1. Comment #113825 by Mitchell Gilks on January 20, 2008 at 5:12 pm

Glad I'm not American. But hey, isn't it the mark of a powerful national when they distort histroy to make it appear how they would like it to?

When you have the power who says what "really happened"? Pfft, reality? When has that even been like we wanted?

Other Comments by Mitchell Gilks

2. Comment #113834 by Cartomancer on January 20, 2008 at 5:50 pm

So history has become a democratic political discipline now has it, where progress is made by taking a vote among people who are not professional academic historians and going with the majority opinion as the truth?

Will all matters of historical debate be settled this way in future then? Must I now submit my doctoral thesis to a board of elected politicians rather than a board of specialist examiners, and get it enacted into law rather than published? And will matters of debate in the sciences and the other humanities subjects be following this procedure too?

First they came for the Communists...

Other Comments by Cartomancer

3. Comment #113838 by Radesq on January 20, 2008 at 6:14 pm

Here are the current cosponsors of the resolution feel free to contact them if you are a constituent.
Rep Aderholt, Robert B. [AL-4] - 12/19/2007
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 12/18/2007
Rep Barrett, J. Gresham [SC-3] - 12/18/2007
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 12/19/2007
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 12/18/2007
Rep Davis, David [TN-1] - 12/19/2007
Rep Doolittle, John T. [CA-4] - 12/18/2007
Rep Drake, Thelma D. [VA-2] - 12/19/2007
Rep Feeney, Tom [FL-24] - 12/18/2007
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 12/18/2007
Rep Gohmert, Louie [TX-1] - 12/18/2007
Rep Hayes, Robin [NC-8] - 12/18/2007
Rep Hensarling, Jeb [TX-5] - 12/18/2007
Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 12/18/2007
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 12/18/2007
Rep Kline, John [MN-2] - 12/19/2007
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 12/19/2007
Rep McHenry, Patrick T. [NC-10] - 12/18/2007
Rep McIntyre, Mike [NC-7] - 12/18/2007
Rep Musgrave, Marilyn N. [CO-4] - 12/18/2007
Rep Pearce, Stevan [NM-2] - 12/18/2007
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 12/18/2007
Rep Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 12/18/2007
Rep Ryan, Paul [WI-1] - 12/18/2007
Rep Schmidt, Jean [OH-2] - 12/18/2007
Rep Tiberi, Patrick J. [OH-12] - 12/19/2007
Rep Walberg, Timothy [MI-7] - 12/18/2007
Rep Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 12/18/2007
Rep Wolf, Frank R. [VA-10] - 12/18/2007
Rep Young, C.W. Bill [FL-10] - 12/18/2007
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 12/19/2007

Other Comments by Radesq

4. Comment #113839 by soul_biscuit on January 20, 2008 at 6:15 pm

I see very little chance this measure will pass. It's rather blatantly unconstitutional for one thing. For another, it debauches the tradition of greats like Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin, who were undoubtedly Deists (at most.)

Still, I'm going to follow the link and see what I can do.

EDIT: I may have posted too soon. That's a [i]lot[/i] of reps.

Residents of those states, [i]please[/i] let those creeps know how you feel. The rep from my state is a pretty staunch conservative too; I think I might send him a message.

Other Comments by soul_biscuit

5. Comment #113846 by douyang on January 20, 2008 at 6:44 pm

I'm not exactly new here, since I've been lurking on this forum for years now. But this is my first post. I just wanted to say hi and that I hope the Americans on this site send a letter to their congressman like I have. You don't see the Christo-Fascists lying around doing nothing, so neither can we.

Other Comments by douyang

6. Comment #113851 by Radesq on January 20, 2008 at 6:53 pm

Hi and thanks for sending the letter.

Other Comments by Radesq

7. Comment #113858 by Jayday on January 20, 2008 at 7:33 pm

Radesq thanks for the information.


Soul_biscuit, I hope you are right and it doesn't pass. However, Since Bush took office, I am constantly astounded at what gets passed in the USA. I don't take anything for granted anymore. Logic, reason, and the rule of law seem to have flown. Americans seem to have lost their sense of "reality." As an American, I sometimes feel I am living in a nightmare that I am REALLY hoping to wake up from soon. My husband and I talk frequently about moving out of the country as we don't recognize it anymore. Sigh.........

This is a time to take action and make our voices heard, not to assume that the Constitution will stand on its own. Those in power have proven that they will subvert it whenever they can. The Bush administration has already crossed that line in so many areas. When the courts and media are stacked to promote a very conservative ideal that includes embracing religion, it is tough to get a secular view expressed without being branded as unpatriotic. It is pathetic and frightening. We are in real trouble with the way the Supreme Court is stacked.

What amazes me is that the American public doesn't seem to have the stomach for impeachment this time for real crimes that affect the safety of our nation and personal freedoms. I think Bush and his cronies will get away with as much as they can before he leaves office. We have been blown back to the "dark ages."

Jayday

Other Comments by Jayday

8. Comment #113869 by Lycosid on January 20, 2008 at 8:33 pm

Jayday, Jefferson and Co. didn't move to another country when they got fed up with British rule. We need patriots in America ready to do what it takes to safeguard our Republic. Stay and vote, please.

Other Comments by Lycosid

9. Comment #113870 by Double Bass Atheist on January 20, 2008 at 8:35 pm

I followed the link and filled out the form to send a canned letter to congress. IMO their letter required quite a bit of editing. In its original form, it reads like nontheists are an interest group and we are upset by being left out of the resolution. I feel that really misses the point. Their website talks extensively about 'revisionist history', for which I completely agree… after all, that's the point here! This resolution contains dozens of historical inaccuracies or outright BS. However, the letter that the Secular Coalition prepared does not make that case at all. Strange.
Far too many people in the US today actually think that America was founded "on our Judeo-Christian heritage" and that the nation's founders were "deeply spiritual men." It does not seem to matter to these people that the mention of 'god' is left out of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or that the writings of the Founding Fathers clearly show that these men were deists at best, more likely atheists. Add in Article 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, which begins: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…" Can this case be made any clearer?
However, none of this easily ascertained information matters to the revisionists. I a similar fashion to the evolution debate, the facts just seem to get in the way with these people. They'll just keep repeating what they "believe."

Other Comments by Double Bass Atheist

10. Comment #113871 by Cartomancer on January 20, 2008 at 8:38 pm

Welcome to the Creationists of my world!

Other Comments by Cartomancer

11. Comment #113874 by kkant on January 20, 2008 at 8:58 pm

soul_biscuit writes:
I see very little chance this measure will pass.

Would that you were correct. Unfortunately, I think something like this has a significant chance of passing. :(

Brainwashing vulnerable and impressionable children is one of the primary ways by which the religious virus spreads. It is not at all surprising that they want to target history classes in school with their revisionist lies (or delusions, to be more generous).

Other Comments by kkant

12. Comment #113876 by flistr8 on January 20, 2008 at 9:51 pm

A brief phone call to your rep's office or a brief email expressing your lack of support for this measure can have an effect. Especially if they don't have a strong opinion either way. Please take the time to weigh in on this folks.

Other Comments by flistr8

13. Comment #113880 by liberalartist on January 20, 2008 at 10:16 pm

I sent my congressman an email last week. While some politicians are truly religious, most will vote which ever direction the wind happens to be blowing which will ensure their continued re-election. So contacting them, IMO is worthwhile.

Other Comments by liberalartist

14. Comment #113884 by MelM on January 20, 2008 at 10:47 pm

The Declaration of Theocracy
The resolution: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.RES.888:

After all the "Whereas's", the meat of the thing is at the bottom

Whereas the first week in May each year would be an appropriate week to designate as `American Religious History Week': Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the United States House of Representatives----

(1) affirms the rich spiritual and diverse religious history of our Nation's founding and subsequent history, including up to the current day;

(2) recognizes that the religious foundations of faith on which America was built are critical underpinnings of our Nation's most valuable institutions and form the inseparable foundation for America's representative processes, legal systems, and societal structures;

(3) rejects, in the strongest possible terms, any effort to remove, obscure, or purposely omit such history from our Nation's public buildings and educational resources; and

(4) expresses support for designation of a `American Religious History Week' every year for the appreciation of and education on America's history of religious faith.

This doesn't make us a theocracy but it's a declaration of direction. Note the sweeping view of religion's role contained in paragraph two. Besides endorsing fake history, the theocrats can--if this thing passes--point people, especially young people, to this and claim that the "Christian Nation" view is an official policy of the U.S.; i.e., they can add it into the "Christian Nation" fraud.

Chris Rodda, author of "Liars for Jesus" http://www.liarsforjesus.com/ debunks some of the "Whereas's" in this piece:

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/1/4/24725/53989

Of course, the legislation of historical fact is outrageous.

Other Comments by MelM

15. Comment #113890 by brue68 on January 20, 2008 at 11:42 pm

I already sent an email to my representative (Randy Forbes, the main sponsor) and got nothing but a form letter in response. I doubt anyone's read it. ;_;

Other Comments by brue68

16. Comment #113896 by Steven Mading on January 21, 2008 at 12:31 am

I sent the letter of to my representative. (idea - edit the letter - don't send the default form. I think if they get copies of the same form letter they might not take it as seriously. Edit each one and make it your own.

Unfortunately my representative (Tammy Baldwin, D-WI) didn't vote against HR 847, so I doubt she'll be receptive to this either. But we'll see.

Other Comments by Steven Mading

17. Comment #113918 by Summer Seale on January 21, 2008 at 2:11 am

What amazes me is that the American public doesn't seem to have the stomach for impeachment this time for real crimes that affect the safety of our nation and personal freedoms.

Again...I'm in the minority here....but...

Bush hasn't actually done anything illegal that you can impeach him for (as far as anyone currently knows). He's bent the law, he's suspended some things, but he has the power to do that. You may not like that, but that's the law.

Example: contrary to popular secular belief and zeitgeist, suspending the Geneva Convention for terrorist suspects is not against the law, nor is it against the Geneva Convention itself. The Geneva Convention only applies to uniformed combatants. In fact, under the Geneva Convention, a captured terrorist could technically be shot in the head upon capture because they're breaking the rules of engagement in a really bad way. The fact that we don't shoot them in the back of the head means we're being better than the Geneva Convention allows us to be at the very least. That may not meet your requirements for humane treatment but..again...it's not against the law.

On the Patriot Act: again, that's not against the law either. That was passed by Congress. It's...entirely legal. You may not like it, but it is not unconstitutional.

On other issues where Constitutionality was debatable, it has been taken up by the Supreme Court which, on several issues, sided with the plaintiffs and against the Administration. And...in every single case, the Administration followed the legal decision, and complied within the alloted time frame.

There was the issue with the spying, which could be deemed to be unconstitutional, but that is still up in the air. Also, because they were acting within certain boundaries, even if it is deemed to be against the law, the boundaries that were set by the courts from years ago may very well absolve them of doing that sort of thing if they stop when they are told. Some of these points are very complicated and either are within boundaries which allow flexibility to do certain things in emergencies, or to even set precedent and then go to the courts for permission. Also, a point not mentioned by Democrats is that half of the oversight Comm of Congress are Democrats...and were fully informed about this program. In fact, some of them even wondered if this program went far enough. So if you're going to indict Bush for it, you're going to have to indict the Democratic leaders as well.

I know that Democrats like to go on about how Bush should be impeached etc....but there is seriously, really, no legal justification. You may hate that, you may really loathe that, you may think he's a "murderer" for Iraq and all the rest, but that's just your opinion, and not law.

That isn't to say that I defend Bush on his stupid religiosity. I don't. But he couldn't be prosecuted for that either. Being religious is not against the law. Promoting it via the government is, and the only thing that he's truly done to promote religion, so to speak, is the religious charities program he pushed in 2001. Again, that's debatable and he's not breaking the law so far as we know, even though I totally hate what it does.

Other Comments by Summer Seale

18. Comment #113928 by goddogit on January 21, 2008 at 2:48 am

"My" cogressperson is W. Herger (CA), whose staff is probably just civil enough not to reply to my email on this with something along the lines, though they know not the reference to which they would be making, of a certain Mr. W. Allen, describing how, as he was engaged in method-acting exercises in preparation for the part of a character named "God" in a play, he told a man who had annoyed him to "Be fruitful & multiply," although "not in those words."

Mr. Herger is a man I have never met, but seems like the absolutely worst sort of Bush-"Republican" there could be, lacking even the the odd charms of Exterminator Delay or Mr. Wide-Stance.

To be a Republican at this late date is as sure a sign as a swastika, and surer than being a born-again Christian, that whatever a person's better points there is something ugly and un-human about even their most innocuous actions and beliefs.

Other Comments by goddogit

19. Comment #113937 by thirdchimpanzee on January 21, 2008 at 3:28 am

Summer Seale - you forgot to mention the following grounds for impeachment of either Bush or Cheney:

- Lying to Congress regarding WMD
Bush/Cheney deliberately misrepresented the opinions and evidence accumulated by our own experts on Saddam Hussein's intentions and activities. "Misrepresentation" is lying. If you remember the Clinton impeachment, the only basis for the action was Clinton lying about whether he has sex with Lewinski. As the bumper sticker said:
At least whe Clinton lied, nobody died

- Revealing the identity of a CIA agent
This one is a slam dunk - its a felony, and most certainly originated with Karl Rove/Dick Cheney. At the very least, Cheney should be impeached and imprisoned for this. Watching various high level Republican and the righ wing blogosphere trying to play this one down (e.g. "she wasn't really an active agent", or "her cover was already blown") was mind-boggling. The mute reaction of the Democrats was equally revealing - and poor public servant Scooter Libby gets spared even a minute in jail.

- Sanctioning Torture
I only wish the Canadian Government had the balls to keep the US on its list of nations that torture. A staple of World War II movie scenes involving Gestapo torture of resistance fighters was water-boarding. It was assumed the audience would react with expected horror at the scenes. How do we go from that to a prospective Attorney General unable to declare such a technique is torture. The cost of this dalliance with evil has been enormous to America's standing around the world.

There's more but this will do.

Other Comments by thirdchimpanzee

20. Comment #113942 by Summer Seale on January 21, 2008 at 4:03 am

@thirdchimpanzee,

Going to sleep right now so maybe I'll answer in the morning in detail, or maybe not. I'm busy. But:

1) Lying to Congress regarding WMD. Sorry, false. Everyone thought he had WMD. The French thought he had WMD. Blix thought he had WMD. Israel, Russia, Germany - all thought he had WMD. Al Gore gave a speech during the Clinton administration saying that he had WMD. Clinton bombed on the premise that he had WMD. Kerry said during the Clinton years that he had WMD. Biden said that he had WMD. Jordan said that he had WMD.

Saddam himself said that he had WMD.

The last is the most important. If Saddam showed that he didn't have WMD, it wouldn't have happened. He didn't, so it did happen. It's too bad for him. He's dead and gone, and I couldn't be happier about that. Going on about who should be "blamed" for it is really stupid in my opinion. He's dead. Move the fuck on and get on with life already.

2) Revealing the Identity of a CIA Agent: Sorry..it was Colin Powell's Deputy, Armitage, who revealed the identity. There was no malicious intent at all - it was thoroughly investigated. Again..another BS charge with no evidence.

3) Sanctioning Torture: Waterboarding isn't torture. We train our own troops by waterboarding them since years and years and years to show them what hard interrogation is like. If it was torture, we wouldn't be allowed to do it to our own troops to train them. We are allowed, we have been allowed, we do put them through it, so it isn't torture. Plus...I couldn't care less about the people they are waterboarding. We're talking about them waterboarding KSM and Zubaideh. You know, it's too bad they're being waterboarded. If it were up to me, I'd opt for 2 hours in a concrete room with a rubber hose, without cameras. I'd also enjoy throwing acid in their faces for encouraging that particular practice towards unveiled women in their time in the field. They're lucky that they are suffering waterboarding instead of getting a vindictive bitch like me in charge. You're lucky too, because you have less to complain about. Count your blessings.

Other Comments by Summer Seale

21. Comment #113943 by Summer Seale on January 21, 2008 at 4:07 am

Oh and one more thing:

You forgot one last point. For all the propaganda about how Bush should be impeached, remember that the Democrats control congress since 2006. They hate Bush. They really, really, hate Bush. If they had any real grounds for impeaching him, they would do it in a snap. They don't, so they aren't going to. It doesn't matter what you want them to say is reality, it matters what the reality really is. If the enemies of Bush have the power and don't impeach him, it's because they can't.

Other Comments by Summer Seale

22. Comment #113946 by October Mermaid on January 21, 2008 at 4:13 am

Well, I sent the letter to my representative, but who knows what good it will do, considering I didn't edit it. I couldn't think of really any way in which I could do so, but then again, I'm currently half asleep.

I pretty much just decided that sending a non-editted letter like that is better than not sending anything at all.

And most of the Christians I know don't even seem to really care about the historical accuracy of this sort of thing. If you provide any evidence to the contrary, they basically respond with "Well, I don't know, but..." and then go on and basically continue saying the same thing they were saying to begin with.

It reminds me of a bizarre song by a Christian band called FFH which deserves some kind of award for its sheer banality. The chorus literally says, "Well I don't know that much about astronauts... but I know that Jesus cares an awful lot!"

I'm not kidding. I wish I were.

Other Comments by October Mermaid

23. Comment #113956 by Fryslan on January 21, 2008 at 4:47 am

Summer Seale said "If the enemies of Bush have the power and don't impeach him, it's because they can't."
Or it could be that they are doing it for some tactical politcal advantage.

Other Comments by Fryslan

24. Comment #113960 by thirdchimpanzee on January 21, 2008 at 4:54 am

Summer Seale

3) Sanctioning Torture: Waterboarding isn't torture. We train our own troops by waterboarding them since years and years and years to show them what hard interrogation is like. If it was torture, we wouldn't be allowed to do it to our own troops to train them.

The point of this exercise is to prepare airmen or others who may be captured by the other side what kinds of interrogation to expect. While I disagree with him on most political positions, John McCain knows what torture is, and he's unequivocal that waterboarding is torture.

What's more troubling is the ease with which so many Americans - who like to think they're wearing the white hat - can bring themselves to accept barbaric behaviour. We've seen this tragedy many times before in history - unless we rewrite the history of course.

Other Comments by thirdchimpanzee

25. Comment #113984 by babrock on January 21, 2008 at 6:22 am

Sam,in "End of faith",I think, asks where we get off feeling rightous for not tortering our enemys when we have routinly bombed entire neiborhoods, causing pain and destruction orders of magnitude greater. How does the distance from the victim make the bringer of harm less guilty. Not that I am saying at all that I have any at all usefull answer to the dilema other than that conflict is bad.Duh.

Other Comments by babrock

26. Comment #113987 by thirdchimpanzee on January 21, 2008 at 6:40 am

Most cultures seem to acknowledge a moral distance principle where actions at a distance (whether its bombing civilians, or dumping toxins into a river) carry less moral burden than actions taken directly on a person. The distance principle also applies to cultural or tribal "distance", where actions can be countenanced against members of an "out" group that would be unacceptable to members of one's own group.

We see this principle in action in Guantanamo, where one of the "justifications" for the unacceptable treatment of detainees is that they're not American, and therefore not entitled to the same legal protections as American citizens. It seems to escape the logic of most Americans that if you kidnap people from around the world, and hold them in a facility you control, you might actually have an obligation to treat them better than your own citizens. After all, the US has more prisoners in jail for non-violent drug offenses than the entire prison population of Europe. Americans may choose to put up with such treatment of its fellow citizens - but the majority of those prisoners would be free in Europe.

Other Comments by thirdchimpanzee

27. Comment #113989 by soul_biscuit on January 21, 2008 at 6:54 am

I sent the unedited form letter, but then feeling like that was not much good I wrote an original e-mail to my representative, Denny Rehberg in Montana. I hope that does some good. I focused on the history angle a bit more than the form letter did.

Other Comments by soul_biscuit

28. Comment #113990 by SteveN on January 21, 2008 at 6:59 am

Sanctioning Torture: Waterboarding isn't torture. ...

I think that the guy here...

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448717

who tried it on himself would beg to differ.

He says:


So, is it torture?

I'll put it this way. If I had the choice of being waterboarded by a third party or having my fingers smashed one at a time by a sledgehammer, I'd take the fingers, no question.

It's horrible, terrible, inhuman torture. I can hardly imagine worse. I'd prefer permanent damage and disability to experiencing it again. I'd give up anything, say anything, do anything.

The Spanish Inquisition knew this. It was one of their favorite methods.

It's torture. No question. Terrible terrible torture. To experience it and understand it and then do it to another human being is to leave the realm of sanity and humanity forever. No question in my mind.


Cheers


SteveN

Other Comments by SteveN

29. Comment #113995 by Nighttripper on January 21, 2008 at 7:15 am

Plus...I couldn't care less about the people they are waterboarding. We're talking about them waterboarding KSM and Zubaideh. You know, it's too bad they're being waterboarded. If it were up to me, I'd opt for 2 hours in a concrete room with a rubber hose, without cameras. I'd also enjoy throwing acid in their faces for encouraging that particular practice towards unveiled women in their time in the field.

Aaah yes, the US is so good at picking out just the bad guys for torturing. Because if they weren't, Guantanamo Bay would be full of innocent people right?

Other Comments by Nighttripper

30. Comment #113996 by babrock on January 21, 2008 at 7:26 am

On the issue of 'moral distancing principal', aren't you failing to distinguish between actual physical distance and the metaphorical distance btwn the ins and the outs. Or at least bring the two issues way closser than they realy should be. Also I realize that that is a view accepted rather readily but I belive Sams position was to question the rightousness of that view.

Other Comments by babrock

31. Comment #113998 by Shmeezers on January 21, 2008 at 7:29 am

I find it to be a very curious phenomenon how atheists close their minds to the 'religious' nature of their views. The BAD thing about religion is its coercive influence on our ability to think - and not its metaphysical claims. Darwinian evolution makes its own leaps of faith (just read the God Delusion - I think Dawkins takes three leaps), but it claims to distinguish itself from 'religion' because it allows people to think freely. Quite the opposite. By calling believers stupid, and claiming they have a mental illness, atheists are in fact destroying this freedom. The point is that the religious background of the US has given people the prerogative to think as they please. Atheism, at least as it has developed today - as a demeaning, condescending, arrogant diatribe - is the new religion of our day.

Other Comments by Shmeezers

32. Comment #113999 by Steve Zara on January 21, 2008 at 7:36 am

Quite the opposite. By calling believers stupid, and claiming they have a mental illness, atheists are in fact destroying this freedom.

I would be interested if you could come up with a single example of any of the "New Atheists" calling believers stupid or claiming they have a mental illness.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

33. Comment #114001 by babrock on January 21, 2008 at 7:37 am

Off subject somewhat but but in WW2 the allies air campaign caused at least about as much sufferig as meted out by the Germans on us (not including the eastern front) and by the Rusians on the Germans on their march towards Berlin, yet we vilify both and pat ourselves on the back for a job well done. And again let me repreat that I am not claiming to have any overall answer to the question of what is to be done given that one finds oneself in a fucked up siuation like that.

Other Comments by babrock

34. Comment #114007 by thirdchimpanzee on January 21, 2008 at 7:54 am

babrock - I could have been clearer here, but my understanding of how people have been able to inflict misery on others usually requires some form of psychological distancing. I honestly don't think the difference between physical and metaphysical distance is as important as you claim.

The Japanese who ran the notorious biological warfare unit in Manchuria, and performed live experiments on prisoners, referred to them as "logs". They were physically very close to these people, but psychologically they might as well have been from another planet.

I get the same chilling sensation when I hear Americans talk about "perpetrators" or "perps" for short. These are no longer people, and locking them up in solitary confinement for 23 out of 24 hours day causes no psychological discomfort to the society at large. Where the UK could have a comedy series about life in prison ("Porridge") - the US seems to prefer shows like "Oz".

All of this is not to argue that one should accept distance as an excuse for immoral behaviour. I agree with Sam Harris on this. I think dropping nuclear bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima was a war crime, and British/American carpet bombing of Germany could qualify as well (as would the German destruction of numerous European cities by air).

One of the reasons Al Jazeera became so detested in the US was not its editorialising, but simply the fact that they relentlessly showed what it was like on the other end of the bombs being dropped. US TV would gladly show grainy cockpit footage of a missile or bomb being launched, complete with the final scene of a building or vehicle disappearing in a cloud of smoke. What the media didn't want to do is show the same scene on the ground, after the dust had settled.

It was ground-based images of Vietnam that helped turn public sentiment against that war.

Other Comments by thirdchimpanzee

35. Comment #114010 by Shmeezers on January 21, 2008 at 8:01 am

Mr. Zara,

Read The Selfish Gene.

Other Comments by Shmeezers

36. Comment #114034 by BigJohn on January 21, 2008 at 8:59 am

I sent a letter to my Congressman who is one of the sponsors:

Dear Representative Gohmert,

I am writing today to urge you to vote against House Resolution 888, "Affirming the rich spiritual and religious history of our [Nation]."

I am convinced that there are many people in the country and even in Congress who would like to turn this country into a Christian theocracy. They barely even take the trouble to hide it at this point. Aside from being filled with inaccuracies about the Founding Fathers and how they arrived at their ideas for our Constitution, this Resolution is clearly an attempt to establish one religion as the "official" religion of the United States. I am simply aghast that this is even being considered.

I note with disappointment that you voted for H.Res 847, "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith." As an agnostic atheist I do not agree that faith in God is a virtue. And, because you are a representative of the government, I find it incredibly inappropriate for you to express your approval of any one religion, any several religions, or any lack of religion.

I frequently find myself in complete agreement with you, and in general, I am proud to have you as my Representative in Congress. I hope that you will not continue voting in support of un-Constitutional bills such as Resolutions 847 and 888."

I am utterly confident, having brought the matter to your attention, that your detailed knowledge of American history will enable you to recognize that most of the historical claims made in House Resolution 888 are not supported by the historical record. I also trust you'll be as appalled as I am by this bizarre attack on our great nation's historical record. Thus, I'm sure you'll do the right thing and vote against H. Res. 888 should it come to the House floor for a vote.

Here is his response:

Thank you for contacting me regarding our most precious rights. This nation was founded under the divine presence of God and it should remain so. I am pleased to know we have such similar views.

When taking the oath of office, I became committed to serving my constituents, God, and country. There is much work to be done to reform some of our current policies. As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, with oversight in the areas you mentioned, I will be an active voice in Congress and will work to restore those guiding principles that have made us strong.

Ronald Reagan once said, "Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged." It is my prayer that we will turn our eyes upon the God who has so richly blessed our nation.

Once again, thank you for contacting me. I appreciate having the opportunity to serve you in United States House of Representatives.

I guess he didn't read my letter. I wrote back suggesting that he read my email before responding. No reply to that yet.

Other Comments by BigJohn

37. Comment #114066 by October Mermaid on January 21, 2008 at 9:57 am

Wow, BigJohn, that's horrible! I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Other Comments by October Mermaid

38. Comment #114076 by chinaski on January 21, 2008 at 10:23 am

goddammit.

Other Comments by chinaski

39. Comment #114088 by Lordsuhn on January 21, 2008 at 10:53 am

unfortunately my Rep recently passed away, and her replacement has yet to be chosen, so I may not have any influence on this on - but I went to the page and filled it out to show my support!

Other Comments by Lordsuhn

40. Comment #114089 by quill on January 21, 2008 at 10:55 am

Oh thank the spaghetti monster, no one from my state sponsored that thing.

We may be #13 in murder rate, but we're #1 in common decency.

Other Comments by quill

41. Comment #114090 by Geoff on January 21, 2008 at 10:59 am

Comment #114010 by Shmeezers on January 21, 2008 at 8:01 am

Mr. Zara,

Read The Selfish Gene.

I have read TSG many times, both the 1976 and 1989 editions (as I'm sure Steve has), and I fail to remember any such quote. Can you be more precise?

In fact, the book has very little to say about faith, except in the "memes" chapter.

Deluded, misinformed, brainwashed, certainly, but none of these indicate either stupidity or mental illness.

Other Comments by Geoff

42. Comment #114113 by mikecbraun on January 21, 2008 at 11:41 am

The ability to be brainwashed, deluded and misinformed and the inability to realize you are brainwashed, deluded and misinformed, to me, may very well indicate stupidity and/or mental illness. Let's take an example: Person A has evidence and reasoning on his/her side in an argument about the origin(s) of life, and waits for good evidence to further accumulate in order to formulate or revise any claims he/she may make. Person B has superstition, an old book, and a stubborn will to ignore or suppress the truth, while all the while claiming he/she "knows" the truth due to the aforementioned book. Person B most likely is very stupid, or has a mental illness that leads them to have delusions of grandeur, or maybe they hear voices talking to them from beyond the grave. Maybe they see visions of the Messiah in the char pattern on the bread of their cheese sandwich. At the very least, they are very stupid when it comes to the topic they are discussing in this example, because they are willingly denying evidence that's right in front of their eyes. The religious in general are scientific dolts and retards of reason. If they aren't plain dumb, they're usually just shit-scared of what they really know deep-down to be the truth: You only get this life, and then, as Porky Pig says, "ba-de-ba-de-ba-de...that's all folks!"

Other Comments by mikecbraun

43. Comment #114136 by dbunker on January 21, 2008 at 12:31 pm

Sent my congressman an e-mail last week on behalf of the humanist group in my part of the USA and the response was not encouraging. I honestly don't think he knew what the big deal was. After all he said he supports the right of people to worship in any religion they choose.
Really is scary when our elected reps are so ignorant of the principles on which our country was founded.

Other Comments by dbunker

44. Comment #114153 by quill on January 21, 2008 at 1:03 pm

dbunker, you probably shouldn't send letters like that on behalf of humanist or atheist groups, or even on the basis that you are an atheist yourself. If politicians think that only atheists are objecting to this, then they're not likely to care. They might even become motivated more strongly in favor of it.

The letter I wrote did not mention atheists. All it did was say that this was historically inaccurate and representative of a growing movement to inject religion into politics. I did point out that 31% of Americans are not Christian, but I didn't say that I was myself an atheist.

Other Comments by quill

45. Comment #114158 by mikecbraun on January 21, 2008 at 1:11 pm

I know people could be tired of the endless 1984 comparisons, but... revisionist history, perpetual war, the Ministry of Love (evangelicals) who preach hate... Forget about that Nostradamus guy, Orwell was actually spot on. We even have our version of Victory Gin here in the U.S.--it's called Bud Light (or insert any major brewery "beer" name here).

Other Comments by mikecbraun

46. Comment #114161 by Jayday on January 21, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Lycocid We are patriots and have no plans to leave the USA. We have been voting, joined political action groups, and avidly writing our representatives, but we are sadly STILL saddled with moving into "the dark ages." The tide is heavy.

(Sorry for the weird layout of each paragraph. It is the way my program copied into this blog.)

Summer seal and thirdchipanzee: Interesting dialogue.


Summer seal,

No doubt that at different times in the past 10 years that the US and many other
countries thought Saddam has WMD. I think it would be important to identify
exactly the type of weapons referred to at any given time in that overall
timeline. Biological, nuclear, rockets, and which fit into the timeline?
Remember back that the UN Inspectors couldn't find any WMDs and that there was
evidence prior to the invasion in Iraq that any programs had been dismantled.

Political leaders "Posture" all the time. I doubt Bush actually made the
decision to attack Iraq "because" Saddam said he had WMDs. The North Vietnamese
said they have a nuclear program, and there is actual evidence that it is such.
There was big posturing going on, but Bush didn't attack them. Their leader
kills Vietnamese citizens brutally, as Saddam did the Kurds. He is a bad guy
too. So, why did Bush choose Saddam over North Vietnam to attack? It is clear
that Bush disregarded intelligence information just prior to the attack on Iraq
and went ahead with the attack anyway. In fact, there is evidence to support
that Bush had plans to go after Saddam prior to 9/11. Bush had other motives for the attack that had nothing to do with WMD, one was to gain control of oil
production. If you recall, Afganistan was strategic because Bush/Cheney wanted
to build an oil pipeline through it. Bush didn't manage to get Bin Laden, he
even later said it was of no consequence! And, the Taliban are making a
comeback. Saddam was a bad guy and I am glad he is gone, however he could have
been "contained" in other ways than blowing the entire country of Iraq apart and
killing thousands of innocent people.

I supported Bush's decision to go to Afghanistan, thinking he was going after
Bin Laden who masterminded the 9/11 attacks. This was the correct response to
the attacks on the US. Anything else was totally senseless. It would be like
the Germans deciding to attack the British because the Finnish had bombed
Munich! Totally without sense and reason. But Bush lied about his motives and
didn't do what he said he would do. Betrayal would be the accurate word.

As for "moving on" about it (WMD). That is just what Bush would want isn't it?
Let's just forget the blunder and lie that was used to sell getting us into
Iraq. Let's confuse the public with disinformation. It is a way to re-write
history, WHICH IS THE IDEA AT THE CENTER OF THIS ARTICLE HERE, and why I am
passionate about responding. I am interested in the truth. It isn't a matter of
"liking" it or not. Bush's attack of Iraq became a turning point in US history
and maybe even the world. Preemptive strike policy. Not likely I will forget
that. I am ashamed of him and the leadership he represents. Saddam was a bad man
but he DID NOT mastermind the 9/11 attacks. Bush and Cheney have tried to
re-write history about this fact many many times in the press, and I won't let
it go. JUST AS THIS HR888 IS TRYING TO BUILD A WEDGE, A PATHWAY TO RE-WRITE
HISTORY IN TERMS OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF CHURCH AND STATE HERE IN AMERICA. I
hope we don't forget the terrible mistake this country has made in the middle
east. Remember, and learn not to repeat it.

As for revealing the identity of the CIA agent. Armitage was only one leak,
there were several And, no one is sure who orchestrated it. Cheney refused to
cooperate and the investigators in the Scooter Libby trial didn't get far
because so many were lying. Libby was the only one they could get proof about
objectively. Libby got convicted but his friend Bush got him out of jail time if
I recall. How convenient.

I can't comment about waterboarding practices other than to say that it serves
this administration's goals to use barbaric behavior. Absolute power corrupts
absolutely. They believe they are above reproach. After all, "God" is on their
side. Remember, George believes he has a line to God about this "crusade." Those
imprisoned in Guantanamo just point to the fact that the "terrorists" are not an
identified army from an identified country we are at war with. George Bush
rallies the country behind the banner of his crusade for the "War on Terror."
There IS no "War on Terror," Terror is a psychological mindset. It isn't a war
with a defined country and army. Bush has managed to highjack the term, use
"fear" tactics to manipulate the American public, and he uses the press to do
so. He reaps confusion, and it sells well in the news. Yes we were brutally
attacked, but not by a particular country. Bush hasn't managed to get Bin Laden
and doesn't seem to care about going after who masterminded the 9/11 attacks.
Bush has not focused our military on dismantling the terrorist cells. He has
diffused our military resources, stirred more conflict ,and inspired more people
to join in the terrorist activities, and made his friends very wealthy in the
process. War makes money for those in the position to gain profit for the goods
and services needed to support it. No, I don't like it. He lies, and can't be
trusted. Look at his actions, not his words. Not one shred of integrity.
Delusional, or just crazy like a fox?

You are quite correct in that there has been a slim Democratic lead in our
congress since 2006. And we still haven't been able to change the course of this
ship. This had added to my GREAT frustration with elected officials. I continue
to write them to communicate my disagreement about it. I am not defending
either party here. The Democrats are not doing much better than their
congressional predecessors. There are many theories about why this is so:

1. A tactic to gain control of the Whitehouse and a larger margin of control in
congress in 2008. Let the Republicans hang themselves in the up coming election.

2. The Democrats are afraid of even opening a serious investigation into
impeachment because they are afraid that the public will think they are "flip
floppers" and "unpatriotic" that would lead to "not supporting the troups."
They are fearful of backlash. Part of this ties in with religious belief and not
being on "God's" side. If you don't believe in God, you don't have good
"values." Remember, the Bush media machine is very good at stirring up
emotions. Combining patriotism with "God's army." A strong emotional message
that lacks reasonable thinking. A way to rally the country behind them. I find
this frightening and insulting.

George Lakoff has written two interesting books about how the Democrats and
Republicans define their values from very different perspectives. According to
Lakoff, the Republican view is strongly based on the "Father Figure," and
modeled from the Abrahamic faiths. Interesting reads from Lakoff: "Thinking
Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision" and "Don't think of An
Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate." Lakoff's point is that the
Republican think tanks have consciously highjacked the language and "reframed"
the original meaning and public discourse about liberal and progressive values
using metaphors that tap into the way we associate ideas and concepts that are
emotionally charged.

3. The Democratic leaders are just as corrupt and in the pockets of special
interest lobbyists as those across the political aisle. Corruption is an ugly
reality. No party is immune.

4.The Democrats have been handed a huge mess, that no one knows how to get out
of easily or cleanly. The fact is, there is no way to "save face." Bush has made
a humongous mess that will affect world relations for decades. Who ever manages
to win in 2008 is going to have their hands full of s**it no matter what because
of Bush's actions.

And finally, Bush is even a poor Christian. He courts the formidable religious
right that helped him get into office, holds a prayer meeting with his staff
each morning to pray for guidance before starting work, and then proceeds to
develop policies that end in property destruction, maiming, and death of
thousands of innocent people while filling the pockets of his buddies. The
ultimate wallow in hypocrisy. Whatever happen to "the golden rule,' or Jesus'
throwing the money changers out of the temple? Oh my my.....sigh

It is critical for the future of our country and its impact on the world, to
maintain a clear line between church and state. Stop the forward march to build
a permanent theocracy that we appear to be headed for.

Jayday

Other Comments by Jayday

47. Comment #114163 by Radesq on January 21, 2008 at 1:22 pm

I would love to agree with your post in 43 mikecbraun -- I tend to "feel" the same way. But the evidence says otherwise. A majority of people in the USA are believers to one extent or another and they lead relatively normal and successful lives. Many go to college, run businesses, serve in the military and in the government, etc. These are not (at least not all) stupid people. They have this area of belief where they shut off the critical thinking parts of their brains to avoid the CD that necessarily flows from holding faerie stories to be true. That's why (I think) the book is called the God delusion not the God stupidity. Certainly there are others here who can correct me if I've gotten that wrong.

Other Comments by Radesq

48. Comment #114171 by mikecbraun on January 21, 2008 at 1:37 pm

Leading a normal and successful life is surely not concrete evidence that one is not stupid. People who drive cars around in circles can earn millions of dollars, as can those who take their clothing off in front of strangers. One need not be a genius to perform these activities. I knew several college students who were absolute dopes because of the pot they smoked. Also, many were just plain dumb and had to drop out. Our president is a straight-C student, and that was with intimidated teachers on the prestigious Barbara Bush scholarship (not mine--that one is the Daily Show's). My take on the military--one would have to be insane or stupid to sign up for that mess. I'd defend my country were it to be attacked, but signing up to destroy other peoples' stuff for no apparent reason signals something is wrong. There just seem to be many, many people who are idiots in several subjects, and they seem to be replicating like prokaryotes. Sorry for using the word 'feel', as I know that it has suspect connotations nowadays. Let me rephrase and be unequivocal: There have been studies showing that there is a negative relationship between religiosity and intelligence. Look them up--I find them to be fairly good evidence that religious people are more often than not idiots. Granted, there are a lot who aren't, but these are the ones who will follow the rest of the lemmings over the cliff, and/or who are so shit-scared of life that they need the fairy-tale with the happy ending. These could be described as the more a la carte religious people. They would probably drop it like a bad habit if they were faced with the necessity to do so. I'm talking about the fervent believers here. Every one of them I've encountered seems to be either stupid or mentally deranged.

Other Comments by mikecbraun

49. Comment #114172 by Summer Seale on January 21, 2008 at 1:38 pm

RE: Waterboarding

Sorry, I still don't care. I really don't. People have argued this before with me, over years now...and I don't care. I don't. I simply...couldn't care less. I have better things to do than to worry if the likes of KSM are getting their asses handed to them by the CIA. Really...couldn't care less. I lose way more sleep thinking about good people around me having a hard time in the economy, or people getting hit by accident crossing the street, than I do worrying about if we torture KSM or not.

Actually, I tell a lie: I do care. I do want him to be tortured. I want it, I applaud it, and I cheer it on. You probably hate me for it, and that makes me happy as well. I want the enemy to hate me. I'm an atheist who really...applauds the incredible suffering we bring upon the Islamists. In fact, you may think that George Bush is a bloody murderer, but he's a teddy bear. I wish Dick Cheney was in power. I wish he was in power, giving the power to the CIA to eviscerate certain people in a very slow fashion with a very rusty and dull knife. Then you can talk to me about torture, and then the argument to me will only be whether or not it is applicable in that level of cruelty on the basis of making their screams last longer or not for my enjoyment. Other than that, I laugh at their pain. I really do. I laugh...the same way they laugh...when they hurt people. You'll think me insane for saying it, you'll think me a fascist, but that doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is winning against them, and making them bleed so much that they forsake their god forever. That's what matters to me. Your platitudes, your pieces of paper, your laws and regulations at the EU and in the UN do nothing to stop these maniacal bastards from having their way with you. Nothing. You sit there and support...nothing. That's fine - your right. You have every right to do so. I have the right to support my own vehemently insane George Pattons who made the enemy fear him more than they feared their own defeat. That is the goal of war, and you're really...really...stupid to forget it.

Want to know how we won World War II? We tortured people to death. Not in torture chambers, mind you, but by bombing the living hell out of them. We bombed Berlin until people there saw the rubble bounce over and over again. That's torture. That's what gave us victory over Germany. Sucks to be them. That's war.

Japan? We tortured people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki with a nuclear bomb each. Extreme? No, it wasn't extreme. It was what was necessary to win the war. In fact, it was almost not enough, because even after those bombs had dropped, some commanders rebelled to try to stop the Emperor from raising the white flag. Two nuclear bombs, and it was barely enough. And that's torture. That's torture far worse than waterboarding, what we did to those people. And it was barely enough.

So torturing KSM? Cry me a river. I say we do to him what we did to Hiroshima. Watch his skin peel slowly off his body. That's what he wanted to do to us, and we should give it back to him in kind. Same with Zubaideh. Fuck'em and let them rot.

P.S. Argue all you like. Really. You'll never, ever, ever get me to concede that this is a bad idea. Never. You'll never, ever win me over. Agree to disagree if you like. But you'll never, ever, win me over to your side. I've seen too much to care about them. Maybe you haven't. I have. I have a bone to pick, and I'll pick it until I bloody die.

Other Comments by Summer Seale

50. Comment #114173 by arthursanford on January 21, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Just remember that every time the parties of God have a success they are then thoroughly debunked. Remember Scopes? Most Americans find creationism to be ridiculuous, particularly here in the Pacific Northwest, arguably the most secular part of the country.

If this bill makes it into law it will be another demise for the parties of god.

Other Comments by arthursanford