I just finished End of Faith. It's a breath of fresh air to read a voice of reason in all the maddness we see on TV and hear on radio. Politicians have to discuss and show they are "believers" before they can even be considered candidates in a political race.
Anyway, I've gone through the previous threads and read them so I wouldn't be beating a dead horse with a topic that has already been discussed. I saw a thread on Sam's critque of Noam Chompsky and I'm glad I did.
Sam raised the question in his book whether or not Bush or any previous presidents would have used or intended to use WMD the way Hitler, Bin Laden, or Stalin would have used them. I'm not as critical of Chompsky on that issue as Sam. I think our current administation walks a fine line between crazy ideology and national defense.
I also liked the fact that Sam is willing to consider the concept of "oneness" a spiritual and rational alternative to faith in holy books. I believe in what Carl Jung referred to as the "universal unconsious" that resides in every culture and every living person.
[quote author=“rab”]
Politicians have to discuss and show they are “believers” before they can even be considered candidates in a political race.
So absurdly true… You find yourself just waiting for it to creep into a speech or response; they are dying to let you know they’re on that team. It’s like it gives them a superhero aura, or something? Smacks of a Messiah, maybe?
I find that once I get confirmation (ala “I just think we need to thank Gawd we live in a country that blah-blah-blah...”) it’s like I forever see the plastic halo bobbing around on their goofy head. And yet it’s utterly pervasive.
You’d think that with all the movies and TV shows that have lampooned this classic image - the pious, God-approved politician - people would have wised up by now. Instead they protest the movie, boycott the sponsers… and elect another God-man.
We all know this wouldn’t be anything to get upset about if only they’d treat their religious affiliations as they do their lovers - keep them private. Instead they use it to change laws, start wars…. and worst of all, prevent a thoroughly reality-based candidate from having a chance to actually run a secular government for a change.
Does anyone know if there’s been a single big-name politician who has refused to whip out God-rhetoric to get elected?
[quote author=“Mia”]Does anyone know if there’s been a single big-name politician who has refused to whip out God-rhetoric to get elected?
I found it absolutely refreshing watching H. Ross a few years ago but I don’t recall if he brought up god or not. Too bad he didn’t inspire anyone else with the same sort of stage presense and focus on issues and lack of being so “political”. Maybe he was the system’s last gasp before falling over the cliff.
[quote author=“Mia”]
Does anyone know if there’s been a single big-name politician who has refused to whip out God-rhetoric to get elected?
_
Of course not…......but this is really the wrong question.
Given the religious demographics in this country, it is clear that no politician could ever become nationally prominent (i.e., “big-name”) unless he/she professes a belief in Gawd.
The real question for us “heathens” is….......
Would you rather vote for a politician who actually sincerely believes the religious BS and has honest faith in a supreme being………. or for a hypocrite who will falsely claim belief (or say anything else) just in order to get elected?
Sorry, but I’ll take a hypocrite any day, especially with the president, who has the power to institute a hastening of end-of-time prophesy. Good point though, C.A.
[quote author=“rab”]I also liked the fact that Sam is willing to consider the concept of “oneness” a spiritual and rational alternative to faith in holy books.
Yea, me too. That was the hook for me as well, a positive constructive alternative to faith.
I can see a role for discussion and debate as well, but it seems debate particularly serves mostly to deepen people’s ego attachment to their favorite concepts. It’s fun, but you wonder what it really accomplishes, except in the imaginations of the debaters.
Rab, I was hoping we might have at least one little corner of the board dedicated to what you call “oneness”, what seems to be an important part of Sam’s message.
[quote author=“treblinka”]... the Palestinians, the victims of the worst holocaust in 5 centuries.
Treblinka, have you considered a psychiatric help? I bet we can find a handful of participants of this forum who will tell you that you are in a desperate need for psychological evaluation. It is not just me.
If you refuse to follow our advice at least please turn your attention to The Champion and evangelicals. You have a substantial difference of opinions on the subject that matters to both of you. Sorry, we are not interested in debating the intricacies of the doctrinal differences between Christians. To us, you are both crazy.
Palestinians are the victims of their own leaders and brothers in Islam. You are welcomed to go there and help them with your Christian teachings. Just don’t expect that we will bail you out when you get kidnapped.
Yes Treb, by all means, go to Palistine and try to tell them that they are all condemed to hell for not following the one true church. That way we can all deny that you were beheaded! For Christ’s sake, have you lost your bloody mind? Do you really hate all Jews so much that you have to rewrite history to make yourself feel better about Adolph! I suppose you think new Iranian president Dipshitzani’s plan to wipe out Israel is a noble calling? So much for loving your neighbor as yourself. Jesus is rolling over in his grave!
I hate to admit it, but it appears the hypocrites do far less damage.
Here, here, Klangdon, I’ll vote for the “hypocrite” any day.
And one other thing, I’m thinking of changing my screen name to Pol Pot or perhaps Killing Fields. What do you guys think? Gulag just didn’t have the ring I was after. Or maybe Auchwitz or Trebl—Whoops! That one is already taken.
I guess I’ll stick with QQ for now until I come up with a really good extermination camp name. Stay tuned…I’m sure I’ll come up with something.
T.O.—you are too funny.
So much for loving your neighbor as yourself. Jesus is rolling over in his grave!
Yup, dfhusky, another reason why I can’t believe in a moral universe…:wink:
OK,……so how do you tell the difference between the true believing politician and the hypocrite….....when they all lie so frequently and so well?
In some rare cases, it is pretty obvious who the true believers are———e.g., Jimmy (I’ll Never Lie to You) Carter.
The hypocrites may be somewhat harder to spot…….. However, this class almost certainly includes the Clintons and John F’n Kerry who selectively flaunt their situational religiosity only when they calculate it to be clearly in their selfish political interests to do so.
George W. Bush……………………..I really don’t know?
Certainly his left wing detractors paint him as a true believer……..but, then they also claim that he is dumber than a door knob even after he has repeatedly kicked their political asses six ways to Sunday for the last decade or more both in Texas and nationally.
My guess is that he is at least equal parts hypocrite and true believer who, along with Karl (The Architect) Rove, has cleverly (and hypocritically) crafted a right-of-center coalition of both religious and non-religious conservatives and moderates to get a majority of electoral votes…..twice.
So, what is the definitive “heathen” litmus test to spot a true and total hypocrite worthy of your unflinching support?
So, what is the definitive “heathen” litmus test to spot a true and total hypocrite worthy of your unflinching support?
Neither a hypocrite or true believer is worth support IMO. A litmus test would be very hard to do. I thought Howard Dean looked a little like a hypocrite when he mentioned he prayed, but an investigation showed he wasn’t what you call a practicing Christian. He said that to appeal to religious voters.
Now Tom Delay is something else. He may strike some people as a true believer, but his actions are one of corruption, bribery, a amoral policies and tactics. He holds talks with fundamentalists all the time. To me, he is a hypocrite because he doesnt practice what he “preaches.”
Bush is certainly a hypocrite. During the Terry Shiavo fiasco, he stated that he always erred on the side of life, that’s why he hurried from another one of his many vacations to come to her rescue. He certainly didn’t err on the side of life when he ordered bombs down on Baghdad.
