Monday, January 9, 2012

The National Atheist Party

From the Huffington Post, with snippets from yours truly:




Atheists face uphill climb with new political party
By Kimberly Winston| Religion News Service
How viable is a political party with the word “atheist” in its name?
Troy Boyle, a corporate legal representative for a finance company, thinks very viable. Last March, he and a friend founded the National Atheist Party, which they believe to be the first American political party organized on the belief that God does not exist.
The N.A.P. is the second atheist American political party, actually... 
Boyle, 45, got the idea to start the party while watching an interview with Richard Dawkins, the British evolutionary biologist and author of several “New Atheist” manifestos, including the best-selling “The God Delusion.” In the interview, Dawkins wondered why atheists did not organize to influence politics.
Atheists wait patiently for instructions from Dawkins.  
“It struck me like a bolt of lightning when he said it,” Boyle recalled.
Bad metaphor for an atheist. Be careful of lightning, Troy.
From his home in Elsmere, Ky., he started researching atheists in politics. “And I found nothing.
Yea. Atheists have scrupulously avoided political involvement, except for a few piddling and oh-so-tentative forays (1789, 17931848, 1917, 1922, 1932, 1936, 1949, 1956, 19611968, 1975. A few still dabble.
So I picked up the gauntlet. I decided to start a political party.”
There's a nice book about atheism's insignificant little dips in the political pool that Troy might peek at. 
First called the Freethought Party, its original Facebook page attracted only a couple hundred members. But when the name was changed to the National Atheist Party, supporters started streaming in, currently more than 8,200.
8,000 Brights didn't know that Freethought meant atheist.  
“It immediately began growing much quicker and with less argument and controversy among members,” Boyle said. “Everyone seemed to understand implicitly what the National Atheist Party would stand for.”
We understand.  
What it stands for, Boyle said, is no governmental favoring of religion — including no religion.
Mandatory Civic Atheism isn't a religion, you see.  
“We are convened with the idea that the Founding Fathers had it right,” Boyle said in an interview.
"All men are Created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." 

Boyle isn't bothered by cognitive dissonance.
“The separation of church and state, the establishment of the U.S. as a secular nation — those two concepts are our watchwords.
Neither is anywhere in the Constitution. We are most emphatically a Christian nation, founded on Christian concepts. Our roots, our culture, our shared values and assumptions are emphatically Christian.

The distinction between secular and church power is also a distinctly Christian idea ("Render unto Caesar..).

North Korea, for example, is an explicitly secular nation with a very effective separation of church and state. It has a vibrant atheist party. The only party. 

Atheist parties have an uncanny propensity to become wildly popular once they gain power. In fact, nobody ever even thinks about starting another political party in nations governed by atheist parties. Once you go atheist, ya' never go back.
We don’t want government to impose a religion,
Except Civic Atheism.
and we don’t want government to impose no religion.
Except Civic Atheism.
We want government to be silent with regards to religion.”
Civic Atheism means that you have the right to remain silent. An obligation, actually. 

Boyle says the NAP has 7,500 members and a chapter in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The largest chapter is Florida, with 200 members, and the smallest is Alaska, with two.
The two atheists in Alaska have no doubt each formed his own chapter. Atheists are a fissiparous lot.  
Bridget Gaudette, a 33-year-old medical case manager, joined the Florida chapter after visiting NAP’s Facebook page. She now volunteers as NAP’s deputy vice president and focuses on outreach.
Atheist outreach in in the 20th century. 
“I am a big advocate of civic participation in government and I’m an atheist, so I loved the idea of a political party that could be the voice of atheists,” she said.
Another political party that could be the voice of atheists, she means. Why do they always forget?
The party’s platform was decided on by a vote — again via Facebook — and includes hot-button issues such as gay marriage (for it) gun control (tighten it), abortion (a woman’s decision), immigration (reform it), energy (green it), and the economy (legalize recreational drugs to create revenue and jobs).
Why vote? Could've guessed the party platform in my sleep. I wonder how they feel about Christmas creches on public property? 
Currently, the NAP is registered with the Internal Revenue Service as a 527 political party, which means it is a nonprofit that can put money behind issues, but not behind specific candidates.
Sorry, Jong-Un. Their support for specific fellow atheist politicians will have to remain spiritual, not financial.
Boyle hopes his party will support candidates sometime in the future.
Kim Jong-Un is mortal.  
There could be quite a wait.
He's only 28.


A November poll conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 67 percent of Americans said they would be “uncomfortable” with an atheist in the White House.

They didn't ask the other 33%, who would be uncomfortable, too.

In 2007, the Pew Research Center found that a candidate who doesn’t believe in God would have the hardest time gaining support from voters, with 63 percent “less likely to support” an atheist, outranking a gay candidate (46 percent), a philanderer (39 percent) or a Mormon (30 percent).

To date, only one “out” atheist serves in Congress, Rep. Pete Stark, a California Democrat.
 Hopefully he'll be even more "out" in 2012. 
“Relative to other religious minority groups, atheists tend to anchor the low end of the favorability scale,” said Robert P. Jones, CEO of Public Religion Research Institute, who ties it to the Cold War image of “godless communism.”
Atheism is a religious minority? So Mandatory Civic Atheism is an establishment of religion? 
John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron and an expert on religion and politics, says the NAP may be the first American political party to organize itself around atheism.
Except...
But such issues-based parties have a long history of dotting the American political landscape — before disappearing.
Atheism doesn't disappear. It just flares up periodically and makes mankind miserable. Like herpes. 
Sometimes, their concerns are absorbed by a major party, and other times, they fade away, Green said. 
“One of the reasons it is hard for a minor party to sustain itself is they don’t win very much,” Green said. “It is easier to keep people interested when it comes to ideas — you follow them on Facebook, subscribe to their magazine and you go to their convention. That is an easier thing to do than to try and mobilize millions of voters.”
Historically, in many parts of the world, atheists have stayed in power quite effectively. They only have to win once.  
None of this fazes Boyle, who says donations are coming in and membership is growing.
8,201....8,202.... 
“We know we are a minority and we know that is not likely to change in the near future,” he said. “We simply want the right to exist.
The right to exist? The right to exist? The right to exist?

Atheists aren't persecuted. There are no atheist martyrs. Atheists are the only religious group in history that has never suffered significant persecution. 

Atheists are persecutors, on a scale unparalleled in history. Atheists in power deny other people the right to exist. Every atheist government has been totalitarian. No exceptions. 

The American public's distrust of atheists isn't "persecution". Americans don't like atheists because they think atheism is idiotic and atheists are bullies. Americans understand atheists.



And if that doesn’t turn into a majority landslide of popular support,
In atheist countries, the atheist party always wins elections with a landslide. It's like it's preordained.
whoever thought it was going to? But an election on an issue or on a candidate can be swayed by a small group of people. ...
Look how effective atheists have been in using the judicial process to censor civic expression of Christianity. Imagine how much anti-Christian hate they can stir up in the legislative process.
In two or 10 or 20 years, who knows how many of us there will be and when we vote on an issue it will matter.”

A bright future for the Brights! And what about an acronym for the National Atheist Party? NAP's? No. Not catchy.

Why not the National Socialists National Atheists?

Hmmm... The National Atheism Party... The Na(s)te Party.

Pronounced the "Nasty" Party.

Heck, no need to explain the acronym.


41 comments:

  1. Michael,

    I don't think that an atheist political party will do particularly well. Organizing atheists is like herding cats. Atheists are too diverse; there are liberal, libertarian, conservative, socialist, communistic, capitalist, etc atheists.

    Atheists are primarily concerned with other things, such as jobs, the economy, the environment, not whether the state mandates the worship of a god or not.

    You are extremely tedious in continuing to blame the crimes of the Communists on atheists. When the Soviet Union fell, there was rejoicing in all of the West, including most if not all atheists.

    If you want to harp on landslide victories 'won' by ommunists, what about the 98% victory won by Diem in South Vietnam. Diem, the fervent catholic supported warmly by American and Australian catholic archbishops. Diem, the South Vietnamese president who favored the catholic minority over the buddhist majority. Diem, the American lackey who'd been advised by his American advisers to claim 65% support in the referenda, since a 98% yes vote was unbelievable. Diem, America's best friend until the CIA arranged his assassination.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The whole concept is upside down.
    Reminds me of the 'Natural Law' party up this way. They wanted to have 'Yogic flyers' levitate about Parliament Hill to fix the nation. Same party agenda as listed above. Just the other end of the 'crank scale'.
    Besides isn't there already a communist party?

    @Bach,
    Simple really. Not sure how it escapes you.
    Technically it is true not all Atheists are Communists (just most, and many more sympathizers).
    While it is also true that ALL real Communists ARE Atheists.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CrusadeRex,

    Communism and atheism are two separate things. Most of the atheists I see are not communists. Communism is very much out of favor, even in China, which is communist in name only.

    Historically, it was true that most if not all fascists were Christians, but I won't claim that there's a connection between fascism and Christianity, because they're two different things, as you claim with communism and atheism.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So, in your learned opinion, Michael, an atheist should not be in the highest office in this country? Did we get it right?

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Bach,
    China is communist in name only, eh?
    To make such sounds after having BEEN there, and while you and your family live south of it is indicative of either cowardice (ie denial) or sympathies with the communist regime in Beijing. Either way I am not interested.

    Oleg,
    I would readily say I do not think anyone with a mental dysfunction like hard materialism should be allowed to own a sharp edge or licensed to drive, never mind a high office. If you mean by 'Atheist' someone who is comfortably agnostic... then no problem. But any of the 'new atheist' set?
    NO WAY!
    I would no more vote for such a person than I would vote for an racist infant or heavily autistic necrophobe.
    It's just a non starter for me and most folks.
    I would even go further: ANY position that requires an oath is out of their depth.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @oleg:

    [So, in your learned opinion, Michael, an atheist should not be in the highest office in this country? Did we get it right?]

    I concur with crus.

    Why would I vote for someone who says the Declaration of Independence is wrong about God-given rights?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Michael said: "North Korea, for example, is an explicitly secular nation with a very effective separation of church and state. It has a vibrant atheist party. The only party."

    North Korea is not an atheist state. NK has a pantheon of gods - they're just not YOUR gods. North Koreans worship deities, "pray" daily, believe in heaven, and attribute supernatural events to their deities.

    "What distinguished [Kim Il-sung] from the rogues gallery of twentieth-century dictators was his ability to harnes the power of faith.... Once in power, Kim Il-sung closed the churches, banned the Bible, deported believers ot the hinterlands, and appropriated Christian imagery and dogma for the purpose of self-promotion.

    North Korean newspapers carried tales of supernatural phenomena. Stormy seas were said to be calmed when sailors clinging to a sinking ship sang songs in praise of Kim Il-sung. When Kim Jong-il went to the DMZ, a mysterious fog descended to protect him from lurking South Korean snipers. He caused trees to bloom and snow to melt. If Kim Il-sung was God, then Kim Jong-il was the son of God. Like Jesus Christ, Kim Jong-il's birth was said to have been heralded by a radiant star in the sky and hte appearance of a beautiful double rainbow. A swallow dscended from heaven to sing of the birth of a "general who will rule the world."
    -- Barbara Demmick, "Nothing to Envy"

    A major factor in NK success at isolating and subjugating its populace has been the wielding of religious faith. And a recurring theme in Ms. Demmick's excellent book is the surprise so many people felt that Kim Il-sung could actually die.

    The United States has an explicitly secular government. North Korea's government is headed by a supernatural being who rules by divine right.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @RickK:

    When people stop believing in God they don't worship nothing. They worship anything.

    Communism is atheist to the core. NK is atheist to the core. All sorts of crazy beliefs emerge when God is expunged from a culture-- nature worship, bizarre paganism focused on the state, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So the party patform is, "Don't talk about religion?" That's it? After that, it would seem that the policy positions would get a bit murky.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Damn it, North Korea is an Atheist State because Egnor say so! You heard him; no matter what crazy shit they believe they’re atheists! Egnor smart, he got you good stupid atheists!

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
  11. @KW:

    So you're actually claiming that Marxism/communism has nothing to do with atheism?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Egnor, Jesus would have been a communist. Unregulated capitalism will inevitably lead to a concentration of wealth among very few, while the vast majority of people will have to work like hell just to get by, having no time to spend time with family. Is that what you want? There is a middle way where people get decent wages, where everybody has access to health care, where people have the time to enjoy family life. The way to achieve that is to regulate capitalism and to tax the wealthy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. CrusadeRex,

    Of course China is communist in name only. How else could you explain the number of billionaires and millionaires there, the amount of private property, the number of private businesses. There is also corruption too, but corruption isn't confined to ostensibly communist countries.

    I'm not particularly fearful of China. Their military hasn't fired a shot in anger for at least 25 years. They're good trading partners, happy to pay for what they need, rather than running the risk of taking it by force.

    Michael,

    Believe it or not, but people can actually hold two beliefs at the same time, and not accord them equal weight or time. Most atheists, indeed most Christians, aren't thinking about their religious beliefs (or lack thereof) all the time. Most people fall on a bell curve of intensity of commitment. Except for when reading your increasingly irrational paranoid diatribes, amusing though they are.

    Communists do what they do because they're interested in creating a fictional communist utopia. They're not interested in creating the equally fictional future Christian utopia in the afterlife. This is one case where it is impossible to hold two different beliefs at the same time. One fiction contradicts the other, and it's impossible to avoid the cognitive dissonance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Michael said: "When people stop believing in God they don't worship nothing. They worship anything. "

    There is zero difference between Kim Il-sung's claims of divinity, Joseph Smith's claims of angelic assistance and divine revelation, and Jesus's claims of divine parentage.

    Zero.

    They are separate in your mind because you believe in one and not in the other two. But from a rational perspective, all three are equally nonsensical. All three have given meaning to the lives of some followers, and have been used to perpetrate great evil by other followers.

    It's all the same.

    And all 3 are radically different from the simple statement: "I find no convincing evidence of the existence of gods or the divine or supernatural, therefore I reject Jehovah just as I reject Wotan, Thor, and Huitzilopochtli."

    Michael, you're dogmatic belief is indistiguishable from the sincere loyalty of a North Korean raised in the traditions of Dear Leader worship. And it is diametrically different from the rational, honest atheism of an educated, rational person.

    Let's just go back and review your many posts, and consider the amount of energy you put into proactively promoting your beliefs and spewing out hatred of those that think differently. Your own writings indicate you have so much in common with the devout Trotskyites, the worshippers of Dear Leader, the saluting Brownshirts, and the wife-trading Saints.

    None of these groups bear resemblance to the atheists who view with skepticism all dogma, all supernatural beliefs, all faith-based worship.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So you're actually claiming that Marxism/communism has nothing to do with atheism?

    I’m claiming, as I have before only to fall on deaf ears, that the leadership of N. Korea has used the trappings and methodologies of religion to control the population. The on-going claims of divine signs associated with the leadership bears this out.

    The religious impulse of Koreans has always been satisfied by an eclectic mix of religions and traditions, and the political thesis by Kim-Il-sung called Juche slid right in, becoming a spiritual movement among those more patriotic and nationalist N. Koreans. According to Juche, there is no god but Kim-Il-sung. Is that Atheist? I don’t think so Do N. Koreans believe it? Some do, others continue to follow their religious traditions the best they can under the watchful eye of the state.

    So when you say things like “"North Korea, for example, is an explicitly secular nation with a very effective separation of church and state” you’re just plain wrong, but hey, you’ve never let that stop you.

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
  16. Egnor: Why would I vote for someone who says the Declaration of Independence is wrong about God-given rights?

    That's a cowardly non-answer. I wouldn't vote for Rick Santorum, either. I don't think, however, that he should be disqualified from running for high office because he is a zealot.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @oleg:

    I didn't say that atheists should be "disqualified" from running for office. That would be a violation of Article VI paragraph 3 of the Constitution.

    I said that I wouldn't vote for an atheist.

    Do you believe that I should be forced to do so? In every atheist nation that has ever existed, people are forced to vote for atheists, when they can vote at all.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Just to make sure I understand you correctly, Mike. You don't think that atheists should be disqualified from running for office of the President, right?

    ReplyDelete
  19. @KW, RickK:

    Communists are atheists. There is no debate.

    Obviously not all atheists are communists. I was an atheist (or agnostic) for most of my life. I have always hated communism.

    But communism is the only political manifestation of atheism to succeed at the nation-level (except in the French Revolution), and its record is sordid. I regret having to harp on the unalienable link between atheism and communism, but you atheists stonewall it, and somebody has to point out the obvious.

    Atheists/communists in power will use all manner of ploy to maintain power-- gulags, terror, war, propaganda, indoctrination, supernatural claims, whatever. It's culture specific. Koreans have a long pagan history, and invoking some of the pagan themes to consolidate power is one of the methods of the N. Korean atheists/communists.

    Communism is an explicitly atheist ideology. Face it, and try to understand it. No one will take you seriously unless you admit the obvious, and make a genuine effort to understand why all actual atheist government has been totalitarian.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @oleg:

    [Just to make sure I understand you correctly, Mike. You don't think that atheists should be disqualified from running for office of the President, right?]

    Of course I don't think that atheists should be legally disqualified from holding office.

    I won't personally vote for one, but that is not the same as legal disqualification, which is unconstitutional and morally wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  21. RickK:

    [There is zero difference between Kim Il-sung's claims of divinity, Joseph Smith's claims of angelic assistance and divine revelation, and Jesus's claims of divine parentage.]

    You're wrong.

    Kim Il-sung was an atheist thug who used traditional Korean pagan themes to consolidate power.

    Joseph Smith was a nut and a fraud.

    Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, and the Lord I worship.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Egnor: Joseph Smith was a nut and a fraud.

    Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, and the Lord I worship.


    I am sure that you also consider Mohammad an impostor and Buddha a figment of imagination. Amirite?

    You know, Mike, militant atheists are only slightly more inclusive than you are.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Michael,

    The only difference between Kim Il-Sung, Joseph Smith and Jesus is that the first two lived in modern times and were well documented, so we know that they were frauds. Jesus, however, was not documented during his lifetime, and it was his followers who wrote the history, so we don't know definitely what he said and did.

    Actually, I count two Mormons amongst my friends (strange that there are Mormons in Australia), and more pleasant and sane people I can't imagine - besides their devotion to Joseph Smith. They're completely different to you with your irrational fanaticism.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Marx and Lenin and their supporters where atheists responsible for the communist revolution, and Stalin was an evil atheist, leveling churches and killing priests, monks, nuns, intellectuals, scientists, and anybody else who could challenge his political power. Truly horrible stuff, there’s no denying it. Is a disbelief in god a requirement for crimes on this scale? Maybe, but I’ve got to wonder about those the good Christians manning Hitler’s genocide machine.

    The origins of communism go back farther than Lenin. Communal living with no private property had been tried before; notably by some of the early Christian sects who believed that private property was evil and that God created the world for all to use equally. Through the Middle Ages there was common cultivation of the fields and a vigorously defended village commons communal spaces, all supported by the church. Comunism didn’t spring from atheism, nor is atheism required for Communism.

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
  25. “Kim Il-sung was an atheist thug who used traditional Korean pagan themes to consolidate power.

    Joseph Smith was a nut and a fraud.

    Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, and the Lord I worship.”

    That is the funniest thing I seen all day. I literally laughed out-loud.

    “Koreans have a long pagan history, and invoking some of the pagan themes to consolidate power is one of the methods of the N. Korean atheists/communists.”

    Let’s change that to its exact American equivalent.

    “Americans have a long Christian history, and invoking some of the Christian themes to consolidate power is one of the methods of the Republican Party.”

    Michael, when you criticize another’s religious beliefs you unwittingly criticize your own. There’s no getting around it.

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @KW: “Americans have a long Christian history, and invoking some of the Christian themes to consolidate power is one of the methods of the Republican Party.”

      That's the first sensible thing I've read from you in these comboxes. The Republican party is, in essence, as Christian as the North Korean WPK is pagan.

      ...which is to say it isn't.

      I'm not entirely on the same page with Dr. Egnor on the whole atheism/communism thing, but I do agree that there is a fundamental difference between an indifference and antipathy in regards to religion. Most secular states are indifferent toward religion (taking their cue from the American first amendment) and most communist states have been hostile to it. State atheism and state indifference toward religion are two different things, and when I bother to weigh in on the subject at all, it's because I object to the habit certain atheists have of conflating the two.

      Just because America has no state religion does not mean that it has established irreligion. The one means that speech is really free; the other means that all speech is free unless it is religious speech.

      Delete
  26. Koreans have a long pagan history, and invoking some of the pagan themes to consolidate power is one of the methods of the N. Korean atheists/communists.

    You do realize that paganism is a religion don't you?

    ReplyDelete
  27. @bach:

    [Actually, I count two Mormons amongst my friends (strange that there are Mormons in Australia), and more pleasant and sane people I can't imagine]

    I agree wholeheartedly. Mormons are lovely people, and I have great respect for their culture. I have several Mormon friends and neighbors, and they're among the nicest people I know.

    But their theology is largely nuts, as was their "prophet".

    The LDS Church is a fine example of the power and beauty of Christianity. Even a Christian heresy founded by a nut is beautiful in many ways, because it has its origin in Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Bach,
    As I noted before, I am totally uninterested in your apologia for communist excess. I no longer care what your motivation is.
    The method is clear.
    Nobody is discussion theoretical egalitarian communism here. It does not exist. Never has. Never was intended to.
    Your (and others) attempt at a 'no true Scotsman' argument for Korea and China only exposes your sympathies for those regimes.

    ReplyDelete
  29. @All
    Here is the FACT you must face about the relation between Atheism and Communism: Most nominal Atheists (globally) declare themselves so for communist party membership. There is not a more organized or larger group of Atheists on EARTH.
    The stark fact is that most living atheists are in communist countries and have NO CHOICE in the matter.
    You people defending and equivocating are simply western apologists for this system, or a capitalist one like it. (ie Bach and Oleg )

    Some may counter: They are not really Atheists, but just say so. They are not TRUE Scotsmen!
    I agree! That is why I used the term 'nominal'.
    Many of them are crypto Christians, Buddhists, and even animists who are not even fans of the communist system, but facilitate it for their own ends - to get ahead. "I was not a REAL Nazi, I joined the party (and supported it!!!) for a job" was a common defence in post ww2 Europe. In many cases it was true. But that does not mean the Nazis have been maligned, it means these people COLLABORATED with them for personal gain. They were corrupted by NS just as the modern communist is.

    So we are left with a typically human mess: Atheist states are the largest source of Atheism and Humanist ethics but most people are actually only NOMINALLY communist or atheist (like bach's Chinese 'billionaires').
    We also see the 'cult' of leader worship quite frequently, which is a logical extension of Humanist state policy. Put mankind before God and you will soon be worshipping a Man. Simple stuff, really. Known since very ancient times, and no doubt another reason why these ideologues love revising history.

    Communism and State Atheism BOTH function, but without the desired / theoretical outcomes (Ie egalitarian and 'fair' societies).
    Instead they become a cynical power grab. A totalitarian state bent on 'progress' as defined by 'The party', the leader(s), and their term based 'plans'.
    Atheism is the philosophical mechanism that allows these ends to be justified by brutal means.
    What else would we expect from the religion of 'me'?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Re Mormons:
    Live and let live. I see their faith as a Christian Heresy, but I have known some very good and moral Mormons. I've no real issue with them other than Polygamy.
    They also make good candies/sweets, chocolates and pies in Salt Lake City.

    ReplyDelete
  31. crus: You people defending and equivocating are simply western apologists for this system, or a capitalist one like it. (ie Bach and Oleg )

    crus, no offense, but sometimes you are just being silly. Like this time. I am not an apologist for the Chinese or North Korean government, and have never been one. Also, unlike any of you here, I have actually lived in a communist country and know first-hand what it was like. So don't make yourself into an ass by ascribing to me the views I don't have.

    Carry on.

    ReplyDelete
  32. No offence taken, Oleg.
    Much of what you write seems extremely silly to me. I am also often convinced it MUST be intentional. It does not surprise me at all you see things in reverse. I would expect it.
    You will note, however, I have used the word 'seems', as I strive to never underestimate foes or opponents - no matter how stupid or shallow their position may be (Islamists for example).
    But I appreciate the disclaimer.
    No offence taken.
    BUT!!! You are wrong, once again.
    I did live in a communist country for just over a year. It was enough. I saw the whip marks on the backs of boys for 'selling dollars'. Cigarette burns made by police - on children. I saw a woman's body lay in the street for a day before anyone came to collect it. I had friends 'censured' for reading banned books. Etc etc.
    As for making myself into an ass (making an ass of myself is the proper expression ;), perhaps you should reread that statement....or perhaps I have completely misunderstood your position.
    You do NOT think an ATHEIST state is desirable? Is that what you're saying? If so I stand corrected, and happily so.
    Let me be crystal clear: I am not interested in your position on collectivism or free markets, but rather on the religious and moral issue. That interest is why your nics are listed at the END of the sentence after the word 'capitalist'.
    Foundations are my concern, not economic policy.
    You may fire when ready.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Actually I *didn't* mean "another" Atheist party, but thanks for playing. In the U.S., there are no political parties to represent the nontheist voter bloc. As an American who believes strongly in civic participation, I did not have a nontheist political party to participate in and therefore welcomed the concept of the National Atheist Party. I never said it was the first attempt in the history of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Michael said: "Kim Il-sung was an atheist thug who used traditional Korean pagan themes to consolidate power."

    You're wrong, and I think you know it, which makes you less than honest. Borrowing freely from Ms. Demick: Kim Il-sung learned his methodology from Christianity. Kim Il-sung's paternal uncle was a Protestant minister in the pre-Communist days when Pyongyang had such a vibrant Christian community that it was called the "Jerusalem of the East". Why do you think the North Koreans were so good at following blindly? Why was Kim Il-sung able to borrow Christian imagery so freely? Because the missionaries had cleared the ground for Kim Il-sung.

    You choose the path of belief. I choose the path of facts. The fact is that Kim Il-sung combined Communism with RELIGION (specifically, Christianity) and made a much stronger version than the leaders who tried to combine Communism with atheism.

    (I'm still chuckling. Pyongyang, the Jerusalem of the East. Once again we see that Christianity is a lousy defense against evil.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You couldn't be a bigger idiot with a lobotomy, Seriously, you are the most idiotic idiot who ever idioted.

      Delete
  35. @Bridget:

    I welcome the National Atheist Party. Anything atheists do to publicly define themselves advances the theist cause.

    At your next conclave, if you have such things, it might be worthwhile asking your fellow godless why all previous atheist parties have given rise to so much human suffering.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I did not have a nontheist political party to participate in and therefore welcomed the concept of the National Atheist Party

    Yes, but after reciting the Godless Pledge of Allegiance and taking your seats, you'll agree to ... what? Despite the media's fixation on which candidate believes what, there's not much religion in the way you deal with long-term bonds, contracting processes and civil servant pensions.

    ReplyDelete
  37. It's called the Democrats.

    ReplyDelete