Video: Hannity and Goldberg on the media’s “atheism agenda”
posted at 9:15 pm on May 15, 2009 by Allahpundit
Traffic is in the tank, notwithstanding Pelosi’s slow-motion meltdown, so I turn forlornly to the one reliable comment-generating topic we have. I like Goldberg but I think this is simply lame: The fact that America’s demographics are trending (slightly) away from Christianity and towards disbelief is, to me, a far more important story than how many charitable donations believers make versus non-believers. The latter is fun as a jumping-off point for argument about which side is more generous but the former is profound insofar as it affects electoral reality. As for Goldberg’s point that atheism is “hip” in Manhattan, that’s even lamer. There’s no love lost between me and urban liberals, but even I’m willing to pay them the minimal respect of assuming that their deepest beliefs about the world are based on something more profound than what happens to be “trendy” in their immediate vicinity. Never would I suggest that Christians are stupid or superficial for believing as they do. Why can’t Bernie reciprocate?
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 Next »
OT, but Allah, you scare me when you talk about record-low traffic. They’re not gonna take our HA away from us, are they?
Pasalubong on May 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM
Has it occurred to you that these topics are the reason why your traffic is low? You get all the e-warlords to show up but not much of anybody else.
Darth Executor on May 15, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Well it is Spring… Allah you just love to talk religion don’t you. Hmmm examine those feelings it might lead you somewhere good.
petunia on May 15, 2009 at 9:21 PM
Hannity needs a cohost. Badly.
therightwinger on May 15, 2009 at 9:22 PM
People need to buy more snorgtees!
daesleeper on May 15, 2009 at 9:24 PM
AP, take some advice from Howard Stern: “Lesbians = ratings”
Mark1971 on May 15, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Orly?
Considering what you’ve said about Christian doctrines in the past, I would say that’s only because you’re such a beta male.
aikidoka on May 15, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Do the studies distinguish between those who are nominally Christian and those who are devout Christians? If the former group ends up moving towards atheism or agnosticism, there isn’t much electoral change. In fact, it could be a good thing: no longer will Catholics and evangelicals have to listen to how “other” Christians find abortion to be acceptable and state welfare to be a Biblical mandate.
Roxeanne de Luca on May 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM
Actually I think the AP is correct that it is topical, because it is topical for the future of the GOP and traditional (not social) conservatism.
If those who want the GOP to be a party centered around Christianity, the party will slowly slide away as people become less religious, which has been a trend probably for the last 100 years.
If the party returns to what it was before Southern Dems came over starting in the late 1960s, it can get back to the Republicans traditional values of fiscal conservatism and limited government, and can be relevent no matter to people of any religion, or lack of any religion.
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 9:32 PM
“but even I’m willing to pay them the minimal respect of assuming that their deepest beliefs about the world are based on something more profound than what happens to be “trendy” in their immediate vicinity”
BOOM. And everything else is just like Forrest Gump’s feather blowing in the wind. Pretty profound stuff there AP.
Spider79 on May 15, 2009 at 9:33 PM
I’m left wondering why it’s so important that everyone categorize everyone else’s beliefs and belief systems.
I could care less if you’re catholic, atheist, jewish, muslim, what the hell ever. It doesn’t affect me unless you show up at my door demanding I bow to your god in the fashion you deem appropriate.
That’s a good way to die.
Otherwise, who cares. Lack of religion is not the problem in this country, if that’s the tie in to any current political or social conversation. It’s the lack of morality, individual freedom and personal responsibility. No religion is responsible for these things, but it CAN be used as a scaffold to uphold them. That’s a parenting thing.
It all boils down to whether or not you want to live your life as a scumbag or a decent person, regardless of which side of the isle you happen to be sitting in.
Spiritk9 on May 15, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Yawn. You need to explore new topics AP.
How about Sexy People?
carbon_footprint on May 15, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Uh, Aum!
Dandapani on May 15, 2009 at 9:38 PM
That’s fine and dandy, but do you have to throw out millions of voters to get to that? Everywhere you turn, some GOP “strategist” or some idiot like Meghan McCain or some other schlub wants the party to leave the social-cons behind. Bu where would that leave that huge block of voters?
Is there not some way to appeal to all the fiscal/social/security cons without giving the finger to the one that actually believes and supports what this country stands for or is the GOP just going to be liberal-lites and move this country away from being a Constitutional Republic?
StevefromMKE on May 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM
No, Allahpundit, what’s ‘lame’ is that atheists think having faith in an invisible being automatically makes a person a mouth-breathing idiot. And sneering at theists for admitting mankind doesn’t have all the answers (and never will), while claiming themselves as the final authority on faith, earth origins and intelligence.
Dark-Star on May 15, 2009 at 9:40 PM
The exception: college.
Hannibal Smith on May 15, 2009 at 9:42 PM
To believe,or not to believe,or sumpin like dat!
Now how about Team Obama,saying don’t you dare click
on Drudge,utelizing government computers!!
canopfor on May 15, 2009 at 9:44 PM
Since your many ignorant posts about religion indicate you’ve know nothing about Christianity beyond your scant memories of Catholicism, why should Bernie assume you’re anything but superficial when it comes to religion?
TMK on May 15, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Poor traffic?
Welcome to my world :D
blatantblue on May 15, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Lame? That of course is a matter of opinion.
rplat on May 15, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Thank you.
This Christian agrees.
jgapinoy on May 15, 2009 at 9:51 PM
Ed, come back!
(Just kidding, AP)
jgapinoy on May 15, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Maybe people are wondering what use more talk is when the economy is failing, the culture is debased, and all the major societal institutions are corrupted and failed to prevent an Obama.
Since those formerly inside are now on the outside, I’d say there’s probably interest in ideas coming from outside the system. Maybe a thread about the next round of protests/tea parties/ civil disobedience would generate some interest.
JiangxiDad on May 15, 2009 at 9:54 PM
So where is Meghan?
jgapinoy on May 15, 2009 at 9:55 PM
I don’t think Republicans can win a majority again without uniting the fiscal, defense and social conservatives. To me this means first promoting fiscal responsibility, strong national defense, strict construction of our Constitutional, and an end to corrupt political practices.
The social issues are highly emotional and divisive. We seem unable to discuss them without offending one another. To me, there is no reason why the Republican Party can’t be a home for people of strong religious beliefs from different faiths, Christian denominations, agnostics and atheists.
But we must learn to restrain our proselytizing and criticizing of one another for our divergent beliefs, speak more amicably to one another, and focus on what unites us.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 9:57 PM
I agree with Allah on a faith issue!!
Oh, my.
Am I on Hot Air?
Now read the Gospel of John and give an honest examination to your non-belief, AP. You’ll see that Christ Jesus is God and that your life before coming to Him was as void as Bernie Goldberg’s ignorant statement.
I’m not getting vicious here. Everyone who comes to Him realizes that before their acknowledgment of Him, they had a life empty of anything of lasting significance.
You’re a smart guy, Allah. Very talented. But you are battling Him and I wish you’d just give it up. It’s not doing you any good.
Skidd on May 15, 2009 at 9:57 PM
Plus,
majority still against homosexual marriage,
plus,
pro-lifers are now slightly more numerous than pro-choicers.
jgapinoy on May 15, 2009 at 9:58 PM
You’re right Allah, I saw this last night and was lame.
Now, how about an open thread? You put up a dull QOTD last Friday night and we hijacked it with better material.
Knucklehead on May 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM
I’ve never thought of it that way before, “e-warlords”. I just assumed they were alcoholics.
repvoter on May 15, 2009 at 10:00 PM
**and it was lame**
Preview function not working on my end.
Knucklehead on May 15, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Trendiness is the not the force that drives atheism, but we are in a trendy period for atheism. Prosperity and peace and lots of time on our hands for intellectualizing tends to soften a society and, in turn, that society leans liberal-secular. We are currently 64 years running without a major war or collective experience with personal deprivation in the west. That’s two whole adult generations. It won’t last of course. We are in an historic lull period. Major cataclysms will happen again. Probably pretty soon, then atheism won’t be so trendy.
keep the change on May 15, 2009 at 10:01 PM
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Grr I hate it when I get block quotes messed up.
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 10:04 PM
If only you knew how to do haiku.
Or, stay on topic.
But thanks for posting.
One more page view for Hot Air.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 10:06 PM
not surprisingly, allahp misses the real point – which is media bias – MEDIA PROPAGANDA, and not atheism per se – and not what page a particular story appears on.
SURE: there’s a place for atheism in america – always has been.
but, there’s never been such a proactive agenda for it before.
it goes hand-in-hand w/the left’s other main goals.
it’s part of the left’s gramscian agenda:
gay marriage; atheism; giving detainees and pow’s habeus corpus rights; favoring EMBRYONIC stem cell over adult stem cells; and desiring abortion on demand.
all of these are promoted in order to demolish the tradtional values which are the very foundation of our civilization in order that the left can replace them with socialism – the STATE.
AND YES: giving detainees geneva rights and citizen’s rights which even illegal aliens don’t have undermines ALL OF OUR RIGHTS.
giving detainees “geneva rights” tells non-signatories that they can get the benefits of the treaty without signing or giving the benfits in return.
this undermines the very notion that contracts and treaties are solemn and meaningful.
obama’s undermining the rule of law in many other ways too. as many other bloggers have noted. as santelli noted in the very first tea pary rant on cnbc: a card laid is a card played, he said.
well, under napoleon and stalin and mussolini and mugabe and chavez and kim and castro and obama, THEY ARE THE LAW.
and they – like the sychophantic msm – rule with utter disregard for the truth.
pelosi lies about the cia briefings; gore about co2, wilson about thiose 16 words; obama about earmarks and so much else; and so on.
and these lies are why their every word amounts to niothing more than propaganda.
propaganda about agw, about gun laws & mexican gangs, about chirstians – and so on.
reliapundit on May 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM
Superficiality and/or attempts to be hip are rampant on both sides. Hell even Maher describes it as a movement … it’s a shame that it looks a lot like a religious movement. Praise Science!
The reality is that an extremely large percentage of both sides cannot tell you the difference between Ontological, Cosmological and Teleological arguments for the existence of God. Genuine Atheists, Agnostics, Monotheists and Polytheists exist, but they are few and far between. Far too many times people proclaim a belief, or lack of a belief, out of spite or custom. Anti-theists, like Dawkins, are a prime example. They act out of an irrational disdain based on prejudice and it is made clear by their focus on evil done by the religious, while ignoring evil done by atheists, e.g. Mao & Stalin.
Stickeehands on May 15, 2009 at 10:12 PM
P.S. Your lust for traffic is admirable.
Stickeehands on May 15, 2009 at 10:13 PM
I agree, and support such an approach. At the same time though, the majority attracted to such a platform are going to be religious people. And the majority of voters are religious people. So, what is to be done with us? Are we to be ridiculed or rebuked for expressing our beliefs? Is there to be no role for religion in the Republican Party?
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Okay, then which religion?
Do you see what that tempest that potentially creates?
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Allah be fair, peer pressure in college does have an effect. If you were going to conform, you wouldn’t admit to believing in a deity. You would stick with the cool kids, and claim their is no God just like their lefty professors tell them. You know the insinuation, your not in high school anymore, and it will make you a grown up. It’s called conforming, I watched an older sister do it. Until she had a life altering event, now she is an agnostic. Emotional Pain trumps Peer Pressure.
Counting the last two post, this is one Palin post, and one Atheist post. (neither currently in the news cycle) You are the Master-Poster.
Dr Evil on May 15, 2009 at 10:27 PM
We’ve had very religious presidents who have spoken in Christian ecumenical style. It can be done without being offensive to those who are not Christian.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 10:33 PM
When will somebody who actually has any good arguments for Christianity finally post here?
Maybe you could get Dinesh and Prager to join under pseudonyms and teach us heathens a lesson or maybe they’ve already tried.
Speakup on May 15, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Yes, but in the past, when many more people were religious, when the Democratic party was open to religious people, and when it was a previous generation of the media who were not hostile to religion.
People now are much different then 1-2 generations ago too, any many more are less comfortable with any certain religion as part of political policy. I think about the future, rather than try to live in the past.
Actually I think there is more religious freedom for everyone, the less government involves itself in religion.
And the best way for religious people to have their own views and religion promoted and accepted is through their own individual actions and examples, than in government policy and political platforms.
Look at that insipidly dumb Republican politician (who called the detestable Schumer “That Jew”) explained how the comments were really meant to show how Schumer was against tradition value and how we really need to live like we are in Mayberry and like the Andy Griffith Show. Which is a freaking television show, not a 1950s social documentary
There were also a lot of social laws that infringed on individual freedom because of religion being part of politics too in the past. Do we really want to return to “Blue Laws”, or stores having to be closed on sunday, or needing memberships to buy alcohol, or not being able to buy alcohol at all, because the local Baptist Church is preaching doom and gloom if people can actually buy alcohol?
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 10:45 PM
If and when you want to learn, I expect you will seek answers yourself.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 10:46 PM
AP, if you really want to generate some traffic, engage us in an open thread with your own arguments for atheism. It’d be a guaranteed draw.
Rosmerta on May 15, 2009 at 10:50 PM
People can be intolerant, ignorant, bigoted, and lust for personal pleasure and power over others, regardless of whether they call themselves a Christian, Jew, atheist, Republican, Democrat, or a wide variety of other labels.
I’m Catholic. I’ve sat through the services of other denominations, Passover dinners, and meals served by atheists. I was able to join in where I felt it appropriate, and remain respectfully attentive when I thought that was appropriate. And I was able to do so without seething about differences of opinion or past crimes committed by members of these groups. I would hope we can all do so.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Having lived in NYC and worked in non-profits for years I think you’re giving them too much credit. Remember when Liberals loved Libertarians? That was an awesome 3 months until they jumped back on the anti-gun band wagon.
Liberalism is Christianity, albeit secularized and run through the filter of perpetual Baby Boomer style adolescence. The sanctimony, self-martyrdom and demands that we design a world where the meek do well at the expense of the rest of us is simply Liberals lifting the worst part of religion while abandoning the best part, Faith. But to claim that what is hip doesn’t change what Liberals believe at any given point is to ignore their ever changing policies on Darfur, education reform, over reaching government surveillance powers (which was fine under Clinton)and the militarization of police.
And remember that you’re in the minority of Atheists in New York who don’t suggest people of any faith are intellectually inferior to them. That Christians are lashing back at them is a good thing for Western Civilization.
Rob Taylor on May 15, 2009 at 11:04 PM
And same for me. I want the GOP to be a political organization that someone of any religion, or no religion at all, can be a part of and feel welcome.
And the last thing I want is for the GOP to be some kind of evangelical organization, that tries to emphazise theology and evangelical values, over common sense economic issues and defense.
It just seems a fair number of social conservatives would have a bit of an issue associating politically with atheists, Hindus, or GASP Pagans too!
Lets not forget that Evangelicals putting Social/Religious issues above economic/defense matters/limited government, gave us the whole Jimmy Carter debacle.
firepilot on May 15, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Eh, but this is assuming it is actually a deep belief, right? If they have sat down and thought about things, that’s one thing. But to assume that every atheist/Atheist/agnostic actually is one because they had months and months of thinking about it/refining their views, seems to be a strong assumption.
Upstater85 on May 15, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Satan probably urinated in his ear.
MB4 on May 15, 2009 at 11:15 PM
I like the lesbian idea put forth by the commenter above
How about topics on hot lesbians and less on atheism. You have done this to death.
How about two hot lesbian in a struggle to (fill in the blank) and they somehow end up in a sweaty heap on the floor.
In walks two stud conservative dudes and these hot lesbians switch teams and give up on this idea of getting married and moving to Vermont.
kangjie on May 15, 2009 at 11:15 PM
It was not just the Evangelicals. I believe a majority of Catholics and a large number of other groups fell under Jimmy’s spell for a while. It wouldn’t surprise me if he picked up the majority of atheists as well.
However, I do know that social conservatives are not necessarily conservative on matters of fiscal or defense policy, the size of government size, and corruptive pork projects. Therefore, we have to be clear about our priorities.
Also, Evangelicals and non-Evangelicals need to get along. I don’t like it when I’m called a fool by atheists trying to proselytize me, nor a “Mary worshiper” or “Idol worshiper” by those attempting to convert me to another Christian denomination. Such behavior is ineffective in changing minds, disrespectful, and rude. And I don’t like it when atheists are publicly condemned to Hell, nor when Evangelicals ridiculed for their beliefs.
I don’t know what glue can hold us together and stop us from kicking one another, but it would be convenient to find some before Obama and the left have completely destroyed our country.
Loxodonta on May 15, 2009 at 11:20 PM
You have been in Afghanistan at a remote firebase for the last several months, I presume.
semloh on May 15, 2009 at 11:21 PM
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
AprilOrit on May 15, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Never would I suggest that Christians are stupid or superficial for believing as they do. Why can’t Bernie reciprocate?
JeffinOrlando on May 16, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Deep South, which is the most Socially conservative and evangelical part of the country, was solidly for Jimmy Carter.
http://electoralmap.net/1976.php
Interesting how overwhelmingly the entire west part of the US was for Gerald Ford, states that would be very hard for a Republican to get now.
Actually the Western States (until you get within about 50 miles of the coast), especially intermountain West are not Leftist, just more “live and let live” types that get turned off by those who want to interject religion into politics, or who are for a social values nanny state.
If the Republican Party gets back to its real TRADITIONAL roots of what it espoused for decades (limited government), it can retake much of the West. But the more the Republican Party gives sway to Evangelicals (not all, just those who want to turn the Republican Party into an extension of their church), the rest of the Western states will go Democratic too.
I am all for a Republican Party that anyone can get behind, a Republican Party back to its roots. Unfortunately there is a big segment of the party that wants to dispense with that.
firepilot on May 16, 2009 at 12:13 AM
Oops. Meant to hit preview instead of submit – sorry.
Hey AP, I’m not sure I follow your irritation here. I don’t think Bernie is lumping all those who don’t believe together. I do believe that some “talk” that talk because it is trendy and for no other reason than that.
But I’m not in New York so maybe they are all educated, well-versed non-believers. Or disbelievers or whatever we are calling it.
JeffinOrlando on May 16, 2009 at 12:13 AM
I’m not.
warbaby on May 16, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Well, they’re certainly right, the media loathe the christian right. But it’s funny to hear them complain about the media thinking religious folk are stupid then have Sean speak stupidly on the Big Bang. I’m sure his grasp of biological evolution is just as shallow. The moral is, if you don’t want to be thought stupid, don’t say stupid things. If you haven’t really looked into a subject, keep your mouth shut.
edshepp on May 16, 2009 at 12:22 AM
That’s just because you’re such a fool, Allah.
The “deepest beliefs” of the non-believers? What stuff and nonsense that is.
The only deeply-held belief of athiests is their deep, deep belief that there is nothing to believe in, and that those who do believe are fools for believing.
Its hard to have much respect for the “beliefs” of people who believe in nothing, except the pointlessness of existence and the finality of their own rotting bones after they die.
Happy belief system.
seanrobins on May 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Well, I don’t know if I am all for a Republican Party that anyone can get behind (Pelosi comes to mind…), but I agree Republicans need to trace back to their roots – “live and let live” would be great to hear again.
That said, I’m not convinced that (at the moment), the “crazy” Evangelicals are the reason for the alleged small tent policies. I haven’t heard Dobson calling for people to be kicked out of the party – actually no one for that matter…
Remember, many Evangelicals bit the bullet both within the primaries and the general election.
Further, I think there was a growing number of Evangelicals who found individuals such as Paul (pro-life) appealing. He’s definitely (right or wrong) of the “live and let live” mind set.
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 12:30 AM
Allah, if HA’s traffic is in the tank, you should consider yourself the main cause of that. Your posts are repetitive nonsense and you are basically a conduit for liberal talking points, “moderate” Republicans (including tons of shit about Meghan McCain that nobody cares about) and atheism.
You fail not only in posts where you actually have something to say, but also in the top section where the stories you pick seem to be intended to demoralize us. If I didn’t know any better I would say you are working for Huffpo and are here to destroy this once great site.
Your analysis sucks, you lack imagination and you are basically a condescending prick who basically seems to dislike 80% of the people in the Conservative movement. You have turned this site into your own personal platform, forgetting that most of us do not share most of your pussified, beta-male opinions. I can’t think of one time where you had anything encouraging or positive to say about the conservative movement or the Republican party.
Your crying about your student loans a while back took the cake. Michelle should broom your ass before you run this site into the ground. Even Limbaugh mentioned a few weeks back there was a pundit on HA who wasn’t “quite right”, we all know he wasn’t talking about Morrissey…
echosyst on May 16, 2009 at 12:41 AM
firepilot on May 16, 2009 at 12:50 AM
Is anyone surprised doofpundit posted this?
TTheoLogan on May 16, 2009 at 12:55 AM
The growing concerted effort by the media, and a growing number of conservative blogs, to shove anti-creationism and atheism down my throat is almost as bad as what the anti-creationists and atheists claim they’ve had to endure in reverse. I feel there is definitely a new line that has been drawn in the sand. If you’re a Liberal/Democrat, you’re bound to be anti-creation and an avowed atheist, elitist, and always ‘correct’. If you’re Republican, you’re an avowed bible thumping toothless inbred hick, gun-clinger, and always ‘wrong’.
With a few notable exceptions.
But everyday, when I pray and/or read my bible, I also look in the mirror at some point during that same day and I see that I have all my teeth, I’m aware that my parents aren’t related in any way outside of marriage, I don’t sport a mullet with a trucker hat and don’t wear never washed denim overalls, I don’t try to force others to believe in my lord and savior with inundation and indignant righteousness, and I value our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right more than I value my personally owned firearms.
I could do without the Charles Johnson emulation when it comes to Creationism and Atheism etc… but hey, it’s not my website and no one’s twisting my arm. Plus, I appreciate being permitted to opine and vent here now and again. Even if I do sometimes come off a bit too angry or even, unintentionally, obtuse. Charles just crashes the ban hammer on yer head for the slightest.
Thank you, AllahP.
SilverStar830 on May 16, 2009 at 1:00 AM
That’s a pretty disgusting response. You come off as an egotistical know-it-all.
As snarky as Allah can get (and sometimes he lays it on thick), when he makes a thoughtful comment like this you disrespectfully bang him upside his head?
Why? Just to get an empty shot in?
Skidd on May 16, 2009 at 1:00 AM
Great post Allah.
deebinto on May 16, 2009 at 1:01 AM
The problem is that the Republicans who are trying to make ID/Creationism as part of politics and curricula, are making the GOP into a laughingstock among a lot of people, especially centrists who we need if we are going to be a political majority again.
While it is unwarranted in many ways since Bush did a lot for science funding, its easier to make fun of Republicans for no-brainer things like this.
firepilot on May 16, 2009 at 1:08 AM
Yeah! Way to go, SilverStar830!
I point this out on these posts at times, too. Allah’s always been good to post these types of threads even though he doesn’t believe in any higher power and even though he takes a good amount of abuse himself.
Kudos to him. I wish more Christians would see this. I think there’s too much crying by Christians on this website.
I’m a Christian and become angry at times, but wow! I realize that this is a fantastic forum to share my beliefs. And for the most part, the majority of unbelievers don’t become hammer-swinging ugly with us.
Skidd on May 16, 2009 at 1:10 AM
You’re pretty funny too. And I apologize for calling you pretty.
Do you know Cindy Mumford, a fine gentlewoman poster here, affectionately referred to as Miss Formater? Did she instruct you in the fine art of posting?
As to your content, you are correct again. There is simply too much intolerance and rudeness. I know its difficult, as I lose my patience and temper at times as well, but I do try to approach these situations with as much good will, humor, tolerance and respect as I can, as if it is a learning opportunity.
People can learn. Even I can. (Proof of the miraculous for you to consider.)
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 1:13 AM
Bill Maher is a moron — he wants company on his miserable, self-loathing crusade against faith.
Richard Romano on May 16, 2009 at 1:17 AM
Too few people publicly confess to making errors these days. They were misunderstood. They blame their mistakes on others. Or even worse, they revel in the way they are, errors and all.
It takes an adult to admit error and try to take the steps needed to improve themselves. It takes an adult to tolerate differences of opinion and beliefs.
Thanks for your generous spirit and post.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 1:27 AM
Maybe all AllahP really needs is a taste of reality from Roger L. Simon’s epiphany.
SilverStar830 on May 16, 2009 at 1:47 AM
I believe in evolution, although I see evidence of God in Nature.
I think the best way to handle issues of school curricula is at the local or state level, and not in a national platform or legislation. However, I also support national programs supporting school vouchers throughout the country, to increase competition between educational systems, and to give parents at least the possibility of choices. Then, if parents live in a district that teaches one way, but want their children taught another way, they can have some financial help making such a choice.
People with brains do belief in Intelligent Design and Creationism and many things that I do not. I would hope the Republican Party would not try to impose a tyranny of the majority, but rather promote options, choices and a culture of liberty.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 1:49 AM
Yeah, I’m not sure why there seems to be this push to have a “unified in platform” national GOP. I think the states and their electorate are better at deciding what they want their GOP to look like. If Snowe or Collins can survive their constituents in Maine, I say, let them stay in the party…
I also support voucher programs. Although ideally I would like to see the federal government completely out of education, this is only idealistic. If the federal government is going to impose the DOE, then there should at least be options.
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 1:55 AM
I want the Party platform to be guided by fundamental principles. Therefore, we must take a clear stand on which pant leg should be put on first. And anybody that disagrees with me on this is a RINO.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 2:15 AM
Is Fox News not part of the media? Because Fox sure as heck doesn’t have an atheism agenda.
RightOFLeft on May 16, 2009 at 2:17 AM
… and start losing every election. You’re basically saying ignore the Reagan Revolution and go back to the same Republican party that was soundly trounced in the 60′s and 70′s.
No thanks.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on May 16, 2009 at 2:30 AM
Given the number of times I’ve heard atheists call Christians ignorant, backwards, and superstitious, I have to wonder where you’ve been. It’s great that you can respect those who believe, but there are a lot of atheists who don’t.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on May 16, 2009 at 2:33 AM
That’s for sure. +10
capitalist piglet on May 16, 2009 at 2:40 AM
We should emphasize the things that unite us and make these the only ‘litmus test’ of what constitutes a Republican: our belief in restraining government spending, pro-growth policies, tax reduction, sound national defense, and maximum individual liberty.
As to the other issues that draw on the deep springs of morality and emotion, let us decide that we can disagree among ourselves as Republicans and tolerate the disagreement.
– Ronald Reagan
While Reagan was a fiscal, national security and social conservative, he was able to work with a large group of people who did not agree with him completely, or at all, on every social issue. As a result, he was able to win the presidency twice, accomplish a lot, and set the stage for the future Republican majority. While we won’t have another Reagan, I hope we can be Reaganesque in our priorities, principles and good will toward those with whom we disagree.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 2:42 AM
Oh, Hannity is stubbing his
headtoe with one of the stock scare-crows. They singled out Allah with code words. ;-)Atheism, with its certainty about non-existence, is a strong faith-based conviction. Liberals don’t have the depth. Their anti-Christian hatred is based on their own religion. Do anything you want; chant the mantra of the day; human sacrifice to Gaia; destroy society to be nice to criminals. Devil worship is closer.
Feedie on May 16, 2009 at 3:00 AM
Speakup on May 15, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I don’t know if I have a good argument for Christianity or not but I can tell you that without the guidance provided by gospel my life would have been very different. My father was drug addict and a criminal. My mother left when I was 3. My life was a living nightmare as I grew up in my father’s “care.”
My home was a living nightmare populated by an assortment of drug addicts, prostitutes and violent criminals. When people purposely work to extinguish the light of Christ within them they are capable of the most inhuman and vile acts. I don’t know what makes people turn their backs on God but I was on the receiving end of what it had done to their sense of right and wrong.
I fully acknowledge that there are many atheists that would never do the kinds of things that I experienced but I cannot understand the choice to destroy God. I understand being agnostic but atheism always seems to be hostility directed at God. In lives of many atheists they seem to think that God has turned His back on them. There is a hurt that I can understand and one that I felt myself.
The pain that I felt nearly destroyed me and I desperately wanted not to exist. I found God and He saved me. In my Heavenly Father I found the rest that I needed and through the healing power of the balm of Gilead I accepted the atonement of Jesus Christ as the Holy Ghost bore witness to the truth of these things. Were it not true I would not write it.
I know from first hand experience the difference in a life that Christ can make either with Him or without Him. The darkness that I saw in those atheists from my youth was terrifying. I can only imagine the kind of hurt and emptiness that they lived in every day.
Mormon Doc on May 16, 2009 at 3:35 AM
The last episode of 24 is coming soon. I’m sure Janeane Garofalo will be having some free time…
Glenn Jericho on May 16, 2009 at 6:16 AM
Can’t be worse than Colmes…
Has Colmes ever actually defended something he believes in?
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 6:25 AM
jwp1964 on May 16, 2009 at 7:22 AM
OK I need work on the quote thing…we need an edit function!
jwp1964 on May 16, 2009 at 7:22 AM
The GOP will have a hard time being taken seriously on matters pertaining to science as long as it has so many ‘leaders’ proclaiming belief in the ludicrous nonsense called creationism (aka Intelligent Design) and other comic book versions of human development. For example, Huckabee, and to some extent Jindal, have their spoons in the superstitious stew which greatly harms their credibility.
Democrats have learned how to triangulate religion for political purposes. You have that model Catholic Admiral Kennedy, thieving protestants in congress — one was freezing the money (to keep the grace in I guess). For many of them religion is a front for the rubes and they know that politicians have to show a religious face (real or not) to get elected.
Sometimes one’s religious role models lose their usefulness and become a handicap (think Rev. Wright) so they are jettisoned and a new faith is adopted as required by the needs of politics. I would not be surprised to learn that our president is a closet agnostic (or perhaps even an atheist) but if that were the case he’d never admit it.
Annar on May 16, 2009 at 7:28 AM
George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, all the usual suspects stated clearly that our Republic will not stand without the presence of Virture, Morality and a deep faith in Providence in the electorate. Fredric Bastiat reasoned that Individual Freedom can only come as a gift from God at birth, otherwise, if man given, man can take it away. We NEED God more than he needs us.
davecatbone on May 16, 2009 at 7:32 AM
The trick is to keep the political arguments on the level of policy. What values do we have in common with regard to actual government policy? Clearly, people like to embellish on that with bible thumping and the like, but doing so is counterproductive if it causes the people that agree with the practical application of your values to back away from you.
Basically, both the religious and the atheist often think that their philosophy grants them an unassailable moral authority, which will grant them victory if they just say it loud and long enough. The truth is that these positions are just assumptions about reality, and those who don’t share your assumptions will not be swayed by arguments based on them. You have to base your arguments on the assumptions of the person you are trying to convince. If your argument is invalid under their assumptions, you will get nowhere with them.
Count to 10 on May 16, 2009 at 7:44 AM
Creationism and Intelligent Design are not the same. Creationism denies evolution and typically looks to a literal interpretation of the Bible to explain human origins. Intelligent Design does not deny evolution wholesale. It simply believes that the scientific evidence points to the fact that there must be an intelligent force behind the universe. That force may have used evolution as one of it’s tools. This is in contrast to Darwinism which believes that human origins are purely the result of blind and random forces. The point is that Darwinism and Evolution are not necessarily the same thing.
frank63 on May 16, 2009 at 8:16 AM
Of course you would want to ignore the related symptoms.
peacenprosperity on May 16, 2009 at 8:27 AM
This is very good advice. I wish I could follow it more frequently.
But I do get puzzled as to how to interact with people who apparently assume that they are completely right, any disagreement with them is invalid, it’s their duty to convince others of this, and if I disagree with them, I am contemptable. How is one to deal with such a person? And what if they are in a group are trying to get their assumptions instituted as law, and especially if they seem to be succeeding at this?
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 8:31 AM
As a Christian, a conservative, a midwesterner and generally an uninformed simple minded rube; I’m simply not fit to comment.
sabbott on May 16, 2009 at 8:37 AM
Because some religious people are extremely self-serving, ignorant, and hateful of people that don’t think like them, while some understand that their moral condescension is moronic, and the best think they can do is just live their lives the best they can, instead of poo-pooing everyone else.
A lot of atheists do the same — poo pooing religious people for being religious. Some of them just walk around thinking they are the smartest motherfcukers in the whole wide wizzorld because they don’t think God exists. And boy, are they just so much smarter than all those ignint people.
This is why I don’t like to talk religion much, because very few people can have a discussion on it without getting all angry, personally offended, and being a jerk off about it.
blatantblue on May 16, 2009 at 8:37 AM
blatantblue on May 16, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Other than that, have a nice day.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM
top o the morn
blatantblue on May 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM
Is today a school work or play day?
Which ever it, do it well and try to be good.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 8:48 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »