I just want to make some general comments on the relationship between religious belief and political ideology. Take them for what they're worth. . .
First, I do not believe it is possible to draw any connections between one's religious beliefs and political preferences. I know pretty liberal Christians who are quite conservative in their politics. I know people who can only be described as fundamentalist who lean quite far to the left. I know people who think religion is bunk who are die-hard conservatives. The list goes on and on. I honestly believe that each individual makes his or her peace with his or her religious beliefs and political ideology as time goes on. To base political persuasion and policy preferences necessarily upon religious beliefs is a fool's game. While generalizations can be made, I honestly believe that the two are, for the most part, separate bits of an individual's way of living in the world. We draw lines between them only when pushed to do so.
Second, I am still not convinced it is good strategy for the Democrats to be busy courting "religious voters". Based partly upon my first belief, I think that identifying a certain block of voters as "religious", and open to appeals to religious rhetoric creates the impression that religion is the only thing in these voters' lives. In fact, I believe that most voters, even rabid right-wingers, make decisions based more upon an appeal to political utility and ideology, with religion being a prop to political ideology, rather than solely upon religious belief. The fact that most conservatives consider the Democratic Presidential candidates' appeal to religious voters disingenuous would seem to prove that point.
Third, I believe it is possible to make a coherent political ideology out of an appeal to religious belief. Simply because it is possible, however, I am starting to lean back toward the position of Richard Rorty that, in public debate and discourse, such appeals, resting as they do upon a sense of ultimacy, tend to stifle debate rather than encourage it. It is fine for someone to say, "I think such-and-such a policy position is correct because of my prior religious commitments"; unless there are other reasons for holding this position (social utility, prior ideological commitments based in secular philosophy, an appeal to history or the Constitution) there is no answer to such a position, quieting debate rather than encouraging it.
Finally, I believe that efforts by religious progressives, including myself, to enter the political fray as self-identifying religious progressives is fine, as long as we are clear that by doing so, we open our religious beliefs to scrutiny and ridicule. It is incoherent to say, "I hold this-and-such a political position because of my religious beliefs", and then turn around and say, "You cannot question my religious beliefs, or insult them, or dismiss them". For one thing, such criticism is the only way to keep the conversation going. For another, religious beliefs are not above criticism, and if we refuse to address such criticism, or fear it because we fear there is more truth in the criticism than in our beliefs, then we are being disingenuous at best.
