But why? Why is it impossible for someone who lives a moral, ethical, compassionate existence based solely on an intrinsic desire to do so rather than adherence to hopelessly antiquated messages in ancient texts that basically try to scare you into being good — children's tales that are so utterly transparent with their "reward/punishment" motif that my 7-year-old is beginning to question them?
It's a question I have trouble answering. The 60s and 70s seemed to be decades of social and societal rebirth on a myriad of topics: Civil rights, women's rights, government corruption, sexuality, pointless wars, etc. There seemed a real momentum in this country to take a more liberal, accepting look at people and the world. Everything I know about that era screams of future religious (or atheist) tolerance.
I just want to know why.
The Bush administration has been a train wreck of unprecedented excesses — from his relentless quest to expand the scope of presidential power at the expense of the constitution, to the either unparalleled ignorance or transparent deception (or both) that spawned the Iraq War, to the incomprehensible fiscal oblivion that has created both the largest trade deficit in U.S. history and the most government spending since World War II (including inflation), to countless other extremes in incompetence that I'd rather not get into because, frankly, they make my head hurt.
But I think there is one excess Dubya has perpetuated I've certainly never seen to its degree in my lifetime or in any other American presidency I've read about. It is, simply, the most blatant, outrageous exhibition of mixing religion with both politics and policy-making in the history of this country (and, undoubtedly, a lot of others). I'll spare you a list of examples because his courtship with and support of the Evangelical Religious Right has been so obvious, and the examples are too numerous to list.
However, it calls into question something Bill Maher talks about from time to time and an issue with which any candidate, regardless of faith, or lack thereof, must deal with: How can I make myself pious enough to win an election?
According to a relatively recent Gallup poll, 95% of Americans say they'd vote for an "appropriately qualified" Catholic for president. And 92% say they'd vote in a Jew. 72% would even vote a Mormon into the White House. In fact, a majority of Americans would support almost ANY candidate from any background. Black? 94% Hispanic? 87%. Female? 88%.
http://www.galluppoll.com/...
Now check this out. The group that is widely considered to be the most discriminated against in the U.S. — gays — don't even finish at the bottom at a respectable (and surprising) 55%. The cellar-dwellers? Atheists at 45%.
Naturally, it isn't surprising that there is exactly ONE self-proclaimed atheist in the entire legislative branch of the U.S. government, Rep. Pete Stark of California. One out of 535. So, it comes as no surprise that we will hear plenty of sound bytes about faith and see plenty of photo opps at churches from the presidential wannabes. Because you're not going to win the county dog-catcher job if you don't profess your faith to some organized religion.
But why? Why is it impossible for someone who lives a moral, ethical, compassionate existence based solely on an intrinsic desire to do so rather than adherence to hopelessly antiquated messages in ancient texts that basically try to scare you into being good — children's tales that are so utterly transparent with their "reward/punishment" motif that my 7-year-old is beginning to question them?
It's a question I have trouble answering. The 60s and 70s seemed to be decades of social and societal rebirth on a myriad of topics: Civil rights, women's rights, government corruption, sexuality, pointless wars, etc. There seemed a real momentum in this country to take a more liberal, accepting look at people and the world. Everything I know about that era screams of future religious (or atheist) tolerance.
And exactly the opposite happened. Many of the people from that generation (the present voting majority) turned into religious ideogogues. What is it about the children's tales that make everyone feel so safe... and so right? Why is "Joe America," with his 2.2 kids and white picket fence who attends church once every blue moon, so scared of someone who doesn't believe in God? Well here's something creepy according to Newsweek, as only 37% would vote for an atheist for president last year, as opposed to 49% in 1999.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...
Are we de-evolving as a society? Are our brains getting smaller? Evidently, the American public's reaction to a very small group of Muslims (in relation to the entire Islamic population) is to somewhat emulate their mentality in clinging to our own children's book. Of course, that mentality ultimately equates to killing them, according to our children's book, and them killing us, according to theirs.
And so the religious insanity continues over the children's books. Personally, I'd rather have someone in the White House that isn't reading about locusts and planetary floods and God giving humanity a collective spanking, nor one who claims God told him to invade Iraq. If we wanted that David Koresh would suffice.
It's too bad only one out of 535 American legislatures has the balls to claim Atheism. I'd like one as president. And, I guess, we can only speculate about who that may be. Your thoughts?