×
ABRACADABRA. Having tracked the religious right's rise over the last two decades, I must say that, unlike Scott and Sam, I find the argument, rendered via Amy Sullivan, over whether or not the religious right is a tool of the man, or poised to become the man himself, largely irrelevant; either way, we wind up with law written by self-appointed religious sages.The most prescient thing ever said to me about a Republican Party high on religion came from the late Rabbi Arthur Hertzerg, a celebrated scholar whom I interviewed for a 1995 Mother Jones cover story on the religious right. (The cover featured a Photoshopped picture of the White House with a cross on its gable, and the headline, "House of God?" A decade later, the Prospect offered a new riff on the theme):
Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, Ph.D., of the Interfaith Alliance, a coalition of clergy formed to oppose the religious right, sees something sinister in the language of the right: the exploitation of a religious impulse felt by the economically strapped middle class to further an agenda that will only fill the coffers of the rich. "They are putting on the magic act of family values," says Hertzberg, "while the pickpocket in league with them goes through the crowd and steals their wallets."As for the rest of it -- whether or not Democrats are too pro- or too anti-religion -- why do liberals accept that frame? We focus on religion at the expense of spirituality. There are a great many "unchurched" among the electorate, and most of them vote Democratic. And most of them believe in God.
--Adele M. Stan
