Holy men blessing bombs should be all the clues you need.

Religion is a symptom of serious mental illness.
It should automatically disqualify anyone suffering from it from holding any public office.
Even Tony Blair realised that the rest of the planet views him as a "religious nutter". His words, not mine.
"Religious nutter" is the nicest thing you could possibly say about Bush, a real compliment.

If the enlightenment is a bit bright for all the god-bothering nutters, I suggest that they try wearing sunglasses instead of trying to drag us all back into the darkness.

St.John, Had to go after I wrote, but was wonderfully amazed at the timing and similarities of our posts. It is closer than current dementia and MSM can admit to, the latter must keep up their profits you know. This is how God is proven. Some do know.

SiouxRose, Half way Known, Half way home. At least it can be seen from here.

How do we acknowledge that someone's actions are detrimental to the whole (judge) without playing into (the appearance of) "Us/Them".

As long as the "us/them" mentality exists then there will be conflict etc.
The "us/them" mentality can only be combated within the self of the individual.

What about those who deny the whole, who insist on us and them (see I'm doing it).

as an atheist, it's so hard to live here sometimes and be absolutely soaked in religious bigotry and nonsense. even worse when religious people claim persecution because they can't get their way all the time. this nation was not founded for xianity or any other religion.

"What is discouraging here is that the bishops, aiming to reinforce their squandered moral authority, are resuscitating an image of a threatening, violent God that religious people generally, and Catholics in particular, have struggled to leave behind. Religion aims not to "save" from an unmerciful God, but to reveal that God's mercy is complete."

god's mercy is complete? one good read thru the old testament and thru much of the new reveals that god's mercy is complete...ly a fraud! the god of the bible is a threatening violent god. how about this little gem?

1st samuel 6:19

He struck down some of the men of Beth-shemesh because they had looked into the ark of the LORD. He struck down of all the people, 50,070 men, and the people mourned because the LORD had struck the people with a great slaughter.

yes the "lord" who's mercy is SO complete, struck down over 50,000 people for.....looking into his "ark". horrible!

I have no problem with faith, or the belief in a higher power...but again, I must point out (preach to the choir...lol) that american christianity (fundie version esp) is no different from islamic fanatics or zionists. The three biggies all developed out of conquest by the Asian steppe invaders who brought with them a crazy warrior sky god who destroyed the balance in a more animistic, nature oriented male/female practice. This is the true Judaic beginnings, their roots. It is demonstrated in the archaeological records.
Furthermore, the gnostics warned of this being as an insane punitive diety that was cast out and then duped Abraham into believing in him, and entering into a covenenant that reduces male sensitivity perhaps even promoting a more agressive manner..

As a country, we do not sanction child abuse or slavery-and yet many still worship a diety who desires and promotes both. Any one who spouts the notion of the Rapture/End Times gives credence to this insane diety who will abuse/punish his children and enslave the non-believers.

These actions are not the actions of sane loving people, but rather fear filled vengence seekers who worship the very thing they fear. They hold no respect for the earth, and why should they, the diety has promised them a better world.

I would love to be able to forgive these folks....but they are hell-bent on destroying everything I hold dear.

Why is it that we lock up individuals who behave in this manner, but a group of them who proclaim they are following a diety gets sanctioned and supported? Some even get voted into the White House....

What is most discouraging to me about the current state of religion is that people who are deep into religion have no objective standard from which to base their belief on. There is no debunking rediculous beliefs based on fact or standards - in fact, trying to do so only enflames religious believers, and entrenches their belief more.

I don't ever see a world without religion, unfortunately - and at the root of this problem is the desire for humans to think they are somehow "superhuman" - that there is in fact an "afterlife". That causes many sentimental notions, not the least of which is that they will see their loved ones in Heaven, and see their enemies roasting in Hell. Organized religion just plays upon this sentimentality, by providing the structure from which people can find added support for their position.

On top of all of this, religion provides an excuse for people to hold biases and bigotry in the warm waters of mutual shared belief, which becomes dangerous when large numbers of believers delude themselves into believing they are justified in thier destructive behavior. Religion tends to promote anger (posed as justified anger) toward anyone who does not agree or abide by the "rules" applied to believers via ancient texts and manipulative leaders. This is how, in the face of even their own biblical texts outlining very clearly that death is wrong, support of the death penalty or war is somehow justified.

In other words, religion gives an excuse for angry, controlling people to exercise their anger and obsession to control, all within a government-sanctioned way. No wonder the Republican party is the party of religion!

If someday the corporate oligarchs find religion no longer useful in this country, it will fade away with not so much as a whimper.

Here's what George Carlin sez about that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

American Religion is as hateful and reactionary as any on the face of the earth but this is easy to forget because our religious adversaries do not have a massive military industrial structure as we do which does our dirty work of imposing our ideas by force. Our enemies are often reduced to terrorism in order to combat the empire and thus can be easily demonized while our armed forces can torture and destroy while being cheered on by our media and the religious nuts. It is interesting to watch as religious indoctrination has made its way into our military schools and we can look forward to a more openly religious military as we build our theocracy at home.

James Carroll asks many questions in his article. Instead, he might as well have asked "What would a 'free' conservative theocracy look like in America?"

The juxtapositions of old vs. new world, American founders religious views, the implied damnation of going to hell, etc. all reveal aspects of what he thinks the system would look like.

However, his "Religion aims not to "save" from an unmerciful God, but to reveal that God's mercy is complete" is a progressive representation and will always clash with the conservative one. Simply asserting the point is not going to change the minds of conservatives.

Of course, I could go on and ask, "If a deity forgives, is it a sign of mercy?" Or, further, "Does forgiveness require mercy?" However, that would be an entirely different discussion.

There is nothing wrong with a person having religious beliefs. Heck, I come from a family of Quakers. The problem is when tries to use that religious belief to justify something that they shouldn't be doing in the first place, or bullying someone into believing what you do..

billjv says: "What is most discouraging to me about the current state of religion is that people who are deep into religion have no objective standard from which to base their belief on. There is no debunking rediculous beliefs based on fact or standards - in fact, trying to do so only enflames religious believers, and entrenches their belief more."

You are missing the point here. Religious conservatives have a standard. Unfortunately, it is exactly what they believe. The objectiveness of the same only applies to the group of people with similar beliefs within a narrow tolerance.

The problem is that religious conservatives view religion as the *basis* for morality, life, knowledge, etc. It is something that they "stand on." Therein lies the error, religion should *never* be the basis for life, it should be the *culmination* of that which is good.

If the church could get away with selling indulgences again (remember those nifty little documents? Give enough $ and you're "guaranteed" a seat in heaven!) it would!

GG PEARL & COUNTESS: Good points.

If anyone wants to hear the diatribe on how religions have shaped a concept of the deity most resonant with the old god MARS from astrology, just ask. It's so clear to me that a nation that boasts its "christianity" and leads the world in both weapons sale AND deployment ultimately worships the 'god' of vengeance, violence and bloodshed and that's about as far from Jesus as any sane soul can get. The old ways of Rome were retained, and just given a new name (Jesus) for endorsement. Tragically, everything being done in the name of this Master is a blasphemy, except for those who are TRULY devout and really do care about mankind and devote their lives to Service. When standing in line at a soup kitchen, or trekking out to some foreign terrain also involves prosletyzing belief systems that ultimately are false, then they, too, add to the legions of granting false witness to that which too many take for God.

Ideally, I'd prefer if I never knew the 'religion' of a candidate, and if it was regarded as so insignificant that people would look funny at a candidate that bothered to try to say what it is.

We should look at a person as to what they've done. If their personal religion has inspired them to do some good in the world, then that's good. But I care more about what they've done than why they say they've done it.

And far to often, these professions of religion seem designed to cover-up the fact that they've really done very little that's good in the world.

ezeflyer,

Carlin is right. No matter what one believes about the ultimate nature of reality, the ultimate source of all the bursts of energy that become absorbed in one's brain through perceptions, a moment's reflection results in the unavoidable conclusion that there are an infinite number of such possible models of reality, and no one can prove that any one is definitely the best or the most true. Since religions cannot be based on the most valid, most provable, model of reality, what are they based on? Generally they evolve to meet the needs of the elites in the society, though at times they may have utilitarian aspects as the elites recognize that they too can benefit from some degree of utilitarianism.

So when the elites find a religion no longer useful they will abandon and defund it. And, in the aftermath of the fall of the "evil" atheistic Soviet Union (with the atheism used by demagogues to convince the simple-minded to fear the dreaded "commies"), US elites are finding religion, including Christianity, to be much less useful and they are abandoning it. As the wealth polarization becomes more dramatic, and as the reinstitution of slavery or the use of others for their body parts become more desirable by those at the high end of that distribution, Christianity, with its claims that all human beings are of equal value, may even face a full frontal assault from US elites.

Years ago, I took a trip that took me to the reconstruction of the Jamestown settlement in Virginia. They had a replica of one of the boats tied up on the docks there.

I remember looking at this little thing, and thinking I'd be nervous crossing a lake on a quiet day on this boat. Especially after your jaw drops when you read the number of people they had crammed on board.

So, what I remember thinking about while standing on that dock in Jamestown was just what in the world would make people crowd and jam onto such a little rickety boat to sail across the north Atlantic, land in a country that they'd never seen before, where there was no settlement waiting for them, where they'd have to build everything themselves.

That's what having religion tied too closely to government created. It created the awful conditions that led to people doing such a desperate act. And its a reminder why the founding Fathers of this nation were so wise and insistent on separating religion from government. They knew what would go wrong. They knew the religious persecution and wars that could result.

Our founding Fathers were wise to separate religion from government. And to those who want to reverse that, we should give a response that's familiar to any progressive who's protested say a war "Hey buddy, this is America. If you don't like the separation of church and state, why don't you go somewhere else." I'd suggest they go back to Europe, but Europe seems to have wised up a bit in the intervening 300 or so years. So where would they go? Well, Tehran seems to have the same sort of fundamentalists. Maybe our fundamentalists would fit in well there!

In the history of Christianity, the Crusades are an important time in the shift from it being a religion of peace to a religion of war. The Kings and Popes of that era wanted to fight massive wars in the name of Christianity. But they had this minor problem in that what Jesus taught was just the opposite. Lets all march to the Holy Land and then turn the other cheek wasn't going to fit the Kings and the Popes an the Knights that wanted war and destruction and conquest and booty. So that's when some of the church writers started developing strains of thought that put forth the notion of being holy warriors in the name of Jesus Christ ... who of course would be completely appalled by the very notion.

BTW, I'd be a little careful about smears towards "American religion" or "christianity". The fundamentalists in the Republican coalition are just one strain. They tend to be a loud and aggressive strain, so its easy just to think of them.

But, if you go to something like any anti-war protest, the protests outside Oak Ridge on Hiroshima day, or especially the protests outside the School of the Americas, you'll meet a very different type of Christian. You will meet some Christians that have taken their notion of the love of Jesus Christ and used it to propel them into the world as a force for peace and justice.

As usual, don't go by labels and don't lump people in to groups. Be ready to see each individual as such, and look at them with regard to what they actually do in the world.

Everyone should watch this conversation between 4 of our greatest living Thinkers..... Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens... on the concept of god ....

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2025,THE-FOUR-HORSEMEN,Discussions-With-Richard-Dawkins-Episode-1-RDFRS

You have to be kidding.
Religion and reason?
Cmon.

I think the birth of new religions is cyclical, when old ones lose their way.

That was the reason christianity was born.
That was the reason that there have been rebellions agains christianity in the name of christ and protestanism.
That was the reason Islam was born.

Organized religion does the same thing as politics.
Put people in power, who then use their power to screw things up.

The Smothers Brothers did a historical spoof on religion and war in the early seventies. Throughout history, as long as tyrants told the masses about "God" being on their side, they were able to convince the ignorant to take up arms against others which they knew nothing about. Apparently it is still working. Unquestioned belief is as rampant now as it was in the so-called "Dark Ages".

Many people desperately need to belong to something and if they are promised a better life in the next plane of existence for behaving in a certain way, or even by commiting crimes for the sake of the clergy who are in cahoots with the ruling class, all in the name of and for "God" and comply. This con game has been going on for centuries.

Look at the 'christianization' scandal in the Air Force not to long ago. It's permeated all of our military branches.

I didn't watch the George Carlin video, as I saw him on an HBO show just blastin' organized religion. I certainly agreed with him. Carlin was not only terrific in his routine, but struck into the core of it.

Any religion that doesn't teach the 'GOLDEN RULE', is disengenuous in my opinion. If it was "Gospel", the nations of the world could disarm and really turn "swords into plowshares"

kivals; A little footnote. During the 'Korean Conflict' one out of every three American POW's were easily convinced by the commies that they were war criminals and couldn't explain liberty, democracy, freedom, etc. So alarmed by this and the advancements made by the Soviet Union at the time, that the Pentagon instituted 'The Code of Conduct' and the Eisenhower Administration added the words "under god" in the pledge of allegiance. I think it was 1955. I remember reciting the 'pledge' in school, every morning. ( Can you imagine pledging allegiance to Cheney and Bush?)

did anybody get the same creepy feeling that hit me, as a pimply kid suddenly lacking control of his vocal chords, when i first applied critical analysis to a hymn i'd been singing for years, "onward christian soldiers"?

that moment marked the beginning of my ascendance toward skepticism, but having a father who was a sunday school superintendent one day a week and a raging drunk the other six probably helped.

the golden rule (common across sectarian barriers, but most often honored in the breach) is the only prescription for life that's needed. the rest is utterly irrelevant dogma, certainly not worth killing or dying for.

one thing i find troubling so far with Mitt Romney has been the country's lack of interest in exposing his religion's major problems....
it is too long ago to prove or disprove Jesus, Abraham, Buddha, or Muhammed...so those have to be taken completely on Faith (something i find troubling in and of itself)....
HOWEVER...there is Plenty of evidence showing that Joseph Smith was a CON MAN....the two big pillars of his faith when he was alive were "Racism" and "Plural Marriage"...yes, he was a BIG racist....only to become a state did Utah renounce those practices, but 'real' mormons still believe them both.....
his stories about finding the stones with the writings of the nephites is HILARIOUS, if it weren't held as gospel truth by so many....
come one America, let's call him out on the absurdity of Mormonism, because we can prove most of it....(it was only in the late eighteen hundreds...so people wrote about him, and most was NOT good....the killings of mormons, and retaliation by Brigham Young by killing Whites and making it look like the Indians did it...yes, Brighman Young, the savior of Mormons was a Murderer.)
i wish we could call out the Christians, Jews, and Muslims too....but no one can prove or disprove much of anything about any of those faiths....
as for politicizing....religion was politicized when the Catholic Church looked the other way during the Holocaust.....yes, Catholics have blood on their hands from that time....

God is what you don't know and God is also the Creative Faculty cognizable as and by the mental being. Religion is the endeavor of the mental being to give credence and substance to speculations which are based on what was experientally known,.....but Creation is always Anew and ancestors were only partially right when and then. This may seem a shaky way to grasp the foundation of life, but ultimately it is the only security to count upon, that is to resolve to live in the pure ray of Now and the journey to now is a re-gathering of the mulitplicity of innumerable Ignorances, wants, cares and so-called necessities to a personal yet expanding ground zero in Knowledge which is impersonal. We diverged out, and now we diverge in. Like the pluck of a chord, the vibration called life has a beginning, a middle and an end. Eastern thought names it Omkara, the Truth is the beginning, the middle and the end. No blame on anyone for God is what you don't know, and sits in Stillness and Creates from Nothingness infinitely beyond all speculation or preference,.... but in surrender there is Knowing.... and a re-evolution to expression of the Same. This you can rely on.
Could any religious or political agenda understand and implement this?,..... but no blame. This and that is merely a preference, a play so to speak. Remove the hostility and anger and it is enjoyable to the core.
Hearts open, Lights on, We be getting there!

Being a religious flaming fundamentalist, I would like to offer a different take on Carrol's perspective.

How a religion fits into society depends on the space in society that that religion allows for the unbeliever. A religion that confuses what it means to be righteous in the Church and righteous in the state will leave less room in society for the unbeliever. Consequentially, the less room that a religion leaves in society for the unbeliever, the less religious the response by the religion in dealing with the unbeliever. This is why when some Islamic Fundamentalists in Asia or Christian Fundamentalists here try to deal with the ills of society, they resort to force or coercion.

Also, though much of our fundamentalist history merits examination and severe criticism, there is nothing in the basic tenets of fundamentalism which implies that we are free to practice social injustice. Believing that Jesus died for our sins or that he will literally return again implies nothing regarding capitalism/socialism, militarism/pacifism, social darwinism/providing a big safety net. I think you will find that support for more progressive values by Christian Fundamentalists will be more prevalent among those who are from other countries rather than American fundamentalists. Unfortunately, we American fundamentalists have been caught in a downward spiral of having or wanting to prove ourselves which leads to actions that betray the gospel. And often, proving ourselves not only includes defending the faith, it also includes defending the likes of a super "patriotic" vision of America.

un-neocon, to your list of thinkers I would add Michel Onfray, author of "Atheist Manifesto".

Speaking a lifelong, practising Christian, I believe that being a Christian should be neither a recommendation nor a barrier to any person standing for elected office.

For God's sake Americans, reclaim the inspired principle your Founding Fathers gave to not just your country but the whole the world, that of 'the separation of Church and State'.

Send those priests and fundamentalists, who would undermine the very foundations of representative government through blackmail and threats, scuttling back to their cathedrals and palaces of dishonour like the rats they undoubtedly are.

caday5: Thank you for your post and your honesty.

The real question for me is how we as citizens got to the point of thinking that we had a right to know anything about a candidate's religion in the first place. I mean, why does the question get asked in the first place?

I remember when JFK addressed the question of his being a Catholic. He didn't respond by defending his religion or by saying that his religeous beliefs would define his presidency. He basically said that his religion was his personal beliefs and that they would in no way influence how he governed. He stated in very bold terms what the Constitution requires. That is that a persons religion (or lack thereof) was NOT to be used as a qualification for becoming president.

So, what has changed in America? Why don't any of these candidates stand up and say that their religeous affiliation is disbarred by the constitution for consideration as a qualification for office? Why don't they answer, as JFK did, that his religious beliefs were personal and that all the citizens needed to know was that there was a barrier between his personal beliefs and his public duty to the country?

COMarc: I loved your post about your visit to Jamestown.

Religion is political.
So is everything else.

The big con is making us think that politics (and religion) is something separate from our day-to-day lives.

How/what we eat is political, where the food comes from is political.
What we do for a living is political.
How we treat each other is political.

So, how we live is political…. not the opinions one might have about this or that.

SouixRose: "If anyone wants to hear the diatribe on how religions have shaped a concept of the deity most resonant with the old god MARS from astrology, just ask."

I'm asking. I'm interested to know how this will fit into the holocaust of the sacred feminine, as embodied in the female priestesses,healers, gnostics, and mystics of bygone ages.

ggpearl: I'm interested in hearing more from you, too.

I also have to disagree about whether or not a presidential candidate's religious practice matters…I have to say it does, how not?

I think it is very important to know the terms that a president's morality operates within.
Is their relationship to the almighty or the cosmos (whatever) not affect their decision making process? Or are they directly related?

Caday5: "How a religion fits into society depends on the space in society that that religion allows for the unbeliever. A religion that confuses what it means to be righteous in the Church and righteous in the state will leave less room in society for the unbeliever."

Such thought patterns cause fundamentalism to arise. It presumes, or at the very least implies, that religion is (or should be) the basis upon which society rests. Religion ought not to be something people "stand on." Instead, it ought to be a culmination of good actions and thoughts created by the collective of its members.
Free societies will allow religion to flourish, insofar as religion does not pretend to be the basis of such freedom.

"…there is nothing in the basic tenets of fundamentalism which implies that we are free to practice social injustice."

I beg to differ; fundamentalism allowed slavery to exist for millennia, until progressive minded people finally got rid of it. I do agree with the concept of working for social justice. However, it is important that people not confuse its impetus as coming from religious practice. Rather, if a religion promotes social justice, it is because the same provides a societal benefit.

Why don't they answer, as JFK did, that his religious beliefs were personal and that all the citizens needed to know was that there was a barrier between his personal beliefs and his public duty to the country?

Because they now can 'ride their faith' into either Office, or cover-their-lyin'-ass with a false-charade of 'morality' (or both). The point is...no one should care about 'faith' [or lack-of-same] when it comes to Governance. Else-wise, the destination is a Theocratic-duopoly, and the nation falls-prey (as has Israel, and purportedly Iran -- not that the US is far-behind, at this juncture) to a Talibanesque-totalitarianism.
Religion&faith [Mythos] is needful/inevitable for any conscious-lifeforms (in some fashion or another, at-minimum in 'early-development'), but for its-sake AS WELL AS the 'Laws'/imperfect-Justice governing civic/civil-affairs, the "twain should never-meet"...
[That's very-hard for any of the "children of Abraham/Book"-followers to get through their little-heads -- Separation was intended to (and DOES) serve ALL Interests, not just the Secular and mainstream]
The secular-Deists who wrote all-related well-knew that from Historic-example and Uncommon-sense.

Just because religious extremists try to rally around the lowest common denominator, does not mean that it is a subject that is "off limits" to everyone else. Rubbish.

How does removing this from the realm of discussion help?
It seems like another excuse to place restrictions on us.

Let the president answer whether he/she thinks Adam and Eve were literal people etc. I want to know to what extent they engage with the texts.

If they would rather watch football on Sunday let'em say so.

There is no way that a person's spiritual relationship to the world is of no importance to the decisions they make as chief executive. Bah.

"Of those 55 Founding Fathers, we know what their sworn public confessions were. Twenty-eight were Episcopalians, eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutheran, two were Dutch Reformed, two were Methodist, two were Roman Catholic, one is unknown, and only three were deists--Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin."

"To heap more fuel on the fire ... of the 55, the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Congregationalists, and the Dutch Reformed (which make up 45 of the 55) were Calvinists, for goodness sake! In other words, these weren't just Christians, these were among the most extreme and doctrinally strict Christians around. Of the 55 delegates, virtually all of them were deeply committed Christians"..these are he men who wrote the constitution..and the info is from their biographies..there is not one word in the constitution about church and state being excluded...there is the 1st amendments exclusion clause..that says the state will not mess with religious expression
After that you can reflect on Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation of October 3, 1863. It begins this way: "It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon. And to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the Lord."

Carrol, one of the very few worthwhile aspects of The Boastin' Glob, writes: "The symbols, rituals, and sacred texts of every faith grow out of contingent historical circumstances that seem at odds with the transcendent claims that religions make." This is all fine as long as you are referring to Bible-based faiths. Religions centered on a Goddess---for example, the longest continuous period of peace and progress in Western history, Minoan Crete---had no need to make "claims at odds" with their historical circumstances. "Goddess" was never an "idol" or "magical being beyond everything" as the Bible and then rationalism told us---"She" was simply the consummate expression of the experience of living directly in Nature---rooted squarely in "historical circumstances," daily life practices, natural seasons, human cycles. People expressed all those things in the image of a strong creative beautiful female: she was not a dictator of morality. She was/is simply all the most worthwhile aspects of existence, what The Bible is STILL trying to forget, destroy and erase within us. "History" is a heap of shit demonstrating that what is not sustainable is suicide. All this political Bible crap (and even worse, "endorsements") is what we're left with when NOT ONE CANDIDATE except Kucinich can even begin to honestly address where we are and what is happening to us around the world because of the end-game of capitalism....Instead they're all smiling and smiling in order to impress an old Grandma (Dubuque Iowa)...

Carrol, one of the very few worthwhile aspects of The Boastin' Glob, writes: "The symbols, rituals, and sacred texts of every faith grow out of contingent historical circumstances that seem at odds with the transcendent claims that religions make." This is all fine as long as you are referring to Bible-based faiths. Religions centered on a Goddess---for example, the longest continuous period of peace and progress in Western history, Minoan Crete---had no need to make "claims at odds" with their historical circumstances. "Goddess" was never an "idol" or "magical being beyond everything" as the Bible and then rationalism told us---"She" was simply the consummate expression of the experience of living directly in Nature---rooted squarely in "historical circumstances," daily life practices, natural seasons, human cycles. People expressed all those things in the image of a strong creative beautiful female: she was not a dictator of morality. She was/is simply all the most worthwhile aspects of existence, what The Bible is STILL trying to forget, destroy and erase within us. "History" is a heap of shit demonstrating that what is not sustainable is suicide. All this political Bible crap (and even worse, "endorsements") is what we're left with when NOT ONE CANDIDATE except Kucinich can even begin to honestly address where we are and what is happening to us around the world because of the end-game of capitalism....Instead they're all smiling and smiling in order to impress an old Grandma (Dubuque Iowa)...http://ancientgreece-earlyamerica.com

Huckabee is only the worst manifestation of this "religious awakening redux" which has plagued us in recent years (decades?)with all this pandering to know-nothings in America's spacious plains. We will only be truly civilized in the United States when an atheist (or perhaps in the beginning an agnostic)can be nominated and win the Presidency. We probably don't have that much time before the "God-fearing people" bring destruction to the nation and maybe the Earth itself. Merry Christmas!

In spite of the best efforts by our government-corporate-MSM industrial complex to deflect and distract, Americans are sponging the message: we are all doomed if most of us do not simultaneously reset our "way of life" to the Save Earth configuration, like, yesterday. And we know there's not a chance in hell of that happening. So many are resetting to the God Help Us configuration instead. The bigger the insurmountable problem, the more wacky we become and, hence, the wackiest "leader" who is also the "closest to God" gets the votes. You know, cause he'll call the Big Guy direct and chew him a new cloud hole and save us all at the last minute.

Like in the movies and stuff...

"Does God send people to hell if they vote wrong? You would think so if you listened to the American Catholic bishops, who said in November that forbidden political choices "have an impact on the individual's salvation.""

Yeah, right! And where may I ask is that written in the Holy Scriptures?

When were tax-exempt religous organizations given permission (on the books of congressional legislation or IRS rules) to decide which candidates would be "fobidden" political choices and still REMAIN as TAX EXEMPT organizations?

This issue needs to be addressed!

Gail; Go Girl, Go!

Case in point to back you up. Remember a few years ago when a minister in a Pasadena, California church questioned the morality of the death and destruction, misery and suffering that the Bush/Cheney/Congressional Crime Family inflicted on the Iraqi people? (these are my descriptive words, not the preachers). Soon after, the IRS investigated the church and (somebody help me) and wanted to take them off tax-exempt status for being "political".

With one scandal after another for over seven years, it's hard to keep tract. That issue and a zillion others need to be addressed!

TRU ORANGE: You may wish to refer to Jack37's post. I gelieve the attack on the Divine feminine has been underway for several millennia. Its most overt forms include the several million women murdered by the church for not conforming to standards that robbed them of their own spiritual knowledge, basis for worship, and inherent gifts. The way nature is treated as a thing, the way women in so many lands are given compromised wages and/or vote/representation, the way rape is a common act of war, the way many intelligent men dismiss these things as being merely the way the world works, or some kind of necessary expression of one of Darwin's theories (survival of the fittest, etc) are all evidence that there has been a crime against HALF the universal force. I am NOT saying that either gender, the quintessence of Yin or Yang, is superior; but that they are intended to dance, just as DNA appears as a whirling dervish molecular structure that marries an equal genetic quotient from each in order to make life.

Societies have cleaved to male power, masculine thought processes, and might-makes-right for centuries. These behaviors have become so long conditioned into the human experience with few notable exceptions that they are taken for what is real, or what portrays human nature. It's like crippling an individual and then studying what he can do on the basis of the handicap. The individual in this case is the entire world society. It is true that during the past century or so, various women have distinguished themselves in a variety of careers, some quite powerful. Many fail to recognize that the qualifications these women have been asked to satisfy still condition them largely to adapt to a patriarchal model of education.

There are always a number of souls from both genders who are natural rebels, geniuses who must fly over the cuckoo's nest and test the limited conjucture of their times. Galileo is a good example. Most who take on this role pay a price, as society tends to punish its visionaries in the interest of maintaining a status quo.

CD has many brilliant contributors, and a lot of them challenge a specific area of presumed truth. How many of us really analyze the basis for our education and cultural/religious conditioning? The very fact that millions in the US can no longer distinguish between the false teachings their religious leaders bring to them, and the "reality based community" is itself evidence that something has gone awfully wrong. All things come full circle. Our zodiac begins with Aries, the principle of the self, the ego, and its often aggressive measures to preserve itself. The signs follow in a succession intended to grow empathy for the whole. If the paradigm was not broken, by the time mankind evolved to the final sign, Pisces, we'd see compassion lived in such a way as to make ours a bona fide and blessed garden of Eden. Instead, with war and violence, might makes right given free rein, what we have is a world that's been poisoned by wars (and the war on nature), and incredible violence seen between the genders. Eden's lovers have instead become broken and maimed warriors, killers, victims and survivors. It's a tragic fate. Out of such long institutionalized depravity, in our common realization of pain, we might still return to the circle, learn to care for one another, and gradually heal the paradise bequeathed to us that life could appreciate the Creator by emulating creative, rather than destructive factors.

Frankly, it's my belief that patriarchal religions, particularly Catholicism, used sex as a means to promote the false idea of sin, so that human beings could not trust their bodies or their instincts, nor the carnal desire planted inside each of us that the perpetuation of our species be fulfilled. The sickness that's been wrought by turning the lovers against each other is seen in the many priests who molest children, in the girls raped by their fathers and step fathers, in the males who must use porn to experience desire (and those that go on to experience sex as a form of violence), and in how we treat our planet, the great MOTHER.

I just finished my children's allegory on the zodiac, a work no orthodox publisher would touch. Violence is Ok for kids, but teaching the Divine circle where there are no sides, where EACH has a place at the table, where the sacred 12 are explained as part of a higher plan... that's taboo. Our society arrests persons who speak of peace or want to smoke the peace pipe, but honors those who kill for financial perks. Obscene times we face because the spiritual values that were part of the Divine feminine have been as co-opted as all things from Nature. Without the intended balance (like both oars for navigating a boat), the patriarchal world view with its emphasis on force, has come to throw the great balance that life's designs rely upon decidedly off.

I believe in miracles and I know there IS a higher spiritual hierarchy. If a driver can humbly own that he or she is lost to ask for directions, they might find unexpected ways to arrive. Mankind is that driver... "A new commandment I give thee: That ye love one another." THAT is what Christ meant... Huckster and Bush-it and the other blasphemers who sing war in the name of the prince of peace are DARK souls indeed. Their time of karmic retribution will come.

If only those who call themselves Christians would actually put into practice what Christ was said to preach.

For those of you with open minds, this is a link to a five star rated video with over 20,000 ratings. There is some great insight here into religion, politics, war, international banking, the Fed and 911.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331
For some reason, we can not mention it by name on CD.

Siouxrose; I'm very touched by what you just wrote to Tru Orange. I hope he or she (?) understands your reply. In fact I hope everyone reading your answer comprehends the message.

The last paragraph was right on the mark.

My Best to You and Yours.

For the past 27 years--since Reagan's election--we have seen the influence of conservative Christians in American government. This has culiminated in the Bush-Cheney regime, and indeed the BARN (born again redneck) voters are about the only ones who continue to support the most incompetent, lawless and criminal administration in our nation's history. We have seen warmongering, slaugher and suffering brought to innocents through illegal wars and cruel sanctions, war profiteering, torture, massive gains by the rich and losses by the poor, denial of healthcare to children, massive budget deficits, refusal to reform our ways as the world's #1 polluters and weapons merchants, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, and a host of other ills. Anyone who reads the Gospels would find it impossible to reconcile the right wing's professions of faith in Jesus with its positions on the issues.

Souixrose: Thank you. I think it would be great if you could become Hillary's spiritual mentor.

AlexLawyer; Excellent points, but it even goes farther back than the Reagan years. In the early part of the 20th Century, a rabid anti-union fascist from Norway emigrated to the United States and involved himself in rightwing political movements and started 'prayer' groups, especially in the Washington DC area. Use the name of Jesus and invoke Christianity and purport to be pious and you're flock will grow.

He started prayer breakfasts in the Whitehouse long ago, reactionaries only, and you can imagine what they talked about. Don't qoute me on this: but I think Hillary Clinton attended some of those meetings.

I like the acronym, Alex. Covered with bedsheets, they had a bible in one hand and a hangman's noose in the other. Ignorance is not bliss.

ALEX LAWYER__ I believe you are right about the conservative fundamentalists being very hypocritical in their beliefs and actions. However, it is disheartening to see so many CD posters drsgging Christianity through the mud. There is a great difference between being Christian and being religious. Just because so many politicians are hiding behind a smoke screen of religion because they think it will get them elected or re-elected, does not mean that religious views are something to avoid. Let`s put the blame on the people that are misusing religion for their own purposes as some use fake patriotism or pandering to the gun lobby. We are in big trouble in this country, but is not caused by ordinary Bible believing Christians, any more than a belief in astrology is wrecking us. Our problem is the same one civilization has always had , that of tyrants gaing power and exploiting it for their own evil desires, and there are always those eager to join up and get their share of the spoils. If the teaching of Jesus were followed, which is certainly not the case now, our Nation would have a good life for all, and not just the rich and powerful. It is not necessary to believe in a life after death to gain much wisdom from religious study.

SIOUX ROSE -- Blessed inspiration to sooth the famished and entangled spiritual space, that intersects our lives:

AS IF the waters of life had become a forgotten cure for the deserts around us, whilst its bubbling source lay within each our own pure hearts