The Democratic Safe House

[GodLovesCats]

Is anyone else here both a Christian and a liberal or progressive Democrat?

 

[FreeinChrist]

Yes There are many.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Yes There are many.

Thank you for the quick reply.

I asked because some people think my combination of political and religious beliefs is impossible and denied I am a Christian just because I am a liberal Democrat. Who are some of the CF members like me?

 

[FreeinChrist]

Anyone on the site that denies that a member who is a progressive or liberal is a Christian is violating the flaming rule.

 

[mark46]

Is anyone else here both a Christian and a liberal or progressive Democrat?

There are many here

I am a Humphrey liberal

 

[GodLovesCats]

What is a Humphrey liberal?

I support most LGBT and abortion rights (with some restrictions), medical marijuana (but not recreational), single-payer health care, making all rich people pay higher taxes with no opportunities for tax breaks, increasing the amount of Social Security money given, increasing the federal minimum wage, making sex education mandatory in all public schools, euthanizing people in grave condition, and providing more services to people who are pregnant or disabled nationwide.

 

[mark46]

Is anyone else here both a Christian and a liberal or progressive Democrat?

There are many here

I am a Humphrey liberal

What is a Humphrey liberal?

I support most LGBT and abortion rights (with some restrictions), medical marijuana (but not recreational), single-payer health care, making all rich people pay higher taxes with no opportunities for tax breaks, increasing the amount of Social Security money given, increasing the federal minimum wage, making sex education mandatory in all public schools, euthanizing people in grave condition, and providing more services to people who are pregnant or disabled nationwide.

Hubert Humphrey is basically the founder of what we call "liberal' in the Democratic Party. He spoke in favor of civil rights at the 1948 convention, was a senator from Minnesota. and subsequently ran for president in 1960 and 1968. He was Johnson's VP in 1964. In 1968, he ran a tough primary campaign. The left considered him too moderate. They backed others and mostly stayed home when Humphrey was beaten by Nixon in a close race.

Today, we have traditional Humphrey liberals and progressives. The Clintons, Gore, Obama and Bide are all liberals and centrists within the Democratic Party. Almost all the positions you state are principles that all Democrats can support. There are two exceptions. The vast majority of Democrats favor the legalization of marijuana. The other exception is your understanding of taxation.

Liberals don't have notion of a tax system with no tax breaks. What you call tax breaks include deductions for much of the R&D that funds and will fund the changes in the economy that address issues like climate change. Liberals don't have any objection to folks becoming rich. We do want a fair tax system. Liberals work with the rich to move forward on lots of fronts. Obviously, Obama and Biden have worked very well with the bankers and business leaders.
==========
That being said liberals have led every fight since WWII for civil rights, access to healthcare, and for programs for the middle class and poor.

What often distinguishes liberals from progressives is that progressive focus on immediate change and on taking clear stands, even if little is accomplished. Had Bide listened to progressives little would have been passed in these past 2 1/2 years, The many, many successes required negotiation and many concessions. The laws required much working with conservatives on almost all issues. However, our perspective is not the myth of what might have been, but rather on the actual gains. An obvious example is the progressive attitude toward Manchin. They truly despise him. Of course, almost nothing would have been passed had he not been so devoted to Biden and his programs. Obviously, there would have been no infrastructure law without Manchin.
============
In the end, after a long fight, there are two questions.
1) Did I stand up for my principles? If nothing was passed, there is always next time.
2) What laws were passed and what benefits were won for the American people, especially the Middle Class.
Liberals focus on Question 2.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I don't like Joe Manchin either because he is a Democrat in name only (DINO). We only had a majority in the Senate the last two years because he chose not to be registered a s a Republican voter. He famously said, "I am pro-life and proud of it." But we can't get any better than him from West Virginia, where most people are Republicans.

Forgive me if I look like a taxes idiot. I am my mom's disabled dependent and will be until she dies.

 

[mark46]

I don't like Joe Manchin either because he is a Democrat in name only (DINO). We only had a majority in the Senate the last two years because he chose not to be registered a s a Republican voter. He famously said, "I am pro-life and proud of it." But we can't get any better than him from West Virginia, where most people are Republicans.

Forgive me if I look like a taxes idiot. I am my mom's disabled dependent and will be until she dies.

DINO?

In MORE than name only.

If Manchin had declared himself to be independent and caucused with the Republicans, the Republicans would have a Senate majority and Biden would have passed very little in the past 2+ years.

There are other senators who identify as Independent. Then, they decided which party to caucus with, and therefore decide committee assignments and which legislation is voted on, and which legislation is passed.
==========
Progressive truly need to consider what would have happened and what would happen if they had their wish and the 2 DINOs agreed with them and decided that they were not Democrats.

 

[Fantine]

I am a progressive Christian and, even living in a very conservative state, I know many, many others.
I don't understand how any follower of Jesus could come to some of the conclusions conservative Christians do. They certainly are entitled to their beliefs, but Jesus doesn't have anything to do with them. Assault weapons, for example.

 

[mark46]

I am a progressive Christian and, even living in a very conservative state, I know many, many others.
I don't understand how any follower of Jesus could come to some of the conclusions conservative Christians do. They certainly are entitled to their beliefs, but Jesus doesn't have anything to do with them. Assault weapons, for example.

While I certainly agree, my example would not be the size of the gun we are allowed to carry.

We simply need to decide which party is about helping the poor, the weak, the sick, the disadvantaged, the prisoner and those discriminated against (the alien or stranger). There has been one party on their side for the last 100 years, and one against almost every effort to serve these groups.

 

[GodLovesCats]

While I certainly agree, my example would not be the size of the gun we are allowed to carry.

For me it is simply the fact that guns were only invented to kill animals and other people. Whether someone is using a handgun or an assault rifle makes no difference; the only reason to have one is attempt or commit murder unless you are a nomad killing animals for food.

I have told Republicans many times the Second Amendment only gives us the right to keep and bear "arms" - not any old kind of weapon. There could be only one type of gun on the planet and, if interpreted literally, that constitutional right is not taken away. Republican gun lovers say they are unwilling to accept my argument because of a SCOTUS case (Heller) that actually proves my point. I think they are just being greedy because many of them own semiautomatic and/or fully automatic rifles.

We know Jesus condemns greed and loving the world. We know people can't have two masters. So I do not understand why many people who identify themselves as Christians get hung up on possessing a variety of guns.

We simply need to decide which party is about helping the poor, the weak, the sick, the disadvantaged, the prisoner and those discriminated against (the alien or stranger). There has been one party on their side for the last 100 years, and one against almost every effort to serve these groups.

You are describing the same party that opposes all forms of bigotry. Being gay, lesbian, or bisexual may be a sin, but Jesus still loves those people as much as he loves us. Abortion may be a sin, but Jesus still loves women who get abortions as much as he loves girls and women who choose to give birth. He does not hate anyone who is a different human race, female, or in favor of equality and democracy. The other party has always given me the impression they only care about subjecting women and weaklings to suffering even though they claim to be "pro-life" (which is not true, as evidenced by their hypocritical obsession with firearms and support of the death penalty).

I have argued in threads about abortion you are not pro-life if you only care about the fact a human fetus became a baby. To truly be pro-life, you must want everyone to automatically get comprehensive health care so that the baby nobody wanted will be healthy and live a long time. Jesus preached improving another person's quality of life, not forcing women to give birth for the sake of increasing the number of unwanted babies. I am still waiting for anti-choicers to explain why they think it is better to make any girl or woman suffer mentally and physically with no concern for what happens to the baby who never should have been conceived after his/her umbilical cord is cut.

 

[mark46]

For me it is simply the fact that guns were only invented to kill animals and other people. Whether someone is using a handgun or an assault rifle makes no difference; the only reason to have one is attempt or commit murder unless you are a nomad killing animals for food.

I have told Republicans many times the Second Amendment only gives us the right to keep and bear "arms" - not any old kind of weapon. There could be only one type of gun on the planet and, if interpreted literally, that constitutional right is not taken away. Republican gun lovers say they are unwilling to accept my argument because of a SCOTUS case (Heller) that actually proves my point. I think they are just being greedy because many of them own semiautomatic and/or fully automatic rifles.

We know Jesus condemns greed and loving the world. We know people can't have two masters. So I do not understand why many people who identify themselves as Christians get hung up on possessing a variety of guns.



You are describing the same party that opposes all forms of bigotry. Being gay, lesbian, or bisexual may be a sin, but Jesus still loves those people as much as he loves us. Abortion may be a sin, but Jesus still loves women who get abortions as much as he loves girls and women who choose to give birth. He does not hate anyone who is a different human race, female, or in favor of equality and democracy. The other party has always given me the impression they only care about subjecting women and weaklings to suffering even though they claim to be "pro-life" (which is not true, as evidenced by their hypocritical obsession with firearms and support of the death penalty).

I have argued in threads about abortion you are not pro-life if you only care about the fact a human fetus became a baby. To truly be pro-life, you must want everyone to automatically get comprehensive health care so that the baby nobody wanted will be healthy and live a long time. Jesus preached improving another person's quality of life, not forcing women to give birth for the sake of increasing the number of unwanted babies. I am still waiting for anti-choicers to explain why they think it is better to make any girl or woman suffer mentally and physically with no concern for what happens to the baby who never should have been conceived after his/her umbilical cord is cut.

I agree with all your comments.

I would note that the Roman Catholic Church has historically avoided this conflict. They have supported both mother and baby before and after birth.

 

[George95]

MOD HAT ON

There has been a cleanup of this thread. Please note the topics that are not allowed to be promoted or encouraged within the CF Rules found here.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[JustOneWay]

Ugh, now I feel like this is not a "safe house" anymore. The thread title is why I posted the deleted messages here.

I guess there really is no way to discuss certain political issues that are very important to me as a Christian liberal Democrat.

It is a safe house, just maybe not the type of safe house you want. It has been this way for forever. You would not believe the trouble there used to be here, and today these safe houses are extremely quiet. Yes I am a democrat.

 

[JustOneWay]

I am no fan of calling a democrat a DINO. There still are a few conservative democrats in government, and I tend to lean towards being a fiscal conservative, although I wish the government would do more to help the poor. I may not be happy with things Manchin or Sinema have done but they are still democrats most of the time. I did vote for Sinema because she was a better choice than McSally, but I probably won't vote for her the next time because she is more interested in herself than working for her constituents.

 

[mark46]

.but I probably won't vote for her the next time because she is more interested in herself than working for her constituents.

Your vote may depend on her opponents.

 

[DaisyDay]

(staff edit)

The Safe House is for fellowship, not for dissing people who can’t fight back here.

 

[DaisyDay]

The term "safe house" can only mean I am free to criticize Republicans as much as I want to because they can't fight back.

Statement of Purpose - American Politics Statement of Purpose

American Politics Forum Statement of Purpose The American Politics forum is open for all members to discuss and debate political topics that apply specifically to the United States. Political discussions and debates may at times become heated, so please remember to keep your emotions in check...

www.christianforums.com

The rules say otherwise.

CF has many threads for fellowship. For me, this is not one of them. I only posted here because of the thread title.

You can comment on issues but not flame the opposition. You can also praise your heroes if you like.

 

[JustOneWay]

The term "safe house" can only mean I am free to criticize Republicans as much as I want to because they can't fight back.

CF has many threads for fellowship. For me, this is not one of them. I only posted here because of the thread title.

Correct, They can't fight back here in this safe house. That does not mean a post in the safe house is immune from the reporting feature.