Login |
New User
Over 1.5 million copies sold
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable
by Richard Dawkins
Print
Atheists: The Last Political Outcasts
by Sally Quinn - Washington Post
Thanks to SPS for the link.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/08/atheists_the_last_political_ou.html
Atheists: The Last Political Outcasts
Bob Tiernan is an agnostic. "I'm not a hard-core atheist", he says. He was raised a Catholic and went to Jesuit College and law school. He is a practicing lawyer who specializes in issues involving separation of church and state. He is also a Democrat. This week he was in Denver to protest what he sees as the dangerous mixing of religion and politics, and the sad exlusion of non-believers in a party known for its inclusiveness.
On Sunday, Tiernan attended the first event at the Democratic National Convention, an Interfaith Gathering attended by some 2,000 people at the Colorado Convention Center. Speaking were distinguished priests, rabbis, imams and religion scholars. "I sat through, I guess I'd have to call it, a service," says Tiernan. "People were responding in unison. In the middle, Leah Daughtry (a pastor and CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee) spoke and said that despite what the media says, Democrats are people of faith."
Tiernan says he couldn't stand it any more. "I stood up and said, 'I'm a democrat but I'm not a person of faith.' I said, 'This looks like a church service to me and I never thought I would see the Democrats doing something like this." At that point, the police came and escorted Tiernan from the hall. They told him he could leave or stay and see what the Democrats wanted to do with him, so he stayed but nobody did anything so he left.
"The thing is," says Tiernan with a chuckle, "I'm not a career protester. I just don't like religion mixed with politics. It's wrong and it's dangerous."
The Interfaith Gathering was the first of several interfaith events scheduled during the convention. The Secular Coalition of America had written to Daughtry to ask that atheists, agnostics and secular humanists be included in these events. The Associated Press reported that she received the request but never responded.
The Democrats are in a real bind this year. In recent elections, the Republicans have owned religion. The evangelical base has helped Republican presidential candidates win elections while the Democrats have stood by helplessly. This year, the Democrats are bound to show they are just as religious as Republicans, but at what cost?
In his speeches, Barack Obama has talked not only about his own deep faith but about the rights of all Americans, including believers and non-believers. But if the Interfaith Gathering was an effort to show how inclusive they are, they failed. Between 10% and 12% of Americans openly say they're non-believers and many more privately admit to not being believers but feel it is socially unacceptable to say so in their communities.
At various times in years past, women, blacks, Jews and gays were the political outcasts in one or both parties. Now it seems the only group of untouchables are the atheists.
This year, the Democrats have chosen a black man as their presidential candidate and they nearly chose a woman. In 2000, a Jewish man was on the ticket as a vice presidential candidate. Gays have won the right to be married in several states and the Democrats now openly endorse civil unions.
Can you imagine an atheist running for or even being considered for President? Even Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church, an open-minded and inclusive evangelical, told Larry King that he could not vote for an atheist.
The Democrats know that they have a large non-believing constituency and they also know that to not accept them is the height of hypocrisy. On the other hand they realize that to recognize them formally would be the kiss of death.
So what is the party of unity, togetherness, compromise, inclusiveness and pluralism to do? Sadly, it seems they have taken Leah Daughtry's approach. Don't answer the mail.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/08/atheists_the_last_political_ou.html
Atheists: The Last Political Outcasts
Bob Tiernan is an agnostic. "I'm not a hard-core atheist", he says. He was raised a Catholic and went to Jesuit College and law school. He is a practicing lawyer who specializes in issues involving separation of church and state. He is also a Democrat. This week he was in Denver to protest what he sees as the dangerous mixing of religion and politics, and the sad exlusion of non-believers in a party known for its inclusiveness.
On Sunday, Tiernan attended the first event at the Democratic National Convention, an Interfaith Gathering attended by some 2,000 people at the Colorado Convention Center. Speaking were distinguished priests, rabbis, imams and religion scholars. "I sat through, I guess I'd have to call it, a service," says Tiernan. "People were responding in unison. In the middle, Leah Daughtry (a pastor and CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee) spoke and said that despite what the media says, Democrats are people of faith."
Tiernan says he couldn't stand it any more. "I stood up and said, 'I'm a democrat but I'm not a person of faith.' I said, 'This looks like a church service to me and I never thought I would see the Democrats doing something like this." At that point, the police came and escorted Tiernan from the hall. They told him he could leave or stay and see what the Democrats wanted to do with him, so he stayed but nobody did anything so he left.
"The thing is," says Tiernan with a chuckle, "I'm not a career protester. I just don't like religion mixed with politics. It's wrong and it's dangerous."
The Interfaith Gathering was the first of several interfaith events scheduled during the convention. The Secular Coalition of America had written to Daughtry to ask that atheists, agnostics and secular humanists be included in these events. The Associated Press reported that she received the request but never responded.
The Democrats are in a real bind this year. In recent elections, the Republicans have owned religion. The evangelical base has helped Republican presidential candidates win elections while the Democrats have stood by helplessly. This year, the Democrats are bound to show they are just as religious as Republicans, but at what cost?
In his speeches, Barack Obama has talked not only about his own deep faith but about the rights of all Americans, including believers and non-believers. But if the Interfaith Gathering was an effort to show how inclusive they are, they failed. Between 10% and 12% of Americans openly say they're non-believers and many more privately admit to not being believers but feel it is socially unacceptable to say so in their communities.
At various times in years past, women, blacks, Jews and gays were the political outcasts in one or both parties. Now it seems the only group of untouchables are the atheists.
This year, the Democrats have chosen a black man as their presidential candidate and they nearly chose a woman. In 2000, a Jewish man was on the ticket as a vice presidential candidate. Gays have won the right to be married in several states and the Democrats now openly endorse civil unions.
Can you imagine an atheist running for or even being considered for President? Even Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church, an open-minded and inclusive evangelical, told Larry King that he could not vote for an atheist.
The Democrats know that they have a large non-believing constituency and they also know that to not accept them is the height of hypocrisy. On the other hand they realize that to recognize them formally would be the kiss of death.
So what is the party of unity, togetherness, compromise, inclusiveness and pluralism to do? Sadly, it seems they have taken Leah Daughtry's approach. Don't answer the mail.
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Thursday, August 28, 2008 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 664 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #238692 by Szymanowski on August 28, 2008 at 1:30 pm
I'd prefer it if a Democrat played along to win the election and THEN admitted he/she didn't believe in magic. Other Comments by Szymanowski
3. Comment #238694 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Szymanowski-Yeah, he can claim he had an epiphany. ;)
Other Comments by Diacanu
4. Comment #238702 by Stormkahn on August 28, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I guess us bad guys are on the loosing end of a system thats support the organised and well funded churches. At some point the numbers will start to matter and the number crunchers for either party will start to place their bets with the rational vote...
Viva La Evolucion!
Other Comments by Stormkahn
5. Comment #238707 by Quine on August 28, 2008 at 1:40 pm
After moving to the town where I was born, my father decided to become active in party politics. He went to a local Democratic Party, meeting, where they began with a prayer; he walked out, and that was that.P.S. When Thomas Jefferson was working to make sure that no official test of religion was required for public office, he argued that such tests just institutionalize hypocrisy. It appears he was correct, yet again.
Other Comments by Quine
6. Comment #238708 by 4horsefins on August 28, 2008 at 1:40 pm
You must pass a religious test to be president of the U.S. I can not imagine, in my life time, the president ending a speech and not pimping out the creator of the universe. If the speech ended with out the solicitation of support from credulous people, what would it end with? Other Comments by 4horsefins
7. Comment #238711 by Eshto on August 28, 2008 at 1:41 pm
WTF? Gays have NOT won the right to marry in "several states". It's two. Count 'em, two. And California will almost definitely outlaw it in Novemeber anyway, leaving only one. And conservatives are still pushing for a federal marriage ban anyway.
There are a few Democrats advocating the lesser status of civil union, which doesn't confer federal rights and wouldn't help, for example, my friend whose partner is getting deported back to Bulgaria. They are going to attempt a long-term relationship, but that's kinda tough when there's a giant fucking ocean in between you and the person you're in love with.
I hate this shit. I do believe homophobia is almost entirely rooted in religion, and so fighting for gay rights and atheist rights are pretty much the same battle. But as someone who has lived with homophobia, I can promise you it is much, MUCH worse to be gay in America than to be atheist and not gay. I don't like being discriminated for either one of those things, but give me a break.
Other Comments by Eshto
8. Comment #238712 by savroD on August 28, 2008 at 1:42 pm
The democrats will implode on this garbage the same way the repewby boys have. It will lead them, the way all religion does, down a path of corruption and criminality. My wish-thinking amounts to just hoping these so-called "people of faith" would just self-terminate! Other Comments by savroD
9. Comment #238713 by bamafreethinker on August 28, 2008 at 1:44 pm
As long as the dems support gay rights and abortion, they are wasting their time courting fundies. It will not help one bit. Obama is taking an unnecessary risk (by being more religious than McCain, and by being dishonest) if you ask me. I think he would be better off leaving faith out altogether. Heck, Gore only lost the election by a few hundred votes without pandering to the IDiots and the homophobes. I hope Obama doesn't believe all the BS he is spouting about faith. McCain may be the most religious of the two, but you wouldn't know it by their words. Other Comments by bamafreethinker
10. Comment #238723 by Ian Bamlett on August 28, 2008 at 2:04 pm
The UK had its first female prime minister in 1979 but has not yet come close to having an openly atheist leader.
Until we see it in at least one other western democracy we will not see it it in the US.
Other Comments by Ian Bamlett
11. Comment #238725 by Ex~ on August 28, 2008 at 2:05 pm
@ bamafreethinker. I wasn't aware that dems supported gay rights. Obama was certainly clear at the evangelical forum that he opposed gay marriage. *sigh*Evangelical Christians are such fucking hypocrites.
Who do you vote for? The guy who cheated on his crippled wife to go fuck some rich heiress some decades his junior? Who's known far and wide for his dirty mouth and rude, uncontrolled outbursts of anger? Whose answer to any conflict is bomb the shit out of the other person? Who wants to extend tax-breaks for the richest of the rich and leave the middle and working class struggling to get by? Who calls popular evangelicals "workers of intolerance"?
Or do you vote for the committed Christian, whose family values are evident in the loving and healthy family he has raised, in a devoted relationship with a woman for every reason but her money?
There is no possible fathomable reason someone looking at the election from an evangelical Christian perspective, could EVER reasonably put John McCain over Obama.
Not that this is necessarily a good thing.
Other Comments by Ex~
12. Comment #238727 by Sciros on August 28, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Ex~ none of that matters if only you accept Christ as your savior! Other Comments by Sciros
13. Comment #238730 by kkelly on August 28, 2008 at 2:09 pm
7, In California, opinion is split at 47/47%, but a majority oppose a ballot initiative to ban it.
http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080828/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_poll
Other Comments by kkelly
14. Comment #238732 by Manson on August 28, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Mr. Obama lost my vote when he gave his 'take it one step further' speech regarding fantasy-based (formerly faith-based) cash give-aways. The "if the government can't do it, maybe the churches can with government money (i.e. our money)" approach is not a policy I can support on any level. Just like Roe v. Wade and Evolution. There is no middle ground in the separation between church and state.His showing at the humpback church was icing on the cake.
It is unfortunate. I also can not vote for the republicans because, well, they aren't republicans anymore.
The libertarians are ideologues who don't know when idealism ends and practical, real-world application of principals begin.
Ultimately, the message that needs to be sent to the Obamas of the world is... take your pick. Either pander to the religious right, or choose your intelligent base of 10-15% rational/atheist/agnostics. It is Mr. Obama who must be realistic not me.
If that means McCain wins, then perhaps it will take the Dems 4 more years to realize that they need our vote too. Evolution in action.
Is a little pandering to reason, science, and rationalism too much to ask? Apparently so in 2008.
EDIT: For two small grammar errors.
Other Comments by Manson
15. Comment #238734 by textnotspeech on August 28, 2008 at 2:17 pm
As if pandering to us atheists will make things better. It's the pandering we need to get rid of. I'd rather have honesty and sincerity. The politicians only say what they think the majority want to hear. There is no winning this political battle. Lowest common denominator runs the show. Why do we still bullshit ourselves into thinking that these people care about anything but power.Other Comments by textnotspeech
16. Comment #238735 by Ivan The Not So Bad on August 28, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Eshto,
Do not despair yet. The latest polls show a majority AGAINST approving the religiously inspired Proposition 8 (which seeks to reverse the recent CA Supreme Court decision to allow same-sex unions).
Other Comments by Ivan The Not So Bad
17. Comment #238739 by dochmbi on August 28, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I am atheist and an anti-theist, but I don't think there should be gay marriage in church. It's their organization, they should be allowed to decide what is done and what isn't done in church as long as its legal. Other than that, I'm all for gay marriage, as long as it doesn't take place in a church.It would be hypocritical to try to manipulate what happens at their church while at the same time opposing them when they try to manipulate other organizations.
Other Comments by dochmbi
18. Comment #238741 by kkelly on August 28, 2008 at 2:25 pm
17, Nobody wanted to. Other Comments by kkelly
19. Comment #238743 by DamnDirtyApe on August 28, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Ian, don't forget how she was - she was a female Oldboy. Anti-abortion, anti-trade unionist, anti-nhs, anti-people basically. 'There is no such thing as society' were her words. She was a social darwinist I reckon. And certainly no atheist.No state funeral for thatcher please.
That's when they finally put you in the ground
I'll stand on your grave and tramp the dirt down.
Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe
20. Comment #238744 by Gregg Townsend on August 28, 2008 at 2:28 pm
7. Comment #238711 by Eshto
I understand your anger and agree there is a long way to go with gaining equal rights for gay and lesbian couples.
I was encouraged when Ted Kennedy said he finally sees an opportunity to end discrimination against homosexuals in his endorsement speech. At least the Dems talks openly about the issue and applaud when a leader calls for an end to discrimination.
I would have loved to see Ted (or anyone) say the same about non-believers.
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
21. Comment #238748 by Gregg Townsend on August 28, 2008 at 2:32 pm
17. Comment #238739 by dochmbi
I think you misunderstand the issue. No one (that I know of) is asking the government to force a church to take members they don't want. The issue is about equal recognition under the law.
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
22. Comment #238749 by daveau on August 28, 2008 at 2:32 pm
The Obama MOR move & jesus hyperbole didn't really start until it became clear that he was going to win the primary. I'm hoping (no factual basis, mind you) that once the November election is over he will go back to being the mostly rational liberal that we in Chicago have known for a while. It would be nice, however, to be able to vote for a non-superstitious candidate someday.Other Comments by daveau
23. Comment #238755 by macros_man on August 28, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Manson - have you ever seen this video?:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4824085103245427405&ei=PBe3SNmGMYzYqwOR8-TJDA&q=obama church religion&vt=lf&hl=en
(if the link doesn't work, just go to google video and search for "obama church religion" - and it should be the first video that shows up)
I think this speech was given some time before Obama was running for president - or at least before he was very popular.
In it, he very eloquently champions secular ideals, and secular reasoning. He has also expressed that any faith-based funds should not endorse a particular religion.
I'm not crazy about faith-based programs either... but there's a chance they may do some good for people - especially if some selfless people are a part of it. And if it just squanders money on religious indoctrination, then this will only be a drop in the bucket compared to how we waste money on other things.
If you renounce Obama for this relatively minor transgression, and choose not to vote for him, you are PUNISHING YOURSELF AND EVERYONE ELSE.
If nothing else, THINK ABOUT THE DAMN SUPREME COURT JUSTICE APPOINTMENTS. WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?!
Even for all his religious misgivings, Obama is light-years ahead of McCain in terms of secular ideals.
It just blows my mind that you could think you are somehow doing everyone a favor by not electing Obama, and thereby encouraging McCain to become elected.
As secularists, I think our ONLY practical option at this time is to do everything we can to ensure Obama is elected. To do otherwise would simply be masochistic.
Other Comments by macros_man
24. Comment #238758 by OhioLen on August 28, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Re voting for Jesus: someone's car is parked about a block away with a "Vote the Bible" bumpersticker on it. Makes me wince every time I see the damn thing. Other Comments by OhioLen
25. Comment #238766 by macros_man on August 28, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Oh... and let's not forget that if Obama is elected president, he will be the first [half] black president the U.S. has ever had.
Wouldn't that make you feel good? To know you voted for the first U.S. president in history to break the race barrier?
As secularists, I think that we are all for eliminating discrimination of a person's race and gender.
Electing Obama seems like it would be a great symbolic step in that regard.
Other Comments by macros_man
26. Comment #238769 by catskill on August 28, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Obama giving his approval for continued faith based funding is obvious politically. The whole faith based initiative was founded under Bush, and it funnels millions of dollars (our dollars) directly to the church. When you are in a country where the largest and most organized voting blocks are based on religious affiliation, you cannot go out and say "Remember that massive flow of free money? Yeah that's gone of you elect me."At this point you just have to hope that Obama gets elected, wins a second term, and then is able to phase out faith funding before he leaves office.
Other Comments by catskill
27. Comment #238773 by Oppomystic on August 28, 2008 at 3:02 pm
In 2005, after losing once again, the people of the Democratic Party knocked their heads together and decided that they needed to appear more religious. I remember seeing their "go-to Gal" for religiousness studies saying that they'll have learned their lesson by 2008. Well, they haven't.The American public could give a fistful of monkey crap about faith and religiosity. McCain could declare that his time spent at the Hanoi Hilton made him an atheist, but that he still respects the 'values' of America, and that he's going to sink Roe v. Wade and make it so homosexuals can't marry legally. Believe me, they'd totally overlook the atheism long enough to vote.
Democrats can't bring themselves to lie about revoking human rights, but they can put on a song-and-dance about being religious with no problem. I'm afraid that a speech about gay rights with 'God, bless America' at the end of it falls on deaf ears.
Other Comments by Oppomystic
28. Comment #238787 by practicing atheis on August 28, 2008 at 3:23 pm
it seems obvious to me that the problem lies in the two party system. as someone who has recently decided to no longer financially support the democratic party, what choices are left to the liberal minded secularist? the answer? none. that is sad. i can't believe that none of the other political parties have been able to garner enough support to at least make a statement in an election. as someone pointed out, the libertarian party at this point is a joke. where is the secular humanist political party?another thing that i can't believe is the willingness of so many 'believers' to allow the theocratization of this country, especially from the non christians and smaller christian sects who are in the real minority. don't they get it? they have more to lose in this mess than the secularists! It was a priest who said these words wisdom;
" "In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
first they go after the secularists / atheists and who's next? mormons? muslims? then who? southern baptists? WTF! it completely baffles me that the religious aren't the biggest supporters of the wall of separation. i suppose i am resigned to a life of confusion.
Other Comments by practicing atheis
29. Comment #238790 by eellerto on August 28, 2008 at 3:26 pm
"Even Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church, an open-minded and inclusive evangelical, told Larry King that he could not vote for an atheist. "What an odd statement. Are they really suggesting that this is a surprise?
Other Comments by eellerto
30. Comment #238805 by TIKI AL on August 28, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Republicans are corporate whores.Democrats are corporate lap dancers.
Vote for Obama-Biden. At least you won't get the clap.
Other Comments by TIKI AL
31. Comment #238812 by kaiserkriss on August 28, 2008 at 3:53 pm
" This year, the Democrats have chosen a black man as their presidential candidate...."
When will these thick reporters get it through their even thicker skulls Barack Obama is NOT black. In fact he is more of an Arab than black. Any way why really care about the colour of his skin??This smacks of racism at its worst and is utterly despicable. jcw
Other Comments by kaiserkriss
32. Comment #238816 by kkelly on August 28, 2008 at 3:59 pm
31, yes, "at its worst"... Other Comments by kkelly
33. Comment #238818 by HourglassMemory on August 28, 2008 at 4:00 pm
My only comfort is that Obama had an atheist father and a mother who also did criticize religion(I'm not sure about her religion. I think she was an atheist in her teens...)Obama says he was not raised in a religious home.
And THAT, in America, coming from a presidential candidate, is a very rare occasion, especially when that person will likely win.
I was also incredibly surprised when I watched his interview at Google:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4yVlPqeZwo <---JUST WATCH THE WHOLE THING. IT GETS BETTER AT THE END. Obama suddenly starts talking about evidence and facts and Reason. I listened to that and I seriously did not care if he thought there was a deity out there.
He's RARE, that's all I'll say. And this is a very RARE occasion to make history. I don't see this being talked about in many places, but it will actually make History if he gets elected. I want the world to go through that. During rallies and this recent Democratic Convention, they could use the "Let's make History!" card...but they never say it. They don't make the public realise that it holds the handles of History.
I'll be very isappointed if McCain becomes president. UCK! I don't even want to think about it. If America votes McCain then there's something seriously wrong with America's intellectual force. It'll be just sad to watch the country do that to itself.
Other Comments by HourglassMemory
34. Comment #238820 by shemp333 on August 28, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Fuck every religion. I am way beyond tolerance for proud and vain ignorance. Science is the only way to understanding, and if you don't agree, you can fuck off....
Close rip off of Dawkins quote....
See Neil De Grasse Tyson and Dawkins on youtube.
Other Comments by shemp333
35. Comment #238826 by Cartomancer on August 28, 2008 at 4:12 pm
dochmbi, comment #17 - Actually, I do think we should force churches to offer gay marriages if they want to offer any marriages at all. Why should they get out of upholding equality of opportunity in this particular case?
Would anyone seriously try to argue that churches should be permitted to deny mixed-race couples marriage? Or black couples? or former divorcees? or people of Jewish background? or disabled people? Yet when it comes to gay people, suddenly that's all right? And why a church and not a burger restaurant? By the same logic the staff at Burger King could make a conscientious decision not to serve food to Spanish people.
Other Comments by Cartomancer
36. Comment #238833 by LBraschi on August 28, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Why, Cartomancer. I used to think as dochmbi (#17) wrote. It's their church and they can do whatever they please.
Now you have made me change my mind. Yours is a completely valid point. Thanks.
Other Comments by LBraschi
37. Comment #238836 by kkelly on August 28, 2008 at 4:24 pm
35, Because churches aren't treated as businesses. I would LOVE to see that happen though. Other Comments by kkelly
38. Comment #238837 by rebby on August 28, 2008 at 4:26 pm
I was headed toward Obama until I heard him pandering to the Evangelicals. I reject liars and hypocrites, whether they lie for their god or they lie for their political party. Fuck'em...I'm writing in Bozo (the clown) again....
I'd love the have the chance to ask Obama if he would appoint an atheist or agnostic to any significant cabinet position. Of course it would only be worth asking the question before the election.
Other Comments by rebby
39. Comment #238839 by kaiserkriss on August 28, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Good point Cartomancer!
They ARE discriminating on the grounds of sexual preference, which elsewhere (out side of a church) would be prosecuted, at least here in Canada. It would make an interesting court case. Any volunteers? jcw
Other Comments by kaiserkriss
40. Comment #238841 by Rational_Skeptic on August 28, 2008 at 4:30 pm
#28 - that was Martin Niemöller, he was a Protestant pastor, theologian and founder, with Dietrich Bonhoeffer, of the Confessing Church in Germany prior to and during WWII. Let's try to be as precise and thorough as we ask our opponents to be.
I'm one of those athiests who apparently has no business criticizing religion because I'm not an "expert" in it, even though I acquired an undergraduate degree in Religious Studies, and attended church regularly for the majority of my adult years. :~)
It comes in handy during debates, I must say.
Other Comments by Rational_Skeptic
41. Comment #238845 by Goldy on August 28, 2008 at 4:34 pm
As kkelly said, aren't places of worship exempt? Civil unions, on the other hand...but that takes us back to that English story from a wee while back...
And I guess the churches can use the same reasoning as pubs use to not serve intoxicated patrons. Or something...
Other Comments by Goldy
42. Comment #238853 by NJS on August 28, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I can't believe any political party would wilfully reject around 15% of the electorate - seems like madness to me. I'd presume that they take it for granted that those voters are even less likely to vote republican but it's still a risk.Other Comments by NJS
43. Comment #238867 by mordacious1 on August 28, 2008 at 4:56 pm
CartoActually in the U.S., churches can legally bar inter-racial marriages in their churches. They would have to give up certain bennies, like tax-free status but they could do it. Bob Jones' University excluded just about everyone who wasn't WASP, for years. It still does, to a lesser degree. In the U.S., we cannot force people to not be racist or homophobic. We can make life more difficult if they are though.
Other Comments by mordacious1
44. Comment #238869 by theonlybap on August 28, 2008 at 4:58 pm
It really pisses me off that Obama's race (whatever the fuck that is) is such a factor. It is pathetic that there has to be a "first black" (half or not) president.Macros_man, you/we/they should also feel terrible that it would be so symbolic and race barrier-breaking if Obama were to be elected president. It's just an admission that the human species is amazingly and infuriatingly irrational. The concept of race (within Homo sapiens sapiens) shouldn't even exist.
Anyway, though his election would be symbolic of a nice breakthrough in human reasoning, I'm not going to let that be a factor in whether I decide to vote for him or not.
Other Comments by theonlybap
45. Comment #238871 by BeyondBelief on August 28, 2008 at 5:00 pm
The Democrats know that they have a large non-believing constituency and they also know that to not accept them is the height of hypocrisy. On the other hand they realize that to recognize them formally would be the kiss of death.
Bullshit! Bullshit!! Bullshit!!!
Obama doesn't have to come out and say, "I'm sleeping with the Atheists." He simply needs to reiterate what I've heard him and others espouse throughout the campaign, "You're electing me to lead the nation and protect the Constitution... the Constitution that guarantees equal rights to all citizens under the law, in support of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are "in bed" with ALL Americans. Civil government (while informed by believers) is a body of law. I don't ask the beliefs of the man or woman beside me who is working to create a more perfect union! I only ask, "Are you here to help make America a better nation; one that lives up to the ideals of our founding principles?"
OK, so I didn't actually hear anyone say that... but I can dream!!
[edit] Oh, and "GOOD on Ye!!" DamnDirtyApe, comment 19. Elvis Costello quotes!! "
Can you imagine all that greed and avarice coming down on that child's lips?"
Other Comments by BeyondBelief
46. Comment #238875 by TIKI AL on August 28, 2008 at 5:11 pm
31.kaiserkriss: "When will these thick reporters get it through their even thicker skulls Barack Obama is NOT black. In fact he is more of an Arab than black."I thought Obama's dad was a 100% black man born like Richard was in Kenya, and his Mom was born 100% white in the US.
How is he an arab?
Other Comments by TIKI AL
47. Comment #238885 by HappyPrimate on August 28, 2008 at 5:29 pm
The USA must elect a Democrat this election. Obama was not my first choice but he is the one I WILL vote for. I've listened to him and he has dropped clues that he is not that religious. He is a politician and he will have to pander to the deluded to get elected. His policies are however very inclusive and his stance is that we are all to be included unlike the repukes who would segregate those who don't fall within their guidelines such as gays and certain ethnic groups, including us as atheists as non-citizens. The Supreme Court is at jeopardy also. This is serious. If you are a voter, even if you have to hold your nose, vote and vote for Obama. Other Comments by HappyPrimate
48. Comment #238890 by BrandySpears on August 28, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Since when does two states count as "several" and since when is Rick Warren considered openminded? Two states is 4%. Rick Warren is still a fundamentalist gas bag. Other Comments by BrandySpears
49. Comment #238891 by Dengarm on August 28, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Actually, employment discrimination against gays and lesbians is legal on a federal level in the US, and only 20 states have laws against it. Not all of those states include provisions for housing discrimination, transgendered people or service discrimination. Churches can and do refuse to perform marriages that they do not approve of (interfaith, interracial or otherwise) and suffer no consequences (as it should be in my opinion, as it is merely expressing their support of the union, not providing a service).Other Comments by Dengarm
50. Comment #238892 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 5:39 pm
HappyPrimate-Well, I've held my nose for every election I've voted in since I turned 18, I'm used to it by now.
Other Comments by Diacanu
Comment Entry: Please Login
Register a new account
Upcoming Events:
Mailing List
Enter your email:
DVDs
'The Enemies of Reason: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Voices of Reason' DVD
'Richard Dawkins: Appearances & Events 2007-2008' DVD
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Root of All Evil?' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
1. Comment #238684 by catskill on August 28, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Other Comments by catskill