You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Our Godless Constitution
- Thread starter shanek
- Start date
-
- Tags
- constitution godless
shanek said:By the way, Claus, what does any of this have to do with your point, which was, in your words, "That the US is invariably interconnected with a supernatural being"?
That should be clear by now. Unless you want to ignore reality.
As Thanz says, Browne was a no hope candidate, and incidentially one who'd likely to appeal to a segment who was particuarly unconcerned by their candidates religion or lack of it. We have a gallup pole saying that only 49% of all Americans would vote for an atheist vs. your recolection of a highly unrepresentatice case. I'd say that the gallup poll is the better evidence.shanek said:Harry Browne, despite the near-dearth of media exposure, got quite a bit of response nonetheless. I don't ever remember anyone making religion an issue.
Thanz said:Or, perhaps when the candidate's opponent makes it an issue.
Maybe, but I can't recall any time this has happened. It seems to me that the candidate's opponent only makes it an issue once the candidate himself does.
You can be sure that if Harry Browne had any chance at all of making an impact on the election, his atheism would have been used against him by the big two candidates (or at least by the repbulicans).
Why can I be sure of that?
And even if that is the case, how does that make religion any different than any other issue they would have used against him?
CFLarsen said:How do you know that? Did you pull that out of a hat, or do you have data?
I have data that shows there are exactly as many elected atheist Presidents as there are astronaut Presidents. And I can point to an astronaut seeking the Presidential nomination for a major party.
CFLarsen said:Don't claim that religion isn't an issue in politics, because it clearly is.
I never claimed it wasn't and you know it. That's another of your pathetic strawmen so you can sit there all self-important and declare:
You are wrong.
to something I never even claimed.
Your claim was, in your words, "That the US is invariably interconnected with a supernatural being." Stop shifting the burden of proof and support that statement.
CFLarsen said:That should be clear by now. Unless you want to ignore reality.
What's clear is that you are completely ignorant of American history and totally unwilling to admit that you're wrong.
Kerberos said:As Thanz says, Browne was a no hope candidate, and incidentially one who'd likely to appeal to a segment who was particuarly unconcerned by their candidates religion or lack of it.
I don't know. There are a lot of very religious Libertarians. Maybe, when faced with a candidate whose principles very closely match how you would want the nation to be govered, religion suddenly becomes less of an issue than if some random pollster asks you a question centering on religion as a core issue?
shanek said:I have data that shows there are exactly as many elected atheist Presidents as there are astronaut Presidents. And I can point to an astronaut seeking the Presidential nomination for a major party.
No data, then. As expected.
We are not talking about occupations, but whether or not a person believes in a supernatural creator or not.
shanek said:...to something I never even claimed.
shanek said:To my recollection, the only time a candidate's religion ever becomes an issue is when that candidate makes it an issue.
Oops.
shanek said:Your claim was, in your words, "That the US is invariably interconnected with a supernatural being." Stop shifting the burden of proof and support that statement.
I did. You can't get elected if you are an atheist. I have also shown plenty of evidence that you can't go anywhere in the US without being confronted with a belief in a supernatural being.
Simply ignoring this doesn't make you right. Don't you have any comments on the Gallup data?
CFLarsen said:No data, then. As expected.
We are not talking about occupations, but whether or not a person believes in a supernatural creator or not.
Claus, you're talking about people being elected. That's an occupation.
shanek said:What's clear is that you are completely ignorant of American history and totally unwilling to admit that you're wrong.
Feel free to point out where I am wrong about American history.
Don't just dogmatically state it, expecting people to believe your word. You do this a lot. Your word is not evidence.
Try with real evidence, instead of decrees.
CFLarsen said:I did. You can't get elected if you are an atheist.
You have done nothing to show this.
I have also shown plenty of evidence that you can't go anywhere in the US without being confronted with a belief in a supernatural being.
So? What do you propose, that we violate people's freedom of speech? That we establish laws forcing them to vote the way we want them to?
CFLarsen said:Feel free to point out where I am wrong about American history.
Already have. Every single example you came up with about how our country "is invariably interconnected with a supernatural being" have been things that didn't occur until over 100 years after our founding.
You are wrong. And, as usual, you refuse to admit it.
shanek said:Claus, you're talking about people being elected. That's an occupation.
You are comparing astronauts - an occupation - with religious believers - not an occupation.
shanek said:Already have. Every single example you came up with about how our country "is invariably interconnected with a supernatural being" have been things that didn't occur until over 100 years after our founding.
You are wrong. And, as usual, you refuse to admit it.
Religious beliefs permeate the entire history of the United States.
Most presidents place their hand on a bible to take the oath, but this is not obligatory. That tradition, like many others, began with George Washington after it was determined that an oath without a bible would lack legitimacy.
Washington also began the practice of kissing the bible and adding the words "so help me God" at the end of the pledge, as well as delivering an inauguration address.
Source
..."lack legitimacy"....
shanek said:You have done nothing to show this.
The Gallup data. Why do you refuse to discuss that?
shanek said:So? What do you propose, that we violate people's freedom of speech? That we establish laws forcing them to vote the way we want them to?
I propose that you stop claiming that you can't go anywhere in the US without being confronted with a belief in a supernatural being. You can't get elected, people don't trust you.
Are you going to address the Gallup data at all? Just yes or no, please.
CFLarsen said:Religious beliefs permeate the entire history of the United States.
Again, so? Washington also said in a speech, "The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion." Quote-mining much?
You're using the same bogus arguments that the right-wingers use. Pathetic.
CFLarsen said:The Gallup data. Why do you refuse to discuss that?
I haven't refused to discuss it, liar. I made the following point above:
There are a lot of very religious Libertarians. Maybe, when faced with a candidate whose principles very closely match how you would want the nation to be govered, religion suddenly becomes less of an issue than if some random pollster asks you a question centering on religion as a core issue?
I propose that you stop claiming that you can't go anywhere in the US without being confronted with a belief in a supernatural being.
As I never claimed that, this is just more of your lies.
Are you going to address the Gallup data at all? Just yes or no, please.
Already have, liar.
shanek said:I haven't refused to discuss it, liar. I made the following point above:
...
Already have, liar.
You have not discussed it at all. You simply asked a rethorical counter question.
Does the Gallup data show that people trust atheists when it comes to political offices?