Forum Thread

Peter Buttigieg impact on religion in the election

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 22 1 2 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The Washington Post has an article on Peter Buttigieg, the 37 year-old openly gay mayor of South Bend, Indiana and declared candidate for the Democratic nomination. Buttigieg is intelligent, a Rhodes Scholar, and highly articulate on the issues...authentic and likeable. Where he differentiates himself from other candidates is his Catholic faith. He wants to bring religion into the debate saying that Democrats cannot cede the God narrative to the Republicans. He would contrast the good Christians in his circle of friends to that of the narrative pushed by the evangelical Pence doctrine. Finding a home for "good Christians" to feel more welcome in the Democratic Party would expand the Democratic Party base.

    I do not think that the American public is ready for a gay man as President (he has a husband) but he can certainly change the liberal narrative to not be so antagonistic to people of faith. He might make a good VP, if the public could even go for that. In any case, his candidacy and the way he can articulate his "progressive Christian faith" and appeal to young millennials on such issues as gay marriage will be interesting to watch. It's a debate that Buttigieg thinks Democrats can win with Christian support. I would love to see him have a Vice Presidential debate with Pence on religion.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    The Washington Post has an article on Peter Buttigieg, the 37 year-old openly gay mayor of South Bend, Indiana and declared candidate for the Democratic nomination. Buttigieg is intelligent, a Rhodes Scholar, and highly articulate on the issues...authentic and likeable. Where he differentiates himself from other candidates is his Catholic faith. He wants to bring religion into the debate saying that Democrats cannot cede the God narrative to the Republicans. He would contrast the good Christians in his circle of friends to that of the narrative pushed by the evangelical Pence doctrine. Finding a home for "good Christians" to feel more welcome in the Democratic Party would expand the Democratic Party base.

    I do not think that the American public is ready for a gay man as President (he has a husband) but he can certainly change the liberal narrative to not be so antagonistic to people of faith. He might make a good VP, if the public could even go for that. In any case, his candidacy and the way he can articulate his "progressive Christian faith" and appeal to young millennials on such issues as gay marriage will be interesting to watch. It's a debate that Buttigieg thinks Democrats can win with Christian support. I would love to see him have a Vice Presidential debate with Pence on religion.

    As I've said so many times; take "religion" out of governing. Governing is totally something else than "religion". The biggest screw up is always" the "god's" will statement to cover your ass in governing. As well as the Hitler club said; "God ist mit uns"
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Everything I've read about him is extremely positive. He has some momentum and people like what's being said. I too was skeptical because of America not being open minded enough. Currently I am hopeful that he rises from 9th most popular up to 3rd most popular. Perhaps in 4 or 8 years it might be his time. A stepping stone might be a cabinet position.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes TJ, I agree. I have seen him as a guest on several programs now and his mannerism and ability to articulate any controversial issue with genuine sincerity is noticeable. Nothing phony about him...self assured and authentic. He has risen from zero to 4 percent in some polls, and I expect him to be in the top tier before this is all done. He will do well on the debate stage...a moderate Democrat not afraid to go on Fox News to amplify his message.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch -- I agree that religion should be taken out of politics, but the fact is, religion is a big part of the Republican Party. The party is essentially a theocracy and nothing you say can change that. However, Democrats can pick away at that by offering up a "kinder and gentler" brand of Christianity, not as a part of the Democratic Platform, but rather day-to-day recognition of the importance of faith to so many Americans. It could sure beat the brand of bigotry being promoted by the Christian evangelicals as part of the power base of the Republican Party.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote: Dutch -- I agree that religion should be taken out of politics, but the fact is, religion is a big part of the Republican Party. The party is essentially a theocracy and nothing you say can change that. However, Democrats can pick away at that by offering up a "kinder and gentler" brand of Christianity, not as a part of the Democratic Platform, but rather day-to-day recognition of the importance of faith to so many Americans. It could sure beat the brand of bigotry being promoted by the Christian evangelicals as part of the power base of the Republican Party.
    Kinder, gentler Christianity...what about a kinder, gentler Islam? Or a kinder, gentler Judaism? The Democratic party’s position should be that people of faith, a bullshit term but it is what we have, are free to believe as they wish, free to worship in their place of worship as they wish. They are not free to have a business serving the public and to discriminate in that business. Why? Because the next step is “we serve no Catholics here” or no Jews or no Muslims or no Hindus so on and so on until it is we serve no Blacks here or no Dagos or no Spics. The various denominations of Christianity despite occasional ecumenical acts do not believe that other denominations are truly Christian. If they did the denominations would not exist. I completely understand the importance of religion to many people, I say religion because it is separate from faith, yet this country has had a unique experiment for over 230 years which says your faith or your religion neither bar you from public life nor qualify you for public life. Religion’s history is that of being a belief system that is intertwined with the state. Not so here at least we claim it to be so. The Republic Party has abandoned one of the critical elements of the system of government established by the founders. And in so doing they are not supporting and defending the constitution. I will grant that the Democratic Party is injured by this. I do not grant pandering to the lowest common denominator.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote: Dutch -- I agree that religion should be taken out of politics, but the fact is, religion is a big part of the Republican Party. The party is essentially a theocracy and nothing you say can change that. However, Democrats can pick away at that by offering up a "kinder and gentler" brand of Christianity, not as a part of the Democratic Platform, but rather day-to-day recognition of the importance of faith to so many Americans. It could sure beat the brand of bigotry being promoted by the Christian evangelicals as part of the power base of the Republican Party.

    No, there should be an strict separation of church and State; to "wash" this over will create the same fanatism as is the case now. Governing requires "common worldly sense" and "brains; religion is an "business" to sell snake oil; they should be taxed for all their property and income as any other business. If you let "religion" rule then you get an ISIS situation; do we want that? Sorry "religion" is the curse of mankind; more people get killed because of it than any other cause other than the black plague.

    Buttigieg will certainly not win; no "evangelical", GOP member, will vote for him, as well most women, let alone his non experience in the "world" around us. Also if he had brains then why be so "religious" in his situation?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    We agree there should be separation of church and state. That's not the point I was making. Gallup polls say 79 percent of Americans believe in God. And most Democrats believe in God. But Democrats can keep their faith separate from government. Not so with the Republicans, or more specifically the evangelical Christian Protestants who have a home in the Republican Party and have a major influence on it. They refer to the Democrats as "Godless" (a falsehood) because they fight to keep the word God out of their platform. The Democratic Platform of 2012 had zero mention of the word God while the Republican Platform unashamedly mentioned God 12 times!

    Furthermore, the Republican (evangelical) vision of doing "God's work" differs from that of the members of the Democratic Party. Just take a look at the 12 references to God in the Republican Platform. Not one God damned word about helping the sick or the poor or any of that stuff that Jesus advocated. It is all about their "God given rights" to help themselves. It's the antitheses of what most religions teach.

    All I'm suggesting is what Peter Buttigieg is advocating -- that we should be more respectful of people of faith (all religions) and not condemn them. I am an atheist, but my mother was a strong practicing Christian...the kind that advocated the teaching of Jesus and not the kind that bowed to the rich and powerful.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Afbeelding kan het volgende bevatten: meme en tekst

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Schmidt, it is like you say: "religion" was and is created since the stone ages to get "power" over the people as well purely to make "money" especially the Catholics. By pushing "fear" for death they obtain their indoctrination goal. Since "death" for the simple mind is made so fantastic with "souls" and "heaven" etc. it works like "weed" for their brains. This indoctrination has worked for centuries and does not seem to apply to animals, trees, flowers, fish, or anything else what lives.

    So let's also run the country that way; make fake promises which you can't keep and then invent excuses why you can't keep these. Except the trick with religion is it has succeeded for centuries to fool people because of the fear of death. Governments may use that trick as well, , as is shown right now.

    That is why "science" should be taught and become an "religion", because it has to "prove" things. But yeah as the Trumpian world sees it "less" education helps him to get re-elected.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    We agree there should be separation of church and state. That's not the point I was making. Gallup polls say 79 percent of Americans believe in God. And most Democrats believe in God. But Democrats can keep their faith separate from government. Not so with the Republicans, or more specifically the evangelical Christian Protestants who have a home in the Republican Party and have a major influence on it. They refer to the Democrats as "Godless" (a falsehood) because they fight to keep the word God out of their platform. The Democratic Platform of 2012 had zero mention of the word God while the Republican Platform unashamedly mentioned God 12 times!

    Furthermore, the Republican (evangelical) vision of doing "God's work" differs from that of the members of the Democratic Party. Just take a look at the 12 references to God in the Republican Platform. Not one God damned word about helping the sick or the poor or any of that stuff that Jesus advocated. It is all about their "God given rights" to help themselves. It's the antitheses of what most religions teach.

    All I'm suggesting is what Peter Buttigieg is advocating -- that we should be more respectful of people of faith (all religions) and not condemn them. I am an atheist, but my mother was a strong practicing Christian...the kind that advocated the teaching of Jesus and not the kind that bowed to the rich and powerful.

    Respectful to people of faith? Mentioning God in their platform? How would you suggest we do these things?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    This was an interesting nugget. The newer and somewhat trendy guy won a writing contest at age 18. He was writing about the guy from Vermont. Funny how things can be obscure and then 20 years later become literally ironic.

    boston.com/news/politics/2019/04/02/pet...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote:

    This was an interesting nugget. The newer and somewhat trendy guy won a writing contest at age 18. He was writing about the guy from Vermont. Funny how things can be obscure and then 20 years later become literally ironic.

    boston.com/news/politics/2019/04/02/pet...

    Sign of the times. Look at liar Trump saying the GOP is going to be the party of health care but no details until after the election. It is time to quit kitty catting around and combat Trump with the man for the people, Bernie Sanders. Trump and the right wing GOP have propagandized the working class into being rugged individualist being soldiers for the top 1%. Listen to propaganderer in chief saying how great his not to be revealed until after the election health care plan is going to be.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote:
    Schmidt Wrote:

    We agree there should be separation of church and state. That's not the point I was making. Gallup polls say 79 percent of Americans believe in God. And most Democrats believe in God. But Democrats can keep their faith separate from government. Not so with the Republicans, or more specifically the evangelical Christian Protestants who have a home in the Republican Party and have a major influence on it. They refer to the Democrats as "Godless" (a falsehood) because they fight to keep the word God out of their platform. The Democratic Platform of 2012 had zero mention of the word God while the Republican Platform unashamedly mentioned God 12 times!

    Furthermore, the Republican (evangelical) vision of doing "God's work" differs from that of the members of the Democratic Party. Just take a look at the 12 references to God in the Republican Platform. Not one God damned word about helping the sick or the poor or any of that stuff that Jesus advocated. It is all about their "God given rights" to help themselves. It's the antitheses of what most religions teach.

    All I'm suggesting is what Peter Buttigieg is advocating -- that we should be more respectful of people of faith (all religions) and not condemn them. I am an atheist, but my mother was a strong practicing Christian...the kind that advocated the teaching of Jesus and not the kind that bowed to the rich and powerful.

    Respectful to people of faith? Mentioning God in their platform? How would you suggest we do these things?

    lonely bird -- just to clarify, I do not want God or Jesus or anything religious mentioned in the Democratic Party Platform. The words are not in the Constitution either. What I am suggesting is that day to day conversations with Christians we not appear so contemptuous about their beliefs. My parents were married for over 50 years (until their deaths). My mother was a lifelong die hard Christian. My Dad was an atheist. They found common ground in nature. Oh and my Dad read Gandhi...not that different from the teachings of Jesus. "Mayor Pete" having a conversation on religion would perhaps be similar to Barack Obama discussing his religious beliefs:

    Obama’s 2006 Speech on Faith and Politics

    It's a long speech but shows a lot of wisdom.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Politicians and religion. Should be oil and water. Does not mix. This was handled well by Hollywood. Washington DC could take a lesson.

Categories: Pete Buttigieg