1. Comment #190132 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Sorry Irate...

F U C K T A R D !

Other Comments by mordacious1

2. Comment #190135 by Colwyn Abernathy on June 8, 2008 at 12:36 pm

WHA WHA WHAT?! "THERE SHALL BE NO RELIGIOUS TEST" DUMBASS!!

P.S.

Establishment Clause...sorry too, Irate.

FUCKTARD!

PPS.

Must we trot out the Treaty of Tripoli again? Jefferson would kick you in the nads...okay, that's me...but he'd still be PISSED.

PPPS.

DOOD, "IN GOD WE TRUST" wasn't put there by the Founders, moron. Sry...I'm done.

Other Comments by Colwyn Abernathy

3. Comment #190137 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Remember...this guy promised to appoint Justices in the mold of Roberts and Scallito...

Too bad he never read a history book on the founding of our nation.

Other Comments by mordacious1

4. Comment #190138 by PrimeNumbers on June 8, 2008 at 12:43 pm

McCain is a grade 1, class A MORON! He doesn't know his own country's history and he doesn't realize that the founding fathers of his country were NOT christian and many despised christianity.

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

5. Comment #190141 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Blah, blah blah....

When Obama addresses the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee he's suddenly Israel's best friend. When Hillary speaks in Pennsylvania she supports gun rights. When McCain panders for the evangelical vote, he finds Jesus Christ.

I'm honestly surprised when people get so riled up at the words of politicians. Don't you know that they'll say ANYTHING to get elected?

What I'm concerned with is voting record and how these people act when given a choice. McCain has a fairly moderate social policy - certainly better than any of the other Republican nominees. I'm not defending him or what he's saying but let's accept the fact that he's probably vote pandering here. Nothing in his voting record suggests that he's a Christian evangelical.

That being said, just wait until the general election campaigns kick into full-gear, now that the primaries are over. With the Democrats trying to capture the evangelical vote for the first time in decades, both candidates will be falling all over themselves to prove who is more religious. It's gonna get ugly...

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

6. Comment #190142 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 12:47 pm

oh BTW, even war heroes can be fucktards sometimes, I know quite a few....so don't get offended when I call this man who served his country bravely an offensive name...it fits in this case, especially lately, hmmm?

I saw a piece where he is having trouble raising money, no real base. He has to pander to the xians or he'll go broke.

Other Comments by mordacious1

7. Comment #190144 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 12:51 pm

McCain is a grade 1, class A MORON! He doesn't know his own country's history and he doesn't realize that the founding fathers of his country were NOT christian and many despised christianity.

That statement is just as ignorant as McCains.

Surely a group as diverse as the Founding Fathers cannot be grouped together. There were Deists, Agnostics (Jefferson/Paine), probably no out-and-out Atheists but certainly many Christians, George Washington among them. While many of them were vocal in their criticism of some aspects of Christianity, it would certainly be wrong to say that all of our Founding Fathers weren't Christian.

I hate when people try to re-write history to suit their political agenda. No need for hyperboles here.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

8. Comment #190145 by Colwyn Abernathy on June 8, 2008 at 12:51 pm

Good points, FF. I still think they should be called on it, and there's a difference between blatant pandering and misrepresenting history. He could waffle on about feelings and spirituality and shit, but I take GREAT offence at fucking up our Founders' vision.


EDIT:

Surely a group as diverse as the Founding Fathers cannot be grouped together. There were Deists, Agnostics (Jefferson/Paine), probably no out-and-out Atheists but certainly many Christians, George Washington among them. While many of them were vocal in their criticism of some aspects of Christianity, it would certainly be wrong to say that our Founding Fathers weren't Christian.

I hate when people try to re-write history to suit their political agenda. No need for hyperboles here.

Well said. It's the twisting of their vision of a government free from theocracy that gets up my butt.

Other Comments by Colwyn Abernathy

9. Comment #190146 by Peacebeuponme on June 8, 2008 at 12:52 pm

You're a real mumbling, stuttering fuck, you know that McCain?

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

10. Comment #190147 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 12:53 pm

FightingFalcon

1) SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

2) He may want to get re-elected, if he lives long enough.

Other Comments by mordacious1

11. Comment #190148 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Mordacious - I'm waiting for a point here. How does that prove McCain has a socially conservative voting record?

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

12. Comment #190149 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 12:59 pm

He could waffle on about feelings and spirituality and shit, but I take GREAT offence at fucking up our Founders' vision.

Well said. It's the twisting of their vision of a government free from theocracy that gets up my butt.

Agreed. I take offense at either side trying to tell me that the Founding Fathers were either hard-core Christians or Atheists opposed to religion.

We're talking about a group of roughly 100 individuals (if you include all signers of the DoI and Constitution) who had varying philosophies. Just one example is Thomas Jefferson vs. Patrick Henry. Jefferson was somewhere between Deist and Agnostic who frequently criticized organized religion and the Bible. Patrick Henry was a staunch defender of traditional religion. That's just examining two of the many Founding Fathers. I can't stand hyperboles and generalizations, regardless of who makes them.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

13. Comment #190150 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:00 pm

The points are: he promised to appoint religious judges, and if he wants to be re-elected he cannot be a moderate in office. It does not matter how he voted in the Senate. The only thing that will stop him is Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

Other Comments by mordacious1

14. Comment #190151 by Dhamma on June 8, 2008 at 1:00 pm

Would it be too late to run for presidency?



(If they would let foreigners run too, though)

Other Comments by Dhamma

15. Comment #190152 by moderndaythomas on June 8, 2008 at 1:02 pm

Just another rich white jack ass running for president again, I see. Well I'm sure he'll compliment my own country's rich white jack ass.

Other Comments by moderndaythomas

16. Comment #190154 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:05 pm

The points are: he promised to appoint religious judges, and if he wants to be re-elected he cannot be a moderate in office. It does not matter how he voted in the Senate. The only thing that will stop him is Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

Yea, I highly doubt he's looking at re-election. He'd be 76 if he ran for re-election. Ronald Reagan got to 76 but that was in his last year in office and I can't see McCain's age not getting in the way.

On the issue of judges, McCain has a fairly moderate voting policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_John_McCain#Judicial_appointments

Not to mention that he is an old-school Federalist (a rarity in America these days) who believes strongly in state's rights and the ability of states to make their own laws, rather than having the federal government mandate them.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

17. Comment #190155 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Whatever you label Jefferson, and I think he would be called an atheist today, he had a repulsion of religion. He tried to build a strong wall between church and state. Madison, Jefferson, Paine...and don't forget Franklin who was quite a slut for a xian.

Other Comments by mordacious1

18. Comment #190156 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Uh...old school Federalists believed in a strong central government...Hamilton ring a bell...he wanted a monarchy.

Other Comments by mordacious1

19. Comment #190157 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on June 8, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Here is Obama on the same topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPBxl53ZNxQ

Refreshing

I think this should be posted on this site. It's important to see both candidates views, even though I'm British, what happens in America affects the world.

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

20. Comment #190158 by Maybeline on June 8, 2008 at 1:17 pm

May I ask why americans are so concerned with what religion the "Founding Fathers" had? What real bearing does the Founding Fathers religious beliefs have on today's USA? Does america only function according to what these individuals dictated centuries ago?

By the way, I just love that phrase "Founding Fathers". It sounds like someting belonging to scripture, science fiction or church heirarchy, like "elders", the sanhedrin, or or the Fremen.

Other Comments by Maybeline

21. Comment #190161 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Ah, good ol' Obama...let's not piss off anyone.

Other Comments by mordacious1

22. Comment #190162 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Whatever you label Jefferson, and I think he would be called an atheist today, he had a repulsion of religion. He tried to build a strong wall between church and state. Madison, Jefferson, Paine...and don't forget Franklin who was quite a slut for a xian.

Go to the Jefferson Memorial where you will see this quote (one of my favorite if not for the reference to god):

"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

There is little evidence to believe that Jefferson was an Atheist. Certainly very critical of organized religion, he was (as I said before) somewhere between a Deist and Agnostic. Please learn the difference between religion and divine providence. Jefferson may have hated the former but he believed in the latter.

Uh...old school Federalists believed in a strong central government...Hamilton ring a bell...he wanted a monarchy.

Hamilton was one Federalist and I'll go out on a limb here by saying that he was probably the only Founding Father to favor a return to the monarchy.

I don't mean to turn this into Civics 101 but since we are showing an ignorance of Federalism here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism

I did not literally mean to imply that John McCain was a Federalist in the 1789 sense. I meant that he supports power sharing between states and federal government. Today, there are few allies left of State and Individual rights. John McCain is one of the few.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

23. Comment #190164 by robotaholic on June 8, 2008 at 1:23 pm

hey at least this guy completed one term as senator - the other person running hasn't even done that - they're both equally religious - in fact if you were objective about this you would vote for Mccain because he has more experience in general - in the senate, in the wartime -I wish this website moderator would be equally objective-

10 bux says that the tide changes and obama doesn't even try to get our troops out of iraq anytime soon - he comes off to me like a lot of hot air -

as far as gay marriage - obama and mccain are equally against it - so therefore I am not voting for either one!- I'm not a 2nd rate citizen, I don't deserve to be treated as seperate but equal - i feel like when it comes to marriage I should be just as entitled to that WORD as anyone else

Other Comments by robotaholic

24. Comment #190165 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Maybeline

The founding fathers wrote the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, when the Supreme Court has to interpret the Constitution they sometimes have to return to the reasoning of the founding fathers to decide what it really says. That's the way it should be done, not always though. So the xians are trying to rewrite history, so they can bring religion into schools, etc.

Other Comments by mordacious1

25. Comment #190166 by robotaholic on June 8, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Hey PEACEBEUPONME - that's a really peaceful thing you said

Other Comments by robotaholic

26. Comment #190168 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:31 pm

as far as gay marriage - obama and mccain are equally against it - so therefore I am not voting for either one!- I'm not a 2nd rate citizen, I don't deserve to be treated as seperate but equal - i feel like when it comes to marriage I should be just as entitled to that WORD as anyone else

McCain voted against the Federal Defense of Marriage Act but he did campaign against gay marriage in Arizona.

I'm honestly surprised to hear that about Obama. I figured he supported gay marriage.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

27. Comment #190169 by Barry Pearson on June 8, 2008 at 1:32 pm

ThoughtsonCommonToad said: Here is Obama on the same topic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPBxl53ZNxQ
Refreshing

He also said this, from the sources below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg8lCLumByw

http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2668,Character-Attacks-How-to-Properly-Apply-the-Ad-Hominem,Scientific-American,page2#188648

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

28. Comment #190170 by robotaholic on June 8, 2008 at 1:32 pm

he's for cival unions - just like mccain- i deserve marriage lol

Other Comments by robotaholic

29. Comment #190171 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:33 pm

robotaholic

You will never advance in your rights with a Rep. in charge...where have you been during GW's admin.? Obama will sign Dem. legislation, I think he's actually pretty liberal...just needs to sound xian if you want to corner the black vote or be a mover and shaker in the black community. I didn't vote for him in the primary, but look at the choices...

Other Comments by mordacious1

30. Comment #190172 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Here is Obama on the same topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPBxl53ZNxQ

Refreshing

I think this should be posted on this site. It's important to see both candidates views, even though I'm British, what happens in America affects the world.

Just wait until we approach November and Obama attempts to crack the Republican stranglehold over the South.

We'll see who believes in separation of church and state then...

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

31. Comment #190173 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:36 pm

he's for cival unions - just like mccain- i deserve marriage lol

Yea, I just saw that.

Too bad. I don't see what the big fuss is about. I suppose you can always move to Mass or California but I suppose it still sucks.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

32. Comment #190175 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:38 pm

FightingFalcon

methinks you should support Bob Barr.

Other Comments by mordacious1

33. Comment #190178 by lostpoet on June 8, 2008 at 1:41 pm

Fighting Falcon...

I find your comments here oddly agitated and dangerously close to the hyperbole you claim to despise.

Why should you (or anyone, for that matter) "...take offense at either side trying to tell me that the Founding Fathers were either hard-core Christians or Atheists opposed to religion?" What??? Are you related to one of the "founding fathers?" It's just an idea -- for discussion and conversation. Lighten-up!

And as per Maybeline's post, why should anyone care about what the "founding fathers" had to say on religion? These people are dead and buried -- long gone...never to return. They and their 200-plus old views are completely irrelevant to our current situations -- they are dead...they can't hear us...they don't care about us...they can offer no counsel or advice.

Stop treating the "founding fathers" as deities. They're not!!

Other Comments by lostpoet

34. Comment #190179 by Maybeline on June 8, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Thanx for the response mordacious one.

However, it seems to me that your Constitution and its interpretation follows the exact same model as any modern christian theologian trying to interpret what some bronze age middle eastern desert dweller thought 3000 years ago. And both the theologian and the modern politician are focusing on law.

What then is the difference between religion and state?

Other Comments by Maybeline

35. Comment #190180 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:46 pm

methinks you should support Bob Barr.

Ugh - the incompetent Libertarian Party. I am a member but I hate admitting it =)

I'll probably end up voting for McCain simply because Obama literally knows nothing about economics. His tap dancing on Capital Gains Taxes alone showed me how little he understands about basic laws of Capitalism.

O well....the joy of being a Libertarian in America...

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

36. Comment #190181 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on June 8, 2008 at 1:46 pm

FightingFalcon

methinks you should support Bob Barr.

More like Grover Norquist

Here he is on the Colbert Report

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

37. Comment #190182 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Why should you (or anyone, for that matter) "...take offense at either side trying to tell me that the Founding Fathers were either hard-core Christians or Atheists opposed to religion?" What??? Are you related to one of the "founding fathers?" It's just an idea -- for discussion and conversation. Lighten-up!

As an Historian, I've seen way too many examples of people pushing political agendas by distorting History. Indeed, sometimes the only way to pass certain political agendas is to change the way that people view History.

I'm concerned with one thing only in this world - what is true. I don't let anyone get away with distorting History to suit their political agenda.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

38. Comment #190183 by Star Spangled Eagle on June 8, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Why is no one commenting on the shitty quality of this video? The abrupt cuts are really annoying, did someone make this in their basement? You don't have a clue what actual questions are being asked, you don't hear the interviewer, some of the things McCain says could be looked at differently if the editing was a bit less "misleading"

Although McCain's comments are not surprising, I think the jumping to anger -yawn- here is not very constructive. Come on, it's no surprise, I mean he's the presumed Republican nominee for president. I'm not making excuses for him but be rational here, what the heck did you expect?

Other Comments by Star Spangled Eagle

39. Comment #190184 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:49 pm

lostpoet

Don't read Darwin either, he's dead, can't offer advice, so why bother...

If you read constitutional law, the justices refer to letters, writings, etc. by the founding fathers to get a grasp of how they were thinking. How they were thinking is the basis of law for the U.S. when the Constitution doesn't address isssues directly.

Other Comments by mordacious1

40. Comment #190185 by FightingFalcon on June 8, 2008 at 1:51 pm

More like Grover Norquist http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=167408

I recently found out about this guy, but I forget how.

I'm not sure how I feel about him yet but anyone in favor of lower taxes and smaller government can't be all that bad in my book.

Other Comments by FightingFalcon

41. Comment #190188 by Cartomancer on June 8, 2008 at 1:53 pm

It never ceases to amaze me just how different the political rhetoric is across the World Pond. If the leader of a political party were to say those sorts of things in public over here then his voting base would dry up quicker than you could say "raving nutcase". Just ask Tony Blair.

He actually said words to the effect of "I think my religion is better than anyone else's" in the context of leading a nation which prides itself on being inclusive and tolerant of all religious minorities. Unbelievable!

I did notice, though, that at one point he was about to say "judaeo-christian" again, but stuttered and said "christian" instead. What are we to make of this I wonder?

Other Comments by Cartomancer

42. Comment #190189 by Maybeline on June 8, 2008 at 1:57 pm

hello again mordacious one

Whereas Darwin is indeed the starting point for evolutionary theory he is not the end. As far as I know, other scientists have improved upon his research. Therefore, the Constitution is the starting point, not the end.

Other Comments by Maybeline

43. Comment #190191 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Maybeline

Your question would take pages.

I'm assuming that your from the UK or one of it's offspring, as we are. All of our law basicly centers on English Common Law and documents formulated over time. Your government, at least the judiciary, does the same thing as we do here, they just don't use that phrase that bothers you. But they still have to discuss, for example what the Magna Carta means. It's just the way countries work.

Other Comments by mordacious1

44. Comment #190192 by Maybeline on June 8, 2008 at 2:00 pm

*But they still have to discuss, for example what the Magna Carta means.*

Um. No we don't. We have no written Constitution.

Other Comments by Maybeline

45. Comment #190193 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on June 8, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Barry Pearson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg8lCLumByw

That is a fantastic link

If this site has posted McCain's views it is obliged to post Obamas as well. I recommend it be this one, the one you linked.

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

46. Comment #190194 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Maybeline

True. But science and law work differently, and the Constition can be interpreted differently as the centuries past, unless you're a real right wing republican. Also the Constitution can be ammended to meet new needs, that's kind of what scientists do with evolution as they discover new facts.

Sorry Don't want to be rude, but I gotta go, so if I don't reply it's not because I'm ignoring you.

Other Comments by mordacious1

47. Comment #190196 by Cartomancer on June 8, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Um. No we don't. We have no written Constitution.

Technically we do. We just don't have it all written in the same place. The constitution of the United Kingdom is spread across all the various parliament acts, succession acts, common law decisions etc. that bear on constitutional matters. If there wasn't something we could refer to, how do you imagine we would know how our government was actually supposed to work?

Other Comments by Cartomancer

48. Comment #190198 by Obecalp on June 8, 2008 at 2:12 pm

What the heck? And I had this guy as my favorite to win the election.

The question is: Is he sincere? I remember a televised meeting between the republican and democratic candidates, where the host asked the candidates: 'Do you accept the theory of evolution?' McCain answered 'yes', stuttered (realizing the implications) and then said something along the lines of 'but when I hike in the Grand Canyon, I see the hand of God' (sic).

Obviously, religion plays it's part - no proclaimed atheist could ever win an election for the presidency.

Therefore, I reckon he's just 'lip singing'.

Other Comments by Obecalp

49. Comment #190199 by mathews on June 8, 2008 at 2:12 pm

As wrong as he may be, I have a feeling this is an opinion shared by the majority of Americans, or close to it. As such, until education systems improve you can probably expect all your candidates to be talking like this for a long time.
That's democracy, unfortunately.

Other Comments by mathews

50. Comment #190200 by lostpoet on June 8, 2008 at 2:12 pm

mordacious1:

"Don't read Darwin either, he's dead, can't offer advice, so why bother..."

Exactly!! Darwin is dead. He can't offer any advice. And thus, we should not treat him as a living deity -- invoking his name as if he were still alive.

That's my point.

And Maybeline's point is spot-on! We in the States tend to treat our "founding fathers' as if they were living deities -- all that they say is good and rightous...damn you to hell if you even have an inkling to disagree with what they said or wrote some 200 years ago.

Obviously, the writings of people who are dead can clearly inspire and motive people today. But that doesn't mean we need to treat them as living deities.

Other Comments by lostpoet