Join the debate
Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire
on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
Our atheists are better than yours
S.E. Cupp states the case for atheists joining the conservative ranks.
FULL TRANSCRIPT:
S.E. CUPP: I don’t know, I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him.
I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group.
It seems like there is this idea perpetuated by atheists that atheists are somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process and I just don’t find that to be the case.
I think in fact atheists have grown more vocal over the past decade or two than ever before.
In fact in many ways atheists act like a religious body unto themselves.
There’s another myth that conservatism is somehow hostile to atheism. I also don’t find that to be the case. I’m a conservative atheist, I’ve felt very welcomed by this party.
In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.
For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity.
Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular.
In contrast on the left it seems as though there is this knee-jerk embrace of what is more like a militant hostility, a reaction against intellectual diversity.
It’s exclusionary. Bill Maher thinks 95% of the world has a neurological disorder.
I don’t think you’d find that on the right, and for that reason I’ll say it, I think our atheists are better than yours.
Meet the Hosts
Author, documentary filmmaker, historian, Speaker of the House (1995-1999), and 2012 Republican presidential candidate
Fmr. Obama Deputy Campaign Mgr. and W.H. Sr. Adviser, founder of Precision Strategies, fmr. Sr. Adviser to Maj. Leader Reid and Sen. Kennedy
Conservative columnist for New York Daily News, contributing editor at Townhall Magazine, commentator and author
Former Special Adviser for Green Jobs under President Obama, co-founder of Rebuild the Dream, author and attorney
"I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group." "Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular."
So basically, this guy isn't really an atheist, he just doesn't want to join a church/religion... As far as the second statement goes, Atheist's don't believe in religion, so how can you claim to be an atheist and claim that you have a healthy respect for the role of religion... That is a contradiction of the atheist beliefs...
So basically, this guy is full of it... I am an atheist and I think religion is the biggest bunch of BS ever... The Bible is the greatest piece of fiction ever written... Look at all the wars that have been fought and still are being fought in the name of religion... BUT, the Bible state we should love our neighbors and help those less fortunate, yet the majority of the religious people are hypocrites and are more of the feeling of do as I say not as I do... Also, one other thing, I grew up in the 60's in a time when almost everyone went to church/Sunday school, and when I spent the night with friends I went to their church... It is amazing how the different religions (Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Mormon, Jahova Witnesses and all the rest use the same Bible yet preach something different... Why is that... And why is there a new and an old testament, who wrote the new one that makes it the new work of God... All these things just don't add up, then throw in the rest and basically, accordingly to the Bible incest is alright as Adam and Eve and their kids originally populated the world, and then after God go mad and flodded the world to start over Noah's son's and their wives repopulated the world... SO, if you REALLY are a religious person, then you should accept EVERYONE in the world as your brother or sister because according to YOUR book you are related anyway...
So like I said, either you are a REAL atheist and don't believe, or you are not and do believe... This guy is NOT!!!!!
I honestly don't think I've ever heard any of my atheist friends denounce anyone because of their religious beliefs unless they were violent in trying to force religious beliefs on other people. It's the fanaticism they have criticized. They don't ridicule my faith and I don't harass them for being non-believers. Religion is a very personal thing, not something I can dictate to someone else. Forced faith is a oxymoron. If it's forced, it isn't faith. I can only know the path for myself, not for anyone else.
I am not sure why atheist insist others want to know what they are thinking.
I don't care whether you believe in God, if you are mad, a joiner, clubber or groupie.
I don't know of anyone who thinks atheists are not political.
No one minds you being vocal, but talk about something other than yourself, Christianity or what believers believe.
Why do so many atheists selfishly think it's all about them.
Newsflash.....it's not.
I also appreciate intellectual diversity, but still can't find an atheist to explain the "order from chaos theory".
If you want to exercise your intellectual diversity....why don't you take a stab at it.
This article is very well written and does express the opinions of many conservative atheists. I find this to be very true "Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular." and that liberal atheists do tend to attack and belittle those who believe. It makes me sad as an atheist that they give the rest of us such a bad name
I've been an atheist my entire life. In fact, I was born one! I've encountered many, many atheists over my life and have yet to meet a conservative one except for the one that purports to be one in this article. I'm not saying it isn't possible to be a conservative atheist, but given the social conservative agenda, I really think it is an incompatible world view. Maybe an atheist neocon, but not an atheist social conservative–that would be an oxymoron. In other words, I think conservative atheists are about as common as alcoholic unicorns.
This Athiest is a Republican? Dear Lord what has happened? This used to be the party of God! These Atheists MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE GOP along with all NON-CHRISTIANS.
Are you serious? Are you aware of how many people in this country are not Cheistians? We need to remove god and Christianity from our laws and policies. That makes much more sense.
I dare our loudmouth atheists to insult ISLAM or Judaism the way they do Christianity or they too chicken to insult the powerful and those who would behead them?
The only reason you see atheists denounce christianity more than anything else is because the majority of the religious people in our country are christian.
They're all nuts.
I would agree that there is a worrisome tend to excuse Islam as being a religion "hijacked by extremists" when it's really just as bad as the next in line.
But really. Don't be surprised that atheists living in the United States have more bad things to say about Christian meddling than the Muslim sort. This will naturally happen when you live in a majority-Christian society.
When you believe god is on your side and that after you're dead you aren't really dead really lends itself to suicidal and/or sociopathic behavior that you just don't see atheists do in the name of their lack of beliefs. Atheists don't blow up abortion clinics because of their absence of belief in god and they don't fly planes into buildings because of their absence of belief in god. Stalin didn't kill many of his own people because of an absence of belief in god, he did it because he thought they were a threat to his political power.
Atheists that live in the United States are more likely to complain about Christian meddling than the Muslim sort.
More at 11.
I am not a liberal but I have to admit your ignorance is amazing. Let's see who pushes for military conflict constantly- why that would be the right wing conservative Christians. We owe these current and recent wars to one party – the republicans- not the liberals. I love how you right wingers push your beliefs and actions on others hoping that people are to stupid to see behind this tactic. You lose.
I don't comprehend this idea that an atheist must protest about what others believe. You can believe what you want, others can believe what they want. Why do they feel the need to mock other religions (especially Christianity?)
Have they gotten so small minded that they can tolerate no differences?
It is quite simple. Atheists have not forced their values into secular law. Religion in particular christianity has forced its way into ever sector of our laws. From absurdities like "blue laws" to prayer in school the religious right will stop at nothing to hijack the constitution. When you keep your religion on your side of the constitution you won't be given the scorn you currently deserve.
I think it's more an issue of them not wanting the religious views of others pushed on them. I doubt most atheists really care what Christians believe. But they will mock those beliefs if Christians start using their faith as a reason for laws or political stances.
And if Christians were honest... they feel the same way. They react with horror or disdain when muslims use their faith as justifications for actions that the Christian in question doesn't agree with. But for some reason many have a blind spot when they use their faith for justification of actions that others find wrong.
What is the atheist split on freewill vs. determinism? For example, Bill Maher believes 95% of the world has a neurological disorder, but does he think they can choose (freewill) to be different? And if any "will" has "freewill" in an otherwise deterministic universe, wouldn't the actions of that "freewill" create all other equal and opposite reactions within the scope of its ability to influence cause and effect? Therefore, either beliefs are determined by input and not choice or any individual that can exercise choice is, if not a god, at least "super-natural." If any conscious being has choice, we are at the beginning of Hinduism (which is a western term to categorize a variety of Easter beliefs).
If you go by Newtonian mechanics, everything's deterministic, there's no such thing as free will. On the other hand, quantum mechanics allows for unpredictability. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle gets the undetermined into the act. So maybe you could make an argument for free will on the basis of that.
An atheist is a person who holds no belief in any gods.
"I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group." is pure nonsense, piffle, gibberish. This disdain for joining groups has nothing whatsoever to do with being an atheist or not.
It seems like a real benefit of being an atheist is not having to go to church, sit around, waste time, and listen to nonsense and have pieces of your time and money pealed off with membership obligations. Still some atheists (probably the liberoid ones) go looking for nice atheist clubs and organizations to join, causes to hump and crusades to prosecute.
What a ridiculous statement. The fact the god is in our national anthem and on our money is a rather blatant violation of the separation of church and state as laid our in the Bill of Rights. You can not "give preference to one religion over another" as interpreted by the Supreme Court. If you believe in no god, or multiple gods for the matter, "in god we trust" is a rather obvious preferential treatment of montheist, Christians more specifically. Now nearly everytime I've raised this debate Conservatives have rejected it while Liberals have recognized the hypocracy. Republican leaders cloak thier speeches in Christianity, making it quite literally repugnant to me. Imagine if atheists did that. Ending speeches by saying "since we all know god doesnt exist...". Absurd. I would hate that as much as "god bless" or some other religious aphorism. That is why the republican party is not the party for atheist. Because they embrace those whom alienate and reject us. Pretty simple if you ask me.
The Separation of Church and State while not a bad idea, or one i think should NOT be embraced, is however not law, nor was included in any foundational documents of our nation. The idea that no religion should be preferenced over another does not mean the exclusion of religion from the public place. The separation of church and state is derived from a letter from Thomas jefferson to a congregation, but has been jumped upon in the decades after it was penned as being of the same genealogy as the declaration of indepdence and the Constitution, it however was never voted upon by elected representatives of the people. The historical precedent for this was the wish of the founders to avoid the debacle with the church of england and a state approved church, however reading writings of the founders including Jeffersons other letters there was no wish to exclude religion from the public space. It is important to note that while this particular letter is seized upon his writings of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 are somehow considered crazy, its cherry picking. Another thing to point out is that it was not until more recent history that the Supreme Court became the arbiters of the law. Prior to this they were more of a advisory group, they gave their opinions and congress could take that into account...or not. It is absurb to think that the Founders wanted to establish a representative democracy/Republican style of government and fight a war to break away from a government that ruled by one man to one that could be ruled by a small group of 4 out of 7. Also the author described themselves as a Conservative, while most conservatives identify with the republican party....anyone from both sides of the spectrum once they wake up, realize that regardless of their beliefs neither party does whats in their interest but does whats in the interest of the ever expanding government. Both parties support overseas wars, spying, overspending, etc. they just do it for different reasons. Conservative/Small Government is not synonymous with Republican Party.
That being said as a Conservative Libertarian Catholic I will say that i do believe that religion should not beocme intertwined with secular government and vice versa, however if there is little to no government to be had there is less of a chance this can happen.
In the end I will say that Atheists as a group will have to decide whether or not they want to follow the path of sanity or zealotry in their own fashion. Forcing someone to pray in a public space or in a government function is one thing, proposing a law to recognize the ten commandments as the laws of a government is one thing as well, however onc eyou start ripping down war memorials because they include religious imagery....that just starts to reek not of rational thought but of religious like zealotry. Will the Freedom From Religious Foundation file a lawsuit when a 3rd grade class has a praying mantis in the classroom
Hooey. The First Amendment's Establishment and Free Exercise clauses spell-out the separation of church and state.
Happens you are totally correct.. I enjoyed your post.
What a funny use of the word hypocrisy.
The notion of "separation of church and state" is really a goofy myth and something of a paradox. Not only does the constitution contain no such language, but the very phrase you so loosely toss about indicates a singling-out of one specific group that you (the collective anti-faith community) find most abhorrent. Islam, Buddhism, etc. are never really considered when talk of "church-state separation" arises. Could that be because "church" is a word taken from the Christian Bible? Thus, the idea of "separation of church and state" is most commonly used as a weapon against Christianity. The phrase isolates and alienates a specific group, yet it's that very isolation that the founding fathers (or is fathers too offensive and sexist?) sought to prevent within the language that DOES actually appear in the constitution. Is that not hypocritical?
Is it not also hypocritical to assert that, because a politician or public figure of any persuasion is a Christian, they should not or even MUST not be allowed to use words that could openly reveal the most deeply meaningful part of who he considers himself to be? "Christian, you cannot talk about being a Christian because it offends my sensibilities as an atheist, but I am fully within my rights and yours to offend you by telling you what you can and cannot say!" Would you be happier if the historically significant phrase adorning all that money in your pocket was adjusted to suit only YOUR preference? Perhaps "In anything but God we trust?" Or maybe "In nothing we trust except that which the Atheists approve." How's that for hypocrisy?
What the constitution does do is prohibit the government from establishing a state-mandated church or religious organization AND prevent government from prohibiting the free exercise of faith or religion. Oddly enough, the latter seems to be the battle cry of the church-state separation movement. "SHUT THE CHURCH UP! SHUT THE CHURCH DOWN!" It seems to me that fringe atheism is all about doing what it accuses the "church" of so often. That, my friend, is hypocrisy.
I hope you don't call the po-po when I say I'll be praying for you.
"For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity."
Really Christina? You can't be serious! If you believe that's true, can you please explain why in 28 (mostly conservative) states in this country, it is in their state constitutions that it is illegal for atheists to hold public office? In states like Texas, you have to formally acknowledge the existence of God.
The GOP tolerates white Christians, the wealthy, and few others. Atheists? PLEASE!
Atheists aren't somehow disenfranchised? Let's count the number of open atheists in each branch of government. If that's too tall an order, let's just tally up the number of atheist Presidents we've had. If that gets us nowhere, let's forecast the likelihood that an open atheist could get elected to the presidency in this country.
Even better: Let's see an openly atheistic conservative Presidential candidate getting promoted by the knob-polishers over at Faux News.
Does any of that seem impossible? If so, then it remains my suspicion that atheists *ARE* somehow disenfranchised in this country.
You're suggesting that a lack of accomplishment by atheists is the fault of others?
That interpretation of what was stated is cute and all but....
When said accomplishments are directly controlled by the votes of the others, yes. An atheist who discovered the cure for cancer and solved all the economic and political problems of the world would still not be electable. It is not because of any personal fault of the candidate, just the bigotry of the religious.
Will someone please explain how a copy of the Ten Commandments hung in a state building somewhere in small town America in 1941 harms an atheist,. Then, explain how removing same would not harm a person of religion in the same way.
Could you please explain to me how a small town in 2014 worshiping Satan effects a Christian?
The government should never endorse any religion. It is in our constitution. When the 10 commandments are put up on public property, all of our rights have been violated, not just atheists. You simply don't see that because you happen to be a part of the religion that is being endorsed. What would you do if your government started promoting Satan? My guess is that you'd sing a different tune.
Could you please explain to me how a small town in 2014 worshiping Sa tan effects a Christian?
The government should never endorse any religion. It is in our constitution. When the 10 commandments are put up on public property, all of our rights have been violated, not just atheists. You simply don't see that because you happen to be a part of the religion that is being endorsed. What would you do if your government started promoting Sa tan? My guess is that you'd sing a different tune.
Because it sanctions Christianity over other beliefs.
Imagine for a moment, that some passage from the Koran was used instead? Do you not think that Christians would have a problem with that?
Kurt
80% is still a majority, so shove your and their liberal extremist views up Obama's left nostril. I don't post in defense of God I post in defense of freedom. When you or they become a majority then you can offer an opinion that matters. Liberals have been screwing this country for several years and we are fighting back.
Btw, I did read your cry baby BS above I had an illness at age 9 nine that would make even you say damn. Neither you nor I really knew about God but I knew love. I didn't know life, but I knew love. I couldn't pray because of the illness but when the doctors told my parents that my life was no longer in their hand they prayed. Call it luck or what you wish the doctors themselves called it a miracle. I call it love. Love of God, Love of family. I will defend our freedom, you defend hate and are incapable of understanding the difference.
Yeah, majority rules! If two Christians entertaining 10,000 Romans by being eaten by lions, have a tough time with that, too bad. Why should the minority deprive the Roman's of their entertainment? Don't like slavery? Too bad, maybe once you're a majority, you can change the laws!--see the problem with your "majority rules" perspective?
Yes, 80% is a majority. But less then a decade ago it was 85%. The percentage of hispanics in the US is 17% by comparison. The GOP has realized that the hispanic group (which votes 70% democratic) is growing and will be a political force in the not to distant future.
The non-religious voters are also a growing demographic. Non-religious whites vote 70% democratic (other racial demographics more closely map with how the racial demographic votes... which is a higher percentage for democrats). There is not a movement away from non-religion. Things are moving in the opposite direction.
As for your experience, I'm sorry that you went through that. And perhaps that's why we don't agree. I had to figure out how to handle my disease and I went out and learned how to keep myself healthy. I relied on educating myself to handle it. You apparently didn't have that chance... you just had to get lucky (or be saved by god). You believe you were saved by something else as there was nothing you could do.
I suppose if I hit a long shot in terms of surviving a disease, I might try to look for a reason why the more likely thing (my death) didn't happen. Or I might just accept the fact I was lucky and fell in the 10%/5%/1% that survive that sort of thing. I wouldn't know until it happened I suppose. I THING I'd probably fall in the luck camp still because if I started to really believe that God saved me... I'd question him chosing to give me the dang disease in the first place. It probably wouldn't put me in a position for "loving" god if I started having more certainty in his existance.
Oh please. I'm sick of the ignorance of people posting "the GOP or the Liberals are ruining this country"! You're not looking deeply enough.
I clicked the link. I shouldn't have clicked the link.
I think I am dumber from having read this. One would have to have lived in a cave for the last decade to say "In contrast on the left it seems as though there is this knee-jerk embrace of what is more like a militant hostility, a reaction against intellectual diversity."
Tell a conservative about research on global warming (or even the prospect of conducting research related to global warming) and tell me how open to 'intellectual diversity' he/she is.
Atheists are just plain weird.
As opposed to people who worship a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
This woman is a hilarious religious person trying to pass herself off as an atheist. Entertaining but stupid
Well stated. It's a joke, and yet there are those who are defending what she wrote. Hilarious!
Its only a joke if YOU can't prove it to be true!
Prove she is lying! We will wait for your reply.
Well, she certainly isn't making any sense.
Not sure which is worse.
Oh we're well aware of the Ayn Rand atheists... and while their opinions may be more rational than the religious right, their lack of empathy, and warped sense of morality make them just as dangerous.
Your broad generalization that atheists have a "warped sense of morality" is sophomoric at best. You do not see us fighting wars. Please make another attempt.
Out of curiosity, where or what or who does an atheist turn to when life becomes so unbearable that family, friends or others no longer are able to provide the help needed? For believers just knowing that we are never alone when we are alone provides the strength to face these obstacles, by the comfort of our belief in the afterlife and the peace to accept our fate with love. Be this a falsehood or truth is of little consequence. To have something to turn to is worth all the hate you disperse on us.
Atheism United Headquarters on Facebook is excellent place for atheists to find emotional support.
Sad, just so sad, that you even came up with such a pathetic answer.
Hahahahahahahaha
Atheists would love there to be a heaven where we are all immortal and get to see our dead loved ones, but, like a bad infomercial, it's too good to be true. Some of us don't like to know how a magic trick is done because it ruins the illusion. We like to prefer to think that the impossible is possible. Others like to know how the magic is done because it grounds us in reality and we take comfort in knowing the truth rather than living a life of self-delusion. We also increase our knowledge. The believers in the afterlife don't want to know how the magician does it. Atheists do because the mechanism behind the trick and why we choose to believe it is more interesting than the original trick.
"We like to prefer to think that the impossible is possible."
Nothing you posted was logical. If you think the impossible is possible then it would stand to reason to believe in God because it would stand to be impossible yet possible.
A denial of the afterlife does not disprove its existence in fact after there is greater evidence for the existence of the afterlife than the non-evidence that it doesn't exist.
I think you didn't understand what was trying to be said in that post SA.
I agree the use of "we" to talk about the "some of us" that believe in religion was confusing though... when using "we" later to talk about atheists/non-believers.
Fact. There is a heaven. Accept it.
FACT – you should look up the definition of the word 'Fact'.
"Out of curiosity, where or what or who does an atheist turn to when life becomes so unbearable that family, friends or others no longer are able to provide the help needed? For believers just knowing that we are never alone when we are alone provides the strength to face these obstacles, by the comfort of our belief in the afterlife and the peace to accept our fate with love. Be this a falsehood or truth is of little consequence. To have something to turn to is worth all the hate you disperse on us."
The answer is the same place religious people would turn if you add "god" to the list of things that provide support that are unable to help.
It's wonderful for you that your belief system gives you some comfort when things go bad. But the idea that it would give me comfort too is simply not correct. I rely heavily on friends and family for support in bad times. I could see myself talking to a therapist if things got bad/confused enough in my life. I like talking things through with people who can talk back. But some generic "it's all God's plan" type belief simply provides me no comfort. Believing that there's a god who WANTS bad things to happen in my life doesn't provide me much comfort.
When I was diagnosed with Diabetes at age 10... I heard the "god's will" thing a bit. That didnt' help make me feel better. What helped was talking to other type-1 diabetics about how they managed the disease and realizing that it was something I can handle. If I believed the "gods will" thing, I'd probably be pretty pissed off at god.
You are a liberal extremist and agnostic wimp and not worth the time I took to type this.
And again with the names.
Good luck to you. I hope that if you decide to come back you can learn to discuss a topic without personally attacking everyone who disagrees with you. Attack the evidence, not the person.
Well stated.
Come back to what? When you can learn that that liberal extremism is detrimental to American freedom then you might have an argument to present but for now I will attack the non-evidence presented. For EVERY article presented in cf you counter with negative comments so don't preach your self righteousness to me.
Why would you be pissed at God for something you don't understand. Maybe it was Gods will to provide the care you needed through medicine, doctors, other Diabetes patients in order to keep you alive for another purpose. Since your are still posting I assume you haven't reached the point of no return. Are you certain Gods will has not been met? If you choose hate over love then Gods will shall never be. This is the difference between part time believers and true believers. Gods will is an opportunity. God gave humans the capacity for learning for understanding for love also for hate. Choose to hate then understanding becomes hidden. Choose to ignore opportunity then Gods Will will be lost. No one will ever know you chose to miss an opportunity to fulfill Gods will, however God WILL know.
I find it fascinating that you assume we're all "full of hate" because we don't have religion. That's so condescending and simplistic. And to answer your question, we turn to – ourselves. I can talk to myself out loud just as you can talk to your god. I usually find the answers I need by working out the problem with logic born of experience. But mainly, it seems you need to do some more praying if that's what get you through, and stop worrying about how I handle "being alone".
I find it fascinating that you assume we're all "full of hate" because we don't have religion. That's so condescending and simplistic
And you are not showing condescending traits, yeah right! The simplicity of that statement implies truth. Your hate for anything religious has no valid reasoning which also implies truth.
"And to answer your question, we turn to – ourselves. I can talk to myself out loud just as you can talk to your god."
So can a believer, until talking with yourself fails the we turn to God. Be it real or imitation it is comfort.
"usually find the answers I need by working out the problem with logic born of experience. But mainly, it seems you need to do some more praying if that's what get you through, and stop worrying about how I handle "being alone"."
I don't worry about you, God will take that role. I on the other hand do worry about the loss of AMERICAN FREEDOM including individual freedom and religion freedom.
You really are proving that conservatism is respectful of intellectual diversity. Reminds me of Henry Ford, "You can get the Model-T in any color you like ... so long as its black."
You are a case in point example of how liberal ignorance promotes loss of freedom.
1.) You don't KNOW that you're never alone. You just *believe* that you're never alone.
2.) The fact that you truly don't care if your beliefs are true or false ("Be this a falsehood or truth is of little consequence") goes a long way towards explaining why believers are typically such intellectual train wrecks.
Yeah, because there's no such thing as a Christian in misery.
I would suggest therapy as an alternative. It's probably a lot more constructive.
Prisons are full of Christians in misery. In fact, there are disproportionately fewer atheists in prisons than there are outside of prison.
Every Christian could claim to be an Atheist. Go back to the root of the word; meaning, not one god.
Early church fathers argued the same thing; Father, Son and Holy Spirit is NOT one.
Not sure what this means. I think you mean that Christians could consider themselves polytheistic?
An atheist is someone that rejects the idea of god(s) period. That is, a non-religious person. Christians are still religious and still believe in at least one god.
A question for atheist. Where, what do you turn to when life becomes so unbearable that family, friends or others are unable to help?
I'm only asking out of curiosity. For a religious person, looking to God brings the belief that though alone we are not truly alone which provides the strength of endurance as well as comfort in our present state. It also provides an inter peace of acceptance, as in the finality of eminent death. Maybe this is a false security and maybe not but denying yourself that one avenue of hope seem counter productive to the alternative and the atheist belief of self preservation.
Didn't think this went through but that's OK, just two ways to say the same thing.
I happen to be a liberal....I have always been a Christian... I do not judge others and you as a Christian should not either. My faith was built on solid ground, what about yours? Seems to me you are in sinking sand but I won't judge you....No one has the right to judge another person in the way you are going at it.....Judge not less ye be judged....I believe the Bible speaks those words.
Like hell you asked your question "out of curiosity".
Every reply you've made has been full of venom, doomsaying in regards to liberalism, and bare-naked insults to those who replied.
You have no interest in any kind of rational discourse. You just want an opportunity to flaunt your obnoxious views further. Get bent.
Sign on the video says; Only Sheep Need A Shepherd. True! The Goats Prefer the Prince of the Power of the Air as their master.
I have been reading about the Yazidi on the mountain. There belief or "religion" is very, very old, approx. 5000 BCE. That is older than both the Christian and Islamic belief systems. It might be older than Judaism, but I am not sure. Yazidi are monotheistic, but it is so very different than today's varied beliefs. It proves to me that since 200,000 or 250,000 years ago there have been so many beliefs systems or "religions" that have come and gone. I can't begin to imagine!
Conservatives are more tolerant of intellectual diversity? What nonsense.
Yeah, I laughed at that one too. This article reads like a conservative political hack just realized that atheists and non-religious are the largest single "minority" in this this country and wanted a piece of the action. It comes off as disingenuous. I know many atheists, but none of them are conservative.
Ya I thought that was very outrageous . One has to just gander at the southern boarder to see how much conservatives embrace diversity.
I think you just proved her point with your comment.........
Liberals are more tolerant of intellectual diversity? What nonsense!
Now we've got it!
I love how all atheists think somehow they are intellectually superior than others. There is a word for that in the dictionary narcissistic.
Their only explanation to anything is that they know it to be true. Which truth? Their only answer to anything about God is prove it to me. If you ask them to prove there is no God, their answer is "I don't have to". Some intellectuals they are.
"I don't have to" is the shortest and easiest answer one can provide when asked to complete the impossible challenge of proving the absence of something.
You're asking a person to prove that something doesn't exist. This is only possible if there is some sort of observable, quantifiable evidence that the thing in question existed at some point in time, but has ceased to exist. No such evidence has ever been found in relationship to a "creator" figure.
You can prove something that hasn't be observed exists through a couple of methods. Better observation tools (microscopes showing microscopic organisms that couldn't be seen before) and devising formula that explain observed action (the existance of gravitation) are examples.
But you can't disprove something exists somewhere unless you have a way of observing everything. I don't know that seventeen headed unicorns with webbed feet and acidic saliva don't exist somewhere on another planet in the universe. I could find one (thus proving it exists)... but I cannot disprove they exist unless I have a way of checking every inch of every planet in the universe.
It isn't a question of being unable to prove that god does not exist. It's impossible to prove ANYTHING doesn't exist. Finding something proves it's there... there is no way to prove that something in particular doesn't exist somewhere out there.
What? In science you can disprove something by proving something.
You had to ramble twice as much to explain what I am asking but somehow your explanation is superior?
Neither of you explained anything you just gave what sounds like excuses......
The absence of light is darkness mull on that for a bit.....
Did you get that saying from a fortune cookie.
I think they did a pretty good job of addressing you. But nah, we'll give the trophy to the vague mumblings about light and darkness.
The idea that somehow the Right embraces people without conditions is absurd. Atheists on the Right tend to be of a more Libertarian stripe, which means they also embraced the self-centered beliefs found in the Objectivism of Ayn Rand. Extreme individualism pushes God out of the center of one's life, so its hardly surprising that a number of Conservatives feel comfortable rejecting anything that might require them to consider giving back. Cupp admits that she does not like being told what to do, so, in an ironic twist, she's telling people that she has the solution: reject God, embrace your own self interest and to hell with anyone else. Her problem is that the conservative movement is filled with people who are equally intent on forcing their own version of the truth down our throats under the guise of freedom, liberty, individualism or whatever sound good on any given day.
I can certainly believe that she is an atheist simply because she did not want to join a club. In reading this nonsensical, unsubstantiated waste of words, it is clear that it was not her ability to think critically that brought her to atheism.
No Political Discrimination?!?
"It seems like there is this idea perpetuated by atheists that atheists are somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process and I just don’t find that to be the case."
Note: the only non "Conservative" hard-right state is Maryland on the below list of states banning Atheists from public office...
Arkansas, Article 19, Section 1:
No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.
Maryland, Article 37:
That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.
Mississippi, Article 14, Section 265:
No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.
North Carolina, Article 6, Section 8
The following persons shall be disqualified for office: Any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.
South Carolina, Article 17, Section 4:
No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.
Tennessee, Article 9, Section 2:
No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.
Texas, Article 1, Section 4:
No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.
Disprove the existence of God then you have a valid point, otherwise, majority rules.
If this is all you can present then you have nothing. States rights! I don't believe that prostitution should be legal but Nevada does. I don't believe weed should be legal as recreational use but some states do. I am not screaming my rights are violated because of it. I relocated to ensure a better education for my children. If you felt so strongly about public service there are options. There are reasons for these requirements. Namely, safety of the public. Denying the existence of God presents itself as self-centered, selfish, unconcerned and the true atheist comes across as possessing these characteristics. It is true the same can be said about all individuals, but as a combined entity, believers win easily.
"Most of the world?"
You mean who believe in religions other than Christianity?
It is scary that you can't see how ignorant and narrow-minded your view is.
These laws in TEXAS, SC and other backwater states are stupid ! A person should have the right not to believe in GOD!! They can't make a person believe something that no one has ever proven there is a god!
james86 These laws in TEXAS, SC and other backwater states are stupid ! A person should have the right not to believe in GOD!! They can't make a person believe something that no one has ever proven there is a god!
August 13, 2014 at 3:04 pm | Reply
You have the right to believe as you wish (in America). You also have the right to move somewhere else if you are unhappy. Just because you are not able to except what most of the WORLD believes doesn't mean the rest of the world is wrong in fact to the contrary, you are in such a minority that statistically the probability there not being a God is slim to none, but enjoy hell if we are right!
definitely,
You should look up Pascal's Wager. You might find it educating.
You keep worrying about that Hell business until the day you die. I think I'll be fine doing what I want for my life, thanks!
Here's the counterpoint to Pascal's Wager: If god doesn't let me in to heaven simply because I don't believe in him or haven't experienced him, then god is petty, jealous, and vindictive. These are all traits that you find in your average dysfunctional relationship or what you would expect from an omnipotent six year old. Given that living with a petty, jealous, vindictive and omnipotent six year old would be closer to hell than heaven, if I don't believe in god, then I don't get to live with the crazy god and take an eternal dirt nap which is better than eternal life with a vain omnipotent sociopath. If I'm wrong about god and I go to heaven anyway even though I don't believe in him, then god is cool and I don't need to believe in him to go to heaven. Either way, I win.
I have become more vocal about my atheist beliefs since a certain religious majority (and a certain political party that panders to them) have become even more emboldened to mix THEIR religion into OUR laws. They are allowed to put up displays, while we get denied. They are allowed to use tax payer money to advance THEIR religion, but if anyone of a competing religion (or no religion) tries – it gets denied. They believe something is a sin, so they pass laws that discriminate against large segments of the tax paying population.. and I'm supposed to remain quiet? They put their religious beliefs onto OUR money and into OUR pledge of allegiance, yet I'm not allowed to object? It is high time that atheists came out of the shadows and stood up to the bullying that the religious crowd has been inflicting upon us.
Bull shit, our laws were written with religion fully embedded into them from the beginning. It is your hate for freedom that wants to dissect these laws to justify your selfish arrogance with no real cause to do so. How exactly are you harmed by any law. We are discussing atheist anything else is a different subject or are you using atheism as a cover to push a different agenda.
So much wrong with this commentary:
"There’s another myth that conservatism is somehow hostile to atheism. I also don’t find that to be the case. I’m a conservative atheist, I’ve felt very welcomed by this party. "
How about some examples of how you have felt welcomed by the part? I see none in this commentary. If you are trynig to convince others of your point, just making a statement with nothing behind it usually does not work.
The face of the current GOP shows as hostile to atheism as well as religions that are not their brand of Xtianity. I'm assuming there are some conservatives who are not Xtians, but the ones who are the most vocal are. And I find them scary.
"In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been. "
Again, examples? This is not the impression I have at all of how the GOP feels about atheists. This is not an argument or a debate, this is just a statement with no evidence of any kind, not even ancedotal evidence.
"For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity. "
In what what is atheism tolerated? Or respected? I do not see the evidence. So share with us what you see happening that causes you to make this statement.
The header said "S.E. Cupp states the case for atheists joining the conservative ranks." No case for anything is made here. Except to avoid anything authored by S. E. Cupp in the future. Just a lot of statements based on nothing. Not even one example of her own experiences that cause her to have this opinion. CNN, I sure hope you are not paying this lady anything for this drivel!
Wow, you certainly proved her point.
Nothing Amy said proved anything this scammer of a "writer" had to say. Amy calls for actual evidence to back up these very vague, generalized claims based on nothing more than personal experience within a group of people of an undefined size.
I agree 100%. This S. E. Cupp person is a total hack making money off of running her mouth and saying nothing at all. It has nothing to do with the fact that she claims to be a certain person, and has everything to do with the fact that she, and by extension CNN, published this meaningless garbage that does not meaningfully contribute to any sort of constructive debate (neither on religion nor on politics). It just serves to inflame readers. Even the title of the article is extremely presumptuous.
I thought this was a fluke, but then they posted that "let's stop calling it student debt" article a week or two ago, and I come to realize that basically I'm working too hard in life because I could just go "work" for CNN instead by making ridiculous, useless assertions.
Well said, Amy.
Amy
So much wrong with this comment.
"There’s another myth that conservatism is somehow hostile to atheism. I also don’t find that to be the case. I’m a conservative atheist, I’ve felt very welcomed by this party. "
"How about some examples of how you have felt welcomed by the part?"
******** "In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.". The next sentence was an example. Reading comp my dear.
"I see none in this commentary. If you are trynig to convince others of your point, just making a statement with nothing behind it usually does not work."
*********** "Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular.
In contrast on the left it seems as though there is this knee-jerk embrace of what is more like a militant hostility, a reaction against intellectual diversity.". Here are more, choosing to ignore it or being unable to grasp the content doesn't mean it is not there. Also, she wasn't writing a book, just a brief article.
The face of the current DEM shows as hostile to atheism as well as religions that are not their brand of Xtianity. I'm assuming there are some liberals who are not Xtians, but the ones who are the most vocal are. And I find them scary and stupid.
"In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been. "
"Again, examples? This is not the impression I have at all of how the GOP feels about atheists".
Examples were given and you are not capable to grasp it. Your oblivious hate for the GOP indicates that had she given a hundred examples you would say the same thing or worse.
"This is not an argument or a debate, this is just a statement with no evidence of any kind, not even ancedotal evidence."
Saying the same stupid stuff doesn't provide a logical reasoning for argument especially since the evidence was slapping you around.
"For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity. "
"In what what is atheism tolerated? Or respected? I do not see the evidence. So share with us what you see happening that causes you to make this statement."
My, my, my, you are stuck in a mindless circle with no compass. This alone is an example by presenting herself as a conservative atheist with first hand knowledge but more importantly presenting that most conservative atheist I know have the same views, "Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular."
The header said "S.E. Cupp states the case for atheists joining the conservative ranks." No case for anything is made here. Except to avoid anything authored by S. E. Cupp in the future. Just a lot of statements based on nothing. Not even one example of her own experiences that cause her to have this opinion. CNN, I sure hope you are not paying this lady anything for this drivel!
You haven't figured out that these headings are designed to trigger discussion for ratings. She makes a hell of a lot more money making you look like a fool than you will ever make commenting on a liberal media site. Search who just took the reigns of CNN political media. Ha, ha, ha. Another liberal who thinks they are posting an original comment, you have been socially engineered and don't realize it. Ha, ha, ha, ha
Hahahahahha you're a tool.
How dare you criticize anybody for reading comprehension or writing ability when you have just written a trainwreck like that.
P.S. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha idiot
I can't believe people as dumb as her have any credibility or appear on TV. Her first three sentences are utter garbage. Many have gone through them above, but...
" I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him."
- Someone who really didn't believe in God would not say that, since for them he doesn't exist in order to be mad a t him.
"I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn't want to be part of a club or a group."
–Saying she's an atheist because she's hot a joiner is so stupid, I have to think she is being intentionally provocative. The only thing that makes you an atheist is not believing in a god. She's saying that since she doesn't like organized religion that makes her an atheist?
"It seems like there is this idea perpetuated by atheists that atheists are somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process and I just don’t find that to be the case.
I think in fact atheists have grown more vocal over the past decade or two than ever before."
- Again, she must be being deliberately provocative. NO one can be that dumb. There are states which have laws that prohibit an atheist from holding office. In most places a candidate declaring he's an atheist loses him any chance he had for election.
Being vocal doesn't mean they're not disenfranchised. Being vocal doesn't mean much if you're hit over the head with a stick when you talk. That's like saying black people were not disenfranchised in the 60s because they were "more vocal".
"Not believe in God but not mad at him"?
Can't agree more with you.
I belive that S E Cupp is delusional, a better name for her is S E Nutt. Republicans are NEVER accepting of anything outside of the mainstream, UNLESS, its two to three months prior to elections!
Perfectly stated!!
There are no good atheists!
And what's your basis for that statement? It just sounds very discriminatory in all honesty.
Really? I bet you know some. Atheist generally don't advertise that they are non-believers. Besides, if religious beliefs are accurate, the only person an atheist hurts, in the end, is his or herself.
Apologist...cute as hell...but still an apologist.
I am not sure anyone could clearly define what a conservative or what a liberal is? What do democrats believe? What does republicans believe? Someone please show me the doctrine on which the follower learns the foundations to these philosophies? Can anyone show me consistency or fundamentals in either one of these factions?
It's pretty simple. Liberals care about all people and their well being and conservatives care only about themselves and their money. Their policies prove this very basic point if you are paying attention.
Wow. You are certainly brainwashed Dude. It must be much easier to go through life believing everything you hear as fact. My only advice to you is trust, but verify. Neither side of the aisle truly cares about the people's best interests. Because you don't understand very basic economics, or choose to ignore it - doesn't make it false. Just because you choose to ignore other perspectives - doesn't mean it might not have some validity. Try opening your mind and taking it in all in before you judge. The politician you admire that is a war hero/celebrity/a certain race or sex are first and foremost out for their best interests first...no matter what their speech writer wrote for them.
She's not really an atheist. You don't refer to the Christian (or Muslim, Hindu, or whatever) God(s) as "him." You can't be mad at something that doesn't exist. She acknowledges it's existence by stating she isn't "mad at him."
Why does someone have to explain to others that he or she does not believe in a God or other religious figure?
Several opinions to which she is entitled except for a quoting a belief made during a comedic interlude. o.O
Why is conservatism better tan atheism, tell me
For a group of people who doesn't believe in God, they sure spend a lot of time talking about him!
We spend time talking about you and what you do with your god belief.
God itself is a non-entity I am unconcerned with.
Cupp calls herself a republican yet claims she doesn't want to be part of a group.
"Good lawd" this woman is thick.
Worse article ever. I think the post here are proof enough that the Atheist have declared the right their enemy
Wow: " I don’t know, I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him."
I am not mad at something I don't believe in.!!!
Wow: "I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group."
I think the person who is an atheist cause he cannot bang the redhead down the street has a better reason than above.
The prerequisite for being an atheist is being a critical thinker. Once you have that in place, atheism is a possible enlightenment.
Our poor ms SE Cupp, so confused. She regularly says she's an atheist, a believer in climate change, pro gay marriage, and pro immigration reform. So why does she belong to a party that is so hostile to all of those things? Including being anti-women, which I think she qualifies as a woman. It's a wonder why someone of her seemingly intelligence would want to belong to such a dinosaur of a political party.
Atheists can continue to battle with each other and religions.
This is pathetic. Atheists are not atheists because they 'dont want to join a group'- its not some silly 'non-conformist' emo fad. Cupp go home. This is about as favorable to the cause as a token in the GOP telling black people that Republicans love them. Any decent sociologist should be rolling on their sides with laughter at this woman's silly diatribe and all the different points where it goes rolling off the tracks. How do people consider her intelligent? just because she is good at saying stupid things does not make her 'Articulate' .
You're misinterpreting the statement – he is not accepting atheism only because he 'does not want to join a group'... read it more carefully.
Miss Cupp's article is not realistic for a number of reasons:
Atheists (in my peer group at least) believe in mainstream science, education, evolution, that creationism should not be taught in school, a woman's right to chose, equal pay for equal work, environmental stewardship, no prayer in schools, access to birth control, that employers religious views should not be forced on their employees (think Hobby Lobby here), and yes they even believe in global warming. All things that conservatives and the Republican Party will never agree to.
So good luck with that sales pitch Miss Cupp's.
I believe in all of that, but I'm not an atheist. Too much imagination.
I just don't understand the purpose of this article, besides draw hits from gullible people like me who hate pointless, irritating and antagonizing "editorials" that don't really have anything to say.
– I don’t know, I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him.
- I get what she's going for, but it doesn't sound atheistic at all. It sounds like something an agnostic would say, not a true atheist.
–I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group.
- She says this, but then she proceeds to marginalize "atheists" into two separate camps (the militant left and the more peaceful, tolerant right). Besides this, she only really focuses on two political schools of thought (the liberals and the conservatives). So, "conservative" isn't a group, though by her own definition it is a group that is more tolerant than the liberal group.
–It seems like there is this idea perpetuated by atheists that atheists are somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process and I just don’t find that to be the case.
- I've heard that atheists feel underrepresented in the political arena because there aren't many non-religious candidates out there. But I've never heard of someone saying they've been left out of the ENTIRE political process because of that.
- I think in fact atheists have grown more vocal over the past decade or two than ever before.
- I've never heard of this woman before, but I still don't believe someone who just spouts out opinions without at least some basis for this (even just saying "a _____ Poll of voters shows that starting a decade ago this started to change" would have been enough to convince me that this is a valid point, but she can't even be bothered to put two minutes worth of research into this crap).
- In fact in many ways atheists act like a religious body unto themselves.
- For the same reason an "afterlife" was invented (to present a comforting and simplified explanation as to what happens in the lack of life), I'm fairly certain this whole concept of "atheism as a religion" was born (to present a comforting and simplified explanation as to what happens in the lack of religion).
- There’s another myth that conservatism is somehow hostile to atheism. I also don’t find that to be the case. I’m a conservative atheist, I’ve felt very welcomed by this party.
- "I'm not a joiner, that's why I rebelled against God. But I'm ok with God in the same way I'm OK with joining a political party."
- In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.
- That's a very bold statement, one that DEFINITELY requires some sort of supporting evidence. Perhaps some conservative chapters are more welcoming of atheists than other liberal chapters from the same area, but to say that ALL of one party is more welcoming than another is a bit ridiculous.
- For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity.
- "Sociologists David Campbell and Robert Putnam argue that the rising number of "nones" and their increasing Democratic tilt are a reaction to the Republican Party's tightening alignment with Christian conservatives since the 1980s. In one recent example, a 2012 Pew Research Center poll found two in three religiously unaffiliated Americans agreeing that religious conservatives have too much control over the Republican Party."
- Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular.
- Wow, that's a highly quantifiable, objective, well-researched and unbiased statement. How many "conservative atheists" do you know? 5? 10? 11?
- In contrast on the left it seems as though there is this knee-jerk embrace of what is more like a militant hostility, a reaction against intellectual diversity.
- How do you know this reaction is coming from the left? Name a specific example or two of this happening. How did you know they were liberal? "It seems like"? You've already proven yourself to be a completely biased writer, so this becomes completely meaningless.
- I don’t think you’d find that on the right, and for that reason I’ll say it, I think our atheists are better than yours.
- This/the title are the most offensive things I've read all day. One of the growing problems in this country, be it from a religious or political perspective, is this "nya-nya, I'm better than you :p" attitude. Grow the **** up, learn to legitimately respect on another, and stop trying to further marginalize and vilify different groups.
You have the opportunity on this site to write something worthwhile and meaningful, yet you put out this worthless dribble that serves no purpose.
One side says there is a God and can't prove it. The other side says there is no God and can't prove it. I guess we can go back to killing each other to prove who is right. Maybe the Jews and Arabs will find an answer in Gaza.
I just don't understand the purpose of this article, besides draw hits from gullible people like me who hate pointless, irritating and antagonizing "editorials" that don't really have anything to say.
- I don’t know, I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him.
- I get what she's going for, but it doesn't sound atheistic at all. It sounds like something an agnostic would say, not a true atheist.
–I became an atheist because I’m not a joiner, I didn’t want to be part of a club or a group.
- She says this, but then she proceeds to marginalize "atheists" into two separate camps (the militant left and the more peaceful, tolerant right). Besides this, she only really focuses on two political schools of thought (the liberals and the conservatives). So, "conservative" isn't a group, though by her own definition it is a group that is more tolerant than the liberal group.
–It seems like there is this idea perpetuated by atheists that atheists are somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process and I just don’t find that to be the case.
- I've heard that atheists feel underrepresented in the political arena because there aren't many non-religious candidates out there. But I've never heard of someone saying they've been left out of the ENTIRE political process because of that.
- I think in fact atheists have grown more vocal over the past decade or two than ever before.
- I've never heard of this woman before, but I still don't believe someone who just spouts out opinions without at least some basis for this (even just saying "a _____ Poll of voters shows that starting a decade ago this started to change" would have been enough to convince me that this is a valid point, but she can't even be bothered to put two minutes worth of research into this crap).
- In fact in many ways atheists act like a religious body unto themselves.
- For the same reason an "afterlife" was invented (to present a comforting and simplified explanation as to what happens in the lack of life), I'm fairly certain this whole concept of "atheism as a religion" was born (to present a comforting and simplified explanation as to what happens in the lack of religion).
- There’s another myth that conservatism is somehow hostile to atheism. I also don’t find that to be the case. I’m a conservative atheist, I’ve felt very welcomed by this party.
- "I'm not a joiner, that's why I rebelled against God. But I'm ok with God in the same way I'm OK with joining a political party."
- In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.
- That's a very bold statement, one that DEFINITELY requires some sort of supporting evidence. Perhaps some conservative chapters are more welcoming of atheists than other liberal chapters from the same area, but to say that ALL of one party is more welcoming than another is a bit ridiculous.
- For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity.
- "Sociologists David Campbell and Robert Putnam argue that the rising number of "nones" and their increasing Democratic tilt are a reaction to the Republican Party's tightening alignment with Christian conservatives since the 1980s. In one recent example, a 2012 Pew Research Center poll found two in three religiously unaffiliated Americans agreeing that religious conservatives have too much control over the Republican Party."
- Most conservative atheists I know, including myself, have a really healthy respect for the role of religion in society and in this country in particular.
- Wow, that's a highly quantifiable, objective, well-researched and unbiased statement. How many "conservative atheists" do you know? 5? 10? 11?
- In contrast on the left it seems as though there is this knee-jerk embrace of what is more like a militant hostility, a reaction against intellectual diversity.
- How do you know this reaction is coming from the left? Name a specific example or two of this happening. How did you know they were liberal? "It seems like"? You've already proven yourself to be a completely biased writer, so this becomes completely meaningless.
- I don’t think you’d find that on the right, and for that reason I’ll say it, I think our atheists are better than yours.
- This/the title are the most offensive things I've read all day. One of the growing problems in this country, be it from a religious or political perspective, is this "nya-nya, I'm better than you :p" attitude. Grow the **** up, learn to legitimately respect on another, and stop trying to further marginalize and vilify different groups.
You have the opportunity on this site to write something worthwhile and meaningful, yet you put out this worthless dribble that serves no purpose.
You had a perfect opportunity to state a case either / or and chose to waste our time with what you perceived as worthless dribble. A prime example of a Hypocrite!
I stated many cases. I'm not sure what you want me to do. I'm a private user asking more from a news website. I am not paid to publish. if I were to be paid, I'd definitely put out more thoughtful and better researched articles than this.
holly atheist? cound need us? to make this age ? in case we encourage at top levels or certain levels a consturction in case that kind of function could come as spirit and could begin with babel as apochriph to remind if we are in ancient age.
The GOP Prayer/Mantra/Solution: Dear God...With your loving kindness, help us to turn all the Old, Sick, Poor, Non-white, Non-christian, Female, and Gay people into slaves. Then, with your guidance and compassion, we will whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, White, Christian, Male, and Straight. Or until they are dead. God...Grant us the knowledge to then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military during the next "unfunded/off-the-books" war. God...Give us the strength during our speeches to repeatedly yell........TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!..........and........GET RID OF SS AND MEDICARE!!!
In your name we prey (purposely misspelled, or is it?)..........Amen
Keep copy/pasting hate maybe I won't appear as dumb!
I don't care about the old, sick, poor, white, Christian, female, straight as long as the government gives me free stuff.
Ihopes they die so I gets their stuff.
Tax the rich more and more and more and more and more and more cause I ain't gonna work for me free stuff!
My comment of soylent green is sicking but I don't care Igots to have my free stuff.
Ican lie better dan enybody so who cares.
I don't need ss or medicare cause da gubermant man gives me free stuff and I just go er anyway.
Ican't speal enyhow an I hopes god do not read my stuplid sick stuff.
Did I manchon I wants more free stuff!
August 1, 2014 at 5:14 pm |
" I don’t know, I don’t believe in God but I’m not mad at him" You just violated the law of non contradiction-the foundation of logic, reason and rational-both can't be true. Thank you for your humble reverence for God. The heavens declare his glory, and there are no atheist, only intellectually dishonest rebellion and idol worshiping. Nothin new under the Son-see history.
Einstein to Time Magazine later in life re creation: we are all like little children entering a huge library filled with 1000s of books written in many languages. The little child knows someone must have written those books!
Shock... the bible says God exists.
I'm more interested in the Rigveda's view on creation (one of the four canonical Hindu texts).
It says the following:
"Who really knows?
Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen?"
So basically when asked "how was the world created?", the hindu religious text says "who knows?" Almost makes me want to be Hindu.
Above meant to be a reply to:
Free Man in the Republic of Texas
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
Psalm 14:1
Oh, please! Less government means that governments at all level, businesses and social groups are free to discriminate for reasons other than personal character, such as race, religion, gender, disabilities, etc., without any interference by the said government and no government interference with despoiling the environment for profit and pleasure. It also means no protections for workers and consumers if a business chooses to cheat or mistreat them or make unsafe products. Liberals don't necessarily favor bigger government if it will just enforce the laws on the book, which is exactly what the conservatives don't want it doing if they don't like the laws, such as civil and voting rights and environmental laws. Yet, hypocritically, conservatives want the government to enforce the laws they like, such as immigration laws. Aside: I support enforcing the immigration laws as well as all the aforementioned laws.
Don't even think that the state governments will enforce the same federal laws if the majority of the state's residents and business community oppose them, like Texas.
The GOP Prayer/Mantra/Solution: Dear God...With your loving kindness, help us to turn all the Old, Sick, Poor, Non-white, Non-christian, Female, and Gay people into slaves. Then, with your guidance and compassion, we will whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, White, Christian, Male, and Straight. Or until they are dead. God...Grant us the knowledge to then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military during the next "unfunded/off-the-books" war. God...Give us the strength during our speeches to repeatedly yell........TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!..........and........GET RID OF SS AND MEDICARE!!!
In your name we prey (purposely misspelled, or is it?)........Amen
Keep copy/pasting hate maybe I won't appear as dumb!
I don't care about the old, sick, poor, white, Christian, female, straight as long as the government gives me free stuff.
Ihopes they die so I gets their stuff.
Tax the rich more and more and more and more and more and more cause I ain't gonna work for me free stuff!
My comment of soylent green is sicking but I don't care Igots to have my free stuff.
Ican lie better dan enybody so who cares.
I don't need ss or medicare cause da gubermant man gives me free stuff and I just go er anyway.
Ican't speal enyhow an I hopes god do not read my stuplid sick stuff.
Did I manchon I wants more free stuff!
August 1, 2014 at 5:14 pm |
I'll tell the conservatives what I tell religious people who try to recruit me... When you can give me a rational reason to believe in your political ideology, then I'll consider it. Right now, as with religious people who try to recruit me, all I see when I look at conservatives are big mouthes, big egos, and no stones to face reality. Generally, they're loud mouthed blowhards who have been wrong, again and again and again, while never being able to admit it. They go around spouting an ideology they have not ever put into practice when they've come to power. Not even their beloved idol, Ronald Reagan, shrunk the size and scope of the federal government, balanced the budget, reduced the debts or deficits. But to hear them tell it, he did that while walking on water. Bah.
They're just liars peddling a fantasy, like televangelists.
I can't speak for all atheists, but I know who gives me the business for being an atheist and who doesn't. It's overwhelmingly conservatives. They start arguments every chance they get, then pretend like I did when I frustrate them. They make snide remarks and hostile comments about atheism around me, and then get superbly offended when I repay them in kind with similar remarks and comments about their belief.
No fantasy spinning conservative talking head on TV can make the reality that I experience with conservatives go away. So good luck with that conservatives. Something tells me you'll need it.
Sorry, but I don't find that Christians of either type, anywhere are intellectually honest.
So, we're all extremely complex beings from nowhere by chance and luck, that crawled out of pond scum, into monkey then man with missing links and artist rendering for evidence? I call that world view a religion! Loving God and loving others (essential Christian doctrine)-what a horrible world view to promote? There's room for one more! 🙂
@DRJJ – "So, we're all extremely complex beings from nowhere by chance and luck, that crawled out of pond scum, into monkey then man with missing links and artist rendering for evidence? I call that world view a religion! Loving God and loving others (essential Christian doctrine)-what a horrible world view to promote? There's room for one more! :)"
You reference popular misconceptions about evolution shared by many religious who are ignorant of the mechanics of evolution.
Often there is the notion that chance and luck are involved in natural selection, which is not the case. The way it works, on a high/basic level, is that, as organisms reproduce, minor flaws in the copying of dna cause changes in physical traits of the offspring. When these changes help the new organism to better survive in their environment long enough to reproduce, those changes survive into future generations – as long as they continue to foster survival. If they cause a disadvantage, preventing reproduction, then the change dies out since it is not copied. This is a long, gradual process that occurs over very long periods of time. This is how a very *gradual* advance from simple (pond scum) to complex (human) organisms occurs – and it takes millions of years. Winners propagate and losers disappear, this is not luck, it is the natural and unavoidable result of this simple, iterative process.
Artist renderings are not the evidence of evolution, the evidence is in the study of biology and our understanding of dna, and is backed up by the fossil record. The 'missing links' reference is a misnomer, a misleading and illogical argument, that gaps in the fossil record allegedly disprove evolution. Except that gaps in no way disprove evolution, just as gaps in photos of a person from a family album that do not show every second of that persons growing up do not disprove that persons existence. A dotted line can point in a direction just as a solid line can.
Evolution is not religion, it is science. It is based on observed supporting evidence, whereas religion is based on faith, which is expected to be accepted without evidence. That is the critical difference.
No atheist ever said that loving others it is a horrible world view – quite the contrary. However atheists deem the notion of loving god as akin to loving the easter bunny or the tooth fairy, its essentially a non-sequitor to us.
I am not sure atheists believe that anyone can choose their beliefs. Freewill has not been scientifically proven. Science is inherently deterministic. There is no evidence for "choice." Therefore, people believe what they believe because of genetics and external stimuli. There is no proof that any combination of electrons, protons, and neutrons can "choose" to so something. Therefore, science "exists" as an experience to our senses, but we don't "cause" anything to happen because "persons" do not exist outside of matter which is subject to the laws of physic and the events that created its current state of being. To expand on Heraclitus, none of us exist in the next moment for "we are not the same man and it is not the same river."
Amen brother – er, Right on!
Yep, YOU are sorry and a prime example of why Christianity is necessary in society.
The three above me are dolts.
You don't know anything about science OR religion, it seems.
The three above me are dolts.
You don't know anything about science OR religion, it seems.
Need Christianity??? Hey , if you enjoy it, fantastic. Those of us who don't, DO NOT Need it. Get a grip on reality not just faith.
Will Rivera
Need Christianity??? Hey , if you enjoy it, fantastic. Those of us who don't, DO NOT Need it. Get agrip on reality not just faith.
August 11, 2014 at 3:43 pm |
OK THEN TELL YOUR COMRADES IN ARMS TO LEAVE OUR RELIGION ALONE. Your reality we don't want or need.
S. E. Cupp is a conservative apologist. She talks about the importance of religion, making it clear that she is not an "anti-theist." However, all she would need to do is spend 10 minutes perusing videos on Right Wing watch posted on YouTube to see how wrong she is. Granted, those are the extremists, but many are conservative leaders. A quick google search would find a number of GOP leaders who have spoken disparagingly of atheists, including Reagan and Bush 1.
Secondly, all anyone has to do is listen to folks like Ryan, Cruz, Palin, etc. to see how important christian beliefs are to conservatives, and this without ever mentioning atheism. "We are a christian nation" is the most common refrain.
This is nothing but trying to falsely make the tent of conservatism bigger. Fiscally conservative atheists are typically drawn more to Libertarianism rather than conservative GOP politics, and this is for valid reasons, meaning avoiding the hate and religious bias of traditional conservatives.
She isn't apologizing for anything, or providing cover for extremists. She is expressing her own conservative political and pragmatic religious beliefs. There is a big difference between being an atheist and being an anti-theist. I don't like to even call myself an atheist because it is too often represented as a dogmatic and intolerant response to religious dogma and intolerance. I prefer non-theist. I am also politically conservative, and don't see any correlation or contradiction between the two. You are talking about socially conservative evangelicals (also known as neo-cons or Christian fundamentalists). That is not at all the same thing a poltical conservatism. Mr.Conservative himself (Barry Goldwater) warned the GOP of allowing those elements to take over the party, and he was right. I am not a Republican, and I don't even consider them a conservative party anymore, since they favor the same government expansion and authoritarianism the liberal Dems do. At least the GOP is forced to be less outright with their big government agenda. That certainly doesn't mean I would even consider referring to myself as a liberal, or adopting any of the nonsenisical liberal ideology. Pragmatism and critical thought lead me to non-theism and political conservatism. It seems I am not alone in that, and maybe one day the GOP will be more open to non-evangelical conservatives and begin to reject or at least keep in check the neo-con faction. Even with that element, they are preferable in every regard to the Dem party. My belief or lack of belief in a deity has next to no influence on my political ideology.
What he said.
You misunderstand what apologist means in this context. It does not mean making an apology. The rest of your response follows from this misunderstanding
Don't know if you've been watching the last 30 years, but the GOP conservatives are primarily neo-cons. The Bush admin was totally neo-cons. Nice write though.
Sadly, though, when it comes time to vote, what choice do Libertarians have? The Libertarian candidate hasn't a chance, and the Democratic candidate is fiscally unacceptable. I'll take sound fiscal policy – and I'm definitely not implying that Republicans deliver on this promise, but at least they promise it – even if it comes with a huge scoop of social conservatism, most of which they don't have a prayer of enacting anyhow. In short, a sound economy trumps most liberal social policies in my book, though I would very much like to see viable political party that could deliver the whole Libertarian pie. I'd rather have a job than legalized weed, in other words, though both would be nice.
The first sentence begs questions of her intellect when she says "I don't know, I don't believe in God but I'm not mad at him." First, I am assuming that the editors capitalized "god", but I am curious how you are, or are not mad at something you don't believe exists? I am not mad at Thor, Ra, Odin, Mithra, Zeus, Hades, or dragons, unicorns and elves. What would be the point? Seems to me that to even entertain the thought that you have an emotion directed towards an entity, somehow acknowledges its existence.
To your point. She is a extremely shallow individual.
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
Psalm 14:1
...dogma...
So obey the book, and send it all your money!!!
"but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, THOU FOOL, shall be in danger of the hell of fire."
Matthew 5:22
See you in hell, Free Man in the Republic of Te- oh wait! You're already in hell.
Enjoy your (eternity) in hell, Free Man in the Republic of Texas only has to deal with it until Obama is gone!
I used to think that the brain was the most fascinating part of the human body. Then I realized what was telling me that
Thank you S.E. CUPP
Excellent Commentary by S.E. Coup
True Atheist should be pushing for governance that limits the role of government to assuring that government, other government, businesses, groups, and individuals let the people and our national diversity be.
Where laws and regulations are limited to mitigating the actions of the careless, inconsiderate, malicious, and anti-functional.
And hold elected and appointed officials to an oath of be inclusive and impartial in executing the duties of their post. And boot them out if they use government to impose their ideology/doctrine/religion/...
Well stated. I agree.
So many confuse the phrase "freedom of religion" to mean atheists should not have freedom of no religion. This is preposterous. How can we have freedom "of" religion that does not include freedom 'from' religion. The phrase "freedom 'of' religion implies we must all choose a 'religion'. Does my government have the authority to compel me to choose a religion? This is so crazy I don't even have words to describe how the phrase "freedom of religion" is so rediculously defined, and so rediculously misunderstood. I demand that my freedom from religion have equal status in determining supreme court desisions, our tax laws that exempt religious organizations (actually just like corporations) to get preferences in how our laws are interpreted.
Marilyn LaCourt So many confuse the phrase "freedom of religion" to mean atheists should not have freedom of no religion. This is preposterous. How can we have freedom "of" religion that does not include freedom 'from' religion. The phrase "freedom 'of' religion implies we must all choose a 'religion'. Does my government have the authority to compel me to choose a religion? This is so crazy I don't even have words to describe how the phrase "freedom of religion" is so rediculously defined, and so rediculously misunderstood. I demand that my freedom from religion have equal status in determining supreme court desisions, our tax laws that exempt religious organizations (actually just like corporations) to get preferences in how our laws are interpreted.
July 30, 2014 at 10:12 pm |
Untrue! Atheist don't just except acceptance they demand all religion be abolished, thought neither can disprove the others position of the existence of God. In the same token religion doesn't demand you to be religious only accept it as the majority's acceptance of a God. From the beginning of belief in a higher power humans have coexisted as believers and non-believers. Why at this point in American history is this no longer acceptable?
This sentence " The phrase "freedom 'of' religion implies we must all choose a 'religion'.", could be stated: The phrase "freedom of religion" implies we must all be "free" to chose the religious organization to which we desire., or The phrase "freedom of religion" implies freedom to be a part of religion. Nothing about the word "of" implies absolute.
This provides a case in point to my first sentence, "I demand that my freedom from religion have equal status in determining supreme court desisions, our tax laws that exempt religious organizations (actually just like corporations) to get preferences in how our laws are interpreted.".
You are tax exempt, that is the atheist problem as indicated in the Wtms," Atheists incensed after IRS grants them tax exemption as religious group". Just what is your justification for tax exemption. Humanitarian, do you serve to benefit mankind because it is the right thing, or only serve to make sure religion fails. Financial, do you serve to benefit the needy or to just expand judicial cause. What is your team mission? Please explain rather than rant. What is the final expected outcome. The belief in God and the commonality of religion has and will always exist so that can't be it. The only obvious explanation is the defeat of Christianity thus American capitalism.
OK how! Explain how a copy of the Ten Commandments hung in a state building somewhere in small town America in 1941 harms an atheist then explain how removing same would not harm a person of religion in the same way.
You're all over the place with your views on atheist. Tax exempt?? Many groups use this financial option. I'm an athiest and I don't expect others to change their views. Are you a conservative? Just curious.
A true atheist simply believes that god does not exist.
It really has nothing to do with any other political beliefs.
Many atheists have extremely strong morals and believe in things such as taking care of the poor, elderly and infirm. And since they are often anti-church, they don't believe that churches should take care of this... they believe government should. I'm not sure why you think Atheism should coincide with desire to have a small government.
I'm confused by that conflation as well.
Incorrect, your being an "agnostic" and a liberal extremist, it is your opinion of what atheist believe about government based solely on what you have been told by liberals but not necessarily what they actually believe.
I'm not claiming all atheist believe any one thing. I simply said that many atheists believe in socially progressive issues. Many do not as well.
The point is their religious views (or lack thereof) have nothing to do with their views on the size of government. There's no connection. Theres no logical reason why a belief or non-belief in a higher power should impact how you feel about how active government should be. It's simply unrelated.
This editorial pathetic, she makes no sense at all. I'm not sure why this is worthy of being on CNN.
How you get the arguments that you state from her commentary is beyond me.
I live in Texas and almost everyone I know is a conservative that attends church on a regular basis. The company I worked for was opneny hostile to democrats and democratic policies and employees openly covered, I mean COVERED their desks with crosses and Christian affirmations so I never felt comfortable discussing my atheism. None of my Christian nieghbors know I am an athiest because I truly believe I would be treated differently if they knew.
S.E. Cupp is dreaming if she thinks 1) the conservative right is accepting of atheist and 2) athiest, at least this athiest. would ever consider joining such a sad little group of imbiciles as the conservatives.
That is interesting you feel like that. I can't speak for all Texans or all Christians because there are always crazies in any group but I live in Texas and work for a church and we have democrats and conservative on our staff and I can honestly say with complete confidence that I would and my place of work would welcome conversation with any person. I'm sorry if someone has treated you in such a way that you live in this much fear, but I wish you wouldnt.
Dear SpaceWheels,
S E is speaking from her personal experience and what she has seen just as you are speaking from your personal experience and from what you have seen. Why would she make that up? Why would you make that up? I don't see her judging you, so why are you judging her? Live and let live. We are all different and we should all respect others' differences. She sees things from her perspective and you see things from your perspective. Just because you might be right doesn't make her wrong.
The difference is that one man posts his personal experience as opinion and does not expect N amount of readers to see his comment and take it as gospel, whereas S.E. Cupp is ... someone (an expert? some... commentator? I don't even know who she is) that publishes video on CNN. For (few/some/many/most) readers and viewers, that sort of thing carries some sort of weight and is the basis for their opinions in future discourse on the topic.
Since my other comment will probably be deleted, I'd just like to re-iterate here that when you have that sort of power (because being part of a global news network is empowering), it's power better utilized for "good" (legitimate reporting on actual stories that make a lasting impact in peoples' lives, stuff that helps unite us) as opposed to this garbage that just serves to get people riled up for no reason other than "for the lulz" (the only possible reason she would have created this piece, because I can't imagine CNN would hire someone stupid enough to make uninformed YouTube-quality video clips trying to associate religion with politics).
I am an atheist, and part of that "conservative right". Atheism is an extension of pragmatism, as is conservatism. Of course their are some Christian conservatives who are intolerant of atheism, just like there are liberal atheists who are intolerant of Christianity. You don't (or shouldn't) base your political ideology on who you think is more likely to be socially accepting of you. I disgaree vehemently with socially conservative Christians, but I respect and tolerate them, and more often than not they return that tolerance and respect. Even if they don't, it doesn't change my fundamental belief in liberty, which is only accomplished by limited government. Quite simply, in political terms liberal means you favor MORE government, conservative means LESS. That should have absolutely nothing to do with religious or social ideology. Unfortunately too many people mistake liberalism to mean "open minded", and conservative to mean socially rigid. Those have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with political ideology except that less government allows greater social diversity and freedom.
Oh, please! Less government means that governments at all level, businesses and social groups are free to discriminate for reasons other than personal character, such as race, religion, gender, disabilities, etc., without any interference by the said government and no government interference with despoiling the environment for profit and pleasure. It also means no protections for workers and consumers if a business chooses to cheat or mistreat them or make unsafe products. Liberals don't necessarily favor bigger government if it will just enforce the laws on the book, which is exactly what the conservatives don't want it doing if they don't like the laws, such as civil and voting rights and environmental laws. Yet, hypocritically, conservatives want the government to enforce the laws they like, such as immigration laws. Aside: I support enforcing the immigration laws as well as all the aforementioned laws.
Don't even think that the state governments will enforce the same federal laws if the majority of the state's residents and business community oppose them, like Texas.
Greg, the issue is that in many southern states (Such as Texas for SpaceWheels or South Carolina for myself), the evangelical wing of the GOP is viewed by everyone as controlling the party. And the views (particularly social views) of the evangelical wing scare many who are not christians... be they muslims, hindus, atheists or agnostics.
If you aren't from these heavily evangelical areas, you may not really understand. When "You are going to hell..." and "The bible states..." are regular phrases used in political discussion and treated as completely rational arguments... things start to feel different for non-believers.
I grew up in Rhode Island. It was definitely not the same there. But when you look at the Southeast and Texas (the strongholds of GOP power these days)... the conservative movement has a VERY strong evangelical flavor. And non-christians tend to not feel welcome in that environment.
The democrats aren't particularly pro-atheist (or pro-muslim, or pro-christian or pro-hindu). But they don't come out as being unwelcoming to those groups either. And that does make a difference. Even when you might agree with a group on policy, it's tough to support them if they regularly come out and say you will be burning in torment for eternity because you don't happen to share their views on God.
As a fellow atheist conservative... very well put.
what world do you live in? Christians pulsate with hate! I am a democrat because I care about people and this country. The GOP is also a hate group. Look at their attitude about children in danger from other countries. Look at their attitude towards blacks, poor people, immigrants The GOP is not about smaller government or budget concerns. It is about hate and making this a Christian nation..
sandragree
sandra green what world do you live in? Christians pulsate with hate! I am a democrat because I care about people and this country. The GOP is also a hate group. Look at their attitude about children in danger from other countries. Look at their attitude towards blacks, poor people, immigrants The GOP is not about smaller government or budget concerns. It is about hate and making this aChristian nation..
COME ON "The GOP Solution" NOBODY HAS AS MUCH HATE AS YOU! ! ! ! ! ! !
BTW, WHY DO YOU HATE POOR PEOPLE? THATS NOT COOL STUPID! ! ! ! ! !
sandragreen sandra green
what world do you live in? Christians pulsate with hate!
Prove it, specifics!
I am a democrat because I care about people and this country
False, if you cared about (all Americans) then you would be a conservative.
The GOP is also a hate group. Look at their attitude about children in danger from other countries.
How many of these "little children" are murders, thrives, drug dealers, gang leaders?
How many of these "little children" came with adults?
How many of these "little children" crossed mexico by themselves?
How much will it cost you (American tax payer) to provide food, clothing, healthcare, education other needs for these "little children" to adulthood?
How much will cost to build jails for these "little children?
What will YOU say when it is millions instead of thousands?
Look at their attitude towards blacks, poor people, immigrants
WHAT IS OUR ATTITUDE TOWARD BLACKS, POOR PEOPLE, IMMIGRANTS? BE SPECIFIC!
HOW ABOUT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE CAN'T PROVIDE HELP FOR THE PEOPLE WHO TRULY NEED OUR HELP BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PROVIDE FOR THE TAKERS!
The GOP is not about smaller government or budget concerns. It is about hate and making this aChristian nation.
WE WERE ALREADY A CHRISTIAN NATION AND YOU ARE AN EXAMPLE OF WHY IT SHOULD REMAIN SO.
"I don’t think you’d find that on the right"
I'm sorry, have you been living in the same country as I have? You're telling me you've never seen liberalism classified as a mental disorder, or a product of indoctrination?
You're a moron. Get out.
Why are you so angry and hateful? That doesn't sound like a happy way to live. Can't you just let people have their own opinions?
Don't you get it?
The author MUST be correct about conservatives being more tolerant and respectful of atheists than liberals because look at how angry the liberals get (nevermind the fact that none of what she posted is rooted in any sort of reality outside of her own personal experience, the extent of which we're not even made aware of from this AWESOME *rolls eyes* clip, making it impossible to judge exactly how qualified she is to even be speaking on the topic to begin with).
Regardless of your religion, political affiliation, nationality, or any other aspect by which we as humans tend to group people, this sort of stuff should be highly offensive to your senses. It is frustrating to say the least.
When you disclose an opinion to the public, you are inviting criticism. I don't know why you think this would be otherwise...?
It also doesn't hurt that she's WRONG. Like, ridiculously so. I've seen enough bookshelves, watched enough television, and heard enough radio to know that you would have to be living under a rock to think "conservatives would never accuse their opposition of suffering brain damage". You would have to be extremely ignorant or dishonest to make that argument.
Her opinion is not sincere. She's being paid to write blithering idiocy. She can get out.
... http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolutionary-entertainment/201206/conservatism-mental-illness ...
Pretty good read...
People that get paid to talk will say anything to keep their job. Case in point.
And other people get paid to express their thoughts. That's why I love S E Cupp. She is so refreshing and articulate. I can see how she might come across as intimidating to some people though. Live and let live. Respect different perspectives and takes on life. We've all traveled different paths and had different experiences.
Nothing about this video is articulate, so I'd like to see examples of what you're talking about.
she and her glasses are annoying. And there's plenty of liberal atheists. Democrats in general don't take religion too seriously and thats why none of us care about atheists. We don't wear are religious association on our sleeve. Its personal and none of anyone elses business.
You do realize that you just proved her point by saying you don't care about atheists. And a personal insult about her ... really??? Not sure what purpose that is supposed to accomplish other than to serve as a negative reflection on you...
RH, time for your Rx...it will make the voices go away.
Wow.
Just.... wow.
I'm agnostic (which most religious people view as atheist). I view Cupp's characterization of Conservatives views on atheism as completely incorrect as to what I've experienced.
Now maybe that's because I'm in South Carolina... but the Southern and midwestern conservativism is pretty much the base for the GOP nationwide. It's VERY unwelcoming to anyone who isn't a Christian... or at least that's the way it's always felt to me. Every political debate with conservatives in my area comes back to religion... and that's NOT an arguement that is respectfull of "intellectual diversity".
If your debate comes down to "god says no"... then you lose the ability to compromise or debate an issue. There can be no changing your opinion because "god says no". Diversity on that issue becomes impossible.
I'm not sure where Cupp is from and what conservative circles she walks in. Perhaps her experience is very different then mine. But as a non-religious person in the south, her characterization of the conservative movement's views on the non-religious feels incredibly off-base. My state's conservatives are currently fighting the school board tooth and nail on evolution in schools. The Scopes trial was 90 years ago, yet in South Carolina conservatives still want to fight it. That's the "intellectual diversity" of the right that I see daily.
KURT
WOW! JUST WOW!
Because of your extremist progressive liberalism views and being self described agnostic you are not capable of providing a unbiased view on the subject of conservatism.
Although, I disagree with her and your view on religion. I do agree with " In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.". The problem with that, is liberalism has exploited atheism for political advantages. Denying, the possibility of a higher being is ignoring science. Maybe you can prove the theory of the Big Bang, but you will never disprove the existence of God.
Also, IF you knew that death was eminent I suspect on your death bed you would cry out GOD FORGIVE ME!
Which is why I defined myself as an agnostic, not an atheist (though many... apparently including you... don't seem to care about the distinction).
Atheists believe god does not exist. Agnostics believe the existance of god is unknowable. More specifically, I'd consider myself an apathetic or pragmatic agnostic which is: "the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic. Therefore, their existence has little to no impact on personal human affairs and should be of little theological interest." (per wikipedia)
I frankly don't care about what any god thinks. I'm going to live my life in a fashion that I believe is moral. If that results in some sort of punishment because god doesn't like what I did, I'll have to live with that. Because I'm not going to let his threats keep me from doing what I believe is the moral thing to do.
And no, I don't think I really consider god on my death bed. I'll probably be worrying about my family and how they'll get by without me. I might be thinking about things that I could have done but didn't, or thinking about how great some of the things I did were. I might be wishing I had more time or I might be thankful my time has come. But I'm not concerned about what (if anything) comes next. I hope that even at that point I'll be strong enough to follow my morals and not fearful that some higher power might punish me when I'm dead unless I break my morals and follow their religion's moral code instead.
The fact is, neither conservatism nor liberalism should have much to do with religion (or lack thereof). But in our country, the conservative movement (at least in the Southern US) has bonded with christianity... particularly evangelical christianity. And because of that many non-believers or believers in non-christian religions who may agree with many of the conservative economic and "size of government" positions feel unwelcome do to the "social conservative" base that dominates the southern branch of the party.
The conservatives who don't feel that way have to realize that they aren't the ones that atheists and agnostics see when they look at the GOP. We see the guys walking around with crosses screaming bible verses outside abortion clinics.
And those people scare us.
The GOP Prayer/Mantra/Solution: Dear God...With your loving kindness, help us to turn all the Old, Sick, Poor, Non-white, Non-christian, Female, and Gay people into slaves. Then, with your guidance and compassion, we will whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, White, Christian, Male, and Straight. Or until they are dead. God...Grant us the knowledge to then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military during the next "unfunded/off-the-books" war. God...Give us the strength during our speeches to repeatedly yell........TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!..........and........GET RID OF SS AND MEDICARE!!!
In your name we prey (purposely misspelled, or is it?)... .....Amen
Yeah right, just like all your other bull sh it, if you were dying right now and knew you had time you would be screaming, I'm sorry God, I'm sorry, Please forgive me, because you don't know for certain whether God exist or not because you can not disprove His existence.
Keep copy/pasting hate maybe I won't appear as dumb!
I don't care about the old, sick, poor, white, Christian, female, straight as long as the government gives me free stuff.
I hopes they die so I gets their stuff.
Tax the rich more and more and more and more and more and more cause I ain't gonna work for me free stuff!
My comment of soylent green is sicking but I don't care I gots to have my free stuff.
I can lie better dan enybody so who cares.
I don't need ss or medicare cause da gubermant man gives me free stuff and I just go er anyway.
I can't speal enyhow an I hopes god do not read my stuplid sick stuff.
Did I manchon I wants more free stuff!
kurt Which is why I defined myself as an agnostic, not an atheist (though many... apparently including you... don't seem to care about the distinction).
I absolutely know and understand the difference. Which is why I have more respect for atheist. They know why they don't believe in God and present themselves firmly in that belief. Agnostics, use that title to accent whichever situation arises in their favor, as you have done here. By choosing to criticize conservatives in the negative based on belief in God, you were aligning yourself with atheist and liberalism. Virtually every stanch democrat I know are also believers in God. Then you chose explain yourself in reply as WELL I AM AGNOSTIC, SO MAYBE I'M JUST NOT SURE ABOUT GOD, BUT I WILL DO AS I PLEASE.
Typical for liberal views, because you only care about you. You align yourself with liberalism because it (government) serves you. Despite what you have been told and chose to believe, we (conservatives) believe all (including you) benefit from the freedom of personal responsibility and less government. We also believe that the attacks on our personal belief in God and religion has nothing to do with the attackers disbelief, rather a prolonged tactical offense to further liberalism to which we can say has been effective but losing ground. That, because with the loss of religious freedom (attacks on Christianity perceived as the greater threat and totally wrong), also comes the loss of individual freedom. People like yourself try to exploit that attack for political gain but thanks to you and a realization America is headed in the wrong direction, a complacent people are returning to God.
So, Thank You Kurt, your agnosticism and political strategy is fueling a resurgence in religion and the belief in individual freedom.
Holy shit, drop the paint chips.
If I scream for God on my death bed, it will only prove that dying people can be desperate. Funny, because that's the exact quality of your posts.
distisec Holy shit, drop the paint chips.
If I scream for God on my death bed, it will only prove that dying people can be desperate. Funny, because that's the exact quality of your posts.
August 6, 2014 at 2:25 pm |
Thank you for providing a case in point. Whether atheist or agnostic if you have a chance to scream not just FOR God on your death bed but beg for Forgiveness then your life has been a LIE, thus your attack on persons of religion an uncalled for LIE. IN OTHER WORDS,YOUR CONDEMNATION OF RELIGION WAS UNJUSTIFIED, HATEFUL AND MORALLY WRONG AND BASED SOLELY ON SELFISHNESS, ARROGANCE AND SELF PROCLAIMED RIGHTNESS WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES!
"Agnostics, use that title to accent whichever situation arises in their favor, as you have done here. By choosing to criticize conservatives in the negative based on belief in God, you were aligning yourself with atheist and liberalism."
No, I'm simply saying I don't want religion in politics. Be it christianity judaism, hinduism or Islam. I don't want atheism running politics either. I really don't care what you believe as long as your arguments for political positions are based on reason rather then faith. Heck, I'm even okay with moral justifications... if you are against abortion because you believe that killing people is wrong and abortion is killing babies.... that's completely coherent. We can talk about that reasonably. But as soon as you say "God says it's bad", well that's when I get scared. The various gods of various religions have said a lot of stuff that I don't believe are good things.
As for people "returning to god"... as of 2012 according to Pew, 20% of americans call themselves Atheists, Agnostics or have no listed religious affiliation. 32% of those under 30 fit in the "unaffiliated/atheist/agnostic" category. A portion of this are people who believe in god but believe churches themselves are not a good thing.
In 2007 it was 15% rather then 20%. I don't really think people are moving the way you think they are in regards to religion.
We are born atheists and have to be taught religion. Atheism is the default setting for human belief. Atheists don't scream out on their death bed "God please forgive me" because they are atheists. They might scream out "I wish I had one more beer" or "I wish I had sex with Susan Lipnicki in 10th grade" but there is no 11th hour conversion. Why? Because we know that if God exists and is benevolent and loving, then he'll accept our error and let us in to heaven anyway. If he doesn't, then he is small, petty, vengeful, and malevolent making heaven more like a living hell run by an omnipotent six year old throwing a temper tantrum and we'd rather take a forever dirt nap than deal with someone resembling a psychotic ex-girlfriend. Of course since we don't believe in god, we don't really spend much time worrying about it and try to front load our life with the good stuff because we know we don't get a second chance.
Logical Positivist We are born atheists and have to be taught religion. Atheism is the default setting for human belief. Atheists don't scream out on their death bed "God please forgive me" because they are atheists. They might scream out "I wish I had one more ber" or "I wish I had sex with Susan Lipnicki in 10th grade" but there is no 11th hour conversion. Why? Because we know that if God exists and is benevolent and loving, then he'll accept our error and let us in to heaven anyway. If he doesn't, then he is small, petty, vengeful, and malevolent making heaven more
Ha ha ha ha ha ha that was the most ignorant BS on here. You are NOT BORN AN ATHEIST you are born a human being with the capacity of understanding the possibility of a higher being. If you chose to ignore that possibility that is a factor of environment and learning. If you chose to accept that possibility then you have then you have gained a belief in something bigger than YOU. You can't speak for all dead atheist and from your post I expect you to be one screaming for forgiveness because you will remember this while dying. It will haunt you the rest of your life because you DON'T know if God is real or not and you will only know when that time comes so wuss, BE YE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, BORN THIS WAY ha, ha, ha, ha
Southern Gent:Ha ha ha ha ha ha that was the most ignorant BS on here. You are NOT BORN AN ATHEIST you are born a human being with the capacity of understanding the possibility of a higher being. If you chose to ignore that possibility that is a factor of environment and learning. If you chose to accept that possibility then you have then you have gained a belief in something bigger than YOU. You can’t speak for all dead atheist and from your post I expect you to be one screaming for forgiveness because you will remember this while dying. It will haunt you the rest of your life because you DON’T know if God is real or not and you will only know when that time comes so wuss, BE YE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, BORN THIS WAY ha, ha, ha, ha
You are born a human being with the capacity of understanding the possibility of all-powerful leprechauns. If you chose to ignore that possibility that is a factor of environment and learning. If you chose to accept that possibility then you have gained a belief in something bigger than YOU. You can’t speak for all theists and from your post I expect you to be one screaming for forgiveness from the all-powerful leprechauns that you willfully ignored because you will remember this while dying. It will haunt you the rest of your life because you DON’T know if all-powerful leprechauns are real or not and you will only know when that time comes so wuss, BE YE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
Logical Positivist
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha just cannot get over that born atheist statement. But OK I will ha, ha, ha, ha, gently ask, WHERE IS THE GENETIC MARKER to prove it? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha
Southern gent: Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha just cannot get over that born atheist statement. But OK I will ha, ha, ha, ha, gently ask, WHERE IS THE GENETIC MARKER to prove it? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
There is no genetic marker for atheism (that I know of). If there is a genetic basis for it, I suppose it is based on the more general predisposition to not assume cause in things that cannot be empirically demonstrated nor to attribute to cause to things that have no predictive power. We are born atheist in the same way that we are born without knowing French. Your religious belief is a circumstance of where and when you were born. If you were born in Mecca, you would probably be Muslim and be just as devout. If there is a god gene (which there isn't despite hyped media attention suggesting a very weak correlation between religion and particular genes), I suspect it would lie right between the unicorn and bigfoot believing genes ; ) I wouldn't worry about me. Existential angst isn't contagious.
Quote from transcript: "In fact I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been. For conservatives, atheism is something that is tolerated, respected, we appreciate an intellectual diversity."
Link direct from CNN website, dated Feb 25, 2014: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/25/cpac-reverses-decision-will-not-allow-atheists-at-conservative-conference/
I suppose that intellectual diversity really means "agree with us on everything or shut your mouth." So much for respect and tolerance, eh?
I thought liberals (i.e. President Obama followers) had that mantra or a similar mantra such as "if you don't agree with President Obama or AG Holder, you must be a racist"? So much for respect and tolerance, EH?
Well, if you ARE a racist...
Did you get that saying from a fortune cookie.
I think they did a pretty good job of addressing you. But nah, we'll give the trophy to the vague mumblings about light and darkness.