An atheist in Congress. Any problem?He said it out loud this week: "I am a Unitarian who does not believe in a supreme being." His name is U.S. Rep Pete Stark (D.Calif). He has been in Congress since 1973. He is perhaps the highest ranking public official to say --- out loud ---- that he does not believe in God. I think we should salute him for his honesty. Obviously, there are other non-believers in elected office, but only Stark has chosen to speak his mind. The fact is, he "represents" millions of Americans who make up a significant minority of our citizens. A University of Minnesota study estimated atheists at 3% of the U.S population; a Pew survey found 11% declaring "no religion", or agnostic; and a Harris Interactive poll put nonbelievers at 9% with an additional 12% expressing uncertainty (L.A. Times Editorial 3-15-07). So Pete Stark has lots of company. I think we should salute him also for his courage. For the fact is that non-believers in America are the objects of profound prejudice and distrust. Consider how every political candidate these days must proclaim at least some vague belief in a higher power; and consider the millions of slanted "voter guides" sent to our churches telling us which candidates are "really religious" and which are not. In a Gallup poll last month, 53% of individuals said they would not vote for an otherwise well-qualified atheist; and 47% said in a Pew survey in 2002 that religion is basic to being a good person. Such is the deadly divisiveness of much that passes for religion in American. Yet our nation is increasingly diverse, and Congress reflects that diversity. This year in Congress there are Buddhists, as well as the first Muslim member. And obviously there are other non-believers who don't admit it (and should not have to!). After all, our U.S. Constitution states that "no religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any office or public trust under the United States" (Article VI). The Framers had it right in 1787 --- let's put our diverse religious preferences aside, and judge political candidates by their promises, their policies, and their political performance. Related: church-state's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: american culture | religion
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 4:03pm.
As a born again Christian I feel more compelled to pray for him then pat him on the back. However, as he is an American living in a free country I believe he has the right to be there if elected. In recognizing the freedom that gives him that choice one also has to recognize the freedom of the voter. When we vote we are either supporting a canidate of our choice whos' principles, ideas, and yes even morality or spiritual conviction are believed to be in line with our own, why would anyone do anything else? The other choice is that we pick the lesser of evils sometimes. I wonder how he has been addressing that part of his life all these years, what will be the reaction from his own corner of the world. One thing is for sure, he is going to be on a gazillion prayer lists from this day forward! Submitted by RichK on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 4:40pm.
What a shame that the efforts of My Clay Sun to afford the residents of the county to express their opinions are subjected to the puerile and base comments as one reply shows. In the absence of any effort to produce a positive contribution or original thought, we have comments that are more appropriate to the mentality better suited to the Jerry Springer set. I only hope that this kind of reaction is not representative of most people in the county.
Submitted by smunsey on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 5:27pm.
Sorry for the above comment, but this first blog is so wack. You actually congratulate someone who is an atheist, support them? Try praying for them, I will....and Rich, Ill pray for you too buddy....God bless. Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net
Submitted by lilyslore on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 5:37pm.
Not to appear TOO cynical, but a looney Unitarian is no more scary to me than the motley crew of hedonistic money chasers we already have. Again, I stated before, we should just have a lottery type system to get our leaders and anyone who actually wants the job should be disqualified as they are never in it for altruistic reasons, only monetary ones. Lily's Lore
Submitted by smunsey on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 5:50pm.
My only hope is that the people of Clay county aren't as liberal or radical as some of us on this website.....HA! Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net
Submitted by smunsey on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 6:06pm.
When George Bush was campaigning for the presidency, as incumbent vice-president, one of his stops was in Chicago, Illinois, on August 27, 1987. At O'Hare Airport he held a formal outdoor news conference. There Robert I. Sherman, a reporter for the American Atheist news journal, fully accredited by the state of Illinois and by invitation a participating member of the press corps covering the national candidates, had the following exchange with then-Vice-President Bush.
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists? Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me. Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists? Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church? Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists.
On October 29, 1988, Mr. Sherman had a confrontation with Ed Murnane, cochairman of the Bush-Quayle '88 Illinois campaign. This concerned a lawsuit Mr. Sherman had filed to stop the Community Consolidated School District 21 (Chicago, Illinois, suburb) from forcing his first-grade atheist son to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States "one nation under God" (Bush's phrase). The following conversation took place.
Sherman: American Atheists filed the Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit yesterday. Does the Bush campaign have an official response to this filing? Murnane: It's bullshit. Sherman: What is bullshit? Murnane: Everything that American Atheists does, Rob, is bullshit. Sherman: Thank you for telling me what the official position of the Bush campaign is on this issue. Murnane: You're welcome Murnane nailed it.... Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net Submitted by RichK on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 5:10pm.
It would seem that Mr. Murname also nailed something else. He nailed is intellect, respect for the views of others and respect for the laws of this country along with Conservative Republican philosophy right on the outhouse wall. It took a while, but last November a fair amount of people in this country saw that target, took aim and put it where it belongs. But conservative Republicans being what they are, have offerred the pupulation new targets. Tom delay, Rumsfeld, Libby, Rove, Cheney & yes, Bush Jr. are also in their sights. The difference? Instead of showing the public the side that Republicans hide in the shadows, we rid ourselves of the trash by adherence to the rule of law. And so far, the Republicans have been so very kind in providing the ammunition. Submitted by RichK on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 5:27pm.
Judging by most of the blogs and replies in this venue, I had thought that the bloggers and respondents would engage in a relatively serious exchange of ideas on a somewhat sophisticated level, on a higher intellectual plain. In most cases, I was right. In your case, I see that I was mistaken, so I won't waste your time, or mine responding after this. As for praying for me, pray if you must. But I must be honest and say that in studying the past two thousand years of history, I have never yet seen any evidence of a cause and effect relationship between prayers and results. Personally, I do not advocate, endorse or employ any elements of superstition, the supernatural, mysticism or mythology. On the other hand, it may surprise you that I am a staunch advocate in defending the rights of others to do just that, regardless of what I may personally think. Good day.
Submitted by smunsey on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 6:11pm.
The Supreme Court in 1892 cited 50 historical examples to prove America was indeed a Christian nation.
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionist, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ! For this very reason peoples of faiths have been afforded asylum, and freedom of worship here." -Patrick Henry America was born a Christian nation. American was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of the Holy Scripture. -Woodrow Wilson George Washington ended a prayer in 1752 with these words: "..Let me live according to those holy rules which Thou hast this day prescribed in Thy holy word.. Direct me to the true object, Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life. Bless, O Lord all the people of his land." Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever. -Thomas Jefferson No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.. -George Washington Whereas, it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor... -George Washington In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for divine protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor... Have we now forgotten this powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs his affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, it is probable that an empire can rise without His aid? -Benjamin Franklin We submit our persons, lives and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords and to all those perfect and most absolute laws of His given us in His holy Word. - Rhode Island Charter 1683 To advance the enlargement of Christian religion, to the glory of God Almighty -The New England Charter Being thus arrived in a good harbor and brought safe to land, they fell upon their knees and blessed the God of heaven.. - Governor Bradford The first and almost the only book deserving of universal attention is the Bible. -John Quincy Adams Our laws and insutitions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of The Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise, and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian... This is a religious people. This is historically true. -The Supreme Court Decision 1892 -Church of the Holy Trinity vs. The United States ANY QUESTIONS? Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net
Submitted by smunsey on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 6:27pm.
Im sure you wont post anymore because there is no other argument to be made on your part. Excellent quote.... Todays popular thinking and ideals lean towards people separating Christianity and Government, many now believe there is no place for Christian morals, and ethics in todays Government. The results of this line of thinking is showing up all over in today's society. We have taken prayer out of schools, we have allowed abortions, and now the sanctity of marriage is under attack with same sex partners now wanting laws passed to enable them to marry legally. America will not and cannot stand without God. The moral decay of society has shown its ugly face all over the front pages of every paper in every city of every state, we can no longer turn on the nightly news without seeing the signs of a nation without God, school shootings become almost a monthly occurrence, fatherless children turning to gangs as their role models, schools handing out birth control, etc... What will it take to become a Godly nation again? Becoming 'Morally Correct' not 'Polotically Correct'. -Brian Klinckhardt. Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net
Submitted by yelvington on Sat, 03/17/2007 - 11:18am.
There is an adage about not discussing politics, religion or money at the dinner table, because it all too often leads to a ruined meal. This is dangerous territory. Nevertheless I feel compelled to dive in, because I think you're all whacking away at each other, arguing about theological questions as if you're wielding well-understood solid objects when you're really waving smoke. I'm not at all convinced that Pete Stark's statement qualifies him as an "atheist." Follow this trail. Consider Thomas Jefferson (quoted above by Steven Munsey, apparently making the point that a lot of Founding Fathers believed in God). Jefferson was raised Anglican but attended many Universalist services. In fact, he once declared "there is not a young man now living in the US who will not die an Unitarian." He was a close friend of the scientist-philosopher-clergyman Joseph Priestley, one of many religious dissenters who left England to get out from under the church-state system there. Priestley expressly denied the concept of the Trinity, as do Unitarian Universalists generally today (that's why they're called Unitarian). Because they reject orthodox definitions of the divinity of Christ, many people regard Unitarians as non-Christian. Unitarian beliefs cover a wide range. One point of view says there is no "being" or anthropomorphic God, and that to assert a "being" is to deny God. Do you see what just happened? Use that to unlock them meaning of Pete Stark's statement and you'll see that this is much more complicated and more subtle than the convenient categorization of Stark as an "atheist." And another thing ... isn't the battle cry of the "conservative" generally that "liberals" want to "tax and spend" to support their social programs? If that is true, how is it possible to hold a "conservative" position in favor of using tax money to support a social program of religious indoctrination? I don't get that at all. Personally, I don't care about whether my elected representative holds any particular religious point of view, eats fish on Friday, abstains from pork or whatever, since I'm not hiring him or her to debate theology or cook my dinner.
Submitted by lilyslore on Sat, 03/17/2007 - 3:10pm.
Thank you Mr. Elvington. What a marvelously well thought out and easy to follow commentary. I especially like your final paragraph. The only thing I would add is that I would not like to be represented by lawyers, politicians or (worst case scenario) lawyer-politicians. I'd rather it be someone with ethics. Lily's Lore Submitted by thegeyser on Mon, 03/19/2007 - 11:17am.
Church-state, are you a member of the Secular Coalition of America? It appears the organization is getting a lot of PR out of a contest they sponsored to identify the highest ranking atheist. Why should we salute him? It appears he was awarded $1,000 for his admission. Just thought the context of his announcement would be enlightening. Atheism is also organized religion; atheists vote according to their beliefs too. Although, it would probably be easier for the Secular Coalition of America print a voter guide because of a lack of belief in God than it would be for a Christian pastor to teach on what the Bible has to say on certain social issues around Election Day. This congressman has a very liberal agenda. While the government can impose no religious test, that doesn't mean the people can't assess a candidate or representative's world view as one that acknowledges or fails to acknowledge the Supreme Lawgiver by his legislative agenda. Maybe people are so hesitant to elect someone without believe in God, because atheists would not fear moral judgement from a higher being? Who holds the atheist accountable? Is there any action that is absolutely forbidden? Submitted by JaxLawOne on Tue, 03/20/2007 - 9:03pm.
I admire the gentlemen in Congress for actually telling the truth much more than the Colorado Springs preachers saying one thing and then cheating on their wives, families and naive congregations with the boy whores and smokin crack! Submitted by JaxLawOne on Tue, 03/20/2007 - 9:18pm.
It was certainly easier to keep up with the scandals actually scandal when Clinton was President...he lied about sex and last time I checked I do not think anyone died. With the Cheney/Rove Administration there are now multiple scandals every week! This week....Justice Department firings and once again directly traced back to the real person calling the shots Karl Rove....and all the time he is laughing at the so called "religious right" for being such boobs believing everything he writes for Jr. to read in a speech...Karl, make sure not to use big words! Submitted by JaxLawOne on Wed, 03/21/2007 - 8:51pm.
Once again the Justice Department firings traced back directly to Karl "Just call me Mr. Himmler" Rove! We still have two days left in the week....what might be next? People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 2 users and 247 guests online.
Online usersWho's newRecent comments |
Excellent thoughts. Somewhere, we, as a nation, have taken to making our criteria for political office a de facto religious test. The one more professes some kind of religious devotion, for the most part, Christian, somehow makes them more qualified. We have sacrificed accomplishment and the will to do the best job for the most people in favor of echoing the religious views of the majority. And it seems that very few people out there have even considered the fact that whatever religious view one holds is rather irrelevant considering the scope of governing a nation.
For another fine view of this subject, author Sam Harris wrote a column in the Los Angeles Times of March 15, 2007.