Browse By

Democratic Party To Officially Oppose Nonreligious Americans

According to the Constitution of the United States of America, the government is supposed to be uninvolved in matters of religion, and leave belief up to individual personal conscience. However, as of 2008, the Democratic Party will no longer support that position.

The Constitution requires that, in government, there be no establishment of religion. However, as of 2008, the Democratic Party will officially support government establishment of religion.

On page 50 of the new Democratic platform, to be approved this week, the Democratic Party officially goes on the record as endorsing the government “supporting faith-based institutions” and government programs to “empower” these institutions. A “faith-based institution” is a euphemism for a religious organization, like a church or missionary organization.

This plank of the Democratic platform supports government establishment of religion, plain and simple.

It also declares the Democratic Party to be an officially pro-religion political party. “We honor the central place of faith in our lives. Like our Founders, we believe that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith,” the Democratic platform says.

The Democratic Party is not neutral on the issue of whether you ought to be religious or not. The leaders of the Democratic Party cannot content themselves with saying that it’s not their business whether American citizens are religious or not. The Democratic Party is now dedicated to using its power to promote efforts to spread religion.

It is now the absurd, yet official position of the Democratic Party that it is not unconstitutional for the federal government to directly fund churches and other religious organizations.

It’s for everybody’s good, the Democrats say.

Well, it’s not for my good. Religion has hijacked the Democratic Party, and taken the Democratic Party away from the position of defending the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The official position of the Democratic Party, after the new platform is passed, will be that it would be better for me and my community if I would submit to a religious conversion.

I cannot accept that position as anything but a purposeful insult to me and to all of the millions of other nonreligious citizens of the United States of America. The Democratic Party no longer defends our rights. The Democratic Party is now set against us.

The reason for this betrayal is crass and corrupt. Evangelical Christians have more money and more organizational power than nonreligious Americans do. The Democratic Party wants to profit from that power, and so the Democrats are engaging in a repudiation of secular government in order to make evangelical Christians happy.

Atheists, agnostics, humanists, brights, freethinkers and other nonreligious Americans no longer have any place in the Democratic Party. We have been told to sit down and shut up, or to leave.

We must not sit down and shut up. So, it is time for us to leave the Democratic Party.

It seems that Americans who truly believe in the separation of church and state now need to work against both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. In order to do so, we need to become as politically organized and energetic as the evangelicals have become. Our goal: To be recognized as a constituency as important and influential as the theocratic Christians have become.

Three places to start:

Coalition of Secular Voters
Secular Coalition for America
Coalition for Secular Government

9 thoughts on “Democratic Party To Officially Oppose Nonreligious Americans”

  1. EvilPoet says:

    I left the Democratic party before the 2004 election cause they no longer represented me and hadn’t for a very long time. As it turns out, it was one of the better decisions I made.

    I find it amusing (in a dark satirical kind of way) that people get all up in arms about one constitutional violation and not another.

  2. J. Clifford says:

    I had held out hope that the Democratic Party was capable of reform by grassroots activists. Now, as I see the Democratic Party moving into even further toward the Republican right on so many policies, I’ve given up that hope.

    I’ve re-registered as independent voter this week, and I feel really good about it.

  3. Jim says:

    I’m not sure what you mean, EvilPoet. Which other constitutional violation haven’t we gotten up in arms about (or which constitutional violation has the Democratic Party bothered about lately)?

  4. EvilPoet says:

    I was thinking faith-based funding vs warrantless wiretapping when I wrote that. Not really targeting anyone in particular just making an overall observation of the reaction each one gets. Does that make more sense?

  5. J. Clifford says:

    It does perhaps for some, but of course, we’ve gone after both here at Irregular Times.

  6. Jim says:

    Yeah, that makes sense. There are a lot of people who have gone after both, and a lot of people upset over neither. I thought you were headed toward the Second Amendment!

  7. EvilPoet says:

    At this point – I think I will just leave well enough alone. The way things have been going today I’ll only make things more confusing. Ugh. It’s been one of those days. My apologies.

  8. Tom says:

    Yeah and Biden has been a spokesman/advocate/inside man for MasterCard.
    We’re electing corporate representatives.
    Who will represent us?

  9. J. Clifford says:

    We will represent ourselves, Tom. Help keep independent media alive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!