Friendly Atheist

Yep, crazy. She acknowledges possibly voting against her interests and her response is “god will take care of us.” Wouldn’t voting for her own interests be a more direct route than relying on prayer? Her body language is also disturbing. She’s constantly rocking and moving around and making strange faces while answering questions. She appears to be hiding something, and if shes outright saying she won’t vote for Obama because of her possibly erroneous belief that he is not a Christian, I have to wonder what else she is hiding.

Yes, it’s disturbing but it’s also typical of what many Americans think. I hear this every day at work (I live in the Deep South USA) and I wonder how our society is going to function if we continue this anti-science, anti-reason trend.

Here are some of those great catholic values circulating in CT in the wake of our Supreme Court decision on gay marriage – touting voting for a Constitutional Convention in CT:

Subject: Massive Chain E-Mail_Vote YES to Question 1 on Nov. 4th Election ballot in just a few weeks.

Dear Citizen of Connecticut,

The recent 4-3, non-democratic CT Supreme Court decision legalized same-sex ‘marriage’ in our state by bypassing the will of the people in CT. By voting ‘YES’ to question 1, on the November 4th election ballot, you are telling the CT state legislature that the CT supreme court does not speak for you as a citizen, and that the vote should be taken to ALL of the people of CT to decide what defines Marriage in our state. (Conversely, by voting NO, you are denying yourself, and CT citizens, the right to vote on this very important issue of what defines a Marriage).

It’s important to note, that if we fail to Reverse this CT supreme court decision on Nov. 4th, by not getting the word out to enough people (who merely think this is only about ‘tolerance’), several things will happen in CT soon (as have already been seen in the states of MA and CA, where same-sex ‘marriage’ is already legal):
1. The sacred institution of Marriage (created and defined by God in Genesis 2:24) will permanently be re-defined for the FIRST time in human history. This will not only change the very definition of what constitutes a family in our schools, but it will also open the slippery slope door for: poligamous marriage, transexual marriage, incestual union marriage, etc, etc. If you re-define the family, you will destroy the family as we know it today (and throughout history).
2. Loss of parental rights, to prevent your children from being taught the same-sex marriage/lifestyle as ‘normal’, right along with traditional marriage, from Kindergarten on up. This has already happened in Massachusetts where children are given books teaching about same-sex marriage as a normal life-style, as early as Kindergarten. Two MA parents then asked their school system to notify them, and allow their Kindergarten child to ‘opt-out’ of such lessons, and was denied. So much so, that the father was hand-cuffed and put in jail over-night because he refused to have his parental rights denied by the school! This just happened this past year in America (not Communist China)!
3. Closing of churches who refuse to perform same-sex marriages.
4. Lawsuits coming to priests and ministers for their ‘hate’ speech because they teach that same-sex marriage is NOT marriage at all (which they must & have for 2,000+ years)
5. Closing Organizations (like Catholic Charities in Boston, MA) who refuse to give adopted children to same-sex couples, because of their long-held beliefs of what constitutes a marriage & a family, as defined by God, not us.
6. Massive costs to CT tax-payers who will have to pay for all of these lawsuits that the gay movement has already brought to MA and CA, and will bring to CT, in such instances.
7. General in-tolerance of a 2,000+ year old Christian belief system and institutions, if they don’t recognize these ‘new laws’, but instead uphold the law of God, which is their duty and has always been so.

Most CT citizens only think this is about tolerance for gay people and equal rights (which no one contests). It is far more than that. It’s about re-defining the fundamental unit in society (the family) and how to define the fundamental UNION of society (Marriage). It also is about an all-out attack on a definition of Marriage that has existed since the beginning of time, and the Institutions that will continue to defend it.

Please forward this e-mail along to every CT parent, person, parish, Church, organization, etc, you know who would want to read this. And, remember, to vote YES on Question 1 of the Nov.

This upsets me to no end…

Stunnning. And anyway, even though Palin is clearly a genuine happy-clapper, I’ve yet to see any evidence that McCain does anything other than pay lip-service to religious ideas. He doesn’t seem any more ‘Christian’ than Obama, whatever that means.

Clearly this woman is just an ignorant, racist, prejudiced bitch. It’s times like these that I kind of wish Christianity were true – I’d love to see her reaction when the real Jesus Christ returned to earth and rebuked her despicable, sanctimonious (and very enourmous) ass.

She’s an argument against evolution if ever there was one.

Be afraid… be VERY afraid.

Honestly, i wonder if she knows that reason and thinking things through for herself, instead of taking religious or cultural ideas, is even possible. It seems that she’s so ingrained in her world-view that she can’t even step back and look at it; she can’t even realize that her being against Obama because he’s NAMED Obama is just idiotic.

Honestly, people like her scare me. They’re the ones who end up starving their kids, or performing exorcisms on them, or suicide bombing abortion clinics, or harassing gay people on the street.

I normally don’t use profanity. When i do use it, it’s quite deliberate.

She’s a vindictive bitch.

And we wonder why the rest of the world sees us as fat, isolationist ignoramuses…

Speaking as a non-American, while I agree this is disturbing, if you think this is all that’s wrong with America, you haven’t been paying attention.

I’m surprised that some of you are surprised. Don’t worry, though, I’m sure just as many will vote for the other side for similar ignorant reasons.

And yes, it is a sad fact about so many of the American voters.

Spot on, Linda.

I loved the little wink and head tilt to the left which seemed to indicate that she was really impressed with what she’d just said.

We’re screwed, aren’t we….guess I’m staying in Japan….although Japan has sketchy rights for foreigners and women to make up for the lack of church-and-state issues…sigh…

I can’t believe she was saying “i will pray for him to make the right decision, and he knows what that is.”

Who you vote for should be kept a secret unless you wish to share and face the consequences of disagreement. The husband should have kept his vote to himself if he knows how his wife feels.
And the wife needs to be kicked in the head. Maybe it will knock some of that crazy out of her.

Wow. I can’t seem to say anything nice. I’ve edited this comment multiple times now. I guess there’s just no defending some people…

Don’t worry, though, I’m sure just as many will vote for the other side for similar ignorant reasons.

Leave it to Linda to trot out the trusted false equivalence fallacy.

Thanks, Linda!

I agree with Skepticat and once again this is why I speak out because I’d take a wild guess 33% of Texas thinks that way and rolling over ain’t an option. Cowaring is what they want, sorry, ain’t an option.

Two things:

1) ollie is spot on: they hate science right until they need it, just like when Ben Stein saying how science was pure baby-eating evil, as he was plugging his MOVIE on a talk RADIO show, which he no doubt got to using a CAR (emphasis added to important words).

2) In regards “the lord will take care of us” mentality, I’m reminded of the joke of the fundamentalist hanging from a cliff, who gets offers from a fireman and two priests to be pulled up, only to turn them away saying “God will save me”. When he dies and blames god, he replies “I sent you a fireman and two priests! What more do you want!?”

Couldn’t she use her wacky church-logic to vote for rationally good reasons, on the understanding god sent her those choices? (Let me have this small hope…)

I think that airing this interview might cause people to take a harder look at themselves and their reasoning process. She has that delightful combination of ignorance and self-congratulatory self-assuredness. Again, it’s a shame that unthinking people are very sure they’re always right, and thoughtful people are often full of doubt.

That said, we don’t have to make her body size an issue for insults and slurs. That’s unacceptable, and reflects poorly on us. I counted 4 fat jokes in this thread. There have been 30 responses since the first one, and nobody has taken the initiative to call that out as unacceptable? Way to go “rational thinkers”.

We have posters and readers here of all body sizes, and I’m glad to stand up for them. What’s more offensive to me, some idiot on TV? Or people here who see obesity as an easy, acceptable and salient criticism of people we don’t like? We atheists sit and bemoan our pariah status. I guess it’s just human nature to pick on whoever is lower than you in the pecking order.

I’m so glad I’m canadian and live in canada.
I was in s. california last month chatting with a cab driver, we both agreed the US is going to hell in a handbasket if McCain is elected. I told him to move to canada.
There just is no hope if that happens.

We have posters and readers here of all body sizes, and I’m glad to stand up for them. What’s more offensive to me, some idiot on TV? Or people here who see obesity as an easy, acceptable and salient criticism of people we don’t like?

Siamang, it’s relevant because she typifies the Christian Right. Obesity is rampant among them, even though gluttony is clearly defined as a sin. As has been pointed out many times, they condemn most forms of pleasure and sublimate by overeating. Also, her excessive weight signifies her as a consumer, in the fullest sense. She “consumes”, contributing nothing, using more than her fair share of the available resources, while condemning all those who would call upon her to stop. She typifies Christian fundamentalism, conservatism and the Republican party in their worst manifestations.

So, yeah – I call attention to her weight, and I have no problem with those who are using it as a pejorative label.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, if this is the type of person that makes up America’s “Heartland”, then I hope the heartland has a massive coronary.

I’m so glad I’m canadian and live in canada.
I was in s. california last month chatting with a cab driver, we both agreed the US is going to hell in a handbasket if McCain is elected. I told him to move to canada.
There just is no hope if that happens.

Did you forget we just voted in Bush Jr.?

I acknowledge Jeff’s argument to a point. Statistics do seem to show that the deep South has the highest obesity rates and is the most deeply religious. Also, and I’m no scientist, while genetics does cause some obesity, I speculate (wrongly perhaps) that the majority of obese people would not be so if they ate wisely and excercised.

Still, I find little relevance in bringing up weight for this clip. The discussion should be based around the context of what she is saying, not so much how she does it, or even less, what she looks like. If the post was about the connection of faith and obesity, perhaps, but not when it is about her ignorant viewpoint of religion and politics.

That’s my two cents..spoken like an overweight (but working on it) atheist.

Oh man, I’m really trying to think of something – ANYTHING – nice to say, but…

I’m a Christian, and honestly people like that scare me way more than any atheist does. Christian fundamentalism in the US is its own subculture (very small problem here in Canada but you see it every once in a while) – it doesn’t even matter what makes sense, or the actual biblical paradigm on church and state, or general courtesy of respecting others’ opinions, or any other argument that you put against her. All that matters is that that little subculture has told her Republicans are good and Democrats are bad.

In regards to the anti-fat argument, I’d like to point out that many in a lower socio-economic class cannot afford to “eat wisely”…I don’t want to say “most of the time,” but a good portion of the time, healthy food = expensive food and unhealthy food = cheap food. The exercise issue also comes into play here. In addition to the question of having the luxury of time to exericse, lower-class neighborhoods may have unsafe conditions that remove walking, jogging, etc. as viable methods of exercise.

Oh, and as for the comment about her being “a consumer” and “contributing nothing,” I’ve active in the Girl Scout movement for most of my life, and have met many “overweight” women there. These women work hard to improve the Girl Scout programs, their communities, and their families, and, yes, some of them might have had views similar to (but not so extreme as!) this woman’s. I know nothing about this woman outside of the video and what I see in the video makes me sick, but still, it stings to see a woman accused of “contributing nothing” just because of her body type.

It’s not really her worldview (”conservative religious”) that bugs me… but her personality. Her entire self-assuredness that everything she says and believes is right, no matter what. ‘It’s not my Christianity.’ etc. Since it bothers me, it should bother everyone.

Well,

You can’t reason someone out of something they weren’t reasoned into.