>In that case, there is no reason to speak of the Left's alleged 'failure'
>to talk to the religous, as some on this list have been doing so. The
>religious aren't any different from other groups, from this point of view.
>
>Yoshie
yes, i would say that's true. both for reasons that katha alluded to in her question (why does this fantasy of exclusion circulate?) and others. basically, i see the fantasy of the excluded leftie religious groups as another version of persecution fantasy, with a barely disguised anticommunism thrown in. (see the left _is_ really godless; they won't have anything to do with _us_, etc.) it _is_ the responsibility of those who imagine themselves as "leftists" to engage progressive clergy and religious movements--no question. but the idea that they are not and have not is ridiculous.
put another way, i'd say that geography, race, class and denomination are a lot more important than religious/secular in this debate. in gainesville, for example, it was crucial (tho not enough) a few years ago to get the largely african-american baptist churches (outside the city especially) on board for extension of human rights for gays/lesbians/bisexuals in alachua county. the local hrc got a letter of support from coretta scott king, but hadn't done the groundwork, and voters from those churches didn't turn out for the initiative. on the other hand, we got lots of support from uu and presbyterian ministries--all largely white, upper middle class voters.
best, christian