236 Comments

History does not begin to support the idea religion makes people more honest and better human beings in general. In fact, history tells us that there is every reason to mistrust the very religious. I certainly wouldn't trust Mike Johnson as far as I could throw Donald Trump. The Bill of Rights wouldn't last fifteen minutes in the hands of the evangelical preachers.

Expand full comment

Oh please, what a tantrum you delivered there. You have to throw DT part by part. And the evangelical preachers would help you gladly. After some use of hot iron sticks.

Expand full comment

One does not need religion to have morals. If you can’t determine right from wrong, you lack empathy not religion.

Expand full comment

Two from Hitch...

"Human decency and morality is not derived from religion. It precedes it."

"Morality comes from humanism and is stolen by religion for its own purposes."

Expand full comment

And my old favorite:

𝐼𝑓 𝑖𝑡 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙, 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠.

-- Leo Wolf

Expand full comment

If you need a god to make you moral, you are a psychopath on a leash.

Expand full comment

Beat me to it as I was typing it.

Expand full comment

neener neener neener! LOL

Expand full comment

Ya bastich. ;)

Expand full comment

Sic 'em.

Expand full comment

"Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people whom we personally dislike." - Oscar Wilde

Expand full comment

Hard to know what to make of this survey if only 23% say they would vote for a convicted felon, yet Trump is still polling in the high 40s. And even if some didn't know he'd been convicted -- 34 times -- only 29% say they'd vote for someone who's been charged with a felony.

P.S. I meant to start by saying that I was encouraged to see that we atheists are no longer bottom of the list, as far as "would vote for" goes.

Expand full comment

I think what it says is that respondents don't know their own minds. That would be a good sign, in that we might expect less actual racism etc. than what the polls indicate.

Or maybe what it says is that questions on nebulous hypothetical candidates are not good predictors of how people will vote on actual flesh and blood candidates. That would also be a good sign, IMO. It would mean people would change their 'stereotypical' vote if given a solid candidate with some quality they don't typically like.

Or maybe some respondents are giving a response that they think makes them look good to the poll-taker, rather than admit some behavior they think will make them look bad. That would be a bad sign, because it would likely mean the poll underpredicts racism, sexism, etc.

Expand full comment

I think it's most that Trump supporters refuse to acknowledge that he's a convicted felon. To the extent that any of them will even admit to the facts of the hush money trial, they'll insist it's just the Deep State, a phony charge, rigged, etc.

Expand full comment

I've seen the "fake convictions" all too often by MAGAts.

Expand full comment

Frankly, I find that list encouraging. We've come a long way from Pete Stark as the only openly atheist governmental official, and one hopes we can go considerably further. The one discouraging part of this whole business is the dearth of (R) notations on that list, notwithstanding the two exceptions Hemant mentions. Sadly, so long as the Republican party is held in thrall by the Religious Reich, I don't expect that status to change anytime soon.

Still, as the nones and freethinkers and atheists grow in numbers, our presence in government can't help but grow along with. Here's looking forward to much more of the same.

Expand full comment

That's the thing with trailblazers like Pete Stark. They're almost always out there alone. But they open the door to those who follow, this list is encouraging for that reason.

The aggressive irrationality and willingness of christian nationalists to impose their views on everyone, ignoring the rights of each individual make that determination for themselves, has created an opening for humanists, atheists, agnostics and nones to step up. This is a trend that will accelerate, IMO.

Expand full comment

I don't get upset anymore when I see the Republican party utterly failing to join the rest of us in the 21st century; I only get upset that people keep voting for the bastards. The GQP has become too broken, too bigoted, and too proudly ass-backwards ignorant of reality to be worth saving. When they had a choice between their normal amount of awfulness and actual fucking fascism, they chose fascism, and they've kept doubling down on it for most of the last decade now. They do not deserve to continue existing as a political movement.

I don't want Republicans to 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 their party- I want to see it collapse under the weight of its own hatred and incompetence, and I want to watch the twisted wreckage burn.

Expand full comment

And those that continue to vote The Red refuse to see that they are voting against their own best interests. GQP voters deserve every bad thing that happens to them as a result of their willful ignorance.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, there's a lot of collateral damage -- their neighbors who voted blue but were hopelessly outnumbered.

Expand full comment

I'll bring the popcorn if you'll bring the sodas.

Expand full comment

There's been no party collapse since the 1800s, so don't hold your breath.

What we seem to be seeing right now is a realignment. After WWII both the Dems and GOP went whole-hog in on neo-liberal economic globalism, and the folks who disagreed with that had basically no major mainstream voice.

Trump has tapped into this. He's their voice. And it turns out there's a lot of them. So whether it's Dems actually paying more attention to unions than they have in the past, or the GOP embracing trade barriers that they've spent the last 40 years trying to tear down, the parties are going to morph to try and get those votes. It's *possible* that what you want happens instead, and they 'stand their ground' and collapse. But my money is fully on "changing our position to capture" rather than "not changing our position, and we die." Heck, just look at abortion over the past four years for that. The GOP has gone from full throated foetus-as-person into let-the-states-decide. It used to be, the extremer the position the more votes they got. Now, in a lot of contested states, the extreme position *loses* them votes. So they changed. For the two major parties, vote gathering is the purpose for existence and the positions they defend in order to get those votes is more fungible.

Expand full comment

I disagree. It seems their goal is to so screw up elections that no one but the most extreme Republican can win. Like the plank in the TX Republican platform to change election law so not only do you have to win a majority of voters, you have to win a majority of *counties* to get statewide office.

Expand full comment

Electoral law is a great example of my point. It is a relatively new position the GOP has adopted in specific locations, because gaining office or staying in office is the purpose for their existence and the positions they adopt shift in order to serve that purpose.

Expand full comment

Yes, exactly, screw with the election law to give them an advantage. That's rigging the system, not taking a position. And they will sabotage and rig the election system to kingdom come in order to guarantee themselves victory. They have proven this over and over again, starting with the massive purging of voter registration rolls in Florida leading up to the 2000 election (and possibly going back even further.) No way will they depend solely on 'shifting to capture votes.' They'll want the backstop of an illegally rigged system.

Expand full comment

Jeebus, seriously? That sucks.

Expand full comment

Someday it will be the reverse:

"Oh, I see that you are on the list of Christian politicians. Well, good luck with that. You know that 60% of voters won't vote for a Christian."

The pendulum swings...

Expand full comment

https://youtu.be/Lkv9v-W5PAY?si=iJwteS_WvGXM7_EF

Featuring the Moirai: Clotho (the spinner), Lachesis (the allotter), and Atropos (with her shears).

Expand full comment

Can't happen soon enough for me.

Expand full comment

No plans to run for public office. Heck, at 78, I can't run anywhere, even when I have to pee! But as an old atheist and old socialist and just an all-around old overly-educated frumpy grump, I will combine my separate "approval" categories into something above 100% (yeah, I know that's not scientifically possible) and call it a victory, Pyrrhic, though it may be. In my early years growing up a white kid on the lower rungs of the social and economic ladder in the Apartheid South of the 1950s, I never thought I would live to see the day in which a woman or a person of color might assume the mantle of president of this great-but-very-flawed nation of ours... and yet, here we are, and I couldn't be happier at the prospect! And while it won't occur within my remaining years, it gives me hope that some day, a reasonable and logical non-believer will also rise to that level of leadership without the chains of religion and superstition (redundant?) to hold them back. Oh, and of course, that depends on the change of hearts and minds of the vast populace of voters who are willing to vote out the remaining 'gods' in favor of something more workable and more worth fighting for. So, Fight the Good Fight, children of reason! And then when you've finally won, go have a toke or a sip or a bite of your favorite self reward! You will have fookin' earned it.

Expand full comment

Religion IS superstition.

Expand full comment

The key founders got it right 235 years ago. Forbidding religious tests for public office was so important to them (and the country) that they explicitly enshrined it in Article VI, Clause III of the US Constitution, the law of the land.

Expand full comment

As regards that, allow me to reprint something I wrote a couple years back:

=================

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛 𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑏𝑒ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑓, 𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑝 𝑡𝑜 𝑎 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡. 𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑦𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑗𝑜𝑏 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚. 𝐼’𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑎 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛.

𝐼 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑎 𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑎𝑦. 𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔:

𝐼 𝑑𝑜𝑛'𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑜𝑢'𝑟𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛, 𝐽𝑒𝑤, 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚, 𝑀𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑜𝑛, 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑚 𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡, 𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑎 𝑏𝑎𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎 𝑔𝑢𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑜 𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠, 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑒, 𝒀𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝑶𝑵𝑳𝒀 𝑶𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑰𝒔 𝑻𝒐 𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑳𝑨𝑾. 𝑊ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝐵𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑄𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝐵ℎ𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑑 𝐺𝑖𝑡𝑎 𝑜𝑟 𝐵𝑜𝑜𝑘 𝑜𝑓 𝑀𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑯𝑨𝑺 𝑵𝑶 𝑷𝑳𝑨𝑪𝑬 ... 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑎𝑦 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑛𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑔𝑜𝑑 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙. 𝐵𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒, 𝑖𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑢𝑝𝑜𝑛 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑵𝑬𝑼𝑻𝑹𝑨𝑳.

𝐼𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑐𝑎𝑛'𝑡 𝑑𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 ... 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦. 𝑃𝐸𝑅𝐼𝑂𝐷.

Expand full comment

You should repost that every few months!

Expand full comment

I might just, when the topic is applicable. Grazie!

Expand full comment

Bravo!

Expand full comment

I suspect Trump would epically fail any religious test. He can't name his favorite book of the Bible.

Expand full comment

Even the one written by the two Corinthian guys.

Expand full comment

Great! It is fantastic to see that religious affiliation is being relegated into irrelevancy.

Expand full comment

A truck loaded with thousands of copies of Roget's Thesaurus crashed yesterday losing its entire load. Witnesses were stunned, startled, aghast, taken aback, stupefied, confused, shocked, rattled, paralyzed, dazed, bewildered, mixed up, surprised, awed, dumbfounded, nonplussed, flabbergasted, astounded, amazed, confounded, astonished, overwhelmed, horrified, numbed, speechless, and perplexed.

Expand full comment

I am discombobulated.

Expand full comment

Disco for short? 😁

Expand full comment

Probably not. Might be confused with the duck of the same name. 😉

Expand full comment

The dethpicable one?

Expand full comment

Could be. He's pretty Daffy.

Expand full comment

Hi, Discombobulated! I'm Troublesh00ter! 😁

Expand full comment

And the roadway was untidy, littered, covered, in disarray, bestrewn, in a shambles, messy, disorderly, cluttered, jumbled, unkempt and chaotic!

Expand full comment

Quel bazar.

Expand full comment

For those of us waiting for those books to be delivered, we have no words….

Expand full comment

But not befuddled, eh?

Expand full comment

Ran out of ink for the posting.

Expand full comment

OT

Trump has created a new word that he used in a post (then deleted after being humiliated over it, even though it was too late thanks to screenshots). That word? "Powerfulnnz." Use it well. Oh, and that post of his just stopped in midsentence. His dementia is advancing and there's not a thing he can do about it.

Expand full comment

Is powerfulnnz what you get after bigly enjoying a cup of Nambian covfefe and a hamberder?

Expand full comment

Ask Kamabla.

Expand full comment

Only in the United Shtesh. I'm pretty sure that is were it has its oranges. Just don't overdoth on it.

Expand full comment

People have been hammering him with cofeve (and hamberder, no doubt).

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Aug 27
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It's how he eats...with a power funnel.

Expand full comment

I wish all politicians could keep their personal beliefs out of who they are as politicians not just for them but more importantly for All the people they represent. I'm grateful for the many politicians who are Aetheists or those with different beliefs who will not be pointing their finger in my face and talking about what Jesus did or didn't do.

Expand full comment

jeezuz demands they speak out about it. OR ELSE Just ask one.

Expand full comment

A question for all of the uber-religious Wholly Babble-thumpers out there: In a nation supposedly personally blessed by the Great Sky Daddy himself and whose worshippers kiss his ass on a daily basis and who line the pockets of his charlatan "interpreters" on Sunday, do we have so many, many people living in desperate poverty on the streets of our cities and not having enough food or access to the medical care they so desperately need? Why don't the professed Chrishun politicians do something in the name of their fookin' Sweet Jeezus to alleviate this suffering? Could it be that they're incapable of doing so and that their so-called caring is just a bunch of selfish made-up superstitious hokum? Nah... I sure that's not so. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to call ourselves, the Land of the Free and the Brave. Right, Cleetus? Yeah... that's what I thought.

Expand full comment

𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐄𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐒𝐨 𝐂𝐫𝐮𝐞𝐥

Generation after generation, Southern pastors adapted their theology to thrive under a terrorist state. Principled critics were exiled or murdered, leaving voices of dissent few and scattered. Southern Christianity evolved in strange directions under ever-increasing isolation. Preachers learned to tailor their message to protect themselves. If all you knew about Christianity came from a close reading of the New Testament, you’d expect that Christians would be hostile to wealth, emphatic in protection of justice, sympathetic to the point of personal pain toward the sick, persecuted and the migrant, and almost socialist in their economic practices. None of these consistent Christian themes served the interests of slave owners, so pastors could either abandon them, obscure them, or flee.

*snip*

Stripped of its compassion and integrity, little remained of the Christian message. What survived was a perverse emphasis on sexual purity as the sole expression of righteousness, along with a creepy obsession with the unquestionable sexual authority of white men. In a culture where race defined one’s claim to basic humanity, women took on a special religious interest. Christianity’s historic emphasis on sexual purity as a form of ascetic self-denial was transformed into an obsession with women and sex. For Southerners, righteousness had little meaning beyond sex, and sexual mores had far less importance for men than for women. Guarding women’s sexual purity meant guarding the purity of the white race. There was no higher moral demand.

*snip*

White evangelical Christianity has a bottomless well of compassion for the interests of straight white men, and not a drop to be spared for anyone else at their expense. The cruelty of white evangelical churches in politics, and in their treatment of their own gay or minority parishioners, is no accident. It is an institution born in slavery, tuned to serve the needs of Jim Crow, and entirely unwilling to confront either of those realities.

https://theologyandthecity.com/2018/03/12/why-white-evangelicalism-is-so-cruel/

Expand full comment

🙆

I will question God today..Why punish us instead of Satan? Why has he let him roam free for that long?🙆

Expand full comment

God sure is stupid.

Expand full comment

Look at who created him. Primitive, fearful, superstitious nomads.

Expand full comment

God admires anyone with a pointy tail and a pitchfork. It's a "look" the Big Guy In The Sky admires.

Expand full comment

KKKon tRump now going after free speech. I csn guess whose speech will be blocked first...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-gotta-restrict-first-211137853.html

Expand full comment

And Kennedy will eat it up.

Heck, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Trump made a point of saying something which would make Kennedy reverse a previous position, just to get him to do it. Looking at JD Vance, he seems to like the 'power play' aspect of taking someone who opposed him and making that person eat crow.

Expand full comment

Always shake my head when the convicted felon starts talking about the law.

Expand full comment

TRUMP HATES FREEDUM! REPUBLICANS HATE FREEDUM!!

Expand full comment

Does that "restriction" of free speech also apply to the christo-fascists who use "free speech" to cover their violation of church/state separation? NO? what a shock.

Expand full comment

Or the ones who loudly advocate for the government to line me up against a wall and put a bullet in my head and everyone like me.

Expand full comment