Saturday, November 6, 2004

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry

'Theo was right - no theocracy'

Yes, he was. Too bad more American voters didn't hear that message. But a theocracy is, apparently, what they want -- and that's precisely what they're going to get.

vaara (ip:80.127.26.54) 6 November 2004 - 22:07 uur

Vaara -

in alphabetical order....

Atheists voted for Bush. Buddhists voted for Bush. Christians voted for Bush. Hindus voted for Bush. Jews voted for Bush. Mormons voted for Bush. Muslims voted for Bush. Wiccans voted for Bush.

How exactly, do you see a theocracy emerging from a mix like that?

Adriane (ip:209.86.18.74) 6 November 2004 - 0:29 uur

Adriane - Yes, people from all walks of life and all religions voted for Bush. But not very *many* Jews (<25%) voted for Bush, even though he's widely known to be a strong supporter of the Sharon government and of Israel. The fear of theocracy comes from the FACT that the Bush government over the past four years has worked tirelessly to diminish the separation of church and state. Is America officially a theocratic state? Well, not YET...

Lyra (ip:198.208.6.35) 6 November 2004 - 14:14 uur

Well said, Lyra.

Yes, 36% of atheists voted for Bush -- which means around 63% of us voted for Kerry. On the other hand, 78% of evangelicals voted for Bush -- 6% more than in 2000. Which group is going to be more influential in Washington during the next four years?

The dictionary definition of theocracy according to m-w.com is: "government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided." Moderate and non-religious Bush supporters can deny it all they want, but George W. Bush and many of his followers really do believe he was chosen by God to lead the country.

What am I, as a gay atheist, supposed to think when the evangelicals, who -- despite frantic efforts by the right-wing élite to minimize their role -- rightly take credit for Bush's margin of victory, now openly talk about packing the Supreme Court with ultra-conservative Christians, and about using my tax dollars to subsidize fundamentalist propaganda under the guise of "school vouchers" and "faith-based programs"? Those who believe the U.S. government should be reorganized along strict Biblical principles might be a minority (though substantially larger than the number of Dutch people who believe in imposing an Islamic theocracy in the Netherlands), but unlike Dutch Islamists, they currently happen to be in charge of the entire government.

vaara (ip:80.127.26.54) 6 November 2004 - 21:32 uur

Lyra -

You lack context for your fact.

---
The fear of theocracy comes from the FACT that the Bush government over the past four years has worked tirelessly to diminish the separation of church and state.
---

The Bush government has tried to diminish the separation of church and state in the provision of social services. American history contains many examples, just as Dutch history does, of religious orders caring for orphans, caring for the sick, providing schools, et cetera. In the late sixties, as social spending increased as part of LBJ's War on Poverty, many government agencies were put under pressure to refuse all contact with social agencies that had religious histories, as a stricter interpretation of ‘the separation of church and state’. The Bush administration has chosen to acknowledge that many of these agencies are quite competent in the providing of services and therefore can by used as referrals by government agencies.

This has nothing to do with the use of religious tests as a form of the basis of government; as an example, the Iranian Counsel of Guardians, an un-elected body which determines of a candidate is 'suitably Islamic', whatever that might mean. There are no such equivalents with the US Government. A person of any religion may stand for office, if she/he/it meets its required criteria, usually age and citizenship.

Adriane (ip:209.86.18.109) 6 November 2004 - 20:56 uur

Comment