Rachel Maddow-Atheist under fire for (lack of) beliefs

[donalmerrick]

'Leviticus' was obviously a bad bad man. Lol... Also, that law states that someone may not hold office if they DENY the presence of "the Almightly God". If he says he simply doesn't believe in it, technically he's not Denying it. The law is invalid anyway according to consitution

[68traceeb]

Thank GOD for the ACLU>

[nafaidni]

And if you took the Bible literally, you could simply divorce your wife by claiming she was not a virgin before marriage. If the father cannot disprove it (HOW he does that is not explained), she will be killed by stoning.

And if a woman is raped in a city and doesn't scream loud enough, she is also to be killed by stoning.

Yes, either she gets her throat slit for not keeping quiet or she gets her brains beaten to mush for not screaming.

[ghuegel]

Isn't O'Reilly demonstrating that his belief is more determined by what he wants to be true rather than what evidence shows? This is exactly what sparked me to realize that there probably is no afterlife -- there's no good evidence and people just see the afterlife as whatever they believe to be ideal.

[SeaVarmint]

I had this crazy dream that the Christians failed to realize that their beliefs are bat-fucking-crazy due to indoctrination. It makes for a terrifying world, the ignorance of religion.

I do believe it was the prophet God who promoted the idea of religious tolerance. Luckily, we have dirty-south born rednecks who don't understand that just because there are other religions in the world doesn't mean that they're all wrong and going to hell.

[ordille75]

I am a Christian, and for the 1st time, I have to agree with Maddow on something. This country was not meant to be a strictly Christian country. What would have happened had this man been a Buddist? Or Hindu?? Having said that, if he doesn't believe in even the exsistance of God, why make a bog deal about saying " So help me God"....would have saved him a lot of heart ache it seems. i can pledge anything to the Easter Bunny, and it wouldn't matter.

[MikeOfTheRedwoods]

Most Christians are funny. They insist everyone in the country live by their beleifs or that we shut up and pretend to be Christian. I thought religoious persacution was part of the reason people came here and created the country on the ideas of seperation of church and state and the respect of all religious beleifs. I would trust most non christians more than I would these born again bigots that want to take away people jobs for not agreeing with them.

[avalanchesoul]

the religious right is not just wrong, they're crazy too.

[minggnim]

Can't we just bulldoze N.C. and S.C into the Atlantic and start over?!

[JTLeFevre]

Not unless you get me out of this looney bible belt state first!

Im an Atheist in NC and its one of the most annoying things ive ever experienced. To see billboards for churches and the minority is hard to deal with.

[Heispeace10]

Leviticus 20:13 (New International Version) 13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

[StartLoving2]

heispeace10, you fundamentalist, neanderthal throwback. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth." Obviously you are anti-Christ.

[davesyd]

@Heispeace10 "But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you.

They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:10-11)

[foresttdog]

@Heispeace10 The Bible is a very poor source of morality

Slaves, obey your human masters in everything, not only when being watched, as currying favor, but in simplicity of heart, fearing the Lord. (Colossians 3:22 NAB)

or... When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. Exodus 21:7-9 NLT

[nafaidni]

@Heispeace10

You want to take everything in the Bible seriously? Really!?!? Then I suggest you buy a Communist Manifesto book and sell everything you have and feed everyone who is hungry.

Luke 18:25:

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a pin than for a rich men to enter the Kingdom of God."

So I believe that you must give up capitalism, right-wing beliefs, your money, your bourgeoisie ideology, and all inequality and become a socialist.

After all, the Bible says so.

[anonymepelle]

What about Leviticus 20:9? "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.". why don't you go out and fufill that comandment? Surely theres enough children around that have cursed theire parents once our twise in theire life that you can go and stone to death.

[callouschristian]

Thanks for reminding us of this, yet another conservative terroristic attack on our constitution, StartLoving2.

[StartLoving2]

You are so welcome caustic. Terrorist indeed. You are very welcome here. Start

[StartLoving2]

Enjoy your dogma friend. Bye.

[beingforitse1f]

I think it says a lot about religious extremists that they are willing to essentially commit treason against their country's own constitution simply to remove a democratically elected official whose beliefs don't happen to coincide with their own.

Ultra-religious conservatives ultimately don't really care about rule of law, patriotism, the Constitution of the United States, but rather about imposing their own narrow-minded theocratic viewpoint on others.

[EntinludeX]

Faith and insanity go hand in hand.

[StartLoving2]

No. Without Faith in the unseen and unknown there would be no Einstein, Lewis and Clark, Apollo Astronauts.... It is not Faith but perversion of Faith that is the problem, including among atheists and agnostics.

[EntinludeX]

No. Faith is in and of itself a perversion of reason.

Belief without evidence isn't at all required to persue the unknown or unseen. Imagination and Wonder ride beyond the limits of human knowledge. It doens't take faith o persue those limits.

[StartLoving2]

EntinludeX, enjoy your ignorance, I can see you hold it tightly. But it is unwelcome here. Goodbye.

[Rayosun]

@EntinludeX , You never cross a bridge without first examining it to make sure that it is structurally sound, right?

You never take a capsule without first analysing its contents to make sure it is what the label on the bottle says it is? Only irrational fools like me put our faith in those who label bottles.

What I try to avoid is IRRATIONAL faith, not ALL faith.

[StartLoving2]

Well said

Rayosun

[zim4fun1]

Yikes! This is scary scary S@!T!!! And why aren't more people concerned about our country turning into a theocracy??? I mean PrayerCast, this incident and all the teabaggers screaming that we need G*D back in the government. Excuse me? These thugs trying to take over the country need a good education about the Constitution! And I truly hope this man is able to keep his post as a council member. It is no one's business what religion you are or aren't!!

[PhilipPorter]

There is a feeling that despite religeous indoctrination and thanks to the likes of Dawkins and Hitchen ever more people are starting to question such beliefs. In third world countries and third world states this may however never happen. But to discriminate over others for reasons of religeon is disgusting and smacks of fascism!

[blacklite911]

Oh wow. thats crazy.

[EnhancementSmoker]

its unbelievable that people arent allowed to deny something which has NEVER been proven to exist....

what else but on the subject of "god" would we allow such irrationality?

[cqsallie]

@EnhancementSmoker Exactly! And what's next, do you suppose? Is god white, or black, or brown, or pink, or bright blue? And if you don't have the right color god, will you be persecuted?

The nonsense and down-right ugliness perpetrated in the name of the endless numbers of gods, just seems to escape some people....

[wild112233]

Nationalism tends to get the same respect that religion does. Both are stupid accidents of birth.

[Bear5177]

/facepalm

Why am I not surprised at this goofy ultra conservative crap? And as a resident of NC, no, I'm not amazed at what is written in NC constitution and laws (although I probably should be, perhaps I'm jaded), nor would I be too surprised at how much many of the states within the "Bible belt" have similar, unconstitutional laws.

[mymatemartin]

@Arcy37: All modern western democratic systems support Freedom Of Religion which also means Freedom From Religion and the singluar issue of this clip is not 'who's belief system is better' but that no belief system is required for a member of the public to serve in a civil capacity. How about mutual respect, civil discourse and a focus on the mix of citizens is a society as the basis of policy. Bring your ethics into parliament but keep your religion to yourself.

[BlightyLume]

Fun fact: Atheism is positively correlated with IQ.

[djamo1969]

For you dumbasses out there, that means the less religious one is, the smarter s/he is. *_*

[wild112233]

And since I am yet to see an atheist politician get elected, what does it tell you about our country's leadership?

LOL

[mymatemartin]

@all those arguing your particular brand of religion

Who cares! This issue is NOT about what YOU or I believe. It is simply about the right of anyone REGARDLESS of their personal belief system to hold civil office. The heart of this debate is protection of the principle of seperation between church snd state (religion and state). Get over yourselves.

[Arcy37]

the words "separation of church and state" appear nowhere in any constitution - state or federal.

[mymatemartin]

All modern western democratic systems explicity support Freedom Of Religion. This also means Freedom From Religion and the singluar issue of this clip is not 'who's belief system is better' but that no belief system is required for a member of the public to serve in a civil capacity.

[SentientSapient]

Seperation of church and state has been mentioned to explain the meaning of the first part of the First Amendment. It does not literally exist in either the US constitution or the Bill of Rights. However, the statement 'seperation of church and state' is still used to describe the meaning of the amendment: That Congress may not establish any national religion, give preference to any religion or none, or keep people from free exercise of religion.

[eqsmooth]

@Arcy37 He is right. The "separation" was a letter to the Danbury Baptists from Jefferson, Most of us have it ass bacwards. Colonists, "founding fathers" wanted there to be no "Church of England Situation". So, no official religion to which one would tithe. My idea is different. All senators and congressman ought to be secular and there should be no Senate Chaplain especially one who is Seventh Day Baptist. That is fucked up, Religion has no pace lobbying or affecting politics.

[antipyrene]

There is a little thing called the Establishment clause of the First Ammendment which, according to Madison, is based on Jefferson's religious freedom ammendment to Virginia's constitution, Jefferson used the phrase Separation of Church and State to describe its meaning, thus the Supreme Court has applied it the Establishment clause...learn some history

[thewritt]

Clearly this man is not qualified to be a priest... um.. minister... I mean become a City Counselor.

[skog77]

Isn't this unconstitutional?

[Arcy37]

Well, lets see now. It's in the state constitution. So, no, it's not "unconstitutional," at least to those in the state.

[johncrwarner]

But the religious test clause in the US constitution means that there can be no religious test "under the United States" and the clause also includes "the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution" so I think it is unconstitutional in the USA.

[DumbDesign]

Did you miss what she said about the SUPREMACY CLAUSE, which means that if there is a conflict between U.S. consititution and the state's constitution, the U.S. consitution prevails. THIS MAKES ME SICK!! how is it ok to discriminate someone on the basis of their lack of religion? Haven't we evolved as a society? You make me sick, and any religious bigot who supports this dark-age "believe what we believe or you are out" laws. You should be ASHAMED of yourself.

[SentientSapient]

It's unconstitutional under the US constitution, so yes, it's unconstitutional no matter what the state constitution says.

[wild112233]

Tell me, you're just playing dumb now, aren't ya? You're not that silly, and you did hear all 6 minutes of that video, didn't ya?

[canpinter]

@skog77 yes state constitution is trumped by the US constitution, a state couldn't make murder legal because the higher law prevents it.

[jshweid]

this is so backwards I can't believe something this moronic would be happening in the 21st century. Religion and politics should never mix

[Arcy37]

Only goes to show that you do not know your history, which is not surprising "in the 21st Century!"

You grew up in an educational system where a redacted history was taught, thereby leaving you unexposed to the truth of this country's founding. Try reading the original state constitutions and you will see that this country and its vision was cast by people of Christian faith. To not know this is to be embarrassingly ignorant!

[SentientSapient]

Funny, seeing as when reading unredacted foreign history texts on the matter, you notice that for the US there was a religious constition proposed, which was discarded before the current one was drawn up. The current one which, I'd like to mention, makes no mention of God, Jesus, or anything specific to Christianity. It was made specifically to be inclusive. I don't know enough about individual state constitutions in the US, though, since history class doesn't go into that such detail.

[antipyrene]

Most of the Founding fathers were Deists, the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were based on the work of John Locke, a Deist philosopher...most modern conservative Christians don't consider Deists to be Christian (the closest modern religion to Deism would be the Unitarians)

Again learn some history

[assfuckme2]

wow so there are some people with common sense in the us..but the aren't allowed hehe

[eqsmooth]

dude, that guy is a dead ringer for actor tom wilkinson.

WE ALL SHOULD DENY THE BEING OF AN ALMIGHTY GOD!

that would be so awesome

[Arcy37]

Denying that the sky is blue doesn't make it so. Even creation testifies that there IS a God. Your conscience testifies of God. Only a fool says in his heart, "there is no God."

[Dan7Bow]

How come it's something only a fool would say?

[Arcy37]

Well, only a fool would look at a blue sky and come back inside to tell people the sky isn't blue. In other words, a little observation is all one needs to know there must be a God! Otherwise, we're left to believe that EVERYTHING came from nothing. You don't believe EVERYTHING came from nothing, do you???

Psalm 14:1 (A psalm of King David) The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God."

[canpinter]

@Arcy37 I assume by everything coming from nothing you mean the big bang. Unfortunately for you the big bang dose not say there was nothing, it says that there was a singularity ( a supper hot dense black hole like structure) that then exploded outward and that will later condense back into a singularity due to gravity in an event known as the big crunch which may or may not explode in another big bang.

[Arcy37]

@ John, The universe IS STILL EXPANDING, John. It has NEVER "condensed back into singularity" as you say. Here is a question for you: If you think it condensed after the "explosion," then when did the subsequent explosion take place??? Because, the universe is still expanding, John. So there must have been another explosion after the the universe condensed. That destroy's the theory of the so-called "big-bang."

[antipyrene]

Actually its now known that the universe will expand forever

[varqanir]

"The fool hath said in his heart, 'there is no god.'"

I imagine there are quite a few fools who say this in their hearts, a few of them meanwhile making big money preaching the opposite to their gullible flocks on TV.

On the other hand, a great number of very wise people say, both in their minds, as well as out loud and in print, that there is no god. I am inclined to agree with them.

[johncrwarner]

So are you a believer in Brahma or Allah?

[Arcy37]

Neither one of those gods exist.  Only Jehovah.

[johncrwarner]

They are the names for Almighty God in Islam and Hinduism. So ou are claiming they do not exist then? You are denying two names of God Almighty so you are not fit to serve in North Carolina either.

[Arcy37]

hahah....

They cannot be the same God as my God Jehovah. My God has a son, whose name is Yeshua. Muslims say Allah has no sons. They have inscribed it this saying on the Dome of the Rock as well. So, Islam does not worship my God.

Hindus worship many gods, not just one. It is not a monotheistic religion. I serve one God - Jehovah.

So, I would still be able to serve in N.C. :)

[johncrwarner]

As you deny names for Almighty God - you are an atheist within the definition of Almighty God.

You happen to be a Christian - but not all Americans are Christian and it says "deny the being of Almighty God" so the Hindu and Muslim perspective are valid too.

[Arcy37]

@ John, in your zeal to prove your point, you're missing something critical to the argument - the understanding that, The God of the Bible is not the god of Islam. Just as the god of Islam is not the same as the "gods" of Hinduism. Try discussing this with a Muslim and he/she will tell you in no uncertain terms that this true...better yet, haven't you heard a Muslim say: "There is no other god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet?"

(see next post for continuation)

[johncrwarner]

First muslims are people of the book like christians and jews. They believe that they worship the same god as christians and jews but that christians and jews got the message wrong. Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus are all in the quran.

I would say that allah is another name for almighty god and a muslim would say that christians are misguided in their worship of Jesus who was a prophet.

[Arcy37]

@ John, If I said to a friend, "Hey, do you know John Warner?" He might say, "Yeah. I Know him." Then I might say, "Cool, do you know his son, too?" To which he might say, " He doesn't have a son." Then I would say, "Yes he does. John introduced me to him one day at lunch." My friend would then say, "We're clearly talking about two completely different John Warner's."

Christians worship a God who has a Son - Jesus. Muslims worship a god whom they say, "has NO sons." Do you understand

[johncrwarner]

I understand that you have no understanding of either Christian or Muslim theology - yes and you keep proving it.

[Arcy37]

@ John,

I just folded you up and put you in my back pocket, John. I thought you might have a semi-intelligent rebuttal but all you come back with is something that illustrates you have no understanding whatsoever of either position or faith. "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

That's a quote from Jesus Himself, John. Go argue with Him.

[vernuf]

'"Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

That's a quote from Jesus Himself, John. Go argue with Him.

"

Since the Christ form of Jesus is nothing but a myth, the quote is meaningless.

[Arcy37]

Yeah, the history of the Apostles who were killed for refusing to renounce Jesus as God in the flesh, willingly died for what they knew was a lie. Yeah, that sounds plausible.

Who wouldn't die for what they knew was a lie, right? Oh, wait a minute...no one in their right mind would die for what they knew was a lie!! So why did the disciples? Answer: Because they saw Him alive AFTER he was dead and buried as did many other witnesses. And they saw him raise people from the dead.

[vernuf]

"Yeah, the history of the Apostles who were killed for refusing to renounce Jesus as God in the flesh, willingly died for what they knew was a lie. Yeah, that sounds plausible.

"

Argument from incredulity.

"Answer: Because they saw Him alive AFTER he was dead and buried as did many other witnesses. And they saw him raise people from the dead."

Or they desperately wanted to believe that or the claims were added later on.

[johncrwarner]

First what about early muslim martyrs killed for their faith, buddhist martyrs are you seriously entering martyrdom as a proof of the truth of Christianity?

[CrimsonPhantom88]

No one "in their right mind" would, I agree. If you believe in god, you clearly aren't in your "right mind".

[johncrwarner]

Sorry quoting a piece of text in translation from a Greek text which in turn is a translation of a possible Aramaic original - points out nothing.

Your analysis which ignores several of the Church Councils where the nature of the trinity was carefully crafted and trouncing round like an Arian Vandal.

[Arcy37]

John, once again you're grasping thin air.

The continuity and trustworthiness of the translations are PROVEN a number of ways, including the monumental discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. They are word-for-word.

We have more copies of these and other scrolls as well as manuscripts noting the carefulness and discipline of the scribes in making them to demonstrate they have more validation than any other writing in human history.

You're toast!

[vernuf]

"We have more copies of these and other scrolls as well as manuscripts noting the carefulness and discipline of the scribes in making them to demonstrate they have more validation than any other writing in human history."

And no we don't.

"You're toast! "

Saying things like this reveal it's you grasping at thin air.

[cqsallie]

@vernuf The "scribes" may have been as careful as all get-out, but what if they were copying science fiction?

The initial work could have (and probably was) the product of scientifically-challenged people who thought in ways totally different from ours due to lack of knowledge. Myths explained what they could not explain.

Every culture has created a god in the image and likeness of man, not the other way around, and we're loathe to disabuse ourselves of this notion....

[johncrwarner]

I like toast too.

Sadly the Dead Sea Scrolls only contain Hebrew scriptures to start with so no Gospels there. Of the texts found only 40% are scriptural and of those only 35% concord with the modern Hebrew bible, 5% with the Septuagint and 5% with Samarian sources - the rest of the biblical content is a real mixture. So are you claiming because some words in a document accord part of the time with the modern version the modern version with extra books is perfect?

[gregstaddon]

No, it is a second-hand observation. No contemporaries of Jesus Christ (if such a figure existed at all, given that there is no non-Biblical evidence) ever wrote a single word in the New Testament. Even the earliest author would have been a toddler when Christ was purportedly killed.

Anyone who knows the first thing about history, literature, and the history of literature knows very well that the Bible is a patchwork document indeed, and worthy of no more respect than as a historical curio.

[factvfiction]

PLEASE stop rationalizing your stupid believes by quoting an irrational bronze age book that subscribes to slavery geneside and murder. It is outrages that we have to listen to such rediculious dogma from irrational brainwashed people. My only hope is that one day we will all be caring secular humanist that disregard the medevil scriptures that keep us ignorant and hateful.

[SentientSapient]

Actually, I can do the same to you. Lets use your John Warner example. Imagine one of them is wrong, lets say the young man John Warner introduced to you isn't his son, but you mistook him for such. You're both talking about the same John Warner, one is just mistaken in some ways about the John Warner you both speak of.

That's basically the muslim standpoint as far as I understand it. Of course, this part of the discussion doesn't have much to do with the whole point of the original topic.

[Arcy37]

@ John, In one of your earlier posts, you stated, "hey are the names for Almighty God in Islam and Hinduism."

"Almighty God" is not plural. Yet Hindu's worship MANY gods. So which, god is the almighty to them?

They don't have one that is "almighty" because they don't worship only one god. They worship MANY. They are not monotheistic.

[AZ1521]

Yay go Polytheism! I see Islam as more of a monotheistic belief then Christianity. Although I still think both are nonsense.

[johncrwarner]

My understanding of Hinduism is more limited than other religions but it comes at least in part from discussing with a Hindu and he suggested that they all worship a supreme god but he/she/it is manifest in many many forms as gods and goddesses. They have at least in part of their religion - more a smorgasbord than a stew the concept of a supreme god and the name usually ascribed to him/her/it is Brahma.

[Arcy37]

@ John, you said "not all Americans are Christian and it says "deny the being of Almighty God" so the Hindu and Muslim perspective are valid too."

The drafters of these original state constitutions were Christians - not Muslims and not Hindu's. So when they said that a person desiring to hold office must take an oath to "Almighty God," they were not referring to many gods (Hindu) or Allah (Islam) - they were referring to the God of the Bible - Jehovah.

In fact, some places it says "Jesus."

[johncrwarner]

Big deal that the framers may have been Christians - the fact the constitution is used now and the people living under it can be Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains or Taoists to name a few  is enough to point out that the constitution on this point is obvious rubbish. I suspect if it gets to court will be struck down as not fitting into the religious test ban.

[eqsmooth]

@Arcy37 nut case

[Arcy37]

John,

Just a quick note. Islam does not recognize Hinduism as a legitimate religion either. One of the few things that Christianity and Islam have in common is that, they are both monotheistic in their faith.

[johncrwarner]

My point exactly which is why I think all politicians in North Carolina should be barred from office as they all in some way "deny the being of Almighty God" in some form.

[antipyrene]

Allah is the Arabic name for Jehovah, its the same god, just a different version of it, dumbass