Even though I am English, I still take an interest in American politics. At the moment, I am despairing that all the main players in this election all seem to be anti-gay and anti-abortion. It sickens me that we live in a world where, despite everything, all people are not equal and two millenia old superstitions still have a tight grip in politics. So here is my question:
As an atheist, who do you want as president?
To even compare them as "Taliban sympathizers" or the sort is ridiculous. Sure, some of them have far right views but that is TOO OUR STANDARDS. They don't want to execute gays and stone them to death. They don't want to put laws against changing religions. They don't want to stone women to death. The comparison is mute and to put it simply, makes one who makes such a claim look rather intellectually lazy, naive, and ignorant.
The thing about sympathizers is that they never explicitly state their support of the extremists.
You used the example of stonings and murdering gays... My threshold of tolerance for sympathizers expires well before these sorts of things begin to be even nominally supported by public figures.
The support of removing or prevention of obtaining rights for certain groups of people is to me serious and needs to always be nipped in the bud. Many if not all of the republican candidates publicly support removing women's rights to make decisions about pregnacy and publicly support preventing gays from having equal rights to hetero couples.
And by the way suggesting that I am intellectually lazy or naive or ignorant is not appreciated. Not every one who disagrees with you is any of these things.
Are ALL sexual minorities entitled to full rights? BDSMers? scopophiles? coprophiles? Is it merely the commonness of homophilia which makes it legal? (BTW, I'm in favor of full rights for homosexuals.)
Common Unseen I didn't take it that far and that not in any stretch of the imagination what I meant.
I seem to remember one republican debate where they cheered how many Americans Gov Perry had killed in Texas. I remember another one where they cheered the idea of someone dying of treatable injuries because he had not purchased health insurance.
The candidate polling second at this time wants to ban pornography and birth control. Eliminating abortion would condemn how many women to carrying rapists babies and force them into a life of poverty because they would be raising babies rather than getting an education and a career.
These republicans, in defunding public education and loan for higher education are trying to prevent all but American Royal class from getting an education. The leader in the national polls and at least one repulican governor wants to repeal child labor laws so poor kids can work for a living at 8 instead of going to school.
The talliban operate from religious zealotry. This republican party is even more dangerous than the taliban. Their motivation is just pure simple greed. They have shown repeatedly that they will throw this country under the bus in a heartbeat to obey their Corporate bosses and put more money in their pockets.
The Republicans have done more harm to this country in the 3 years of the Obama administration than the Taliban have done to this country. So no it is not being silly to compare them to the taliban.
I agree that was ridiculous. I am against the death penalty and despite the fact how petty and ignorant it was them to cheer such a thing, it is important to note that in their mind everyone who is executed is a murderer. So even then, the comparison to the Taliban is mute.
For goodness sake, the Taliban stone women to death for suspected adultery or simply for the fact that they "disobeyed" their husbands.
And no one wants to ban birth control, even Rick Santorum. That is a lie and a grave distortion of his record.
To add: your moral relativism and world view in making the atrocious claim that the Republicans have "done more harm to this country than the Taliban have" is ridiculous and shameful. It demonstrates that you are an ideologue.
And I am sure that the Taliban is convinced that every they have killed have performed some heinous deed, like adultery.
Santorum is on the record saying he would like to ban birth control because it leads to promiscuity. That he is not pushing it now is because he knows how outrageous an idea it it. But like others have said, they would see winning an election as a mandate to initiate christian sharia, not that dissimilar from regular sharia.
It was not the Taliban that caused the downgrade of the US credit rating. It was the petulant republicans refusing Obama any victory. Victory meaning anything that helps this country get out of the economic mess they created.
Corporate personhood- citizens united being a 5-4 decision of a conservative, republican court. Really just opening the floodgates for the rich to continue to loot this country.
Bush tax cuts- once again rapidly bankrupting this country redistributing the wealth to the wealthy while we are firing police and fireman, closing schools, un paving roads.
Republican governor of Michigan 'firing' elected governments of municipalities that he bankrupted with corporate tax cuts then putting unelected czars in control.
Relaxed financial regulations causing the financial collapse that made trillions of dollars of capital and 401K balances disappear in a puff of smoke.
You can keep repeating false information to yourself but you are only misinforming yourself. I can criticize Santorum on many of his far right social issues that he holds, but he never advocated banning birth control. That is factually false.
And I'm sorry, I don't believe raising taxes is the right solution in an economic recession. The Bush tax cuts actually helped stimulate spending; hence it helped give a boost to the economy.
You know, not all atheists are ideologue liberals. Some of us think for ourselves.
Technically you are right. He does not openly claim that one goal of his administration would be to ban birth control. It is evident by his quote however that he thinks it is bad, and if he could get it banned on a state level he would be ok with it. Plus we all know that if given the opportunity given how bad he thinks for our country I'm sure he would not actively seek to ban birth control. He is so good about not legislating anything else that he feels is morally necessary.
Sassan, they currently do not have the means to enforce what they would like to do, but backers of some GOP candidates have talked about literally introducing biblical punishments such as stoning gay people to death. Really. Dictating what women do with their bodies is another common theme, e.g. making abortion illegal, even for rape and incest or if the mother's life is at risk (although it is apparently OK for Rick Santorum's wife to have a "medically induced miscarriage" - something he would deny, along with any contraception, to other women). We are talking capability and degree, but once you base governemt on religious dogma, anything becomes both possible and "justifiable".
No, none of the GOP candidates have talked about stoning gay people to death and the only one of the GOP candidates backers that I have heard say such a thing is one of Ron Paul's wacko backers. No one in this country, even the GOP, wants to stone gay people to death.
Yes, some on the right want to make abortion illegal. While most of the candidates are for show and I don't take them very seriously in actually doing anything to make abortion illegal, the exception is Rick Santorum. While Rick Santorum is a great person, particularly on his support for the plight of the Iranian people, I simply cannot even consider supporting him as a candidate due to his religious convictions in wanting to make abortion illegal (although not for rape and incest, that is Rick Perry).
And for the record, Rick Santorum does not want to make contraceptives illegal. As for the guy I like and would consider voting for, I find his religious ploy to be simply that: a ploy to pander to the ignorant right wing base of his party.