Do left-wingers have a problem with how they talk about religion?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Not for the same reason as Turkey of course and that's an insane comparison, but overall yes, mostly because of how ignorant liberals tend to be when talking about evangelical voters....it seems a decent chunk of such extremely online people seem to think the average evangelical is like the characters on that stupid f[inks]ing godawful Moral Orel show. And like I noted here many also seem to think that all evangelicals are like a Frankenstein of various theologies that pretty much does not exist, (as in there obviously exist people who believe some of those things, but someone who believes ALL of them is pretty much non-existent, much less the average evangelical.)

(The absolutely strangest such belief is probably the notion that KJV-Onlyists make up the majority of evangelicals or even majority of Christians when they're probably at most something like 0.1% of American Christians.)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Not for the same reason as Turkey of course and that's an insane comparison, but overall yes, mostly because of how ignorant liberals tend to be when talking about evangelical voters....it seems a decent chunk of such extremely online people seem to think the average evangelical is like the characters on that stupid f[inks]ing godawful Moral Orel show. And like I noted here many also seem to think that all evangelicals are like a Frankenstein of various theologies that pretty much does not exist, (as in there obviously exist people who believe some of those things, but someone who believes ALL of them is pretty much non-existent, much less the average evangelical.)

(The absolutely strangest such belief is probably the notion that KJV-Onlyists make up the majority of evangelicals or even majority of Christians when they're probably at most something like 0.1% of American Christians.)

KJV Onlyists may well be a majority of rural Kentuckians based on my anecdotal experience. Certainly it’s more than you think.

Rural Kentucky is probably one of the few places you can find them in great numbers. It's pretty much just a fundamentalist independent Baptist thing which is in the US mostly isolated to Appalachia and the rural south.

I'd have a very difficult time finding a KJV-Only church near me despite being a much larger area. I'm not ruling out that there might be one or two random ones somewhere but that's obviously still a neglible percentage of evangelicals in the Twin Cities metro.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, they’re not nearly critical enough.

Yes, this would totally win the Democrats more votes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, they’re not nearly critical enough.

Yes, this would totally win the Democrats more votes.

When did I suggest that the Democrats should adopt this as a messaging strategy?

Yes, they’re not nearly critical enough.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, they’re not nearly critical enough.

Yes, this would totally win the Democrats more votes.

Running against “theocracy” and “puritanism” actually would win the Democrats more votes.

That is not the same thing as spouting Reddit neckbeard style platitudes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, they’re not nearly critical enough.

Yes, this would totally win the Democrats more votes.

Running against “theocracy” and “puritanism” actually would win the Democrats more votes.

That is not the same thing as spouting Reddit neckbeard style platitudes.

You always accuse an atheist of being a Redditor when you can't counter their arguments. Get new material

Can't counter the argument? You just admitted this would be an absolutely terrible electoral strategy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

While the premise of the original post is absurd (the left in the United States and in most countries is not nearly as anti-religious as the CHP), I think the way this thread has devolved in the last dozen posts or so is itself proof that American liberals at least do have a problem with how they talk about religion.

Part of me really dreads what the state of American religion will be in 20 years. If enough "True Unbelievers" start taking the reins of power as all the olds retire/die, then an anti-religious sentiment could easily start affecting the party. For the last several decades, the Democratic nominee has been chosen by old black voters who are more religious on the whole, but things can and do change and the overturning of Roe could definitely cause anti-religious backlash.

This is never going to happen for the same reason the Twitter anime avatar crew will never hold any real power or influence, they have no organization and never do much besides sh!tpost online.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

In your post. What should Democrats use as a messaging strategy if denigrating religion is not on the table?

They probably shouldn't address "religion" as a broad concept at all. It's a third rail.

The question in the original prompt wasn't "how should Democrats change their messaging strategy regarding religion" it just asked if the left wing has a problem with how they talk about it. Religion should be criticized more by the left in an ideal world, but that's not advisable given how religious America is.

You chose to add "and Democrats should adopt this strategy" to my sentence, when that's not what I said, and that wasn't the question that was asked.

If left wing activists were to just start spouting openly anti-religion stuff, do you think the Democrats wouldn't get blamed? Not talking about tankies or people who already hate the Democrats too but more mainstream ones. Democratic politicians would be put in a tough bind between having to condemn them or be associated with them.

Also what do you think would be the result if people did something like burn Bibles at a pro-LGBT rights rally? Would that help the cause? Part of what led to greater LGBT acceptance was mainstreaming the message that you could supportive of LGBT people and Christian, this was a pretty big part of the message here in 2012 when we voted down our anti-gay marriage amendment. Just taking a "vote no on Q1 to trigger the Christians lol" message would not be very effective to put it mildly.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The left ceding Christianity to the right has probably been their biggest mistake in the past 50 years. Like, this isn't the 1780s estates-general anymore.

Did the left "cede" Christianity, or did American conservatives/reactionaries substitute Dominionism for white supremacy as their chosen cultural wedge in class consciousness?

Both. Obviously the latter was much worse since it was actively malevolent rather than merely stupid and self-righteous.

Forgive my indifference towards the Four New Atheist Horsemen and the plethora of smug youtube ranting community clones which populated my adolescence in light of your sitting Senator who among others repeatedly cite scripture to defend illegal Israeli settlements in search of fundamentalist campaign money.

Implying that Chuck Schumer (who, yes, is way too pro-Israel even for my liking) is part of a Dominionist political project is in breathtakingly bad taste.

Also that fundamentalists are actually donating to Schumer...LMAO!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

My own personal inclination draws me toward the sort of "religious anticlericalism" popular among a lot of 19th century Continental European radicals (like Victor Hugo, who fervently believed in God while despising the Church), but I realize that this position is better suited to a historically Catholic country than one with America's religious history.

That sounds like hipster Christianity.