and our rights were safe for eight years with Bill. Let him help us again. Religious people often voted Democratic and will again if they feel they can be somewhere inside the tent.

[chelsea0011]

25. If Hillary is running for Pres. she is losing the left

and the above quotes are correct, the right will NEVER vote for you. She will be destroyed in the primaries if she keeps this up. Neither Clintons could be considered true progressives anyway. They have always had a way to pander to the right.

[Vinca]

29. I wish the Dems would stop pandering and practice what their

religions supposedly teach. We need to be working for health care for all, a good education for all, housing for all, employment for all and other apparently unpopular political agendas. Stop kissing Republican fundie butt.

[saigon68]

79. The Repuke Platform = no abortions for anyone

And after the kid is born. Let the Fornicator and her offspring starve.. They are not worthy --- they are Trash and they never vote anyway.

[booksenkatz]

30. I'm looking forward to the day when we enact FREEDOM *FROM*

I don't care what or whom you worship in your head or in your home or in your church, synagogue or mosque. Don't try to force me to do it with you, especially not in the workplace. Is that too much to ask? Jeez, it's enough to make me want to create my own country and write something called a "constitution" with a "first amendment" that declares that the government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or something totally batshit like that. I know, I know, it's crazy of me, but I can always hope, right?
:crazy:

[peacetalksforall]

32. I've become anti-Hillary for a variety of reasons, but it seems she is

mostly talking religious liberty in this article...not that DLC pap about Dems having more values.

I am against her running. I am angry at her for way too many reasons...mostly her vote to kill and not talking about getting out....wait, there's more.

My support took a turn after 12+ years of passionately defending and admiring her.

But what is wrong with religious liberty? Do we have to look at some subliminal levels to find some twist that I'm missing?

[DemBeans]

34. my take on this

Religious liberty is a nice concept, but what I prefer is to have the liberty to not have someone else's religion thrust upon me in the workplace in an aggressive fashion. Many fundamentalists have a call to proselytize and recruit for Jesus. They want the "liberty" to do that in the workplace. No, that's not something I support.

[peacetalksforall]

38. OK, I see it now. Another subject to follow. We're being attacked from

all sides.

[Malva Zebrina]

45. You are right on

the workplace=pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control. The workplace is
WalMart, who refuses to fill prescriptions for the morning after pill, but who gladly use people from another country to make a profit, such as China, which forces a government will on women to have abortions and to limit the size of their families.

The workplace will be filled with bible preachers who could be a serious dismissive to others, such as atheists, who Senator Clinton says are a "challenge". She is preaching religion; telling people how to live. She ought to stay out of it, before we have a whole slew of workplaces that would see fit to discriminate against those who may be a "challenge" to their religious beliefs, much the same as the Boy Scouts, or the Salvation Army.

She is getting deeper and deeper into a corner.

[Renew Deal]

36. The NY Sun is a right wing rag. You are being manipulated.

It's up there with the Washington Times and the NY post. I wouldn't take it seriously.

Hillary's comments read differently if you read a different article.

[freedom_to_read]

37. exACTly

The issue isn't the Dems moving to the right. It's the right-wing media portraying their values as the center.

[Merlin]

39. Many liberals are just blind about why this is damn smart politics.

I read so many saying "Forget it! You'll never win them over. They hate you. They hate all of us. It's a lost cause."

If you think that way, you're completely missing the political wisdom of this approach.

We don't have to win them all over. We don't have to win half of them over. We don't have to win 10% of them over. All we need is a precious 2% or so. That's all we need to tip the balance.

There are plenty of religious minded, values oriented people voting with the right who are very uncomfortable over there. Our job has got to be to win them back.

[Stuckinthebush]

42. At what cost?

If you win 2% and lose 5%, then you are at a 3% deficit.

The point many are making is that we continue to drift away from our core values. Our core values are not pandering to the religious moralists. We shouldn't apologize about our core values, but we should point out how our values are so much more aligned to any religious creed than the GOPs values.

I think it is bad politics because you are alienating your base and seeming to be a panderer when you take this approach.

[Merlin]

53. At no cost at all. There's not a damn thing wrong with what she's pushing.

How can a law guaranteeing freedom of religious expression in the workplace be harmful, in a general sense (not to say it couldn't be gimmicked up, but that's not the issue here).

Nor can advocating religious "freedom of conscience" -- especially in Iraq where the danger of Islamic fundamentalist rule is strong -- be considered contrary to our liberal traditions.

They may not be our priorities. They may be the priorities of others. But good politics means understanding and supporting the legitimate concerns of others, not just our own.

The general liberal tendency to look down upon those who are religious is elitist and reprehensible. We would never despise or ridicule the religious traditions and tribal rituals of favored minorities like native Americans or Tibetan monks. We ought to get it through our heads that the we owe same kind of religious respect to all people of faith, including the family next door, provided they are tolerant of the beliefs of others (e.g. non-fundamentalist) as well.

[Neecy]

74. oh, but that IS the issue

You can lecture us about elitism all you want, but have you ever been at the receiving end of an evangelical Christian?

How can a law guaranteeing freedom of religious expression in the workplace be harmful, in a general sense (not to say it couldn't be gimmicked up, but that's not the issue here).

Scenario: My evangelical Christian boss decides that as a lesbian, I'm an affront to his religious beliefs, and either fires me outright or makes my life so hellish I have no choice but to leave. The Congress has yet to pass legislation that's been before it for years protecting me from workplace discrimination, so what recourse do I have? NONE. His religious liberties trump my non-passed Employment Non-Discrimination Act. If you think this isn't going to be "gimmicked up", you live in a fantasy world.

That isn't being "elitist", that's me afraid of losing my goddamned job. Get off your high horse.

[theboss]

88. You don't have that federal protection now though

Your state or city may have it, but under federal law, your bos CAN fire you for being gay regardless of whether he is a Christian, Jew, Atheist or Satanist.

[FiveGoodMen]

48. Ever read Animal Farm?

By the end, the pigs that had taken over looked just like the men they had replaced. If you sell out everything that matters, what good is winning?

[Merlin]

54. With all due respect, that is a completely inapt simile.

Nobody is selling out here. She is advocating positions we already support. They may not be our priorities, but they are in no way inconsistent with liberal principles. It is the job of an elected representative to understand and advance the legitimate concerns of others as well as their own. That's part of what Democracy is all about.

The greatest threat to liberalism today is our own knee-jerk elitism, as reflected in your statement. It is the notion that we are superior to all others and free to disrespect the legitimate traditions of decent, good people of faith simply because we do not share their religious beliefs.

[FiveGoodMen]

56. Who's this 'we'?

Speak for yourself. I don't agree with Hillary.

[Merlin]

57. "We" is you and me. If not you, then you're on the wrong godam board.

This is a liberal board, and these are liberal principles she's espousing, like freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. If you "don't agree" with those things, then you're living on a different planet.

[FiveGoodMen]

73. My, my

Apparently, 'we' is whoever agrees with you. And you've completely defined what's liberal?

See posts like #45 (not mine, but my sentiments). My whole complaint with Hillary is that she does NOT seem to be a liberal.

PS: I will decide whether I'm on the right god-damned board. But thanks for trying to help.

[Merlin]

84. You choose to ignore your very own words.

In your prior post on the subject of this thread you said
"Who's this 'we'? Speak for yourself. I don't agree with Hillary"

I say to you beyond any doubt that if you do not agree with the principles of freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, as espoused by Hillary--which IS the subject of this thread--then you are no fucking liberal, no matter what you may think. Stick around if you like. But you belong somewhere else.

[FiveGoodMen]

100. Just out of curiosity...

Does everyone here agree that the litmus test for being a liberal is agreeing with Hillary Clinton?

[blindpig]

93. respect should be reciprocal

but that is almost impossible with fanatical monotheists. You agree with them or you are in error(evil) and will suffer in God's funhouse for eternity. It is impossible for me to tolerate such arrogance. If that makes me elitist TFS.

[jayfish]

52. Dear Mrs. Clinton,

To me 'Religious liberty" doesn't even rank in the top 500 of the "most important issues on the world's agenda today".

Jay

[Merlin]

55. Maybe it doesn't to you. But you're not the only person in America.

Did it ever occur to you that this might be important to others; that you may not have all the answers; that decent people of religious faith are also worthy of being heard and having their legitimate concerns advanced?

I'm sick to death of the kind of elitist arrogance and snobbery I see reflected among so many of my fellow liberals any more.

Since when are we so perfect that we can look down our nose at others?

[jayfish]

60. Here Is The Deal.

You chose to follow your particular god and it's flavor of religion. It's not a physical trait, it's not a disease and you were not born with it. Why do I own you anything for your personal beliefs? Not to mention the fact that I think religious freedom is great. I have also said several times on this board that I don't have a problem with religion, as long as proselytizing is kept to a minimum. It's just not "one of the most important issues on the world's agenda today". Sorry but I think that something like saving tigers in the wild is much more important and that's still near the bottom of the list.

Jay

[Merlin]

68. Again, you seem to think you're views are the only ones that count.

I'm a Jeffersonian Deist. I happen to disagree with everything the group she spoke to believes, religiously, including the bible as the "Word of God," the divinity of "Christ" (a term that pisses me off since that wasn't even his name), and on and on. But I still respect their right to "freedom of conscience" and "freedom of religion" which are the two issues Hillary mentioned.

Maybe they aren't important to you. Frankly, I'm more in agreement with you than with these folks on that point. But Hillary is elected to represent the legitimate concerns of all her constituents.

We must, as liberals, be respectful of others whose views we considered less enlightened than our own. We would certainly not be disrespectful of, say, Tibetan concerns for religious freedom. We owe the same to our fellow Americans.

Elitism is a characteristic disease of way too many liberals. And it does not go unnoticed by others. We need to look into our own hearts and views and purge ourselves of the scourge of elitism.

[0007]

58. I certainly wouldn't trust this source of this information

any shape way or form.

[AuntiBush]

64. Will NEVER Vote for Hillary Clinton, ever! Sell-out!

And, she's a fool if she thinks the right-wingers want her.

They're pushing her as a ploy, so we'll lose next time around. No way!

[Merlin]

69. Who cares how you vote. But don't smear her as a "Sell-out"

You probably didn't even read the article to determine exactly what she was arguing for.

FYI, her two points were "Freedom of Conscience" and "Religious Liberty." Do you have a problem with those things?

You are simply reflecting a knee-jerk tendency to despise anything and anybody religous. That's called liberal elitism, and it's reprehensible.

[0007]

72. Please read the article again. Hillary Clinton is not a "sell out"

Like Jefferson said, it is easy to confuse people.

[Emillereid]

71. In my estimation this kind of talk on the part of Hillary or any other

Dem stays right within the repuke so-called values frame -- and no matter what she ends up saying or what she means it will be interpreted within their frame. Lakoff notes that all this does is reaffirm the repuke position -- the nuanced differences between her postions and the republicans won't matter. We've got to get out of their frames completely -- and speak from within our own. Forget the Fundie, religious vote Hillary -- speak to the poor, the working class, the single Mom with three children, the nickeled and dimed, etc. -- people who don't vote usually because NO ONE represents them anymore. Those are the people to target when we 'GET OUT THE VOTE'. Values that address the 'least among us' are the values I want my Dem candidate to talk about. Keep religion personal and private!

[saltpoint]

75. A lot of liberal Democrats are already egdy about Sen. Clinton's --

-- cozying up to the Right.

This religious mollycoddling isn't going to help her much with that voting group.

So I am wondering out loud: can a right-of-center Democrat win the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire primary (usually within a week or two of each other)?

If not, how does Senator Clinton expect to become the party's nominee?

____
edit: typos. Poster agrees to take spelling and typing course.

[BigBearJohn]

80. Amazing how a man turns to God after a quadruple bypass

[Freddie Stubbs]

92. You may want to reread the article

The Clinton who this article is about did not have a quadruple bypass.

[lastliberalintexas]

82. Oh good fucking god!

Religious belief is ALREADY protected in the workplace. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ALREADY prohibits any kind of discrimination on the basis of religion, and allows even for the practice of religion in the workplace to an extent:

(j) The term ``religion'' includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business.


Too bad our "leaders" don't know anything about the laws already on the freaking books. :eyes:

[Arugula Latte]

83. Oh Jesus.

I thought this was going to be a Democratic push for REAL values, like helping the poor, the sick, and the elderly and protecting our air, land, and water. Silly me. :eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

85. So, protecting religious freedom isn't a 'real' value?

And people wonder why the Republicans keep winning.

[Arugula Latte]

98. If you're talking about in THIS country

the religious run roughshod over everyone and every instititution. Nobody is stopping them from practicing or praying .... What a bunch of hooey.

[cosmicdot]

86. then, call on your colleagues to disinvest their portfolios

of corrupt corporations and corporations hurting our common good ... call on your colleagues to disinvest from corporations which are exploiting peoples in other lands where they don't have freedom of conscience or religious liberty?

~let's have some real values clarification, Hillary~

Diebold, ES&S, et al, decided the election in 2004; and, they're going to do it again in 2006 and 2008 unless the issue is properly addressed. Tie that into your 'moral values' pandering ...

who on the Democratic side has stock in the Frist family's HMO business, HCA? didn't HCA defraud Medicare?

who on your side of the aisle owns stock in Halliburton? in MBNA? in Wal-Mart? in AIG? in Clear Channel? in Pfizer? in polluters? in off-shore drilling companies?

Clear Channel, not only is destroying local radio creativity, but pumps in anti-Democratic radio ... what Democrat would hold stock in CC?

oh, the Dominionists and the CNP appreciate your help ... "whatever the cost" ...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1112887778015&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1040

````````````````````
A New Beginning
Insight and Action
http://www.kucinich.us/

[Catt03]

89. What ever happened to just being a spiritual person?

Why do we keep labeling ourselves?

I am so tired of this religion, that religion, who's right and who's wrong. I feel like I living in a religious crusade.

Hillary Clinton nor George Bush are our spiritual leaders; they are politicians. No matter what our beliefs, I think we should be fighting to get religion out of government....period.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

96. I'm for protecting religious liberties as long as those liberties don't

discriminate against anyone else's liberties

[Placebo]

97. I don't know what's wrong with all of you getting PISSY about this.

How is she pandering to the "religious right" just by advocating for Iraq what we have in America; freedom of religion? :shrug:

ugh, can't even say "religion" on DU without being declared a traitor

[leesa]

99. O h yeah?? How about unprovoked invasions of disarmed countries

in which tens of thousands of innocent people are slaughtered?? Is THAT moral you hypocritical bitch?

[Dervill Crow]

101. Freedom of religion and freedom FROM religion.

Two sides of the same coin. At work a gargoyle sits atop my computer monitor keeping viruses away. I have a wall calendar marked with sabbats and esbats. As long as there are people in my department who are free to put religious stuff all over their cubes and wear their ID badges on lanyards that proclaim "Jesus is Lord," management really can't say anything about my pentacle and gargoyle.