Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Excerpt: The Left Hand of God

By Michael Lerner, AlterNet. Posted February 10, 2006.


A progessive movement that speaks to people's spiritual desires could win the popular support it needs to create a world of peace and human rights.
021006_story2

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Michael Lerner

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Editor's Note:The following is excerpted from The Left Hand of God: Taking Our Country Back From the Religious Right, by Michael Lerner (HarperSanFrancisco, Feb, 2006).

The unholy alliance of the political Right and Religious Right threatens to destroy the America we love. It also threatens to generate a popular revulsion against God and religion by identifying them with militarism, ecological irresponsibility, fundamentalist antagonism to science and rational thought, and insensitivity to the needs of the poor and the powerless.

By addressing the real spiritual and moral crisis in the daily lives of most Americans, a movement with a progressive spiritual vision would provide an alternate solution to both the intolerant and militarist politics of the Right and the current misguided, visionless, and often spiritually empty politics of the Left.

People feel a near-desperate desire to reconnect to the sacred, to find some way to unite their lives with a higher meaning and purpose and in particular to that aspect of the sacred that is built upon the loving, kind, and generous energy in the universe that I describe as the "Left Hand of God."

By contrast, the "Right Hand of God," sees the universe as a fundamentally scary place filled with evil forces. In this view God is the avenger, the big man in heaven who can be invoked to use violence to overcome those evil forces, either right now or in some future ultimate reckoning. Seen through the frame of the Right Hand of God, the world is filled with constant dangers and the rational way to live is to dominate and control others before they dominate and control us.

It is the search for meaning in a despiritualized world that leads many people to right-wing religious communities because these groups seem to be in touch with the sacred dimension of life. Many secularists imagine that people drawn to the Right are there solely because of some ethical or psychological malfunction. What they miss is that there are many very decent Americans who get attracted to the Religious Right because it is the only voice that they encounter that is willing to challenge the despiritualization of daily life, to call for a life that is driven by higher purpose than money, and to provide actual experiences of supportive community for those whose daily life is suffused with alienation and spiritual loneliness.

Many Americans have a powerful desire for loving connection, kindness, generosity, awe and wonder, and joyous celebration of the universe. These desires are frustrated by the way we organize our society today. A progessive movement or a Democratic Party that speaks to these desires in a genuine and spiritually deep way could win the popular support it needs to create a world of peace, social justice, ecological sanity, and human rights.

As I watch the likely Democratic Party candidates for president in 2008 scramble to position themselves as mainstream, I am all too aware that taking this kind of spiritual politics seriously is going to require a huge leap for many of us. Some Democrats think that they don't need these changes to win power, and they may be right in the short run. The current implosion of the Bush administration as it wallows in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, a failing war in Iraq, and scandal and indictments at the highest levels of government, may be enough to provide Democrats with election victories in 2006 and 2008 (though Republican redistricting is likely to dampen the chance for a Democratic landslide in 2006, and electoral fraud has increasingly characterized American national elections where so much is at stake).

But Democrats have won elections, even the presidency, before--and yet the movement of intellectual and political energy keeps on sliding to the Right, and so Democrats in office often end up acting from the assumptions of the Right in order to show that they are "realistic" and "non-ideological."

Nothing has been more dispiriting than to watch years in which Congressional Democrats continued to vote for tens of billions of dollars to fund the war in Iraq even after learning that the country had been lied to and manipulated into that war. Even after conservative Democratic congressman John Murtha called for immediate withdrawal from Iraq within six months in November 2005, the Democrats were unable to firmly endorse that courageous call.


Digg!

Rabbi Michael Lerner is the editor of Tikkun.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
A Republican Persepective. . . .
Posted by: NthnBrazil on Feb 10, 2006 2:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a pro-choice, pro-civil union, Alternet reading, Born-Again Christian Republican. I am Republican because I have never seen a single Democratic candidate I would be willing to vote for. In my many online disourses on various subjects it has been made clear to me that progressives in general can't understand how that can be and more often than not I come away at best mildly insulted and shaking my head, and at worst outright flamed. Rabbi Lerner has struck a nerve with me that I can't deny. Quotes that elicited an audible "Wow!":

Empathically put yourself in the place of people whose actions we don't agree with. Too often progressives can do that when it comes to foreign terrorists but can't do that when it comes to right-wing voters.

The prejudice of many people on the Left against religious and spiritual people, the view that they must necessarily be on a lower level of intellectual or psychological development if they believe in God, is a view that is elitist and destructive. We need to make that kind of elitism as unwelcome in the Left as we once had to make sexist or homophobic approaches to the world.


This man clearly "gets it" and in my opinion, if this is to be the left's new rallying cry, the right is in serious trouble. I'm very interested to see the average Alternet readers' response to this, since I am clearly an anomaly around these parts. I expect some big-time bristling (particularly at the comments I quoted), but progressives would do well to listen to Rabbi Lerner very closely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Republican Persepective. . . . Posted by: mountainmama
The Challenge
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Feb 10, 2006 4:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"we are calling for a challenge to the globalization of selfishness that goes under the title of "capitalist globalization," and we seek to replace it with a globalization of love and caring."

Both political parties are committed to "capitalist globalization". To meet Rabbi Lerner's challenge we must first break the hold of the coporatocracy on both parties. We must force both parties to serve the people rather than allowing them both to serve the establishment. It can be done.

Join The Lincoln Initiative and help make "government of the people, by the people, and for the people a reality. Click on we can do it

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Challenge Posted by: AlienSlave
» RE: The Challenge Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: The Challenge Posted by: AlienSlave
» RE: The Challenge Posted by: yogicflyer
» RE: The Challenge Posted by: Lincoln fan
The Ultimate
Posted by: Riverside on Feb 10, 2006 5:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rabbi Lerner is absolutely right, but there are so many scars and also open wounds that need healing before many who most likely would agree with the Rabbi are in a mind to even listen , much less take action.

Some folks may balk at using the spirituality concerpt out of fear that this is some other religious based move toward theocracy. What I read and gain from Rabbi Lerner is his call for the loving care of the human spirit first and politics last. Accomplishing the first will completely change the last for all times.

Beautiful ideas, and philosophy but I wonder if it can happen in time for 2008?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: can happen in time for 2008? Posted by: AlienSlave
Does Alternet get paid for these excerpts?
Posted by: amalgamatedspats on Feb 10, 2006 6:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If so, how much? If so, shouldn't it be disclosed somewhere? If money didn't exchange hands, was there some sort of quid pro quo involved?

I'm not trying to bash the excerpt, I haven't gotten around to reading it yet. It just seems like pretty blatant advertising, but I'm not even sure it is an ad because ads on this site usually have disclaimers.

Sell prog books by getting a prog website to publish excerpts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There needs to be 'spirit' in Leadership
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 10, 2006 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There comes a time when we humans have to take stok in ourselves and where we're going. That time in now. We are highly creative,productive beings. The big trouble is,our 'faith' has been placed on our 'creations' and their appearent wealth potiential. We hold what we make in higher regard than we do that which is responsible for all of Creation.
Within everyone there's a 'Spiritual Code' that drives our actions.Mostly it's in a good way that we move. It's when corrupt,greedy souls that feel somehow superior,that living conditions for all things starts to go down hill. We know inately that killing is wrong,,war is wrong, poisonong the planet for profit and plunder is wrong, as well as rape and molestation. Having a Spiritual Foundation makes you more respectful of all Life. It guides you to a life of balance and harmony. It teaches you that there's great Power in the path of a Peacemaker. It keeps you connected to the 'root' of All That Is. It tempers your decisions with Wisdom not Anger.
With logic and not irrational hatreds. It leads you to create Foriegn Policy that DOES'NT END IN 9/11.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Place to Start
Posted by: the islander on Feb 10, 2006 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any change for good has to start with honesty. The Democrats can stand for that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Skyeblue
Posted by: skyeblue on Feb 10, 2006 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bravo!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spirituality ?
Posted by: Jimbo on Feb 10, 2006 9:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Creating spirituality for the democrats is some what of a paradox. It is difficult for many people to be spiritual with out adhering to a specific organized religon. Their insecurity requires a structured system with defined boundaries. Progressives though are suppose to be open to all forms of faith, therefore, can not utilize one specific form. I see this democrat spiritual quest as a quandry and dont see how it can work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: stormchilde1975
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: omidele
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: YogiBear
» Hebrew Bible more than Leviticus. Posted by: dirkster42
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: smccaw
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: marshallmotz
» RE: Spirituality ? Posted by: mountainmama
» But we don't have to "create" it!! Posted by: GreenLibbie
Working from the Outside In
Posted by: CosmicBiker on Feb 10, 2006 9:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I applaud anyone who helps vivify a platform of true spirituality for political leaders, I have witnessed a different scenario than how “a near-desperate desire to reconnect to the sacred” “leads many people to right-wing religious communities because these groups seem to be in touch with the sacred dimension of life” and that politicians are the ones to help us clarify that alternative vision of the “left hand of God.”

That left-handed vision is alive and well in the United States and individuals who have enough mental stamina to think outside the decaying box of most organized religions have found it and are developing it further. Rather than creating another box of organized platforms, politicians should first personally engage as children of God, and then find ways to organically socialize that personal experience into appropriate venues for secular life.

The Religious Right creates chaos when they are driven by fear, trying to maintain a rigid structure for viewing the world. This leads to an attempt to control real life without the faith that, as a huge dissipative structure, society has the capacity to reorganize itself into a higher form that better relates to the world as it is constantly changing. It is ironic that people who define themselves as religious lack true faith that God will help us maintain a strong core of truth, beauty and goodness as a tool for self-referencing while we move forward.

Democrats - and Republicans – need good listening skills to hear the existing progressive voice in their communities, and then they should exercise the faith that their beautiful minds, in concert with divine inspiration, will organize all that info in their heads into a wonderful vision of society that will reflect, not direct, the spiritual forward motion of its people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Working from the Outside In Posted by: yogicflyer
Rabbi Lerner misses the 3rd party point
Posted by: YogiBear on Feb 10, 2006 9:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Others take the approach of the "let's-move-further-to-the-left" section of the Left, insisting that the old formulas of the really radical Left, mixed with a repackaging of identity politics and presented as economic populism, would provide the magic formula, if only those Democrats would listen! But meanwhile, they can't explain why their candidates, running in Democratic primaries or as Greens, rarely manage to get significant support from American voters.

I like a lot of what Lerner has to say, but it's comments like this that show me that he really doesn't understand those he disagrees with on the left. The 3rd party advocates know damned well they won't get a presidential candidate elected, but they believe in not sacrificing their values for the sake of "the lesser of two evils." Ironically, that's exactly the message the Rabbi is trying to get across.

Voting 3rd party is a political statement that says "We're not going to take it anymore." If it weren't for the Greens and the Naderites, the Dems would be shifted even more right than they are now. The 3rd party factions (on both sides) are like dragging anchors desperately trying to get their parties to stay upright.

Furthermore, Greens, Libertarians and other independents ARE gaining ground in our political process, especially at local levels. The reason they are is because of the corruptive corporate influence on our political system. The more independents we have in all levels of government, the better it will be for our Democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No thanks!
Posted by: Moonray on Feb 10, 2006 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A "progressive spiritual vision" is a contradiction in terms. If you believe in an invisible man in the sky, there's already something wrong with the way you look at the world.

Religion has always been the bully boy of human belief systems. Priests, shamans and others of that ilk rely on coercion -- blatant or implied -- to impose their beliefs on others.

At least the right-wingers are forthright in their fanaticism and their lunacy. They don't try to sugar-coat their illogical religious beliefs with fanciful allegories and feel-good New Age approaches.

If you are smart enough to reject fundamentalist religious pap, you are smart enough to realize that all religion is fallacious and, in fact, probably is the manifestation of neurosis. It's time to let go of that security blanket and face the universe as it is -- a scary place with no God, Jesus or any other benevolent force in sight, no matter how many prayers you mutter or joss sticks you burn.

Only when we get beyond religion can we begin to conduct our political affairs with genuine compassion for humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No thanks! Posted by: sln70
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Jimbo
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: pottymouth
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Moonray
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: tcx2
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Moonray
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Roverton
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Moonray
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: tcx2
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: mountainmama
» RE: No thanks! Posted by: Gma1
totally spurious
Posted by: kingfelix on Feb 10, 2006 9:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
religion is NOT progressive. there is no progressive organized mainstream religion. there are progressives who go to church, but that's a different deal to saying there are churches who are progressive. american life needs a lot less religion, not more religion with a different flavor. you'll never win a single vote from the mass of religious nuts, the moment they hear that progressives favor gay marriage and reproductive rights.

stop looking for the holy grail under the sign of jesus christ. far better to start taxing those churches who agitate and organise on behalf of the republicans. adjust their status and smash up the republican revenue streams, just like the right smashes up labor organizations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: totally spurious Posted by: sln70
» RE: totally spurious Posted by: kingfelix
» RE: totally spurious Posted by: sln70
» RE: totally spurious Posted by: kingfelix
» RE: totally spurious Posted by: sln70
there's another stupidity in this...
Posted by: kingfelix on Feb 10, 2006 9:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and that is that the reason you can't have progressive religious appeal is because religion and patriotism work on the basic level of tribalism/territorialism, it's the evolutionary mechanism that is used to rouse people to war (and so far, has proved a success). you can't have a rainbow coalition, a multitude of different cultures, etc, through an appeal to this level of the individual (for anyone interested, it's circuit two in the 8 circuit model of consciousness, or what Jung called feeling), because it doesn't function that way. no rational person, and the overwhelming number of progressives are more rational perhaps, than they are religious, that is, they make decisions that will override what religious beliefs they have (so a person can be against abortion personally, but be pro-choice, and so on), no person of that type will sign up for a Jesus jamboree that forsakes the secular ideals for a Bible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Confucius disagrees Posted by: stormchilde1975
» RE: Confucius disagrees Posted by: kingfelix
please note
Posted by: kingfelix on Feb 10, 2006 9:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for the circuit two religious nuts, reason triumphing over faith is termed hypocrisy. it is anathema to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» hypocrisy Posted by: stormchilde1975
» RE: hypocrisy Posted by: kingfelix
» Not to split hairs.... but Posted by: peritonlogon
» RE: hypocrisy Posted by: YogiBear
i came away with soul stirred
Posted by: kingfelix on Feb 10, 2006 10:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i guess my soul is stirred by the truth. and i like the references.
i would be fascinated to read a revised version of Gore's speech that in your opinion stirred the soul.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wal-Mart is not the Pearly Gates
Posted by: monkeywrench on Feb 10, 2006 12:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a terrific article: in many ways, Michael Lerner articulates splendidly what oh, so many of us in Forgotten America feel. However, I do believe that the effect of voting fraud in the last two presidential elections was underplayed. In both elections, Bush (and his neocon manipulators) did NOT win, but were either selected (2000, Supreme Court meddling) or put in office by theft (2004, election fraud on a scale never seen before).

The point is that most Americans, probably all humans for that matter, do not cluster on the left or the right, but exist in that great, forgotten, moderate center. We are eminently practical, occasionally thoughtful, and, yes, spiritually hungry.

And our society definately does not satisfy that hunger. It is no accident that the religious right and the corporatocracy are in bed together: the concept of a vengeful God overseeing a savage universe promotes the fear-driven "dog-eat-dog" mentality that legitimizes the anti-human values of laissez-faire capitalism. (Isn't it interesting that people who live in quasi-"socialistic" Canada and Europe are surveyed as being more content and happier than we here in "buy-more-now" America?) It also allows those on the right who ARE self-agggrandizing and greed-driven to take advantage of others who look there for true spiritual enlightenment. After all, doesn't profit equal success, and doesn't God love a winner?

The problem is going to be, of course, that anyone advocating a better way, a more fair society, a truly spiritually fulfilling life will be fought tooth-and-claw by the ruling elite in the religious right/politico-corporate cabal, because for them, power and wealth ARE gods. It is going to take one hell of a grassroots movement to break the corporate stranglehold in which we find ourselves today. We can start by convincing people that there is more to life than Wal-Mart. However, that may be asking more than any politician, or group of politicians, beholding as they are to corporate handouts, are willing to risk. I do not believe that we can look to politicians – especially today's politicians – for guidance. A new social order will most likely have to percolate up from the body politic. Say a prayer and hope for the best.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bullshit
Posted by: peritonlogon on Feb 10, 2006 1:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At first I thought a point by point refutation to the excerpt would be the way to go about demonstrating that it is loaded with bullshit. But you can't refute bullshit because it's just bullshit. "Spiritual crisis?" This is a very popular narative now that, as far as this one person can see, is non exisitent. In fact 'spiritual crisis' or whatever similar phrase/idea is an ever present theme in civilization. Its little brother is 'moral crisis' or 'moral decay,' whichever you prefer, and this one, as far as my non-statistical and unscientific observations go, varies as strict morality and as the power of oppressive "moral" leaders. Examples for this include Cicero's rhetoric, Plato's dialogues, every Witch Hunt that has ever taken place, along with the entire Victorian era.

In other words when people start talking about 'spiritual crisis,' 'moral crisis' or any of those 'observations' what is really happening is that popular ideology has become more oriented to fear and persecution. It is these things that make people see a 'crisis' or perhaps, more accurately, it is these things that create a crisis.

The autor also mentioned that many people of the Left have been moving to the right in order to seem more mainstream. The author just doesn't get it. EVERYONE has moved to the right, at least superficially. For instance, when I was growing up "trickle down economics" or "Reganomics" was always a derisive term and was used frequently. Now it's not used very often despite its greater prevelance, and the biggest critique that is reguarly leveled against it is 'tax cuts for the rich are just really popular in America because everyone aspires to be rich.' This is the biggest critique because most people in America (I'm guessing at least 4/5) actually believe that tax cuts for rich people and big business stimulate the economy, which, I might add is bullshit. In fact, the opposite is demonstarable.

People love grand theories that relate to the 'spiritual.' The fact of the matter is the Left just has to start campaigning on issues that people want, for example, healthcare reform (specifically universal healthcare) and stop swallowing the Bullshit they're fed, for example, universal healthcare is politically impossible. The first step for the left to rise again is to start calling people on bullshit... start calling bullshit bullshit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bullshit Posted by: Lincoln fan
Mark Twain's thought on this
Posted by: condenser on Feb 10, 2006 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who has ever read Twain's essay, What is Man?, will chuckle at this debate.

As humans we are not capable of anything more that selfish acts. It is the only rule for a very basic machine. We weigh everything and we chose to act in the way that pleases us most. There are no selfless acts. The feel good, spiritual, person does what pleasures him the most, as does the fundamentalist religious. Who is more selfish?

Twain's argument is that you cannot change this, but that there is a higher type of selfishness. The selfishness that benefits the most parties is probably the best. It can be learned and it must be trained.

The right selfishness in governmental/social structure is hard to define in the mess of beliefs that exist. Who's going to tally all the pros and cons? The extreme right is not even playing within the limits of their physical lives. Their reward is somewhere else and it outweighs everything else in the now. This sounds quite selfish to some, but the opposing view is just as selfish to those people. Asking them to worry about wordly things, and feel-good thinking is probaly dooming them.

Who can ever settle that debate? I think we have to just agree that we cannot. The best we can hope for is common ground on as many sides of an issue as possible. I would like to think that we all value our lives and that we can all agree that war is not to be desired. Both parties voted for war, sadly. It appears that their is something that we ALL value more than our lives. I suspect it is the free-for-all version of freedom that is so valued by people like us that have it so good. We don't like laws.

Alot of what is causing problems is actually prohibited by laws and common to both parties. We are not suppose to kill, to steal, to lie under oath, to rig elections, to mix religion and politics, to have executive and judiciary in the same bed, just to name a few. Wouldn't alot of the problems go away if we all played by the same rules? Laws hold us back, it is true. they make it harder to raise election dollars also (lol). But they were meant to ensure that some things are protected. We can start by enforcing our laws and our Constitution, rewriting them if so needed. So much going on is blatantly illegal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Same thing Posted by: condenser
Alternative to Republican and Democratic thinking is the solution
Posted by: yogicflyer on Feb 10, 2006 1:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Readers, The solution to the inability of the politicians to do the legal, moral, caring, financially beneficial thing is to do what is taught by the US Peace Government. Haven't heard about it? We've tried to get your attention. Look at www.mum.edu, www.uspeacegovernment.org, www.globalcountry.org, www.permanentpeace.org, www.alltm.org, www.istpp.org, www.mou.org. It's been said for some time that Man is using only 5 or 10% of his mental potential. Some will say this isn't true but it is although the understanding of what this means is not always accepted. At the depth of every human mind is an infinite field of consciousness, that is the home of the Laws of Nature. This field of consciousness is the home of the intelligence that creates the universe based on those Laws of Nature. It is the field of pure spirituality. Because we are only using a small percent of our mental potential, we are only partially conscious and not aware of this. That is the only reason Man has not been able to live in peace. If enough people begin to develop full consciousness, this will create a peaceful world. We can prevent the violence that is getting ready to erupt. Read Victory Before War. DO search for "yogic flying."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

otto
Posted by: otto on Feb 10, 2006 3:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with Rabbi Lerner 100%. I have been fascinated with the expression "Left Hand of God" ever since a movie by that name came oudt years ago; to me it has meant the recognition of a mysterious God who can and does act outside the limitations we "Church" people try to put on Him (Her?). In recent years I have found satisfaction in using two idfferent terms in religion, "The Church" (which is a more visible institution) and "The Kingdom of God (which seems to speak of a greater, more mysterious way that God works in all people and all things). Jesus mainly used parables, and spoke of the kingdom as a seed planted in the ground, and we don't understand how it is growing.
I like the distinction between "spiritiual" and "religious" because I think spiritual denotes a deep reality found in many religions and even outside religion in many people. Too many of us "religion people" let our religion degenerate into an lot of external observances only - what Jesus and so many of the Old Testament Prophets condemned. A concern for others, especially for the poor and weak and marginalized, always seemed to be at the heart of the most profound religions. I think that's what gets lost in politics today, and Rabbi Lerner shows this well.
I once knew a Catholic priest with a good sense of humor and social values who used to say: "Democrats are evil in a relative way (secundum quid), but Republicans are evil intrinsically (simpliciter). I think there's a grain of truth there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oldsonofthewest
Posted by: sonofthewest on Feb 10, 2006 6:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe there are just many of us who see no need for religion, aren't afraid to face the future on our own feet and see through the irrationality of believing in bs on faith. There is no need to have a god/goddess to explain reality, existence, "I am" or anything else, the theory of evolution does it just fine and you don't end up paying tithes to subsidize a bunch of lazy, mostly men, religious wise people who sit around and philosphize about the unknown and the unknowable and try to suggest how the rest of us should live. Just at this time in world history we have crazy rightwingnut christians, jews, and muslims trying to destroy each other and the world around them. AND NOTE THAT I SAID RIGHT WING FOR ALL THREE GROUPS: I DO NOT CLAIM NOR DO I BELIEVE THAT ANY OF THESE RELIGIONS IS INTRINSICALLY "BAD", BUT IT IS THE IRRATIONALLITY OF UNPROVABLE BELIEF THAT MAKES THE MASSES SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE BULL OF OUR CORRUPT POLITICAL LEADERS. ALL THREE OF THESE RELIGIONS ARE PATRIARCHAL AND TEACH SUBSERVIENCE TO THE MALE GOD FIGURE SO GO FIGURE. THEN WHEN THE MALE GOD FIGURE/PRESIDENT/MAXIMUM LEADER SAYS MAKE WAR, WELL THE POPULACE LINES UP TO MAKE WAR AND CLAIMS IT IS JUST FOLLOWING THE DICTATES OF PATRIOTISM (PATRIARCHAL ISM), LOVE AND SUBSERVIENCE TO THE FATHER.

As a non-believer I don't wish ill on believers nor do I try to suggest that they are sinners or less than me because they choose to believe; but my experience is that they often look down on non-believers, try to force us to agree with their moral position and respect their beliefs. When they have the same respect, understanding and appreciation for my non-belief as I do for their belief then we might be able to talk a bit. Although I have my doubts because after they challenge you believers often don't really want to talk about the weakness of faith, belief in unproven existences and myths like the virgin birth or the existence of god. They just try to get off the playing field and refuse to talk about it except to say, "I have faith," as though they have won the grand prize. Faith and $1.75, just like atheism, will get you a cup of coffee at s___bucks, maybe, or 2/3 gallons of gasoline. Just some thoughts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oldsonofthewest Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: oldsonofthewest Posted by: sonofthewest
» RE: oldsonofthewest Posted by: kipleitner
Many of the replies in this thread prove Rabbi Lerner's point
Posted by: MEL810 on Feb 10, 2006 9:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That some of the left make their case by cynically putting down anyone who has a religious belief and who might believe that some higher power, not matter what form that power might take, created the universe and gives us the inate impulse to draw closer to it and ultimately, to love one another.
I am a Christian. Please do not insult and confuse MY JESUS with the intolerant religionists seeking political power and monetary gain in the power structure of the religious right.
Jesus stood for loving the despised, clothing the naked, feeding the hungry and stood against hypocritcal religionists seeking temporal power. Jesus stood for progressive values.
And perhaps my fellow progressives, while standing for such values, we could take a look at why some good people have drifted rightward. Could it be because a few of our so-called progressive values lack a moral center and strike many people as devoid of human feeling? Could it be because those of us who choose to believe in God/Goddess/Force/Laws of Karma and/or Jesus don't want to be considered blithering idiots by some of the strict secularists in our midsts? To have our religious and spiritual beliefs and rituals compared to a child believing in Santa Claus or the Little People is insulting.
As for our political values: Take our pro-choice stances: could we perhaps be pro-choice but anti-abortion and not put abortion in the same moral and medical category as removing a mole? Is it anti-choice or non-progressive to abhor abortion for any reason other than drastic reasons? I think not. Shouldn't abortion always be the lesser of two evils?
Could we stop saying my body; my choice? IF it's our body and our choice, we can use contraception or abstain from sexual activity! (of course rape and certain other situations deny choice, so that doesn't apply there).
Can you understand why parents might think their under-age daughters should get their consent for an abortion? After all, minors need parental consent to be treated for any other medical procedure. I do support parental consent laws with caveats; I think young women should have the legal right to challenge their parents decision. Parents who neglect and/or are a danger to their children should have no voice in such a decision. Any girl who is seeking an abortion because of rape or incest should be able to obtain one.
I remain pro-choice because I don't want desperate women risking their lives and health in back-alley butchery and I want the government to regulate my adult personal choices as little as possible. But I am anti-abortion and understand those who consider themselves pro-life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» MEL810 something you must understand Posted by: peritonlogon
The Light and the Darkness
Posted by: profpark on Feb 11, 2006 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been troubled by how so many people who call themselves Christians seem so warlike. The Christian right has provided Bush with his most dependable base of support for the war on Iraq. I have come to believe that they support war because
they see the world as a stage for the war between good and evil. They see God in a
perpetual battle with the power of evil, a war between the light and the
darkness. They give great power to the darkness and essentially worship a God
of Force that they believe can destroy the darkness. Their worship of a God of Force
leads them to support war and the use of military power. They see everything in terms of battle and personify their enemies as the agents of darkness.
However, as a Quaker, I believe in the God of Love, not the God of Force. Evil is not the presence of some dark power outside of us. Evil is the absence of the light within us. The fundamental Quaker belief is that the light of God is present within each of us and is only revealed by love which is why we are commanded to love our enemies. Only the light of God can displace the darkness.
It's hard to explain what I mean by saying that evil is the absence of the
light. The best I can do is the plant analogy. Plants are created to grow
and flourish in the light of the sun. They do nothing to receive that light.
Humans, however, are created with consciousness and free will that gives us
the power to control the amount of light from God that we receive. Every
act of hate, violence, greed, and selfishness closes the aperture of our spirit that
receives the light. As the light fails, we, like the plants, struggle,
wither, and die spiritually. God created us to grow and flourish in the
light of the spirit. God did not create the darkness. That is our own doing.
Violence is useless because it shuts out the light and serves only to
produce more darkness. The fundamental reason why force does not work is because there is nothing to be destroyed. Evil is an empty state, the absence of God’s light. Shine a light on the darkness and it disappears! No amount of force can destroy that which does not exist. The reality is that there is nothing behind Darth Vader’s mask. Our calling is not to kill our enemies because we see them as servants of darkness. Our calling is to help bring more light into the world through the power of love, understanding and forgiveness. We are called to increase the light that will ultimately fill the darkness. Violence blocks the light that is in each of us. Non-violence allows the light of God to shine through conflict and to illuminate the path to peace and reconciliation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Light and the Darkness Posted by: mountainmama
» RE: The Light and the Darkness Posted by: Lincoln fan
The athiest left laughs sadly.`
Posted by: jimlup on Feb 12, 2006 4:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From my prespective any attempt to push religion to convert or to grandstand is a very bad thing.

With all due respect to John:

Imagine NO religion. I wonder if you can?

At best this article and resulting blogs are a waste of time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An important spiritual truth
Posted by: profpark on Feb 12, 2006 1:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that Lerner reveals an important spiritual truth with his concept of the two hands of God. Those who grasp the right hand of God bring forth the God of wrath and judgement. Those who reach out to the left hand of God bring forth the God of love and forgiveness. The truth could could well be that God-Spirit-Pure Being exists as an infinite quantum probability field and that the God we see is the God we seek.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spirituality is Not Religiosity
Posted by: DickHildreth on Feb 12, 2006 6:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To be moral does not require one to be religious. In fact, it doesn't even require belief in any supernatural being whatsoever. So is the case also with spirituality. An atheist can be in support of all of the "spiritual" goals elucidated in this article.

Please don't convolve this kind of spirituality with the brainless, thoughtless religiosity practiced by the Religious Right and their followers. As another post suggested, these are people of small mind who need only an authority figure to kneel down to. It may be difficult to communicate with these people, but feigning respect for their small-mindedness is far from the best approach to making a breakthrough while still maintaining self respect.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion-Denominationlism vs Christianity-Spirituality
Posted by: BlackMan on Feb 12, 2006 10:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a saying; one groups religion is paradise while another group believes it is hell. Rabbi Lerner is on to something but it is not enough to satisfy truth. Truth is where freedom lies in spirituality. Truth brings unity. Truth is fact that does not require a special feeling, a special intrepreter, nor a special religion or denomination. The truth that unifies and eliminates all this evil in this world is in Christ. The evil in the world denies Christ because it misbehaves in rebellion against his kingdom.

The Democratic Party is willing to accept non believers as well as believers and it should. The Democratic Party is able to unify America and convert with truth should it decide to manifest itself into the teachings of Christ. The result would end all debates about where one should align themselves based on religious values politically.

The political organization advancing the factual, irrefutable, transparent, and non-demonominational teachings of Christ is able to convert the Jew, Greek, Muslim, Evangelical, Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Catholic, Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Methodis, Quaker, et. al.

The key is that the bible is the only foundation needed for the conversion. The very book Falwell screams from to attack abortionist speaks about Bath Sheba's abortion in the Old Testament, but Falwell and others refuse to explain the truth about King David and Bath Sheba's child being aborted by God through the Priest.

There must be a place for the extremist to go for love. That non violent love is in Christ's kingdom on earth. The love for persons who abort their child and feel guilty but not threatened because in true Christianity the members of the body will not judge them for the act. The love that offers a better choice for the Muslim willing to commit suicide in desperation to make a statement against someone they fear or hate. A better choice for the non-Christian believer to spend time learning the truth from the scriptures without private intrepretation and bias perversions of apostasy that places them into judgemental fear. A home for the Agnostic and Atheist for truth. If anyone chooses not to listen to the scripture, it is their choice and their is no persecution from the Church of Christ. The Church of Christ will love them and welcome them to return for more teaching of truth, untill they refuse the knowledge. If nothing else people will know where true love and non condemnation exist; and it is real, not phony. Most importantly, none will need to die to find this love of humanity.

The greatest threat to the Conservatives is truth. The greatest achievement to end their bias is truth. The greatest reason to stop the perversions of their politics is truth. The end of their dominance and ignorance is truth. Where is this truth? The truth is in the very book the non-Christian Right uses daily; the bible. The only need is to have it rightly divided and they fear that the most.

Who teaches this truth; "The Churches of Christ". They are almost in every community in the world and are the quietest true, honest, spiritual, loving, and Christlike people who are able to turn the Christian Right on its ear with truth. The Church of Christ knows the Christian Right is satanistic in its views. A national debate between the Christian right and the Church of Church would not be a contest Jerry Falwell would like. It would show him, Billy Graham, Benny Hinn, T.D. Jakes, Pat Robinson, et. al., to be the wolves in sheep clothing that Christ warned the Church of Christ about in the book of Matthew and elsewhere in scripture.

There is much to speak about on this idea. Please share your comments. I know this body of believers are able to help the Democratic Party combat and end the Religious Right etremism permeating into the mainstream of our society. The Church of Christ is the only organization able to stop them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God is bigger than our old ideas would allow
Posted by: TheBigGuy on Feb 13, 2006 1:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Re: Left Hand of God
There was a comment that global warming is easier to believe than the existence of God.
When I was going to university, the theological discussion centered on the idea that our old concepts of God were dead. We have found ourselves in a much bigger and different universe than our ancestors understood and the old concepts of God no longer worked. That discussion seems to have died with the sixties. I think it is worth reviving.
During my years as a science student, I was troubled by origins. The physical universe seemed to me a mechanical system that could not have created itself. It can run in only one direction – down. To my mind, Newton's laws of motion postulate an external causation: "A body at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by an external force." While some might take this to mean that a teenager will remain on a couch until his girlfriend calls, or his mother tells him to take out the garbage, Newton was referring to the physical universe, which exhibits an even more phenomenal tendency to remain at rest until pushed. It was while reading a text on sub-atomic particles that I realized this universe was a created thing. At that time, I did not have a concept of the nature of the Creator, merely the necessity of one.
Seeing the physical universe, our concept of God must be big enough to encompass what we find: “Billions and billions,” as Carl Sagan used to say. At this point, I believe that the Creator is big enough to encompass all the concepts we have of God, or Gods. Rather than being wrong, I think all religions are right, as far as they go, but God is bigger than the concepts we use to define or describe God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »</