The Serious Thread (standard disclaimer here))

[bjørn]

I hope I NEVER get used to earthquakes . . . . . Glad you're doing okay (assuming that you still are since I didn't respond to you for more than two weeks.

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year and a soberly-reflective-yet-morally-uplifting Martin Luther King Jr. Day to you all !!!

Yes, even you - the one behind the couch. I'm feeling generous.

[bjørn]

BOT

Ken Starr (yes, that old asshole from the witch-hunt era in the '90s) wrote a stupid opinion piece in the Washington Post today.

"Can I vote for a Mormon?"
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-i-vote-for-a-mormon/2012/01/06/gIQAodWBkP_story.html

For those of you too busy or with too much sense to read it I'll summarize his position:

"YES! I can, and so should you ."

I won't do a point by point critique of his essay, I haven' got time, just a broad brush condemnation of his central premise - that a candidate's religion doesn't matter only her/his stated positions on issues.

Of course your religion matters. There are many different faiths/cults/sects. Many (not all) religions attempt to institutionalize as articles of faith bigotry against certain groups. They proscribe and condemn certain perfectly legal behaviors on "moral" grounds. They require adherents to attempt to convert others to their beliefs. They are intolerant by definition. They reject science in favor of ancient mythical origin stories. They are fundamentally opposed to the tolerance mandated by the constitution.

So yes, if you are a follower of one of those religions you should not be in a position of political power.

Done now.

[judi]

but what do you REALLY think?

i'm honestly CONSTANTLY amazed that the people who actually demand proof for what they believe in are suspect (morally), and the people who believe wholeheartedly in an unknown (according to precepts fed to them as children, usually, to determine what form that unknown takes, but adamantly certain their way is the ONLY correct one) are the ones who seem to be viewed as somehow "better." it's so ODD. we don't do this in any other area of life... we view those people who believe wholeheartedly in unproven things to be crackpots and flakes. but when it comes to "God" ...it's assumed to be true and anyone who needs proof is the crackpot, apparently.

[bjørn]

That is a disturbingly accurate observation.

Thank you

[bjørn]

By Tom Toles (Washington Post cartoonist)

Explain this. After telling us that Bill Clinton’s sexual dalliance was an extraordinary, unforgivable threat to the public morality, and that the marriage of committed, loving gay people is an intolerable threat to the institution of marriage, the conservative “values voters” of South Carolina not only listen politely to Newt Gingrich’s remarks about his adultery, but then CHEER.

Listen respectfully? Okay. Find some forgiveness in their hearts for Newt’s human frailty that neither they, nor Gingrich in particular somehow ever found for Clinton? Okay. Be all of a sudden annoyed by the same media that dragged Monica’s blue dress across the news landscape? Okay. But cheering? Tell me what that could mean. This was adultery. You know, the biblically forbidden Ten Commandments adultery that is on those stone tablets they are always trying to erect in the public square. This is the kind of thing that they claim is bedrock to the way they view the family and the morality of personal conduct. Cheering?

What will the children think? All those years of squirming in the church pews listening to the preacher talk and talk and talk about sin, and then in three minutes have it all swept away by listening to their conservative parents cheering Mr. Serial Adultery. CHEERING. Jesus forgave, but I don’t remember him cheering. Explain it to me. No, don’t bother. Explain it to your kids.

[kaffymoo]

Holy moly. What Tom said.

The only issue I ever had with Bill's adultery was his lying about it. If he'd just said "Yes, I cheated. This is a personal matter between my wife and myself. It is not a matter for public consumption. Please respect that" lather, rinse, repeat, then he'd still have been torn apart in the media, but at least he'd have gone down with his integrity intact.

[frank]

dave,

i just started lunatics an i am laughing my ass off! im sitting in a lanai (?) in naples, dropping my mom off before going back to columbus ...love yor work!

[judi]

glad to hear you are enjoying the book. why can't i make this type big enough to see? anyway. what bjorn said.