Video: Three arrested after disrupting Hindu prayer in Senate; Update: Reid audio added

posted at 2:31 pm on July 12, 2007 by Allahpundit

Classy: “Lord Jesus, forgive us, father, for allowing the prayer of the wicked, which is an abomination in your sight.” There’s no report of them being linked to any organization but the AFA encouraged its members earlier this week to e-mail Congress and express their disappointment. Money quote:

Barton says given the fact that Hindus are a tiny constituency of the American public, he questions the motivation of Senate leaders. “This is not a religion that has produced great things in the world,” he observes.

According to ABC, Harry Reid took the floor after the disruption and paid tribute to the tiny statue of Gandhi that he keeps in his office and the Indian food he used to enjoy as a college student. I can’t find the footage but I e-mailed the guys at Beyond The News to see if they’ve got it. I’m cautiously optimistic that it might provide as much pure potent schmaltz as the now infamous “Tommy” speech before the shamnesty vote. Click the image to watch.

prayer.jpg

Update: It’s not as funny as the “Tommy” clip because his cause here is just, but it’s still Reid and it’s still absurdly schmaltzy. Deep thanks to the BTN team for making it happen.

Meditate upon this as you listen.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

what was it Gandhi said??

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”- Mahatma Gandhi

zane on July 12, 2007 at 2:48 PM

He also said:

The English should surrender to the Nazis and the Jews should commit suicide.

Gandhi himself had remarked (in 1922) that he had “repeatedly said that I would have India become free even by violence rather than that she should remain in bondage.”

Also Hinduism is no better than Islam:

As soon as the oppressive British were gone, however, the Indians–gentle,
tolerant people that they are gave themselves over to an orgy of bloodletting.
Trained troops did not pick off targets at a distance with Enfield rifles.
Blood-crazed Hindus, or Muslims, ran through the streets with knives, beheading
babies, stabbing women, old people.

So, for those who
like round numbers, the British killed some 400 seditious colonials at Amritsar
and the name Amritsar lives in infamy, while Indians may have killed some *4
million* of their own countrymen for no other reason than that they were of a
different religious faith…

If only the Jews of Germany had the good sense to
offer their throats willingly to the Nazi butchers’ knives and throw themselves
into the sea from cliffs they would arouse world public opinion, Gandhi was
convinced, and their moral triumph would be remembered for “ages to come.” If
they would only pray for Hitler (as their throats were cut, presumably), they
would leave a “rich heritage to mankind.”

Tim Burton on July 13, 2007 at 2:34 PM

ColtsFan on July 13, 2007 at 11:19 AM

So your position is that atheists cannot use the laws of logic because they are immaterial? That just looks like a convenient excuse to avoid the question I brought up. Where is the logic involved in believing in a god (and specifically the monotheistic Gods)? Do you admit that those who believe in God don’t have any measurable evidence? Do you admit that believing in something with no evidence is illogical? If not, why not?

I disagree that the Bible is full of holes. I believe there are no internal contradictions found in the Bible.

“Internal contradictions.” Given the fact that the book has been edited so much throughout the years I’d be surprised if there were “internal contradictions.” But are there external contradictions? Certainly. The fact that no person has ever lived to be older than 400 is one, the fact that there was never a flood that covered the Earth is another, the fact that many of the traditional Biblical stories have actually been told before in Sumerian mythology is another. There are many things in the real world that contradict with The Bible but if you can’t see that then I guess I could see why you’d believe in the God of The Bible.

5.) there are facts or data that suggest the need for a theistic world.

Even if I accept that premise why should that deity be omniscient or omnipresent?

7.) one of those facts is the undeniability of the universal, immaterial laws of logic that are a-priori.

Why do you believe a god created the laws of logic? It is even more probable that they are human creations (like the law of contradiction and like God himself) of immaterial concepts in attempts to explain the physical world.

8.) we know that atheism cannot justify or explain 7.)

ColtsFan on July 13, 2007 at 11:42 AM

I think atheists can very well explain why human beings felt it necessary to create the numerous gods we’ve had throughout our history just as well as they can explain why we created the laws of logic. Therefore I don’t think 8.) is a given. Religious people might like to think that only their god is capable of explaining the universe they live in, but I’ve yet to see any facts whatsoever to back up this claim other than the statement “God exists.”

Actually, Nonfactor, I’m speaking of people who actually have a map, rather than those who simply believe they have one.

And how do we know they have a map? How do they know they have a map? It’s convenient to simply say “they have a map,” because it’s similar to saying “X god exists.”

You can argue that it’s a map that leads nowhere, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a map.

The map is in the persons head. He went insane knowing there was no way out and created one to assuage his feelings. That’s what religion does. It’s what we said about the religions of ancient Greece and it’s most likely what we’ll say thousands of years from now about Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. This isn’t to say these ideas aren’t artistic or knowledgeable, it’s just to say that they aren’t true.

Atheist would argue that there is no way to get out of the cave, and that we should just sit there and enjoy it rather than working so hard to find a way out that, they believe, does not exist.

Agreed. As an atheist I view the world and the universe not as if I’m trapped in a cave (as it appears the religious people do in your metaphor) but as if I’m a privileged resident of Caveland. The way out of the cave is to travel through space or look through a telescope. There may be other caves out there (other alien civilizations) and I’m not discouraging people from attempting to find them.

But you have no proof that it doesn’t exist.

True. I never said I did. What I said is that there is no proof that a God exists. If we were to obtain proof that some foreign God (not one confined to a religion of this world) existed I’d believe in Him, but that isn’t to say I’d change my way of life pray to him every night. The claim is that “God exists,” I’m rebutting that claim by saying that there is no proof he does. If you want to reasonably make that claim give me some proof.

There’s no harm done if we’re wrong.

Disagreed wholeheartedly. If you cannot see the harm done to humanity due to certain religious practices you’re blind. All because these religions believe their God or gods to be the ultimate true authority.

if we’re right and didn’t at least try to help others, doesn’t that make us monsters?

How do you know you’re right? The Bible has falsities. If you can’t even trust The Bible, the only reason you know about the God you worship, then why should you trust it when it says “God exists” or “The Bible is right” et cetera?

I’m not going to engage in an argument with you about whether or not we’re right.

Esthier on July 13, 2007 at 11:51 AM

How convenient it is to only claim you’re right and then not engage in a discussion that would determine the fact.

I’ll get back to the discussion in a bit, taking a break.

Nonfactor on July 13, 2007 at 3:04 PM

You just dissed a group of people, close to the magnitude of the population of the United States, by mocking what they hold deeply holy.

naliaka on July 13, 2007 at 12:47 PM

Left field as in that question came out of left field, not as an insult. The fact that you took my two word response and then wrote a page-length diatribe against me speaks more to your compulsion than to my tolerance.

Nonfactor on July 13, 2007 at 3:06 PM

My main beef (there goes that word again) with a Hindu opening the session in prayer has to do with the idea that we were a nation founded under one God. That being the God who started with Abraham and then sent His Son to live among us to teach us first hand how to live.

::insert baby crying here::

wow how could anyone really give that much of a crap about the whole one god thing. go cry some more about how we’ve betrayed our tradition and then maybe you and god can discuss how to take the power back :P

ernesto on July 13, 2007 at 4:39 PM

Why is it the American citizen’s fault? Why is the American citizen being thought of as boorish and rude?

naliaka on July 13, 2007 at 12:47 PM

Just a theory, but I’m going to guess that it was because the American citizen in question acted like a boorish, rude religious bigot. Hence people thinking that person was a boorish, rude religious bigot. It’s uncanny, really.

It was the majority Democrats who forced it, it’s the Democrats who were the ones being boorish, rude and inconsiderate, 1) using an unsuspecting guest as the trigger, making him feel uncomfortable 2) slapping the American People across the face and then sneering at them for being surprised, then irate.

Ah, I see, the people that tried to silence this Hindu man were just poor helpless victims of an evil plot by the Democrats. They had no choice but to respond to a brief prayer by someone who dares to believe something different than they do by freaking out and trying to silence him. Wow, and here I thought both Christians and conservatives believed in crazy things like free will and people being responsible for their own actions. Your “forced” defense puts you in the ideological company of great philosophical thinkers like the Aussie Rape Mufti, who thinks that men have no choice but to rape women who leave their “meat” uncovered. Bravo. You must be so proud.

The fact is, the three bigots could have protested in other ways that didn’t require stifling somebody else’s speech. They could have walked out or held up signs, or they could have called a press conference afterward or issued a statement to the press voicing their disapproval and disagreement with the practice. Those are just a few of the things they could have done, all of which would have allowed them to exercise their 1st Amendment rights without infringing on anybody else’s. And protesting in one or all of those ways would have had the added benefit of not alienating all the people that see something like that clip and get the impression that all Christians are narrowminded bigots who can’t wait to ram their religion down other people’s throats. I know that isn’t true, not for the vast majority of Christians, but it’s awfully hard to convince people otherwise when you have evidence like this little escapade.

But instead of protesting in one of the ways I suggested, or doing something comparable, the three nimrods chose–no one put a gun to their head and forced them to do anything–to decide that God gave them carte blanche to decide who gets to talk and practice their religion and who doesn’t. And apparently you approve of that, which disappoints me on a lot of levels. Heck, why not just shoot the guy? That’ll not only silence him today, but it’ll remove all risk of any other bigot ever feeling “uncomfortable”. Now wouldn’t that make Jesus happy! Might as well permanently shut up everybody else you disagree with too while you’re at it. Yeah, that’ll win souls for Christ.

We have a 1st Amendment for a reason, and it’s for everybody, not just Christians. But I’d be just as pissed if it was you getting shouted down.

ReubenJCogburn on July 13, 2007 at 5:01 PM

The map is in the persons head. He went insane knowing there was no way out and created one to assuage his feelings. That’s what religion does. It’s what we said about the religions of ancient Greece and it’s most likely what we’ll say thousands of years from now about Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. This isn’t to say these ideas aren’t artistic or knowledgeable, it’s just to say that they aren’t true.

Let me step back and actually explain the metaphor a bit more.

The map is the Bible.

You can argue that someone in the past went insane and thought he/she knew the map and wrote it down, but Christians today are literally looking at a map they did not make up themselves.

The way out of the cave is to travel through space or look through a telescope. There may be other caves out there (other alien civilizations) and I’m not discouraging people from attempting to find them.

Actually, in my metaphor, the entire universe is inside this cave or system of caves.

Basically, Plato’s allegory, transcending what we already know to be true rather than exploring the things we can see already.

Disagreed wholeheartedly. If you cannot see the harm done to humanity due to certain religious practices you’re blind. All because these religions believe their God or gods to be the ultimate true authority.

You’ve just changed the subject. And I already addressed this earlier.

All dogma is harmful when followed blindly. That has nothing to do with God and whether or not He exists.

Religion is not the same as a belief in God. And to be clear, when I’m writing, I’m not writing about religion at all. Religion is the one thing Christ hated the absolute most.

How do you know you’re right? The Bible has falsities. If you can’t even trust The Bible, the only reason you know about the God you worship, then why should you trust it when it says “God exists” or “The Bible is right” et cetera?

Just because you believe the Bible is the only way we know God doesn’t make it so. Christians discuss regularly about having a relationship with God.

You don’t have to read book about your parents to know they exist. You talk with them.

Very simplistically, let’s say there was a “fountain of youth,” but that it was separated from the rest of the world by a huge canyon which was only accessible by an invisible bridge and which could only be traversed once by each individual. I could tell you the bridge existed and give my stories about how living forever has been cool, but unless you decided you believed me and took that step, you’d never really know.

Of course, the difference being, at that scenario, you’ve actually got a risk involved.

But as I wrote already, this isn’t something I care to prove to you. The only point I was making is that if we’re right, which I’m not trying to prove even though it’s all you seem to want to talk about, then we should share this with other people.

How convenient it is to only claim you’re right and then not engage in a discussion that would determine the fact.

I’ll get back to the discussion in a bit, taking a break.

Nonfactor on July 13, 2007 at 3:04 PM

I never claimed I was right. I’m convinced that I am, but for the purpose of this discussion, I have not claimed as much.

But again, it isn’t relevant here.

You cannot prove that I’m wrong, and I have no reason to prove that I’m right. You seem to be reasonable and educated, and I’m sure you’ve heard many arguments presented as proof. I’m certainly educated in my own right, but that doesn’t mean I can add anything more to what you’ve already heard.

And with my invisible bridge analogy, what I’m really trying to say is that the only way anyone ever knows is if they take that step and either stumble to their deaths or drink some water at the fountain.

I can’t take you on my journey. It was a personal one.

Or rather, to quote the flawed Bible, “spiritually things are spiritually discerned.” Meaning, if you want to know what a Spanish broadcast says, you’ll have to learn Spanish. I can translate for you, but you’d have no proof that my translation is correct.

Therefore, I see no reason to go back and forth on this one. Though the point made in one of the links provided was interesting. The fact that our earth is expanding proves that it had a beginning, since as reversing time would eventually show the universe retract. And if no energy is created or destroyed, then how did the world come to be?

But I’m sure you’ve got several reasons for all of that, including the fact that going back far enough even science still leaves a lot up to mystery, so I just don’t see the point. Really, I’m sure you’ve heard it all. I have. When I was young, I took to arguing with my teachers and really enjoyed it all, believing these discussions would lead somewhere, but they never did. In my somewhat wiser years, I just don’t see any reason to do that.

Do you?

Esthier on July 13, 2007 at 5:13 PM

Since my trackback title got edited above, I’ll add the original here:

Video: (Darts for Jesus) Hardcore Bible Thumpers Reveal Their Ugly Intolerance

Lance on July 13, 2007 at 8:12 PM

Atheism, as a system, can be compared to a man writing checks on an empty bank account. The man does write checks, (”logic”), the problem is his system cannot account for his usage of checks.

See, having a tautology as the basis of logical thought “a = a” is what I learned in logic class.

Somehow I missed the “a = a because god said so” portion of logic. Exactly what about a reproducable simple construction of proofs and reasoning requires a creator? Does rational thought not happen without divine intervention?

I’ve never deconstructed a proof down to the point at which I required divine intervention to explain the construct… and I’ve done a lot of proof work and deconstruction.

Can you explain how logic relies on God?

gekkobear on July 13, 2007 at 11:14 PM

I’ve never deconstructed a proof down to the point at which I required divine intervention to explain the construct… and I’ve done a lot of proof work and deconstruction.

Can you explain how logic relies on God?

gekkobear on July 13, 2007 at 11:14 PM

Guys, thank you very much for your cogent responses. Those are EXCELLENT, well-thought out, probing questions that deserve a serious philosophical response from me. To be honest with you, I just worked a very long shift all day today. And I am scheduled to work 14 hours tomorrow on Saturday. And Sundays are kinda crazy for me too.

Here are my suggestions.

We take both (and more of your questions or issues) of your excellent questions, and formulate them into a general “Atheist Argument against the ‘Argument for Truth in Defense of Theism’ “. Then you two guys email my boss below at this website.

Maybe suggest to him the need for a public “debate” on this same issue. I say “debate” loosely here because it is not really a debate at all. Rather, I intend for it to be a respectful, written presentation of competing presuppositions on a key topic, in a question-answer session. Then maybe later we ask Allahpundit if he can think about referencing a future Hot Air link to the website, and also have an open thread along with it for reader comments. When Allah naturally declines this idea, we can then mention to him that we all know where Michelle shops, where Michelle has her checking account, and where Michelle has her nails done, and we can thus “guarantee” that Allah will soon have his iphone delivered gift-wrapped.

When Allah declines our idea the second time, we just unload the nuclear weapon: “Hey, Allah, we happen to be very good friends with KP and ….”

If this sounds like a goofy idea, please remember that I am very exhausted, and I will try to respond to your excellent questions in a couple of days.

What do you guys think?

ColtsFan on July 14, 2007 at 12:58 AM

Nonfactor on July 13, 2007 at 3:06 PM

Nonfactor:

Hey buddy, You also were included in the above. I just forgot to do the blockquote for you.

If there are any other atheists who want to participate, feel free to come along.

ColtsFan on July 14, 2007 at 1:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4