Wednesday, November 5, 2008 | Reason : Political | print version

Print | Comments |

Liddy Dole's Un-American Ad

by Sally Quinn, On Faith

Thanks to Connie for the link.

Reposted from:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/11/liddy_doles_un-american_ad.html

I knew Liddy Dole when she was an amazing resume. Now she has crumpled up that resume and tossed it in the garbage. How sad. All those years (she's now 72) of being a high achiever and what she has left now is a soiled reputation that she will never be able to redeem, even if she wins her Senate seat again.

Sen. Dole was so desperate to be reelected to what has been a drab and undistinguished Senatorial career that she threw away all of her scruples with a despicable ad against her distinguished opponent Kay Hagan in the North Carolina Senate race.

She accused Kay Hagan, a Sunday School teacher, loyal member of her Presbyterian Church, and a devout Christian of taking "godless money" at a "secret" fundraiser hosted by a man who belonged to a secular organization. At the end of the commercial was a picture of Hagan, a question from the announcer saying, "What did Hagan promise in return?" and a voice in the background saying "There is no God."

Naturally Hagan went ballistic. She shot back with an extremely effective ad asserting her faith and her Christian bona fides: "Well, I believe in God. My faith guides my life and Sen. Dole knows it." Then she talks about "bearing false witness against fellow Christians."

There are several points to be made here.

First, what's wrong with Hagan going to a Democratic fundraiser in Boston along with several other prominent Democrats like Sen. John Kerry?

Second, how was she to know that one of the hosts was on a secular board called "Godless Americans PAC." (I have to say that this group could use a little PR advice. Whoever thought up that name surely should be in another line of work.)

Third, isn't it pathetic that in this day and age, in this country founded on the idea of religious liberty, whose settlers came here to avoid religious persecution, that one could be criticized for one's religious beliefs or lack of beliefs? For Kay Hagan to have to defend herself by claiming that she does in fact believe in God is against everything this country stands for. It is un-American.

The really awful truth is that Kay Hagan had no choice. She had to proclaim her faith in God. Nobody in this country can get elected for high office today by acknowledging the fact that they are an atheist, an agnostic or even a secular humanist. You would have a better chance getting of elected if you were gay.

This is not a Christian country any more than it is a Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or atheist country, but you certainly wouldn't know it by the rhetoric in this campaign, hitting an all-time low with Liddy Dole's commercial.

It seems that a lot of people have forgotten about the idea of separation of Church and state.

Last week, Colin Powell struck a blow for the Constitution when he scolded those who question Barack Obama's faith. Imagine if Powell or another high-profile public figure used similar words to scold Dole and defend Hagan. What would it sound like if -- using Powell's words -- we replaced "Muslim" with "atheist."

"Well, the correct answer is that she is not an atheist, she's a Christian. She's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if she is? Is there something wrong with being an atheist in this country? The answer's no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old atheist-American kid believing that he or she could be President? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, 'She's an atheist and might be associated with other pagans, for instance.' This is not the way we should be doing it in America."

That conversation may seem a long way off, but then so did the idea of an African-American president.

Posted: Wednesday, November 5, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 54 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #278958 by Eshto on November 5, 2008 at 12:51 pm

There would be something a bit suspicious about a seven year old claiming to be an atheist.

Other Comments by Eshto

2. Comment #278964 by NormanDoering on November 5, 2008 at 12:54 pm

More and more, with each passing election cycle, it seems that the Republican strategy depends on lying to stupid and bigoted people. They have no choice, that's all that is left in their base.

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/10/proving-that-republican-base-is-mostly.html

Other Comments by NormanDoering

3. Comment #278972 by Bruno on November 5, 2008 at 1:02 pm

For whatever it's worth, Dole lost her bid to be re-elected. Hagan won.

Other Comments by Bruno

4. Comment #278982 by Kiwi on November 5, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Note to moderator: African-Americam change to African-American

Other Comments by Kiwi

5. Comment #279006 by justdust on November 5, 2008 at 1:17 pm

There would be something a bit suspicious about a seven year old claiming to be an atheist.

You are probably right.

Is there a word for someone not aware of God?

We are not born atheist. The theist/atheist label only comes with making a choice.

Other Comments by justdust

6. Comment #279012 by aussieatheist_111 on November 5, 2008 at 1:21 pm

The really awful truth is that Kay Hagan had no choice. She had to proclaim her faith in God. Nobody in this country can get elected for high office today by acknowledging the fact that they are an atheist, an agnostic or even a secular humanist. You would have a better chance getting of elected if you were gay

Very true. Maybe in another 50 years.

Other Comments by aussieatheist_111

7. Comment #279022 by morgantj on November 5, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Comment #279006 by justdust said, "Is there a word for someone not aware of God?"

Yes, it is called ignorant. I don't think we are born atheists, I think we are born ignorant. Without knowing of the idea of god first, there is no idea of god to not believe in.

Other Comments by morgantj

8. Comment #279072 by dochmbi on November 5, 2008 at 2:06 pm

@aussieatheist_111
Today a black man, tomorrow a woman and the day after tomorrow a homosexual.

Other Comments by dochmbi

9. Comment #279082 by cristinabories on November 5, 2008 at 2:16 pm

Well I don't know about you, but I will write a letter to Ms. Hagan first congratulating her on her victory and then...
I will ask her to adjust her response to Ms. Dole and not behave like being called an atheist is akin to be accused of depravity.
Here is the link: http://www.kayhagan.com/

Other Comments by cristinabories

10. Comment #279154 by Lemniscate on November 5, 2008 at 3:49 pm

I agree that America should not get too self-congratulatory over electing a black man. It's still going to trail miserably behind similarly developed countries in acceptance of homosexuals and atheists.

On the notion that a seven year old couldn't be an atheist. Why not? If some seven year old children can master calculus, then why can't they decide on god? I'd certainly made my mind up on god before calculus.

Other Comments by Lemniscate

11. Comment #279248 by frosty on November 5, 2008 at 6:45 pm

My seven year old is definitely an atheist, with some prompting from myself. He did, however, come be be an atooth-fairiest all by himself (I'm so proud!), but is cleverly hiding any Santa disbelief just in case.

I am having a few more problems with my 5 year old, but I think thats because the lunchtime religious programme bribes his friends with lollies.

Other Comments by frosty

12. Comment #279251 by Ed-words on November 5, 2008 at 6:53 pm

"... what she (Dole) has now, is a soiled
reputation"

This would also apply to Sen. McCain.

(Excellent article - I bet Ms. Quinn is
"one of us")

Other Comments by Ed-words

13. Comment #279253 by Ed-words on November 5, 2008 at 6:58 pm

Frosty- Comment # 11

You say your seven-year-old is an atheist
"with some prompting from myself"

Isn't that what we criticise religious parents for doing?

(Lunchtime religious programmes? What's that
all about?)

Other Comments by Ed-words

14. Comment #279266 by Ed-words on November 5, 2008 at 7:33 pm

dochmbi # 8 Glaring omission- - -

. . .and the day after that an atheist
(president)

Other Comments by Ed-words

15. Comment #279275 by steveroot on November 5, 2008 at 8:01 pm

9. Comment #279082 by cristinabories on November 5, 2008 at 2:16 pm

I sent the following:

Congratulations, Kay! I am extremely pleased that the people in your area rejected the distasteful campaign ads for Elizabeth Dole. I would have been even *more* pleased if you had been able to include a remark to the effect that there are decent, productive and admirable members of society who also do not profess any belief in a god. I count myself among this group.
Best regards,
Steve Weeks, DDS

Ste5e

Other Comments by steveroot

16. Comment #279280 by HappyPrimate on November 5, 2008 at 8:38 pm

I was delighted to see Kay won the election. It shows that the voting public is gaining a tolerance, if not acceptance, of the fact that atheists are real citizens and not the evil ones.

On another point that I've been having. While I am delighted we elected Obama, aren't we all African-Americans who live in the US? I guess it depends on the acceptance of the out of Africa theory. Oh and have you heard that Sarah Palin thought Africa was a country, didn't know it was a continent. Ooops! That was a close one.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

17. Comment #279287 by ksskidude on November 5, 2008 at 9:19 pm

When will it ever end? Is there ever going to be a time in America when calling yourself an Atheist isn't considered a bad thing?

I personally have come out and made it very clear with my friends, with my family, and with whom I work with. This is not to say I am combative or even argumentative with them; I simply let it be known that I disagree with their particular belief's.

I fear that we will never see a shift in the attitudes of believers, if we do not let it be known that more of us do actually exist.

So please do not be afraid to speak out!!

Other Comments by ksskidude

18. Comment #279288 by Notcrowingbutyawning on November 5, 2008 at 9:20 pm

1. Comment #278958 by Eshto on November 5, 2008 at 12:51 pm

"There would be something a bit suspicious about a seven year old claiming to be an atheist."

Perhaps, but try this. Eighteen months ago my niece [then eight] returned from school and without prompting announced to her parents 'You know, I don't beleive in god and I think that the bible stories are probably just made up.' When questioned, she felt that there might be something in Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster, though. :O)

Other Comments by Notcrowingbutyawning

19. Comment #279293 by Ed-words on November 5, 2008 at 9:31 pm

Happy Primate # 16

1.The voters DID care
whether Hagan was an atheist.
The facts showed the charges to be false,
and she was horrified that anyone should
call her such a terrible name.

2. Isn't it sad that so many black voters,
who should know better, voted to ban
gay marriage? Blame it on the Bible!

Other Comments by Ed-words

20. Comment #279312 by Ian (South Africa) on November 5, 2008 at 10:51 pm

This is not a Christian country any more than it is a Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or atheist country, but you certainly wouldn't know it by the rhetoric in this campaign, hitting an all-time low with Liddy Dole's commercial.

Sadly this isn't really true and while I applaud the the intent of the act of seperation the US is demonstrably and aggresively a christian country. Other religious flavours are tolerated as long as they remain sub rosa or remain confined to the particular districts allowed to them.

Edit: And if you are an atheist the chances of becoming pariah are often inversely proportional to the population of the area you inhabit. However you will always be looked upon with suspicion and distrust.

Other Comments by Ian (South Africa)

21. Comment #279358 by Heretic on November 6, 2008 at 12:59 am

Re:Comment #279006 by justdust on November 5, 2008 at 1:17 pm

We are not born atheist.

A new-born baby does not have any political association - Therefore he/she is a-political.

A new-born baby has no sexual interest - Therefore he/she is a-sexual.

A new-born baby has no theistis beliefs - Therefore he/she is a-theist.

Babies ARE born atheists, by the very definition of the 'a' prefix.

Other Comments by Heretic

22. Comment #279362 by NJS on November 6, 2008 at 1:11 am

I'm with PZ Myers on this. In the euphoria of Obama's victory, people seem to have suddenly assumed that all bigotry and prejudice in the US has magically disappeared forever. The fact is that due to the same African-americans who voted for him, proposition 8 failed. The fact is that we are still a million miles away from a time when an Atheist could be elected.

Obama's victory is a a good step for the US but please don't carried away.

(BTW I'm from the UK and admit a lot of what I said applies here too).

Other Comments by NJS

23. Comment #279457 by windfall on November 6, 2008 at 4:26 am

Was extremely put off by NPR's coverage of the Dole-Hagan thing. Wednesday morning they interviewed Hagan and the interviewer used the word 'atheist' in such obvious scare-italics that it made me sick. Something like: 'but she called you an *AYE-theist*?!' The tone was understood to mean, 'she accused you of having the morals of a serial killer.' Again, imagine if the word 'jew' or 'muslim' had been substituted. I'm going to send them an email now that I think about it.

Other Comments by windfall

24. Comment #279487 by Just Plain Cliff on November 6, 2008 at 5:53 am

Thank you, Heretic; babies are born atheist.

Other Comments by Just Plain Cliff

25. Comment #279492 by al-rawandi on November 6, 2008 at 6:05 am

Ian (SA)

In many parts of America is acceptable to be an atheist. I am fortunate to inhabit one such place. There are still decent centers of culture in the United States. Just not in the red states.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

26. Comment #279606 by Ed-words on November 6, 2008 at 7:40 am

NJS # 22

Right! Just because an Obama, or a Sammy Davis,Jr.,or a Jesse Owens is treated equally,
doesn't mean the less talented black American
is, too.
The property tax funding of public elementary and high schools in the U.S. creates a two-tier
school system. The poorer inner city schools
get the short end of the hickory stick.

Other Comments by Ed-words

27. Comment #279612 by lbq on November 6, 2008 at 7:45 am

"Third, isn't it pathetic that in this day and age, in this country founded on the idea of religious liberty, whose settlers came here to avoid religious persecution, that one could be criticized for one's religious beliefs or lack of beliefs?"

I would question that. Hiram Maxim, inventor of (inter alia) the Maxim Gun, said about his French Huguenot ancestors that they moved to America "in order to freely worship God in their own way, and to prevent everybody else from doing the same." He was right.

The reason for the separation of church and state in the U.S. was not a matter of high principle, but entirely practical. Without it, the different denominations would have burned each other at the stake until nobody was left. Well, maybe not the Quakers. Maybe ...

Other Comments by lbq

28. Comment #279628 by irate_atheist on November 6, 2008 at 7:59 am

1. Comment #278958 by Eshto -

Is that why everyone looked askance at me when I was seven?

Other Comments by irate_atheist

29. Comment #279632 by Ian (South Africa) on November 6, 2008 at 8:01 am

Hi Al,

Yes I realise that, hence the inverse proportionality statement. You are lucky where you live except perhaps needing a shotgun under your bed;-)

So are you happy that you now have 'Chope'?

Cheers,
Ian.

Other Comments by Ian (South Africa)

30. Comment #279638 by Ian (South Africa) on November 6, 2008 at 8:05 am

Is that why everyone looked askance at me when I was seven?

Personally I always look in askance at you Irate :-)

Other Comments by Ian (South Africa)

31. Comment #279639 by friendlypig on November 6, 2008 at 8:05 am

1. Comment #278958 by Eshto

There would be something a bit suspicious about a seven year old claiming to be an atheist.

I was a late developer.

I was eight when I realised that Dead Men coming back to life, feeding 5000 from a couple of fish and a bit of bread etc, were just plain silly.

Other Comments by friendlypig

32. Comment #279687 by irate_atheist on November 6, 2008 at 9:08 am

30. Comment #279638 by Ian (South Africa) -

Thank you! Most kind :)

Other Comments by irate_atheist

33. Comment #279703 by Chris Davis on November 6, 2008 at 9:29 am

I don't recall specifically thinking of myself as an atheist, but by the age of seven I was entirely aware that my family didn't do religion.

I don't think I paid much attention: it was one of several things our family did differently from our neighbours. Mum was a scientist, and was privy to details of reality that others appeared not to have.

CD

Other Comments by Chris Davis

34. Comment #279736 by Watts_Pete on November 6, 2008 at 10:38 am

'She's an atheist and might be associated with other pagans, for instance.'

Atheists are a form of pagan are they? I thought paganism was a religion...

As theists often point out, prayer sessions are often held in US legislative bodies, including Congress. They seem to think the fact that different religious traditions are used is somehow relevant. But a while back I heard of a US politician who wanted to start a session in a local assembly with a pagan prayer and was told "only monotheistic prayers are allowed." Monotheism is the established religion of the US.

Other Comments by Watts_Pete

35. Comment #279745 by Tezcatlipoca on November 6, 2008 at 10:47 am

I thought there was some sort of triumverate going on. Father, Son, Holy ghost. Sounds a bit pantheistic to me.

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

36. Comment #279750 by popeye on November 6, 2008 at 10:56 am

Thank you Heretic, I also believe everyone is born an atheist. As everyone says, religion is indoctrinated from the time you are born, but before that, you are an atheist.

Other Comments by popeye

37. Comment #279753 by popeye on November 6, 2008 at 11:00 am

Atheists are a form of pagan are they? I thought paganism was a religion...

Pagans are not atheists. Pagans are anyone that worship something other than Christian, Jewish, or Muslim gods. That is the definition of it.

Other Comments by popeye

38. Comment #279757 by The Hogfather on November 6, 2008 at 11:04 am

Is a baby an Atheist- well (technically) probably yes, but I think it shows the inadequacy of the word "Atheist" rather than anything else. My point is that there really is a difference between somebody who doesn't know about a subject (or somebody who is incapable of knowing) and somebody who does understand, has looked at the evidence and then come to a decision based on said evidence. So maybe we shouldn't really use the word "Atheist" when talking about children. After all Atheism isn't a religion, it isn't a philosophy or a ideology, all it is is a conclusion.

Other Comments by The Hogfather

39. Comment #279765 by popeye on November 6, 2008 at 11:20 am

Well....I see what you are saying hogfather; but even though a baby doesn't know it is an atheist, it would still be an atheist. It would just be that after doing what you said about coming to a conclusion that it would just afirm that it is an atheist.

If there would be no religion, the baby wouldn't come to the conclusion of atheism, but would it still be an atheist?

Other Comments by popeye

40. Comment #279770 by D'Arcy on November 6, 2008 at 11:37 am

FWIW my viewpoint is as a materialist, no spooks, spirits or holy spirits. Materialism can happily explain how religion arose and how it is fostered and propped up despite no evidence of any deities.

Perhaps those not so brave would-be US politicians should describe themselves as "materialist", as its other meaning might appeal to the voters.

I was certainly an atheist before age 7. My parents never fed religion to me, and any such crap which was picked up at school was easily poo pooed in the home environment.

Other Comments by D'Arcy

41. Comment #279773 by black wolf on November 6, 2008 at 11:45 am

NJS,
"The fact is that due to the same African-americans who voted for him, proposition 8 failed."

I think you misspoke here. Proposition 8, advocating banning gay marriage, succeeded. But that's what you meant I suppose.

Other Comments by black wolf

42. Comment #279774 by Corylus on November 6, 2008 at 11:47 am

Good article Sally.

------
Darcy

Perhaps those not so brave would-be US politicians should describe themselves as "materialist", as its other meaning might appeal to the voters.

Would probably be best advised to avoid the ‘naturalism’ though... too easily confused with ‘naturism’.

Wouldn’t want to be confused with those degenerate types that (gasp) go around in public with... no clothes on!!

Other Comments by Corylus

43. Comment #279780 by D'Arcy on November 6, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Wouldn’t want to be confused with those degenerate types that (gasp) go around in public with... no clothes on!

You are talking about would-be emperors, aren't you?

Other Comments by D'Arcy

44. Comment #279791 by Corylus on November 6, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Darcy, Good point :-)

Other Comments by Corylus

45. Comment #279807 by Stefek on November 6, 2008 at 12:39 pm

38 Hogfather

I'd have to agree with you on the need to differentiate between the ignorant true atheism of a child and the informed rational atheism that many of us here ascribe to. Perhaps it would be more fitting to call ourselves rationalists. This however may offend many people as it suggests that religious believers are irrational, but that sadly often seems to be the case.

-Stefek

Other Comments by Stefek

46. Comment #279878 by popeye on November 6, 2008 at 2:25 pm

That would work, atheism is already taken. Or maybe we could just expand on it to be something like 'rational atheist'. So an atheist has no belief in a supreme being, and a rational atheist has reasons for not believing in a supreme being.

I like rationalist, but then religious people would say they are rational also, like you said.

Other Comments by popeye

47. Comment #279895 by sane1 on November 6, 2008 at 2:54 pm

Way to go Sally!!! This point is almost never mentioned when teh Liddy Dole commercial is discussed. Spot on!!!

Other Comments by sane1

48. Comment #280058 by frosty on November 6, 2008 at 8:03 pm

Ed-words re: post 13.

"Isn't that what we criticise religious parents for doing' "

When he came home from school wanting to tell me about Jesus (After a Christmas related visit from some Church) I just explained that I thought it was just made up, and that there didn't seem to be any real evidence behind it. ( I consider that a bit different than saying "believe what I say or you'll burn in hell"! ) He took that on-board and, sometime later, declared he didn't believe it either. I'm sure he has no idea what "atheist" means.

"(Lunchtime religious programmes' What's that
all about') "

Bloody good question, It's a public school too! (Canberra, Australia) It seems to work in the same way they might have a chess club, so its deifnitely opt-in, and not authorised by the school itself.

Other Comments by frosty

49. Comment #280103 by Jiten on November 7, 2008 at 12:27 am

She accused Kay Hagan, a Sunday School teacher, loyal member of her Presbyterian Church, and a devout Christian..

This is to show Kay is a good person? Can´t be a good person if you´re not all those things? The underlying message is surely that being an atheist you can´t be good.

Other Comments by Jiten

50. Comment #280186 by popeye on November 7, 2008 at 6:06 am

Yes Jiten, it means that she is role-model citizen capable of doing no wrong!

You must not have gotten the memo going around america that atheists just want to destroy the world and all of the people in it. That memo also noted how atheists are the most immoral people ever!

I am just kidding, but that is the popular opinion about atheists, and it disgusts me.

Other Comments by popeye

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 | Next | Last