Stabby-

Christian Politicians base their politic on their Religious Concepts: Abortion, Prayer in School, Stem Cell research and Gay rights, just to name a few.

By appealing to Religious ideology they open the door to a complete exposure of their faith. They pretend it is a secular argument, but it really comes from a mythological root.

Therefore, it is the media's responisiblity to expose all the quirks and bizarre concepts that a religious ideology entails.

Thus, it is valid, legitimate and necessary to ask politicians such as Ashcroft, Bush and Hatch questions along the lines of:

Do you believe only christians will go to heaven? If so, how can you treat all citizens equally?
Do you believe in angels?
Do you believe in possession by evil spirits?
Do you believe in levitation?
Do you Believe in Creationism and why?
Do you believe in the Tower of Babel? The Flood?
Ask Hatch his theory on why there are Blacks and American Indians.

By imposing their Beliefs through politics on the public, they put their beliefs into the public spot light. It is valid to expose their fantasy world for what it is. A savy Secular reporter is justified in asking any of these questions during any press conference to exposed the flawed basis of all their political arguments.

Stabby-----

shermttam

Just a question...
Christians and the like appeal to the Bible or to some sort of document/doctrine for their world view.
What do secularists appeal to? And don't use "common sense" for your answer. I'm asking seriously. How does a secularist form his/her opinions, thoughts, ideas, etc.?

Scrambles

I smell a presuppositionalist

livius drusus

Stabby - I agree that politicians who claim a certain belief system as their main guidance in matters personal and public should be made to answer a wide range of questions about it. I just can't imagine any interviewer actually going that deep either out time/space limitations or the usual craven fears of public and sponsors being offended. Never mind at a press conference, where so few questions are taken and even fewer ever make it to print or video.

shermttam - Please don't derail a thread with the second posting. Your question is broad enough for a thread of its own. Perhaps you should start one in the Philosophy or Moral Foundations forum.

If your question was leading somewhere mildly pertinent like what would we think about an atheist politician (such a rare breed in the US, I can't think of one) being questioned in detail about his philosophy(ies) of life, then go ahead and ask that instead of attempting such an elaborate set up.

Besides that, welcome to the forum. I hope you stick around.

Writer@Large

<Moderator Hat ON>

Agreed. shermttam, these topics are discussed daily over in Moral Foundations and Principles. This is Church/State Separation; let's keep it on topic .

<Moderator Hat OFF>

I see one problem with this theory: if the media went so far as to "expose" them, a majority of voters would likely see it as a *boon*, not a hinderance. Remember how many people were so proud of Dubya when he cited "Jesus" as his favorite philosopher?

--W@L

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: Writer@Large ]</p>

shermttam

My apologies...



I'll do better next time.
Thanks for the welcome by the way.

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: shermttam ]</p>

Oresta

Stabby
Ask Hatch his theory on why there are Blacks and American Indians.

His Mormon party-line response would more than likely be satisfactory to his constituency. Else why his "moral" posturing and pandering in Congress?

Welcomr to the II.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 11 | From: the west | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged

Henrietta

Do you believe only christians will go to heaven? If so, how can you treat all citizens equally?


Perhaps they should answer a slightly different version of this question: If you believe that anyone who does not believe as you do deserves the worst punishment imaginable, how can you represent those people fairly?

Toto

GW Bush got caught once. He said something along the lines that you need Jesus to be saved, and the media reported that he believed all Jews would go to Hell. He learned to say that salvation was up to the Lord, not GW Bush.

Arrowman

The latest Governor-General of Australia (local Head of State deputising for the Queen) is a former Anglican Archbishop. He was effectively appointed by the current (conservative) government. There was some controversy around whether this was an appropriate appointment, and something was said which I think is relevant to this thread:

The religion writer for a national newspaper (a guy who is a Christian himself) wrote that he thought it was inappropriate for an archbishop to be apponted as G-G, because an archbishop has taken an oath of allegiance (to his church and his God) which is lifelong, not something one can "resign" from, and which should supersede his allegiance to an earthly government. This is a Christian writing this, remember.

I wonder how politicians in general would feel if they were told their allegiance to God would preclude them from holding secular public office?