It’s time for a secular right to emerge in a visible way like never before, in the name of both tolerance and practicality. In seeking tolerance, the GOP should support openly secular candidates and remove religious litmus tests. It should embrace our founding creed, e pluribus unum, since we are indeed a nation of many philosophies converging in one polity.
A "secular" right? Is something like that even possible?
Well according to this writer it is:
Embracing secular language and ideals (which coincide with conservative and even religious ideals far more often than the GOP realizes) makes political sense. Religiously unaffiliated Americans are the fastest-growing “religious” bloc, with 20% of Americans now claiming no organized religion, according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Electorally, this demographic trend translated to 25% of Mr. Obama’s total votes coming from the religiously unaffiliated. If Mr. Romney had been as concerned about courting the secular middle as he was about courting the religious right, perhaps he’d be preparing his Oval Office drapes.
To remain relevant in the 21st century, Republican leaders need to stop nominating candidates who engage in tone-deaf outbursts on social issues, a la Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, failed 2012 U.S. Senate candidates who used religiously motivated, clumsy language seemingly excusing some cases of rape. These were bombshells that hurt Republicans among women and seculars; they were easily understood, visceral targets for the left to exploit and distract away from the more arcane debates over fiscal cliffs and debt-to-GDP ratios. To cite “Biblical principles” on a campaign trail as too many Republicans do, is grating on the ears of many moderate, secular voters. It is impossible to predict exactly what a candidate will say or do, yet party elders can do more to support candidates who don’t use the traditional religious buzz words or who choose to focus on civic and cultural endeavors rather than religious work in their home lives.
You know I hate to give ANY credit to a writer who was once Robert "The Prince of Darkness" Novak assistant, but she makes a good point.
In fact I think the ONLY way for the Republican party moving forward is to break their alliance with the Evangelical community and start talking about conservative policies that don't involve doing way with a woman's right to choose, vilify gay Americans, or try to insert Biblical teaching into the public classroom.
However the question is whether without the religious trappings is the Republican party any more palatable?
I would think that continuing to support big business over workers rights would be almost as problematic for them as embracing the religious right, and the same would be true if they continued to fight regulation, and denied the reality of climate change.
However I think this kind of conversation is probably going to continue within the GOP and I guess we have to wait and see if it takes hold. Or if they simply refuse to accept that their fundamental message is WHY they keep losing and instead focus on doubling down and trying to be more aggressive in getting that message out to the American voter.
I know which direction I'M hoping they take.
