One of the most vocal proponents of Christian Family Values in the U.S. Senate is Sen. Rick Santorum. Linked to the title of this posting, is the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO posting on Santorum’s family values record.It is family values like Sen. Santorum’s that all Humanists must fight against. Please vote on November 7th and stop Christian family values like opposition to raising the minimum wage or elimination of the 40-hour work week and overtime.Sen. Santorum may be a radical Catholic who pays lip service to being pro-family values, but he is certainly no Humanist. Because of radical Christians such as Rick Santorum, I assert that being pro-Christian is the same as being anti-Humanist. Peter Nuhn
Comment from: digital-eyes
They’re not…
phreddy,
You didn’t ask that question. You asked…
Maybe you should read your own history. Like I said, I’ve yet to see you have a discussion.
Who wouldn’t be in favor of raising the minimum wage? It benefits everyone. The points was, he touts “family values” and is against things that would help families. Or was that too much for you to understand?
phreedm asked:
i’ll answer only because i think it is important for other christians who visit the site.
i defined it in words already: those who help and accept their fellow man without a [religious]litmus test.
a perfect example says it best:
we have a neighbor who knows of our non-belief. she is on the board of a local church that needed a DIRECTOR for their weekday school. she recommended and facilitated my wife getting the job because she knew my wife would [and did] do a great job for them.
someone like you or jcc would have flipped out and feared that my wife would corrupt the morals of the kids and everyone else in the congregation. you would likely have done everything in your power to prevent my wife from getting a position like that.
this woman also has housed a family of new orleans refugees for a year, has adopted an incompetent family members young children (her own are grown) and is constantly doing charitable service.
she is a real christian.
Comment from: brodie
Live and learn…minimum wage is nothing more then a hidden tax designed to make people feel better…
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa106.html
Comment from: flanonblvr
So according to your definition any good person (whether believer or not) can be called a “real christian”
logic,
Welcome, I think you will enjoy posting here.
phreedm,
You seem to like getting other people mad. You say things like “This will be rich.” and you mock us by saying we are not intelligent. Please don’t say thing like that because it is full of hatred and only will get other people upset.
Oh and about that baby thing, I’m not even sorry about that. (For you kids, don’t read the rest because I am going to swear)
That was just FUBAR (fucked up beyond recognition). Taking a dead, vile body and showing it to your kids and then sleeping next to the thing?
How can that be even be slightly considered affectionate?
THAT IS FUCKING CREEPY.
Like others have said, doing that with a spouse (whom is more important than a stillborn baby to the husbad/wife and kids) would be unacceptable.
I can understand a short cuddle with the corpse, but sleeping next to it and showing it to children? I rest my case.
Live and learn…minimum wage is nothing more then a hidden tax designed to make people feel better…
By feeling better, could you mean being able to provide better for themselves and their families without having to have 2 and 3 jobs? Yeah, that would make people feel better.
The problem is that with the rising costs of gas, housing and other expenses, the minimum wage has not kept up. People find it harder to provide the basic things they need. But it’s not like the republicans care.
Well, do tell us your definition of a “real” xtian. Of course, if all xtians were like that definition, we probably wouldn’t need this blog, but you’re not.
Unfortunately you have not made a case, merely restated a subjective opinion based (as far as I can tell) on visceral emotion.
While it may seem creepy from your point of view, what gives you the right to judge how others choose to act, and then pronounce your judgement as beyond reproach?
It seems to me these people did what they felt appropriate for their family. No laws were broken (I assume), so why not give them the benefit of the doubt that they made the right decision for themselves?
Of course if you’re just looking to disparage Santorum, then why not come out and say so? Pretend it’s a close friend in this situation. Would you be compassionate enough to let them handle their grief in their own manner, or would you rush to judgement?
I have to agree with Phreedm here. To attribute “real xian” to the characteristic of non-judgemental, non-discriminatory purveyor of good works seems to me to be totally inadequate.
Surely a “real xian” must first and foremost believe in supernatural entities (gods, angels, saints, demons, etc)
Surely a “real xian” can live to any set of creeds and regulations that are supported in their holy book (The fact that many regulations are mutually exclusive forces all “real xians” to make arbitrary choices or live in a constant state of contradiction.
Other than that I don’t think there are any additional characteristics of a “real xian”…..
phreedm said
“Check my history. When someone has an intelligent question, I’ll be glad to debate it.”
Ok,Here are the same three questions
you have failed to answer.
1. Should gays be allowed in church.
2. Should women be allowed to preach in church.
3. What makes your religious opinion any more authoritative than mine or the prson at the window in McDonalds?
Wow. Looks like I missed out on a day of fun.
Santorum’s actions with his dead fetus/baby are indeed quite odd.
HZ, if any of my friends dis this, I would seriously worry about their mental health.
To each his own, I suppose.
But I do suspect, in Santorum’s case that there was a political agenda tied to the actions. “See how much we believe a 20 week fetus is a real human being!” If true, than it’s pretty disgusting, because who does take home any other dead humans to cuddle and sleep with?
Phreedm
Perhaps if you had to work for minimum wage, you would understand that issue better.
Or maybe you pay your employees minimum wage, and that’s why you don’t want it increased?
Karen,
One would hope that if indeed any of your friends did this you would allow them the privacy and respect to deal with the situation in their own manner.
Perhaps it was a politically inspired action. If so, I agree that it is reprehensible. Not because of th action – but because of the motivation.
I am implicitly giving the guy (and his family) the benefit of the doubt that they were genuinely grieving the loss of this potential life, and decided that this is an appropriate way for them to do so.
Whether I, or anyone else, agrees with their decision is irrelevant. We have no right to judge them as sick or creepy just because they deal with an ugly situation in a manner that offends us emotionally.
C’mon people, where’s your objectivity gone?
Incidentally, for those that might criticize Santorum’s actions as unnatural, let’s not forget that certain primates cary their dead young around for days before eventually being forced to concede that they are in fact dead.
Perhaps Santorum is expressing his evolutionary roots?
HZ
I understand what you are saying.
But here’s the catch. If my friends wanted to take their dead baby home from the hospital, to have a sleepover, the hospital wouldn’t let them. Cos they are just Joe and Mary Blow from down the street. They aren’t SANTORUMS.
And if they really wanted more than to just spend some time in the hospital, makybe rocking and singing or talking to their dead child, I really and truly would worry about their grieving process and twhether they needed some sort of interventionary help.
Does Santorum have any family history of keeping the dead in the home. Or was this a political stunt to garner more votes from conservatives?
Activity among other primates notwithstanding, there are rules and regulations regarding dead people among human primates. I just think something smells fishy in the Santorum house.
Karen,
Is this an assumption, or knowledge? I wonder what right the hospital would have to deny parents access to their deceased unborn offspring?
While the hospital might advise against it I doubt that their are any legal impediments to doing what the Santorums did. If there were, then by definition they broke the law and their actions become criminal rather then subject to idle opinion.
I, for one, am not qualified to judge the most effective method of mourning, but I’d bet it’s not the same for everyone.
HZ
It’s just an assumption, based on my own experience with having deaths in the family. Of course, since I view the body as just a dead body, I never questioned the hospital’s authority over what to do with the body, never wanting to take one home with me.
I am aware of the deaths of children, in which the parents and siblings sat with them in the room for a while, but after a time, they were ushered out, so the hard facts of what happens after a death could be attended to. Again, I know of no one who questioned the process.
Mourning is certainly not the same for everyone. My grieving experience for my dad was the polar opposite of that for my mom, in fact, though I loved them both dearly.
Perhaps this is what this family needed. It just seems to conveniently fit Santorum’s agenda politically; therfore, I find it suspect. I’d like to know more about the legalities involved, but I’m too lazy to try to find out.
I’m too lazy too. You may well be correct about the political motivation, but I certainly hope not. As mentioned before, I’m prepared to give the guy and his family the benefit of the doubt.
Nah, I’m still around. I just don’t post much these days.
All humor aside, it is of little consequence to any of us precisely whom you consider to be “intelligent posters” or exactly which questions or debates you, in your obvious omnipotence, deigns to respond to. Your record seems to indicate a predilection toward answering questions that are really low-hanging-fruit and leaving the difficult ones alone. Stop showing up at baseball games with a cricket bat to cheer yourself on when you bunt and we might take you more seriously.
Just because I happen to feel that the democrats aren’t right about the effects of a minimum wage doesn’t mean that Santorum isn’t a scumbag.
The topic, since you have a hard time reading it, is: “What are Christian Family Values?”
In that light, it becomes clear that the “values voter” is an idiot if he blindly votes for his religion and not for his political beliefs. Airing those political differences raises this very poignant question.
I can understand how subtlety might elude you. I don’t believe that it does. Rather than face a tough real question you’d rather pick it apart, remove all context from a statement, and make it appear as if another question is being raised – one that you can attempt to control the answer to.
Unless you’re an economist, keep your opinions to yourself about the minimum wage. I certainly don’t want to hear another sermon from you, memorized by rote, that gives little more than pat answers to questions answered by your political party or your religion. I’m sure most of the rest of the people that post here don’t want to hear it either.
Is that enough of an “intelligent” response, oh omnipotent one?
I usually agree with your opinions, but not this one. I now ask you “where has your objectivity gone?” You are willing to overlook the obvious because you’re allowing your opinion, based on “visceral emotion,” to cloud your judgement.
This is a politically motivated stunt designed to garner votes from religious ideologues, otherwise nobody would ever have heard about it. HIPAA would basically prevent any of the staff at the hospital from talking about it, and Santorum would be suing them if they did. As it stands, he clearly has something to gain from being so public about it. Why else would he keep a picture of the fetus on display in his office?
This is where we differ: I do not give the “benefit of the doubt.” That is exactly how the world became entangled with idiocy like religion to begin with.
atomic,
Perhaps my opinion has gone a little off track since this started. My original post was really an attempt to put an opinion counter to the prevailing negative opinion out for some balance.
I am of the opinion that we do not have sufficient knowledge of the circumstances, motivations and medical advice to make an informed opinion of the appropriateness of the actual method of mourning. The reasons posted on the blog seemed to range from “it’s creepy” to personal attacks against Santorum’s motivations for doing so.
I happily concede that he might have done this for political reasons, but hasten to point out that we have no evidence to suggest that he did – or rather, the only evidence we have is after the fact evidence.
The topic under discussion was the appropriateness of a method of mourning (who was involved did cloud the picture), not any exploitation of the tragedy after the fact.
HeatheNZ,
I do not like the guy, but I am not bashing him because of anything to do with how he acts in congress. I am just pointing out what is widely perceived as unhealthy actions.
The guy seemed to go to an extreme, which is not healthy. I was thinking that was strange, so I showed how I felt with not only feelings but some logic as well. What he did is creepy, so creepy it could be in a horror movie.
I am not trying to be all knowing however, if you do not agree then by all means let me know. I am willing to hear you out.
phreedm asked?
i’ll answer your question with a question:
Tom Brady displays all the attributes of a great quarterback. he is a member of the Patriots. so according to this definition, anyone who displays the attributes of a great quaterback is member of the Patriots.
to expound on your question (since it is on topic btw) one does not need to be a christian to hold similar core values.
example:
i have no problem with 7 of the ten commandments (the ones not involving god worship)and follow them in my life. does that make me part xtian?
no, it means i hold similar values. if all just followed those 7 commandments i think there would be less worldwide tension.
The fact that we aren’t hearing in the news that he’s sued the hospital on HIPAA violations is enough evidence for me to believe that he made sure that he could advance his political agenda with this stunt.
atomic,
I just checked on wikipedia. The death in question was back in 1996. I’m not sure if you were aware of that when commenting that we are not hearing things in the news…..
Bones:
I totally agree with you and I do the same exact thing you do: I refuse to go over to the coffin and look at the cadaver/corpse/dead body. If I see them, that will absolutely be the last memory I’ll have of that person and I’d rather have the good memories of when they were alive. I’ve suffered a lot of losses in my immediate family and close circle of friends but have never seen anyone at that state (I have been doing this since I was a very young child and my grandfather died). Today, I still have and cherish the times I had with those that have died and they will always be with me as they were. (Also, please be aware that I come from a culture where funerals/wakes ARE performed in the deceased’s living room – yes, creepy as it may sound to you guys, that’s the way it is for some cultures).
“Jesus loves you but I?m his favorite.”
darwinluvsu,
I’m sure you’ve seen this bumper sticker and it’s one of my favorites:
“Jesus loves you but everyone else thinks you’re an asshole”.
I’m not sure if it gets better than that.
spanders,
No, what about this one: “Even God hates you.”
Spanders:
Yes, I’ve have that one and, of course, love it! There are several versions of that one (“Jesus loves you but thinks you’re a wanker” is another favorite). Or this one: “Jesus was a cross dresser” cafepress.com and evolvefish.com have a lot of good stuff like that (the former also have merchandise for believers too as well as political ones). I even found in the later, a Jesus paper doll, complete with outfits like tutus, Santa, etc. Too funny! Love the fact that you’re SOOOOOO open minded about this religion thing, now, why can’t all the religious people be like you?
Scientology: we accept credit cards”
Hey, I’m new to the blog first post.
My take on raising minimum wage is yes raise it, but when I think about it logically, I think with a raise in minimum wage I see a raise in prices and thus, it is pointless. Anyone else think this?
My take on minimum wage is that it should be the minimum that we as a society think a person can live on. It should have nothing to do with economics and everything to do with social justice.
Prices may go up but the market is more complicated than that. Competition may force companies not to pass on all their cost increases (as one example). Workers who are paid a little more and have more job security may also have a better work ethic and be more productive which brings the cost per product down.
Yeah, you are probably right, I was looking at it to generally. After thinking about it, if you raise the minimum wage it resurects the economy because everyone will be spending the extra cash they have.
HeatheNZ said, “Pretend it’s a close friend in this situation.”
Before s/he left the hospital, I would gently remove the body from my close friend’s arms, hand the body over to the staff trained to process and prepare for burial, and hold my dear friend close so that we may cry together. Then I would take my close friend home, where we would cry some more, and begin the grieving process on a healthy (not macabre) note.
One topic I would not want to discuss with my close friend 20 years later, “Remember sleeping with the dead body of your stillborn?”
cry4turtles,
And if your good friend does not agree with your definition of a healthy grieving process, what then? Do you impose you values on your good friend? Do you help them through the process in their own way? Do you criticize them for being creepy and inappropriate?
I understand that you are proposing this with the best of intentions, but with all due respect, the road to Hell (praise be upon his name) is paved with good intentions.
What gives you the right to decide what is appropriate for your good friend? It’s fine if you are generally in agreement, but if you are diametrically opposed (as might well be the case), how are your actions substantially different to a religious group doing an intervention “in love” to save your immortal soul?
I’m not suggesting that grieving should be done by any particular method, just that somewhere along the way the griever has some goddamn right to work through the process in the manner of their own choosing (legal considerations not withstanding), and anyone – especially those who care about the person – have some sort of obligation to – get out of the way.
I want to throw some support HeatheNZ way. I agree it is creepy (my personal opinion) but more importantly I think it is none of my business how people grieve.
Santorum has many objectionable public opinions we can attack him about.
If it were a friend I might try to gently talk them out of behaviour that seemed unhealthy to me but if they remained adamant I would step back.
Hey Monika – thanks for the support.
i was beginning to get an idea of what it muct feel like to be a theist on this site at times
Actually it’s not the forst time I’ve been out of step – and neither will it be the last.
damn free thinking atheists
The day we all agree on anything apart from a lack of theism will be a strange day indeed.
HeatheNZ, I hope you can take this on a lighter note, but if my friend’s grieving prompted him/her to jump off a cliff, I would, without hesistation, exercise my “right to decide what is appropriate for your(my) good friend.” Sometimes when people are not thinking clearly (as through the wretchedness of grief) it may become necessary for others to take the lead. If anything happened to my husband, I may be tempted to join him, since life without him would be unthinkable. I may be tempted to jump into the casket with him to never let him go, etc. etc. At that time, I would expect my family to intervene and prevent me from doing irrational things at a very irrational time for me.
What Santorum did was the definition of irrational; however, considering the political slant, he had a motive other than finding a functional grieving process. And that’s even sicker!
PS-I apologize if I made you feel like “a theist on this site at times”. Please know I have a great deal of respect and admiration for you. After it was you, and others on this site, that that gave me the courage to shuck the last remanants of religion that clung to my shirt tails.
Great minds never agree on EVERYTHING:)
cry4turtles,
First. Please don’t apologize for being in the majority. It’s a good wake up call to argue a position from the minority – and frankly something I’m used to in the real world.
Regarding your friend’s suicide attempt at dealing with grief. I think each situation should be judged on it’s own merits. The two scenarios in question are very different in their respective long term impacts, their effects on others, and their possible therapeutic value.
I think what you might be implicitly asking is “where does one draw the line?”. that question can of course be deflected back at you by asking if it’s appropriate to tell you friend to “stop crying and you’ll feel better” after a similar event. If the answer is no, then at what point do you intervene?
These questions are of course impossible to answer because we are trying to impose discrete values onto a graduated scale. Each situation is unique and should be treated as such.
It is precisely for the above reason that I am loath to judge any method of grieving as inappropriate, especially when armed with precious few facts and many unfounded opinions.
Were Santorum’s actions irrational? Possibly. But in such circumstances we are not really dealing with reason. We are dealing with raw emotion and how best to manage that pain.
Interestingly if you are positing that Santorum dealt with his grief in this manner for political gain, then surely that would argue strongly that this was a rational decision. It sems you want to have your cake and eat it too…..
Hmmn, as a as a 40-something childless female vegetarian/raw vegan atheist in a small rural farm town, I’m not used to being in the majority. What shall I do with this new-found power???? He he.
In reality, when I ponder Santorum’s political motivation (as Karen has pointed out), I realize his actions were entirely rational (as HeathNZ said). I’d be willing to bet that if he wasn’t pushing his pro-life agenda, he never would’ve commited his offensive deed. Nevertheless, Santorum has been voted out–HA HA (pat-pat on my back ’cause I helped)–so we needn’t be immediately concerned about his sicknesses.
Whew!!
“Because of radical Christians such as Rick Santorum, I assert that being pro-Christian is the same as being anti-Humanist.”
That’s a huge sweeping generalization you made just there. Those are just the beliefs of one man, not the whole of Christianity.