Mormonism and Romney follow-up

btw, I'm not specifically picking on Mormonism here, just using a relevant example to prove my point from the earlier post.

Jerusalem has been a religious focal point for millenium. Why? BigHugeImportant things keep happening there. That gives it very special status.

Well, if ages ago, Jesus came to America, and if centuries ago, angels came down and spoke to John Smith in America, then doesn't that make America special too? God-chosen, even?
If you believe that, then wouldn't that have an effect on, at the very least, foreign policy?
I'm not saying it would have a negative effect, but simply that it would change how we interacted with the rest of the world.
Isn't that important to know about your candidate?


Tags:Mormonism

Mitt Romney and judging religion

On the way in to work today, NPR was doing a bit in New Hampshire about reactions to Romney's speach and his religion in general.
One person said something to the effect of: I thought Kennedy put this to rest. When a jewish person comes to the forefront, are we going to have to go through this again? Should we really be judging other people's faiths?

In one sense I agree with this guy. Should we be judging if one faith is more true than another? Of course not. Faith, by definition, can't be known in that sense (though many might disagree...ego is wonderful, isn't it?).
But when it comes to the tenets of that faith, then yes, not only should we judge, but we MUST judge.
While a president may be able to distance himself from the direct influence of his church, these are still the beliefs that will shape his policy, and the church determins those beliefs.
Look at our current president. He believes that homosexuality is wrong. He believes this because of his faith.
The Catholic church says that capital punishment is wrong. If we elect a Catholic president, the Pope might not call him and tell him whether to sign or veto a bill abolishing the death penalty, but the decision is already there.

Certainly, on big issues like the above, issues that come up during the campaign, you can simply find out where the person stands. But those are not the only issues that will come up during their term.
More subtle ones: government aid to the Boy Scouts (a religious organization that bans gays from being troop leaders), how scientific information is handled (promoting abstinance only programs against all information that shows they don't work, or global warming, for that matter), and so forth.

Ignoring this is no different than ignoring whether or not a candidate is, say, pro-big government, or a socialist, or an oil baron.

Thats sort of the thing in America. When people say they want 'a person of faith', they are lying. The really mean 'a person of my faith, or at least something close'.
Because I shit you not, for people who toss that phrase around, they don't mean jews or muslims or hindus.




Tags:Mitt Romney
mormonism

Rampant Links: Newsflash Edition

I'm sorry, Mr. Richardson, exactly where in the Constitution? Where in the Bible?
My response: Fuck Iowa.


See, Bob, thats what you get for going techno.


Duh, Part I. Film at 11.


Duh, Part II. Join us next week for our lead story, "People would rather be rich than poor"


The only story of late that doesn't make me sad, angry, or homicidal

Tags:god iowa presidential campaign Bob Mould sex drugs rock and roll gaming

Republicans: Yeah, we only care about Straight White Males

Film at 11

Univisión planned to air the first presidential debates in Spanish on Sept. 9 and 16, one for Democrats, the other for Republicans, trumpeting a national coming-out party for Hispanic voters.

Except Republican candidates aren't coming. Only Ariz. Sen. John McCain agreed to participate in the event at the University of Miami.
...
All eight Democratic candidates are slated to show up Sept. 9, and party leaders plan to highlight the contrast.

Seriously, they don't wanna do the youtube thing, they can't stomach the idea of the logo debate, and now they don't feel like reaching out to latinos.
What's left?
Well, what do they care. They don't need those snotty tech brats, or those disgusting fags and man hating dykes. And they especially don't need those fucking wetbacks.


Tags:republicans racism

Craig, gays, and self-loathing

The logic is that if you're gay, you must therefore support gay marriage
No, you twit.
The logic is that, if you are gay, and you don't support gay rights in general, you are, in fact, pathetic.
The right's objections regarding homosexuality aren't at all limited to gay marriage. Thats just the most recent outbreak (mostly because the gay rights movement is winning, as freedom and civil liberties always do, eventually).
And here's Craig hiding frm his own fears again:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/29/craig.arrest/index.html

Craig also has opposed expanding the federal hate crimes law to cover offenses motivated by anti-gay bias and, in 1996, voted against a bill that would have outlawed employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, which failed by a single vote in the Senate.

If you go through the whole article (which is a very good overview of how opinions on Craig have changed now that the election has passed), it becomes apparent that the real problem the right has with Craig is that he was having illicit GAY sex. Vitter, on the other hand, appears to have just been too manly for one woman.

Anyhow, Craig has shown himself to be a self-loathing hypocrit who puts his desire for power ahead of everything. Even his own nature. He has, in fact, sold his soul to those who would see him burn.

I'm reminded of a character from The Boondocks cartoon.
Rufus.
He is, of course, the modern day version of...well...a particular class of slave who worked in the owner's mansion.


Tags:larry+craig gay+rights