We seem to always be getting warned of the coming theocracy.
I think about the arguments I've been given for not openly questioning the modern liberal ethic. Don't question the healthiness of homosexuality because this family member has gay attractions and they will feel bad about themselves. Don't openly question whether a fetus is a baby because this family member has had an abortion and will be offended. Don't say anything about Affirmative Action because this person will think you don't like minorities. Don't say that Clinton helped create the economy bubble by having banks sued for not giving as many housing loans for fiscally at-risk minority debtors; people will think that you don't favor civil rights.
For a political "wing" that allegedly prefers logical arguments to "emotional arguments," they seem to have the corner on emotional appeals. These are all "arguments" that are solely framed to make you feel like you are goosestepping around in Gestapo boots if you are not with the liberal program. There is a right and a wrong, and being on the wrong side of the issue means that you are unequivocably black-and-white maleficent in the eyes of many a liberal.
Britain is even more liberal, it seems, than America, and yet they technically do have a theocracy. Their political figurehead, the monarch, is also the Defender of the British faith, the Church of England. The monarch is really no less a figurehead religiously than politically, but we would have got rid of something like that long ago, either because it offended our "un-Pope-ish" sensibilities or because a few atheists somewhere wouldn't stop pulling their hair out.
But our President has more influence over the moral and religious affairs of our citizens than the Defender of the Faith has over those of British citizens. We choose our President based on moral issues because he appoints the members of the highest religious authority in the land: The Supreme Court. The un-elected SCOTUS decided that instead of individual states deciding whether they could live with abortion, every state would have to deal with it. Soon the SCOTUS will decide whether each state can decide whether "marriage" will continue in the meaning it has had long before we inherited it from British common law. A congress of nine non-elected will take it upon themselves (they are, after all, social and moral geniuses!) to decide what is good for all societies in America: moral taxation without representation!
Why, to hear Andrew Sullivan state it, all Obama had to do to nullify the Defense of Marriage Act was to direct his Attorney General to not defend it in court. Yes, we live in a society where the main thing that stops federal judges doing what they feel like doing and setting liberal precedents is for the Executive Branch to actually make the case for what the people's representatives have enacted. Obama takes his election as a clearer mandate than Congress (in which the people are much more evenly represented) and overrides those decisions at his leisure, since he knows better than those of us who bitterly cling to our guns and religion. And since without the Executive Branch making it in court, what the People have enacted means nothing, the President is changing our society into something that many parents don't approve of. The SCOTUS has steadily worked to secularize our society against the will of its citizens. Progressivism requires coercion.
Why, Obama has more influence over our social sense of normalcy than the Pope does over Catholics. Obama is more likely to desensitize American Catholics to abortion, by not only having a Supreme Court that enshrines it in their society but also getting them used to subsidizing it, than the Pope is likely to encourage them to stand by their Catholic principles. (Hell, I've been desensitized to it simply by living in this country.) Look at Clueless Joe Biden: He says he believes absolutely that parents are murdering their children in abortion, but he's not going to let his Catholic faith have him stand up for those children being murdered -- it's none of his nevermind. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi pushes Obamacare through because the way she tells it that's what Jesus wants her to do, to force everyone to care for the needy. No, these people are living by their religion, by a shared morality; this shared religion just has a tenuous relationship to Christianity. It's the Progressive Church of America, and if you have a degree in one of the liberal arts, you've been to one of its seminaries.
The Democratic Party has for many decades been the home for liberals and social progressives who pride themselves on their empathy for the defenseless and downtrodden, whether they are abused pets, endangered species, the homeless, the poor, the underpaid, the falsely accused, etc. Some of the same people that think that a "prom mom" should get life for killing her baby support late-term abortion. Liberals who pride themselves on their willingness to tolerate murky moral ground have so little moral conflict about abortion that they celebrate it. A horrified pro-life liberal dubbed the recent DNC convention "Abortion-palooza." Few liberals voice any outrage at a fellow liberal who says "I love abortion." Never has death been so openly celebrated. We've out-thugged the Thuggi.
Dan Savage believes that Christianity (and especially its Bible) is bunk because it didn't unite all its adherents against slavery: "The one unequivocal moral issue and Christianity got it wrong." Well, here is the most defenseless, helpless, undefended creature to be callously targeted for spurious reasons, and liberals celebrate its death by mangling, maiming, and torturous expulsion.
The one issue and liberals got it wrong. A truly soulless party. There are many otherwise good people that are attracted to the Left, but sadly most of them have drunk the abortion Kool-Aid and seem to have no qualms whatsoever about it (or they won't be so boorish as to say so). They've successfully been desensitized to the awful reality. For many leftwing people, abortion is a rite of passage, to some almost a sacrament.
The Democratic Party is selling indulgences. Sell your soul for convenience; you can buy it back by voting to force everyone to take care of the poor and voting for other liberal darlings. Go on, sell your soul. You're not really using it anyway. You're delegating all the moral work to your politicians. Vote for them and they will be your collective conscience.