posted on November 4, 2004 12:59:52 PM new
So, the big story of the election is how public concern over "moral issues" gave George Bush the decisive edge over John Kerry.
In most of the coverage, however, we never hear articulated exactly what these "moral issues" are, what distinguishes them from plain old issues and why it's taken as a given that conservatives are more "moral" than liberals and progressives.
The term seems to encompass opposition to gay marriage rejected by a majority of voters in 11 out of 11 referendums and so-called "partial-birth" abortion, along with support for an increased role for religion in the public sphere.
It doesn't so much disturb me that I may be hold a minority viewpoint on all three of these questions, but that pollsters and pundits so readily employ terminology that assumes the idea that the above are the more "moral" positions.
To use the word "moral" so narrowly yet so casually is to yield vast territory in the culture wars before the first rhetorical shot is fired.
I won't do it.
I refuse to concede the idea that the person who wants to amend the Constitution to prevent a loving, consenting same-sex couple from creating a legally recognized bond containing all the rights and responsibilities of marriage has higher "moral values" than the person who doesn't.
I refuse to concede that the person who believes it's his right to interpose his beliefs about right and wrong into the often painful and very difficult decisions made by pregnant women and their doctors has higher "moral values" than the person who doesn't.
I refuse to concede that the person who wants the government to endorse one particular belief about the supernatural over another has higher "moral values" than the person who thinks it's none of government's business to take sides on matters of faith.
There's more.
I refuse to concede that a person has higher "moral values" if he believes in God.
I refuse to concede that a person has higher "moral values" because he strives to restrict free expression of political and artistic ideas that may offend others.
I refuse to concede that a person has higher "moral values" because he subscribes to the errant notion that "abstinence-only" is the best way to teach teenagers about sex.
I refuse to concede that a person has higher "moral values" because he believes in diverting public education money into voucher programs that would end up using tax dollars to fund parochial schools.
I refuse to concede that a person has higher "moral values" because he favors capital punishment and opposes medical marijuana and fetal stem-cell research.
In short, I refuse to concede that true "moral values" are inherent in the entire grab-bag of conservative causes, notions, paranoias and fantasies to which we have attached both that label and the equally abused and co-opted term "family values."
Morality right and wrong is bigger than that.
U.S. Sen.-elect Barack Obama made that point in his second debate with challenger Alan Keyes, who made incessant, hectoring attempts to claim the moral high ground:
Well, I think there's something immoral about somebody who's lost their job after 20 years, has no health care, are seeing their pension threatened.
I think there's something immoral about young people who've got the grades and the drive to go to college, but just don't have the money.
It's at this level that Democrats/liberals/progressives need to start trying to bridge the "moral values" gap into which John Kerry evidently fell Tuesday.
Yes, morality is important.
But it's obscene to apply the term to something as ultimately harmless as the legal status conferred upon a gay couple and not apply it to, oh, say, the idea of waging a pre-emptive war based on an ill-supported conjecture or giving huge tax breaks to the richest Americans while cutting funding for education and after-school programs.
The left should eagerly embrace the term "moral values" and join the debate.
War is a moral issue.
Tax policy is a moral issue.
Workers' rights is a moral issue.
The environment is a moral issue.
The preservation of civil liberties is a moral issue.
Until we make that case, we'll continue to lose national elections.
We voted George Bush to be President,not Preacher of the Free World.
There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on November 4, 2004 01:36:18 PM new
I just read about Bush's plan for the next four years. This whole push for "moral values" sounds like Bush is going to turn American into a religious state. I am tired of having some elses religious values pushed down my throat. The next four years under Dictator Bush will not be pleasant.
It is time for America to wake up and understand what the 1st amendment says about religion:
In 1802, President Jefferson wrote a letter to a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut, in which he declared that it was the purpose of the First Amendment to build ''a wall of separation between Church and State.'' 15 In Reynolds v. United States, 16 Chief Justice Waite for the Court characterized the phrase as ''almost an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment.'' In its first encounters with religion-based challenges to state programs, the Court looked to Jefferson's metaphor for substantial guidance. 17 But a metaphor may obscure as well as illuminate, and the Court soon began to emphasize neutrality and voluntarism as the standard of restraint on governmental action. 18 The concept of neutrality itself is ''a coat of many colors,'' 19 and three standards that could be stated in objective fashion emerged as tests of Establishment Clause validity. The first two standards were part of the same formulation. ''The test may be stated as follows: what are the purpose and the primary effect of the enactment? If either is the advancement or inhibition of religion then the enactment exceeds the scope of legislative power as circumscribed by the Constitution. That is to say that to withstand the strictures of the Establishment Clause there must be a secular legislative purpose and a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion.'' 20 The third test is whether the governmental program results in ''an excessive government entanglement with religion. The test is inescapably one of degree . . . [T]he questions are whether the involvement is excessive, and whether it is a continuing one calling for official and continuing surveillance leading to an impermissible degree of entanglement.'' 21 In 1971 these three tests were combined and restated in Chief Justice Burger's opinion for the Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 22 and are frequently referred to by reference to that case name.
There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on November 4, 2004 06:14:18 PM new
The way I interpret it means there is a separation of Church and state. The government should take a neutral stance in terms of religion. The governement should not aid (promote) one religion over another.
The link I provided will give a better background on the actual wording and meaning.
There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on November 4, 2004 07:09:06 PM new
I don't know why you keep equating "moral issues" and religion. If NJ would have had the marriage referendum on the slate, everyone I know would have voting against it and not a single one has seen a bible in years.
posted on November 4, 2004 08:26:54 PM new
I think that point that he is trying to make is that many people, not all, but many who have fundamental religious beliefs consider themselves to be "moral". This of course would include the pedophile priest that rape young boys, and the congregation who almost always in disbelief support them.
I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a puritanical society. This is 2004, not 1604. I plan to support Democrats and their efforts. I also plan to join the ACLU and other such organizations.
posted on November 4, 2004 08:36:10 PM new
Then tell me why John Kerry was making a political speech from a pulpit in a black church. Is this separation of church and state?
posted on November 4, 2004 09:02:10 PM new
That's what I wonder.
Someone wrote a "letter ot the editor" letter in the Dayton Daily news the other day. They wanted to know why a church that hosted a big Sean Hannity rally here in Dayton didn't get it's tax exempt status revoked. He seemed to conveniently forget that Kerry visited and gave a speech from a black church here on Sunday.
If Kerry or Hannity want to go to local churches and pray that's fine. If they make political speeches, that's NOT fine.
And yes, I'm one of those who thinks MORALS=BELIEF in something, not necessarily just Christianity. I do not believe it is possible for an atheist to have MORALS. That's not to say that there are no prefectly nice and good atheists out there. However, atheists may believe in civil responsibility and the golden rule, but morality is more than that.
I'm not going to get into a gay/anti-gay discussion here, but that is a perfectly good example. Some people believe it's OK and others believe it is wrong. It is religiously immoral, but it doesn't hurt anyone, so it's socially acceptible.
Social Acceptance does not equal morality.
Morality comes from (insert supreme being name here).
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
[ edited by replaymedia on Nov 4, 2004 09:03 PM ]
John Kerry was visiting a Black church. He wasn't trying to make legislation from the church, or trying to make that church's view of religion the official position of the US. There is a difference.
What Bush does is collectively pander to them in hopes of getting them to vote for them. Since many of the religious fundamentalist are republicans, he courts them. I believe in the republican party they call it "energizing the base". He knew that if he would tell them what they wanted to hear, then they would vote for him.
posted on November 4, 2004 10:23:48 PM new
Yeager, how do you know that for sure. First if he wanted to meet with the black voters he could have done it in the basement of the church, which would have been proper, or in a meeting place in the town or city.
Why did they show him standing by the pulpit* with the congregation sitting in the pews and he was holding a microphone. What was he giving a speech about his agenda or the word of God? Either one would be inappropriate.
*In case you don't know what a pulpit is, it is the place where the Minister or Priest stand during their church service.
In case you didn't notice Kerry tries to pander to the people he was talking to. In Wisconsin it was the Packers and Badgers fans, In Boston it was to the Red Sox Fans.
Also, you forgot the time(s) that Bush paid a nice visit to the pope. Why was that I wonder? Could it be the pope was discussing military strategies with Bush? Or was he making a deal for oil exportation from Vatican City? Was he selling jet fighters to the pope? Or was he courting the cathlicks so they would feel "comfy" with him?
posted on November 4, 2004 10:37:41 PM new
No I didn't forget it. Remember George Bush was President at the time and the Pope does visit with the leaders of nations.
I know this is late but here is a campaign speech by kerry from Florida.
MIAMI Oct 10, 2004 With just three Sundays left before Election Day, Sen. John Kerry is asking for all the help he can get from black voters and the Almighty.
The Democratic presidential nominee attended two church services Sunday, instead of his usual one, worshipping first with Haitian Catholics and then with Baptists, where the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton tied his election to the civil rights struggle.
"We have an unfinished march in this nation," Kerry said at Friendship Missionary Baptist Church, as many congregants waved fans handed out by the campaign with his slogan, "Hope is on the way."
"Never again will a million African Americans be denied the right to exercise their vote in the United States of America," Kerry promised, referring to the disputed Florida recount in the 2000 presidential race. As he often does before black audiences, Kerry said he has a legal team that will aggressively respond to any allegations of disenfranchisement.
Bush Outlines Agenda for Second Term
The Note: The Permanent Campaign
Bush Pledges to Change Social Security
Black turnout is key to Kerry's plan for victory in Florida and elsewhere less than 10 percent of black voters nationally supported George W. Bush in 2000. But Kerry's campaign says there have been efforts to turn religious blacks against him based on his support for abortion rights and civil unions for same-sex couples.
Jackson told worshippers their political concerns are issues that touch their everyday lives, not gay marriage.
"I see disturbing signs today that some of our churches have been confused by wolves in sheep's clothing," Jackson said. "How did someone else put their agenda in the front of the line?"
"November 2, the power is in your hands, hands that once picked cotton," Jackson said.
Added Sharpton: "Everything we have fought for, marched for, gone to jail for some died for could be reversed if the wrong people are put on the Supreme Court."
Speakers avoided criticizing President Bush by name, since they were in church, but he was indirectly vilified.
Former Rep. Carrie Meek said Kerry is "fighting against liars and demons. He challenges the man who walks with a jaunty step." She rocked her hips in an imitation of Bush's swagger as the congregation cheered and Kerry laughed from his high-backed seat behind the pulpit.
Bush did not campaign on Sunday, instead spending the day at his Texas ranch riding his bike, working around the property and engaging in informal preparations for the campaign's final debate. Vice President Dick Cheney also stayed off the campaign trail, while Kerry running mate John Edwards appeared on the five Sunday talk shows before heading to the Midwest.
In Washington, Republican Party chief Ed Gillespie criticized Kerry for saying in an interview in The New York Times Magazine that, "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance."
"This demonstrates a disconcerting pre-September 11 mind-set that will not make our country safer," Gillespie said on "Face the Nation" on CBS. "And that is what we see relative to winning the war on terror and relative to Iraq."
Hours later, Bush's re-election campaign announced a new television ad that plays off of Kerry's interview comment. "Terrorism a nuisance? How can Kerry protect us when he doesn't understand the threat?" the ad says. The campaign said the ad would run on national cable television networks and the campaign's Web site.
In Florida, Kerry, who is Catholic, also attended Mass at St. James Catholic Church. Aides said it was for his own personal worship rather than for any campaigning and that Kerry plans to fit in Catholic mass every Sunday through election day.
As Kerry told a teenager who asked him Saturday night if he can get rid of standardized tests, "You do a lot more praying during exams than any other time of the year."
I am fully aware of what a pulpit is. It's actually a platform that is elevated. A lectern could be also be considered a pulpit. Rabbis also use them, not only ministers or priests.
Kerry visited the Black church on Sunday. This is when the people who attend that church meet to worship their god. If it was his goal to meet with them, then it would only make any sense to do it when they are gathered. Very often when a church has an guest of any importance, he/she is usually asked to address the congregation. This is commonly done while standing at the pulpit. They don't say after the service, let's chat out in the parking lot. Did that church have a basement anyway? Some don't.
As far as Kerry pandering to the Wisconsin fans, Bush did the same thing here in Michigan when he said Michigan grows the very best cherries, of course when visiting Traverse City, home of Michigan cherries. They all do it.
posted on November 4, 2004 11:42:29 PM new
Did your candidate try and put his moral values on us? What was the reason he tried to get the black vote preaching from their church. Now don't tell me the blacks are so poor they don't have a meeting place other than a church.
Anyway the election is over. The citizens of the US have spoken. Thank goodness Pres Bush was elected for many reasons as I am not going to state because I am not going to get into a long debate over this. Nov. 2 has passed, it is time to move on.
posted on November 4, 2004 11:59:13 PM new
Replay says, " I do not believe it is possible for an atheist to have MORALS. That's not to say that there are no prefectly nice and good atheists out there. However, atheists may believe in civil responsibility and the golden rule, but morality is more than that. "
Replay I'm sorry, dear , but you're talking out of both sides of your mouth....you say atheists can be good, nice, believe in civil responsibility and the Golden Rule and we're STILL not moral according to you?????
I get the idea that you think a person has to believe in god to be moral?
You mean like the priests who rape children are more moral than I am, I, who wouldn't harm a child if my life was threatened?????
Is THAT why people are so shocked when they find out I'm an atheist. They first know me as a law abiding, considerate , friendly, helpful, loyal, hard working person who minds her own business..., just a normal everyday person and then WHAMMY, they find out I can be all those things and NOT believe in god.....no wonder they're shocked.
Unfortunately, there are lots of people who mis-think like you do Replay. You have that smug certainty, just like the rapist priests, that YOU believe in god, therefore you're special and anything YOU do is moral......
posted on November 5, 2004 04:50:52 AM new
And Yeager, the Pope is a head of state. The Vatican is a country just like all the others. The Pope however, is a lot more influential than say, the leader of Estonia.
Considering the differences between Catholics and Protestants, I have strong doubts that Bush cares one way or the other about the Popes religious views. The visit was partly for show and partly for political reasons.
Ah crow, you seem fixated on rapist priests just like twelve and his gays. Were YOU ever a rapist priest? Sorry. I couldn't resist that shot!
But yes, if you leave out the part about the rapist priests, then your last post is spot-on.
People are amazed to see good atheists, because it's generally a contradiction in terms.
Being good and being moral are not equivalent. An atheist can be law abiding, kind, and an all-around great person, but cannot be moral, since an atheist has no morals.
Now don't go and show me the definition of "morals", cause I just looked it up and it makes no reference to religion. But we were discussing all those people in the exit polls, who didn't look it up. This is the opinion of most people.
I know YOU disagree, but that still doesn't mean MOST people believe it.
posted on November 5, 2004 05:01:59 AM new
LOL ACLU, what joke... no one really likes them...
Liberal democrats just refuse to see that people are sick and tired of their "everything you do is ok" shtick...
The country has been moving right for years and those on the left have been moving farther left... so much for their rhetoric of coming together... it was pure BS...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Bigotry and prejudice -- these are assertions, not arguments. This is name-calling, not case-building.
posted on November 5, 2004 06:46:42 AM newThen tell me why John Kerry was making a political speech from a pulpit in a black church. Is this separation of church and state?
For the same reason why Bush did it.
There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on November 5, 2004 06:50:48 AM newHowever, atheists may believe in civil responsibility and the golden rule, but morality is more than that.
So I suppose it is only the atheists that go around killing and raping people or having abortions?
How is killing an unborn child morally acceptable in this country especially when it is done by a Southern Baptist or a Catholic?
There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on November 5, 2004 07:22:29 AM new
replay you must be very religious, and of course very moral but I have never encountered anyone with less reasoning ability.
Edited to add: Since you have the same lack of education as some other neonazicons on this board:
Webster's (that's a dictionary, Replay) defines "moral" as , "relating to, dealing with, or capable of making the distinction between, right and wrong in conduct. Good or right in conduct or character."
So you consider priests who rape as moral because they believe in god.
No wonder you're a Republican.
[ edited by crowfarm on Nov 5, 2004 09:15 AM ]
posted on November 5, 2004 01:18:26 PM new
" Since you have the same lack of education"
At least I can read the posts I am responding to. I clearly said I had just looked up morality and it said nothing about religion. I never said morality had anything to do with religion. I said MOST AMERICANS believe that. I I still think that statement is 100% correct.
I said you cannot have morals without believing in God (or something like God). I did not say believing in God makes you a moral person. One is a requirement for the other, they are not equivalent.
"So I suppose it is only the atheists that go around killing and raping people or having abortions? How is killing an unborn child morally acceptable in this country especially when it is done by a Southern Baptist or a Catholic"
I don't remember saying anything even remotely like that, so why should i respond to your made up non-sequitur?
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on November 5, 2004 02:30:54 PM new
Replay, please excuse my confusion but you post so many differing staetments like:
"I do not believe it is possible for an atheist to have MORALS. "
""Ethics, Morality and Social Policy are not dependent on religion."
"I never said morality had anything to do with religion"
"An atheist can be law abiding, kind, and an all-around great person, but cannot be moral, since an atheist has no morals."
WAIT!!!! I GET IT....
you think an atheist is a person who studies athes!!!!!! Oh, no , Replay, dear, an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, person who is not religious !!!
posted on November 5, 2004 03:04:53 PM new
Thanks, maggie, I accept your nomination!
I shall win, too!
I will lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie.........over half the people in this country love being duped and made fools of so with more lying ...I'm a shoo-in!
What position (don't be dirty) would you care to hold in my new cabinet.
There's :
1.Master Torturer (previously known as Secretary of Defense).
2.The War Non-Planner.
3.Administration Spokesperson: "What They Want To Hear and Nothing Else".
4.The CIA Outing Committee Chair.
5.The Secretary of "What Country Can We Borrow More Money From...Saudi Arabia is Tapped Out and China Owns Most of America Now"
6.Secretary of Giving The Wealthy Another Huge Tax Break....(you may not want this one....verrry busy !)
7.Secretary of Lucrative Contracts for Corporations with Off-shore Addresses so They Don't Pay Any Income Tax (another BUSY one!)
8. Commisioner to Save the Planet by Eliminating Pollution Controls of Any Kind (Supports the "Clean Air That Can Kill Ya Act"
9.OR, and here's the really busy , stressful one.....Secretary of Planning bush's Vacations.
posted on November 5, 2004 03:24:19 PM new
LOL...I want to be head of the Bend over and kiss my Azz or Social Reform Program ...
I want to be the one to tell all our Loser Seniors that I'm doing away with their Welfare...aka...Social Security and fine them big time when I trace them crossing the boarder into Canada to buy their meds..oh yes.. and I want to be in charge of rounding up all those homos and shipping them off to their own private island... and then last but not least..I'll shut down those stupid right to choose groups along with the loose women's clinics for abortions and nip the stem cell research and all that other voodoo in the bud, while I'm at it.. I figure I'm the best person for this position, because I am God Fearing, white, straight and moral.. Maggie
