Anunnaki

Attention fundy Christian fanatics!

Your lord and savior (G W Bush) just said that this country was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

Bush:

ohwilleke

Don't overstate that, I'd put emphasis on "official". (Also, it isn't really true, individual states have had established religions).

In any case, it is nice to hear some acknowledgement. Better a speechwriter inserted positive statement, than an off the cuff anti-atheist remark he feels the need to defend for every after.

Grumpy

Whoever wrote that speech for Bush has surely been fired by now. And from now on, he'll have Dick Cheney give him the gist of whatever he'll be reading in front of groups before he says something he'll regret.

Layman

I'm not sure what believing that nonreligious persons' being able to be moral has to do with all of these policies. One can believe that--as I do--and still support each of the president's policies on these issues.

What do you mean when you say something is a "science issue"? Are you saying that "science issues" cannot also be "moral issues"? I find that rather silly. Surely the issue of stem-cell research is a science issue and a moral issue. You just disagree with the President's decision.

Toto

Bush (and Lieberman's) position on faith based funding is rooted in their idea that religion is more likely to make someone moral and drug-free. Without that premise, there would be no particular reason to fund a faith-based charity over a secular charity.

And there are science issues that pose moral quandaries. The problem arises when you let your religious beliefs decide the scientific facts for you (i.e., zygote = human life).

Josh Gelbwaks

any time you let anyone think for you a problem arises Toto.

Kevin Dorner

I thought that was his dad... when did he say something like this?

Layman

Okay. But that does not conflict with the idea that people can be moral independent of religion.

The question of whether a zygote is a human life is not strictly a scientific question, it is a moral question.

Vorkosigan

Is there a way to define "human life" without bringing values to the table? Bush's error it seems to me is not consulting values, but in consulting only RELIGIOUS values.

Layman's question is a valid one. Bush could

-- cease supporting coerced prayer in school
-- cease supporting the dismantling of church-state separation
-- cease spouting nonsense about the history of religion in this country
-- openly invite non-religious leaders to the White House
-- cease violating church-state separation with proclamations, prayer breakfasts, and other assorted religious activities
-- cease supporting organizations that discriminate on religious grounds
-- cease the faith-based charity drive

I'm sure there is more he could do.

Michael

DougI

Isn't it great that one day out of the year Bush recognizes the non-believers as citizens. Tomorrow it will business as usual.