We're All in This Together

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

Learn More

Full disclosure dept.

Blog powered by Typepad

Idaho food and beverage

We can do MUCH better

« Monday water cooler 8.20.07 | Main | Calling all Ada Democrats »

Comments

Sisyphus

Wow, a Muslim taking the high road? But I thought all Muslims were hellbent on killing, beheading and terrorizing? What has Bryan Fisher said about this? Mr. Ellison sounds so Christlike, turning the other cheek and all.

And he sends a message of unity, tolerance and inclusion. Is this what they call "leading"? I've heard of these things called leaders and leadership but I must confess I rarely see it here in Idaho. I was told by my "leader" the founding fathers didn't envision his kind as leaders?

Julie in Boise

I also thought it was very interesting that the article was in the Jerusalem Post, of all places.

David Erin Anthony

Just amazes me how organized religious espouse how they teach love but teach to hate, intollerance and condemnation of anyone who doesnt share thier belief. And, again, my butterknife mentality, but dont all religions recognize a single GOD?

Julie in Boise

DEA,

Christianity, Judiasm, and Islam all recognize one God - that of Abraham. But there are many other religions that are either multitheistic or nontheistic (Buddhism, for example). Then there's one of my faves, pantheism, which holds that God isn't a person but a presence in everything.

Julie

David Erin Anthony

But thats just it Julie. Most of the major religions recognize a signal devine entity and the basic basis of the originations of man. But none seem to recognize the common theme within each religion.

Julie in Boise

OK, I see your point. I guess I didn't see it at first because to many of us, the common origins are so obvious!

I'll brag on my faith just a little bit here. Unitarian Universalism is predicated on the idea that there are many paths to enlightenment, including all the world's religions as well as the scientific method.

UUs do not have to believe any specific set of dogma (we're more into deeds than creeds!), but most of us recognize that the heart of every faith is what Americans call the Golden Rule: treating others the way you'd like to be treated.

David Erin Anthony

Over the summer I read James Carville's latest book, "Taking It Back." In he he points out a significant percieved defect of Democrats. The perception is all Democrats are anti-religious. I am Luthern and proud of it. However, I don't make that the cornerstone of who I am. I let my religion guide me. Like most Democrats we don't parade our religion for all to see. And because we do not the perception is formed. In his book he encourages Democrats to not be afraid to espouce your religion but not to make it the cornerstone of who you are.
By the way, I liked your final comment abuot the treat others as you would be treated. When did that rule disappear in the modern religious movement??

Julie in Boise

I am not a big James Carville fan, to tell you the truth. I don't think it's a problem if people want their religion to be the cornerstone of their life.

The problem emerges, as we've seen with Sali et al, when people believe theirs is the only true faith and disrespect those of other faiths.

I guess the trick is in letting religion guide you, as you say, but also in being open and affirming to the fact that others may see truth somewhat differently. As long as that search for truth is responsible, it ought to be a person's choice what he or she believes. But fundamentalists can't abide this, and that's where the problems begin!

Sisyphus

I echo Julie on Carville. He is overly concerned with reacting to his perceptions of what Republicans are doing to the left. His suggestions are reactionary and therefore puts Republicans in control. This is primarily what is wrong with the DLC.

Mind you I recognize the distortion the Roves are purveying, I just think in some cases its ineffective and reacting to it only elevates the issues to ones worthy of debate. That Dems are anti-religion may appeal to the fundamentalists but hardly to the moderates and independents who know better because they attend our churches. It is more in the way of red meat for their base.

But reacting to Republican Talking Points grants them the authority to control the agenda which I am unwilling to do. I suggest shifting the question back to being accepting of other faiths, all faiths, rather than us arguing a non-sensical point that we're not anti religious. After all Dems have the big tent and fundamentalists really shouldn't argue with us on our tolerance because tolerance, as epitomized by the golden rule, is the bedrock of Christianity.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Linked in

  • View Julie Fanselow's profile on LinkedIn