Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (95220)	1/14/2005 9:53:01 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

So far you haven't posted anything by Bush that "disses the non-religious", you've just said that you have this subjective feeling about him. Please stop telling me I said things I didn't say. My argument that Bush disses the non-religious is, was, and has been that for some time he spoke about Americans in terms of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. conspicuously (to me and mine) leaving out the non-religious, which suggests that in some way we don't count . That was the extent of my point. That is an argument, not a "subjective feeling." I have not yet heard a focused counter. Bush is a conservative, Carter is a liberal. Is your bias showing? Are you calling me a liberal? Them's fightin' words. <g> Seriously, as for your assertion of bias, I didn't vote for either of them. As for the relevance of your point, I still don't get it. What has been presented as the nexus between Bush and Carter is that each of them spoke openly of his religiosity. DMA mentioned it first and then KLP. I affirmed this point of fact to each of them although it's so obvious I can't imagine it being called into question. How does my recognition of the same fact that DMA and KLP recognize make me biased or a liberal or mistaken about Bush elsewhere excluding the non-religious? A equals B in terms of religious expression. A does not equal B in terms of making statements that exclude the non-religious. The latter may be the case because the two have different attitudes about the non-religious or it may be simply, as I suggested, that the occasion for Carter to make such a statement simply never came up. The record is thin. In any event, Carter is a red herring in this matter, it seems. It will so seem to me until and unless someone connects the dots between the shared religious expressiveness of Bush and Carter and Bush's exclusion of the non-religious.