In Which I attempt to zing Mark Kleiman who wrote
"After all, Jefferson himself — no orthodox believer — chose to frame his assertion of human equality and human rights in religious terms."
I believe that Kleiman is referring to the words "and are endowed by their creator with certain rights including ..." in the declaration of independence. The declaration was a bill passed by the continental congress after Jefferson's draft declaration was amended. IIRC Jefferson wrote "and from that creation proceed certain rights including ...". I believe that Jefferson's draft made no mention of a creator and was amended to Christianize it (he was almost as unusual then as a non Christian non Jewish politician would be today).
On the broader point Kleiman writes "In fact, the use of religious language to appeal to black (and Latino) voters isn't controversial among liberals. The controversy is about whether liberals should try to woo Bible-believing, church-going, born-again whites. To which I say, "Why not?""
I think the controversy is over how far to go to try to woo them. I don't know of anyone who objects to Obama's use of Christian references in his speaches (I sure don't and I'm an atheist). The question is whether it is time to compromise over issues which are key to "Bible-believing, church-going, born-again whites" meaning abortion, gay marriage and laws against discrimination against gays.
