It's a safe bet that I won't be voting for McCain

Judeo/Christian values huh?

I can't wait for the candidate with the anti-shrimp platform.

Also:

I would probably have to say yes, that the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation. But I say that in the broadest sense. The lady that holds her lamp beside the golden door doesn't say, "I only welcome Christians." We welcome the poor, the tired, the huddled masses. But when they come here they know that they are in a nation founded on Christian principles.

Ahem. I'm only going to say this once, so pay attention.

DEMENTED FUCKWIT.

Gosh, I seem to have lost patience with slimy bastards pandering to ignorance and bigotry in order to win votes, haven't I? It's like I think the Constitution still matters, or something. I sure hope sucking Satan's cock is a "Christian principle", because damn, that's the favorite spiritual activity inside the Beltway today.

Judeo-Christian ?
A Christian from Judea founded the US of A ?
Isn't that, sort-of, the basis of Mormonism ?

what a pandering ass. and i thought he might be one of the "good" guys....

Let's ask Mr McCain: to WHAT Judeo-Christian principle is he referring? Where is there a Judeo-Christian principle in the Constitution? The Constitution makes no reference to God, Jesus, or the bible. Furthermore Article VI states "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office." Looks to me like the our founders specifically excluded any Judeo-Christian principles. Maybe that's why America has been such a success.

I thought democracy was a Greek invention, and they were a bunch of godless heathens.

He also endorses the usual canard that the US was founded as a christer nation. How disgusting. 'E pluribus unum', not 'Gott Mit Uns'

I was reading through a speech made by, what in the UK is the equivalent of the opposition parties, leader, I found 1...1 mention of religion in the whole 50 minute speech:

"And that's why I am proud that I can stand here with the first Muslim woman of a Shadow Cabinet or Cabinet in Sayeeda Warsi who will be a great talent for our party and our country."

That's it, in context it is actually more about ethnic minorities than religion.

At least I have something to be proud about my country for...

Divisive appeals to religious intolerance will get you nowhere Mr. McCain. What Christian principle was he referring to? Compassion? The same compassion that motivated the crusades, and the witch trials to name a few...

I wish the democrats would come out for atheism.

they include an invisible, unnamed token Jew

I expect that at some point in the future Arlington will have a "tomb of the unknown Jew" to round out the fantasy that Christian nation doesn't mean "our specific virulent brand of charismatic stupidity".

Aren't there THREE world religions that share the same setup? Gotta wonder what would happen if McCain vowed to support the Islamojudeachristian values, etc...

Deeks wrote:

The same compassion that motivated the crusades

It is more than a bit of stretch to say that the crusades were motivated by compassion.

It's not just inclusion; it's also excluding the other major Abrahamic faith.

Yeah, and everyone else.

The most remarkable thing about this post is that I learned McCain is running for some kind of electoral office. What? Seriously? Someone's putting me on.

"Judeo-Christian values" became popular post WWII when it was no longer seemly to be seen as anti-Jewish. Shockingly enough, they didn't change much from the "Christian values" being flogged pre-WWII.

And this has always been a "Christian Nation" - except back in the early 1800s when the Christians were squawking about how evil the Constitution was and how we were all going to hell because we didn't have an established state Christian religion. But now we've always been a "Christian Nation". I think we've always been at war with Eastasia too, or something like that.

PZ wrote:

...[I]t always seems to me that these claims that toss in the word "Judeo" are made solely to put up a pretense of inclusiveness -- they really mean "conservative Christian"....

I agree. PZ also asked:

Whenever I see these pious testimonies to "Judeo-Christian values", I always wonder...how many Jewish founding fathers were there?

Manybe at least one, apparently, partly depending on your definition of "founding fathers." I remember learning about Haym Salomon.

I think McCain has it backwards. the country has become important in spite of the superstisious traditions. Fortunately much of the mindlessness of the "Good Book" was specificaly marginalized by the founding fathers.

You never hear a Jewish person of the Hebrew persuasion refer to "Judeo-Christian" values now do you??

Every time I hear the words "Judeo-Christian" these days, it seems to be from a guy whose beliefs are based on an Old Testament God with the Jesus of Revelations.

Have we forgotten McCain's special time with the Discovery Institute? He's already lost my vote.

I know other major industrial countries have their fair share of political zealots and ideologues, Australia for instance, but these guys seem to be the exception not the rule except here in the States. Romney and his magic mormonic underwear, Giuliani and his precious Madonna/catholicism defiled by elephant dung, McCain and his "(judeo?)Christian" core/corps values - I won't even dignify Brownback and Huckabee, et.al.

The dems are just as willing to publicly suck on that christian teat if the veracity of their faith is ever questioned while mealy-mouthedly whispering, "psssst, church and State - seperation thereof, unless y'know, you start suggesting we're HUMANISTS or even AGNOSTICS, god forbid! Why then we'll assert to you what avid CHURCHGOERS/SYNAGOGGERS we are."

Now let us all sing, "What a friend we have in Jeeeebuuuus, Christ Almighty! - what a paaaaaal"...

An atheist has no chance in hell as a presidential candidate in the US and I doubt that will ever change in my lifetime. McCain is so desperate that if it takes fellating the Religious Right(wrong) in full view of the media to stay in the game, he's willing to cover his teeth with his lips and say, "aaaaahhhhhh".

'Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?'

The "greatest experiment" in what, exactly?

How long it will take for a bunch of fundie morons and ass-licking politicians to completely destroy the country?

Jsn -

Romney and his magic mormonic underwear

Now, look. The mormon underwear thing is not that weird really. Especially when measured against things that mainstream religions do - like the ritual cannibalism that takes place at every single Roman Catholic mass. The underwear things is a bit like a devout Jew keeping his head covered or a devout Catholic keeping a rosary handy at all times. Superstitious and odd? Sure, but not much odder than the practices of mainstream religions.

There's no need to pick on Mormonism for odd rituals and supersititions - there are plenty of odd rituals and superstitions to go around where religion is concerned.

I thought democracy was a Greek invention, and they were a bunch of godless heathens.

Posted by: yud

I take offense to that. The Greeks had lots of cool Gods.

"You never hear a Jewish person of the Hebrew persuasion refer to "Judeo-Christian" values now do you??"
Yes. Debbie 'why wont atheists just shut up' Schlussel talks of them.

I think the timing of this pronouncement by McCain is also significant. In just the past few days James Dobson, Tony Perkins and a few of the other major evangelical leaders met in Salt Lake City to decide if they could support Rudy Giuliani if he wins the Republican nomination. Of course, the council of evangelical nitwits decided that if Giuliani wins, they would support a third party candidate rather than support someone who is pro-choice, pro-gay and divorced three times.

McCain figured it was the perfect time to pander to the fundies. McCain is trying to make up for his moment of honesty back in 2000 when he called the evangelicals "agents of intolerance."

The other day I saw Tony Perkins on Hardball (Chris Matthews) and he actually called Giuliani "pro-abortion." You know it's over when they start demonizing a person with that crap. I am pro-choice, but I would never refer to myself as "pro-abortion."

Here is exactly what McCain said back on Feb. 28 2000-

"I am a pro-life, pro-family fiscal conservative, an advocate of a strong defense, and yet Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and a few Washington leaders of the pro-life movement call me an unacceptable presidential candidate. They distort my pro- life positions and smear the reputations of my supporters.

Why? Because I don't pander to them, because I don't ascribe to their failed philosophy that money is our message.

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right."

Aw, come on, PZ, was there ever any chance of voting for McCain? After all, your byline is

random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal

.

What are you going to do now that the (nominally liberal) Dems have started playing to the christers?

The Judeo may stand for Jesus... a relatively wellknown Jew. The term 'Jesus-Christian values' would have been more straightforward though.

This country was founded upon the rational, secular, scientific principles of the Enlightenment. We don't have to speculate about this, and there's no room for argument; it's not something the Founding Fathers tried to hide. They didn't look to the Bible for insights on how to design a government, they looked to classical sources, mostly Greek and Roman.

So it is more accurate to say this country is built on pagan, homosexual principles than to say it is built on Christian principles.

I can only think of one attempt during the Revolutionary period to rationalize the American experiment in terms of the Bible. In Common Sense, Paine uses the Old Testament to make a protracted argument against the institution of monarchy. But since Paine was a famous atheist, I guess we can assume he was pandering a bit. He also had nothing to do with the Constitutional Convention.

McCain: I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, 'Will this person carry on in the Judeo Christian principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?'

Apart from the blatant charvinist nonsense that the US would in any sense be the greatest experiment in the history of mankind, should the number one issue not be (choose one):
a more equitable distribution of income
protection against worker-lay off
health insurance
old age pensions
affordable housing

or anything of that type?
Such policies might moreover help reason: nothing like social security to empty evangelical churches

"Whenever I see these pious testimonies to "Judeo-Christian values", I always wonder...how many Jewish founding fathers were there?"

Robert Morris was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

they really mean "conservative Christian," and they include an invisible, unnamed token Jew to hide their real narrowness.

That's not really so surprising. Isn't Christianity founded on invoking an invisible, unnamed token Jew to hide narrowness and avoid responsibility?

And I used to kind of like McCain back in 2000. I probably would have voted for him if he had won the nomination. Too bad it's become obvious that his lust for the Presidency has utterly destroyed his independence, such that he'll suck up to the worst elements of the religious right.

"I take offense to that. The Greeks had lots of cool Gods."

Yeah. A whole pantheon of petty, spiteful, squabbling deities who basically treated humanity like a snotrag. A much more likely theological basis than the Abrahamic schizoid.

"There's no need to pick on Mormonism for odd rituals and supersititions - there are plenty of odd rituals and superstitions to go around where religion is concerned."

But it's Mormon underwear. Has ever a more hilarious combination of words been made? Well, "compassionate conservative" is one, I guess. I Googled the term once and was a tad disappointed. They're mostly just another manifestation of the Mormon "modest is hottest" sensibility, at least now that they're not the old one-piece.

"The term 'Jesus-Christian values' would have been more straightforward though."

Yeah, but that might imply things like being meek and turning the other cheek, and (heh) weaksauce stuff like that.

And where in the Bible does one find support for democracy rather than the divine right of kings and other hereditary dictators or military usurpers?

how many Jewish founding fathers were there?

How about Schmuel Gelbfisz better known as Samuel Goldwyn one of the great founders of Hollywood the true capital of America. Most of the other great founders of Tinsel Town were also Jewish.

And where in the Bible does one find support for democracy rather than the divine right of kings and other hereditary dictators or military usurpers?

Pilate asked the Jews to vote on who they'd rather see crucified, Jesus or Barabbas, the results of which were then tallied by the centurion Diebold.

"Judeo-Christian" values is just good cop/bad cop.

See, if it was just "Christian" values, then they'd have to do more than pay lip-service to the Gospels. Add that "Judeo" on there, though, and it's screw the peacemakers! Yahweh's pissed! Who's for a crusade?

H. Hershey @35:

And where in the Bible does one find support for democracy rather than the divine right of kings and other hereditary dictators or military usurpers?

I don't think the bible offers much support for democracy. Would have been surprising if it did, of course. Democracy wasn't a big player in the ancient world; even Athenian democracy was pretty thoroughly undemocratic. But nor is the bible big on the divine right of kings. Samuel warned the Hebrews that kings are not, on the whole, a good idea; and I seem to recall the OT remarking of most of the kings of Israel and Judah that they were abominations, did evil in the sight of the Lord, etc. And of course, the quintessential religious authority -- the papacy -- wasn't willing to wear the "divine right of kings" at all, and spent a lot of time and effort on trying to put kings as firmly under its yoke as the peasantry.

There is a strong case to be made, though, that the NT supports socialism. For some reason this is not an aspect of the book that gets a lot of emphasis from the Republican-Evangelical Axis.

Howard Hershey (#37) asks:

And where in the Bible does one find support for democracy rather than the divine right of kings and other hereditary dictators or military usurpers?

Well, maybe not democracy, but certainly communism:

And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.

Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,

And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

               (Acts 4:33-35, KJV)

Oops! Should have been Acts 4:32-25:

And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

Good summary of communism.

Anyone know at what point in American history Christians began affixing the "Judeo" prefix in front of their label? I'm guessing it began at roughly the time Israel was formed, received America's backing, and evangelicals noted this chain of events bore an extremely vague resemblance to doomsday scenarios in their holy book.

invoking christian values always sounds like to me to be an appeal to authority and not to the people in any democratic form.
the political right and the religious right have resisted democracy since the beginning why would I think that would change now?
how could they really allow the ordinary people even the unsaved sinner have a say in how we are governed?
Is there any where a democratic religion? in modern times? in the united states?

Hey Nony Nony (rippittypippityay)*

/There's no need to pick on Mormonism for odd rituals and supersititions - there are plenty of odd rituals and superstitions to go around where religion is concerned./

Huh? Don't pick on a specific religion because it has superstitious beliefs that fly in the face of rationalism? Um, I don't believe Mormonism was the sole target of my rant. But I confess I did feel a little schadenfreude with the Mormonic/moronic pun.

Look, certain sects of jews wear prayer shawls and underwear with no claim of "magical properties", they are culturally, as well as religiously SYMBOLIC. Priests wear vestments and evangelists have big hair but they don't carry the quite the same mystical claims as mormon undergear. I'll have to retract that statement as to priestly vestments now that I think about it. (The power of Christ COMPELLLLS you....)

Perhaps the mormon church's outright fabrication of the genetic lineage of Native Americans would have been a worthier target, or perhaps the "golden books" which no one can produce as evidence? For all his wealth and seeming intelligence, Romney belongs to a religion that even most mainstream Christians identify as a cult. As a former Southern Baptist-cum-Charismatic-cum-Methodist-cum-Episcopalian/flirted with Catholicism/ Judeism kind o' guy, I can tell you what the majority of each thinks of other xian demoni -er - denominations. And yes, I have Mormon friends and some of their beliefs are just an affront to logic and reason beyond the underwear issue.

I view most, if not all, religions as a rejection of reality and reason. Anyone who lays claim to magical/metaphysical occurances without evidence or some proof beyond anecdotal evidence is fair game no matter how benign their rituals or superstition, even the Mormons.

*{obscure I Love Lucy refernce, -couldn't resist}

I lost all respect for McCain years ago when he was on Charlie Rose's show saying that he believed that schools should teach the controversy.
Southy (#8): I was watching a speech that Gordon Brown was giving a couple days ago, I don't know the circumstances but sometimes C-Span airs foreign political coverage. Every few lines out of his mouth was either a bible quote or a reference to something in the bible and I couldn't watch it. You guys don't have the fundie squick factor developed yet because they haven't coated everything in your government with their unique blend of slime but it's there. Keep your eyes open and hopefully it won't get as bad there as it is here.
That reminds me though, don't these people who talk about the US being founded on religious principles and how the founding fathers were kinda fundies as well realize that the title "Defender of the Faith" belonged to the guy who lost? Ok, obviously not. Then again, I just saw a poll where Bush has a 69% approval rating with Republicans, compared with a 7% approval rating from Democrats and 19% with independents you have to wonder what planet they think that they are on and if they think that it's flat or not.

There is one part to this story you didn't report here. These comments were made to amend and defend a remark he had made the day before:

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who has a grounding in my faith," the GOP presidential hopeful told the Web site in an interview published Saturday.

From this article.

So, first McCain said he would not trust a non-Christian candidate, got criticized for it, and THEN amended it to a watered-down statement about "Judeo-Christians."

I have a modest proposal: Instead of sending people who accept superstitions to a dangerous level to Washington, to lead us, how about if we instead look to helping them solve their problems so they can lead happy lives?

But I'd be a Stalinist and a Maoist if I suggested that "mainstream religion = superstition", wouldn't I?

Yesterday five or six of my freshmen composition students (class of nineteen) specified that one of the criteria for an ideal presidential candidate would be that he be Christian. About the same number specified that 'he' would have to actually BE a 'he'. That number included a couple of women who wouldn't vote for someone of their own gender. ("Women are too affected by their emotions.") Oh, yeah, one student specified that the ideal candidate should not only male but also a WHITE male. (Rationale: Our nation has done fine so far with white males as president, so why change a winning formula?) Care to guess who was mentioned most as top choice for president? That's right: John McCain.

Now see, here's the problem with not having a religious background. The Judeo-Christian thing is code for I suscribe to all that Old Testament stuff that Jesus tossed out in the New Testament.

MKK--former Baptist

they really mean "conservative Christian," and they include an invisible, unnamed token Jew to hide their real narrowness.

You're right, except his name is Joe Lieberman.

Hey Prof, lighten up! Jesus wasn't 'Judeo' enough for you??

The man's a vote whore - as they all are - I'm sure his speech notes looked something like this:
I think the number one issue people should make [in the] selection of the President of the United States is, 'Will this person carry on in the...

• [when speaking to fundie xians] Judeo Christian
• [for oil companies] energy economy
• [Black Panthers or if Jesse Jackson is in the crowd] inclusive multiethnic
• [random muslims] god-willing Koranic
• [mormons] bigamist with magic underwear
• [big tobacco] freedom to smoke so much that you need a tracheotomy
• [Germane Greer] feminist
• [Sesame St.] big yellow bird
• etc.

...principled tradition that has made this nation the greatest experiment in the history of mankind?'

Yud,

The Greeks were heathens, as far as the christians are concerned, but they certainly weren't godless. In fact, they were lousy with 'em.

-jcr

Yo! Philboid Stooge,
You got any archaeological proof this Jesus dude existed? Like, uh, outside of this bible book? Funny, huh, that no matter how many miracles this guy was supposed to have produced, there is no first hand mention of him anywhere in Roman or Greek accounts outside of the gospels and they kept really good accounts.
Barring that, dude, the gospels say he rejected the Rabinic teachings of his time so I guess he wasn't the best example of Ju Ju Judeo, HUH.

There is simply no point in examining any of the various utterances of the Republican Candidates. Any particular bit of idiocy they espouse in the primaries becomes immediately inoperative once the nominee has been selected.
The Republican nominee than receives a complete moral and political make-over for the general election.

Re H. Humbert

"Pilate asked the Jews to vote on who they'd rather see crucified, Jesus or Barabbas, the results of which were then tallied by the centurion Diebold."

Would Mr. Humbert care to elucidate us as to what percentage of the crowd was Jews and what percentage was Arabs. Let us remember that Barabbas was an Arab and undoubtedly many of his followers and relatives were in the crowd.

Now, look. The mormon underwear thing is not that weird really. Especially when measured against things that mainstream religions do - like the ritual cannibalism that takes place at every single Roman Catholic mass.

I've met Mormons who claimed, with a straight face, that the underwear could block lightning. They have urban legends about Mormons being struck by lightning, but only being burned on non-underwear-covered parts of their bodies. (Which killed them anyway, so clearly they should have worn more underwear on their heads.)

I don't think the Catholics can top that for hilarity, unless they're actively claiming that the host can incinerate vampires or something.

Anton Mates @56,

I don't think the Catholics can top [Mormon underwear] for hilarity, unless they're actively claiming that the host can incinerate vampires or something.

Anton, never ever underestimate the Roman Catholic church's gift for hilarity. Mormonism is more or less science fiction, yes, but cannot come close to catholicism for sheer weirdness. (Mormonism is simply a much younger cult, so its weirdnesses haven't had as much time to permeate the culture and thus acquire the patina of respectability.)

If you ever have the great good fortune to visit Rome, be sure to drink in the architectural wonders for which we must all be grateful to the Roman church (no snark). But when you're done, spare some time for the cellar of Santa Maria della Concezione in the Via Veneto. Like many things in religion, this chapel actually makes perfect sense, if you accept the underlying premise. In this case, the monks believed they had nothing to fear from death because their Saviour would rescue them. Their method of giving architectural expression to this confidence -- contempta mortis to use the technical term -- is not altogether unadmirable. (No, really; when you once get your head past what the decorations are made of, it's actually not badly done minor baroque.)

When you're done at S. Maria d. C., pop by Sacro Cuore del Suffragio, right on the banks of the Tiber. Architecturally, it's a bit of a disappointment after the last church. It's gothic; indeed, the only gothic church in town. That tells us straightaway that it's a fake, built centuries after the core gothic era. (There's certainly authentic gothic in Italy, vide the Milan Duomo, though goodness knows it is not the best of the genre; but in much of the peninsula and certainly in Rome, gothic was looked down on as the architecture of savages. This church is an arriviste.) Anyway, forget the church. What you want is the tiny museum right next door. It shows signs sent by the tortured souls in purgatory (handprints burnt into bedsteads and the like.) These were desperate reminders from the ghosts of the departed that their survivors needed to spend more money to buy masses and indulgences, so that the temporarily burning dead might be released to paradise.

And what, I ask you, do the Mormons have to stack up against that? A God who lives on a distant planet with Mrs God? Submarine-borne Israeli Native Americans? Holy Altogethers? Pish tosh; amateur stuff entirely.

"Judeo-Christian"

Considering every bible comes with a copy of the Torah, I've never had a problem with the term. In high school, if I ever needed to write a paper on the subject (I think it came up once or twice) I always lumped 'em all (jews, catholics, protestants, mormons, and muslims) together as part of Judaic tradition and thought myself pretty clever. Still do, actually.

Whenever I see these pious testimonies to "Judeo-Christian values", I always wonder...how many Jewish founding fathers were there? How many Jewish presidents have we had? I have no objection to electing a Jewish president, but it always seems to me that these claims that toss in the word "Judeo" are made solely to put up a pretense of inclusiveness -- they really mean "conservative Christian," and they include an invisible, unnamed token Jew to hide their real narrowness.

As a Jewish person, absolutely! It makes me nuts when Christians do this. It will stop offending me the moment Christians decide to stop condemning Jews to hell, clinging stupidly to old rules most of the Jewish community has long since rejected, and start acknowledging (as every Jew I ever met, no matter how conservative, has done) that a literal interpretation of Torah/Bible is indefensible.

Of course, the council of evangelical nitwits decided that if Giuliani wins, they would support a third party candidate rather than support someone who is pro-choice, pro-gay and divorced three times.

That's a reason to hope Giuliani gets the Reptilian nomination. Isn't it?

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.

Farrakhan? Left?

They didn't look to the Bible for insights on how to design a government, they looked to classical sources, mostly Greek and Roman.

And Iroquois. :-)

BTW, Max Udargo, Tom Foss, and H. Humbert get a Molly nomination each. If I don't forget.

Let us remember that Barabbas was an Arab

Huh? Are you interpreting the Son of the Father as Barabbas, or what?

They have urban legends about Mormons being struck by lightning, but only being burned on non-underwear-covered parts of their bodies. (Which killed them anyway, so clearly they should have worn more underwear on their heads.)

ROTFL!!!!!

gothic was looked down on as the architecture of savages.

Which is why it's called gothic.

Are you interpreting the Son of the Father as Barabbas, or what?

My question exactly. Surely Barabbas was a Jew, presumably of the violently anti-Roman zealot sect? Indeed, I'm not even certain the term "Arab" would have had much meaning in ca. 30 CE. SFAIK "Barabbas" would have been a polite euphemism for a man who, emm, wasn't sure who his father was. On top of that, I've heard Christian biblical scholars assert that Barabbas's given name would have been "Jesus" (Yeshua); though on what evidence has never been clear to me (in more general terms, however, this was apparently a fairly common name back in the day).

gothic was looked down on as the architecture of savages.

Which is why it's called gothic.

Absolutely! But that meaning is lost most people. Anyway, being a northern savage myself, I wouldn't dream of dissing gothic buildings (so long as they are well executed); but our Italian betters thought differently back in the middle ages.

In addition to all the other things people have mentioned, it's sad to see that a Senator and presidential candidate (wannabee) is so ignorant as to think our nation is founded on Judeo-Christian traditions rather than Roman ones.

I suppose he imagines that Senator, President, Constitution, Congress, Republic, etc., are biblical terms.

While Mcains "values" aren't for me, as a white male I'm pretty sure it will work out in my favor regardless.

JudaeoChristian? It's like MuslamoSikhism, only different.

The whole Barrabas story is borrowed from an earlier folktale.

Here in beautiful Troy, Michigan, there was a dust-up a few years ago as the right-wing evangelical Christians who were holding the annual National Day of Prayer on the steps of city hall weren't allowing "moderate" Christians and other religions (Jews, Hindus, etc.) to participate. Nevertheless, the evangelicals were still billing the NDP as a "Judeo-Christian" event. Members of the excluded Jewish synagogue in town complained loud enough and eventually the group relented by dropping the "Judeo".

What's wrong with teaching the controversy? Teach it, I say; But make sure evolution comes out on top, or at least demonstrate that only evolution merits being taught *science* class.

And what's all this about Judeo-Christian values being the basis of our nation? Are we so ignorant of our own history and culture that we believe we must turn to the bizarre odd ramblings of a bunch of barbaric Eastern goatherds for guidance? Our laws are based on ancient Anglo-Saxon tradiions, Roman law, Greek political theory, and homegrown European Enlightenment radicalism. Let us be proud of who we are! The Decalog cannot be the basis of our law. Much of it is about the relationship between the Individual and God, and thus cannot be part of our laws. The "coveting" commandment says there are thoughtcrimes, and also cannot be part of our law. That leaves only three commandments; the ones against murder. perjury, and theft. Any moron could figure out these three.

I think the problem is that we do not understand our own culture. Everyone should read "Against Verres" by Cicero, and Plato's Euthyphro and Gyges' Ring arguments. That would show how much more sophisticated our European heritage is than the alien genocidal penis-slicing hell-sentencing filth (yes, *filth*!!) we find in this so-called Bible.

I do not mean to exclude my fellow citizens of African descent in this pro-West/anti-Middle East rant. There are plenty of good ideas and examples from Africa. Some of the worlds most productive crops came from Africa. Ironworking without passing through a bronze stage was discovered in Africa. An empire in Natal arose from almost nothing and was able to oppose European powers for decades.

And what about Asian-Americans? They have traditions that relaibly date back to before the YECs think the cosmos came to exist.

It's not only that fundies are ignorant of biology; They are ignorant of the glories of human history.

Wow, and for a while there I thought McCain was a sapient vertebrate. Try to imagine the depth and breadth of my disappointment.

But what they hell are "Judo-Christians"? Are they like Jesus Nijas or something?

I would agree with the main point here that most fundamentals just slip in the "Judeo-Christian" to appear inclusive, and yeah, there has never been a president who considered himself Jewish. But I think your point is backwards. "Christian" is the part that they unwittingly tack on! All the values that the fundies love to proclaim, ten commandments and the like, are actually found in the Old Testament(Jewish!!!). As an athiest I find it crazy funny that I know more about the bible then most bible thumpers. When was the last time you herd them talk about the Beatitudes(Blessed are the merciful, Hello Capital Punishment!) or anything Jesus actually said or did in his life.I would love to see the look on the faces of the fundies when they find out they're actually living by Jewish laws!

And on a related note, seeing as we're talking about the values and support the troops party, nice to see they're maintaining their commitment to fiscal conservatism at least in the area of stiffing the working classes out of benefits: National Guard Troops Denied Benefits After Longest Deployment Of Iraq War. To specifically limit deployment to 1 day less than required for educational benefits is just...what? Mean? Vindictive? Oh but stick a magnetic ribbon on your SUV and it's all OK.

invoking christian values always sounds like to me to be an appeal to authority and not to the people in any democratic form.
the political right and the religious right have resisted democracy since the beginning why would I think that would change now?
how could they really allow the ordinary people even the unsaved sinner have a say in how we are governed?
Is there any where a democratic religion? in modern times? in the united states?

Of course, the council of evangelical nitwits decided that if Giuliani wins, they would support a third party candidate rather than support someone who is pro-choice, pro-gay and divorced three times.

That's a reason to hope Giuliani gets the Reptilian nomination. Isn't it?

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.

Farrakhan? Left?

They didn't look to the Bible for insights on how to design a government, they looked to classical sources, mostly Greek and Roman.

And Iroquois. :-)

BTW, Max Udargo, Tom Foss, and H. Humbert get a Molly nomination each. If I don't forget.

Let us remember that Barabbas was an Arab

Huh? Are you interpreting the Son of the Father as Barabbas, or what?

They have urban legends about Mormons being struck by lightning, but only being burned on non-underwear-covered parts of their bodies. (Which killed them anyway, so clearly they should have worn more underwear on their heads.)

ROTFL!!!!!

gothic was looked down on as the architecture of savages.

Which is why it's called gothic.