There’s a post over at Winds of Change on the prospects for the Democratic Party courting the evangelical Christian vote. The post has spawned a vigorous discussion of the relationship between religion and the Democratic Party, a considerable amount of which on both sides appears to me to be poppycock or, at least, gross exaggeration.
If there’s any hostility to religion in the Democratic Party here in Chicago, I’ve yet to notice it. Chicago is, of course, overwhelmingly Democratic (my wife refers to herself as “the Republican in our precinct”). I don’t have the figures at my fingertips but I’m sure that at least a majority of Chicago’s white Democrats are Catholics (Chicago is a very Catholic town) and that the overwhelming preponderance of black Democrats are either Baptists or AME. I don’t see anybody making a secret of their religion here.
And, BTW, there are as good support systems here for people actually practicing Judaism here as any place I know of.
For general information on religious denominations in the United States, this is a pretty good place to start.
You might also find this interesting. In the present Congress Catholics hold 29% of the seats with 128 representatives and 24 senators. Here’s a quick breakdown:
Catholics in Congress
What does “evangelicals” mean, precisely? Is it a euphemism for white non-orthodox Protestants? There’s certainly no particular antipathy towards religion, generally, apparent in that list. Quite the opposite.
Now, if what’s being discussed is an antipathy towards religion, generally, or Christianity in particular among opinion makers, i.e. journalists, television personalities, actors and actresses, in New York, California, and Washington, DC, they may have something. But that’s a much narrower claim.