Monday, January 24, 2005

not what we meant

Senator Wayne Allard, a Republican from Colorado, thinks that the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage might just have a chance in Congress after all.

Following the 2004 elections, Democrats have been wringing their hands trying to figure out how they can break up Republicans' monopoly on moral values.

Allard seems to think that this might include reconsidering their current opposition to the amendment.

"I know the Democrats are reevaluating their position on a number of social issues, and I'll bet this is one of those issues."

Yeah, that's not what we meant.

Lefties got pretty bent out of shape when Dems started talking about embracing morality and religion as a strategy for winning more elections. Lots of blather about the need for the separation between church and state. Lots of anxiety that suddenly the Dems were going to do just what Allard seems to think they are -- abandoning their principles.

That's not what it is about. Soon after the election, Rabbi Michael Lerner wrote, "Imagine if John Kerry had been able to counter George Bush by insisting that a serious religious person would never turn his back on the suffering of the poor, that the Bible's injunction to love one's neighbor required us to provide health care for all, and that the New Testament's command to 'turn the other cheek' should give us a predisposition against responding to violence with violence."

Jim Wallis has a similar message in his new book, God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It.

Some of the Left's biggest heroes — Dr. King, Gandhi, Jimmy Carter — have spoken eloquently about the role that their faith has played in their views on social justice. I'm with them. It's not about letting the Right define morality. It's about making it clear how the things that we believe in are moral.

No comments: