Democratic convention

[markomalley]

From the insightful Father “Z”:
From The Weekly Standard I learned that the Democrats, as the meet in their convention and as they rewrite the (savagely pro-tax-paid abortion on-demand) platform, have removed the word “God” from their working text.

2008 Platform:

“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

2012 Platform:

“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”

This seems to be consistent with how on various occasions The First Gay President, in quoting the Declaration of Independence’s acknowledgement of the true origin of man’s rights, edited out “by their Creator”. God isn’t part of the picture. Big government sure is, however.
​

 

[oldcelt]

Of the signers of the Declaration of Independence only 2 were deists (Jefferson & Franklin) “The signers were those individuals who happened to be Delegates to Congress at the time… The signers possessed many basic similarities. Most were American-born and of Anglo-Saxon origin. The eight foreign-born… were all natives of the British Isles. Except for Charles Carroll, a Roman Catholic, and a few Deists, every one subscribed to Protestantism. For the most part basically political nonextremists, many at first had hesitated at separation let alone rebellion.”

Of those who signed the Constitution, one: Franklyn

I don’t see how that justifies the Democrats abandoning God in their platform though.

Why, would anyone include the word God in a political document? This is politics, not religion.

John

 

[He_Man]

I’d be very careful about dropping God from my platform, lest He drop me from His.

 

[sw85]

I’d rather He not be associated with a party of infanticide and sodomy enthusiasts, so hooray.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Why, would anyone include the word God in a political document? This is politics, not religion.

So what is your theory as to why the Democrats only just discovered this distinction in 2012? Prior to this year they thought it was entirely appropriate to include a reference to God in their platform.

Note that the Democrats came very close to giving Cardinal Dolan the boot as well:

catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=35223

Saints preserve us!

 

[Seeker1961]

It does, however, certainly at least indicate a disrespect for our Creator.

Maybe it acknowledges that not every American citizen believes in God. We might think they are wrong, but that doesn’t take away their citizenship.

That pesky Constitution does say something about not establishing a religion at the same time it talks about not infringing on the exercise thereof. If every speaker at the RNC and their platform refers to God…isn’t that saying that only believers need apply?

 

[oldcelt]

So what is your theory as to why the Democrats only just discovered this distinction in 2012?

Pandering.

John

 

[oldcelt]

Note that the Democrats came very close to giving Cardinal Dolan the boot as well:

That depends on whose account you read…and believe.

John

 

[He_Man]

I don’t see it that way.
Just because the word “God” isn’t there, doesn’t mean He’s being avoided…He’s there for all to see. The words in those paragraphs are very passionately talking about God in many different forms. You are bothered only because the word “God” is not there?
This way is a more creative, descriptive way of saying “God”, imo.

Please, stop. How dumb does the DNC think we are if that is the schpeel they roll out with? They have yet to give a cogent answer is to why, which is telling, they don;t want to say. EVERY NETWORK is covering the fact they don’t have a good answer.

Your answer, while nice and sweet in a My Little Pony kind of way, misses the point that they INTENTIONALLY removed every reference. They didn’t just draft it by luck, they specifically removed all references.

I don’t get why people have such a hard time admitting when their party does something bad. If Mitt Romney dropped his pants at the podium, I’d call him out. “Shame on you Mittens; you had no right to remove your pants.”

Likewise, I’d expect democrats to say shame on their party. Unless, they agree with getting rid of God, which I suspect many of them do.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Pandering.

So they previously were pandering to Chritians and now they are pandering to post-Christians. Even such a cynical view tells us a great deal about the realignment of American political parties.

 

[oldcelt]

So they previously were pandering to Chritians and now they are pandering to post-Christians. Even such a cynical view tells us a great deal about the realignment of American political parties.

To quote an old statement, “We may not be eyeballin, but we are communicating.”

John

 

[Seeker1961]

Please, stop. How dumb does the DNC think we are if that is the schpeel they roll out with? They have yet to give a cogent answer is to why, which is telling, they don;t want to say. EVERY NETWORK is covering the fact they don’t have a good answer.

Your answer, while nice and sweet in a My Little Pony kind of way, misses the point that they INTENTIONALLY removed every reference. They didn’t just draft it by luck, they specifically removed all references.

I don’t get why people have such a hard time admitting when their party does something bad. If Mitt Romney dropped his pants at the podium, I’d call him out. “Shame on you Mittens; you had no right to remove your pants.”

Likewise, I’d expect democrats to say shame on their party. Unless, they agree with getting rid of God, which I suspect many of them do.

I really don’t understand the odd requirement American Christians have about needing constant acknowledgement of their beliefs by the government and business. I can have Christmas whether the Target clerk wishes me Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays and I can handle a political speech that ends without God Bless America and still hold on to my faith.

 

[He_Man]

I like to invoke my Creator as often as possible, and give Him as much respect as I am able, given nothing we can do will ever be worthy of what he truly deserves.

And there is also a difference between Him not coming up in your speech, and intentionally striking His name from the platform. I am not surprised it doesn’t bother you, even though it should.

 

[oldcelt]

Likewise, I’d expect democrats to say shame on their party. Unless, they agree with getting rid of God, which I suspect many of them do.

Then I’ll say it…well done.

John

 

[He_Man]

Then I’ll say it…well done.

John

I’ll counter that typiccally enigmatic response with another - “pass the guac.”

 

[BernardM]

The standard way of listing the date in those days…remember how many deists were among the founders. I dare say a few atheists. BTW, many in those days also referred to royalty as Lord. Flowery language from a different era.

There were no atheist amongst the founding fathers, the best you can claim is 3 who were possibly deist but still attended church. That is three possible, but not likely out of more than 200.

 

[Personanongrata]

The speakers are definitely better.

 

[oldcelt]

There were no atheist amongst the founding fathers, the best you can claim is 3 who were possibly deist but still attended church.

Your view is as valid as mine…church attendance is no proof.

John

 

[He_Man]

Your view is as valid as mine…church attendance is no proof.

John

So your argument against common historical knowledge is that Bernard has no real proof, since he wasn’t there? You might as well argue the founding fathers were all girls, too. Since, I can’t *prove *it.

 

[oldcelt]

The will of God prevails. In great contests, each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be wrong.

Abraham Lincoln

He didn’t know for certain. I guess what concerns me are the people who think they really know.

John