Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Democrats Supress Freedom Of Speech


Neon Genesis

Recommended Posts

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith...litical_ou.html

 

Bob Tiernan is an agnostic. "I'm not a hard-core atheist", he says. He was raised a Catholic and went to Jesuit College and law school. He is a practicing lawyer who specializes in issues involving separation of church and state. He is also a Democrat. This week he was in Denver to protest what he sees as the dangerous mixing of religion and politics, and the sad exlusion of non-believers in a party known for its inclusiveness.

 

On Sunday, Tiernan attended the first event at the Democratic National Convention, an Interfaith Gathering attended by some 2,000 people at the Colorado Convention Center. Speaking were distinguished priests, rabbis, imams and religion scholars. "I sat through, I guess I'd have to call it, a service," says Tiernan. "People were responding in unison. In the middle, Leah Daughtry (a pastor and CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee) spoke and said that despite what the media says, Democrats are people of faith."

 

Tiernan says he couldn't stand it any more. "I stood up and said, 'I'm a democrat but I'm not a person of faith.' I said, 'This looks like a church service to me and I never thought I would see the Democrats doing something like this." At that point, the police came and escorted Tiernan from the hall. They told him he could leave or stay and see what the Democrats wanted to do with him, so he stayed but nobody did anything so he left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Valgeir

    13

  • Japedo

    8

  • nivek

    7

  • Neon Genesis

    7

:(

 

So.... we (Atheists) are the political homosexual-illegal alien-black-out of wedlock child of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see where free speech has anything to do with this. This was an interfaith gathering; what business did this guy have there? I am a militant atheist and ardent supporter of free speech. If I thought this dude's rights had been denied, I would have something to say about it. I was herded by police into a remote "free speech zone" when Bush came to town, so I know what real infringement is.

 

This is nothing but a tempest in a teapot. Some guy gets a mini-lecture from cops for disrupting an event. Big deal. I think those churches that display little white crosses to represent abortions are packed with boneheads, but I don't stand up in their churches and say so. Let the faithful have their fun, to a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The line I was refering to above, was the next to last paragraph.

 

The Democrats know that they have a large non-believing constituency and they also know that to not accept them is the height of hypocrisy. On the other hand they realize that to recognize them formally would be the kiss of death.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see where free speech has anything to do with this. This was an interfaith gathering; what business did this guy have there? I am a militant atheist and ardent supporter of free speech. If I thought this dude's rights had been denied, I would have something to say about it. I was herded by police into a remote "free speech zone" when Bush came to town, so I know what real infringement is.

 

This is nothing but a tempest in a teapot. Some guy gets a mini-lecture from cops for disrupting an event. Big deal. I think those churches that display little white crosses to represent abortions are packed with boneheads, but I don't stand up in their churches and say so. Let the faithful have their fun, to a point.

But then why did they claim that this was a public event and everyone was invited if they only wanted people of faith to have a say in anything? It seems like a double standard to me that it's ok that theists get to voice their opinions at an event where everyone is allowed to go to, but not non-theists. Why bother inviting everyone then in what was supposedly a free and open event?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday, Tiernan attended the first event at the Democratic National Convention, an Interfaith Gathering attended by some 2,000 people at the Colorado Convention Center. Speaking were distinguished priests, rabbis, imams and religion scholars. "I sat through, I guess I'd have to call it, a service," says Tiernan. "People were responding in unison. In the middle, Leah Daughtry (a pastor and CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee) spoke and said that despite what the media says, Democrats are people of faith."

 

Tiernan says he couldn't stand it any more. "I stood up and said, 'I'm a democrat but I'm not a person of faith.' I said, 'This looks like a church service to me and I never thought I would see the Democrats doing something like this." At that point, the police came and escorted Tiernan from the hall. They told him he could leave or stay and see what the Democrats wanted to do with him, so he stayed but nobody did anything so he left.

 

 

Well there was some nutjob with a blow horn saying 911 was an inside job while MSNBC was trying to cover the Dem. Convention. I have no idea how long it went on, it went on for far far to long, I was so pissed off and aggravated I turned it to C-Span. Sure it's open to the public, but, common decency is expected. There are ass hats that just get off being disruptive and causing drama.

 

Now to the OP,

 

WTF is an agnostic doing at an interfaith gathering ? The person has no faith, hence why go? Sorry... Sounds to me like he was irritated and stood up and interrupted, much like the nutjob on the Blow horn. This is what's known as an attention whore. Go someplace you know goes against your personal belief then have the audacity to interrupt then bitch when you're shown the door. :Doh: I see no violation of rights here, just a violation of manners by the complainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF is an agnostic doing at an interfaith gathering ? The person has no faith, hence why go? Sorry... Sounds to me like he was irritated and stood up and interrupted, much like the nutjob on the Blow horn. This is what's known as an attention whore. Go someplace you know goes against your personal belief then have the audacity to interrupt then bitch when you're shown the door. :Doh: I see no violation of rights here, just a violation of manners by the complainer.
Maybe because Leigh Daughtry, the CEO of the event said that anyone could speak at the event regardless of belief but apparently never bothered to tell skeptics that didn't include them?
That will be reflected in the interfaith service -- which may or may not include an address from an atheist but will be open to anyone regardless of belief or political party, Daughtry said.
And she claimed that they should be treated with respect?
"Atheists speaking at an interfaith service ... does that work?" Daughtry asked this week. "I don't quite know. But they're part of the party, you treat them with respect. I'll give them an answer."
I wonder whatever happened to that answer.... Also, doesn't this make their movites for this interfaith gathering suspicious?
Leah Daughtry has married faith and politics, holding positions in the Clinton-era Labor Department, working on the 1992 Democratic National Convention and heading her party's outreach to faith groups, Faith In Action. And she continues to lead her own House of the Lord Church of 20 or 30 people in Washington, D.C.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/politics/1...096/detail.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1) They were never removed

 

2) They weren't asked to leave (which it states they didn't) for being a non-believer but for disrupting, there is a difference. It clearly states he was agitated and stood up and spoke his mind. which equals disrupting.

 

3) They left on their own accord after no more drama.

 

I still see no infringements on rights.

 

Was he arrested? Was he jailed? Was he Taserd? No .... he was ASKED to pipe the heck down or leave.. that's it. This really is a non-story, sorry. I'm the first to jump on the totalitarian Jackboot train when I see a gross injustice, but it's not the case here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Analogy Man was walking home from work one day. It seems he had forgotten where he had parked his car. Analogy Man wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he knew that walking was good for the heart, so he whistled a happy tune as he tried to recall what neighborhood he lived in. He passed a building with a large sign that read:

 

SPAGHETTI DINNER--NO CHARGE--EVERYONE INVITED

 

Analogy Man was feeling a bit peckish, and he thought to himself, "I love dinner!"

 

When he entered the building, he couldn't help but notice that everyone was eating spaghetti. What was up with that? He walked up to the serving table, and, sure enough, only spaghetti was being served, although several different sauces were available (all, unfortunately, containing tomatoes, which Analogy Man thought he might be allergic to).

 

"But...I don't like spaghetti!" whined Analogy Man.

 

"I'm sorry," responded the server, "but didn't you read the sign outside?"

 

"It said everyone invited," retorted Analogy Man. "Surely you could have foreseen that not everyone likes spaghetti. It is, in fact, entirely possible that I and many others are allergic to tomatoes!" He was getting a bit louder. Some other folks in line began to wonder when they were going to get their spaghetti.

 

The server tried to calm Analogy Man, but he was beside himself now. "How can you say everyone is welcome when only spaghetti lovers are being served? It's not fair! Like many in our fair city, I believe in separation of pasta, especially that with tomato sauce, and free dinner. Don't you care about us?"

 

The server nodded to the rent-a-cop standing some distance away. The guard took Analogy Man aside and suggested that he might want to let the folks enjoy their dinners and take this issue up with the event organizers at some other time. He did not kick Analogy man out, but he implied that he might not be made welcome by the hungry folks he had interrupted.

 

Analogy Man stood and glared at the uncaring multitude. "They haven't heard the last of me!" he resolved. "I'm going to write a letter to the editor...people are going to know how my free speech has been stifled."

 

With that, Analogy Man, after some difficulty in finding the exit, walked into the street and tried to remember how he got there in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Analogy Man was walking home from work one day. It seems he had forgotten where he had parked his car. ...

 

Great analogy Ro-bear. You have won the debate in my opinion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this agnostic went about it the wrong way, but I still think this brings up valid points to address. Should atheists be allowed to speak at an InterFaith Gathering? Why should they not be allowed to? What issues should be brought up if they did? What about people who believe in god but don't belong to a religion like deists? Should there even be an Interfaith Gathering?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one could also question what is an Interfaith Gathering in general itself is accomplishing or why there is one. This whole Interfaith Gathering to me seems like a last minute chance at grabbing votes from evangelical Christians by saying "See, we're just like Republicans, we're people of faith, too. We're not like those other secular Democrats that are giving us a bad name."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one could also question what is an Interfaith Gathering in general itself is accomplishing or why there is one. This whole Interfaith Gathering to me seems like a last minute chance at grabbing votes from evangelical Christians by saying "See, we're just like Republicans, we're people of faith, too. We're not like those other secular Democrats that are giving us a bad name."

 

Neon,

 

I know it's frustrating but it's a fact. To avoid the Xtain vote in the United States, is political suicide. Any politically savvy politician will have to find a way to siphon off some of the right wing voting block. Much like McCain is trying to siphon off votes for the women voting block with his 20 month experienced female Governor. Such is the life in politics, its the name of the game to win the most votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one could also question what is an Interfaith Gathering in general itself is accomplishing or why there is one. This whole Interfaith Gathering to me seems like a last minute chance at grabbing votes from evangelical Christians by saying "See, we're just like Republicans, we're people of faith, too. We're not like those other secular Democrats that are giving us a bad name."

 

 

Bingo. This is politics. It's about power not truth.

 

 

However, let's not kid ourselves. The Democratic Party has not more interest in the bill of rights than the Republican Party. I predict that we will see nothing restored under Obama and the trend of rights abatement will continue under the guise of "The Holy War On Terror". The real threat to the Government is not a couple of Arabs with a coffee can full of C4 and nails. It is plain old Joe & Jill average American mad at the real sources of their misery.

 

Let no one think that having the Dems back in power means that the good guys are back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one could also question what is an Interfaith Gathering in general itself is accomplishing or why there is one. This whole Interfaith Gathering to me seems like a last minute chance at grabbing votes from evangelical Christians by saying "See, we're just like Republicans, we're people of faith, too. We're not like those other secular Democrats that are giving us a bad name."

 

I think you are pretty much on target here. For a long time, democrats were fairly quiet about their faith, not waving it about like republicans do. That is one thing I liked about them. Unfortunately, that didn't pay off too well. When republicans cornered the flag and the Bible, that made it too easy to paint dems as faithless unpatriotic libertines. I'm glad that the democrats are appearing to be more accomodating of persons of faith; maybe we will get a couple of reasonable Supreme Court justices out of it.

 

Politics are largely about appearances and lip service. I wish it weren't true; I wish we weren't so gullible. But I see no reason to let the assholes win because they know human nature better and aren't too noble to take advantage of it. At some point, you must choose to be a noble loser or say, "Fuck nobility; I want to win!"

 

The older I get, the more I look at the big picture. If I have to have a little nasty chemotherapy to kill the cancer, I'm going to go for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chef,

 

We may be on opposite ends of many things politically but on your statement you are so correct. Kudos!!! I stated in another string. Politics is the art of herding mindless voters into voting for a the candidate of your choice by telling them what they want to hear. It has nothing to do with the truth, just manipulation and power.

 

Talking about politics and not of any specific geographical location...isn't it the case that any party basically does the same thing as any other party would because of the economic and social situation? They just fly different flags?

 

That must sound terribly naive but it's based on things I've seen. For one thing, as someone says in a post above, you don't expect better times just because another party gets voted in. Another example comes from a local situation many years ago. One party advertized about keeping gas or oil prices down and the other party did not. The party that promised to keep the prices down got voted in. But after a few weeks or months the prices went up anyway. Thus, I got the impression that politicians cannot necessarily control these things--global economy is more powerful than our politicians and all they can do is make this or that issue a platform from which to appeal for the vote. After that reality happens. I dunno....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bingo. This is politics. It's about power not truth.

 

 

However, let's not kid ourselves. The Democratic Party has not more interest in the bill of rights than the Republican Party. I predict that we will see nothing restored under Obama and the trend of rights abatement will continue under the guise of "The Holy War On Terror". The real threat to the Government is not a couple of Arabs with a coffee can full of C4 and nails. It is plain old Joe & Jill average American mad at the real sources of their misery.

 

Let no one think that having the Dems back in power means that the good guys are back.

I think this is what irritates me the most with this whole thing. That so many people keep acting like Democrats are going to be the saviors of society and if we can just get Obama into office, he's going to save us all from the evil Republicans, but from where I'm standing, the Democrats have been differig very little from the Republicans with this current election. I'm also disappointed because Obama made that really good speech awhile back about secularism in America and how America wasn't just a nation for Christians and the problems of biblical inerrancy. For awhile, I was actually rooting for Obama and getting really excited about him, but he hasn't shown any concern for secularism since and it feels like he's selling himself out. Like, why couldn't we have at least had that science forum nobody wanted to participate in instead of that worthless Rick Warren popularity contest? Then there's also that recent statement Obama said awhile back where he criticized secularists for asking Christians to keep god out of politics and completely contradicting his earlier speech. Also, considering that Leah Daughtry supports teaching creationism in public schools as a requirement, it makes me wonder how much she really respects atheists and just how much about unity does this Interfaith Gathering really care about.
The covenant pledged to “require public schools to offer Bible literacy as part of their curriculum” and made at least two vows that run counter to positions of the national party
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/magazine...ml?pagewanted=3 It's like Republicans want to turn American into a Christian nation and the Democratic party wants to turn America into a nation of Abrahamic religions with a dash of Buddhism on the side.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Ro-Bear here. Nobody forced that guy to go to the interfaith meeting. He choose to go, even though he probably knew that he would be bothered by it.

 

He could have easily remained silent and got on his cell phone and texted a post to his blog, or waited til he got home, and ranted on his blog about the whole thing. Or vented to his friends when he got home, which is pretty much the same thing. Instead, he made a spectacle of himself.

 

Obama is courting religious types because he needs the votes. I'm not crazy about him doing that, but I can see why. Until we get to the point in our society in which it is socially acceptable to not believe literally in the Bible, and that it is okay to admit publically that one is an Atheist without having to worry about losing one's family, friends, home, and/or job, we are going to have to accept that politicians will want votes of the majority, which are unfortunately, not us. That is what pisses me off...it feels like Obama is being fake and seen as religious just to get the Christian vote, and if I and others are picking up on it, the Christians must be too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politics are largely about appearances and lip service. I wish it weren't true; I wish we weren't so gullible. But I see no reason to let the assholes win because they know human nature better and aren't too noble to take advantage of it. At some point, you must choose to be a noble loser or say, "Fuck nobility; I want to win!"

 

The older I get, the more I look at the big picture. If I have to have a little nasty chemotherapy to kill the cancer, I'm going to go for it.

 

I think you make an excellent point here. It's Hollywood that has made people want to believe in the myth of the noble politician. But the noble politician either does not exist or is very naive, because he or she will eventually lose to the cutthroat politician. And the aforementioned cutthroat politician will gladly screw us all for the sake of money and power. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there... I have a couple of thoughts I want to share with you all...

 

It's easy to be cynical. Politicians knowingly make campaign promises they have no ability to deliver once elected... they waffle on issues based on the audience they're talking to... they say horrible, nasty things about each other... they screw around and do stupid things that embarrass them and their families... but...

 

What is the ultimate benefit to cynicsm?

 

You could declare that our political structure is broken and politicians are all crooked, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you. But does that mean we should just sit back and do nothing to try to make things better in our society? I, for one, look forward to the day when we will elect a disabled, homosexual, African-American, female ATHEIST to be President! But today is not that day. I still think it is important to try to make our society better not only in the short term, but more importantly, for the future generations that will inherit our Earth sickened with pollution and global warming and our 9 trillion dollar deficit.

 

For me, this means campaigning and voting for Barack Obama, because I mostly agree with his views on issues that matter to me, and I think he has more substance than John McCain. I'm not putting down McCain's war hero status so please don't yell at me. I get enough of that from my Republican husband! But I think that anyone who watched the Republican convention would be hard pressed to quote any speech that actually addressed the real problems facing our country right now and offered a viable solution.

 

So, I guess what I am trying to say is that as tempted as I am to just say "to hell with politicians and screw the democratic process," I am actually going to get involved in the political process this year because our government isn't going to fix itself. We have to fight for change if we really want things to get better. If we don't fight to make things better, they are only going to get worse. If that means complaining about every damn "faith based" political meeting and doing everything in my power to show my neighbors that atheists are moral people who care about our society, I will do that. The alternative is to be thrown back into the Dark Ages where people were imprisoned, tortured or killed for their lack of belief in god. I don't think any of us want to see that happen. So I challenge you all to look at our country and ask yourself what you can do to make things better. And then do it.

 

Ok, I'm done. Fire away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ng2fy0.jpg

 

 

2v3sn5i.jpg

 

 

 

Friends don't let friends vote for stealth Marxists

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I guess what I am trying to say is that as tempted as I am to just say "to hell with politicians and screw the democratic process," I am actually going to get involved in the political process this year because our government isn't going to fix itself.

 

Hi Susan, I get what you are saying. Unfortunately it is fairly clear that the citizens no longer have an impact on the democratic process; perhaps that's their own fault, but it is how it is.

 

Politicians in the current system necessarily accept huge campaign contributions with strings attached. Moreover, they are completely beholden to special interest groups. Who did both McCain and Obama first go running to on bended knee when they wrapped up their party's nominations? AIPAC.

 

Until real campaign finance measures are put in place and until special interests are hamstrung and until the media monopolies are subjected to anti trust violations America will not be a democratic country, but a plutocracy, which it is today.

 

I suppose that almost anything is better than a McCain government, but I can't really see how it's going to affect things that much. I've seen O saber rattling about Georgia along with Dick Cheney. M wants to spend money on the military, O wants to spend money on social programs and yet will still be beholden to the military. Neither side wants to talk about spending decreases, which is what the nation really needs if it is to survive. O's rhetoric seems to me to be more preferable to M's rhetoric, but rhetoric is all it is and both have proven as much in how they have flipped on important issues and proven that they are both just puppets of the plutocrats.

 

I think O will win by a landslide, and I've outlined my reasons why in a similar thread today. I'm not sure it will have a major impact on the daily lives of the citizens for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friends do not let Friends go ignorant of Overt Marxists Running for Office of any type.

 

"Obamanomics" will be more of a disaster for whats left of our tattered Econ. Investor's Business Daily fairly "MoR" when reporting their brand of politics.

 

 

2v3sn5i.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for one, look forward to the day when we will elect a disabled, homosexual, African-American, female ATHEIST to be President! But today is not that day.

 

But I suppose I'm like you in thinking that Obama is a teensy bit more likely than McCain to appoint her to the Supreme Court ... or to his cabinet ... or at least to give her a steady job tucked away as Postmaster General or something.

 

(Jeez, I wish, like Bill Maher, that I could feel anybody in politics was my champion.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.