Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Morford writes: "People like [Gov. Chris] Christie are, of course, so locked like sad demons into their stiff little roles they cannot help but toe the party line, delude themselves into believing what is so clearly a violent mischaracterization of love and marriage, even as they sell their own soul for the sake of the vote and the sneering fundamentalist GOP nod."

qNew Jersey Gov. Chris Christie speaks at a rally for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in Exeter, New Hampshire on January 8, 2012. (photo: Justin Sullivan/AFP/Getty Images)
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie speaks at a rally for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in Exeter, New Hampshire on January 8, 2012. (photo: Justin Sullivan/AFP/Getty Images)



How to Be More Like Satan

By Mark Morford, SF Gate

25 February 12

 

ften in the midst of my second glass of whisky do I ponder how it can be that seemingly savvy and knowledgeable people, people who clearly know better, people who you sense have a modicum of wisdom and perspective despite steaming piles of evidence to the contrary, how can such humans so brutally decide against their own better judgment, against their own inner voice, against what they must know, way down deep, to be honest and true?

More broadly: How can it be that we as individuals, as a species so often override our most innate, potent knowing simply because it is the popular choice, or the thing that will gain us more votes, or Likes, or money or candy or sex or time or power or support or accolades or cocktails or bonus points or awards? Particularly when we understand that such a choice will put us squarely on a collision course with illness, pain and prescription meds by the fistful?

"How is it," I ask, already knowing the answer, "that someone like, say, New Jersey governor Chris Christie could so ruthlessly veto the gay marriage bill that came across his desk recently, as passed by his own state legislature and increasingly supported by a majority of New Jersey's (and the nation's) more open-minded residents, even as DADT gasps its last and gay marriage calmly, if sporadically gains support and inevitability nation and worldwide?"

(WARNING: I'm going to assume for the sake of the next few paragraphs that Christie, a Catholic, has a shard of intelligence, appears reasonably articulate, understands what's happening in the culture and the world around him. I know, but let's just go with it).

Indeed, part of the the answer is already encoded in the question. People like Christie are, of course, so locked like sad demons into their stiff little roles they cannot help but toe the party line, delude themselves into believing what is so clearly a violent mischaracterization of love and marriage, even as they sell their own soul for the sake of the vote and the sneering fundamentalist GOP nod. Hey, this is politics. The murdering of one's own humanity for the sake of power and position has been around since man first oozed out of the slime and demanded a campaign contribution.

But surely he knows. Surely he saw what just happened in Washington state, or even right next door in New York just a few months ago.

Surely he is hearing a tiny but persistent voice in the night, his own conscience as a screaming whisper: "Oh goddammit, now I'll be one of those ugly footnotes. Now, in a handful of years when gay marriage is fully legal and no big deal, I'll be remembered as one of those dark smudges of ignorance who stood on exactly the wrong side of history, who jeered his disapproval, even if, deep down, I knew full well it's the wrong and immoral choice." Surely he knows. Don't you think?

Maybe he doesn't. This is the astonishing thing: We will choke down our better judgment, our own soul, in favor of the power and the cash, the political gain and the backslapping of approval from exactly the wrong kinds of people. Despite roughly one billion historic examples of how this is the unhealthy, hurtful and spiritually vacuous path, we will do it anyway. Just ask the Catholic church.

Make no mistake, this is not an immutable law. Nor is it, I believe, the true nature of the human spirit, to work from a bitterly reactive state of fear and suspicion, instead of from a pro-active, intuitive state of possibility and love. It's just the way many have been trained, the prevailing modality, politicians' and organized religion's favorite weapon. Most don't know how to do it any other way. But as the wise ones and ancients say, it's also completely full of sh-t.

Occasionally, one falls through the cracks. Occasionally someone steps up, just a little, to reveal how life can actually be when you dial in to the core and listen to the true voice. It is no easy thing to do. In fact, it is often the most difficult task of all.

Occasionally you get someone like Maureen Walsh, a small-town conservative rep from the tiny burg of Walla Walla, Washington, once known for its famous apples and funny little name and now known for its superlative vineyards and funny little name.

Did you hear? Walsh recently did a most remarkable thing. As her state's landmark gay marriage bill was being debated in the legislature, Walsh stood up and, choking back tears, powerfully broke ranks with her Republican counterparts.

Apparently, Walsh lost her husband of 23 years, the love of her life, six years ago. Also, Walsh's daughter is gay. The two emotional realms collided in her heart to reveal one overwhelming conclusion: To deny her own daughter the possibility of such a state-supported love, of a marriage ceremony and life of couplehood such as she and her late husband had known, would be nothing less than cruel. And for what? More Republican fear? A nasty misreading of a single tortured line in the Bible? Please.

And so you think, is that what it takes? Some personal hit, a death, a wake up call from a loved one, a child, a perspective slap so hard and deeply felt that, if you don't heed its call, not only will you be on the wrong side of history, but your very own soul will quickly wither and die? Is there really no other way?

Somewhere in the new "It Gets Better" documentary is the stunning statistic that fully 26 percent of kids who come out as gay to their families are told to get the hell out of the house. True. One in four children are saddled with parents so hateful or scared, so ill-informed or spiritually bereft, they can do nothing but reject their own child over the fact he or she loves in a way they can't and won't understand.

Perhaps you know people like this. Perhaps you are one yourself. If so, I am terribly sorry for you. But more so for your child.

In Milton's epic poem "Paradise Lost," the glorious, church-sanctioned tale of the fall of man, when the defiant angel Satan is cast out of heaven, he is first depicted as a completely glorious badass, reclining in fiery majesty, magnificently sexy and monstrously regal in his underworld throne.

But then, a slow deterioration. A ruthless decay. A withering and shrinking as he slides further and further away from God, from Source. And why? Well, one way to look at it is Satan was no longer in alignment with his God. Or what we might call, in the yoga tradition, his own true spirit, his divine nature, compassion and heart. (Another is that he was a radical individualist and anarchic rejecter of contrived heavenly dogma, but that's another column).

Strip out the bitter, dualistic Christian mythology, and the deeper lesson is simple enough: Stray from your true self, your calm inner knowing, deny your own heart's quieter, more authentic voice in favor of power, shrill punditry or the ego's sly trickery, and watch yourself fall, decay, slither into lower and lower realms of hate and sadness. Choose a path of fear instead of love, and watch yourself die.

Seems simple, no? Shall we alert the politicians?

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+117 # gslusher 2012-02-25 10:05
"I'll be remembered as one of those dark smudges of ignorance who stood on exactly the wrong side of history"

You may be right. Christie, Romney, Santorum, et al, may, in 20 years, be viewed as we now view Sheriff Clark, George Wallace, and all those politicians and preachers who passed and supported anti-miscegenation laws, saying that God didn't want the races to mix and that marriage between blacks and whites was unnatural.
 
 
+14 # ER444 2012-02-26 01:14
I have a problem with the concept of hell, but if it exists it is surely reserved for hypocrits and will certainly be full of "white collars" and "trubans" and all kinds of "religious" symbols of dogmatism. What a group of twisted hateful people these fundamentalists are. Maybe it is time for a real agape feast to show them what love and forgiveness is really about. They have certainly forgotten if they ever knew it.
 
 
+145 # bugbuster 2012-02-25 10:48
If you seek the devil, look for the most pious person in the room.
 
 
+62 # Virginia 2012-02-25 10:50
The issue of marriage, gay or straight, doesn't belong in government or politics. Civil unions for the purpose of benefits should be an impartial form, free from gender, religion, race, in order to issue an unbiased certificate that can be taken to a licensed individual to perform a marriage ceremony.

The government doesn't belong inside your home. Bad enough they are wired into it with cable, but your private life doesn't belong on a political platform whether it be for your sexual preference or control of your body (birth control, conception, abortion, etc). This is between you and your God, unless you harm another individual.

Frankly speaking, tax deduction based on marriage are discriminatory. End that and there would be less reason for the government to be concerned with gay marriage. And maybe then they would have to find more compelling topics to discuss like the Federal Reserve printing too much taxpayer money.
 
 
+1 # E-Mon 2012-02-27 01:56
I was getting ready to say pretty much the same thing. Looks like you beat me to it. I second your emotion!!! Who people choose to love is none of the government's business. We have waaay more important issues to deal with.... Like you say the Fed, to my mind, should be #1 priority. I have to laugh when I hear about someone getting busted for printing even a few hundred counterfeit bills when meanwhile the Fed is running the largest counterfeit operation the world has ever seen. And WE are all slaves to the interest they charge for that counterfeit money. Was just reading about executive order 11110 signed by JFK. It's actually still in effect but no other president since him has had the balls to implement it. Too bad.... If we were still printing REAL US currency backed by gold or silver (instead of Fed fiat funny money) there wouldn't be any national debt!!!!! And no inflation. I remember back in the early 60's when the dollar bills said "Silver Certificate" up on top instead of "Federal Reserve Note".
 
 
+68 # lisamoskow 2012-02-25 11:05
I love you Mark Morford!

And I agree with Virginia and bugbuster.

There is great wisdom in separation of church and state and in the protection
of our individual liberties.

Regarding birth control, the planet is way way overcrowded--in light of the damage humans do to survive. We need to have all children be wanted children with parents who can nurture them. This concept is the key to eliminating crime.
 
 
-68 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 13:23
So then, you agree that there should be rules regarding how life is brought into this world.

Do we need also protect the right to have promiscuous, meaningless, recreational sex as often as is liked?
 
 
+30 # Majikman 2012-02-25 19:49
It's none of your dam business who has sex with whom and what kind or how often....unless, of course, you're applying for the position of Sex God.
 
 
+15 # nelly73 2012-02-25 20:16
Don't you think that allowing gays to marry would help eliminate any desire for "promiscuous, meaningless, recreational sex"? Maybe that stereotype stems from the fact that until the last few decades, a gay relationship was impossible, especially since it was difficult to have a relationship between two closets!
 
 
+12 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-25 20:33
VOICE of REASON: Noone here is talking about any "rules"...in regard to..."how life is brought into this world", or promiscuity or "recreational sex", whatever that is.

This discussion is about the separation of Church & State which is a bedrock of Constitutional Law, and Equal Rights for women, which began with women being given the "right" to vote & progressed to a woman's right to make decisions about & to be in control of her own body.
 
 
+3 # KittatinyHawk 2012-02-25 21:54
We do protect the right to do what we want ...or we used to, now we just seem to like letting others leading us around.

Government has no business dictating our lives after we are off the clock. For all who wanted less government, sounds like you want Nazism. Need to be told when to jump. I do not, I work, I therefore, have the right, in the USA to do what I want when I go home as long as I am not harming another being or creature.
You want to jump, go ahead, but I don't want to, that is my choice.

I believe in sterilization, man has shown me why Perhaps the Creator is taking the eggs away until we grow up.
After all the Lord Giveth and Taketh Away.
Maybe our pollution, poison are working against us, we will be sterile. than you all can thank your Corporate Killers like Monsanto, GE, Koch Bros. But without us here, robots will take over our jobs, they are already. You all let them
 
 
+11 # historywriter 2012-02-26 10:27
Who says it's "promiscuous, meaningless . .. ." etc.? Were you in on it?
By the way, we already have a sex God: the Pope.
 
 
+7 # David Starr 2012-02-26 12:41
Rules on how life being is brought into this world? Well, there are the rules of nature: sex can = the fertilization process can = pregnancy, or not. Rules? On what? Making abortion legal or criminal? Which is responsible, based on realities of various individuals, notably women, that have existed before & during Roe v. Wade or based on a sterile reading of old, male-written scripture traditionally viewing women as baby assemblylines?

Regarding your second qustion, am I to take it that sex can't be enjoyed, but Victorian-era/bible-thumping procreation is only allowed? As opposed to having some great responsible, mutual sex for pleasure w/o procreation being a requirement? I really haven't seen people out on the streets daily having orgies, so don't worry. I don't think all people are sex-crazed 24/7.
 
 
+3 # ruttaro 2012-02-26 16:42
The answer to your question: YES!
 
 
0 # historywriter 2012-02-29 19:00
I think you're going against the tide. Anyway, it's not your problem.
 
 
+29 # cpolaw 2012-02-25 11:14
Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.

Gilbert K. Chesterton
 
 
+12 # moreover 2012-02-25 15:03
My take is different:
After 2000 years of Christianities (schisms abound) the trial period is over. Salvage some philosophical bits if you must but toss the rest.
Schools let you retake a test so many times but at some point the applicant has to leave without a diploma.
 
 
+10 # DoctorDemocracy 2012-02-26 09:08
You may be interested in The Jefferson Bible if you are not already familiar with it. Thomas Jefferson, American patriot, enlightenment scholar and no more a "Christian" in today's terms than any of the other primary founders of the United States, made the same observation as you: salvage the good bits. So he engaged in a systematic process of throwing out all the fairy tale material and isolating the teachings of Jesus that are corroborated by more than one gospel. He retained the artful language of the King James version, so it's also nice prose. It's available free online.
 
 
+48 # Mouna 2012-02-25 11:15
Well, Mark, you've made it to the top as far as I'm concerned! Your sarcasm, wit, and intelligence pound a powerful message to those whose dogmas are unleashed. I hope to find you more often on RSN. You may take some getting used to, but your genius and heart shine through your message. I applaud this
piece and hope to hear more from you. Thanks, RSN!
 
 
+111 # poosta7 2012-02-25 11:27
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Mohandas Gandhi
 
 
-10 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 13:25
Mohammad said the same thing about Moslems:

The day will come on My people when nothing will remain of Islam but the name. The religious doctors of that age will be the most evil under the shadow of heaven.
 
 
+2 # rebelgroove 2012-02-25 20:29
Rabbis, priests and mullahs are the parasites of faith
 
 
+27 # WGR 2012-02-25 11:37
Thank you, Mark.

What a straightforward piece of writing! The way most of us test any idea or issue in life is to see how it feels: a gut check, or a heart check, if you will. This is at the core of any sincere Christian's spirituality. Facts and reading words on a page don't get you there.

Fear of rejection by others is a reason so many hold onto beliefs and ideas that have been robbed of their original intention. This fear is inappropiately called 'faith.' Christ is likely saddend by the use of Old Testament perspectives to justify "Christian" thinking - Old Testament laws and attitudes that were meant to be replaced by love and no judgement.
 
 
+23 # CL38 2012-02-25 11:47
Mark, in case you haven't yet read it, I refer you to this article for more on the motivation for far right policies:

A Conservative Explains Why Right-Wingers Have No Compassion: Former Republican Senate Congressional staffer on why right-wingers think people without insurance deserve to die.
http://www.alternet.org/visions/154194


-------------------------------------
 
 
-23 # lnason@umassd.edu 2012-02-25 12:04
CL38

I know hundreds of right-wingers and I do not know one who thinks people without insurance deserve to die.

In addition to being factually absurd, this statement does nothing to further the goals of determining how best to make healthcare inexpensive and available to all.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+25 # reiverpacific 2012-02-25 15:19
Quoting
CL38

I know hundreds of right-wingers and I do not know one who thinks people without insurance deserve to die.

In addition to being factually absurd, this statement does nothing to further the goals of determining how best to make healthcare inexpensive and available to all.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts

Check out former (and I hope soon to be again) Florida Senator Alan Grayson's remark about how the Republican's or plan for health care is 1. "Die" 2 "Die soon" or words to that effect. And I have heard at least one representative on the floor of the house (can't remember who any more but it presents the attitude of the right in general) stating in a loud voice that "Healthcare is NOT a right, it should be earned". Now if that isn't an invitation to die and soon, what is it?
 
 
+24 # historywriter 2012-02-25 17:37
The cheering in one of the debates when one of the candidates suggested that a terminally ill person be left to die was one of the most chilling things I've ever heard.
 
 
+11 # Billy Bob 2012-02-25 17:43
You're right. I think the exact quote was: 1. Don't get sick. 2. If you do get sick, die quickly.
 
 
+34 # DoctorDemocracy 2012-02-25 11:50
@The Voice of Reason. In case you did not understand Gee Rob's suggestion about changing your username, I'd like to add a tip for you:

You are NOT God!

You are NOT God!

You are NOT God!

When God wants you to speak for God, we will all be notified.
 
 
-34 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 13:26
How will we be notified -- will you be the one to tell us ???
 
 
+11 # moreover 2012-02-25 15:06
Thanks for pointing to one glaring argument why a god with a message to us does not exist: so far he's not used his arsenal to make it unmistakably clear who is boss, or even just why HE and not some other "deity" (I counted ~ 4500 throughout recorded history) are the one to listen to.
 
 
0 # Dave_s Not Here 2012-02-25 17:18
Quoting
Thanks for pointing to one glaring argument why a god with a message to us does not exist: so far he's not used his arsenal to make it unmistakably clear who is boss, or even just why HE and not some other "deity" (I counted ~ 4500 throughout recorded history) are the one to listen to.


For me, I am listening only to GANESH, the one true god
 
 
+14 # historywriter 2012-02-25 17:44
Dave
There are other ways to view "god." Maybe it's not an entity. Maybe it's within. Maybe it's all of us and our environment. Maybe it's the sense that we are all interconnected; that we stand on ground that somehow connects to our lakes, rivers, mountains, pastures, other human beings (even those in other countries we consider our enemies), our animals, and our loved ones.
I think God is a puzzlement, but I don't want to dismiss the idea. Not yet.
But what I do not believe is that it is a male God who knows everything and directs everything and can be petitioned with prayers. (I have born-again relatives who keep saying this sort of thing, totally ignoring the fact that a cousin died at an early age, for example, while she claims petitionary prayer works.)
 
 
0 # reiverpacific 2012-02-25 20:14
Quoting
Quoting
Thanks for pointing to one glaring argument why a god with a message to us does not exist: so far he's not used his arsenal to make it unmistakably clear who is boss, or even just why HE and not some other "deity" (I counted ~ 4500 throughout recorded history) are the one to listen to.

For me, I am listening only to GANESH, the one true god

Ga'nesh yer teeth at somebody else; (heh-heh) -sorry, I'm on my fourth glass o' Scotch now!
Watch that elephant in yer Livin' Room!
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2012-02-25 17:44
God will notify us if you're to be the next messiah. So far, God hasn't done that, so apparently you aren't.
 
 
-18 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 21:05
Are you aware that the Messiah appeared in 1844? He was promptly arrested by Iranian religious leaders and authorities and, like Jesus, He was suspended in the air by a nail and executed by a brutal government.

Still, in spite of all the opposition by the combined forces of the Iranian clergy and military, He left numerous Holy Books and foretold the coming of One even greater than He.

Perhaps you would like to look into it.
 
 
+9 # historywriter 2012-02-26 10:28
Where the heck did THIS fantasy come from? Quit smoking that stuff.
 
 
+9 # David Starr 2012-02-26 12:56
From "The Voice of Reason":
"Are you aware that the Messiah appeared in 1844? He was promptly arrested by Iranian religious leaders and authorities and, like Jesus, He was suspended in the air by a nail and executed by a brutal government."

Are you aware you should provide some backup for such a claim; similar to others like it that have been claimed for generations, but w/o literal, tangible proof? Perhaps you'd like to cite a source or sources in you post? Or like Righties, you may think you're exempt from doing that, based on the idea that it's "true" just because...?
 
 
+4 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 14:24
Voice: Please state the respected theological or literary writings that support your statement.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-02-26 17:08
Wow! This is comical. So, you're preaching to the rest of us based on Biblical Scriptures, but the Messiah you believe in is contrary to that very Bible. It seems kind of confused. Perhaps you'd like to look into it.
 
 
+3 # David Starr 2012-02-26 12:44
Well, no, it will be you since god "gave permission" for you to speak for him/her/it. And so we will wait for eternity.
 
 
+2 # XXMD48 2012-02-26 14:31
To "The Voice of Reason"

Ona day I had to tell a woman: "Maam, I can not reason with you when you are unreasonable."
 
 
-18 # lnason@umassd.edu 2012-02-25 12:00
Gay marriage should be legal and eventually it will be but it is yucky to be harangued using such biased language.

Simple facts should be enough to convince people of the correctness or incorrectness of political views. This kind of hit piece only antagonizes and polarizes the opposition -- a sure fire way to sabotage any rational discussion that might lead to us convincing others that are views are sensible and will not lead to a breakdown of traditional marriages.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+26 # moby doug 2012-02-25 12:00
How un-Christlike is the doubly misnamed Chris Christie. He and his cynical ilk seem intent giving a perfectly good divinity a very bad name. But Christ's name has been exploited by charlatans for millenia.....just ask the Pope.
 
 
+16 # BigMouthRanting 2012-02-25 12:02
Mark Morford is a treasure.
He used to occasionally appear in the SF Chronicle, with some wonderfully acerbic comments about GW Bush, and I used to get a "Morning Fix" email with his column on SFGATE, but then he seemed to disappear. Glad he's back, and that RSN picked up on him!
 
 
+16 # Larkrise 2012-02-25 12:12
Mark Morford's article is a wise and illuminated piece of writing. Voice of Reason's response, based purely on prejudice, ignorance and intolerance, is not. People like him think inside a box. They fear change.They thrive on hatemongering and bigotry. They cannot feel whole until they have a person, a group, an idea to exclude and fulminate against. They are threatened by loss of control over their perceived direction that society must go. They will use anything available to justify this, be it the Bible, politics, faulty statistics,or the words of madmen and demagogues. Look at the majority of red states. Are they prospering? Are they offering the rest of the world advances in science, engineering, even lifestyle? If so, only a minority in those states are strong enough to do so. The rest of the population is mired in ignorance, poor educational opportunities, poverty, and prejudice. After all, they must blame someone else for their predicament.We require equal opportunity and equal laws for all of our citizens, if we are to survive as a modern nation. We must have tolerance, compassion, fairness, and generosity as societal values, if we are to survive as a people. If your church doesnt want to offer a sacrament to one group or another, so be it. I pity that attitude; and have left the Catholic Church because of it. However, church and state must remain separate. Otherwise, as in Iran, will you have one religion destroy the others? Who shall have presidence in a theocracy?
 
 
+5 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 20:39
Larkrise: High 5 on "a wise & illuminated piece of writing" which is how you describe Morford's article & I'm
using to describe your comment. The prejudice, ignorance & intolerance you base Voice of Reason's comment on & I agree, but would like to add it's a good description of Rick Santorum, as well

About Chris Christie, I don't believe he's ignorant, intolerant,prej udiced or homophobic.

The man is a hypocrite & political opportunist which will come back to haunt him when same sex marriage is legalized.
 
 
+17 # Peace Anonymous 2012-02-25 12:21
The Voice of Reason ??? WTF
I do not drink. I have not drank for years. I have a great relationship with my God and He does not promote the kind of hatred you seem to be all to willing to embrace.
Last night a 20 year militray man stated so eloquently, "Having a heartfelt desire to kill another human being is not normal." So I ask you where is the acceptance. Where is the acceptance of Muslim, black, gay, poor, and/or communist. We are all people and we all have a right to believe what we believe. My God is inclusive. He embraces all people, not just the politcal right.
 
 
-12 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 22:36
What hatred? I'm only asking people to tell me why it's so important to drink, among other things. There is nothing hateful in the question. I just get right to the point and don't waste time. You read things that are not there. Why?
 
 
+6 # David Starr 2012-02-26 13:11
"The Voice of Reason",

Based on your previous posts, you look like you take a crooked path to a point, or "point" rather than a straight line. Rules for birthing? Implying that sexomania is rampant? A messiah appearing in 1844 arrested by Iranian authorities? (Iran is mentioned. Is this an implication to the current tensions w/ that country?) Your questions & statements have a certain color or tone to them, which bare out a Right-sounding noise. Understandably, other posters here will be critical of you.
 
 
-13 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 16:55
You are welcome to look into the Messiah's appearance. It helps explain the turbulence, treachery and violence in the Middle East. The Iranians put the Promised One to death. That can't be good.
 
 
+4 # David Starr 2012-02-27 08:45
"The Voice of Reason",

And you're welcome to provide a source. What you have thus far are vague, unprovable abstractions w/ pretended certainties. Your username contrasts your content like day & night.
 
 
+21 # myungbluth 2012-02-25 12:25
Dear "Voice of Reason", You're not. You are the voice of unprovable fanciful religious fairy tales - a denier that ALL good and ALL evil comes from the minds of men. In short, you're a goof.
 
 
-17 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 22:41
If it's all a meaningless fairy tale, you should be able to admit you're a non-believer. They used to call them infidels.

Are you sure you want to do that?

My statement was that people seem so willing to incur the wrath of God that they do it on a dare. Have I misstated the truth?
 
 
+4 # historywriter 2012-02-26 10:43
Do it on a dare? I am a non-believer, and it isn't the result of a dare or anything similar. I am a heretic (like Eve, a role model) and do not fear the wrath of God.
I may be wrong.
You know the saying there are no atheists in foxholes? I have been in the equivalent, in a roaring rapids after a canoe overturned and I was left hanging onto a rock, sure I would not get out of it. I didn't think of praying. My brother who is also an atheist has had many brushes with death (including Navy experience), and he has never thought he needed to petition anyone.
My own born-again cousin, when I outlined what I believe (no personal god, for example, wrote back and said "You are so brave!" I could never get her to say more.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 12:51
sDear VOICE of Reason: You have misstated the truth! Yes & in more than one area.
1) POLITICALLY: The constitution gives all Americans freedom of religion which means you have the right to believe in your religion & everyone else has the right to believe in their religion OR not to believe in a religion.

2) LOGICALLY: "Universal statements" implying that "ALL" people should behave or believe in a particular way can not be predicated by any of your statements which is the way to reach a logical conclusion or a statement of truth.

3) CULTURALLY: Your myopic, sweeping statements about alcohol, drugs, sexual relations, promiscuity & contraception are out of touch with society today, misinformed & biased by your religious beliefs and by your acculteration.

VOICE: I say this with good intentions:

It would behoove you & your religious argumentation to take University secular
courses in "Sex Education" &"Comparative Religions".

It would widen your world view to study political science, history & philosophy.
 
 
-10 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 16:34
Still don't see your points, and what you infer is necessarily not what I said. This is definitely a feel good generation, and has been since the 60s. Has it really made us a more enlightened society, or are we pandering to base appetites? To act like beasts of the field seems beneath our humanity. Could there possibly be a higher purpose we were created for, or is this the best we have to look forward to?
 
 
+6 # David Starr 2012-02-26 13:29
FRom "The Voice of Reason":
"If it's all a meaningless fairy tale, you should be able to admit you're a non-believer. They used to call them infidels."

Why should myungbluth admit to being a nonbeliever? Maybe he believes in Krishna, whatever, or maybe he doesn't believe. Infidel is sure a fuedalistic word.

"Are you sure you want to do that?"

Now what are you implying? Is this a warning? A threat? Did god tell you to ask this?


"My statement was that people seem so willing to incur the wrath of God that they do it on a dare. Have I misstated the truth?"

I don't see much truth in your statments to begin with. The one above is quite a fallacy. Athiests & Agnostics come to their positions through thinking, questioning-sooner or later-rather than what you equate as some kids daring each other to steal apples off a tree in a yard owned by a wrathful, grumpy old man.
 
 
-9 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 16:28
Never made a threat in my life. The 'are you sure' means 'do you hesitate'. Again, you guys read so much into this that is not there. You're so touchy.

But I do readily admit that I have seen atheists who are more spiritual than fundamental and fanatic religious people.
 
 
+3 # David Starr 2012-02-27 09:17
"The voice of Reason",

I didn't accuse you of making a threat. Why didn't you just say "do you hesitate" since "are you sure" sounds more like a question to someone who has decided something rather than hesitating. It's not reading so much into what you're saying, it's questioning your claims which state implications & unprovable anomalies. Instead of implying something & shapshifting into something else, clearly put out & briefly elaborate your claims, rather than pretending to be a voice of reason. If not, you're just plain out of touch.

I'm sure Atheists can be "spiritual" w/o the religous trappings, i.e., no myths; although the word has been usually associated w/ religion.
 
 
+1 # historywriter 2012-02-29 19:06
There's no real difference in terms of morals of atheists and agnostics and the "churched" people. Morals were set as soon as people began getting together in groups some 400000 years ago. Had to. Otherwise it would be pure chaos. There had to be rules or everyone would die, if they didn't work together and cooperate.
It's still true today.
 
 
+4 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 16:31
VOICE of REASON: I took the time to answer many of your questions & would appreciate a response. Thank you.
 
 
+6 # Billy Bob 2012-02-26 17:10
There are literally millions of atheists in the world today. Some of them are billionaires. I assume the wrath you're refering to will be after death, right?
 
 
+11 # rpauli 2012-02-25 12:31
Mark Morford, what a great message. Thank you.

Now about that human-caused global warming: Take the intransigence of the issue of gay marriage and then put a ruthless deadline on it. We either apprehend and change now or else face bigger, more dire problems further ahead.

Educated Republicans truly believe that humans have not done anything to heat up the atmosphere and oceans, and hence do nothing to stop it. And they remain blissfully unaware of the scientific inevitability that - unless we face it - can doom us all.

This wedding day approaches fast -- where human carbon habits meet up with real consequences. And for this issue, everyone will eventually have family members that are victims. But unlike gay marriage - this is change that must happen years before it takes effect. Like planning your wedding a few decades ahead.

We may know the science and we can yearn for a safe future - yet deciding to change before it gets worse is the most difficult part of that.

Thanks for scrutinizing how change happens, it seems like it takes empathy for personal pain. Plenty to come.
 
 
+7 # Annette Saint John Lawrence 2012-02-25 12:54
Mark Morford, where have you been hiding? It is rare to find a gem like this piece you wrote. From my perspective I am called upon to say that You use your God given talents wisely and well.
Uplifting to say the least. In these times when people are being muzzled, and especially in the media, you stand out as a
hero. I thank God that I am my own person and I freely speak from the Spirit within. You are one of those people I would love to sit down and talk with. I customarily sign everything I send with some form of Love. So,

Love In All-Ways, Allways,
 
 
+13 # rebelgroove 2012-02-25 12:56
Great article.

'Voice of Reason'? Pffffffft. Voice of demagogic idiocy. You just don't get it. You insist on believing in fairy tales; fine with me. But that's not enough for you, is it? You're pissy because you can't stand that I don't accept your fairy tales as 'truth.' And you consider yourself an adult?

And how does a 'second glass of whisky' make him evil, or less than you? Are you so afraid of your lack of control that you can't abide a few alcoholic drinks and so demonize those who can? AND HOW DARE YOU SPEAK FOR GOD - you puny one-of-7-billion. Arrogant worms make up the GOP.
 
 
-10 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 22:54
Sorry, not an R either. And I don't get points if you accept. And I'm glad to let you guys walk all over me with your diatribes, so how can you say I think you are less than me?

You forget that 100 years ago this country was fed up with alcoholism, and thought they could abolish it. But the alcoholics leagued partners with the mobsters and murderers, and 'the Gangster Rebellion' broke out. After they won, it was renamed 'the Roaring 20s', I guess to highlight the excitement of drive by shootings and mob rule.

But now we've had 80 years of generational alcoholism. And my question remains: where has it led us? Do you think you can answer that simple question without calling names, Mr. Liberal minded thinker?
 
 
+3 # historywriter 2012-02-26 10:23
Sorry, you've got your history all wrong. The "alcoholics" didn't go into league with the mobsters. Prohibition was brought about by a strong, conservative Protestant movement that believed prohibition would cure alcoholism and men would bring home their paychecks to their family, thus reducing evil and reducing crime. The effect instead was that gangs, already in existence, made smuggling alcohol their number one business because it was so lucrative. That resulted in making the Mafia strong than ever, set up competition among the gangs and law enforcement (somewhat), and resulted in mayhem in the streets. It turned millions into lawbreakers (they didn't think drinking was wrong and many made it at home; I am sure some of my uncles broke the law) and dozens of other results--none of them good. Thus did the gangs get a stranglehold on America and they have not gone away.
Nothing good came out of Prohibition. No, it wasn't renamed the Roaring 20s. That was a much wider social phenomenon that lasted only until about -- a little after -- "The Great Depression." It was also brought about by World War I, when Americans went off to war and saw other parts of the world and introduced them to other cultures--not all of them beneficial.
And "we've had 80 years of generational alcoholism"? We have? What is your evidence.
Arts, architecture, loosening of what were the predominating "morals" at the time.
 
 
+6 # David Starr 2012-02-26 13:43
"The Voice of Reason",

As historywriter says, you got the history of Prohibition wrong. As alluded to in historywriter's overview, it actually spread vice & illegalites. Our ancient ancestors developed something called gruel which was an intoxicant. Alchohol has been practically a staple & a vice for many generations; probably before the creation of religions. Of course, there is a need to provide help when it becomes too detrimental. Many can drink w/o being alchoholics. Those w/ problems w/ alchololism have access to groups & programs. So, you think it takes religion to wipe out alchohol, Mr. Right-leaning implyer? That was proven wrong.
 
 
+10 # erogers 2012-02-25 13:25
Hey "voice of reason", you are certainly not a voice of reason. But you are a voice of the very worse and most feared type, you are the voice of an ideologue. You would have made a helluva propaganda minister of hate for Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot or better yet what a great head of the Spanish Inquisition you would have been. Another Torquermada to spread the ideology, hate and death of the so-called one true faith.
If I could make one suggestion to Romney, Christie and the rest of the nuts trying to call America a Christian nation. Do a bit of in-depth reading on what our Founding Fathers were striving for and then get rid of your damned messages of division and hate. World history has shown the results of those messages.
 
 
-12 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-25 21:15
What are you talking about? I am only questioning what people do and asking them to justify their life style. And how many times have I said that you don't have to agree with me?

You guys fly way off the handle, make wild and unfounded accusations, and apparently don't want to answer the question.

Why can't you just say that you're not interested in a dialogue if it doesn't agree with you. Is that what liberal minded means these days?
 
 
+7 # lexx 2012-02-26 00:46
Oh, Voice...having a bit of a rough ride here, aren't you? Hard to ask people to justify their life style to someone who lives in a religious box and besides, what business is that of yours?

It's hard not to fly off the handle when you make wild and unfounded statements. Your bible is important to you but for many, me included, I couldn't stop laughing after the first couple of pages...that stuff sure is a long stretch.

It's also tough to have dialogue with a "believer" as they are often so indoctrinated in their whacky stories and shut down intelligent conversation rather quickly...I have a few beloved Evangelical friends who just can't open their minds to the most basic arguments...think Rapture and all those bodies, dead and alive, going up to the clouds...really, how does one stop shaking their head?

But hey, today's article is really not about religion, not directly anyway. It's about getting over a big nothing and letting people live the way they want. Life's way too short for this kind of time wasting.
 
 
+3 # historywriter 2012-02-26 10:38
What gives you the right to justify anyone's lifestyle?
 
 
+2 # David Starr 2012-02-27 09:53
From The Voice of Vaugness,
"What are you talking about? I am only questioning what people do and asking them to justify their life style. And how many times have I said that you don't have to agree with me?"

Your previous posts indicated more than open-minded questioning. You've made various claims which are still just that...claims; & you were wrong on the effects of Prohibition. And I haven't counted that many times, if any, that you said we don't have to agree w/ you.

"You guys fly way off the handle, make wild and unfounded accusations, and apparently don't want to answer the question."

That's quite reactionary; I don't see others using exclamation points & the caps key to respond to your claims. The accusations result from your claims that have been alluded to before w/a Right-leaning tinge. Why don't you answer to your claims? There's still that first one about "meaningless" sex.

"Why can't you just say that you're not interested in a dialogue if it doesn't agree with you. Is that what liberal minded means these days?"

Why don't you apply those questions to the Right? It would be more applicable given how outwardly the Right has been in its agenda, which is 19th century/Medieval-like (Just listen to the Repub "candidates."). You do know sides are taken. But from your very first post, I didn't sense comments reflecting civil discourse, rather reflecting a vague, Right-like tinge.
 
 
+17 # JLischin 2012-02-25 13:48
No need to over think Christie. While he is a Catholic, I am not convinced that he is homophobic. The head of NJ's foremost gay rights group says he believes Christie is not ant-gay.

What Christie is, first and foremost, is a very, very, very calculating and ambitious politician. Every step he takes can be easily understood as part of a strategy to become President. He might accept Vice President or a cabinet position if he believes it will advance his goal.

He is very smart and very knowledgeable and totally ruthless. He is a liar and a bully. I have seen no sign of ethical restraint. He is Giuliani, but charming when he wants to be and has avoided Giuliani’s New York baggage; e.g. Christie has no history of being pro-choice or pro-gay to make him poison among Evangelicals and conservative Catholics.

He is not worried about winning the ultimate election, he is worried about winning the Republican nomination. If you look at his past behavior, he will follow the classic run right until nominated then run center until elected.

I believe he is positioning himself to save the day if the Republican convention is deadlocked or to be the frontrunner for the nomination in 2016 if Obama is reelected.
 
 
+4 # lexx 2012-02-26 00:14
I believe he is positioning himself to save the day if the Republican convention is deadlocked or to be the frontrunner for the nomination in 2016 if Obama is reelected.

The best posting here. I had an earlier response to The Voice, which was not printed and realized later that his views really mean nothing here; this is about Christie's grab for power, not about a god or religion per se. Very smart of Christie to slough it off on the NJ residents in November as he washes his hands of this issue.
 
 
+13 # historywriter 2012-02-25 14:25
CPOLAW: I have always heard this as, Christianity has not been tried and found wanting. It's never been tried.

Doctordemocracy : I cannot understand the sheer arrogance of people who believe they speak for God. I have some born-again relatives who talk like this and I can never get over their audacity and their unchristian effrontery.
No one knows much about God, much less how he/she thinks.
 
 
+16 # ganymede 2012-02-25 14:36
Great article and great comments, for the most part. Someday people will understand that homosexuality is normal. There have always been people who are attracted to people of their own sex, and you can't and don't want to pray it away!

I can't help but wonder why rightwingers can't understand that they have been on the wrong side of history for a long time now, and that the inner contradictions of their world outlook is causing the collapse of their political party as well as causing them and the rest of us a lot of strife and turmoil. Whether it's same sex marriage, universal health care, an understanding that you can't outlaw abortion, can't make war when it's not necessary, or have people who make the most money not pay their fair share for the general good. Te list goes on and on and on virtually every major issue, the rightwingers are wrong and history is currently teaching them a lesson. Hopefully, some of you are getting it.
 
 
+15 # RMDC 2012-02-25 14:58
Santorum, Santor, Sator, Saton = Satan.

Morphing.
 
 
0 # futhark 2012-02-25 16:04
Wasn't Jesus that Jewish prophet who most strongly condemned violators of the Mosaic law to the harshest allowable punishment? Didn't he teach his followers to abhor deviation from strict and literal adherence to the Old Testament laws and to regard tolerance and compassion as dangerous signs of weakness and spiritual and social decay? The spirit of his followers, the Pharisees, lives on in the Republican Party. ;-)
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2012-02-25 17:54
" 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

(Matthew 22:36-40)

I think he was less concerned with the letter of the law than he was with taking care of one another and showing love for your fellow human beings - even your enemies, and people whose lifestyle you disagree with.
 
 
0 # futhark 2012-02-26 07:32
Yeah, Billy Bob. That's what ;-) means.
 
 
+3 # Bob-Investigates 2012-02-25 17:33
Notice how (R)'s just keep shooting themselves in the foot with comments like, "just put an aspirin between your knees, ladies?" Of course, the worst (ok, maybe) are already out---Pathetic Palin, The Brain Pain Cain, "G.W." again Scary Perry, WitchbitchBachm ann----but stay tuned, Mitt the Twitt, Newt the Insect and Needs-a-Sanitarium-Santorum are like a freight train down a mine shaft. Just wait 'til they hit bottom. As a disabled Vietnam war vet, I like Ron Paul's take on the MIC and war, but the poor old guy's other ideas are about as useful and realistic as a 3 dollar bill. I have a suggestion for the GOOP Party: run Ronald McDonald---he's a better clown than all of the GOOP candidates put together!
 
 
+2 # Bob-Investigates 2012-02-25 17:46
AND, concerning Chris Christie---WOW, this guy missed his calling as a barker at a carnival side-show for the "Alligator Lady" OR as an announcer for one of those whacko "wrestling" shows. Everytime I see this guy on some "news" network, I cringe and have to hold my belly. He hurts my head, too. I have known some folks who act like him / look like him. They are either pushing up daisies from booze, drugs / over-eating or they are in jail for ripping off nursing home residents with phony life insurance policies. He's the kind of guy who needs to take a real hard look at himself in a mirror and then go repent to some priest AND THEN SHUT UP! "Hey, Chris, there is a park bench somewhere missing a big derrier." Feed the ducks and leave the rest of us alone---PLEEZ!
 
 
+6 # angelfish 2012-02-25 18:01
I'm not sure, but I believe Christie was/is a Lawyer. HOW in good conscience, as an Officer of the Court, not to mention as Governor of the State, could he exclude so many people from their basic Human, not to mention CIVIL Right, to marry? Civil Rights are NOT something to be decided by a "referendum". Citizens either HAVE Civil Rights, or they do NOT!
 
 
+6 # Bob-Investigates 2012-02-25 19:31
angelfish: The answer is this: they don't have a conscience and their behavior proves it conclusively. Just think how many "Officers of the Court" have turned out to be really big crooks! I personally know one of these bottom feeders who ripped off his own son/law firm partner for a million bucks! His own kid! What a great guy, huh? At about age 80, his wife finally had enuf of him and divorced him. Everyone I know who knows him, hates him. As for Christie, he's a poor excuse for a human being. He's ultra-arrogant-ignorant of simple human kindness. It's so typical of the behavior of people who get rich and get some power. In the old days, these types became kings and then really lorded it over the peasants/peons. Many people in this country seem to have forgotten that we had a revolutionary war to get rid of a king. Well, the 1% have been busy trying to turn us into peons in a monarchy turned into a Plutocracy. The Bible says that "the love of money is the root of all evil." Even those who don't "believe" will agree that those words are absolutely true. Our country these days is certainly the perfect example.
 
 
+10 # reiverpacific 2012-02-25 18:10
As father of a lesbian daughter, I love her as much now as I did before she "came out" (which we anticipated for some months prior thereto) and went to her H.S. Prom with one of the most popular guys in school but always had what my wife described as a "Catch and release" attitude to men. She evolved into her sexual orientation comfort-level without any pushing or pulling from us and it was good to know that she felt secure with us being two of the first to know.
Anybody who calls GLBT people "sick", "unnatural" or "curable with prayer" might want to look in the mirror and address their own urges, like playing footsie with an FBI agent in an airport bog (sorry; "bathroom") and at the wisdom of the indigenous tribes of this and other countries who had a significant place in the great circle of existence as "the Human beings" for all, including those what we in our "advanced state" call deviants (from the norm, whatever the Hell that is).
All together folks; "R-E-A-C-T-I-O-N-A-R-Y H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E-S" (what does it spell???)
 
 
+6 # Ellioth 2012-02-25 18:49
I have not seen Mark's writing in a while. Good to see you again.
I'd only add that your observations and eloquence goes well beyond the issue of gay rights/marriage. I do agree with what you say, however.
To me the issues you raise - selling one's soul for a few votes, a few dollars, a candy bar - and knowing that you are selling your soul - is a deep violation of one's humanity.
The vast majority of right wing politicians lie through their teeth for vote and a dollar, tell their audiences complete and utter lies and nonsense, knowingly, and say whatever they think they need to in order to satisfy the madness of the nut cases called "the base". I think (not sure) people like Romney and Gingrich (Santorum is insane enough to believe his own sh-t) have a brain and some sense of right and wrong. They are now empty dead souls.
Americans with a soul and a brain are left holding a pile of garbage, knowing our kids are screwed because of these sick fu--s. There are enough ignorant and closed minded Americans who actually believe this garbage.

Imagine a Congress and President that actually did "the right thing" for the common good. Imagine a health care system that cared for people instead of insurance companies (deficit gone), a fair tax system where those with the most shared their wealth and good fortune with a smile, a government-public policy apparatus run by people with wisdom and compassion, instead of a corrupt bunch of liars. Imagine.
 
 
+6 # Bob-Investigates 2012-02-25 19:40
"Imagine a Congress and President that actually did "the right thing" for the common good. Imagine a health care system that cared for people instead of insurance companies (deficit gone), a fair tax system where those with the most shared their wealth and good fortune with a smile, a government-public policy apparatus run by people with wisdom and compassion, instead of a corrupt bunch of liars. Imagine."

I think that the "GREED IS GOOD" crowd--the 1%'ers who have control of our country---see the great things you mentioned as totally against their interests----stuffing ever more wealth into their already overflowing pockets. After being stationed in Europe for two years and seeing how universal healthcare there puts people's health above money/greed, I see our system as an incredibly sick and twisted system putting $$$$$ first and people last. Look at the millions upon millions of U.S. children who don't have health coverage. It's a national disgrace that the 1%'ers don't give a damn about.
 
 
+8 # amye 2012-02-25 19:40
Mark Morford just like Chris Hedges understands that we as humans must rule from our hearts and souls if we are to have a lovely life and give a good life to others! This is what its all about in life!
 
 
0 # beeyl 2012-02-26 07:20
"How can it be that we as individuals, as a species so often override our most innate, potent knowing simply because it is the popular choice, or the thing that will gain us more votes, or Likes, or money or candy or sex or time or power or support or accolades or cocktails or bonus points or awards?"

Simple answer: tribalism.

Belonging to and supporting our group is a basic instinct in most animal species, and in moderation, it is a good thing. But with all such behaviors, there is a spectrum, and those of us with principles call a person who prioritizes his group above everything else a "douche bag." Or, if it's Chris Christie, a "humungous douche bag."
 
 
-9 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 09:26
BTW, not a Christian either. So you're wrong on that front too. I don't subscribe to their dogma and frequently point out the corruption of their religious leaders. So what is your basis to insist I'm one of them?

It might normally be nunufmybiz, but you are the ones demanding the force of law and the sanctity of marriage. so now it is my biz to ask what right do you have to change what historically has been termed depraved into sanctified? It is a legitimate question.

You are liberal and fair minded, when do I get to see some of that? All I have seen is prejudice and venom for asking (not demanding, not forcing), just asking what is your basis for this, and are you aware of the historical precedent.

I do not believe in force of any kind, especially against the closet liberators. I am asking a question. If you have to hide behind your veils, then be honest and admit that is what you are doing. It is only reasonable.
 
 
+5 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 16:02
Dear Reason: Being a Christian or a member of the religious sect you belong to is not the point here.

The point is you're making proclamations about "heretic practices" &" fear-based beliefs" that the majority of the people who practice other religions or no religion are finding archaic, without rationality & insulting.

Respect is a two-way street. Noone has said negative things about the religious sect you belong to because you have a right to believe in any religion by the Constitution. It gives everyone else in the US, also, the right to believe as they choose, including non-believers.

You cannot force your religious beliefs about right & wrong, & the wrath of GOD on other people. It is wrong to do so.

Alcohol consumption, & sexual relations between two consenting adults is legal in the US. I assume your angry comments & your statement that people hide behind veils has more to do with your religious & personal beliefs about homosexual couples having the legal right to marry.
 
 
-9 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 16:15
but it's okay to call Gov. Christie Satan? That's not 'archaic, without rationality & insulting'?

Makes perfect sense. Well, maybe perfect hypocritical sense.
 
 
+5 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 20:14
VOICE of REASON: My comments are factual statements & not intended to insult you. I will explain why I stated your proclamations are "archaic, without rationality & insulting.

You are proclaiming personal beliefs that are not in sync with the morways & laws of contemporary society. Saying that people who believe differently will be met with "the wrath of GOD" is a projection of your fears & insulting.

Prohibition of liquor was overturned decades ago. No point to discussing it.

Second Wave Feminism taught women to be in control of their bodies & ability to procreate. Women take their right to use contraceptive & abortion options very seriously & do not want religious groups or the government to interfere. These are medical advances which occured after the canonization of the bible written by men, not GOD! I hope you know that!

Genetic & medical theories in regard to homosexuality has made it crystal clear that same sex marriage needs to be legal. Christies veto was the act of a hypocrite & political opportunist.
 
 
+2 # David Starr 2012-02-27 10:10
The Voice of Vagueness,

In a simple tit-for-tat; But it's O.K. to call Obama: Hitler, AntiChrist, Islamocommie? To harp on his midddle name Hussein because it's Arab-sounding, & perhaps Saddam-like? Hypocrisy rears its ugly head.

For politicians,e.g., I guess its a matter of who's saying what & what for: Taking sides, which sides come closer to truths & facts, which side's agenda/ideology is of benefit to whom, whether the few or the many. Then, come the responses, positive & negative, who's deserving & who isn't.
 
 
-1 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-28 11:12
I support the President. And he seems to prove the pundits and critics wrong on a daily basis.

But I'm concerned about the price of gas. That's going to bankrupt our economy again.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2012-02-26 17:19
No, you're obviously not a Christian. Good call. Now, I'm just wondering why you feel the need to join the choir of phony Christians who want to destroy religious freedom in this country?
 
 
-10 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-26 09:40
and again, the title brings up Satan, so someone needs to answer the 'look whose talking' q.

Or, if it is all just a big fantasy, then why don't you buy 666 square miles, form a separate nation, and call it Sodom and Gomorrah. After all, Las Vegas bills itself as sin city. No hellfire there. Yet.

My guess is, because something inside of you balks at being that openly defiant. That's just too real.

But I'm only guessing. You are free to prove me wrong. Just try to avoid the anarchy of insults and guilt by association. It makes for better dialogue, instead of making lib'ruls look like the very enemy you hate so much.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2012-02-26 17:21
Maybe that would be an outrageously extravagant and expense way to prove a point to a guy on the internet who isn't listening anyway. I'm only guessing. You're free to prove me wrong.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 20:17
VOICE: Writers use irony all the time.
The journalist was not being literal. The term "Satan" is a metaphor.
 
 
0 # Midwestgeezer 2012-02-28 08:49
Metaphor? I don't know about that. In my long-ago life as a Holy Roman Catholic we recided a prayer in which the Devil/Satan/Beelzebub "...roamed about the world seeking the destruction of souls!" According to Sister mary Cimberta, SSND, the devil was real. I'm happy to say that he was unable to destroy mine.
 
 
-1 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-28 15:24
What is the metaphor, "the Devil" or "pure evil"? But you're right, I was way out of bounds to bring up religious imagery. Cut me some slack, I'm still trying to navigate the stormy waters on the Nile of your reasoning.
 
 
-1 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-28 19:22
I mean, de Nile ...
 
 
+2 # David Starr 2012-02-27 10:24
The Voice of Vagueness,

You've got several claims to back up but you keep adding more.

"Las Vegas bills itself as sin city. No hellfire there. Yet."

Care to be less vague & openly come out of the closet? Care to elaborate re. the word "yet"?

"Guilt by association?" Well, that can be resolved by stating directly where you're coming from, rather than using the Right-like camflouge.
 
 
-1 # The Voice of Reason 2012-02-28 19:19
This was first published in 1944. skip the preface and go to page 3&4 for starters. Then go back and read the preface. Or read as you like.

http://www.bahai-library.com/writings/shoghieffendi/pdc/pdicall.html#1
 
 
0 # David Starr 2012-02-29 12:09
It wasn't recorded in 1844 (such a major event) but published years after? Hmmm...I may check it out, although I'm no longer religious regardless if it's the Bahai strain or any other.
 
 
0 # The Voice of Reason 2012-03-03 09:13
I am of the general opinion that people, such as yourselves, who are 'no longer religious', are far more religious than closed minded and fanatic religious people.
 
 
0 # David Starr 2012-03-03 10:51
"Voice,"

Well, your general opinion is more wrong than not (again). Since religion is usually taken by everyone in associating it w/ a god, gods, goddessess, miracles, prophets, saviors, messiahs, promised ones, holy books, etc., etc., etc., that disqualifies me as being religious since I don't support all that. I don't support those myths, be they Christian, Islamic, Bahai, & the other various strains proclaiming to have the absolute truth. Your attempt to twist nonbelieving w/ believing is just that...a twist, & nonreasoning.
 
 
0 # The Voice of Reason 2012-03-05 15:03
Think of all the prophets being the same Voice, repeated over time. Only the name is different, and some social laws. Then think of all the followers as people who at first get it right, then after 100 or more years get it wrong. Or in the case of Moslems, they got it wrong when they rebelled the moment Muhammad went to the next world.

Religion is meant to inspire and unite and guide the human race to its glorious destiny. But the Day of Justice is only now dawning.

In the past the name was forgiveness, which means everyone gets to be as corrupt as ever and they are not held accountable. Although the Jews were punished for over 2,000 years.

But there is no worse corruption than a corrupt religion. No amount of internal reform can ever save it. Only a new messenger from God. And who is going to believe that? Certainly not right wing Christians and especially not fanatic Moslems.

Still, my guess is you and people like you will believe it. It just takes some seeking on your parts.
 
 
+1 # historywriter 2012-02-26 11:05
If after all this you want relief and another wholly different view of politics, read Parker Palmer's "Healing the heart of democracy. The courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit."
He gets it, and still asks us to plow on.
 
 
+3 # Susan1989 2012-02-26 12:33
So much time spent on keeping law-abiding people from marrying and contributing to society! If anyone has compromised the institution of marriage it is heterosexuals who don't seem to be doing very well in keeping their marriages together. Our society is making existence so complex that it is hard for couples to marry and raise children without becoming so stressed out that they compromise their relationship. I do wish that our leaders would focus on what is really crippling our society.
 
 
+7 # historywriter 2012-02-26 14:30
This is one of the sad truths of this period of time. So many unsolved issues--unemployment, poor schools, poverty, the breaking safety net, people living in their cars (some of them sick). This stuff is too hard to figure out so they bring out their "principles" and not only try to make abortion and same sex marriage illegal, but, trying to outdo each other, claim they could make contraception illegal, call the Girl Scouts (the Girl Scouts!) radical or something, and in one way or another try to make women completely powerless. Meanwhile our schools decay, our roads aren't fixed, bridges fall down . . . . Is that what they want? If somehow or other it helps them get votes. Weird.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-02-26 16:18
History Writer: I love your comment. It is rationality pre se! Thank YOU!
 
 
-1 # Midwestgeezer 2012-02-28 08:02
Why, I was speaking with God just the other day and he told me that he thought Governor Christie was full of "it" (I think *he/she meant to say sh-t)!
*I could not detect the gender of the voice, but it sounded kind of.... you know.
 
 
0 # Mirkka 2012-02-28 10:10
So demand female rabbis and demand to stop childrens circumcision, too. Allways demanding only catholic church to change its opinions.
 
 
+1 # historywriter 2012-02-29 18:56
These practices and rituals affect only Jews. Unless you're Jewish, it means nothing to you.
The Catholic Church isn't being asked to change its opinions. It's being told that it should not interfere in the country's secular life when it wants to impose its morals on everyone. It believes it has the "truth" and most of us don't agree and don't want to live under those rules.
Your children don't have to be circumsized. It's just a popular practice in the United States.
We already have a lot of female rabbis. They're doing a great job, too.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.