I don’t think ANYONE outside of the extreme religious right wing of society considers a plank supporting a secular, science based educational system to be “extreme”.

I’m asking for an example of a Democratic platform plank that middle of the road, sane people would consider extreme.

“Faith-based groups have been excluded from grants because they will not conform to the administration’s social agenda. We will reverse this tragic course, encourage more involvement by the most effective aid organizations, and trust developing peoples to build their future from the ground up.”

Does this mean that the Republican party wants to fund the Tony Perkins and Scott Lively trips to African nations?

I suspect this plank underscores their desire to shift funding back to groups that are popular amongst a key portion of their political base in the USA.

My understanding is that he was defending the LCR, not the actual party itself. I personally think that the LCR at it’s core isn’t a bad group, but they ultimately still seem to support candidates like Mitt Romney (who I strongly suspect they will endorse, if they have not already done so), who are anti-equality candidates, and therefore, I really can’t ever throw my support behind them, regardless of what their intentions and motivations are.

And to Zeke:

The Democrats in general support a secular, science-based educational system, and to many people (specifically evangelicals) this makes them extremists, because they’re leaving the bible out of the mix. Obviously I 100% support a society that has high (secular) educational standards, but there are people that vehemently disagree with opinions such as mine.

From a logical standpoint, I don’t view the Democratic platform as being extreme in any way, shape or form, but religious extremists don’t use logic to make their points..they use “faith” instead.

But when Republicans as a group adopt such a vile policy it’s what both parties do when they “turn the platform over to the less-mainstream members”.

Frankly I’m pretty tired of this “both parties are equally bad, but at least Republicans are better for my wallet” argument.

‘At the same time, faith-based groups — the sector that has had the best track record in promoting lasting development — have been excluded from grants because they will not conform to the administration’s social agenda’

Which ‘social agenda’? I highly doubt the administration is cutting aid to any group that doesn’t endorse full equality since that would include most of the US. The only ‘social agenda’ I could see them being denied funding for is supproting imprisonment or worse.

My personal theory is that it’s all bull. I doubt any religious charity we gave money to was suporting our execution, at least I hope not, and the only faith based groups being denied funding are ones that just get axed in the normal course of bureaucracy because they thought some secular group could do it better or cheaper.

The platform statement is being implemented and it will continue. The Republicans are financiers and the platform statement defines an “effective” organization worthy of funding. Funding vehicles are already in place. The platform just says that they will continue.

These Republicans are working with the USCRIF (including Robert P. George) to scrub the constitutions of anti-gay but pro-American regimes. When they’re done, the regimes will look like human rights champions and legal repression of GLBT people will enshrined in their laws, if you read the fine print.

Here we go with false equivalence again. I challenge anyone to find a plank in the Democratic Platform that is extreme in any way comparable to large parts of the Republican Platform. The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party is a center to right of center Party. We don’t have a viable leftist party in America. The Democratic Party in America is more like the Conservative Party of UK than it is like the Labour Party. The Republican Party would be comparable to the British Nationalist Party (BNP) and far right to extremist party not to the Tories. That’s why Cameron virtually shunned Romney when he visited England.