Recent Interfaith Alliance Walter Cronkite Faith and Freedom Award recipient, Asra Nomani, wrote an op-ed piece that looks at religious tolerance and hatred in India in light of the horrifying terrorist attacks from last week.  Her piece looks at how fragile democracy can be when endangered by religious intolerance.

Way to go, Kathleen Parker! Today’s column, “Giving Up on God,” may be a little over-the-top even for Ms. Parker, but it made me laugh and nod my head in agreement, so I’m more than happy to pass it on.

“Simply put,” she says, “Armband religion is killing the Republican Party…. Which is to say, the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. In the process, the party has alienated its non-base constituents, including other people of faith (those who prefer a more private approach to worship), as well as secularists and conservative-leaning Democrats who otherwise might be tempted to cross the aisle.”

Exactly. I mean, does anyone who isn’t an evangelical Christian at ease with publicizing their faith really feel comfortable with evangelical Christian members or supporters of the GOP publicizing their faith at every opportunity? (And I’m sure the people who answered “No” to that include some evangelical Christians who prefer to keep their faith private.)

The Republican Party’s traditional base includes a large number of conservative Christians, which in the last thirty years has come to include the often reactionary organizations of the Religious Right, most of whom believe they should have significant influence on the party’s platform and candidates. (Case(s) in point: Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and Focus on the Family’s James Dobson.)

Having large blocs of people with similar beliefs who vote together isn’t a bad thing – in fact, it’s one of the main ideas behind the democratic process. But having large blocs of people who think their common belief should be imposed by the government on everyone who doesn’t already agree with them is certainly not democracy, and is in fact the very antithesis of what the founders intended.

So, actually, is giving up on God. One of the many exciting things about being a citizen of the United States of America is that you’re actually commanded – by the First Amendment to the Constitution – to believe whatever you want. So don’t give up on God – or do – your choice. More to the point, don’t give up your beliefs whether they include one God, six gods or no gods at all.  Keep faith in the Constitution alive by continuing to adhere to your own personal faith – whatever it may be.

So let’s keep religion out of politics and the government out of houses of worship and see if we all can’t get along with just a little less tension than we’ve seen throughout this (very long and finally over!) election season.

Last night a vigorously-contested election came to a conclusion with an inspiring declaration of vision and mission from President-elect Barack Obama and a moving statement of exemplary civility from Senator John McCain. Whether your candidate won or lost, every person who cast a vote in this election has reason to be thankful, proud and hopeful.

Our founding documents and the United States Constitution itself won a victory last night as a man who a few short decades ago would have been forced to sit at the back of the bus is now at the head of our government. There are real challenges ahead - some of which became readily apparent in yesterday’s election. But today is a day to pause for a moment and reflect on the historic nature of this election. A day to remember that the American Dream reflects realistic potential.

The diversity of people who reached a consensus about our next president points to the possibility of a more mutually respectful, unified country. The record shattering number of voters who participated in this election is a ringing endorsement of democracy and a stirring promise of greater and more broad-based civic participation. I believe that Interfaith Alliance is a vehicle through which that active participation can continue.

I am grateful that Sen. Obama coupled his soaring vision with down-to-earth realism.  He knows that the amount of work to be done in our government requires more than a popular president. As the President-elect now turns his attention to the details of organizing and staffing his administration, we would do well to turn our attention to the contributions that we can make to the nation.

Today at Interfaith Alliance, we celebrate the vitality of our democracy and rejoice in the possibility of finally realizing long-awaited action on issues that beat in the hearts of most Americans. Our concerns about the role of religion in the life of the nation, individual rights and freedoms, care for the weakest and poorest among us and an international reputation characterized by inclusion, civility, liberty and justice still command our attention. But, we are also devoting ourselves to careful thought about the most important contributions that we can make to “the change” for which the majority of the electorate voted. Within the next few days I will write to you about the details of those priorities and how we can work together to achieve them.

As the International Herald Tribune’s Jeff Zeleny put it this morning, if this election were a marathon, we’d be at mile 25 now. Having run the 33rd annual Marine Corps Marathon last Sunday, I have to agree with him.

It’s at mile 25 where exhaustion falls by the wayside and every runners’ eyes are focused dead ahead, on a finish line they can’t quite see but know is coming fast. By mile 25, there are no more questions about whether or not you’ll finish; the questions now are how you’ll finish, how you’ll feel afterward and how you’ll handle the backlash.

A marathon is a pretty good metaphor for a presidential election, although in a marathon the distance between spectator and competitor is much less than in an election, and the sense of community among athletes is much stronger than that among competing politicians. But that sense of community – whether from athletes, spectators, candidates or voters – defines both the marathon and the election, and has a lot to do with how everyone feels at the end.

As far as the marathon goes, I was inspired and energized by the incredible sense of community that dominated the race course – both from my fellow runners and from the crowds of spectators. Runners cheered for each other and cracked jokes in passing. Marines kept us moving with drill sergeant-esque commands to suck it up and pick up the pace. And the spectators cheered for anyone with a name printed on their shirt, held out snacks, waved signs, shouted, clapped and rang cowbells throughout the entire course, bursting with enthusiasm whether they had been watching for 15 minutes or four hours.

Everyone out there, watching or running, was part of the same community. And the positive energy generated by the faith of that community in the athletes they were supporting was a powerful thing. I find myself thinking about it now, marveling at the force of all that hope and determination, and wondering what it could do on a national level.

The presidential candidates are rounding the last corner of mile 24 now and by tonight, making their last speeches, they’ll have passed the 25-mile mark and be pounding down the home stretch, teeth gritted in determination until the moment it becomes clear who will be the victor.

Since I’ve already finished my marathon, I’ve had more of a chance to look ahead than the candidates have lately, and I have a challenge for our next president, whether he turns out to be Barack Obama or John McCain:

Hold onto the sense of community that’s grown among your supporters, among the citizens of this country, during the campaign. It’s been a long one and we’re all tired of it, but we’re united in our desire to see a better, brighter future for America. Take that unity and hold it up for the country to see, make it clear that regardless of who any one person voted for, the next steps in American history are up to all of us. Foster that sense of community among the diverse voices that comprise the citizenship of our country – if you do, I believe that you’ll be able to accomplish more than any president in the last twenty years has dreamed possible.

Use the collective energy of that community to fix what’s broken: give children a positive public school experience, leaving squabbles over prayer and creationism out of the classroom and keeping personal faith at home for the betterment of their education. Gather that community around minority groups – the LGBT community, Muslim-Americans, Sikhs – who are too often the innocent victims of attackers who don’t understand them and only recognize them as different and therefore dangerous. Pit the enormity of that positive vibe against the negativity of the Religious Right’s extremist positions, and let’s see if we can’t overwhelm them in such a way that makes their self-absorbed, blind hatred obsolete.

I believe the American people have the power to accomplish all that and more and I challenge you, Mr. President, to harness it. The marathon’s almost over, but the real test of strength has yet to begin. I hope you have the guts to meet it head-on, and win.

It’s the year 2012 and America has suffered four separate terrorist attacks since 2009. Pornography is flaunted in stores across the country, countless Christian businesses are forced into bankruptcy and Iran has launched a nuclear bomb that exploded in the heart of Tel Aviv. Why? All because Americans shunned the Lord on Election Day and voted for Barack Obama.

Don’t believe me? Just ask James Dobson. He recently released this letter written from the viewpoint of a hypothetical Christian in 2012 lamenting America’s demise. It is 16 pages of unadulterated fear-mongering meant solely to scare people into voting for John McCain. Dobson has yet again managed to drive the level of our political discourse to a depressingly low level.

Beyond being a blatant insult to voters, the letter hijacks religion and drags it along for Dobson’s ride through the mud. He makes nothing more than a token reference to the millions of evangelical Christians voting for Obama and leaves little doubt that any vote for the Democratic candidate is an affront to God.

(And how about not judging the next President of the United States before we even know who he is?)

I like to think I paid at least a decent amount of attention in history class, but maybe I missed the section on America’s transition from democracy to theocracy. Can someone get me up to speed?

The Matthew 25 Network has started running a series of radio ads supporting Barack Obama. The ads, which address Obama’s faith in Jesus Christ and his positions on how to reduce abortion rates, are running on Christian radio stations in Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, Missouri, Indiana, Virginia, and North Carolina.

The Matthew 25 network is a group Interfaith Alliance has had some concern about since it was founded earlier this year. Their goal seems to be to apply the tactics of the religious right to electing candidates on the left. I don’t disagree with the premise that democrats need to fight the perception that they are godless. However, no candidate - or supporter - should suggest that you should vote for them or against the other candidate because of their faith.

These ads, despite being put out by an independent organization and containing a disclaimer that Matthew 25 is solely responsible for their content, are just the latest example of the 2008 election turning into the race for pastor-in-chief instead of commander-in-chief.

Both candidates have failed to challenge the popular belief that to be a good president, you have to be Christian. the constitution states that their shall be no religious test for public office, but the candidates and their supporters seem all to willing to take it anyway.

watch the ads online here.

The following is cross-posted at BeliefNet’s Progressive Revival.

October has been a good month for religious pluralism in America. Not great, but good. This past Sunday on Meet the Press former Secretary of State Collin Powell condemned the religious bigotry that has emerged during the campaign, saying:

“I’m also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, ‘Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim.’ Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian.  He’s always been a Christian.  But the really right answer is, what if he is?  Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America.”

Congratulations to Secretary Powell for his willingness to challenge those on the right who use the Muslim community as their punching bag, and to those on the left who seem less than enthusiastic about speaking in their defense.

Thankfully, Secretary Powell is not alone. His comments echo a commentary CNN anchor Campbell Brown delivered on her program earlier this month entitled “So what if Obama were a Muslim or an Arab?” In it she asks:

“When did that become a disqualifier for higher office in our country? When did Arab and Muslim become dirty words? The equivalent of dishonorable or radical?”

Alongside these great statements by Powell and Campbell is the continued distribution of 28 million copies of the movie Obsession. This film, despite what its makers tell us, is a pervasive demonization of Islam.

I have been happy to see a broad range of people from across the religious and political spectrum speak out against both Obsession, and the false rumors about Senator Obama’s religious background. But, I remain concerned about the staggering number of people who are choosing to stay silent. Now is the time for all fair-minded, freedom-loving people to condemn the poisonous onslaught of religious prejudice.

Religious freedom is a founding principle of this nation. Basic to American identity as envisioned by our founders is every citizen modeling not merely tolerance, but respect and understanding. Right now it is particularly crucial that political leaders – on both sides of the isle – not only pay lip service to religious freedom, but embody it.

October has been a good month for religious pluralism in America. Not great, but good. What would make it better would be if a presidential candidate, asked about being a Muslim, were to respond by saying, “I am not a Muslim, but so many patriotic Americans are.” What would make it exemplary would be if a presidential candidate whose allies seek to use religion as a political weapon were to put a stop to such divisive tactics. What would make it terrific – and most patriotic –would be if faith were not a factor in presidential politics. Period.

The cover of The Economist a few months back featured Barack Obama and John McCain, deeming their candidacies, “America at its Best.” If only that were so in terms of religion and politics. Here’s the latest example of inappropriate campaigning.

According to the Los Angeles Times, an October 11th McCain rally began with Rev. Arnold Conrad’s invocation, which quickly devolved into an appeal for God to help McCain defeat Obama. The reverend simultaneously made McCain the candidate of God and showed a fundamental misunderstanding of world religions by warning that millions of people are praying to “Hindu, Buddha, Allah” that McCain loses. On the off chance that the reverend is reading this, allow me to help out: Buddhists do not consider Buddha to be a god and there is no deity in Hinduism named “Hindu.”

Rev. Conrad even managed to suggest that God’s reputation was at stake, to be determined by the election’s outcome.

This is a prime example of religion being hijacked for an inappropriate political purpose. I’m getting really tired of people trying to tell me which candidate, military campaign or piece of legislation has God’s backing. I’m tempted to send Rev. Conrad a copy of Huston Smith’s The World’s Religions, for the sake of his congregants and our national discourse.

I generally turn CNN on in the evenings and then ignore it, but my ears perked up when I heard Campbell Brown, in the “Cutting Through the Bull” segment of “Campbell Brown: Election Center” last night, say, “So what if Obama was Arab or Muslim? So what if John McCain was Arab or Muslim? Would it matter?”

Like anyone who’s read Article VI of the Constitution, my answer was a resounding “No!” Apparently Brown is also up on her Constitution knowledge, because she seemed as frustrated as I am by the implicit religious test for public office being created by the reaction to this whisper campaign about Obama’s “secret Muslim identity.” And she made some spectacular points - take a look:

Brown is right: Obama is not Muslim - although millions of patriotic Americans are - but it shouldn’t matter. What should matter are his positions on the issues at stake, and that he’s an American. Everything else is just intolerance at best, and hatred-driven prejudice at worst.

Campbell Brown may be my newest hero.

I spent the first of this week in Wilmington, NC with my parents for Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.  Besides getting a chance to see the ocean for a final time this season, I also had the opportunity to hear some fine sermons.  My parent’s rabbi is Harley Karz-Wagman, and he preached a sermon on the power of language.  He explained the need for people to take back language from the Christian Right and from people blasting GLBT equality among other examples.

The Christian Right, he said, does not represent most Christians and in fact is not “right” at all. GLBT equality is about the basic rights of all people to visit their loved ones at their hospital beds and to inherit estates; it is not about harming families or getting special privileges.  His sermon spoke to me because the day before the Christian Right launched the offensive you have read about before on this website, that would allow (taxpayer subsidized) religion to become a partisan political tool.  Congregations in America have the privilege and the responsibility of being tax exempt.  Rabbi Karz-Wagman was able to follow the rules of a tax deductible organization and speak powerfully on important issues.

The next morning I read the local paper and learned that Brunswick County, the county next door, was having a fight over teaching creationism in schools alongside evolution.  My favorite quote came from a Catholic priest named Father Hector La Chapelle who is standing against this attack on science: “The Bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.”  That is some great wisdom for the folks who think their take on religion is the one to teach in public schools.

Maybe everyone on the Brunswick school board should sit down with Rabbi Karz-Wagman, Father La Chapelle, and all the other clergy in the area and see if they can all decide which version of the Bible they should use to teach children about science.  If anyone thinks that is a simple question, read the article and see what the Buddhist monk in the area says about it.