— Liberal offers GOP advice on recruiting
Let me see if I have this straight. Dan Rodricks, Baltimore Sun columnist, who twice in his column referred to the Republican Party as the Angry Old Party, is offering his advice to help the Republican Party? In his column, “GOP sending immigrants to the Democrats,” printed in the March 16 issue of the Kokomo Tribune, Dan informs us the Republican Party is continuing to drive away immigrants by supporting such policies as making English the official language of our country.
Dan writes, “you’d think a new generation of Republicans would want to recruit some new members.” He also writes, “it makes no sense for the future of the [Republican Party] to be conceding large masses of the population of the Next America to the Democrats.” Really, Dan? The Next America?
He writes of predictions made that show the U.S. could become a majority minority by 2040, and the Democratic Party could become a majority minority by 2020. Does anyone besides me think this is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard?
Let’s take a look at the majority of today Dan is talking about. Who are they? They are Italian-Americans, German-Americans, Polish-Americans; all kinds of hyphenated Americans who have chosen to just be Americans.
For hundreds of years, all political parties, American citizens and immigrants themselves have understood the importance of us as a nation to assimilate into one people: Americans. Some still see America this way, but others such as this author continue to break us down into many groups. What I call Americans, Dan refers to in his column as immigrants, minorities, white working class, affluent constituencies, Hispanics, blacks, other minorities, single women, lower income voters, centrist Republican women, whites and Republican men.
The United States of America is a much healthier nation while governing with policies benefiting America as a whole, leaving no one out. I have to admit, I do not have much use for the Republican Party either, but what has happened to the Democratic Party of old – the party of JFK? It is obvious Dan is suggesting the Republican Party should abandon what it believes is best for America, only to attract voters. Well, Dan, if it were to do that, it would be the Democratic Party.
If Dan and the Democratic Party of today were around while our nation was in its infancy, we would no doubt be similar to so many other countries in the world. Today we would be populated by dozens of ethnic groups who all speak their own language. E Pluribus Unum is a motto many of us are familiar with. It is Latin for, “Out of many, one.” Apparently, some would like this to be, “Out of one, many.” It appears as though this is exactly where we are headed.
Religious right fears marketplace of ideas
The Indiana Youth Group, whose purpose is to be supportive of teen and young-adult gays and lesbians in Indiana, had a specialty license plate. Its plate was voided after 20 state senators complained. It was said the Indiana Youth Group’s contract was voided because of a technicality.
In Indiana, a huge percentage of license plates issued in the state say “In God We Trust.” One doesn’t have to pay extra for this promotion of religion. No plates say, “In humanism we believe” or “In gay rights we believe.” That would, of course, have no chance in getting approved.
For every plate that had mentioned the Indiana Youth Group, there are hundreds that promote a deity, at no cost to the driver. Indeed, in Pennsylvania, an ad was rejected by a local transit agency because it said “atheists.”
That’s it, just the word “atheists” was enough to get it rejected. But conservative religious groups are trying to get Ten Commandments displays put up on public lawns. What are the chances the Humanist Manifesto, which supports free thought and institutions made for humans, not dogma, be put on public lawns?
None, nor do I as a humanist want it put there, even though humanism and our Enlightenment nation have a lot in common. Both value reason, free thinking and human rights.
We have a nation where the religious right can promote its religion through the government, but when humanists such as I do so in the private marketplace of ideas, that is called intolerant. Why is the religious right afraid of the marketplace of ideas, anyway?