Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 06-16-2002, 09:38 PM

Getting back to the Republican convention, I knew that <a href="http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?next=2&ColumnsName=miv" target="_blank">Molly Ivins</a> would have something to say.

(from her June 11, 2002 column if the link goes bad)

Quote:

...
Texas Republicans are still split between the Christian-right and the "country club Republicans," meaning those who are economic conservatives but more socially liberal than the Christian right -- many even drink. The Christian right theoretically took over the party in 1994, but many of its members feel both betrayed and powerless. Their big win was undermined by Karl Rove, President Bush's political shot-caller. He simply re-routed the big money contributions around the state party and straight to Bush until he had regained control.

The incumbent party chair Susan Weddington is theoretically of the Christian right, but many of them consider her a "a sell-out." (In one of the more surreal moments at the convention, a black minister brought in to give the invocation accidentally wound up thanking the Lord for Sarah Weddington, not Susan. Sarah is the lawyer who successfully argued Roe vs. Wade before the Supreme Court.) But the Christian right is still a peppy bunch, raising hell -- if Christians can be said to do that -- about all kinds of things.

Their big effort this year was the "RINO rule," an effort to extirpate candidates who are Republican In Name Only. They want the party to refuse to fund any Republican candidate who does not swear allegiance to the entire platform. I always wind up rooting for the Christian right because they're the populist insurgents of the party, as opposed to the old Establishment poopers -- but I admit no one since Josef Stalin has actually thought a party purge was a good idea. But Texas Republicans tend to be the hard-shell Baptists of political theology, the ideological equivalent of "dancing will send you straight to hell"; whereas Texas Democrats are more like the Unitarians, a pretty much "whatever" approach.

The fight was really over an extreme litmus-test on abortion -- the platform outlaws abortion even in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff told Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News, "For those of us who would not sign such a document, because such documents are always too simplistic, it's just a good thing we don't have the rack or burning at the stake anymore because they might be gathering firewood." Ratliff is, of course, retiring.

The Christians lost in what sounded like a fast gavel on a voice vote, but they promise to persevere.

RufusAtticus · 06-16-2002, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:


To me, this looks like a basically Deist statement, since it exhalts reason over doctrinal purity, with the addendum of exhorting Christians to practice what they preach. But I can see how it would appeal to someone trying to prove that this is a Christian nation.

It only proves that Virgina is a Christian State.

Coragyps · 06-17-2002, 08:56 AM

Aw, sh*t! Now that I've read this thread, I may have to actually think about political activity again. And I haven't tried that since 1969. And this time, I could get fired....

06-17-2002, 12:31 PM

Quote:

the platform outlaws abortion even in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

tragic_pizza · 06-17-2002, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by atheist_in_foxhole:

Platforms are like as*holes, everyone's got them.

I'm prolife, and even I know that any law prohibiting abortion hasn't a snowball's chance. Let them kowtow to the pseudoreligious right all they want to, imho. When folks start voting Democrat in protest of it, they'll drop the Richard Roberts contingent like a warm turd.

fromtheright · 06-17-2002, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:

I can see how it would appeal to someone trying to prove that this is a Christian nation.

Actually I wasn't trying to prove anything by my quote of Mason, except perhaps how ridiculous Mageth looked in blasting a Mason quote as "Falwellian poison".

hezekiah jones · 06-17-2002, 06:12 PM

Quote:

... a black minister brought in to give the invocation accidentally wound up thanking the Lord for Sarah Weddington ...

LOL!

Toto · 06-17-2002, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fromtheright:


Actually I wasn't trying to prove anything by my quote of Mason, except perhaps how ridiculous Mageth looked in blasting a Mason quote as "Falwellian poison".

You could find reasonable people (for their time) in the 18th century who thought that natural disasters were punishment from the almighty for their bad behavior, but these days, anyone who thinks in those bizarre terms has to be classed with Falwell, Pat Robertson, or the Reconstructionists.

Oresta · 06-18-2002, 06:08 AM

Quote:

... a black minister brought in to give the invocation accidentally wound up thanking the Lord for Sarah Weddington ...

I'll drink to that.

Buffman · 06-21-2002, 03:12 PM

Cydonia

But i also feel that just because there are some religious freaks in charge who are bad for the country, it doesn't automatically make their political opponents (liberals or democrats in this instance) right by default. They have their own problems that in my opinion are just as harmful as any religious brainwashing. They have their own ways of attacking the mind.

I apologize for being so tardy when responding to your excellent post. I suspect it did not receive the attention it merits because most folks agree with you.

Personally, I have many bones to pick with the public school educators who supported a socially engineered graduate. Not because I necessarily disagreed with the fundamental reasoning behind their desire to produce a more socially and environmentally aware citizen, but because, IMHO, they lost sight of the real goal of education...to produce a graduate capable of independent, accurate, analysis of the real issues/problems. To do so, the students must be given the necessary academic tools. Forcing school systems to teach down to the lowest common denominator ultimately results in a disservice to all the students...including those at the bottom of the education ladder.

Thus, in effect, these so-called "liberal" educators are the very ones responsible for opening the door to the religious radicals...who had some very valid, IMO, complaints about the direction in which our public school systems were being led. The fundamentalists parlayed the issues of Sex Education, Abortion, Evolution and Patriotism into a nationwide political force that actually overwhelmed and took control of the former Republican Party.

Unfortunately those valid educational complaints were cleverly manipulated into a political mechanism with an entirely different agenda and ultimate goal. An astute and extremely effective propaganda campaign has been launched to paint anything counter to religious conservative goals as "evil." Since liberal philosophies are often at odds with those of the conservatives, they must be "evil." Therefore, liberals are "evil." And since Democrats espouse many socially liberal philosophies/policies, then Democrats must also be "evil."

The whole thing would normally be laughable...if the campaign had not been so effective and politically successful. Currently, I find the Democratic Party to be defensive and in total disarray...which only seems to confirm, for the radical, religious right, conservative, Republicans that they have "Satan" on the run. So far the only thing I have seen the Democrats doing is attempting to out-religious the radicals by claiming to be even more religious than they are. What a sorry state of affairs for a federal republic where advice and consent, secular law, and checks and balances were originally designed to protect every citizen from the tyranny of the majority.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-17-2002, 08:56 AM	#53
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	Aw, sh*t! Now that I've read this thread, I may have to actually think about political activity again. And I haven't tried that since 1969. And this time, I could get fired....

06-21-2002, 03:12 PM	#60
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	Cydonia But i also feel that just because there are some religious freaks in charge who are bad for the country, it doesn't automatically make their political opponents (liberals or democrats in this instance) right by default. They have their own problems that in my opinion are just as harmful as any religious brainwashing. They have their own ways of attacking the mind. I apologize for being so tardy when responding to your excellent post. I suspect it did not receive the attention it merits because most folks agree with you. Personally, I have many bones to pick with the public school educators who supported a socially engineered graduate. Not because I necessarily disagreed with the fundamental reasoning behind their desire to produce a more socially and environmentally aware citizen, but because, IMHO, they lost sight of the real goal of education...to produce a graduate capable of independent, accurate, analysis of the real issues/problems. To do so, the students must be given the necessary academic tools. Forcing school systems to teach down to the lowest common denominator ultimately results in a disservice to all the students...including those at the bottom of the education ladder. Thus, in effect, these so-called "liberal" educators are the very ones responsible for opening the door to the religious radicals...who had some very valid, IMO, complaints about the direction in which our public school systems were being led. The fundamentalists parlayed the issues of Sex Education, Abortion, Evolution and Patriotism into a nationwide political force that actually overwhelmed and took control of the former Republican Party. Unfortunately those valid educational complaints were cleverly manipulated into a political mechanism with an entirely different agenda and ultimate goal. An astute and extremely effective propaganda campaign has been launched to paint anything counter to religious conservative goals as "evil." Since liberal philosophies are often at odds with those of the conservatives, they must be "evil." Therefore, liberals are "evil." And since Democrats espouse many socially liberal philosophies/policies, then Democrats must also be "evil." The whole thing would normally be laughable...if the campaign had not been so effective and politically successful. Currently, I find the Democratic Party to be defensive and in total disarray...which only seems to confirm, for the radical, religious right, conservative, Republicans that they have "Satan" on the run. So far the only thing I have seen the Democrats doing is attempting to out-religious the radicals by claiming to be even more religious than they are. What a sorry state of affairs for a federal republic where advice and consent, secular law, and checks and balances were originally designed to protect every citizen from the tyranny of the majority.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.