The Importance of Comparative Religion »« Arizona Gets Elective Bible Classes

The Democrats’ (No Longer) Godless Platform

David Brody, the alleged journalist for the Christian Broadcasting Network, is outraged that the Democratic Party platform no longer includes God. Yes, those heathen liberals have actually thrown God right out of the party, picked him up and threw him headfirst through the saloon doors like an old western movie. Oh, and it’s an “exclusive” report.

Guess what? God’s name has been removed from the Democratic National Committee platform.

This is the paragraph that was in the 2008 platform:

“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

Now the words “God-given” have been removed. The paragraph has been restructured to say this:

“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”

ZOMWhatever! Of course, the platform still contains lots of meaningless rhetoric about the value of faith:

“Faith has always been a central part of the American story, and it has been a driving force of progress and justice throughout our history. We know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. Faith- based organizations will always be critical allies in meeting the challenges that face our nation and our world – from domestic and global poverty, to climate change and human trafficking. People of faith and religious organizations do amazing work in communities across this country and the world, and we believe in lifting up and valuing that good work, and finding ways to support it where possible. We believe in constitutionally sound, evidence-based partnerships with faith-based and other non-profit organizations to serve those in need and advance our shared interests. There is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution, and a full commitment to both principles is essential for the continued flourishing of both faith and country.”

But no God! Everyone panic!

Update: And just like that, the Democrats show their ability to be spineless and to shoot themselves in the foot at the same time. They decided to amend the platform to put that infamous — and useless — word “god” into the platform, and to include a statement about Jerusalem being the capitol of Israel (as if this was an issue this country has, or should have, any say on at all), but they did it with a voice vote that gives the loony right the opportunity to say “See! Democrats hate God and Israel!” Oh what a sight we get to gander when politicians decide to pander.

Comments

  1. d cwilson says

    As soon as I heard that they had amended the platform, I could here the democrats wimpering, “Do you like us now, Fox? Please don’t be mad at us!”

    The democrats have put on some great speeches, but the party in general needs some balls.

  2. Akira MacKenzie says

    Sorry about reporting the same comment from Pharyngula, but I’m feeling lazy today and I don’t feel like rewriting the same point:

    The problem is that I don’t know who the hell they’re trying to pander to. Christian Conservatives? They’re already aligned with the other party. Liberal theists? Is their faith so fragile that they’ll leave unless the platform mentions their deity? The undecided voter? Are there THAT many moderates who are clamoring for political religious affirmations? Who?

    The Democrats are supposed to be “The Party of Jefferson.” While the man had his faults, he’s mainly the credited for starting this church/state seperation business in the first place. Now, for the sake of avoiding the appearance of “godlessness” (A charge that their opponents will level no matter what the Dems do. The allegation of atheism always sells here in Christianity-poisoned AmeriKKKa. ) they are willing to betray that concept, stoop to the level of the Right, and piss off liberal atheist voters (like myself) to the point where I have to wonder who whether or not it’s worth it to vote in November.

  3. says

    They decided to amend the platform to put that infamous — and useless — word “god” into the platform

    Why didn’t they put “Cthulhu” and “Allah” in there, too? If it doesn’t matter, and it’s just tradition I’m sure they wouldn’t mind.

  4. Randomfactor says

    Remember what Adlai Stevenson said. When told he had the votes of “every thinking American,” he said “that’s not enough–I need a majority.”

    When thinking Americans are the majority, Democrats can stop appealing to emotion, maybe.

  5. regexp says

    By the way my twitter feeds were going nuts yesterday – you would of thought Israel was nuked from orbit by aliens due to the Democrats omitted a mention in their platform.

  6. imrryr says

    And I demand that the democrats firmly state once and for all which city is the real capital of South Africa.

    d cwilson –

    As soon as I heard that they had amended the platform, I could here the democrats wimpering, “Do you like us now, Fox? Please don’t be mad at us!”

    I think that the democrats should just go ahead and make Droopy the dog their official mascot already.

  7. Ben P says

    Other than the fact that Mitt Romney stuck his foot into it last month when he traveled to Israel and declared that he recognized their claim that Jerusalem was the capital, why exactly is the proper location of Israel’s capital an issue in US politics at all?

    Obviously israel itself is not obscure, but in my mind this is akin to asking a US president’s perspective on whether the trial of Bo Xilai was a legitimate cleaning up of power abuses within the Chinese government or the result of an internal power struggle.

  8. says

    The problem is that I don’t know who the hell they’re trying to pander to. Christian Conservatives? They’re already aligned with the other party. Liberal theists? Is their faith so fragile that they’ll leave unless the platform mentions their deity? The undecided voter? Are there THAT many moderates who are clamoring for political religious affirmations? Who?

    There are a lot of “low information” voters who, not coincidentally, are more likely to be undecided than the rest of us. These people may well be sensitive to claims that the Democrats hate God and hate Israel; I can only assume that someone, somewhere has focus-tested this shit. What’s interminably annoying is that the evidence of God/Israel hating is so ludicrous, and wingnuts make the charge even without evidence, so you wonder if pandering does more harm than good.

  9. slc1 says

    Re Ben P @ #9

    The issue really is whether the US embassy, currently located in Tel Aviv, should be moved to Jerusalem. AFAIK, every party platform and every presidential candidate over the last 30 years has promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem, including the current incumbent, but somehow, when they become president, the vow is quickly forgotten. I would be willing to bet that if Romney is elected, he too, will not move the embassy to Jerusalem.

  10. eric says

    The problem is that I don’t know who the hell they’re trying to pander to.

    At a guess? Voters in the major swing states.

    The three biggest swing states are Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. Don’t really know about Ohio, but the other two have significant populations of people I’d term ‘strong Christians.’ I.e., people who might take exception to no mention of God.

  11. yoav says

    The way the vote to amend the platform was done was one of the most disgraceful show of undemocratic behavior I seen in a long time.
    The Jerusalem issue is mostly about whether the US will do the symbolic thing of moving the embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem,which everyone knows will not happen, platform or no platform, until there is some sort of a political solution to the issue of east Jerusalem. If reelected Obama is going to face the exact same political calculus that made W leave the embassy where it is despite every republican on the planet repeatedly declaring that the embassy is going to be moved any day now.

  12. billyeager says

    @8

    why exactly is the proper location of Israel’s capital an issue in US politics at all?

    You Anti-Semite! – Why? Well you ask the kind of question that doesn’t get answered in a rational and reasoned manner. You ask a question that DEMANDS AN EMOTIONAL DIATRIBE OF SPITTLE-FLECKED RANTING ABOUT YOU BEING AN ANTI-SEMITE!!!!!1!1!1!11!!!

    I am reminded of an article a number of years back in one of the UK’s broadsheet newspapers that contended the Jews could not tolerate criticism. It was, of course, followed up by numerous “How DARE YOU!” ‘Letters to the Editor’ from the Jewish Lobby. The irony was painful.

    Quite simply, the reason why the proper location of Israel’s capital *is*, *must*, and always should be, an issue in US politics is . . .is . . .um . . . something to do with them being the seed of some guys that G-D ‘gave’ it to. It’s an inheritance thing. From G-D. So don’t fucking question it. . . . or their predilection for slicing off bits of their baby boys’ genitalia. You Nazi.

  13. says

    The Republicans had an identical moment when Boehner took a voice vote on adoption of rules disliked by the Ron Paul folks and declared that “in the opinion of the chair” the ayes won when it was perfectly obvious to all that they didn’t.

  14. StevoR says

    Jerusalem being the capitol of Israel (as if this was an issue this country has, or should have, any say on at all),

    Well yeah, Israel’s capital is up to *Israel* to decide and it has made it clear that it has selected Jerusalem.

    Why is that a problem or controversial? Why not accept reality and the wishes of the Jewish state?

    Does anyone here seriously argue that Jerusalem should be divided again like Cold War Berlin or made an international zone and taken out of Israeli control or anything like that?

    @14. eric :

    At a guess? Voters in the major swing states.
    The three biggest swing states are Florida, Ohio, and Virginia.

    Dunno about Virginia and Ohio but pretty sure there’s a fairly large Jewish community in Florida. That may have something to do with it from a political calculus point of view.

  15. dingojack says

    “Why is that a problem or controversial? Why not accept reality and the wishes of the Jewish state?”

    Because they’re not the only stakeholders in this.
    Any other dumb questions, Stevo?

    Dingo

  16. slc1 says

    Re billyeager @ #16

    Since at one time an estimated 90% of males born in the US were cut (that figure is now down to some 50% of newborns as we sit here today), most of those folks were, at least nominally, Christians.

  17. says

    I have to agree with c wilson.

    Had Obama ignored the criticism, nobody would have been upset enough about this to change sides or alter an intended vote. As it is, Obama has handed the Rethuglicans a perfect opportunity to point and gasp further about the Democrats “appalling” lack of godliness.

    Yes, one can spin this as Obama showing some form of “leadership”, but a better example of leadership would have been for him to have simply ignored the godbots.

  18. d cwilson says

    Does anyone here seriously argue that Jerusalem should be divided again like Cold War Berlin or made an international zone and taken out of Israeli control or anything like that?

    **Raises Hand**

  19. slc1 says

    Re d cwilson @v #22

    United Jerusalem today, united Jerusalem tomorrow, united Jerusalem to the far horizon, united Jerusalem forever.

  20. says

    Does anyone here seriously argue that Jerusalem should be divided again like Cold War Berlin or made an international zone and taken out of Israeli control or anything like that?

    What I would seriously argue is that for permanent peace in the region, there will almost certainly need to be a two-state solution. And that will mean that East Jerusalem will be the capital of Palestine, and the rest the capital of Israel. Alternatively, Jerusalem can be declared a free city and Israel can put its capital in Tel Aviv. But as long as Israel declares all of Jerusalem for itself, a peace agreement is almost certainly impossible.

    I would also seriously argue that this isn’t any of America’s business, beyond the desire for peace and happiness for all parties involved, and that the contest to who can be more slavishly pro-Israel is both sickening and stupid.

  21. baal says

    What’s the life expectancy of a Palestinian?

    I think we can continue to be a friend to Isreal and demand the slow death of a people end.

    Also, I’d like to have seen the real impact of not including ‘god’ in the platform (magic seals anyone?). I think the decision to quash the faux-controversy by including god is a result of fear based reasoning. I’m sure the party types would argue that they didn’t want a distraction from the rest of the convention (like the door closing fire marshal noise). While that’s an nice generic point, the parse of voters that d_cwilson did above, points up how weak the negatives appear.

  22. busterggi says

    I’ll go along with d cwilson – as long as Jerusalem can be used as a theo-political football it will be a thorn in the side of the world – better to make it an apolitical zone under UN mandate than keep it as an excuse for starting WWIII.

  23. davem says

    Does anyone here seriously argue that Jerusalem should be divided again like Cold War Berlin or made an international zone and taken out of Israeli control or anything like that?

    Yes, the entire planet outside of the USA and Israel.

  24. Die Anyway says

    re 26: “…starting WWIII”

    I saw this quote the other day and was struck by it:

    “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” — Albert Einstein

    or as the song goes:
    … one sunny day, someone will set the spark off and we will all be blown away.

    Time to go crawl under my desk.

  25. d cwilson says

    United Jerusalem today, united Jerusalem tomorrow, united Jerusalem to the far horizon, united Jerusalem forever.

    Cute.

    United under whose control? That’s the question. Just because all three Abrahamic religions think Jerusalem is theirs by divine right because their messiah/prophet/god once took a shit there, why should peace-loving people tolerate constant bloodshed over it?

    There is no scenario in which either Israel or the Palestinians can claim sole control over the city and not expect more decades, if not centuries, of violence. Take it out of both their hands and have the UN protect access to the sacred sites for each religion.

  26. savagemutt says

    The Republicans had an identical moment when Boehner took a voice vote on adoption of rules disliked by the Ron Paul folks and declared that “in the opinion of the chair” the ayes won when it was perfectly obvious to all that they didn’t.

    Even better, according to my local weekly, Boehner’s announcement of the outcome was on his teleprompter. There’s supposedly video of it.

  27. says

    slc1 “United Jerusalem today, united Jerusalem tomorrow, united Jerusalem to the far horizon, united Jerusalem forever.”
    /says slc, masturbating furiously.

  28. slc1 says

    Re d cwilson @ #29

    Actually, I think that the only equitable solution for Jerusalem is for the eastern part to be shared, with the US embassy to Palestine to be placed therein. There is no way any Israeli Government will agree to relinquishing total control of East Jerusalem or cede the entire city to the UN.

  29. d cwilson says

    And there’s no way the PLA will ever agree to just “sharing” East Jerusalem.

    So, it’s either more bloodshed or fuck ‘em both and take the choice out of both their hands.

  30. John Phillips, FCD says

    savagemutt, I wouldn’t laugh too loud about that, as the pre-ordained result of the DNC vote was also up on the auto-cue prior to the vote, as was shown on either last night’s The Daily Show or The Colbert Report.

  31. Ichthyic says

    What’s interminably annoying is that the evidence of God/Israel hating is so ludicrous, and wingnuts make the charge even without evidence, so you wonder if pandering does more harm than good.

    I guess it depends on how you define “harm”.

    Probably should ask Bill Clinton. I seem to recall him being good at defining words…

Leave a Reply