Democrats’ Anti-God Religion

[Geee]

American Spectator

 

Even though Amy Coney Barrett seems to have avoided a much-anticipated religious inquisition from the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, the hearings have reminded us that Democrats over the years have pretty much established themselves as the anti-God party. They booed him at their 2012 national convention, after all. They had omitted reference to God from their platform in 2008, and when, in 2012, they tried to add it back, witnesses say about one-third of convention-goers booed. Their social platform pushes against historic Christian morality at nearly every turn — on abortion, on same-sex marriage, on gender identity, on end-of-life issues. And who is it that sues nuns and hassles religious schools and tries to pull down crosses on every little public patch of land they can find?

Last year, the Democratic National Committee decided to court the “religiously unaffiliated” by passing a resolution acknowledging the “value, ethical soundness, and importance” of nonreligious Americans. As the “nones” are pretty much all-in on the Democrats anyway — 70 percent of them voted Democrat in 2018 — this seems cosmetic. After all, one of every three Democrats is religiously unaffiliated.

Now, if they were a church, going after the unchurched would be sound strategy. But they’re a political party, one that apparently wants to get as far away from historic Christianity as they can.

Which is a shame … and not very smart, politically speaking.

 

Fortunately, there is a religion out there that allows them to escape all the beliefs and teachings they hate of historic Christianity while still claiming religious adherence, which might come in handy when their candidates are standing in pulpits importuning church people for money during election campaigns. They can indeed have it both ways.

It’s been right under their noses since 1968. In that year, Latin American Catholic priests who had grown weary that directives from the hierarchy did not deal adequately with the plight of people on the ground invented a “theology from below” that ministered directly to the physical needs of common people. This theology — given the moniker “liberation theology” — cuts out all the “pie-in-the-sky-by-and-by” that liberals hate for its otherworldliness, which, they contend, fools the poor into accepting their plight in this world with visions of rectification in the next.

It is based on Marxist economic theory — so that’s a big plus — and emphasizes social concern for the poor and reorganization of social, governmental, and economic structures to benefit the impoverished. But what it isn’t is a religion that emphasizes all those doctrines and beliefs liberals so hate about historic Christianity.

Liberation theology views some of the major doctrines of Christianity differently. For example:

Sin

If you’re talking religion, the topic of sin will have to come up sooner or later. And most often it’s sooner — like right out of the gate. The reason you need religion in the first place is sin. All religions have to deal with it.

Christianity in its traditional form, for example, goes after it right away. It’s probably the first thing an evangelist will say to you — you’re a sinner! You have bad thoughts, you do bad things. Being called a sinner is not productive to enhancing the self-image. It’s a real bummer.