During their summer meeting, the Democratic National Committee drafted a set of resolutions in which they voice an inclusive stance toward the growing demographic of the “religiously unaffiliated.”  These resolutions clearly have a deeper meaning than just inclusivity; they aim to attack Christian values in our society.

Before continuing, I’ll issue a disclaimer of sorts:  Only in our stifling political climate will criticism of one party be received as an endorsement of the other.  To read this criticism of the DNC as an endorsement of the Republican party is to fail to account for the fact that this is written by a Catholic.  This means that the liberal/conservative filter does not apply.  Catholics are inherently conservative of the divine deposit of faith and liberal in loving their neighbor.  Nevertheless, the import of this DNC resolution may be easy to overlook and therefore deserves closer scrutiny.

The DNC is obviously attempting to pluck the low-hanging fruit of the fastest growing religious denomination, “Nones.”  This may be politically savvy, but the ideological offspring of Saul Alinsky have something further in mind.  Groups, especially political groups, always need an organizing principle.  If you can organize around something people agree on, then you are more likely to move them into action.  The cohesive force the DNC is using to graft the “Nones” onto the Democratic vine is non-religion.

But the problem with this approach is that you cannot unite around a non-principle.  It is like saying an American is someone who is not a Soviet; there is no real binding force.  But if you define an American as being Anti-Soviet, then you can unite around opposition to a common enemy.  Likewise, the DNC is setting itself up to be the anti-religious party.  Their resolutions make clear that it is not really religion per se that they have set their sights upon, but Christianity specifically, by opposing those who have “used those religious views, with misplaced claims of ‘religious liberty,’ to justify public policy that has threatened the civil rights and liberties of many Americans, including but not limited to the LGBT community, women, and ethnic and religious/nonreligious minorities.”  In mentioning the “religious minorities” it is clear they have the religious majority, Christians, in mind.

Christians can expect two things.  The first is obvious.  The DNC will become more and more anti-Christian as time goes on.  If that is what unites them, then they must continue to ramp up the attacks.  This fits with the overall mission, which is to overthrow the Judeo-Christian order, so it will be met with necessary zeal from the rank and file.  Likewise, religious freedom will diminish as the number of orchestrated attacks increase.

The second is a rebound effect.  If Democrats are the anti-Christian party, then Republicans will be the anti-anti-Christian party.  Defined as such, they don’t really need to adopt Christian values but just not be as bad as the Democrats.  Assured of Christian support, they will reach out to more moderate “nones” and make concessions where necessary.  True Christians will be marginalized in that party as well.  This is exactly what we saw in the last presidential election, where many voted for the current president because “at least he is pro-life.”  Meanwhile they are forced to support a Party that has given up protecting marriage and family, and unquestioningly supports the LGBT agenda.

The marginalization of Christians should be no surprise.  A separation of Church and State always pits the State against the Church.  Attacks come from both flanks, not just from the Left.  Those whose allegiance to the Church is above the State must be marginalized.  State neutrality on religion always ends in the pit of anti-religion.  Perhaps our country was founded on such neutrality, but we can be sure it will not last.  Only religion, and only the true religion, has the power to bind people together.  And only when Christ is recognized as King and is rightfully put on the throne will things get better.