A current front-page story, as well as plenty of other political discussion here and elsewhere, understandably goes after "Godless," the Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) ad that all but declares that Democratic challenger Kay Hagan is an atheist.
I can certainly agree that "Godless" is disgracefully dishonest, and that it's an ugly attempt to play on North Carolinians' religious bigotry. But the fervency of the denunciations of the ad is a bit unnerving in itself--it sends an ugly (and perhaps unintended--but in many instances I fear it is intended) message of its own.
As I said in a comment on that front-page thread:
Yes, Dole's ad is false. Yes, it is an attempt to play on voter bigotry. But there are plenty of Republican ads this cycle that meet those two conditions. It wasn't an ad, but Sarah Palin's repeated claim that Barack Obama has been "palling around with terrorists" is, I think, measurably worse than "Godless"; it is (1) just as false and (2) an attempt to tie Obama to terrorists, who (I hope we can all agree) are generally worse people than atheists are. And yet Obama, unlike Hagan, hasn't threatened legal action.
There is an overtone in a heck of a lot of the comments, both from political professionals and from Kossacks, that being called an atheist is an unbelievable affront--"beyond the pale," and so on. "Palling around with terrorists," yeah, that sucks, but atheist--whoa, that's outrageous!
I suppose it's hard to blame her given the religious climate she's trying to run for Senate in, but Kay Hagan is not winning a lot of friends in the atheist community today. Writes biology professor and king of the atheist blogosphere P.Z. Myers:
I've written a couple of posts decrying the tactics of Elizabeth Dole--who uses the act of talking to atheists as a smear--and favoring her opponent, Kay Hagan. It seems Ms. Hagan doesn't like us very much, though.
Democratic Senate candidate Kay Hagan angrily demanded Wednesday that incumbent Sen. Elizabeth Dole take down a new ad that questions the challenger's ties to an atheist political group, calling the spot a slanderous and pathetic attempt to maintain political power.
Hagan's attorneys sent a cease-and-desist order to Dole's campaign, saying the "libelous" ad should come down within 24 hours. The order promised legal action if the ad stays on the air.
So…being called an atheist is "slanderous" and "libelous", huh? Oh, well, then. Never mind, North Carolina, it doesn't matter who you vote for in that election, you're getting a loser. I suppose you should still vote for Hagan, but only for her party and not because she's on our side.
I wouldn't go as far as P.Z.; I'm sympathetic (in a hand-over-the-eyes, "please make it all go away" sense) to Hagan's need to get votes from plenty of North Carolinians who are virulent atheophobes. Still, I'm a bit disturbed by the combination of (1) the heavy level of indignation she--like so many of her supporters, including Kossacks--is launching in response to "Godless" and (2) the general lack of criticism, from the same indignant critics, of the nasty bigotry that Dole's ad promotes toward atheists.
Where is Colin Powell, or someone like him, to say "Kay Hagan isn't an atheist, but so what if she were? Who would dare to tell a young atheist boy or girl that he or she couldn't grow up to be President?" (Not to mention the offense this presents Article VI, section 3, of the U.S. Constitution.)
I wish the liberals who are angry at Dole and "Godless" would take a hint or two from Powell's "Meet the Press" appearance. It's not just Hagan who is being bashed in that ad, and I worry that Hagan and her supporters are tacitly/implicitly endorsing that attack.
As a damn proud atheist, I hope the undercurrent here isn't what it eerily feels like. Fine, Kay Hagan isn't an atheist--but if she were, for f***'s sake, so what? Do we agree with Elizabeth Dole that North Carolinians shouldn't vote for an atheist for Congress?
--
Update: Thanks to itchyredness's comment below, here's Powell on "Meet the Press":
I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America.
The really right answer is, what if Kay Hagan is an atheist? Is there something wrong with being an atheist in this country? The answer's no, that's not America.
Right, Kossacks?
--
Update 2: About a half-hour after I posted this, Kossack MQW posted a diary making most of these same points. MQW's diary is quite good; it picked up more than six times as many recommendations as this one did. (Hmph!) Check it out.