US 2008 Presidential Campaign Thread - Part 2

[Irvine511]

Yeah, I guess you're right. And the pilgrims were really Wiccans...

the pilgrims burned witches.

Jefferson owned slaves.

good christians, all.

 

[Irvine511]

I guess by 'Creator' they were referring to Buddha's dream of the lotus leaf...the quotes give context to the official language of the founding documents.

but this is the point. this is the genius of secular humanism.

a Buddhist could read these documents and, yes, have precisely that interpretation.

Jesus doesn't give a Buddhist shit. his sense of freedom, his sense of dignity as a human being -- which is actually what these documents are getting at, that we are all, peasant and king, cosmically equal -- comes from a very different place. but the Christian and the Buddhist and the Muslim can all agree that, cosmically, one is not superior to the other.

(but would you agree with that?)

(and what if all those quotes were decidedly Catholic, had lots of Mary-worshipping stuff, would you be as eager to toss them as evidence that the FF's were standing in your corner?)

 

[deep]

I guess by 'Creator' they were referring to Buddha's dream of the lotus leaf...the quotes give context to the official language of the founding documents.

I am agnostic

but if I were an atheist I would have signed that document


it is a pretty good deal to get rights from a creator that no one can see or find

vs

A Monarch that will tax me and can take my property or imprison me at will.

 

[deep]

This is unfortunately very true...

why is it unfortunate?

child rape is a bad thing

and let's be honest

even in 1770's

any decent and God fearing person would have to conclude that slavery was an absolute abomination

sure one can rationalize any practice
if it serves their own selfish purposes

just look at the polygamists in UT/AZ

They are decent God fearing people, too.

 

[AEON]

but this is the point. this is the genius of secular humanism.

a Buddhist could read these documents and, yes, have precisely that interpretation.

Jesus doesn't give a Buddhist shit. his sense of freedom, his sense of dignity as a human being -- which is actually what these documents are getting at, that we are all, peasant and king, cosmically equal -- comes from a very different place. but the Christian and the Buddhist and the Muslim can all agree that, cosmically, one is not superior to the other.

(but would you agree with that?)

(and what if all those quotes were decidedly Catholic, had lots of Mary-worshipping stuff, would you be as eager to toss them as evidence that the FF's were standing in your corner?)

Well, I do think that using the generic word Creator was wise decision. My issue was with the denial of the Christian influence. The Founding Documents were not written by Buddhists, Agnostic Secular Humanists, nor Catholics - but by White Protestant Anglo Saxon males (Oh no!).

These men had faults, the documents aren't perfect, and our nation is always a work in progress; but the United States was formed by White Protestant Anglo Saxon males whether we like it or not. However, I do think that writing in an inclusive, and not exclusive manner, extended the American dream to include those of all faiths, races, and genders.

 

[phillyfan26]

And it's blatantly obvious that we should recognize their mistakes here and remember the phrase "separation of church and state."

 

[deep]

However, I do think that writing in an inclusive, and not exclusive manner, extended the American dream to include those of all faiths, races, and genders.

I do agree the best thing was the ability to amend.

A good many of the founding fathers would hate what America is today.

And the fact that their handy work permitted it.


It may seem I am a harsh judge of these fine fellows.

I think it is just my swinging back hard on the white washing of history I believe I was brought up on.


How many of us really were taught that we almost never had to fight the Civil War?

 

[martha]

it wasn't like McCain went out on a limb and said something extreme. His quote is right in line with the quotes I posted from men like Washington, Adams, and Jefferson.

But he said it 200+ years later in a more diverse USA.

So yeah, it was a revealing thing to say.

 

[martha]

A good many of the founding fathers would hate what America is today.

And the fact that their handy work permitted it.

Don't judge men of 200 years ago by modern standards. It can't and shouldn't be done. They were men of their time. No amount of revisionist history can make them modern men.

 

[phillyfan26]

But he said it 200+ years later in a more diverse USA.

So yeah, it was a revealing thing to say.

And then we get nitwits like Laura Ingraham saying that anyone who would disagree with him is trying to destory religion altogether.

 

[martha]

And then we get nitwits like Laura Ingraham saying that anyone who would disagree with him is trying to destory religion altogether.

Poor persecuted thing.

 

[deep]

Jews - need not apply.

McCain "I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles.... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith."

 

[deep]

Don't judge men of 200 years ago by modern standards. It can't and shouldn't be done. They were men of their time. No amount of revisionist history can make them modern men.

are you serious?

 

[diamond]

That's not what he said though, is it.

So.
We know his intent.

Only a dishonest person would claim that John Mccain is an antiSemite.

And as far as Mr deep trying to dance around the word "judaeo" last time I checked the 10 commandments were from derived from Judaeo principles which many of our laws are founded on.

That said our country is founded on Judaeo-Christian principles, John McCain is not an antiSemite but you my brother are noting more than a gutter sniper in attempting to paint him as such.

dbs

 

[phillyfan26]

It's not that he dislikes Jews, he just made a statement that is insensitive to the diversity of religion in this country.

 

[Irvine511]

McCain isn't an anti-Semite.

but he did say that they aren't the most qualified to lead our country.

i'm not prejudiced. but those puerto ricans just can't be trusted to clean my house (they steal).

 

[deep]

The McCain from 2000

would not be in this mess


it is his sucking up to the Conservative Christians that has gotten him in this jam

 

[deep]

last time I checked the 10 commandments were from derived from Judaeo principles


dbs

go check again

 

[diamond]

go check again

The 10 Commandments were contain in the Law of Moses, contained principles which Jews followed anciently, which we as a nation have incorporated a lot of those precepts into law, therefore you can say that the USA is founded on Christian and Judaeo Priciples much more than you can say John McCain is intolerant to ppl of religious beliefs different from his-as you tried to do.

dbs

 

[yolland]

In context, McCain was responding to the hypothetical of a Muslim presidential candidate. The "Jewish groups" who criticized his remarks knew that perfectly well, and weren't arguing that he's anti-Semitic, but rather condemning the fact that someone of McCain's stature would endorse preferentially voting for Christian candidates on the grounds that they're more fit to lead this country than others.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/220/story_22001_1.html

(Beliefnet): Has the candidates’ personal faith become too big an issue in the presidential race?
(McCain): Questions about that are very legitimate.... And it's also appropriate for me at certain points in the conversation to say, look, that's sort of a private matter between me and my Creator.... But I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, 'Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?'

It doesn't seem like a Muslim candidate would do very well, according to that standard.
I admire the Islam. There's a lot of good principles in it. I think one of the great tragedies of the 21st century is that these forces of evil have perverted what's basically an honorable religion. But, no, I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles.... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith. But that doesn't mean that I'm sure that someone who is Muslim would not make a good president. I don't say that we would rule out under any circumstances someone of a different faith. I just would--I just feel that that's an important part of our qualifications to lead.

Mostly, I think this is the result of McCain not having thought through as well as he should have how to appeal to Christian voters without alienating non-Christian ones, not of any particular prejudice towards non-Christians. However, they were right to criticize him for saying what he did. There's a reason why the Constitution explicitly forbids religious tests for public office, and while one can perhaps understand the 'average Christian voter' feeling inclined in a sentimental way towards candidates of his or her own religion regardless of the particularities of their platforms, it's another thing altogether for a veteran politician running for president to publically say 'I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith.' That is alienating to many non-Christian voters, who needless to say couldn't get away with making equivalent statements if they were running for public office.

 

[Irvine511]

and while one can perhaps understand the 'average Christian voter' feeling inclined in a sentimental way towards candidates of his or her own religion regardless of the particularities of their platforms,.

it's true.

for example, i'd never let a heterosexual cut my hair.

 

[martha]

are you serious?

Yes. So many people think that the "Founding Fathers" were worthless because they're not men of the 21st century. I don't mean we can't be critical, but to dismiss all that they did simply because they don't think like you do is ridiculous. It was 200 years ago.

 

[Irvine511]

It was 200 years ago.

no -- don't you see?

based on those quotes, they thought exactly like the politicized conservative protestants of today.

 

[AEON]

it's true.

for example, i'd never let a heterosexual cut my hair.

Now THAT is funny...lol

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

McCain criticized for religious remarks
By LIZ SIDOTI
Several Jewish organizations criticized John McCain on Monday after the Republican candidate said he would prefer a Christian president over someone of a different faith.

In an interview with Beliefnet, a multi-denominational Web site that covers religion and spirituality, the White House hopeful was asked if a Muslim candidate could be a good president.

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles ... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith," McCain said. "But that doesn't mean that I'm sure that someone who is Muslim would not make a good president."

Later, McCain said, "I would vote for a Muslim if he or she was the candidate best able to lead the country and defend our political values." He added that "the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation."

The interview was published Saturday.

The American Jewish Committee, an international think tank and advocacy organization based in New York, issued a statement criticizing the Arizona senator, arguing that McCain should know that the United States is a democratic society without a religious test for public office.

"To argue that America is a Christian nation, or that persons of a particular faith should by reason of their faith not seek high office, puts the very character of our country at stake," Jeffrey Sinensky, the group's general counsel, said Monday in a statement.

A partisan organization, the National Jewish Democratic Council, also called McCain's comments repugnant.

Amid the criticism, Democrat Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an Orthodox Jew, came to the defense of his Senate colleague.

"I have known John McCain very well for many years and I know that he does not have a bigoted bone in his body. I know that he is fair and just to all Americans regardless of their faith," Lieberman said.

Over the past few days, McCain has sought to clarify his remarks.

While campaigning in New Hampshire on Sunday, he said that the most qualified person could be president, no matter his or her religion.

"It's almost Talmudic. We are a nation that was based on Judeo-Christian values. That means respect for all of human rights and dignity. That's my principle values and ideas, and that's what I think motivated our founding fathers," McCain said.

Also Sunday, in a statement, his spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said: "The senator did not intend to assert that members of one religious faith or another have a greater claim to American citizenship over another."

 

[martha]

Wow. Great backpedaling job!

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

play the USA Today/ABC candidate match game

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/candidate-match-game.htm

my results

1. Dennis Kucinich

2. Mike Gravel

3. Joe Biden

 

[verte76]

1. Mike Gravel
2. Dennis Kucinich
3. John Edwards

 

[verte76]

I don't like McCain's comments about this being a "Christian nation" and the country being founded on Christian principles. It was not. The Constitution clearly forbids the establishment of a state religion. I don't blame the Jewish groups for being upset. There goes the Jewish vote.

 

[2861U2]

1) Mitt Romney
2) Fred Thompson
3) Tie between Huckabee and Giuliani