Obama can have his faith; Clinton is the anointed one and it is only she that can begin the dismantling of the massive machine of tele-evangelical theocracy that had weakened the American democracy with idiots like the “Bible College Girls” [to quote a noted ex-pat expert on such matters] that have been 5% of the Department of Justice’s hiring in the last six years. Unqualified Bible thumping career members of the Justice Department with psychological issues from regent, Liberty and Bob Jones and even small more insular places like Monica Goodling’s Messiah College. The real Constitutionalist Conservatives that attended Stanford and Yale law could not be found to serve at Justice they had to be wanting because they failed the most important test; the one that said they had to be as loyal to Bush and his policies as they were to their religion. The conservative attorneys that We know are men and women of Faith and Belief. They are Faithful to the Constitution above their loyalty to religion and believe in America more than they believe in what a man in a pulpit says. Is it not the same as the fear the GOP had that Kennedy would be taking orders from Pope John XXIII that we see know at Justice where civil rights has been so abandoned that the rogue DA in Jena, Louisiana would have gotten away with sending six young black men into decade long incarceration had the blogospheric Left not come to their rescue? Are you so infected with the need to control or damn others that you cannot see that to bring these issues into the public agora is to defy reason and ensure polarization?

So now it is Hollywood's fault that America is a diverse place where everyone does not have to conform to your Judeo Christian view of the world? So why not just wage a war to have all movies banned? Fox Faith puts out some great films and We have a banner on Our site for them showing Our support. Let people decide what they do or do not want to see.

We, Ourselves, wonder why so many people that call themselves religious could so easily go along with a candidate like Reagan that so easily embraced a racist like Jerry Falwell. Is not your religion for all races? How do you folks feel about interracial marriage? We think it is an expression of two people's love for one another Falwell, Hagee and those of that ilk feel it is akin to gay marriage part of that well known "slippery slope" that eventually leads to bestiality.

If the religious right were so bent on their values and beliefs why not just start sending your incredible noise machine out in favor of Mike Huckabee? He seems like he was cut out of the right cloth to Us and push right out of the door of central casting for the GOP cause. Maybe it is the fact that you know in your hearts there are not enough zealots out there to really elect a president because you are only 30% of the GOP not 33% of the electorate as you had puffed yourselves up to be in the Reagan era. Most Americans want a job a home and a purpose, to be left alone to worship as they please and not have a bunch of 16th century Jacobinian crap shoved down their throats. If they wish to get married they will; if they choose to divorce they will, if a woman chooses to abort her fetus she should have that right [the consequences of her Soul are of no concern to anyone save her and her Creator], if the people wart fair taxes as Warren Buffet does through a progressive consumption tax then it shall come. We, Ourselves, of the Collective welcome discourse but We will not be libeled and We will not be mocked by lesser forms.

An individual's faith is a personal and private matter and does not belong in a Nation's governing policies. Each and every citizen is entitled to believe, or not to believe, as he or she sees fit.

Religion in politics is the antithesis of a government that serves and works for ALL of its people.

"Religion in politics is the antithesis of a government that serves and works for ALL of its people."

Wow I guess those founding fathers like Jefferson and Adams just weren't as smart as you. I mean cmon what they created just hasn't resulted in much now has it. Those ignorant hicks that wrote this just didn't understand like you do:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

As always your shallow thought stands out.

widely misunderstood alert -

Our CONSTITUTION does NOT specify SEPARATION rather that govt will not ESTABLISH a religion.

another...

if SCOTUS overturns ROE, then abortion returns to state jurisdiction; some will & some won't.

we now return u to reg programming.

An individual's faith is a personal and private matter and does not belong in a Nation's governing policies.

Then the U.S. left needs to stop invoking the Christian "help the poor" ethic to justify its social programs. Helping the poor is the Christian's duty to God, not to Caesar. This is not to say that the programs should be abolished, only that they should not be conflated with Christian charity.

Is not your religion for all races? How do you folks feel about interracial marriage? We think it is an expression of two people's love for one another Falwell, Hagee and those of that ilk feel it is akin to gay marriage part of that well known "slippery slope" that eventually leads to bestiality.

Christianity is for all races. Jesus told his apostles to "make disciples of all the nations" (Matt 28:19), preach the gospel "to all creation" (Mark 16:15), to proclaim repentance for the forgiveness of sins in His name "to all the nations" (Luke 24:46-47). See also Revelation 7:9.

A true Christian has no problem whatsoever with interracial marriage. Neither do conservatives. Those who have had problems with it have misunderstood Biblical verses about how the Israelites were to avoid mixing with certain peoples. This avoidance was not due to racial or ethnic differences, but religious differences. God did not want His people corrupted by pagan religious influences.

A true Christian also does not equate gay marriage with interracial marriage. The Bible tells men not to lie with another man, as with a woman (Lev 18:22, 20:13), but never says not to marry someone of a different race. Bestiality is prohibited in Lev 18:23. Much of Lev 18 recites bans on incest.

"When Democratic politicians talk about faith, we can all rest assured that it won't go beyond words, and that is the real shame of it all."

What an arrogant, ignorant, un-Christian thing to say. When the Right is littered with continually exposed faux-Christian hypocrites, your views are completely baseless and delusional. You talk of your Christian enlightenment one day, and say things like this the next. What a crock. Who are you to judge?

Funny, Jesus NEVER speaks against homosexuality or abortion. Yet he speaks out VEHEMENTLY against DIVORCE (which, after all breaks one of the COMMANDMENTS). . . So why is homosexuality worse than divorce (something most of the GOP candidates have done, but none of the Dem candidates) DIVORCE is said by JESUS to be an 'abomination'!

And "baby killers"??? Ummm, last I checked the LEADING GOP Candidate was a bigger advocate of.. . ummm. . .'baby killing' than is Hilary Clinton (he actually advocates TAX dollars fund 'baby killing'). And "Mitt Flop" has OFTEN been pro 'baby killing' (not sure what his stance is today, though). Condi Rice, Laura Bush, Barbara Bush, etc are also all pro "baby killing".

You guys would be funny even if you weren't so hypocritical!

Mark states: "When Democratic politicians talk about faith, we can all rest assured that it won't go beyond words, and that is the real shame of it all. There is much good liberals could do if they would actually carry their faith beyond platitudes."

For someone who constantly writes of his religion, I suggest you spend some serious time studying the Bible. Who made you the judge of what is in the hearts and minds of others? There has been so much hyprocrisy from the religious Republican right, with everything from illegal campaign contributions, sex with prostitutes, soliciting same sex exploits in public bathrooms, campaign smearing with lies (ie McCain's "illegitimate black child"; Kerry's VietNam record; McCleand's lose of limbs while service his country; etc). But, you just address the issue of Democrat's not being true Christians - only giving lip service to Christianity. This is one of the most disgusting writing you have posted so far Mark. Are you without sin? You are so quick to judge, it would appear so.

With Obama invoking a spiritual awakening and wanting to build a "kingdom" (seperation of church and state), and Hillary wanting a continued presence in Iraq (illegal occupation), is there any Democratic candidate the left can vote for?

I suggest their vote can only be cast for Kucinich or Edwards, the only two that truly represent their positions. Would they be hypocrits to vote for anyone else?

I suggest their vote can only be cast for Kucinich or Edwards, the only two that truly represent their positions. Would they be hypocrits to vote for anyone else?

Posted by: neocon at October 31, 2007 10:11 AM

I suggest the only vote that a true Republican can cast would have to be for Ron Paul, since he advocates for limited Constitutional government, self-reliance, free markets and low taxes. Would you be hypocrites to vote for anyone else?

Poor pitiful pain, so distraught over religion in general and now so incoherent about religion. pain says: "We, Ourselves, wonder why so many people that call themselves religious could so easily go along with a candidate like Reagan that so easily embraced a racist like Jerry Falwell."

?????????????????????

Not quite sure if pain is using the Royal "Ourselves" or what, but accusing Jerry Falwell of racism while embracing the likes of Rangel, Jackson, and Farrakan is pretty silly.

Oooops--my bad. Silly and pain, too redundant.

P.S. Get a grammar book.

There are deeply religious people on both sides of the political aisle. That's fine. That's good. What baffles me is that when conservatives acknowledge the role religion plays in their lives, they are scorned and revlied and accused of being some vaguely sinister group called the
Religious Right". Ooohhh....scary.

Furthermore, those on the opposite side of the aisle---in this case, many Democrats----try to scaremonger based on this labeling, claiming that these bad mean scary "Religious Right" folks want to establish a THEOCRACY.

Really? I ask. And what religion would be the basis of this 'theocracy'? Well, CHRISTIANITY, I am told. Hmmmmm. There are something like 1600 different Christian religions, so which one is going to get to be the boss? Since they can't agree on the most basic tenets of their religions---tablets of gold, virgin birth, ascension into Heaven, speak directly to God or just through ministers, fancy robes and incense or plain benches and no art---just how are all these many, varied, and dissenting groups going to coalesce to create one big CHRISTIAN theocracy?

Yet on the D side of the aisle are equally fervent, equally evangelical, equally passionate Christians. And some of these are pretty extreme---snake-handling comes to mind, and speaking in tongues, both of which I associate more with the kinds of churches at which I see Democrat candidates campaign.

Yet no one worries that these devout Christians will somehow band together to take over the country. Gee, if the conservative Christians took over the country and managed to create a 'theocracy' based merely on sharing a belief that Jesus was the son of God and our Saviour, those Democrat Christians would be right in there, too, wouldn't they?

But they are not seen as a threat.

And the same Liberals who first invent a "separation of church and state" element of the Constitution and then drag it out at every opportunity have absolutely NO problem with Bill Clinton very publicly calling in a handful of ministers to pray with him and minister to him in his deep conflict over his latest adultery---no, that's OK.

And they have no problem whatsoever with having THEIR candidates actually campaign IN churches----speaking to the congregations during the services, even having the ministers instruct the congregation to vote for said candidates, from the pulpits.

Right now they seem pretty happy with one of their favorite sons talking freely about "establishing a kingdom right here on earth".

They wanted to elect a man to the presidency who had gone to divinity school. (But he did flunk out, so maybe that diluted the Christian element enough to make him acceptable.) They absolutely DOTE on Jimmah Cahtah, and he talks about his religion all the time.

I'm just saying, be consistent. We are the first country in the world openly founded on a Christian ethic and on a determination that all should be allowed to worship as they choose. Our Founding Fathers spoke openly and freely of their relgious beliefs and of their belief that religion should play a part in our government and the life of our country.

The anti-religionists are allowed to be so---just not to foist their negative beliefs on others. But we really need to stop this cherry-picking, of which Christians are untrustworthy because of their religion and which are enhanced by it.

And instead of whining about religion, I suggest you all re-read these two paragraphs, and then address the specifics with which you disagree.
.................................

"It is hard for impoverished, single mothers to impart good morals to their children - it is made harder by the smut and violence the kids are exposed to relentlessly in the popular culture. Our Democrats will talk much of how their faith makes them want to help out such women...but when it comes time to attack the smut, there are the checks from the Hollywood purveyors of smut to help Democrats forget the day to day problems of all parents, let alone those single mothers they talk to wonderfully about.

It is hard for a poor parent to provide good education for their children - it is made harder by the corrupt public school systems which are more and more run for the benefit of a few well connected bureaucrats. Our Democrats will talk much of how their faith makes them want to help provide quality education for all chidlren...but when it comes time to attack the absues in the public school systems and provide alternatives, there are the checks from the teachers' unions to help Democrats forget those blighted schools they so recently deplored with such moving, faith-invoking rhetoric."
................

Go for it..............

just how are all these many, varied, and dissenting groups going to coalesce to create one big CHRISTIAN theocracy?

Probably the same way these constantly battling Muslim groups are going to FOLLOW THE TROOPS HOME AND ESTABLISH THE CALIPHATE!!111!!!!!

Sunny,

I beg your pardon? I have not judged Obama, or any other Democrat...in fact, I am forbidden by my Lord from doing so...on the other hand, I can judge actions, and when a politician calls upon us as God's children to help the poor, but then advocates murdering unborn children...well, I judge the action, and find it wanting.

jayhay,

How about addressing what I've written?

Almiranta,

We, do apologize that Our structure at some times reverts to our lingua franca but the meaning We hope remains the same. Our distress for the direction that the United States of America takes is not a matter for jocularity or flippancy. Decisions that are made in the next few decades mean very much to Us and even more they mean much to the species of Homo sapiens sapiens. These decisions therefore must needs be made by more rational Men than those who see events through a lens of the power to control via religion. In matters of faith We, Ourselves, support the spiritual and the Hope that Human Beings have to elevate themselves above their baser instincts but as a mission of devotion for life for the several man it is a folly that leads undeniably to self worship, race thinking and the acceptance of greater sins like genocide. Once people effused with the mighty flux of seeing themselves deified by the words of preachers and feeling themselves as instruments of a body that is to be feared only damnation can follow the death they are willing to sow. These are Our Feelings on those who place their race and religion before the good of the Commonwealth.

Your racism and indoctrination into the camp of those who worship what they see in the mirror on Terra is clear in what you say about Men like Rangel, Farrakhan and Jackson. These are flawed souls who aspire to great thing as opposed to men who see themselves as great and cater to their flaws. Falwell was so racist in his sermons at Thomas Road Baptist that the very recordings were ordered sealed in a vault. We would not be the least surprised if they were interred with the man such that he may revise his own history. Are there no white Liberals whom you feel deserve such a smearing treatment, or is your odious rhetoric only fit for a race you feel beneath you? Much is owed to the Negro Almiranta and this may be a great part of your concern for you know the funny thing about debt is, -- most of the Fates accept both blood and gold as payment over time for the sins against one’s fellow man compounded with interest.

¶2

Do not be baffled by the simplicity of why conservatives get bashed by the media, the Citizenry and their own partisans about religion. The reason is that Democrats, most liberals even the Blue Dogs in the House do not wear it on their sleeves but carry it in their hearts. These Men are in service to their constituencies not some higher calling yet they resonate with their districts as one of them. Yet members of the GOP especially in the South and West feel they have some sense of anointment that seems contrived to convince their voters and nothing more. We have just completed John Dean’s book that was a part of Our reading list this year and many great explanations about the psychology of the “Christianist conservative” vice the mind of the Faithful Christian. We refer you to Chapter Two of “Conservative Without Conscience” for further clarification. We do fully acknowledge that the going into churches for the purpose of speaking to black congregations is widely practiced by the Democratic Party in the South and it has been a very effective means of energizing the black religious base which in its acts is far more conservative in its daily life than most white who attend church regularly. This, however, is a cultural divergence that is a discussion for another time. Yet there are rarely any rationales for massive voter guide drives and armies of consultants on buses touring the nation for a candidate as took place for Bush in white protestant churches during the 2004 National Election. Inherently, these are the same functions that only differ in their respect for the voter beyond being a voter and their scale and it is in these two things that makes the GOP effort seem insincere.

¶3

Noonan is a great example of how Protestant Theocracy based on a feeling of empowerment and belonging can even fool Catholics, Jews and even a few Muslims to think that they and their religious beliefs would be welcomed in a bright new American Theocratic future. We, Ourselves, are sure many Jews in Weimar Germany thought they would be included in the new path of National Socialism as well as long as they were “good Germans.”
On the issue of Theocracy We, Ourselves, feel that at the height of their power those who would see Roe v Wade (1973) overturned and the decision to allow abortions returned to the states [We prefer a national referendum with the decision to be renewed by a national vote every eight years] have made this issue the bedrock of their march to have Biblical Doctrine trump Constitutional Law. In this effort they have managed to take the spiritual nature of the founding fathers and turn them into some evangelical council who had only the intent of bringing forth a Christian nation upon Terra. Nothing could be farther from the Truth and such a nation would have horrified Jefferson and Madison to no end. Yet organizations like the Fellowship and the Family Research Council press on with their Theocratic Agenda to bring control of the liberal masses in the name of Christianist values. What they do they do for power and money not for the betterment of the lot of the Common Man. Their path is a very dark one slicked with the blood of Faithful Patriots who oppose them.

¶4

We, Ourselves, of the Collective were concerned that you would not invoke Clinton !!!! at some point in this discussion. Yes Clinton did pull a political stunt in bringing in ministers to pray with him while he sought forgiveness for a transgression that occurred while he was in office. His sexual dalliance however was magnified only by its partisan nature and by the fact that he was the sitting Chief Executive. The vast majority of Christianists and those who call themselves highly religious, especially in the South, have both the highest rates of marital infidelity and divorce in the United States despite living in the States with the highest rates of church attendance. The bulk of the nearly 40,000,000 people who call themselves evangelicals are a part of a family that has been touched by divorce at some point in their lives. We are sure that these people wanted to have their souls healed by being ministered to during their time of recognized anguish despite theirs having no political ramifications. A query: If Clinton’s decision to pray and get spiritual counseling in the midst of the Monica Lewinsky Adultery Scandal is somehow fraudulent because of his political beliefs what does that say about an ordained minister like Ted Haggard’s restored heterosexuality in light of his actions? Like most swords such issues cut both ways and the damage is based upon the skill of the One wielding the instrument.

¶5

We could find no evidence that President Carter ever attended a divinity school. Only that he had attended Georgia Southwestern, GIT and received his Bachelor of Sciences Degree in physics from the United States Naval Academy. America, however you may choose to believe was not founded on a Christian ethic that is modern day revisionism and code utilized to further your political agenda of exclusionism. It is politically incorrect to be racist so racism has had to move to the safe harbor of standing behind the pulpit to rally white Americans away from progressive politics. Rationalists by and large are nearly silent compared to the amount of foisting being done by Christianists. How many two ton copies of the Allegory of the Cave have you seen wheeled into court houses in the last few years under the cover of darkness We might add. If Roy Moore’s Ten Commandments memorial was legal why not just wheel it in at noon on the busiest day of the week? Yet cameras were there to videotape the event for the media which makes that sordid bit of Alabama history a mere political stunt.

Now to your 2 points . . .

"It is hard for impoverished, single mothers to impart good morals to their children - it is made harder by the smut and violence the kids are exposed to relentlessly in the popular culture. Our Democrats will talk much of how their faith makes them want to help out such women...but when it comes time to attack the smut, there are the checks from the Hollywood purveyors of smut to help Democrats forget the day to day problems of all parents, let alone those single mothers they talk to wonderfully about.”

We, Ourselves, feel this goes far beyond political partisanship and is one of the fundamental issues of Mankind’s current era. But Noonan misses the point. All the good will on Terra cannot impart food into the belly of a hungry child no matter how good the morals or ethics of the single mother. Marriage alone is not a balm against poverty or suffering an often times leads to further abuse of children because a mother may find herself willing economically to make sacrifices that she would not if she could earn a living wage and have adequate childcare without a husband. These choices while personal in their nature often need to be addressed by the State. For women who seek to raise their offspring on their won Federal, State and Local help with job training and education need to be there to allow people to be judged by the standards of fairness and not the harsh rod of rigid religion. We must disagree about how hard it is for a mother alone to impart the good ethical lessons of Life. No one on Terra is more qualified than a female human being of good character to raise a child. That character may have been taught to her by her own mother or she may have earned it over time but character can stand for itself and there are many Souls this morning who have prepared their children for school and sallied forth into the hard world of work knowing that what they do alone for their child is better than bringing a strange man home from church who displays kindness long enough to gain what he truly desires and then turns into the monster that he really is.

We would need a definition of smut to be able to tell what you mean as We are not clear on whether you define everything that Hollywood does that is not of a nature that pleases your eye or whether it is your eye you feel that should determine what all others see. People go to movies for diversion, they listen to music for the same reasons, they watch the television to be entertained, gain knowledge and be informed. More so, the Internet is replacing the television as a powerful source for information and a massive social influence on children. Smut has to be defined somehow. If you mean sexual content yes there is a booming industry for pornography across all forms of media. The human mind finds the image of the act of sexual contact fascinating on a chemical level you would likely not comprehend. Should such images be viewed by children, unequivocally, We say no. Should pornographers, porn stars, porn distributors, movie and television producers, studios, the Screen Actor’s Guild, the Writer’s Guild of America and the Janitor who scrubs the bathrooms at political donors who feel 1st amendment protections and Internet neutrality are important donate to the candidate of their choice as much money as they are able? Yes. Should the candidate accept this money knowing that they are expected to support free speech? Yes, again. Should this apply to both and all political parties? Yes.

“It is hard for a poor parent to provide good education for their children - it is made harder by the corrupt public school systems which are more and more run for the benefit of a few well connected bureaucrats. Our Democrats will talk much of how their faith makes them want to help provide quality education for all chidlren...but when it comes time to attack the absues in the public school systems and provide alternatives, there are the checks from the teachers' unions to help Democrats forget those blighted schools they so recently deplored with such moving, faith-invoking rhetoric.”

The failure of the American public school system is a sore spot for Us. We advocate better education for all children in America and the only way to do that is to regiment the system for the 21st Century. Schools should be located in neighborhoods. The system of integration solely for the purpose of sending minority kids to white schools has been an abysmal failure and this failure We lay at the feet of white parents who fled city neighborhoods in the 1970s and 80s for suburbs where they would find themselves a controlling majority for nearly two decades. Re-segregate the schools, eliminate the teacher’s union by privatizing the national school system on a state level and demand students and teachers be able to perform not to a level of a test designed to assure more union workers and their benefits but that the children be able to live in the real workaday world. We also advocate the wearing of uniforms to school as both a cost savings to parents and to move toward eliminating class distinctions based on clothing and gang affiliations. Those not willing to attend such privatized schools, where since they are not being funded by federal tax dollars would allow prayer by students who wished to participate, the so called hard cases would be moved to three annexes across the United States. One each adjacent to Parris Island, Naval Station Norfolk and Fort Dix for the purpose of making 9 to 16 year olds into men who will one day serve to protect the United States from both its foreign and domestic enemies. Those over 16 would be processed into the branch of service they are most suited to after being explained their options otherwise which would be National Environmental Service working to clean up the nation or working on infrastructure projects. This is the New Educational Deal We would propose. Parents must be willing to support the efforts of progressives to make this new system work however or it is doomed to die on the vine.

Qu'ul cuda praedex nihil!