Hat tip to Sandefur for catching this. President Bush was at Monticello for a 4th of July celebration and he delivered an address. But it’s quite telling that his speechwriters, in quoting Jefferson, cut out an anti-religious statement from a long and famous quote. Here’s the way Bush put it:
Thomas Jefferson understood that these rights do not belong to Americans alone. They belong to all mankind. And he looked to the day when all people could secure them. On the 50th anniversary of America’s independence, Thomas Jefferson passed away. But before leaving this world, he explained that the principles of the Declaration of Independence were universal. In one of the final letters of his life, he wrote, “May it be to the world, what I believe it will be — to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all — the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.”Now let’s look at the full quote, including the part that was cut out. This is from a letter he wrote to Roger Weightman reflecting on the upcoming 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (which, it turns out, was the day both he and John Adams died):
May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.Jefferson made many such statements, of course. Clearly they are best edited out by those who advocate nothing if not monkish ignorance and superstition.
alatham,
Semantics aside, I’ll clarify.
Xians have this separation between themselves. If you aren’t a fundamentalist, a tow-the-line Republican, and don’t believe the leadership of the country should be entirely comprised of people like you: you aren’t a true xian.
There’s a very strongly liberal core to atheist politics (maintaining the secular wall between church and state) and it is undeniable. Some identify so strongly with their liberal beliefs that they take it upon themselves to push those of us with conservative or libertarian political views away. Kind of a “we don’t want your kind here” mentality. This, to me, is a very direct parallel to the same issue more liberal xians face. If a liberal xian is not a “true xian” and a betrayer of their cause, then by the same token a conservative atheist is not a “true atheist” and a betrayer of the cause.
This is precisely how I feel, and why I rarely post. I can tell when I’m not wanted and for what reason.
atomic,
i am a conservative turned libertarian. no doubt many here are very liberal atheists, but why take anything said personally? let each blow off some steam now and then. it is easy to criticize and ridicule others in a blog setting. no blood and no consequences.
i just try and interject whenever it seems i have something worthwhile to offer, or to needle the trolls now and then just for kicks.
keep posting….
What Sayonara said.
I miss Atomictesting!
Comment from: alatham
Great question…there is no such thing.
Just like there is no such thing as a “true christian”…
Hey…”What do I know”…
I see your “messiah” has flipped once again…
What happened to his promised filibuster?
What’s that…number 7 in the last 2 weeks?
Appears I feel the same way atomictesting does:
“There’s a very strongly liberal core to atheist politics (maintaining the secular wall between church and state) and it is undeniable. Some identify so strongly with their liberal beliefs that they take it upon themselves to push those of us with conservative or libertarian political views away. Kind of a “we don’t want your kind here” mentality. This, to me, is a very direct parallel to the same issue more liberal xians face. If a liberal xian is not a “true xian” and a betrayer of their cause, then by the same token a conservative atheist is not a “true atheist” and a betrayer of the cause.”
Whenever I lurk on an atheist site , I don’t feel encouraged to join the discussion & often don’t. It often seems that the liberal mindset does not allow for disagreement with the party line.
Me too! I value your input, Atomic. We’ve disagreed on gun control, but I think that’s about it. I hope I haven’t made you feel pushed aside. If I have, I sincerely apologize and ask what I can do to make it up to you.
karen
you don’t hurt anyone good lady.
atomic,rez conservative atheist how do you define that.i consider myself one for reasons like favor death penalty belief that the constitution restricts gov’t authority.how do you define it.i don’t consider myself libertarian because i’m not against the gov’t doing something if it has constitutional authority to do so.
like to hear your views.
karen,
i can’t remember a time when you have made someone feel pushed aside. you have been a good natured and calming force on the blog.
rez,
since we are “free thinkers” it shouldn’t be surprising that we would cover the political spectrum. and you one of your posts generates negative waves you can argue or ignore. either way is ok.
Thanks for your comments reason, sayanara & others. I will try to answer reason best I can this late in the day. I absolutely believe in peaceful coexistence if reasonably possible, so I don’t usually make negative or attacking remarks.
I don’t get too complicated with this. I’m an atheist with regard to a transcendent god. This is due to a lack of extra-biblical (or extra-koranic) evidence, as well as personal experience with the total ineffectiveness of prayer.
About government’s role, I would agree with you, reason, because I too am not against government doing what it’s supposed to do. Such as defend the country, build & maintain the infrastructure & so on. We might disagree about the extra-constitutional powers it has taken, such as most social service programs. I would hope we agree that governemnt has no business peeking into bedrooms or financing church programs (such as both Bush & apparently Obama believe in).
To comment on the original subject of this thread, yes, the founding fathers are misunderstood & misquoted all the time. So is the Bible & the Origin of Species. I find nothing really new about it.
phreedm
That’s refreshing. Do you still believe there’s such thing as a ‘true conservative’?
atomictesting
I find this to be a very profound analogy and it really has me thinking. Thank you.
I’m pretty sure that my politics come off as ‘liberal’ to most everyone here, and I’ve certainly had my share of lively, sometimes heated, discussions with some of the more libertarian members on this blog. But I also have many lively debates with my liberal friends, as I find many aspects of modern liberalism very annoying. Maybe I just can’t help but want to argue everything out, or maybe I’m just very suspicious of cant, even when I’m tempted to agree.
I like to have my views challenged, especially by smart people. That’s probably the only reason I ever post here, as I get bored with the echo chamber threads. I hope I’ve never said to you that would make you feel uninvited, and if so I apologize.
Rez
Part of the problem that I have with discussing and arguing politics with conservatives is contained in, and often repeated by conservatives in one form or another, your post above: “what it’s supposed to do”. We decide what that it is. In a democracy there is no “supposed to”. Words of this nature are indicative of rigid not rigorous thinking.
So do really stand by your “supposed to” statement or is this shorthand for something?
Yesterday, McCain economic adviser Phil Gramm said the U.S. had become a ?nation of whiners? over the economy because the recession is largely ?mental.?
So if John “Keating Five” McCain and Phil “Father of the Housing Bubble” Graham are the GOPs answer then what is the question?
An actual statement by John “Keating Five” McCain this pat Monday
Well Duh Sherlock that’s how SS was designed to work. How else could it work. Is McCain is ignorant about economics as he tells us he is? You bet.
What
regarding your reply to Rez.a correct reading of the constitution is not rigid thinking.
obama owned and operated by aipac.
reason
You mean like a correct reading of the Buybull? That kind?