Single-issue Voting, Secularism and the Presidential Election of 2008

Conn_in_Brooklyn
Conn_in_Brooklyn's picture
Posts: 239
Joined: 2006-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Single-issue Voting, Secularism and the Presidential Election of 2008

I am, ideally, a libertarian and, pragmatically, a Democrat (because, to me, social liberty is more pressing than economic liberty - which is a long story that we can get into later ...), so my question-comment is, which of the 2008 Presidential contenders (esp. on the Democratic side) has a good position on the seperation of church and state, the protection fo science education and the elimination of the 'faith-based initiative'?  (In many ways I'm a single-issue voter & that issue is secularism) ... I mean, I like Barack Obama, & I would love to elect a Black man (or woman to the Presidency) but he is a little too evangelical to me (i.e. the "We worship an Awesome God too" statement in 2004) ... and it bugs me to see the other candidate trying to act pious, or spiritual, or spirited (in some Southern Baptist or charismatic church, trying in vein to clap in rhythm to the gospel music ... ahem, Hilary) ... So far, only Chris Dodd from my homestate (the Great State of Connecticut) and Bill Richardson, former Governor of New Mexico, have, well, not made ridiculous pronouncements vis-a-vis popular delusion ... or have they?  What info do you'all have to share on this matter?  Anyone look good to you?  Any secular humanists running for office?  Unitarians maybe?  Pete Stark?

(You know, Al Franken expressed a mature, patheist view in "The Truth" and his wickedly funny ...) 


Conn_in_Brooklyn
Conn_in_Brooklyn's picture
Posts: 239
Joined: 2006-12-04
User is offlineOffline
... er, pantheist, I mean

... er, pantheist, I mean ...


rab
rab's picture
Posts: 273
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
All the democrats claim to

All the democrats claim to support church/state separation, but the only one who claimed to be a secularist/Unitarian is Mike Gravel. I heard him say so in an interview on Air America Radio. And he would also eliminate the faith-based initative.

 

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation


Conn_in_Brooklyn
Conn_in_Brooklyn's picture
Posts: 239
Joined: 2006-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Really?  Does the FFRF have

Really?  Does the FFRF have anything to say on the candidates?


rab
rab's picture
Posts: 273
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
Conn_in_Brooklyn

Conn_in_Brooklyn wrote:
Really? Does the FFRF have anything to say on the candidates?

They do not publically support any candidate. They have talked about candidates religious views on their radio show/podcast.

http://www.ffrf.org/radio/podcast/ 

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation


Conn_in_Brooklyn
Conn_in_Brooklyn's picture
Posts: 239
Joined: 2006-12-04
User is offlineOffline
you know, I am a dues paying

you know, I am a dues paying member of the American Humanist Association ... maybe I should consider joinging the FFRF as well ...

I'm off myspace.com so you can only find me here: http://geoffreymgolia.blogspot.com


Gizmo
High Level Donor
Gizmo's picture
Posts: 397
Joined: 2007-03-06
User is offlineOffline
Sadly I don't really like

Sadly I don't really like any of the Democrats.  I haven't really decided on who to vote for yet, tho probably HIllary or John Edwards (as stated earlier, I think Obama is a bit too faith based).  Hillary generally keeps her shit to herself, and I haven't heard much on John Edwards (tho probably cause he is trailing in most states).  None of the republican candidates look all that much smarter than Bush (and for those Ron Paul lovers out there, the fact he thinks we should get rid of the seperation of church and state kills it for me). 

Unfortunately as always its going to be a vote for a lesser evil.  I personally don't believe in voting for someone that I know damn well is going to lose, only in the hopes that they will get a little more money next time if they ahve a go at it.  Nevermind the fact that unless something changes, it will always be Dem vs Rep. 


Eloise
Theist
Eloise's picture
Posts: 1804
Joined: 2007-05-26
User is offlineOffline
Hi Conn, as is well known

Hi Conn, as is well known here I'm australian and this week I'm cheerfully optimistic in our recent victory for social liberty - I agree it is the most pressing issue of these particular times - in my optimism today I've been looking over the finer points of the US presidential election. In particular I was just looking at a quick reference table which outlines the positions of each candidate on the most noted issues in your country. I don't know if you'll like my answer to your question, but I will say anyhow, based on the information I've gleaned your best candidate, I think, is Dennis Kucinich, a fairly distant second to him are John Edwards and Barack Obama. JMHO.

BTW The republican candidates all look a bit freakin mad to me. My fingers are crossed for you all that none of them win.

PS. I know very little about your third party candidates except, perhaps, that they generally don't get voted for, do they? same occurs over here.

EDIT:: some supporting material {

By removing the trappings of religion from our public schools, courthouses, and other institutions of municipal, state and federal government we actually increase the freedom of everyone to freely and openly practice the beliefs of their choice; by not clothing our public institutions in words and symbols specific to any one religion, we uphold the Constitutional mandate requiring the separation of Church and State. That mandate is one of the cornerstones of our democracy. I believe it protects all of us.

 

http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/01/21/dennis-kucinich-on-religious-symbols-in-public-areas.htm

 

This is why I believe that the “faith-based initiative,” which provides specific and controversial ways in which religious organizations and governments may partner to provide social services, violates that basic constitutional mandate. In lending the imprimatur of the state to organizations that are overtly religious, it blurs the distinction between church and state and renders meaningless the promise that our government will not promote one religion over another.
I would do away with the faith-based initiative and instead work through the Department of Peace and other social compacts to promote programs designed to reduce poverty, homelessness, joblessness and illness, and to raise the health, prosperity and cultural literacy of all Americans.
School vouchers also harm rather than help. They bleed vital funds from our public-school system and threaten values vital to the health of American democracy. Vouchers attempt to disestablish not only public education, but the entire public realm. They divert public money away from the vast majority of public-school students — in most cases, the students who need it the most.
[added emphasis mine]
http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/01/13/dennis-kucinich-on-churchstate-separation.htm

 "This is the modest view of an atheist. By atheist, I do not imply any antagonism toward religion or faith, but only the lack of supernatural belief within my mind."

"In any event, Kucinich was gracious enough to spend a few moments speaking with Tucker.

The result left me impressed with the Presidential hopeful and has reaffirmed (for me) Tucker's amphibious qualifications Eye-wink"

http://bpabbott.blogspot.com/2007/11/dennis-kucinich-tucker-carlson.html

 "Though I am an atheist who strongly feels that religion has highly contributed to the sad state of the US, I can’t help but think that if Christian America had any common sense left, it would recognize in Kucinich the leader that it, as a country, truly needs."

 http://loadedpen.com/2007/11/24/who-would-jesus-vote-for/

}

Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist

www.mathematicianspictures.com