In the last two decades there has been a fundamental shift in how conservative Christians perceive themselves and who they define as their enemies.

For centuries fundamentalist, evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians were at each other's throats. The main issues were why the Catholics are wrong, why the protestants are wrong, why the Jews are wrong, etc. and the discussions were all about theological differences. Back then the important thing was to be right about the church or the Bible or Jesus, and the enemy was largely defined as other Christians not in the "true church."

Today the situation is much different. Conservative theological differences take a back seat, and conservative religious folks all join hands as "people of faith." The important thing now is to be right on abortion or homosexual marriage, and the enemy is the "liberals," and theological differences are very much in the background. (Note that in conservative Christianity the "enemy" is a constant; what changes is the definition of the enemy.)

Religious differences that used to crystallize along the theological axis now crystallize along the social and cultural axis, and specific social and political issues have replaced theological issues as the main focus and litmus test. In a real sense, social and political issues are the main religious issues for many people.

What happened is that religiously conservative Christians got into bed with politically conservative Republicans, and made a deal with the devil. In exchange for support for their social agenda, Christians adopted the politically conservative economic, political, and military agenda.

But this realignment comes at a cost to religion. Many have observed that conservative Christians often do not reference the teachings of Jesus on many issues. You can have a very long discussion with a conservative Christian and the word "Jesus" won't even come up. On the one hand Christians worry about "what would Jesus do" in a personal pietistic sense, but their main agenda virtually ignores what Jesus would do.

In that sense, a number of American Christians have effectively abandoned the teachings of the Second Person of the Trinity. Oh sure, they still believe in the Incarnation and all of that, but the focus on the Jesus of the gospels has virtually been surgically removed.

It is not an exaggeration to say that a conservative Christian will have more in common with an anti-homosexual atheist than he will have in common with a liberal Christian. In fact, I personally know conservative Christians who loath their liberal "brethren," while at the same time admiring the Oxycontin-eating and Viagra-toting non-Christian Rush Limbaugh. The non-Christian Michael Savage supports the Christian fundamentalist social agenda, and in return many fundamentalists suspect that when the rapture comes, he's going with them.

The issue is how liberals can respond to this situation without turning every issue into a religious debate, and without liberal candidates having to say "oh look, I'm religious too, I go to church too."

Here I think the concept of "tradition" is helpful. While the U.S. never was a "Christian" nation, the values of the nation have been significantly shaped by the religious traditions of Christianity and Judaism. However much we have failed and continue to fail, we still believe in basic ideals such as fairness and justice. We don't let people starve to death or bleed to death in the street. We don't like the idea of poor people being exploited. We are revolted by the idea of torturing people or locking them away forever without a fair trial.

To the extent that these ideals are being ignored by the religious right, that represents a loss of the basic moral tradition. It is a moral traditon that to some extent grew out of religion, but is not religious per se. It is a tradition to which both secular and religious people can appeal.