NoGodBlog.com

Has there been an effort on our part to reach out to them with our concerns?

Hell yeah I'm voting.

Even if we consider atheism our most important issue, it's not the ONLY important issue, is it? Refusing to vote over one issue is short-sighted.

Absolutely I'll vote. Voted in the primary and will be voting in the main event.

Since I live in Iowa, I've already had my say, for all the good it did (Edwards is already out, even though he merely "suspended" his campaign) I agree with Cynic - basing your vote ONLY on atheism limits us. In fact, it tends to make us just like the anti - abortion voters, or the pro - gun voters, any of the "single issue" folks. Divide and conquer.

Actually, as far as issues go, this is a pretty content free election. It's more about personalities, and sometimes looks, like the caucus did, like a campaign to become the high school class president. Substantive issues such as poverty, education and especially the Empire are pretty much ignored. A great disappointment to me.

Act like a grown up. Only children set-one-out when they don't get everything they want. Vote? HELL YA I'M GOING TO VOTE!

vote, I'm with cynic on this one,

even though its important, its not the ONLY important issue.

If you are a pinhead who thinks that a politician can only be defined by a single issue, then stay home. If you think that the future of our country is at stake, then vote for the person who will best lead us into the future. Remember, those pinheads of the far-right used anti-woman, homophobic test to select their leader and look where we are today.

Is there some way to hack into the computers and change the votes so that Ron Paul wins the election?

yea...one issue in particular may be very important to many of us, but what about the rest? What about all the issues conservatives use to push religious ideals? Abortion, stem cell research, and a "marriage amendment"...don't all of these express our views on atheism in relation to politics? Look at the issues that we care about...not people just caring about us. Further more...(and this is very sad) but if a candidate were to reach out to atheists, secularists, humanists, or whatever, it would put them at a considerable disadvantage because of the stereotypes attached to us. Remember folks, it's about the combination of issues, not just the support of a group. Sam Harris has recently spoke of how we should be seen as less of a group and simply people who care about what's happening in the world. If a candidate were to reach out to us, it would allow for greater stigmatizing of them and us...can you blame them??? don't waste your voice, vote!

Abortion, Stem Cells, and Marriage equality are all PART of the separation of church and state. Yet NONE of the politicians even mention it -- or us!

And IMO how anyone can vote for a politician that thinks this is a Christian Nation(or one that doesn't decry such statements) is beyond me. It doesn't matter what they think about the other issues. If they hate people like me, I don't vote for them. Done.

The only reason many of you believe that there are no candidates for you to vote for is that you won't vote for Libertarians. Regardless of whether a Libertarian is a "believer" or not has no bearing on his/her ability to determine that government has no business dictating, pandering to, or being run by faith.

The only reason many of you believe that there are no candidates for you to vote for is that you won't vote for Libertarians.

I can't make sense of that.

I voted for Obama strictly to keep the bitch out of office. I seriously believe many did for the same reason.

My final vote will be between one of the two, McCain or Obama, let see what they say and do in the next few months.

I'll vote for the person I think will do the least damage. They will then ignore me. Usually gridlock is more of a friend than an enemy.

I have been hearing many people in the Atheist community ramble on about why we should NOT vote. Who would this punish? Would anyone even know that this was a protest? We are too small of a community for it to make a difference. Many Atheists out there vote on other issues first, or are not in the least bit organized. If we do not vote we are more likely to get another "atheists are not americans" type.

I will not vote for Hillary. This has nothing to do with her sex, I would love to see a good woman run. I will not vote for her because she is an idiot. She spends too much time watching polls and is too connected to buisness. I hope that it comes down to Obama and Mcain.

Ellen is an idiot. If the Republicans get another president in office, the Supreme Court will be completely overrun by neocons and theocrats. What will happen to freedom of religoin then? It will disappear.

Anyone who doesn't vote Democrat in the upcoming election is also an idiot, even if they don't like the candicate.

We are certainly NOT too small of a community to make a difference. According to Barna Group polls, there are more atheists and agnostics in the US than there are evangelical Christians. Just see if they go around whining that their group is too small to make a difference.

And what a load of sexist crap about Clinton, DeepDiver and whoever agrees with him, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Jesus Fucking Christ already with the misogyny.

not vote? although I wish and hope and dream for the day the politicians pander to me, politics is the only blood sport I endorse and I'm not about to give it up.

Let's see, which liar should I vote for? HMMMMMM!!

OT: Female Referee Removed From Officiating Boys' Basketball Game by Religious School

The reason given, according to the referees: Campbell, as a woman, could not be put in a position of authority over boys because of the academy's beliefs.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330642,00.html

ps... I guess that means none of those people will be voting for Hillary....

I'll vote. It took too many years, and too many women (and a few men) worked for far longer, and endured far more hardship than most of us know today so that women might have a say in who represents us.

So even though I may not like any of the candidates or the fact that they do not recognize me as worthy perhaps of even being a citizen of this country, I WILL VOTE. The priviledge is far too precious and I refuse to squander my right to vote.

That said, this will be a hard election for me. I have held for months that I would not vote for a Republican this go round, but the more I know about Obama the more I believe I cannot vote for him. Not only is he a xian but he is a xian who is a member of a church which on its website states without apology that it is "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA". What does this mean? I see no mention of a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO THE UNITED STATES. I believe completely that he has a right to belong to whatever church he chooses and believe whatever he chooses as it pertains to religion. However, I also believe his first loyalty when it comes to political commitment should be to the USA. This is, after all, the country that gives he and his wife the freedom to worship as they please.

Obama's church's website: http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

I didn't like either Gore or Kerry but I voted for them--more against King George than FOR either of them, but at least I knew that when they went to church they weren't mixing loyalty to another country in with their god-crap.

To whomever came up with this idea, I'm not sure how to say this other than it's incredibly stupid.

As an atheist it pisses me off that people make religion and what candidate they vote for, a one issue vote, or election. Or not even religion, I have conservative friends not voting for Obama solely for his stance on abortion. When you vote based on one issue you get everything you have coming to you. I am speaking mainly to Evangelicals and their vote for Bush.

So why would I not vote because there isn't an atheist candidate, or one that openly supports atheism? If I do so I have now turned the election into a one issue election for me. That's stupid beyond belief, besides the fact that atheists tend to be Liberal, and not voting would likely give conservatives an edge. Please Ellen, explain to me how throwing the election to a conservative is going to help the atheist cause? I must be missing something...

I could go on an on but at some point I have to stop myself.

Think of it this way. You have a choice between bad or worse. If you do nothing, you may get worse. VOTE!!

If you do not cast a vote, you have no right to complain about the office holders.
I voted absentee then I worked the polls.
Try it- a close up look at how the mechanics of elections work.
The actual politicians are another story.....
All are the lesser of 2 evils.

Hell yeah, I am voting.

I know that they have not mentioned us, but so what? I am not looking for attention to feel like the candidate will do a good job in office.

GodFreeandGlad:
I do not hold the same opinion as you on Obama. I am coming closer and closer to pledging my support for him. Yes, he is xian, but if you read his book, "Dreams from my Father," you will see that he has been raised around numerous religions and actually questioned his belief early on...Also, his commitment to Africa is interesting, but it is his roots.

I don't know for sure, but I am starting to agree with his ideas. Also, religion is not my main concern. I suggest looking at all facets before such a large decision.

podry,

Religion is not my main concern either. This country gives each of us freedom to believe what we choose or not to believe at all.

And so okay, Africa holds his roots, but all of us have roots to some other country. Guess I'm a bit tired of "black" TV channels, "black" history month, etc. How would it be taken if a group of white people professed that they were "a congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO RUSSIA"? Wouldn't you find that just a tad unsettling?

Seems to me that by belonging to a church so committed to blacks (to say nothing of Africa) that politically speaking this is not a wise choice of churches for someone who aims to be President of ALL the people of the United States. I want somebody I know is committed totally to protecting my country and right now I'm feeling that even Huckabee at least(vomit!) has a first allegiance to the US, whereas the Africa thing with no mention whatsoever of the USA rather puts me off.

I understand that he says he was raised with exposure to several religions, but his final choice of churches leaves me a bit unsettled.

I'll vote for Hillary. I don't think Obama can stand up to the rethuglican slime machine. The Clinton machine has played nice and not said a lot about race or admitted drug use, imagine how the Rs will act about such. Even if McCain tries the high road the machine will be cranking out slime.

the only way we will ever have a voice as a group, and have candidates that speak to our specific concerns as atheists, is if we are organized, probably under the banner of AA or an organization like it.

it's important to remember that this is exactly how religious extremists have been able to exert an influence on politics disproportionate to their actual numbers--organization.

the advantage the religious have in this area, of course, is that they can all be counted on to attend church on sunday, making them much easier to reach.

we don't have such a place, so the question becomes what existing civic/community spaces make sense to target for organizing efforts.

universities?

anyone have any thoughts?

Obama may not reach out to the secular community but he doesn't exclude us either. Here is a segment from one of his speeches where he discusses religion and politics. The entire document is at:


http://tinyurl.com/2r5566


"For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn't the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn't want the established churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.


Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.


And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let's read our bibles. Folks haven't been reading their bibles.


This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."

I was astounded, and it's staggaring to hear someone supposedly who cares about the Constituion and our Bill of Rights, science, education, the separation of church and state, etc. actually tell people not to vote! Are these things not important anymore? Is the Supreme Court ruling as a corporate theocracy not important enough to vote? Is having the FDA rule with science and not religon, and putting actual qualified people in these powerful positions not something atheists are interested in?

I guess I'm a differnt kind of athesit then, because I've even noticed the sidebar ads on the main website here, and to me as an atheist I have to question what's going on. One ad is for Ben Stein's pro-intelligence design film which shows how awful scientists are as they only allow Darwin's Scientific Theory of Evolution to be taught in schools. And then there was what I thought would be a fun silly quiz about how much of an atheist I was, so I clicked on the link and it's to a site called mary.com--a religous dating service! Plus I've noticed a lot of people here seem to support putting men in power who are anti-women, anti-gay, anti-science and very pro-war and pro-corporatism. So while I guess we may have being non-theist in common, we certainly don't seem to have much of anything else, which to me is kinda sad and unexpected.

Oh, and to the jerk who called Hillary "the bitch", thanks for the misogny. How new and clever of you!It's interesting because Hillary, along with two other Women Senator's are the only reason I now have access to over-the-counter Emergency Contraception (although a person can deny me buying it because of their religon, but that's another issue altogether). Senator Hillary forced the FDA to put science over religion. And that's real life in real time that affects millions of women (myself included) in this Country. So believe me, while I will obvioulsy vote for Obama if he wins the nomination, I'm hoping it will be Hillary. Not because she's a woman, but because I am!

I also wonder if you're a "libertarian". Which seems to come in two veins (anarchists and neo-cons too scared to admit that's what they are) and these roads of libertarianism all lead to the same disaster--some form of dictatorship (whether through theocracy or corporate fascism). In times of crisis and chaos, fear and confusion, people will always look towards a leader to tell them what to do and to show them the way out and give them some semblance of control. Unfortunately those leaders seldom seem to hold progressive liberal democratic ideals.

With all that the Bush regime has done to our Country, I don't believe electing another republican who's in lock-step with Bush and the religous-right is what's best for me and the rest of our Country. So I hope even those who are atheists will vote. Although as I noticed a lot of people here seem to be McCain supporters, and that's just too scary for me to think about right now.

Vote

and if you really think there is no one to vote for...

Run

The ballots in every state in November will have much more on them than just the presidential candidates. There will be local elections and initiatives, school board seats, judges, fundings, etc.

These may not affect atheists much as a whole, but where ever you live they will affect you.

To not vote at all is to abdicate any personal responsibility for the results. If you didn't fight against what you believed was wrong then you have no right to complain when the results adversely affect you.

Ellen espouses an irresponsible position.

VOTE! It does count. There's always more at stake than you think.

Hi everybody I just returned from vacation and I feel grrrrrrrrrrrreat!

Diane,

The sidebar ads are not controlled by this website. It is google adsense and it "senses" what sort of ads based on the words used on the blog. Obviously it is highly flawed.

Atheists are very different than one another and we all have a wide range of opinions. I would say what we share in common is intelligence, which makes for some great conversation. Don't judge people so quickly because they do not agree with you politically.

As for libertarians, I don't think you have a good grasp of what it means. I would point you to a video series on youtube called the esoteric agenda. http://youtube.com/watch?v=t9rLGGjJt9I

I, as a female, am proud to see a female run for president but I cannot vote for her because I don't want my wages garnished to pay a corporation for a product (health insurance). It is unconstitutional to give my money to a for-profit private company instead of pooling our money and just covering everyone under medicaid-care.

Hillary is my choice but at this point I question that she can get the nomination.

You made some good points, Diane, and thanks for calling the jerk who called Hillary a "bitch" a jerk. Have you read A Woman In Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton by Carl Bernstein. This book really gives good insight into her character. She is a woman possessed of good decent qualites and blessed with smarts. She is my choice above all others but barring a miracle I don't think she will be on the ballot.

I do not like McCain or Obama. It will be a hard choice and I may have to take a barf bag to the polls, but *I WILL VOTE*.

And let me say how impressed I am that as a group we seem to be united on the issue of voting or not voting. In a country where so many fail to vote I think this speaks extremely well for us as a group.

Glad to have you back dawnisis. Wondered what had happened to you.

I don't get what you mean by:

"It is unconstitutional to give my money to a for-profit private company instead of pooling our money and just covering everyone under medicaid-care."

Medicare and Medicaid are responsible for a lot of the problems we have with health care costs today. The fact is that there are no good answers to the health care problem.

I wouldn't worry about Hillary's health care plan causing your wages to be garnished to pay a corporation for health care. All politicians tell us what they are going to do, but it is little more than talk to get elected. Obama says his plan is to REDUCE health care costs so that everybody can afford health care. I about died laughing at that one and notice he hasn't clued us in on exactly how this can be accomplished.

Remember, no matter who says what a universal health care plan has to be paid for somehow and the money just isn't there. So roll with the talk and take it for what it is. Example: Jimmy Carter told us he was going to end world hunger. That doesn't seem to have happened just like universal health care has little chance of happening.

This is a joke. Unfortunately it is pretty close to the truth:


While walking down the street a US senator is tragically hit by a truck and dies.

His soul arrives in heaven and he is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

"Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you."

"No problem, just let me in," says the senator.

"Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you
can choose where to spend eternity."

"Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the senator.

"I'm sorry, but we have our rules."

And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse
and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him.

Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people.

They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne.

Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go.

Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises...

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St Peter is waiting for him.

"Now it's time to visit heaven."

So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing their harps, but actually it's a little boring.

When the 24 hours have gone by St. Peter returns. "Well, then," he says to the senator, "you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity."

The senator reflects for a minute, then he answers: "Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell."

So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell.

Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage.

He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above.

The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder.

"I don't understand," stammers the senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?"

The devil looks at him, smiles.

"Yesterday we were campaigning......
Today you voted."

Sorry Ellen, but abdicating my right to vote in either the primary or November just turns over my power to those who ARE recognized by the politicians. So I will use my clout to vote for the person I think will best serve this country and who, hopefully would not be the choice of the religious right.

Thanks Ellen but I disagree. My vote doesn't really count that much because I live in Texas. Maybe in the primary right now between and Hillary and Barrack it would but next November a Republican will carry Texas so my vote goes out as a populous vote as far as being counted. Only two things matters to most Texans, a 1-christian and 2-conservative candidate. In other words Huckabee is their man and McCain knows it.

I will vote.

Writing in FSM would be a better choice than not voting or voting for a Republican within the next few years, the Republicans absolutely must change their platform before I will vote for them. Republicans produced the worst President in the history of the United States, their platform is the same and the goals are the same. John McCain would be almost the same as reelecting George of the jungle.

I think there are a significant number of people who believe Republicans offer fiscal restraint and favor smaller government expenditures, however, if you check the history it is the Republicans that produce the largest deficits.
There could at some future time be a worthwhile Republican presidential candidate but, not this year.

Back to the 'not voting' issue, you would need to explain how you would be separated from the christians who have called their sheep not to vote. I won't risk being counted as one of the christians by being lumped into that group. Write in FSM if you like but do vote, at least to avoid being counted as a non-voting christian.

Also as anadrol commented in the "Darwin Day in Cincinatti!" topic:

Anybody who is interested in hearing what the presidential candidates have to say about science policy should probably go here and add their name to the list. I'm sure Darwin would have signed.

http://www.sciencedebate2008.com/www/index.php

Christians by their numbers, can make a statement by not voting. I don't think non-theists can do that effectively.

I became a citizen of this country 26 years ago so that I could vote, and I intend to continue to do so (even though no presidential candidate I have voted for has ever won, so far). I was shocked and disappointed to hear Ellen Johnson's comments. Does she think she is somehow punishing the candidates by withholding her vote? Does she honestly think they even know about her childish little temper tantrum?

It would take a huge, organized, highly-committed coalition of nonbelievers (who all agreed with one another - good luck with that) to get even the slightest attention from political candidates. I don't see that organization anywhere. I do my little bit by being an AA member, AU member, writing occasional letters to the editor, etc., but it's a drop in the bucket. American Atheists is one of the most under-the-radar organizations I've ever seen - I'm sure McCain, Clinton, and Obama neither know nor care about what the president of American Atheists thinks or whether she is going to vote. And what ever happened to GAMPAC? Is everyone just supposed to hold their breath and turn blue until an atheist runs for president?

Get real. VOTE VOTE VOTE

This "don't vote" thing reminds me of the time 'Team I Believe' declared they were going to boycott the Rational Responders website.

I think that one of the most important issues is to counter the conservative slide of the Supreme Court. For that reason, I will support whatever Democrat wins the primary, ignoring their stupid religious views.

I was leaning toward Hillary Clinton, but sadly have become convinced that electing her would amount to electing Bill Clinton again. Wouldn't be my first choice! So, I think I will vote for Obama in the primary. His goals of getting out of Iraq, investing in green industries, and repairing our decaying infrastructures resonate with me.

McCain supports overturning Roe vs. Wade and has suggested staying in Iraq for 100 years. I don't think so. Either Obama or Clinton would be a far wiser choice, IMO.

GF&G,

Thanks for the wb.

Regarding:

Medicare and Medicaid are responsible for a lot of the problems we have with health care costs today. The fact is that there are no good answers to the health care problem.

I agree with this entirely. I have contemplated the health insurance issue until I can no longer stand to think about it. I have changed my position 100% and I no longer believe the government should have any role in providing such "insurance" whether private or government run.

We are all responsible for our own lives and health. The government should have no role in deciding or forcing us into any "system".

I live under a system that not only rejects what I believe, but tries to vilify what I believe.

The only thing worse would be to live under a system that punishes (jail, torture, death) me for what I believe.

Yes, I'll vote.

But Obama has reached out to secularists. He's not perfect -- for example, I wish he were in favor of gay marriage instead of just civil unions legally equivalent to marriage -- but he's made it clear that the state should be neutral on matters of religion, and he's made it clear that atheists should be considered equal partners in American society along with religious people. That's more than I've heard from Hillary or McCain.

Yes, he could be more explicit about how he will support and enforce the provisions of the Constitution that matter the most. But refusing to vote at all is just petulant stupidity (for reasons others have elaborated above), and pretending that no candidate has reached out to the secular community is quite simply a lie.

But here's the thing: even if no candidate had reached out to secularists, we still have to remember that the people we elect this year will shape the social and legal battlefield for years to come. If you can't vote for a candidate that represents a victory this year, then you can still vote to tilt society a little bit more in our favor in the years to come.

So get out and vote, and don't be a twit.

I voted for Obama strictly to keep the bitch out of office.

Careful! Your fear of the fairer sex is showing.

Nevertheless, IMHO this is one of the most exciting democratic races I've witnessed in my lifetime. I think either Obama or Hillary will do their best to lead us away from the republician mess we're in (not sure either will succeed), but at least we got real canidates this time, not a poser walking around stiffly carrying a gun. I wish Edwards would not have given up so soon. I liked him too.

I watched Hillary today in Youngstown. What a speech! If I were a cheerleader I would've waved my Pompoms at her.

A black man and a woman. Isn't it great to be an American in 2008!

Perhaps we should vote for Huckabee, leave the country, then wait till America comes to her senses. It would be playing with fire, I know, but the scenario has a bit of poetic justice.

I'd love to comment on our libertarian friends who say they will vote for Ron Paul. Go ahead. It'll be the same as voting for no one.

In case any of you care, none of you will vote for President because the United States doesn't vote for President. We vote for Electors who choose the President.

I am in the same position I am always in on the general election for President. I have no candidate. Barry is against Medicare for All health insurance. Hill will never get if for us. I believe the pundits who say she is in the back pocket of the hospitals and health insurance lobbyists who are helping to fund her election and I am still angry over her stabbing the effort to death back in 1993.

But to get back to our friends here in this blog who don't like paying taxes and having a government (the libertarians).

I want to wish all of you the best of luck with that position. Let's see. First we close the IRS and stop taxation in America. The next day we close all the prisons and release all the murders, rapists, kidnapper, and thieves. Oh boy are we gonna have fun then.

The next day we close down every US military base in the world. I am gonna feel real sorry for all those soldiers we leave deserted in all those countries. I guess we can let them sell their assigned equipment to live on until they find new jobs or use the proceeds to travel home.

I wonder who will be first to come in and take over our country when we no longer have any military to stop them?

I guess lot's of people are going to die when there is no one to pay for all those medical bills that all those retirees keep racking up and there is no Medicare. Also all those little children who won't be getting any more Medicaid will probably be in a lot of trouble. Oh well.

Of course, we won't have to worry about the problems of what to teach in public schools. There won't be any public schools. So the over all majority will be ignorant.

Yea, I'm getting to like this new libertarian world the Ron Paultards have in mind. I get to smoke, snort, shoot, or eat any damn thing I want and then go out and rape or kill or steal anything I feel like so I can buy more shit. Yea, I'm gonna vote. I'm gonna vote for John Galt for Dictator for Life.

NOT

http://www.physorg.com/news122212997.html

Medicare and Medicaid are responsible for a lot of the problems we have with health care costs today.

Really! Like what?

Peter, please. I know we don't have to tell you what a Straw Man is, because you've got it down pat.

We are all responsible for our own lives and health. The government should have no role in deciding or forcing us into any "system".

Wrong. The people have already spoken and have said that all individuals should have access to the ERs of America. There is absolutely no significant political will to ever remove this huge constraint from the health care "problem". Most of these folks are in the ER because emergent and very expensive care is needed. Of course they can't pay for the care and the costs get passed on to you. You are paying for the care of others whether your ideology likes it or not and this will not end.

As for Ellen, she doesn't quite get that the secular problem is one of organization. Atheists know this all too well.

Sure, secularists account for more as a single group than many of these other groups. But the difference is that wherever a politician goes, he/she can find those other groups all organized and ready to listen. Religious folks in one room. Check. Black religious folks in one room. Double Check.

For politicians, time and money are everything. They've got to get the most bang for the buck, and secularists don't deliver.

It's not their fault, it's ours.

Here's Ellen, trying to get secularists not to vote on an atheists web site. How many non-atheists secularists just heard that message?

Yea, I'm getting to like this new libertarian world the Ron Paultards have in mind. I get to smoke, snort, shoot, or eat any damn thing I want and then go out and rape or kill or steal anything I feel like so I can buy more shit. Yea, I'm gonna vote. I'm gonna vote for John Galt for Dictator for Life.

Fucking idiot.

I was going to merely dismiss that quote as idiocy and leave it with a return volley of ad hominem. But I won't.

Libertarians don't want to end all of the laws, we want to get rid of the idiotic laws that do nothing but cost the taxpayer money. We also believe that the actual crimes (like the ones you enumerated, rape, murder, theft) should be punished and far more severely. If we're not spending all of this money giving drug users free housing for life (prison) we can use it locking up the serious threats to society for longer. I don't want murderers, rapists, and thieves on the streets any more than you do. In fact, I want them off the streets for far longer than you do.

If you continue to support anti-drug laws, have fun with it. You are the reason that people that commit real crimes are getting out of prison before their sentences are up. You are the reason that some states actually had to pass laws to require these offenders to serve at least 80% of their sentences. You're leaving our prisons filled with people whose only crime is against the cells in their own bodies, a choice they can make with or without your laws and upon which your laws have no effect.

The only way to reach a solution is to understand the problem.
What are the most common, most expensive, easiest to aviod, etc. maladies to pass through the ER?

Here's Ellen, trying to get secularists not to vote on an atheists web site. How many non-atheists secularists just heard that message?

Exactly. And not many atheists heard it, either.

wow great posts diane and McPlasticMan

I have allot of respect for Ellen but I think she should reconsider her position......

What are the most common, most expensive, easiest to aviod, etc. maladies to pass through the ER?

Dirty illeagle Mexicans without insurance.

Dawnisis--- Thank you for explaining about the sidebars. I was quite taken aback as you can imagine. But I understand now that it's a google thing.

GodFree&Glad-- Thanks for the tip on the book on Hillary! I'll check it out. There's also a great link at http://www.nowpacs.org/2008/hillary/issues.html It's on NOW's website (Natl Org of Women) that sums up Hillary's experience and her plans should she be elected. But I will check out that book, (although right now I'm re-reading "Vile Bodies" by Evelyn Waugh because I recently watched Stephen Fry's film "Bright Young Things" which is based on the novel). Also, as for Hillary, she's won the biggest states--NY and CA, so I'm not counting her out just yet. Plus Obama has never faced the full strength of the republican assault machine, while Hillary has (big time!) and made it through. So we're not out yet!

I'm also heartened to see so many here disagreeing with the notion that atheist's should not vote. We should, and I'm glad so many of us are!

What,

I know whereof I speak. Medicare and Medicaid might well be called Medigraft. Lots of waste and theft. The system is too big for adequate oversight.

Emergency Rooms: Yes, they handle real emergencies, but all across this country they are filled with people using them who should be seeing a family doctor for things that do not qualify as true emergency needs. Why? Because they don't have insurance and the ER has to treat them, to at least stabilize serious problems.

This is especially true in the border states but a fact all across this country.

Mark my words, there is NO health care solution. We cannot afford a universal health care solution. The cost of health care is going to bring us down if something else doesn't do it first. It will be painful and seem unjust to many but lines are going to have to be drawn in the sand sooner or later.

A lot of threads on this site end up becoming discussions about health care. Could we maybe have a dedicated thread for that? Just a suggestion, I'm not fussing at anybody.

Mark my words, there is NO health care solution.

Sorry Rusty, but I gotta comment. There is actually a solution to health care, and, like everything else in life, it requires EDUCATION. I'm not talking about a college degree either; I'm referring to the need for everybody to self-educate about what makes them sick.

For example, take the person who eats at Micky D's 5 times a week, has wings on the weekend, and never fails to start the day with bacon and eggs. And then they get chest pains-DUH!

People are eating, smoking, and lounging themselves to death, and they all want a pill to make them healthy, at the expense of everybody else (the pharmaceutical's dreams have come true).

Until we educate up, everybody's fucked, and we all pay.

Dave Silverman wrote: Abortion, Stem Cells, and Marriage equality are all PART of the separation of church and state. Yet NONE of the politicians even mention it -- or us!

Obama on stem cells research: he's for it.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/additional/Obama_FactSheet_Science.pdf

Obama on abortion access: he's pro-choice.
http://www.barackobama.com/2008/01/22/obama_statement_on_35th_annive.php

Obama on marriage equality: He's weasely on this one -- he supports legal equality for civil unions but not "gay marriage" itself. I wish he did, but it's better than nothing.
http://pride.barackobama.com/page/content/lgbthome

Obama on church-state separation: it's vital for the rights of everyone, including nonbelievers. He asserts that the religious have no monopoly on morality, and it's better for secularists to be open than to show fake piety. He argues that religious values must be acceptable as universal values before they can be expected of a pluralistic society. However, he also panders to religion by saying that faith-based programs might be useful in some contexts and by arguing that public servants need not leave their faith at the door. It's a mixed bag, but I think it's a better bag than we're accustomed to having.
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaonFaith.pdf
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060628-call_to_renewal_1/index.php


Clinton on stem cell research: she's for it, and she's pro-science in general; she claims she'll end political interference in research.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=3566

Clinton on abortion: she's pro-choice.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/reproductiverights/

Clinton on marriage equality: I can't find an explicit position on her web site regarding the issue, but lots of gay people seem to think she would be favorable in general on LGBT issues.

Clinton on church-state separation: I couldn't find an explicit statement on her web site; her supporters clearly believe she will defend separation.

McCain on stem cell research: he appears to be either against it, or inclined to put it under heavy restriction.
http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm

McCain on abortion: he would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade.
http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm

McCain on marriage equality: if I'm reading this correctly, he would push the issue to the states and resist federal fiats for or against.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm

McCain on church-state separation: I don't find anything on his site, but the Pew Forum says he asserts that the Constitution founded a "Christian nation."
http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Church_and_State

That last link has some information from all the candidates on church-state separation, but little of it is very detailed for ones left standing.

cry4turtles,

You make some good points, and I agree that some health problems are self-inflicted. Many are not, however. Personally, I have been diagnosed with both thyroid and parathyroid problems in the past few months. The first requires daily medication, the second required surgery. Neither happened because of diet, exercise, or lack thereof. Sometimes stuff just goes wrong. Luckily, we have fairly good health care (with a very high deductible), but lots of people have little or no coverage and just have the bad luck to be struck by disease.

Tarma, thanks for the nod. Did you know that thyroid problems have been linked to MSG, aspartame, and other excitotoxins? Did your doctor tell you this? Look up Dr. Russell Blaylock. He's a respected neurosurgeon (albeit theistic) who did tons of research in this area. Maybe it will help?

Any vote we do not cast is just going to help McCain. And we all know that Democrats are *far* more reasonable when it comes to equal rights. We *must* vote.

About 75% of all hospitalizations are due to the big three behaviors: (1) Ellicit drug abuse, (2) Smoking and (3) Alcohol consumption.

Changing these behaviors definitely would have a great effect on the expenditures for health care. Good luck trying to control health care costs by diminishing these behaviors through "education" alone. So the "solution" is not coming from that direction is it?

Any vote we do not cast is just going to help McCain. And we all know that Democrats are *far* more reasonable when it comes to equal rights. We *must* vote.

Emergency Rooms: Yes, they handle real emergencies, but all across this country they are filled with people using them who should be seeing a family doctor for things that do not qualify as true emergency needs. Why? Because they don't have insurance and the ER has to treat them, to at least stabilize serious problems.

Umh, isn't that what I said?

Mark my words, there is NO health care solution.

Huh? Many of America's competitors are doing it a significant less cost and with better outcome!

What,

Wrong. The people have already spoken and have said that all individuals should have access to the ERs of America. There is absolutely no significant political will to ever remove this huge constraint from the health care "problem". Most of these folks are in the ER because emergent and very expensive care is needed. Of course they can't pay for the care and the costs get passed on to you. You are paying for the care of others whether your ideology likes it or not and this will not end.

I was on the fence with the "health insurance" thing for a long, long time, but for me it comes down to more than just everyone should be treated.

A friend of mine just took his kid in for a broken arm, not a compound fracture mind you, just a broken arm. The bill $30,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, that procedure is worth 2k tops, and I mean tops. There is a serious problem with healthcare in this country.

What I want is freedom. I want access to all drugs WITHOUT A PERSCRIPTION. I am not an idiot and can handle my own diagnosis in most cases. I want the doctor to present a price list of services so I can shop. I want to draw my own blood and pay a lab to analyze it as I dictate.

Everyone should resort to this system of dangerous health-care as a LAST RESORT. The Internet is a tool to take charge of your own healthcare and find homeopathic therapies and alternatives to this disgusting way medicine is practiced in the western world.

Screw hospitals, screw insurance companies and screw the doctors and their BMWs.

The entire game is changing with stem-cell and genetic research and I guarantee you these treatments WILL NOT be covered.

Medicine treats symptoms but does not cure and that's the system you want to force on the population.

I am free and I say NO thanks. I can set a bone and do a cast and there is no way I paying these crooks 30,000 friggin dollars to do it for me.

Good luck trying to control health care costs by diminishing these behaviors through "education" alone.

What, I hear ya. It's sooo damn frustrating. Very few people want to face the facts and take responsibility for their own health. Sad, sad.

Alexatheist...

My, my, the racist...how 'bout "AIDS cures itself"? Or the N-word? Nice one. Idiot.

My, my, the racist...how 'bout "AIDS cures itself"? Or the N-word? Nice one. Idiot.

Racist? no. Concerned about the illeagle invasion from south of the border which is destroying my state and nation, yes. I have no issue with legal immigrants who are skilled and educated; my family being exactly this. The fact is that we can not open our nation's borders to anyone who wants to come here without destroying our own way of life. Many of the hospitals here in NC are each millions of dollars in debt due to unpaid bills of illeagle and uninsured immigrants. Bed bugs, polio, and tuberculosis are showing up in my state thanks to Third World immigrants. I was unable to place an order at a restaraunt a few days ago because the Mexican working there spoke zero English (this happens to me at least once or twice a week). The NC tax payer supported school system is bursting at the seams becasue there aren't enough teachers to handle the influx of all of the illeagle Mexican immigrant children who speak very little or no English. I care too much about America and the American way of life to sit back and watch as Third World momentum turns this country into a shithole like Mexico.

As far as AIDS is concerned, I see it as a disease which is transmitted through behaviour so I have little sympathy for those who make stupid decisions and contract the disease as a result of having unprotected sex with multiple partners. Honestly, just how difficult is it to use a condom? My attitude extends to others who make poor persoanl decisions as I have little sympathy for smokers who develop lung cancer or lazy fat fucks who die of heart attacks. Whatever happened to taking personal responsibility for ones actions? It used to be a common American trait before we all became "victims", even of our own behaviour.

alexatheist,

Why not place the responsibility on the employers that do the hiring?

Dawnisis

That has to be one of the dumbest posts you have ever made. Get a clue.

Alex

You are a diabetic, correct? Type I or II? You, of course, are not obliged to answer.

Tarma

Personally, I have been diagnosed with both thyroid and parathyroid problems in the past few months.

You are smart and motivated. You will do well under treatment. Best wishes to you!

Just a note re a comment that none of the US presidental candidates have reached out to the secular community.

I have a great speach by Obama posted on my blog at this URL:
http://stupid-files.blogspot.com/2008/02/voice-of-reason.html

Barak Obama has absolutely reached out to those of us who have no need of imaginary friends to keep us moral and ethical.

I am Canadian so I have little direct interest in the US election, other than being terribly excited to see a human - not a monkey and it's trainer - in office south of the 49th.

WriterWriter

Sorry.. new to this format and just realised my comment belongs to another post - down a few from this one... apologies.

writerdd:
Sexist? I think not. She is a bitch. There are many women I would love to have for president, they just are not running. There are many women I have voted for, because they had what it takes. Bush is a dick. Does that even it up for you?

Clinton is the worst choice I have seen in many years and is a disgrace to the women of this country. Working in DC, I know many that personally know her and it is unanimous that unless she wants something from you, you are trash to walk on.

For those who don't like Obama there's
OBAMANATION.COM A conservative christian rantfest.

McCain’s challenge to Obama was based on a Washington Post article that morning highlighting pork barrel project recipients. The article said Clinton helped lock down more than $340 million in earmarks for her home state of New York in last year’s spending bills, placing her in the top tier of Senate recipients for the type of localized federal spending against which McCain claims to be a crusader. By comparison, the article said Obama recorded $91 million in earmarks.

The Post article cited a report from Taxpayers for Common Sense, which said McCain was, in fact, one of just five senators who rejected all earmarks.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330738,00.html

So much for listening to the voice of the people...

"While it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials serving as superdelegates have received about $890,000 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years," the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported today.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/superdelegates.html

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/

Um... yeah ... I am voting. As many times as they will let me!

Obama... Hillary... I don't care which.

What,

You are smart and motivated. You will do well under treatment. Best wishes to you!

Thanks much. I have an excellent family doctor - she is a D.O. - whom I trust and feel comfortable with. Went to a not-so-excellent endocrinologist who absolutely refused to listen to any of my concerns, especially about some medication she prescribed which was causing me problems. She really pissed me off. Dropped her, found another, and was referred to a world-class endocrinology surgeon. All ended well, and I was treated with respect and was completely involved in all the decision-making.

While I had to laugh at dawnisis's earlier rant against doctors and medication, I can definitely understand her exasperation. One thing I do know - medicine is not an exact science. You absolutely do need to educate yourself and be involved in the process. And the costs, without health insurance, are obscenely high, especially if you are hospitalized.

I am voting for Hillary this primary!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why? Because of the few I like Hillary is the least likely in my view to expect me to consult with CLERGY on some personal decision. Although she is religious and regularly attends church, she does not use this as a reason for superiority. I have listened to and read many of Obama’s speeches and every time I feel as if I am sitting at a sermon. Huckabee is no different. And Mcain is just now starting to court religious fanatics.

I will however VOTE in the November election. This is important even if we do not like the candidates. I am not saying we should vote for any of them if we don’t like them; but if we do not vote, then the parties view that as simply low voter turnout. Instead if I do not like any of the candidates I will write in a name.
I suggest that in November if there is no acceptable candidate for us then we all write in the same name. I know it is not likely that that person will win but what it will do is bring attention to the fact that there is a large voter block that has been ignored.

I have decided that if I like none of the candidates in the November election I am writing in Ralph Nader as my choice. This is to tell the Democratic Party that I want them to represent me also, and it is one person that they hate (Ralph Nader).

Perhaps if we can get a large enough group we can write in Ellen Johnson.

I have decided that if I like none of the candidates in the November election I am writing in Ralph Nader as my choice. This is to tell the Democratic Party that I want them to represent me also, and it is one person that they hate (Ralph Nader).

Ah, the "send a message to the Democratic Party" strategy. It backfired on the Naderites in 2000, so why do you think it will work now?

lets go GREEN
but I really think Obama is an atheist

FairyDogMother
No offense, but in your comment
If you do not cast a vote, you have no right to complain about the office holders.
When I was young and naive, i used to believe that too. However, you have freedom of speech and therefore a right to complain. When none of these idiots supports a damn thing you believe in, then you got a real right to complain. When none of these idiots hardly supports anyone, you have a great right to complain. If there is nobody to vote for, then why on earth would we vote for anyone? If you vote for an idiot and he proves to be an idiot, you DONT have a right to complain because you voted for that idiot. You are listening to old fashioned political rhetoric purposely created to get you to vote.
The sad fact is that if we all don't vote, then the rediculous republicans will get in for four more. The Dems have abandoned us. Screw em all! We should all get together and either vote green or Libertarian and show these parties that we no longer support them.

support the constitution party.the federal gov't is limited to external affairs and national defense all else is the domain of state gov't and the people according to the constitution.

Comment from: reason

support the constitution party.the federal gov't is limited to external affairs and national defense all else is the domain of state gov't and the people according to the constitution.

AMEN...can I say it again? AMEN.

Reason you are soooo right!!!!

This is EXACTLY why the Sep of Church and State is a MYTH!!!!

This is EXACTLY what the "Treaty of Tripoli" was saying...

IT'S THE STATES RIGHTS STUPID!!!!

Phreedm,

This is EXACTLY why the Sep of Church and State is a MYTH!!!!

This is EXACTLY what the "Treaty of Tripoli" was saying...

IT'S THE STATES RIGHTS STUPID!!!!

Phreedm, did you forget to read the first amendment this morning?

The Constitution does not give the states the right to deny a separation between church and state.

Reason,
The Constitution Party suffers from clear lack of literacy, why would you vote for them? They want to force their interpretation of the Bible on everyone.