Obama, Religion and the Blog Reaction

post from TPMCafe - The Coffee House feed on 28 June 2006 04:30:06 PM. © TPMCafe - The Coffee House feed

Barack Obama gave a speech to bunch of fellow religious liberals gathered together to discuss the failure of progressives to connect with many religious voters-- and he actually analyzed what some liberals say and don't say that might be causing that failure.

And the blog reaction has been swift:
Chris Bowers- "So thanks Senator Obama, for reifying this Republican-driven talking point about Democrats."
Pachacutec- But this bullshit from Barak Obama is Bill Clinton?s fault.
And a furious backchannel debate among bloggers to boot.

If you read the whole speech, the almost kneejerk response to Obama pretty much illustrates his point of the discomfort by some progressives in any discussion of religion in the public square.

This was a speech to other progressive religious people and I really find it hard to believe people are trashing it so hard, given that he upholds almost all progressive principles and mostly accuses secular folks of "avoiding the conversation about religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that - regardless of our personal beliefs - constitutional principles tie our hands." Hardly a Republican talking point, just a statement that most liberals don't feel comfortable engaging in this religious debate, which is not inaccurate I think.

What's remarkable about some of the blog and other reactions is that folks seem to be talking about every policy other than the one Obama himself seemed to emphasize for change, which is progressive opposition to allowing prayer in public institutions. Opposition to prayer and other expressions of faith in public institutions is hardly a fringe position on the left-- it was decided by Supreme Court Justices and supported by liberal opinion editors for most of the last four decades.

Obama did not suggest changing progressive positions on abortion.
Obama did not suggest changing progressive positions on gay rights.

He suggested changing progressive positions on expressions of faith within public institutions such as schools.

That's the concrete proposal he made, criticizing those who hold out for a stronger version of separation of church and state.

That's a pretty small subset of what he said, but the fact that some people treated his speech as even suggesting a weakening of progressive commitments to gay rights or abortion is exactly the equation of religion with rightwing views that Obama was challenging.

And for anyone who thinks Obama was making rightwing talking points, they should pay attention to these passages:

And don't even try to tell me the following parts of his speech are rightwing talking points:

"After all, the problems of poverty and racism, the uninsured and the unemployed, are not simply technical problems in search of the perfect ten point plan. They are rooted in both societal indifference and individual callousness - in the imperfections of man."

"I think we should put more of our tax dollars into educating poor girls and boys, and give them the information about contraception that can prevent unwanted pregnancies, lower abortion rates, and help assure that that every child is loved and cherished. "

"Pastors like Rick Warren and T.D. Jakes are wielding their enormous influences to confront AIDS, Third World debt relief, and the genocide in Darfur. Religious thinkers and activists like my friend Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo are lifting up the Biblical injunction to help the poor as a means of mobilizing Christians against budget cuts to social programs and growing inequality. National denominations have shown themselves as a force on Capitol Hill, on issues such as immigration and the federal budget. "

"I that the conservative leaders of the Religious Right will need to acknowledge a few things as well. For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religiouspractice. .."

Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers. And even if we did have only Christians within our borders, who's Christianity would we teach in the schools?..should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage so radical that it's doubtful that our Defense Department would survive its application?"

"If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing."