Do We Really Want To Talk About Religion?

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 16:12


So, apparently Clinton decided to go there:

Clinton decided to weigh in on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy, telling the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, "He would not have been my pastor," Clinton said. "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend."

She continued later, "You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that. I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving."

On her sniper gaffe, "I was sleep-deprived, and I misspoke."

Even though it is not the main subject of this post, I really like that last line. I mean, if you are arguing that you are better at answering the red phone at 3 a.m., it seems like a really good idea to claim that you misspoke about national security experience because you were too tired. It really instills a lot of confidence in the 3 a.m. claim.

But anyway, do we really need to be telling other people where they are praying? Is that a pandora's box we really want to open in this country? Does a country built on religious freedom need one of the three people vying to lead the country comment on where one of the other two candidates should be praying? Really? That's a good thing for the country? That's a good thing for Democrats?

And hey, via BooMan Tribune, since we have decided to cross that line, let's see where it could lead us:

Clinton's prayer group was part of the Fellowship (or "the Family"), a network of sex-segregated cells of political, business, and military leaders dedicated to "spiritual war" on behalf of Christ, many of them recruited at the Fellowship's only public event, the annual National Prayer Breakfast. (Aside from the breakfast, the group has "made a fetish of being invisible," former Republican Senator William Armstrong has said.) The Fellowship believes that the elite win power by the will of God, who uses them for his purposes. Its mission is to help the powerful understand their role in God's plan.(...)

The Fellowship's long-term goal is "a leadership led by God-leaders of all levels of society who direct projects as they are led by the spirit." According to the Fellowship's archives, the spirit has in the past led its members in Congress to increase U.S. support for the Duvalier regime in Haiti and the Park dictatorship in South Korea. The Fellowship's God-led men have also included General Suharto of Indonesia; Honduran general and death squad organizer Gustavo Alvarez Martinez; a Deutsche Bank official disgraced by financial ties to Hitler; and dictator Siad Barre of Somalia, plus a list of other generals and dictators.

Military dictators and death squad leaders, eh? The elite winning power by the will of God, eh? This all kind of makes me wonder if Clinton's support for the Bush-McCain mission in Iraq is actually based on her right-wing prayer circle.

But you know what? It is Hillary Clinton's business where she prayers and worships, just as it is every American's business to choose where they decide to pray or not pray, worship or not worship. As soon as we start commenting on whether someone's religious choices make them qualified to lead the country or not, we start down a path where we might as well just pry into everyone's religious background. If that is the path that Clinton wants to follow, fine. However, once people start looking into The Fellowship, it will turn out pretty bad for her campaign. Further, it sends us down a pretty nasty path where religious minorities, which in this country technically means everyone, are going to have a hard time holding public office.

Holding a national conversation about religion could put us in a much nastier place than even a national conversation about race, especially if it starts by openly questioning someone else's religious choices. As Hillary Clinton said, religion is indeed a choice, and one that the Constitution guarantees as the right of every American. Once we start to question those choices, rather than a slippery slope, that is pretty much a steep cliff. And once we start falling, there is no going back. There are some things that really should be kept private, and disdain for other people's religions is one of those things.

Chris Bowers :: Do We Really Want To Talk About Religion?

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
motherjones.com having trouble (0.00 / 0)
I'm just getting a Network Solutions "Coming Soon" page.

No doubt the Clintons sabotaged the Mother Jones site to keep people from reading the story.


I pray at the bottom of a pasta bowl (4.00 / 1)
is that so wrong?

<FSM>E

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare


Herringings, red herrings everywhere. (0.00 / 0)
Clinton is really getting ugly. I guess it's her only hope to get out from under her little fib. Strategy, strategy.

I'm almost at the point where having to vote for HRC in the GE... (4.00 / 1)
Would mean having to do so while vomiting.  Yes, I'd still vote for her in the extremely unlikely chance that she is the nominee, because President John McCain scares me if for no other reason than his Supreme Court appointments, but every time I think she's hit a "new low" that I'd still be able to rationalize for a GE vote, she goes even lower.  I'm thoroughly disgusted.

Not sure I could. (0.00 / 0)
I'll just say that Bloomberg would be a fool not to run if Clinton got the nomination. If the campaign is any kind of predictor, a Hillary administration would just be 4 years of embarrassment and humiliation for the Dem party. I'm not sure taking nausea pills and voting for her would do my side the slightest good. It would more likely contribute to major damage.  

[ Parent ]
Unavoidable... (4.00 / 1)
If she manages to snag the nomination, the damage to the Democratic party will already be unavoidable.  The question only becomes, at that point, who would be more damaging to the country.  I'd still vote for Clinton because I think McCain represents simply a continuation of the damage Bush has been doing to this country, although I imagine she wouldn't win anyway.  If she wins the nomination, I imagine she'd be apologizing to the black community once a week for her tactics, trying to convince them that "Hey, I'm sorry for what I did... but who else have you got now?"  And we can just kiss the young/new voters goodbye as well.

[ Parent ]
She won't be the nominee (0.00 / 0)
According to Harry Reid, it won't be protracted, because "things are being done."  That doesn't bode well for Hillary.

And as for her, who was the DNC official who characterized her recent moves (Wright) as her "Tonya Harding option"?

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.


[ Parent ]
Not sure... (0.00 / 0)
His answer, to me, just seemed to be the same intentionally vague answer that all of the democratic leaders have been saying.  

[ Parent ]
She needs to go (0.00 / 0)
While John McCain is enjoying a 67% approval rating, Clinton is using Hannity talking points on Obama.  I can't say I'm surprised.  I hope Gore and Edwards are paying attention.  A little help would go a long way from either of those two.

[ Parent ]
I Can NEVER vote for HRC (0.00 / 0)
Seeing the way the Clinton machine has used race as a political tool, I cannot ever vote for her--even if it means a third term for George Bush.

If I vote for her, then it will mean that all the things she and her campaign have done and said, including this most recent Wright comment, is acceptable, and in fact encouraged in future campaigns, because in the long run it will led to political victory (Buzzflash has an interesting interview with James Moore that talks about this http://www.buzzflash.com/artic...

We're told from childhood that we should play fair--show good sportsmanship.  How can we condemn baseball players for using human growth hormones if we reward someone who benefits from disenfranchising black voters, or any voter who cares about race?

The Supreme Court is important, but it's no more important than moving our country forward from the racial bitterness that so many generations have experienced.  


[ Parent ]
Buzzflash Link (0.00 / 0)
For some reason it's broken, but for anyone interested, you can get to the interview from the home page.

[ Parent ]
I understand what you're saying... (0.00 / 0)
But it's not a fair world... and while it would be ideal if we could just have a nice and fair campaign, it just won't happen.

I don't appreciate Clinton weakening our likely candidate, but if she were the nominee, I have to put my "spite" aside and vote for what I think is best for this country.  I don't think spite is a very good reason to vote or not vote for president.


[ Parent ]
So...My Anger is not Real or Significant? (0.00 / 0)
My decision not to vote for HRC has nothing to do with spite.  It has everything to do with listening to my 61-year old mother say we [blacks] haven't moved much farther than when she was forced to drink from the colored water fountain in MS as a girl.  There are still two sets of rules for blacks and whites.  The black candidate is heavily scrutinized and would never be allowed to lie about his/her harrowing trip to Bosnia.  A black candidate would never be allowed to make such a gaffe as confusing Sunni al Qaeda with Shia insurgents.  People from both parties would be calling for him/her to drop out of the presidential race.

This campaign--all of it--has been a step back for blacks.  When Clinton says she would've left Wright's church, she's playing into white fear.  AA churches all across the country have Rev. Wrights as pastors who are bitter about race relations.  But MSM media, rather than trying to understand these pastors and their churches, choose to make them into clowns.  And Clinton capitalizes on this.  Even McCain isn't that low.

This has NOTHING to do with spite.  This is about principles.  Just like I would never vote for GWB for his party's gaybashing, I can never vote for Clinton because of the racebaiting her campaign has engaged in.


[ Parent ]
Fair enough (0.00 / 0)
I said awhile ago that I wish I could just hibernate throughout this primary season and come out after August, so that I'd just have two candidates to pick from and I'd decide how I would want to vote then.  But, you make a reasonable argument for why it's not necessarily the right thing to do that, and I accept that.

Luckily for us, there is no way for Clinton to become the nominee.  If she does, there's no way she'll win the general anyway.


[ Parent ]
Your protest vote for McCain could help ruin this country (0.00 / 0)
If the Republicans gain one more conservative on the Supreme Court you can kiss good-by abortion rights, civil rights, consumer rights, and many other rights which the Court has protected over the years.  You can visit the graves of tens of thousands more dead American men and women, dying for nothing on foreign soil which happens to contain oil.  And all for spite?  How does a lifetime of support for the black community turn into 9-1 anti-Hillary votes by black folks because a black candidate is now available to them?  Is Barack really 9 times better than Hillary? How could a true supporter of black folks support a Chicago hack like Stroger, the new President of the Cook County Board, who is loading the payroll with his relatives and cronies?  Has anyone explored the connection between Barack and the Daley Machine?  Maybe when that pending federal indictment of Daley finally is filed, the truth will come out, but by then you will have put this man in the White House.

[ Parent ]
It's not about prayer (0.00 / 0)
She simply said that she didn't like Rev. Wright's sermons.  The voters will get it. The blogophere?  Not so much.

No... (0.00 / 0)
That is not what she simply said. If she had simply said that, then this woulnd't be an issue.  

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

[ Parent ]
Not even close (0.00 / 0)
To true. Maybe the sniper fire is making it tough to understand, but she attacked Obama for not leaving the pastor AND church.

[ Parent ]
We could have a national coversation about religion (0.00 / 0)
but one would probably not want to start it with, "Well, I wouldn't go to THAT church."

Give Hillary's reaction I'd say she's still not seen or read THE SPEECH. (all caps for voice of god effect).

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare


Clinton releases her pledged delegates (0.00 / 0)
Will Bunch, via TPM --

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/a...

Will Bunch was at the Daily News editor board session with Hillary Clinton today. And in the process of asking her a delegate number crunching question she told him, "And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged. You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

While Billary's goal is to peel off pledged Obama delegates, under the goose gander sauce theory, this statement effectively tells all of Clinton's pledged delegates that they are free to support Obama.


in fact the whole consitution doesn't even mean that much (0.00 / 0)
I love goose gander sauce.

/me licks lips

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare


[ Parent ]
Just more not getting much of anything (4.00 / 3)
Clinton has no clue about the black church and what it's meant. She doesn't get that an old black preacher who still remembers his own humiliations by Jim Crow might understandably be distrustful and angry. She has no respect for her opponents' privacy and no awareness of the doors she is opening with the new lows she is sinking to. She reveals by her words that all the hype about "the first black president" had no more substance than a slick ad about Exxon Mobile's commitment to the environment.

I've never understood her extreme tin-ear problem, or where it comes from. She seems deaf to her own words, and unable to predict their most obvious consequences. She is willing to side with McCain against Obama because she cannot see that she is providing ammo for the GOP that will be equally effective against herself and the rest of the Dem candidates at every federal level. Add the cluelessness to the stunning hypocrisy and you have a candidate who will do a Kerry in the general election. She has become a one-person disaster show.

It makes me very sad to see a Democrat, and a woman, who has achieved such prominence throwing away the respect and credibility she has worked so determinedly to win. She seems unable to change her path of self destruction. It is time for the Democratic Party to bring this sorry, embarrassing spectacle to an end before it can do more damage.


Tin ear comes from (0.00 / 0)
Too much experience in Washington, DC.  It just isn't like the rest of the country.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
Aiming to be a "god-leader" doesn't help (0.00 / 0)
Apparently, the Almighty talks very loudly - just ask GWB.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
I think she has a clue (4.00 / 2)
She's given up on winning black votes for the primary.  Wright in the news hurts Obama - her calculation doesn't really go much further than that.  She doesn't care about the black church or the Democratic Party for that matter except as means to an end - she just wants to be president.

[ Parent ]
Her calculations (4.00 / 1)
don't even seem to go as far as not destroying her own prospects in the general election. I really believe that she's just destroyed any chance she had to beat McCain should she win the nomination. It's not her ethics or loyalty that surprise me. It's her inability to comprehend her own self-interest. More and more her behavior is looking like a kind of spite that's so intense it must be satisfied at any cost, even to herself -- almost getting into mental illness territory.

[ Parent ]
I agree dave (0.00 / 0)
you made the comment I was looking for.  I think church goers but black churches especially think of themselves AS family - the church family.  And showing this kind of disconnect will not help with faith based outreach whether in the black community or otherwise.  

[ Parent ]
Not unable (0.00 / 0)
Unwilling is more like it. She is quite smart and understands her words. I believe it's just a strong belief that she will be president and all her actions now will be one day vindicated later on. I really think she believes if not now, 2012 will be her year and she'll be the one to beat. I do not agree, but that's on her.

[ Parent ]
Framing (0.00 / 0)
The privacy of religion is absolutely key.  One of the many right-wing frames that have become commonplace in both social and political discourse in the US is that the "freedom of religion" that the Constitution guarantees for all Americans somehow does not include freedom to reject religion.  It saddens me that if I was running for public office and said I didn't believe in God, many people would believe I had no moral compass.  (Whether or not they are correct is another story entirely, but shouldn't be inferred from my rejection of deist theology.)

I await the day that a leading figure in either party can do what Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats in the UK, did when he was running for his party leadership: when asked whether he believed in God, he replied, simply: "No."  He was elected handily and his atheism has not proved a factor in his party's electability.  

I am a keen Obama supporter but I wonder how many people feel that he is "principled" on the basis of his faith alone, not on the policy positions he espouses (which, ironically, are mostly in line with many Christian ethical principles).


Hillary Resurrecting the Wright Controversy (0.00 / 0)
I blogged about Senator Clinton's resurrection of the Wright controversy at http://swimmingfreestyle.typep...

excerpt:

"...Until Bosnia, sniper fire and ducked heads.   Hillary Clinton's dumb insistence on grandly embellishing her visit to Bosnia bit her in the butt.  The media has picked up on the story, splicing together video of her recounting the harrowing ordeal with actual footage of her very peaceful arrival at Tuzla.  Embarrassing, to say the least.  The story has prompted some closer investigation into Mrs. Clinton's executive experience claims, and it looks like there's more "big fish" tales from Senator Clinton waiting to be investigated more fully: Northern Ireland, Macedonia, SCHIP legislation, Family and Medical Leave Act."


Whither Al Gore? (4.00 / 2)
I'm starting to think that at a certain point, it becomes cowardly for the Dem leadership to not step in and stop this sort of thing.

Really, if Clinton had the explicit goal of trying to weaken Obama for the general election, would her behavior over the last few weeks have been any different?

If she were a theocon/neocon Republican, would her arguments have been any different?
 


Want audio on her 'power' cult? (0.00 / 0)
Audio Tapes Raise Questions On Hillary Clinton's Right-Wing Cult Associations
By Bruce Wilson

The audio clips you can hear in this video I have produced are taken from sermons given by the man Senator Hillary Clinton has described as a "spiritual mentor": Doug Coe is the head of a secretive Washington religious organization, which hosts the yearly National Prayer Breakfast : The Family. The Family is not a conspiracy. It is a right-wing fundamentalist, elitist power cult and a global influence peddling ring with links to some of the most savage, bloodthirsty regimes of the 20th Century. The audio clips you can hear in the following video production are taken from sermons given by the man Hillary Clinton has described as a "spiritual mentor", Doug Coe. There is no evidence to prove Clinton is aware of these statements by Coe, but the agenda of The Family is far from secret...
http://www.talk2action.org/sto...



Just as an ethical question (0.00 / 0)
The Fellowship is suspect.   In 2003, it was reported that six congressmen and senators (four Republicans - DeMint, Brownback, Ensign, and Zach Wamp and two Democrats - Bart Stupak and Mike Doyle) were living in a four story townhouse owned by The Fellowship.    

Care to take a guess on how much they each paid in rent to live in this house, which reputedly has 12 bedrooms and 9 bathrooms (unconfirmed, but probably true - looking for a more detailed link)?

If you guessed $1800, you'd be wrong.

If you guessed $1200, you'd be wrong.

If you guessed a whopping $600, you'd be right.

I wonder how many affordable housing bills DeMint, Brownback, Ensign and Zach Wamp have supported.


Well, at least nine bathrooms and five living rooms (0.00 / 0)
according to this Harper's write up on The Fellowship, which is worth a read for that and more.

http://www.harpers.org/archive...


[ Parent ]
So Hillary would have gotten up and walked out (0.00 / 0)
Uh-huh.

John McCain doesn't care about Vets.



Religion (4.00 / 1)
Everyone has a opinion. I don't care if there is one more opinion expressed about Wright.  As long as both of the candidates are on the worshiping Jesus side of the fence they are equally nuts it's not a distinguishing factor.

On a side note, yes, Hillary Clinton has already lost so this matters even less.

John McCain would love to send your kids to war.


Well, the folks that brought us the Spanish Inquisition (0.00 / 0)
were also "worshipping on the Jesus side of the fence", excuse me if that doesn't make me feel comfortable.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
This sheds light on Clinton's insistence on staying in the race... (0.00 / 0)
If she really believes this to be true...

The Fellowship believes that the elite win power by the will of God, who uses them for his purposes.

I understand her staying in the race. Losing the nomination would, if she believes all the things these wackos claim, fundamentally shake her rationale for believing in the god she believes in.

I'm not very religious, and if I went anywhere to pray, it would be synagogue, but that kind of puts the race in a whole new light.

If god picks people to lead, and you then lose, you must not be one of gods chosen people, right?

I'm not being snide, is it possible she really believes this? If so, give me Rev. Wright any day.


Are you suggesting the Clintons to be hungry warmongers? (1.33 / 3)
Since the proHillary writers went on strike at DailyKos, i realized that this blog diverted from giving quite a fair review on both candidates to becoming a anti-Hillary blog. Looks like the antiHillary crowd has decided to invade this blog with Chris Bowers leading the crowd. I would advise you to read through all your articles that you have written since the strike at Kos and you will see how much hate contained in your writings. If you are all wondering what will split the Democratic party, it is this hatred that will eventually cause of to lose. Months ago almost all Hillary supporters are fine with Obama as pres, but with all this negativity against her, more of her supporters are doubting the 'new' politics of Obama.

Welcome to reality (4.00 / 1)
Again, the victim card.

Clinton is her own worst enemy, and this bullshit of blaming those who call her out for her indiscretions is getting tiresome.


[ Parent ]
Bathing in hateraide, eh? (0.00 / 0)
To be serious, your post left a bit to be desired.

Months ago, supporters of most every candidate were happy with the other candidates for president. Recently, (I believe the March 4th primary exit polls bore this out) Obama supporters were by and large MUCH happier with a Hillary nom than Hillary supporters were with an Obama nom. That seems to belie any notion that Hillary Clinton supporters are "fine" with Obama, not to mention the fact that Hillary won that primary AFTER throwing the self-titled 'kitchen sink' at Sen. Obama.

The demonization of Barack Obama by the Clinton campaign and the candidate herself, though, is deplorable and makes me not want to vote for her. I do not know her personally, but I am not electing a student body president when I go into the voting booth, I am voting to elect (indirectly) a President. That the Clinton campaign cannot seem to find a way to run gracefully against a member of their own party but shower with compliments the candidate of the other party seems to make me think not voting Clinton or McCain is actually the best thing for this country.

If THAT is hatred, then maybe you and I will never be able to actually have a serious discussion of the election or any issue.


[ Parent ]
Only to the extent that Clinton implies that Obama is (0.00 / 0)
anti-American and racist because he has accepted Rev. Wright as his pastor.

Will she publically disown Mr. Coe?

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
She was asked a direct question... (0.00 / 0)
"How would you have responded if your pastor had said things the Reverend Wright had said?"

A direct question hard to avoid.  The reporter brought up Wright, not her.  So she answered how she truly felt.  

2 points. The rabbi emeritus of my synagogue was one of the most left wing rabbis in America (one of th ereason I joined besides the fact that he was also a joyful man to be around)he was always provocative though never inflammatory like Wright.  There was many a Shabbat sermon that people would get up and walk out on his left wing sermons....and then leave the congregation. I liked what he said...I stayed.

Second point. Obama supporters are putting their head in the sand in terms of the general elelctorate if you don't see what a terrible albatross Rev Wright is for Barack Obama....you can not say to that elelctorate that you have to, you must understand,  the black church and how it uses rhetoric and anger.  They aren't going to buy it.  

Well you (Obama supporters and the Dem primary elelctorate)  may take it into account to erase the visceral discomfort of hearing a loud, angry, vituperative man say "God damn America" twice, but they don't have to undersand and they won't understand.  Obama may have a truly felt sense of personal obligation to defend his pastor...as well as a political reason because if he threw him under the bus then his 80-90% African American support woould plummet; but Hillary Clinton does not have an obligation to defend Rev. Wright.

So she said what was true....Any other answer would have involved deending Rev. Wright's utterances ... to do otherwise would be to make some sort of rationalization for Rev. Wright. I don't think she liked what he said and millions of Americans don't like them either. I think she knows the general electorate doesn't feel that way...and in November they won't feel that way.

She was talking about her own religious leanings....that was the question she was asked.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


I prayer you aren't serious (0.00 / 0)
Quibble:  to prayer is not a verb.  It's just pray.

Substance:  this is a truly bogus comparison.  There is nothing to link Hillary to any meetings attended by the dictators and strongmen mentioned, nor is there any evidence she voted for the aid to dictatorships mentioned.

She didn't sit in a church of her choosing for 20 years, listening to drivel like white men deliberately gave AIDS to black folks, or like 9-11 was deserved because of evil American policies of the past.  She didn't lie and say she had never heard such remarks and if she had, would have quit the church.  Senator's Obama's speech on race, a very fine one in many respects, also had within it his admission that he had heard such remarks, and we know he never denounced or quit the church in the past.


Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search