Theists and Non-Theists

Is this true? Is Stark the only one?

There is only one member of Congress who is on record as not holding a god-belief.

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), a member of Congress since 1973, acknowledged his nontheism in response to an inquiry by the Secular Coalition for America (www.secular.org ). Rep. Stark is a senior member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and is Chair of the Health Subcommittee.

Although the Constitution prohibits religious tests for public office, the Coalition’s research reveals that Rep. Stark is the first open nontheist in the history of the Congress. Recent polls show that Americans without a god-belief are, as a group, more distrusted than any other minority in America. Surveys show that the majority of Americans would not vote for an atheist for president even if he or she were the most qualified for the office.

What about our two new Buddhist members: Hank Johnson of Georgia and Mazie Hirono (D-HI-2)? Regardless, non-theists are the most politically discriminated against group in America. And we generally don’t complain. Should we?

11 Comments

macdust on March 12, 2007 at 4:33 pm

Simply circulate among those like Joe Lieberman who declare that religion is the foundation of all morality, and pretend that by forcing our eyes not to focus we too can see human figures in the universe’s background radiation.

S2 on March 12, 2007 at 4:47 pm

why “non-theist,” not good ole “atheist”?

anarchronarchist on March 12, 2007 at 5:05 pm

Atheism implies an antagonist stance to the man on the street, which no politician has yet been brave enough to admit.

DaveW on March 12, 2007 at 5:08 pm

I’d say the discrimination is against honest people. Do you really think Bush, Cheney, and most of the other pols believe any of the stuff they so mindlessly babble about? I don’t, not for a minute. If the Bible is correct and you’ll know them by the fruit of their labors, there are very few pols or other members of the ruling classes who qualify.

Honest people of whatever religious persuasion would stutter and define and qualify any answer to questions like this. As a yes/no question it’s simply nonsense.

Poeschek on March 12, 2007 at 5:11 pm

When you combine religious fanaticism with religious ignorance, nothing good is likely to result.

USA Today

Sometimes dumb sounds cute: Sixty percent of Americans can’t name five of the Ten Commandments, and 50% of high school seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were married.

Stephen Prothero, chairman of the religion department at Boston University, isn’t laughing. Americans’ deep ignorance of world religions — their own, their neighbors’ or the combatants in Iraq, Darfur or Kashmir — is dangerous, he says.

His new book, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know — and Doesn’t, argues that everyone needs to grasp Bible basics, as well as the core beliefs, stories, symbols and heroes of other faiths.

I’m a non-theist but I’m not hostile to faith. I’m hostile to the blind certainty that leads people to kill abortion doctors, blow themselves up on Israeli buses or fly planes into buildings. I’m also hostile to the notion that religion means that someone can get a pass on defending their beliefs, however morally repugnant they may be. Failure to more harshly condemn practices such as female genital mutilation and the failure to distribute condoms in Africa are just two examples of this.

We allow faith far too much respect in our public discourse, to the point where it trumps all other considerations. This is especially difficult since so many of these mouthbreathers don’t even know WHAT THEY BELIEVE other than that their pastor or imam told them that God hates fags or that 72 virgins will be waiting for a martyr in heaven.

As an aside, when fundamentalists cite Leviticus to promote intolerance towards homosexuals, I love asking them why they aren’t out protesting at the Red Lobster.

Leviticus 11:9-12
These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Poeschek on March 12, 2007 at 5:19 pm

LOL, whoops, guess they don’t allow hotlinking…

pettylarseny on March 12, 2007 at 5:16 pm

Pete Stark is actually far from the only non-God-believer in Congress. I’ve got some details on (some?) others at my blog, here:
http://petty-larseny.blogspot.com/2007/01/keith-ellison-tip-of-iceberg_01.html

anarchronarchist on March 12, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Complain? We need to take over the country and forceably re-educate the peasant masses and… aw forget it. Looks like we just have to learn to shepherd these folks via their belief structures vs by combatting their belief structures. This is the GOP strategy.

I have a feeling that Democratic beliefs might actually be better expressed in the language of religion than Repug beliefs anyhow. Might as well go with it.

Renee in Ohio on March 12, 2007 at 6:31 pm

This might be of interest, given the topic.

“Asserting Our Humanism”
by Melvin Lipman, President of the American Humanist Association
Speaking at a forum of the Humanist Community of Central Ohio
Saturday, July 29, 2006, at Upper Arlington Public Library

http://religiousleft.bmgbiz.net/melvinlipman.html

Limelite on March 12, 2007 at 8:50 pm

No. We’re not discriminated against. There’s a solution for our underrepresentation.

More of us should run for office.

Salunga on March 12, 2007 at 11:08 pm

Regardless, non-theists are the most politically discriminated against group in America. And we generally don’t complain. Should we?

Depends if Ann Coulter is nearby and has any weapons within reach.

Pete Stark I’m proud of you. I’ll bet Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are too. Represent for all of us.

Remember old Tom Jefferson was a deist. More likely a non-theist. Pretty cool for two hundred years ago.

macdust on March 12, 2007 at 4:33 pm

Simply circulate among those like Joe Lieberman who declare that religion is the foundation of all morality, and pretend that by forcing our eyes not to focus we too can see human figures in the universe’s background radiation.
S2 on March 12, 2007 at 4:47 pm

why “non-theist,” not good ole “atheist”?
- anarchronarchist on March 12, 2007 at 5:05 pm
  
  Atheism implies an antagonist stance to the man on the street, which no politician has yet been brave enough to admit.
DaveW on March 12, 2007 at 5:08 pm

I’d say the discrimination is against honest people. Do you really think Bush, Cheney, and most of the other pols believe any of the stuff they so mindlessly babble about? I don’t, not for a minute. If the Bible is correct and you’ll know them by the fruit of their labors, there are very few pols or other members of the ruling classes who qualify.

Honest people of whatever religious persuasion would stutter and define and qualify any answer to questions like this. As a yes/no question it’s simply nonsense.
Poeschek on March 12, 2007 at 5:11 pm

When you combine religious fanaticism with religious ignorance, nothing good is likely to result.

USA Today

Sometimes dumb sounds cute: Sixty percent of Americans can’t name five of the Ten Commandments, and 50% of high school seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were married.

Stephen Prothero, chairman of the religion department at Boston University, isn’t laughing. Americans’ deep ignorance of world religions — their own, their neighbors’ or the combatants in Iraq, Darfur or Kashmir — is dangerous, he says.

His new book, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know — and Doesn’t, argues that everyone needs to grasp Bible basics, as well as the core beliefs, stories, symbols and heroes of other faiths.

I’m a non-theist but I’m not hostile to faith. I’m hostile to the blind certainty that leads people to kill abortion doctors, blow themselves up on Israeli buses or fly planes into buildings. I’m also hostile to the notion that religion means that someone can get a pass on defending their beliefs, however morally repugnant they may be. Failure to more harshly condemn practices such as female genital mutilation and the failure to distribute condoms in Africa are just two examples of this.

We allow faith far too much respect in our public discourse, to the point where it trumps all other considerations. This is especially difficult since so many of these mouthbreathers don’t even know WHAT THEY BELIEVE other than that their pastor or imam told them that God hates fags or that 72 virgins will be waiting for a martyr in heaven.

As an aside, when fundamentalists cite Leviticus to promote intolerance towards homosexuals, I love asking them why they aren’t out protesting at the Red Lobster.

Leviticus 11:9-12
These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
- Poeschek on March 12, 2007 at 5:19 pm
  
  LOL, whoops, guess they don’t allow hotlinking…
pettylarseny on March 12, 2007 at 5:16 pm

Pete Stark is actually far from the only non-God-believer in Congress. I’ve got some details on (some?) others at my blog, here:
http://petty-larseny.blogspot.com/2007/01/keith-ellison-tip-of-iceberg_01.html
anarchronarchist on March 12, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Complain? We need to take over the country and forceably re-educate the peasant masses and… aw forget it. Looks like we just have to learn to shepherd these folks via their belief structures vs by combatting their belief structures. This is the GOP strategy.

I have a feeling that Democratic beliefs might actually be better expressed in the language of religion than Repug beliefs anyhow. Might as well go with it.
Renee in Ohio on March 12, 2007 at 6:31 pm

This might be of interest, given the topic.

“Asserting Our Humanism”
by Melvin Lipman, President of the American Humanist Association
Speaking at a forum of the Humanist Community of Central Ohio
Saturday, July 29, 2006, at Upper Arlington Public Library

http://religiousleft.bmgbiz.net/melvinlipman.html
Limelite on March 12, 2007 at 8:50 pm

No. We’re not discriminated against. There’s a solution for our underrepresentation.

More of us should run for office.
Salunga on March 12, 2007 at 11:08 pm

Regardless, non-theists are the most politically discriminated against group in America. And we generally don’t complain. Should we?

Depends if Ann Coulter is nearby and has any weapons within reach.

Pete Stark I’m proud of you. I’ll bet Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are too. Represent for all of us.

Remember old Tom Jefferson was a deist. More likely a non-theist. Pretty cool for two hundred years ago.

About The Author

BooMan

11 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments