{"id":471,"date":"2013-02-22T11:21:06","date_gmt":"2013-02-22T16:21:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/dangeroustalk\/?p=471"},"modified":"2013-02-22T11:21:06","modified_gmt":"2013-02-22T16:21:06","slug":"its-about-ideas-not-labels","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/dangeroustalk\/2013\/02\/22\/its-about-ideas-not-labels\/","title":{"rendered":"It\u2019s About Ideas, Not Labels"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last night, I attended my county Democratic Party nomination convention. The keynote speaker was an elected official from a neighboring county and he gave a pretty good speech. One thing in particular that I liked was that he talked about how it isn\u2019t just about helping people win with \u201cD\u2019s\u201d next to their name. It is about helping people win who support our values. It isn\u2019t about party affiliation; it is about real issues that affect real people.<\/p>\n

Indecently enough, Roy Speckhardt just authored a great article on Huffington Post<\/a>. In the article, Speckhardt talked about how the next Pope will be a victory for atheism\/humanism. It doesn\u2019t really matter who it is because if the next Pope is more right wing, he will drive more people away from Catholicism and toward atheism.<\/p>\n

But here is the really great part. If the next Pope is more progressive, then we still win because it isn\u2019t really about the label. It isn\u2019t even necessarily about believing in deities on insufficient evidence. It is about real issues that affect real people. So if the next Pope is more progressive, then that will mean that Catholicism might keep a few of the people they would have lost with a more right wing Pope, but all of Catholicism will move closer towards becoming more humanistic.<\/p>\n

In both politics and religion, ideas trump labels. Sure, labels are important and I would much rather have people identify as progressives and atheists, but for whatever reason, some people don\u2019t feel comfortable with those labels. Ultimately the ideas are more important and so I am willing to settle for that in the time being.<\/p>\n

What is not acceptable however, is the use of those labels with the absence of the ideas behind them. This doesn\u2019t usually happen with atheists. I can\u2019t recall any instance of someone claiming to be an atheist and then stating that they believe in some sort of deity. But in politics, we see people label themselves as Democrats or progressives who just do not support the core ideas behind those labels.<\/p>\n

For example, Obama is not a progressive. He is barely a Democrat on many core issues. In my state of Pennsylvania, we have a US Senator who is a Democrat but doesn\u2019t support a woman\u2019s right to choose what happens to her body and not long ago, the county Democratic Party endorsed a creationist for County Council. He lost btw, but he remains a vocal voice within the Party at the county level.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think someone has to support ever plank in the Party platform, but there are some pretty core issues that I think are essential. Someone may disagree with me on what those core issues are, but for me if a candidate doesn\u2019t support an issue that I think is central to being a Democrat, I probably won\u2019t waste my time supporting that person as a candidate. I might even actively work against that candidate. So if the party wants to win elections, it might make sense to have candidates that represent those core issues. That\u2019s just my opinion; I could be wrong.<\/p>\n

Related articles<\/h6>\n