Beam me up, Scotty!!!! This is rational?

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

If people get to take shots at the nuttiness of Ayn Rand (and her influence on Paul Ryan), then can we please, PLEASE, PLEASE have a story or two on Joseph Smith. His only competition is L. Ron Hubbard. I may have to go with Golden plates versus OT levels for the you've-got-to-be-fuckin'-kidding-me un-falsifiable award.

And, fine, if we want to go after Xianity, great, but 'Murikans don't give a shit about that insanity. We have here as philosophical models a woman who believed women desired to be raped by strong men, that altruism was weakness, and that selfishness was the highest cultivated virtue; and a man who, yeah, well, there's just too much.

I hope someone asks what Ayn Rand would have thought about Joseph Smith. Hell, ask Paul what she'd think of the pope. Hell, ask him what the Pope would think of Joseph Smith. And then ask Romney what Joseph Smith thought about the Pope. They'd wish they had radical Muslim to clear all this shit up.

[limpyhobbler]

1. I say no. We don't go after people's religions.

It ain't right.

It's downright un-American.

Ann Rand is fair game, but leave Joseph Smith out of it.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

2. Hmmm.

"It ain't right."
***Why not? If these thinkers have influenced or influence the person's decisions, we need to know how.

"It's downright un-American."
***No. In fact, it's quite American. We're always questioning our candidates' religions. Not voting for them based on their religion may be un-American, but asking how religion would influence their time in office would be doing due diligence on the part of the electorate. I'm afraid you've bought part of the right's strategy hook-line-and-sinker. They don't want us talking about this shit in public. Most of us are pretty moderate (don't do mean shit, help a brother out when you can, God, Jesus, prayer, national anthem). I think the right tries to keep the crazies from us.

"Ann Rand is fair game, but leave Joseph Smith out of it."
***She's as religious as he is, maybe even more so.

[limpyhobbler]

3. ok well you make a good case I guess we just disagree. nt

[tkmorris]

4. Does a person's religion affect how they will act or govern?

If the answer is yes then we not only have the right, we have a sacred DUTY to examine those religious beliefs and how they influence the decision making processes of those we elect.

[limpyhobbler]

6. Ok well I can see one question in a debate like "can you tell us how your religion has influenced

you, and how it will impact your policies. Do you have any religious obligations that will prevent you from doing your job?" That seems reasonable.

But as a campaign issue "Mormons are weird" would be kind of mean.
Or "Mormons are out of the mainstream", "Mormons believe crazy stuff", "Mormons are a cult".

After all they are a religious minority everywhere but Utah and I don't want to see us start some shit that will lead to the Mormon kids getting picked on at school.

[Odin2005]

7. BS is BS, I don't give a damn if it is a religion or not.

[ohheckyeah]

8. Actually, it's very American, it's been going on for over 200 years.

In few, if any, presidential contests has religion played a more divisive and decisive role than in the election of 1800. Jefferson’s religion, or alleged lack thereof, emerged as a critical issue in the campaign. His Federalist opponents vilified him as a Jacobin and atheist. (Both charges stemmed from his notorious sympathy for the French Revolution, which in the 1790s had turned bloody and, some said, anti-Christian.) In the days before the election, the Gazette of the United States, a leading Federalist newspaper, posed the “grand question” of whether Americans should vote for “GOD—AND A RELIGIOUS PRESIDENT [John Adams]; or impiously declare for JEFFERSON—AND NO GOD!!!”

Jefferson’s Federalist foes did not invent the stinging accusation that he was an infidel. Years before, his ardent advocacy for disestablishment in Virginia had led many pious Americans to conclude that Jefferson was, if not an enemy of religion, at least indifferent towards organized religion’s vital role in civic life. The publication of his Notes on the State of Virginia in the mid-1780s exacerbated these fears. He wrote, “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” This passage came back to haunt him in the 1800 campaign. Detractors said this proved he was an infidel or, worse, an atheist.

Source

[Skittles]

5. they are all nutty; it is just a matter of degree