I’m listening to the Democratic prez debate in NH right now. Nobody is talking about the separation of church and state. What can we do to make this more of an issue in a time where international issues are so pressing?BTW, My sis and bro-in-law were in he audience. They look good. Blurry, but good.
Right…
Unfortunately the dems see no alternative but to be on the righteous bandwagon….they are too late…I hope…..
Maby they just didn’t get to it, there’s another debate in july, mabey the topic will come up there
Honestly the church & state thing is not the most pressing issue at the moment. I can forgive the democrats and the organizers of the debates for not addressing the issue.
but why are we having debates this early anyway?? This is the second major debate, right? And it’s June 2007! Before long people will just be perpetually running for office and not at all doing the job they’re ostensibly elected for.
the democratic candidates were all in church this morning…no hope to be elected for any one of them that wouldn’t attend …but they couldn’t all have been praying while there…some of them must be rational..maybe checking out the ladies…we’ll see which church the lightning hits.(Lightning hitting a church is my ultimate july 4th fireworks fantasy show). If at the next debate a candidate shows up looking like they just stuck a steel-handled shovel in a new york city transformer and hair like Buckwheat’s but still smoking….then that’s who i’m voting for(and they get my daughter’s 2 votes of course)
I emailed Clinton’s, Edward’s, and Obama’s campaines about searation of church and state and none of them have gotten back to me after more than a months wait.
Separation of church and state does not fit into campaign rhetoric and political pandering while the majority of the population still subscribes to first century superstition. Therefore it is improbable that separation of church and state will become part of someone?s platform in the near future. What we can do is to empower organizations like American Atheists and Freedom From Religion Foundation by becoming dues paying members. We can also provide incentive for Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris to continue bringing rational thought to the forefront by buying their books.
Apple
Makes me wonder out loud if the dems are presently floating the candidate that they will ultimately get behind. They could all be decoys. Gore could come back and win. He was right on the f’n invasion of Iraq and right and global warming and right on just about every position he has taken in contrast to the repubs.
At the present pace of needless US troop deaths in IRAQ we will hit the number 5000 just prior to the presidential election. That is, unless the cowardly American people actually grow the balls they like to think they have and send this entire administration to the International Criminal Court to stand trial for crimes against humanity.
Does anybody know how to petition the ICC to begin proceeedings on such a matter? How about we just start a petition … a petition to ask the world to save us from our maniacal “leader”. What a slap a BushCo that would be … a complete repudiation by the people, cutting out any middlemen.
Help world we needing protection from the Decider.
‘Off topic’
Can I ask why would you lock up dumface but georgous Paris Hilton when there are thousand of crims and con-men walking free and you have 11-15 million illegal immigrants in the US.
20,000 plus murders each year incl 350+ spouse murders. Surely a corrective sentence would be more appropriate like community service for your poor your homeless your starving?
Send her to Iraq to entertain the troops.
Not all States even accept breathyliser tests for drunk driving which is a problem everywhere. But jail??
There’s enough problems in the world to address without this surely.
After all she never hurt anyone! She was really just in contempt.
There’s a damn war going on.
Why is it that the assumption is that we are all Democrats? I’m insulted. I identify with the Libertarian party. Some of us are Republicans, some Greens, some probably have no party affiliation.
If I’m incorrect in what I see being said, please correct me Dave.
Aussie
Approximately 42,000 Americans die on our nations highways every year, year after year, decade after decade. Approximately half of these deaths have been due to DUIs. Two of my friends were killed by drunk drivers and one friend was killed by a reckless driver. This is no small matter by any stretch. I hope that answers your question.
atomic
I don’t see that assumption being made. I just see people speaking out.
“What can we do to make this more of an issue in a time where international issues are so pressing?” One way to make the separation of church and state more of an issue at this time is to emphasize the links between the international issues and a failed W church-state administration to address much less tackle these issues. I watched the NH dem debate also and easily pick up on a split between dem candidates when it comes to which presidential wanna be’s have followed the W cue, screwed up, and have a price to pay for their guilt by association with W. Everything touched by Bushco evangelism has gone the way of scorched earth to worm dirt.. Look what happened to Tony Blair.. My suggestion is that we should further expose the detriments that the unsanctimonious church-state marriage has had and will have on international and domestic policies. Do we as a people want to move backward or forward? Which political party and/or candidates will move us in those directions and what case can we make to support our choices? Maybie we should be asking ourselves these and other serious questions. We may even want to ask Jack Kevorkian what he thinks after having eight years to think about it.
Then why isn’t this question being asked of the Republicans?
Nobody asks this question of the Libertarians. Our stance is quite clear:
http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml
There is an implicit statement that seems to be made here – vote Democrat, they’re the only ones that will listen to us. I understand that Dave is a Democrat and that his blog isn’t the views of the American Atheists organization, but why not reach out to those that are already reaching out to you?
There are good people in the Republican party that hate the entanglement of their party with the religious right. There are still Goldwater Republicans that reject the RR. Why aren’t we reaching out to them too?
Why aren’t we trumpeting from the rooftops to every political party that the issue of Separation of Church and State should be a plank of each and every party as it is foundational to our government (so foundational that it is the very first thing the Constitution was amended to include).
Homonid
I couldn’t agree with you more. The tie between the RR voting block and the GOP made the disaterous (in fact criminal on a monumental scale) last six years possible. The connection between the RR and BushCo is the prototypical example of the dangers of religion. This connection should be pointed out at all times. If the GOP survives what they have wrought (which is doubtful) they would do well to cut all times with the RR and build bridges to middle class america.
What: Amen to what you said here brother! That bridge to the middle class could come none to soon since there hardly is one anymore.
Atomic
“Then why isn’t this question being asked of the Republicans?”
Well. Ask it.
atomic,
i’m not a democrat, either, but the reality is that if any major politician is going to become a spokesperson for separation of church and state, that person is probably going to be a democrat (at least in the current political moment).
the religious right are too powerful a voice in the republican party; the minor parties barely get any media exposure.
if we want to get our issues more favorable coverage in the media, the democrats are the most likely road to achieving that.
however, as several point out above, there isn’t a single democratic presidential candidate who has the balls to admit to being rational, and it calls into question whether electoral politics is even a viable path toward advancing our agenda.
for all of these reasons, i argue that it is not.
“georgous Paris Hilton”
Dear Aussie friend, no offense mate, but you need to get your eyes checked! Paris Hilton is a dog-faced mutt!
By the way, I think there’s a special on ?CNN? tonight, 6/4, addressing faith and politics with Clinton, Barak, and Edwards.
aussieatheist:
Generally I totally agree with your comments, but Paris Hilton needs to go to jail. Drunk drivers kill thousands in this country every year and poor pitiful Paris has become the darling of way too many young women who mimic her partying and irresponsible lifestyle. It will be interesting to see if going to jail now becomes something they all hanker to do as well.
Last week Oprah had a family on that had been involved–through no fault of their own–in a horrible accident caused by a drunk driver. The mother sat for over an hour with with her six-year old daughter’s head in her arms and watched as the rest of her family and the driver were slowly extracted from a limo. About all you can say in defense of Paris Hilton is that she hasn’t driven while drunk and killed anybody YET.
cry4turtles:
Aw don’t be so hard on Paris Hilton. I wouldn’t call her a dog-faced mutt. If you saw her on the bus, dressed modestly, you’d think she was pretty. She only seems unattractive in comparison with all the other actresses and models on magazine covers.
……Though I want to point out that I have no sympathy for her in regards to drunk driving.
What can you expect from the these Dems kowtowing to the religious right?
Edwards, ?we all fall short, which is why we have to ask for forgiveness from the Lord.?
Obama, ?Faith can say forgive someone who has treated us unjustly,?
Clinton is even worse,
“I am very grateful that I had a grounding in faith that gave me the courage and the strength to do what I thought was right. Regardless of what the world thought, and that’s all one can expect or hope for.”
And senator Clinton said the crucible of life as First Lady would have made her turn to God, even had she not been brought up a Methodist.
“If I had not been a praying person, shortly after getting to the White House, I would have become one in a big hurry.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21851910-1702,00.html
Also, from long ago,
“In 1994, she was asked by Newsweek magazine, “Do you believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? She answered, “Yes.” She was then asked whether she believed in “the atoning death of Jesus?” Once again her answer was, “Yes.”"
And,
“In that same Newsweek article, she says, “I think that the Methodist Church, for a period of time, became too socially concerned, too involved in the social gospel and did not pay enough attention to questions of personal salvation and individual faith.”"
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/117043.aspx
Are these apparently educated and intelligent people just pandering or are they completely nuts?
Here is a series that should be interesting on Belief Net. First, and interview with John Edwards. Frightening.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/213/story_21312_1.html
The only good thing is the way he handles the question “Do you think America is a Christian nation?”
Subsequent interviews should also be enlightening.
Blech. I watched part of the debate on C-Span yesterday. It got to be so sickening I just had to quit. When asked if they would go after Bin Laden with large force even though INNOCENT CIVILIANS would possibly die, all of the candidates raised their hands except for Kucinich (sp?). Smart man. I noticed he got placed at the very edge, almost out of sight. Poor guy.
Dennis Kucinich on Belief Net.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/139/story_13914_1.html
Also, I was a bit unfair to Obama, who seems to have a much more measured approach to religion than Clinton or Edwards.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062901778.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1546579.html
There are other texts that you can find by searching “obama on faith”. Well, that type of search applies to the other candidates as well.
eac: I saw Kucinich on one end too and Gravel on the other end. One other way to look at it was that other candidates were squeezed between Gravel and Kucinich where they were surrounded and had to explain some things. They each got their brains picked liked cherries.
Is there something so special about Bin Layden? What’s that on his chin anyway? Some gal he couldn’t get down and will never be an afterlife virgin?
Two thoughts. First, I was encouraged by how few mentions of god, faith, and other irrational absurdities there were. At least that is something. Second, one of the things we need to do is stand up and be counted. Our numbers are greater than anyone realizes.
An outstanding step would be for those of you with ties to American Atheists to encourage them to either join the Secular Coalition for America or to provide us with some rationale for refusing to do so. I realize I’m a broken record on this subject, but they are refusing to respond to my e-mails, and I will not let this one go.
A thought: a few of the questions posed to the debaters have been read from e-mails. Perhaps the more media-savvy and concise writers could try their hand at submitting an e-mail question to future debates. Ideally it might contain reference to either the percentage or the gross number of nonbelievers, perhaps a mention of Bush 41’s infamous slur on Atheists, a reflection that most candidates seem to feel that it’s safe to offend Atheists, and end with a query – What, if anything, will you do to (reach out to)(attract the votes of) the (% or #) of Americans who do not believe in a supreme being.
All of that would probably make it too long to be accepted. Another puzzle might be where to send it. Before Sunday’s debate, with no clear thought yet in mind, I looked at CNN’s site for possible e-mail input and did not find anything. From what I think I heard on the debate, e-mail questions would have had to go to the Manchester Union Leader.
The moderators have not seemed to shrink from asking embarrassing questions, i.e. the Republicans being asked who did/did not believe in evolution. I think a short, appropriately-worded question would stand a chance.
Each and every individual should be separated from religion to eradicate poverty and corruption from the world.