Re Homer’s post beginning “here you go …”: You seem to think that it is self-evident that the absence of “God” from the text of the Democratic party campaign platform of 2012 means that the Democratic party has some objections to G-d. You evidently do not understand that in a pluralistic democracy which guarantees freedom of religion in its constitution, religion and G-d are left to the people to glorify (or whatever else they want to do with G-d) as individual citizens determine. As Jews, we should be particularly gratified that our government is not authorized to support religion, as we should know from our history that when governments support religions, the Jewish one rarely gets a fair share.
As for toivah marriage, it’s optional for those who want it. I don’t understand it, you don’t understand it, Torah forbids it, but government should not be picking our spouses for us. Marriage is a religious institution, in which governments have long kibbitzed. Stick to your religion, and if the government respects all religions, as our government should and mostly does, toivah marriage is not a governmental issue for us Jews.
As for the capital of Israel, I see no problem with not putting a thumb in the eye of Palestine supporters by referencing the issue in a party platform. Party platforms should be set forth reasonable goals and should not be wish lists (and as soon as elections are over, they are waste paper). Democratic presidents have been unqualified supporters of the State of Israel since its founding, and the siting of its capital should be worked out if and when the Palestinians sit down and negotiate for their own future with Israel.