By Virgil Smith, February 13: “Faith is believing what you know aint so”

So believe in The Ring..........

“electing people who respect and believe in democracy.”

Where are they? The people who have come up for election all belong to the same dinner clubs as these present dictators.

Michael Moore was correct in his criticism’s of both Obama and Clinton. There health care proposals will still saddle us with enormous health care costs compared to other industrialized nations. He was also correct in chastising Clinton for her two votes to support Bush on iraq and Iran. She is touting herself on getting it right on day one but her track record in the Senate suggests otherwise.  She didn’t even take the time to read the NIE on Iraq before voting to go to war. Those who voted against the war actually read the NIE.  Plus her husband Bill pushed NAFTA, a disastrous piece of legislation for working people. It only benefited multi-national corporations and is one of the leading root causes of our upsurge in illegal immigration in this country.

There has never been a perfect democracy. It is a matter of degree. The United States once led the world in democracy. Under Bush we have slipped far behind. Currently the most democratic countries are in Europe. That doesn’t mean they are perfectly democratic, just more democratic than the U.S. But we can catch up, by getting rid of the current would-be dictators and electing people who respect and believe in democracy. The most nauseating thing is watching the U.S. behave like an empire and doing so in the name democracy. For that, we deserve the title of the most hypocritical nation on earth.

I don’t think it is a matter of “keeping their heads in the sand.” We have genuinely evil people as front runners for the highest office in the land. It is as if Mussolini and Hitler are the only contenders for President. I just tell people to stock up on food, ammo, and guns.

Amy Goodman seems to be on your side, aside from hairdos and hairy legs. She has little time for 9-11 truthers. I don’t know which guys are nuts. Are you a sister f**ker, and do you smoke weed and drop acid? A very confusing post.

Who’s there to vote for Yankee?

Re Robert Mendez, February 9 at 11:51 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

“Re: Tell me if I’m religious
Does it bother you then to live in a place where democracy is not practiced?”
-------------------------------------------------
Robert,

Of course it bothers me. That’s why I have joined the Obama campaign to restore democracy in this country. Bush has done everything in his power to undermine our democracy and subvert our Consitution, while he has dragged the name of democracy in the mud to justify his imperialist adventures. Democracy cannot be spread at gunpoint. That makes Bush a hypocrite, not me. I have despised Bush from the minute I laid eyes on that lying piece of shit.

Democracy is the only way to peace, and human rights, and its basic principles are universal; they apply to all human beings everywhere. It can only evolve peacefully.

You really are a honey, Maani.....and thank you.

semantics |səˈmantiks|
plural noun
the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning......

To strive for ‘Meaning’ is a Very Good thing....

Rhythm..Ritual...Reverence.......One practice leads to another....
My own experience of faith is this:.....Until I was deeply saturated through meditation, prayers begging for mercy (all inward effort..’-)..and, ‘of course’, the most mystical and humbling component, Grace...with the light of certainty of actual Divinity alive within my heart, and then, of my individuated, conscious responsibility to it...my faith was something like a ‘lady-in-waiting’ ...Now....it is my unshakeable Ruler....from tiny, fragile sapling to fabulous, giant redwood as it were…

I speak often of striving on, for that, to me, is The Work at hand....Built into ‘trying’ there is the natural opposite of ‘failing’....
As I understand these matters, striving does not have this problem, for it is inherently forward, and it is toward, and it is predicated upon Ideals, which naturally breed Imagination, which is followed organically by Enthusiasm....All of this is about ‘meaning’ when pondered deeply...The only opposition built into the work of striving is to stop striving....
That stage, as I have observed for decades, rarely lasts for long once striving has begun, and is more of a naturally occuring ‘test’....a wake up again call..so to speak...a big version of the proverbial blessing in disguise....

Whether Mr. Moore is a sympathy or an antipathy for me, ‘personally’ is never the point as regards my respect for him in his efforts use his gifts and intentions toward the serarch for meaning, truth, and good service to his fellows...His imperfections only mirror my own in that regard…
Striving toward following the Golden Rule really does breed Compassion...and, indeed, vice versa…

Since I do believe in karma (i.e. comes around, goes around), and also, yes, reincarnation, I, therefore, also, absolutely, believe that I/we reap what I/we sow....As I see it, great care must be exercised in judging anyone, let alone their ‘imperfect’ efforts...Nobody gets over...’-)…
Also, there is a wonderful, challenging Sufi saying....."Learn how to behave from those who cannot”...I taught my own children..."If you don’t like what you see, don’t do it”....It was, I thought, a good start.....

Mr. Michael Moore’s inner religious/Spiritual work, by his own admission, informs his choices on, apparently, many levels… and he is, to my way of seeing, doing what he can to help…
Always comes the question, am I?

As we think, so we become.
May Peace Prevail.

GC:

I like your “religion/spirituality” aphorism.

As a minister, I would also add that, re Christianity, “Religion is about laws, regulations and behavior; faith is about a relationship with God and Christ.”

In my opinion, there is FAR too much “religion” going on, and not enough “faith.” Too much emphasis on rules, regulations and behavior (for which there is certainly a place WITHIN faith), and not nearly enough emphasis on “faith” (or, to use your word, “spirituality").

It is not “faith” that causes wars, violence, etc., but “religion”; that is why we CALL them “religious wars” and not “faith wars.” (Yes, I’m engaging in a bit of semantics here...)

Peace.

...at least, I keep saying the same thing:

Religion is from the top down;
Spirituality is from the inside out…

“It is always the denial of the Spiritual in the world which produces the worst kind of malpractice in thought..”
-R.Steiner

Warm Toast And Courage For All,
.....We Strive On.......

GrammaConcept

#By Maani, February 9: “Re: Religion DOES matter… Does this mean you (i) did not vote in the primary in your state, if one was held, and (ii) will not vote in the general election, since ALL of the current candidates in both parties are Christian and believe in God...”

Oh boy, Maani, it sound like a lot of people would rather leave GWB and the Neocons in power than be bothered to trouble themselves to vote, uhh!!! Any excuse for keeping their heads in the sand.......

#By Tony Wicher, February 8: “Religion is ideology - Ideology means a belief system. It does not matter whether it involves believing in God or believing in no God.... Is it possible to get beyond belief and ideology, to have a perception of human events that is unconditioned by ideology...”

Ideology is a belief system but it is not necessarily religion. It can be science or creationism or music or art or militarism or materialism or aetheism or a million other things. It is a subset of ideas about how we think and act towards some end.......

But being “unconditioned by ideology” is only possible in two ways. One is more or less total and utter ignorance of everything - and that is not so unusual. The problem with that is that we are still “conditioned” by our wants, desires and fears, etc etc, whether learned or unlearned. That is the quandary facing most people as they grapple with the inner demons of their own R-Complex and subconscious mind.

The other is pure original thought - or what we think is “original”. In fact, nothing is really new or original as it was all created some how in the beginning. That is, it is not possible for a human being to design anything new, let alone a human body. In some way we don’t quite understand, it was all “thought” into being aeons ago when life as we know it first began on Earth.

Thus the nearest thing to an “unconditioned… ideology” is to consciously become in contact with the Universal Mind and to learn how It created everything in the Universe. That is possible - but, as you say, it can only be done by freeing oneself from limiting man-made concepts such as religion and even science and to accept the ultimate Reality as It really Is - and that we are a part of It - and just how precious this Nature is.

In doing that, we find out how deprived we have been for millenia in following man-made sets of rules about anything. Instead, we should have been following our Intuition and avoiding the pitfalls and aiming towards discovering the real reason why the human race was created in the first place. That is something that is still unknown despite all the prophets and all the masters of yoga and all the raving idotic priests of mankind’s slavery to his/her inner fears and emptiness.

Larry King is about as dead in his response to Michael Moore’s criticism of US media giants regarding “political retribution” as the BBC’s David Frost was to Benazir Bhutto last December when she said that Osama bin Laden had been killed, possibly back in 2001. Then again, maybe that was eventually edited too???

But this business of being “morally prohibited from voting for Hillary.... because of her war votes” simply because Moore is “an Irish Catholic” is utter garbage. People tend to use that excuse for avoiding ever facing up to their own lack of perception in voting for GWB and so forth. Essentially though, Moore is just another sexist when the chips are down.

Moore doesn’t seem to realize the hypocrisy in his words when it was Bush and the Neocons who led the USA into war, not Hillary Clinton. What is more, there were 100’s of other congress persons and senators who also voted the same way from both major parties so he has no reason to pillory Hillary Clinton for what others are guilty of. Easy to do to a woman, uhh.

Its also precious that religion should be “off limits” in a country which is being so usurped and led up the garden path by the Zionist fiends from AIPAC. In fact the Catholic religion is as guilty as any in that regard never mind the historical atrocities it has been guilty of over the past 1,000 years. But the Christian churches’ upholding the “old testament” garbage about the bloodthirsty Jews as being in any way “holy” or “the chosen ones” is the ultimate hypocrisy.

Micheal Moore has sadly shown himself to be the utter fool that he really is.............

Re WriterOnTheStorm, February 8 at 10:29 am #

“Re: Religion is private
Imagine a young candidate running for president of Pakistan. He holds the exact same religious beliefs as Bin Laden. However, he has no “record of actions” to go by. Is his religion irrelevant to his campaign as well? What if that same belief system were held by an American candidate? Still private?”
-----------------------------------------------------
Sure, why not? From my standpoint and presumably yours, bin Laden’s brand of Islam could not be any more ridiculous than Mormonism. If he took the same approach as Romney did in his speech, which I rather liked, and said that his religion is his own business, and people should be concerned only with what he does in the public square as a politician, I would say that’s fine. If Osama wants to have a beard and bow to Mecca 5 times a day, bully for him. Tolerance is one of my basic principles, and I’m not going to persecute or ridicule his religion. But if he tries to impose those practices on others as a matter of legislation, that violates basic democratic principles. 

How about putting it this way: there is, after all, one common relgion that we all have have to believe in - it’s called democracy. That’s my relgion, as it was that of our founding fathers.

But I do also have a private religion. I am very rational and scientific, but at the same time I believe that reason is limited, thinking itself is limited, and that reason is only possible because there is some kind of source, or ground, call it the Tao if you like, which cannot be comprehended. I have religious icons (I prefer the ancient Egyptian) on my desk, and they give me a good feeling.  Sometimes before going to sleep I pray to God, and give thanks for every minute of my life, because after all, I did not create myself. It’s good to have such a religion, I think.

DP:

Does this mean you (i) did not vote in the primary in your state, if one was held, and (ii) will not vote in the general election, since ALL of the current candidates in both parties are Christian and believe in God?

Peace.

For the benefit of those bamboozled, historically ignorant people who think that ‘atheism’ is responsible for tens of millions of deaths…

‘Atheism’ is a word that refers to people who find that the reasons and so-called ‘evidence’ that are presented in support of the idea that god(s) exist is not compelling… and, therefore, insufficient to initiate or sustain a mental state of ‘belief’. In other words, they simply do not ‘believe’ the god story. That’s it… that’s all… that is the ONLY thing that ‘defines’ what an atheist is… ‘skeptical’ with regard to the idea that gods actually ‘exist’.

Fascism and communism are totalitarian IDEOLOGIES… just like christianity is a totalitarian ideology. There were totalitarian governments… IDEOLOGIES which held the STATE to be the highest, ultimate authority. These totalitarian POLITICAL ideologies found themselves to be in opposition with competing totalitarian RELIGIOUS ideologies, which held that invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairies (gods) were the highest, ultimate authority. So, what religionists dishonestly attempt to portray as SKEPTICISM REGARDING THE CLAIM THAT DEITIES EXIST being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of human beings is a vile lie… it was, instead, a POLITICAL god (the state… the ‘supreme leader’) in conflict with an imaginary supernatural ‘god’… forcing people through terror, torture and murder to acknowledge the STATE as their master, instead of a supernatural ‘god’. This was a POLITICAL agenda… and had absolutely NOTHING to do with the reasonableness or unreasonableness of ‘belief’ in deities. Yet even this conflict extended only to the religious hierarchy and infrastructure… there were no purges of populations of people because of their ‘beliefs’… it is only the religious who do that.

“Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things… that takes religion.” ~ Steven Weinberg, Freethought Today, April, 2000

*** I am aware of tens of millions of human beings having been tortured and/or murdered in the name of totalitarian RELIGIOUS ideologies… i.e., Jesus… god… christianity… islam… PATICULARLY christianity.

*** I am aware of tens of millions of human beings having been tortured and/or murdered in the name of totalitarian POLITICAL ideologies.

*** I am NOT aware of even a SINGLE person who has ever been tortured and/or murdered in the name of ‘rational skepticism’.

THINK about that… a group of sane, reasoning, rational, critically-thinking people having achieved a controlling position of vast political power SOLELY by virtue of the fact that they thought that some sort of compelling evidence ought to be presented before they could be persuaded to ‘believe’ something… torturing and/or murdering whole groups of people for the crime of being somewhat more gullible than they thought was reasonable. THAT is what would be the most accurate description of what might be considered to be an ‘atheist regime’.

“I contend that we are both atheists.  I just believe in one fewer gods than you do.  When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." ~ Stephen Roberts

Moore failed to answer the most important part of the question… something like: “What do you think of the idea that the intent of the Constitution was to keep government out of religion… not to keep religion out of government?”

Since Moore did not answer, I guess I’ll have to answer for him… that idea is insane. It is a lie that is perpetuated by religious puppet-masters whose agenda is to keep their historically and scientifically ignorant constituency (i.e., the ‘religious’) in a perpetual state of bamboozlement so that they can be relied upon to support the sub-rosa transition the USA into a christian theocracy.

Regarding Moore’s contention that a candidate’s religion/religious beliefs do not matter… absolute rubbish and nonsense. One’s religious beliefs are the only accurate barometer of just how gullibile, irrational, willfully ignorant, self-deluded, intellectually dishonest, lying, hypocritical and droolingly stupid a candidate is. The only flaw there is that it requires the presumption that the politician is ‘honest’ in his/her declaration of faith… or lack thereof.

Statistically, one is obliged to presume that at least 10 members of the Senate and 44.7 members of the House… roughly 55 congressmen… are atheists. Considering that there is a statistically significant INVERSE correlation between religiosity and intelligence, one would probably be justified in presuming that there are a lot more atheists in congress that what the plain-vanilla demographic statistic tells us. But guess what? There is only ONE member of Congress who admits that he is an atheist. So… what does that tell us?… it tells us that in all likelihood, ALL members of Congress… save one… are EITHER gullibile, irrational, willfully ignorant, self-deluded, intellectually dishonest, lying, hypocritical and droolingly stupid (i.e., religious)… OR… that somewhat over 10% of them are just lying. The ones that are ‘just lying’ (the atheists) MIGHT be excused if we recognize that there is an unwritten ‘law’ that says that a candidate must proclaim religious ‘belief’ in order to be electable… an unwritten law that AUTOMATICALLY DISQUALIFIES the best ... the brightest… the most educated… the most intelligent… the most capable… the most qualified critical-thinkers… from eligibility to be elected to high public office.

We get what we deserve.

Is it possible to get beyond belief and ideology, to have a perception of human events that is unconditioned by ideology?

Tony...my answer to this is YES!! It IS possible. I do have a perception of human events unconditioned by ideology, though it actually had to first be reconditioned, to have the ideology removed.

OR..maybe it only meant accepting that everybody has their own ideology, and that for the most part, that’s perfectly fine, as long as everybody KNOWS that everybody ELSE has their own ideology, and that ideology, (being the belief system that it is) is NOT necessarily based on FACT or proven truth.

In other words, ideology and fact are not the same, just like opinion and fact are not the same. It’s perfectly fine to have ones own INTERPRETATION of reality, or..’the facts’. It’s just not a good idea to replace any given interpretation as ‘fact’ without some degree of truth.

Does that makes sense? Or is it just really late, and long past my bedtime?

Should I give an example? As for the God thing, I’m inclined to believe that there IS ‘God’ in a spiritual sense. But I don’t believe there is ‘A’ God. Like for me, God could be my dog, or God could be the Sun. Or God could be the Wind. Or God could be, (and this is my standard) humanity at large.

And nope...I’m honestly not crazy. I generally believe God to exist in humankind. That’s my ideology.

Now there’s no proof of that, so I’ll pretty much accept any other explanation of God, from anyone else. EXCEPT that I don’t feel obligated to follow anyone conversations with their own God, or take orders from another human being, based on what they claim God told them. For instance...George Bush. I don’t care what God says to him. And, I’m not persuaded to believe in orders or take directions from any religious text either, that doesn’t have a traceable authorship.

So, is that good enough for getting beyond belief and ideology, beginning with pretty much just believing what we see, and then going from there on the interpretation part?

Obama is just a younger, greener psychopath. I am sure he will come of age very quickly and his venom will be full strength by the time he is in office.

It was funny watching Bill Maher on the show today saying he used to take antibiotics before he got religion. The PJ O’Rourke quipped that wasn’t something a militant atheist like Bill Maher (who had just previously characterized Mitt Romney as a
magic-underwear-wearing Mormon) should be careful about saying on his show. Bill replied that he had religion about health, not about religion. He then proceeded to go on a passionate ten-minute rant about the evils of prescription drugs and eating right to keep the immune system strong and stay healthy. I sing in the same choir as Bill on this subject. I guess we would consider our religion relatively well thought-out and rational.

there is a new Bill Maher show on at 8. Maybe he has some of his writers back.

I’m enjoying this discussion myself. I would pass the weed, if a technology existed to pass it over the Net.

MMC:

Ditto.

Peace.

The only thing that matters is how people act. Acts are public, religion is private. I would not accuse Romney or Huckabee of being incapable of rational thought or action. They just go to church on Sunday and recite some weird incantations and go through some bizzare rituals, while you and I might prefer to stay home and watch Meet the Press. That’s how I look at it. It’s really none of my business what people do in church any more than in their bedrooms. Why should I care? They might prase Jesus all day Sunday, and be the phoniest back-stabbing bastards in the world the rest of the week.

Ideology means a belief system. It does not matter whether it involves believing in God or believing in no God.

Is it possible to get beyond belief and ideology, to have a perception of human events that is unconditioned by ideology?

Christians invented anti-Semitism. It’s an essential ingredient of Pauline dogma. Hitler used it for his own purposes, that’s all.

To Tony Wicher :
Sorry but I am not a mean spirited SOB . The fact is I am a very kind and caring person . That does not deny me the right to challenge certain people issues or statements in the “news” .
Mr. Moore is a very sly crossbreed of cat , chameleon and hog . If you follow his history in cinema , politics and public statements , you find he is all about money , always being on the “correct” political side and goes only on shows where he is comfortable with the knowledge that he will not be challenged by the host(s) or other guests . No wonder he would make this statement during an interview with Larry King . The only place safer for Mr. Moore would be solitary confinement in a rubber room .
Everyone has the right to their opinion including you . I have a brother who views Mr. Moore as an American Patriot and Folk Hero . I do not challenge my brother on that , but I personally think he is a sucker for the Moore Myth. I would rather believe in Santa or the Easter Bunny . At least those two imaginary figures are associated with giving , where Michael Moore is only associated with taking .

CY:

See my lengthy response re Hitler to another post below.

Re the Jews, they were NOT killed because they were another religion.  They were killed because they were scapegoated for having created the financial mess that caused Germany’s economic collapse via the fact that they became the “money-lenders,” and were resented for it.  To the degree that religion was USED as an EXCUSE for killing them, as noted in my post below, this was propaganda.

As for the numbers of people kill re religion and re other ideologies, the number killed under Mao, Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot are easily obtained via any number of websites.  Depending on which figures you use, the number is between 100 million and 150 million.  And again, this was all in a space of 60 years.

The number killed in the name of “religion” is based on figures I have seen in various historical texts, both religious and secular.  They include estimates of the number killed by the Israelites in the early books of the OT, and the number killed in the various Crusades, inquisitions, witch burnings, etc.  Again, depending on which figures you use, the number is between 50 million and 75 million.  And again, this is over the whole of recorded time.

Peace.

JS:

As one who studied this in depth both prior to and during my ministerial studies, I can assure you that you are misinformed.

Hitler “used” Christianity to further his goals.  Keep in mind that his ultimate goal was a “master race” of Aryans: however, Aryan is a BLOODLINE, NOT a religion.  And very few Aryans are Christians (if they believe in anything at all, it is a form of paganism).  As you know, Hitler attempted (almost successfully) to take over the Protestant churches.  This is was a prelude to dismantling them.  As well, Hitler did NOT have a cozy relationship with the pope; in fact, Hitler was aware that the pope (who admittedly could have and should have done more) was turning a blind eye to Catholics helping the Jews escape.  And in a speech to the party faithful in 1933, Hitler said, “It is through the peasantry that we will finally destroy Christianity.  One can be a Christian or a German, but not both.” [He began to make good on this statement when he had all the parish priests in Prussia (over 460) rounded up and arrested, ostensibly for “treason.” Within two years, 75% of them were dead, and the Prussian church was left decimated, with only 15% of its priests remaining.]

Thus, once he was done exterminating the Jews, he had his sights set on Christianity.

Hitler was an equal opportunity murderer; in addition to the 6 million Jews, he murdered between 2-3 million Christians, plus hundreds of thousands of blacks, homosexuals, trade unionists, communists, the elderly, and the physically and mentally handicapped.

Hitler’s self-proclaimed Christianity was simply another factor in the propaganda machine that he used to control the populace.  After all, one can self-proclaim ANYTHING, but that doesn’t make it so.  After all, we know that the main precepts of Jesus’ ministry were love, peace, forgiveness, compassion, humility, patience, charity, selflessness, service, justice and truth.  Yet Hitler practiced the polar opposites of all of these: hate, war, lack of forgiveness or campassion, arrogance, impatience, monomania, injustice and lies.

Even from a strictly logical and common sense standpoint, the idea that Hitler was somehow a Christian serving Christian ends is absurd.  But when we look at his words and actions vis-a-vis the Christian church, and his intention to “destroy” it, it is clear that he was simply “using” his self-proclaimed but unactioned “Christianity” to further his goals of world domination and a master race of (non-Christian) Aryans.

Peace.

Don’t know why Kerry gets a pass, but he didn’t get one from me.

(I’m not an Obama supporter, just so you know) There is a big difference between authorizing the initial action and continuing to fund the action.  Its the old legislative saw about how hard it is to get bad legislation off the books, so the best thing to do is not put it on the books.

And yes, i do think that people hate Sen Clinton that much.  I don’t, but i wouldn’t vote for either of them...i’m leery of Obama, but i would give him a chance.

The Pentagon scenario is fraught with red herrings and contaminated evidence, much like the JFK assassination. Sometimes it is just easier to stick with your strongest argument; that is that the WTC looks like it was taken down by controlled demolition. I agree with you that making the official story look weak is the best strategy. BTW, the Japanese have publicized the chinks in the official story. I heard haqqt Loose Change was broadcasted on Japanese television. As is often the case, the only the secrets the establishment has are from the American people as the rest of the world usually knows the real story.

Imagine a young candidate running for president of Pakistan. He holds the exact same religious beliefs as Bin Laden. However, he has no “record of actions” to go by. Is his religion irrelevant to his campaign as well? What if that same belief system were held by an American candidate? Still private?

Blueshift,

Surely you are not claiming that the neocons make make no use of religion in their arguments for war and “new world order”.

“Mr. Moore makes millions of dollars off the suffering of others , but what does he give back to the subjects of his films - relatively nothing in contrast to the amount of money in his pocket . ”

You mean there’s a left wing icon who is a fraudulent, posturing hypocrite?

Say it ain’t so!!!!!

“If there’s one thing the neocon’s war on Muslims has taught me it’s that a candidate’s religious beliefs matter. They matter a great deal. ”

Fraudulent claim.

What we have is a feeble and ineffective show of resistance to Islamic extremism.

Interesting interview...thanks for the link.

Moore is okay in my book. Anyone not voting for the regressive candidate is a progressive candidate.

Ah, good ole Alex Jones.  He’s spot on concerning a lot of things.  My only problem with the 9/11 truth movement is that it does not stick to a very good argument: that the “official” story is in fact a conspiracy theory that is full of holes big enough to fly a jumbo jet through.

Putting forward competing conspiracy theories makes it easy to dismiss.

All i really want is a good explanation of how a jumbo jet can crash into the Pentagon, leaving a perfectly circular hole and no wreckage.  Simply, where did the wings go?

^ he’s a most informed guy.

Good for Ron Paul. I do agree with him on many issues. Too bad he’s such as socioeconomic reactionary.

Tony:

Actually, Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate in either party who is calling for a new, thorough, non-political investigation into 9/11, following ALL the evidence WHEREVER IT LEADS.

Peace.

Cyrena:

“In reality however, we know that more crimes against humanity have been committed in the name of ‘religion’, (specifically Christianity) than any other ideology, or even the need for basic survival.”

Not quite.  The most liberal estimate of those killed in religious wars, Crusades, inquisitions, witch burnings, etc. is around 50-75 million IN ALL OF HISTORY.  The number of people killed either directly or as the result of the policies of just four men - Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot - was 100-150 million IN JUST 60 YEARS.

So political ideologies have caused FAR more deaths and human suffering than religious ones.

Peace.

Bush is so self-deluded about religion I don’t know if you could call him an exploiter. The rest of the neocons are amoral and use whatever will help them achieve their aims. Cheney’s motivation is power and money, thus his only familiarity with God, country or family seems to be exploitation. The rest are blind to everything but power and ideology, a Machiavelli masking and justification for what they want to do.

I do agree that 9-11 may be an inside job, or at least that bin Laden had inside help. I also agree that we have psychopaths in power. I’m sure this will never come out in a Clinton administration. It might possibly in an Obama administration. At least I dare to hope.

So far I have listened to about 10 minutes of this show and I haven’t heard one true statement yet. I’m not sure how much more I can take.

You sound like one mean-spirited SOB. Who cares what you believe? It’s how you act that matters.

If this were indeed the democracy that it claims to be, and if there were indeed a separation of church and state, and if we were in fact governed by THE RULE OF LAW, then in reality, “another’s religion’ would not be scrutinized, including any candidate. It wouldn’t be necessary, because we could assume that the candidate was guided...(in policy and in leadership decisions) by the RULE OF LAW, and NOT by religion.

But alas, we only pay hypocritical lip service to the notion of Rule of Law, and so unfortunately, these ‘religious’ beliefs do end up being scrutinized, as they should be, least we wind up with a Ron Paul, just as we’ve wound up with others who would attempt to turn us into a Theocracy instead of a Democracy.

Sadly, the American mentality does not understand the difference between morality and ‘religion’. They attempt to make them the same, because in the average thinking, they are connected, at least theoretically.

In reality however, we know that more crimes against humanity have been committed in the name of ‘religion’, (specifically Christianity) than any other ideology, or even the need for basic survival.

At any rate, one could avoid having their religious beliefs ‘challenged’ if they just didn’t have any. That said, I’d vote for ANYBODY that admits to NOT having any. In other words, I think it should be a eligibility requirement for anyone running for office, to be an atheist. That means that they would hold NO OTHER GOD, higher than ‘we the people’.

Now that isn’t to say that I don’t believe in freedom of religion. I do. I believe people should be free to practice as few or as many religions as they want..or none at all. I don’t even care if they switch up every month. But for presidents, they need to be atheists.

Just my 4 cents. (inflation and all).

I detest Obama, but Hillary Clinton is a nightmare. No I am not a Republican operative. The problem is we are under invasion. We have psychopaths in power. Please listen at the 50 minute mark for Larry Nichols. You can fast forward to it.

http://www.nw0.info/files/Radio/Alex Jones Radio Archive/2008/February/aj_2008-02-07.mp3

I know, and those choices trouble me.  If Clinton were to say that she regretted that choice, i could probably pull the lever.  But her blame shifting and more recent votes against banning the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas and banning land mines push me over the edge.  I’ll go third party in a Clinton/McCain election...but if that’s the way it shapes up, i’m just as likely to vote with my feet. (again)

What a joke ! Michael Moore gets religion ? Michael Moore’s Catholicism prohibits(?) him from voting for Hillary Clinton and yet infers that the religious beliefs of others should be off limits ??????
This Ambulance Chaser needs to start living Catholicism - there is a difference between being a Catholic by birth (affiliation) and being a truly devout Catholic in practice (belief) .
Mr. Moore makes millions of dollars off the suffering of others , but what does he give back to the subjects of his films - relatively nothing in contrast to the amount of money in his pocket .
Maybe this is the primer for his next film - “Jesus Moore saves the World” . After all , when you really look closely at Mr. Moore , it is all about Michael , Michael and Michael .

Yeah.

One’s values are those given to you if you are very religious.

One’s values are based on thinking if you are not so religious.

With one caveat. Politics always means choices between real alternatives. If it comes down to Clinton v McCain, my values inform me to vote for Clinton on the grounds that she is less warlike than McCain. As long as I have Obama to vote for, however, I’m not going to vote for Clinton.

Why not just politely tell them to go away?

I said your values determine what you do, not your religious beliefs. I also said that what you do shows what your real values are, not the religious beliefs you profess. What matters is how you treat people, how you behave, not what you say you believe.

The only putative ‘christian’ in the neokon camp is Bush himself, nominally a subscriber to the tooth-fairy principles of evangelicalism. The rest are non-observant in their faith: Cheney, Feith, Kristol, Rumsfeld.... this is not a group likely to be seen at the front of a church at an altar call. Believe me, they aren’t believers.

Well, i know where Moore is coming from...i’m not even religious.

Scholars in the field called “comparative religion” use this basic definition: religion is a system of beliefs that informs behavior in this world.

Under this definition, we’re probably all religious with varying degrees of organization.

I won’t vote for any politician who voted for the war, its as simple as that.

There are no real differences between Catholicism, Scientology and Mormonism. They are all imaginary and subjective. Religion is intrinsically private and subjective. Actions are not. Obviously we do not know for sure what a candidate will do when he becomes President. But that does not mean that we have only what a candidate tells us he believes least of all his religious beliefs - we also have the record of his actions to judge by.

Tony,
If there’s one thing the neocon’s war on Muslims has taught me it’s that a candidate’s religious beliefs matter. They matter a great deal.

You seem to be trying to make the distinction between religious beliefs and one’s de facto moral life. But the latter is only clearly revealed in the course of the candidate’s eventual presidency. This means that we must extrapolate based on what we have during the campaign—i.e. what the candidate tells us he/she believes.

While Scientology, Catholicism, and Mormonism are equally moronic in my book, they have very real distinctions in terms of the morals, values, degree of humanism and social responsibility they demand of their constituents.

Ignoring these crucial differences is an unintended consequence of this society’s insistence that another’s religion cannot be scrutinized, lest one’s own beliefs be challenged in turn.

One’s values are one’s real religion, whether one is a Catholic, a Mormon, a Scientologist, an atheist or none or all of the above. Of course these values determine every act, whether public or private, political or non-political. One’s true values are manifested in one’s acts. One’s religious beliefs and practices, if any, are incidental and entirely one’s own private business.

Peace is very important to me as it is to Michael Moore. Therefore we both condemn Hillary’s war vote and would prefer to vote for someone who did not vote as Hillary did. It does not matter at all that he is a Catholic and I am not.