Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Good News Nobody (Atheist Congressman)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Good News Nobody (Atheist Congressman)
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He's a 75 year old 30 year congressman from San Francisco, so it doesn't really count. But it's a start. Muslims, Mormons, and Atheists, oh my!

Maybe someday we really will be a country with freedom of (or from) religion! [Smile]

(What is OSC ranting about Mitt Romney for?)

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Does this atheist Congressman have a name?
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I forget. It was in the Houston Chronicle Sunday and I'm in Magnolia, Arkansas right now. I'll find out his name Thursday night or Friday when I get back home. Sorry.

I read what OSC was saying about Romney. Basically it starts out as a whoa is we (Mormons) and then turns into a sales pitch on why Christians of all faiths should vote for Romney. Several times in there he mentions that faith shouldn't be an issue. In between the appeals to Christian conservatives to vote for Romney because he shares their values and core beliefs.

Apparently the LDS hasn't had polygamy since 1890. I could have sworn I saw reports on it and a big wig Mormon arrested by the FBI just a few months ago for polygamy, but then I don't have anything against polygamy, just lies and hypocrisy, so what do I care?

He also takes a shot at all the bad things he could say about atheist politicians though he fails to mention one single thing.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
His name is Stark. Link when I get home.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LoverOfJoy
Member
Member # 157

 - posted      Profile for LoverOfJoy   Email LoverOfJoy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From what I've read (and I haven't kept up to date on it) I believe the guy who got arrested is not a member of the LDS church but rather a leader of some splinter group that the LDS church denounces.
Posts: 3639 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Charlemagne
Member
Member # 2649

 - posted      Profile for Charlemagne     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think you are talking about Warren Jeffs. He is (or was) the head of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which is indeed a splinter group that broke away from the church in about 1890. They are very polygamist and have some sort of compound in Texas. Apparently, he recently renounced his position as head of the FLDS.

Either way, he isn't LDS.

Here is a link to the story about Stark in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Posts: 66 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'd be more impressed if an atheist congressman were elected without resorting to the sham of Unitarianism. Most Unitarians are nonbelievers -- nonbelievers in the god hoax, in any event.

OSC's analysis of Romney (and his slim chances) failed to note that he is the greatest flipflopper in the annals of political artistry. I cannot at the moment remember anything he didn't flip on or flop on.

Romney's ambition to become president far exceeds his electability; he'll spend $500 million in ad agencies instead of donating the money to health care.

And the man didn't just rise out of the dirt, like OSC suggests. If I remember, his father was an auto executive with a platinum parachute and fixed connexions to nation's biggest banks.

Let's put it this way on OSC's biography: I didn't learn a thing about Romney that was true -- but quite a bit about him that wasn't.

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
On further thought about his essay, however, Romney could do worse than hiring OSC as a spin doctor [Wink] .
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete Stark made waves during Vietnam by putting an enormous peace sign on the sides of both branches of his bank - in Walnut Creek and Fremont I think. After about ten years of a spirited legal battle with the city council, he had to take that down; but I was sorry at its passing. I could see it from miles away in the hills and it made a useful landmark. He also annoyed the Treasury Department by putting up large signs in his bank saying in effect that anyone who bought U.S. Savings Bonds was a moron because they paid such low interest. Running on a populist platform he won an easy election to Congress from whatever district contains Fremont, and he has been doing useful work in the House of Representatives ever since. He is allegedly a very smart man - I do not know him - and probably filled out that form just because he felt like it.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KnightEnder:

Apparently the LDS hasn't had polygamy since 1890. I could have sworn I saw reports on it and a big wig Mormon arrested by the FBI just a few months ago for polygamy, but then I don't have anything against polygamy, just lies and hypocrisy, so what do I care?

Yeah as charlemagne pointed out, Warren Jeffs and his Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints aren't normal mormons. They are to the rest of America's Latter Day Saints what David Koresh was to the rest of America's protestants: a bunch of crazy-ass weirdos in a lunatic fringe cult. The great states of Utah and Arizona have been trying to nail FLDS bigwigs for decades now because of the way they run their crazy inbred little abusive communities, and trying to tar mainstream mormonism with the same brush as these guys just makes you look like an ignorant guy taking a cheap shot.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
caladbolg1125
Member
Member # 3666

 - posted      Profile for caladbolg1125   Email caladbolg1125   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ignorance can be fixed. As for taking a cheap shot...well... KE does that to every organized religion not just LDS.
Posts: 615 | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Dey:
he'll spend $500 million in ad agencies instead of donating the money to health care.

Are you saying that candidates should donate their money instead of running for office? Or just Romney cause you don't like him. Give me a break...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
and trying to tar mainstream mormonism with the same brush as these guys just makes you look like an ignorant guy taking a cheap shot.
Nice! Assume he knows the details of the situation, then attack him based on that assumption.

That's the way to educate people about LDS beliefs and do your part to see that the Curch of Later Day Saints is considered mainstream [Wink]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here is some education:

It is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, not the Curch of Later Day Saints...

And people should do a little research into a "situation" before making statements...

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I make typos and drop words occasionaly.

Deal, or don't read my posts.

Actually, I'd perfer if you just didn't read or respond to my posts, not that I expect you to respect that.

[ March 28, 2007, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry ma'am, I thought you wanted to be skooled...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
caladbolg1125
Member
Member # 3666

 - posted      Profile for caladbolg1125   Email caladbolg1125   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why would you post if you didn't want anybody to read them? [Razz]

Or are you just talking about Lobo?

Posts: 615 | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just Lobo.

If I wanted a freeper to respond to me, I'd post at freep.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What is a freeper?

If you can't handle a response in the same vein as your post, go cry somewhere else...

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And notice I didn't take the bait on your last misspelled word...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow....

You actually believe that was in the same vein?

Stay away from syringes.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I saw a food label today:

HORMONE FREE.

But I had to pay anyway.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh, I get it; I was supposed to put the little winky guy after my post and then it wouldn't be so bad... sorry about that. [Wink]
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lexocorrectness

I certainly wouldn't rank you a blogobomber or a threadsnipper, Lobo, but argumentum ad hominem is a yellow light!

I'm homolexic. I make lots of homonymic typing errors and, since I work on an old computer, I don't use spellcheck. Add that shortcoming to my unrepressed preference for stopping the flow of thought with neologisms, a penchant for unpopular idears (that's how Yankees pronounce it), and I'm extremely vulnerable to the lexicologically correct -- the killjoys of innovative thinking, exploration, and solving enigmas.

I defend Jesse's American right to pursue spelling happiness. If spelling sloppymess makes U happy, swell! If you can afford to employ a professional proofreader for posts, better yet!

Argumentum ad hominem, however, is the crime of derailing around here; and that is a freedom below belt. It's a lot more distracting than the exercise of creative spelling.

Just as in the law, it is the intent which must be ascertained; and the ascertainers are the Membership, not the Inquisition.

LDS

When I get back to civilization I'm supposed to be treated to a PBS espose' of this LDS thing which will let me know if it is a real religion or just another bogus nonprofit (with huge taxicab and fine-dining bills for its executives) like PBS is. I'm not hopeful; but I got the impression that OSC's essay was preparing me for the worst!

I don't have anything against blind people, well almost not anything, but 'blind followers' make my skin crawl. One recent discovery here gave me hope: that LDS has lay ministers of some kind -- you know, like they're trained well enough in their religion (unlike most Christian sects) to know what it means -- not that I get that impression from their missionaries, but it's the intent that matters, I'm sure.

I don't think we have any blind-following Saints around here. They're even able to joke about being Saints at all [Smile] .

It's because, not cause he's a flipflop fop that I don't want him as my president -- and yes, I do think that Bain & Co. should have contributed more to Massachusetts; it's headquartered in Boston. I worked for both Boston Consulting Group (when Romney was there) and Bain (when Romney was there). The answer to Romney then was no; the answer to Romney now is no. It has nothing to do with his charm, his talents, his cold-bloodedness, his religion, or his house on Winnipesaukee. It has everything to do with the fact that he is a flipflop, personally stalwart but indecisive in public matters. It is the last kind of personality we need in The White House, IM-oh-so-HO.

http://www.consultingmag.com/CMCoverFeat-Bainfeb01.html

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, Rallan, I'll research every silly religion before I make a factual statement regarding members of that sect to make sure they are the "right" members I'm slamming.

Personally, Mormonism is my favorite religion. But I don't think that weirdo you mentioned is as out there as Koresh, nor do I think he and his 'rogue' group are the only Mormons still practicing polygamy. Especially since I've seen a couple of documentaries about regular everyday Mormons that are polygamists. Albeit without the LDS's public approval.

But I'd hate to look ignorant to you. And I reserve the right to take cheap shots at all fairy tales purporting to be facts.

Edited to add: Based on OSC's article I was starting to like Romney, until Rallan soured me on Mormons. [Wink]
KE

[ March 28, 2007, 10:10 PM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
True. There are a handful of Mormon offshoots and they aren't nearly as "out there" as the mainstream LDS church would like you to believe. Those that still practice polygamy simply believe the revelation ending the practice was bogus so they continue it. Hardly an "extremist" view, in my book.

The "official" LDS Church allows little in the way of doctrinal disagreement, so if you honestly believe the Church has some bit wrong then, unless you keep it to yourself, you're only option is to form or join one of these offshoots.

[ March 28, 2007, 11:12 PM: Message edited by: MattP ]

Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just a side note not really related to much, but I don't see why polygamy is illegal but it's legal not to marry a bunch of women or even love them very much but get them knocked anyway up and then as a 'man' hardly even take care of the kids, often times not take care of any of them at all, sometimes not even know they exist.

If polygamy is illegal, wouldn't it make sense that having children by multiple women out of wedlock should be even more illegal?

Eh, it's probably just me...

[ March 29, 2007, 02:20 AM: Message edited by: cherrypoptart ]

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hmmmm, now who is closer to Joseph Smith, not to mention the fruitful Brigham Young? The whacko with the many wives or the respectable mainstream LDS? [Smile]
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Cherry, the only reason is that marriage laws are based on the bible and man's attempt to "manage" men's (and women's) behavior, whereas men and women innately obey a higher law, their fundamental (biological) natures.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KnightEnder:
Yeah, Rallan, I'll research every silly religion before I make a factual statement regarding members of that sect to make sure they are the "right" members I'm slamming.

I would think that you would want to make factual statements... although I do understand that it is sometimes more entertaining to bait certain people on this board.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1