The following is a series of e-mails between me and an old acquaintance with whom I attempted to reconnect. This unfortunate exchange illustrates the divisiveness of the current cultural/political situation, the escalatory nature of the divisive rhetoric, and the effect the Culture War has on relationships.
For there is definitely a Culture War raging. It's been going on for at least 70 years-- ever since the advent of the New Criticism and the rise of fundamentalism. It has now escalated to a fevered pitch and is, as this exchange clearly shows, essentially religious in nature-- although only for conservatives is it overtly so. But make no mistake, there is a sectarian fracturing in this country as deep and as contentious as any Sunni-Shiite split.
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 8:22:01 AM
Subject: Hey
What's up? So I finally got your email address (from Mom). It seems you are not on facebook, at least I couldn't find you there. Anyway, how you been?
K
From: Him
Sent: Tue 4/21/2009 5:49 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
Hey K-
I've been good (or I was until they elected that clown to the White House and his three-ring circus! ) Nowadays I am holding on to my wallet like grim death!!
I don't do facebook, but (my wife) does. Saw your folks on Easter Sunday-they seemed good. Hope everything is good on your side of the fence.
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 10:47:33 AM
Subject: RE: Hey
Well, I don't know about you, but we're not in an income bracket to be negatively affected by any new tax policy. Besides, we are just so relieved to finally be rid of Bush and his cold-war ghouls (if Cheney would ever shut up). Eight years of going backwards has done a lot of harm and unfortunately will be rather expensive to fix.
We're doing alright over here. Living in (small town), working in (bigger town), going to school, kids growing up, you know, the usual.
K
From: Him
Sent: Mon 4/27/2009 5:54 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
I'm not sure what you mean by "going backwards" with Bush and Cheney. I felt safer the past eight years than I do now with Hussein Obama going on his "Apologizing for America" tour which I found disgusting to watch on tv. I hope Dick Cheney does not "shut up" I hope he makes all the rounds on tv and magazines to get the word out about the wrong road the current administration is going down. Our current president has had no executive experience prior to January 20!! At least Sarah Palin has had mayoral and governor experience, and I was quite impressed with her background. If anything, in 2012 we will be cleaning up the mess made by Obama in the first 100 days and I pray then we get him out and have a real fresh start.
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:56:19 AM
Subject: RE: Hey
Not sure what I mean by going backwards? WTF?
Well, to start with Bush was selected president after actually losing the election--let's not forget that. So the administration began with a subversion of democracy. And it may be off-point here, but many think 9-11 might not have happened had Bush not been in office.
And then he filled his administration full of fascists and cold-war artifacts such as Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Cheney, etc.
First action on taking office was to undo 40 years of environmental regulation, including the allowing of mountaintop-removal mining, and furthermore being the only developed country in the world to ignore the Kyoto protocol.
General snubbing of the international community and the resultant building of anti-American sentiment throughout the world.
Over-reaching of executive power, with the vice president seizing more power than the Founding Fathers ever dreamed, which unconstitutionally upset the balance of power.
Imminent domain was expanded to include private, commercial seizure-for-profit.
Most importantly was the shredding of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution generally:
-the suspension of habeas corpus and carte blanche authority given (in secret) for warrantless:
search and seizure
arrest
rendition
wire tapping
torture
--do any of these make you feel safer?
It's as if they read 1984 and said, "Hey this is as great idea, Orwell was a political genius."
Bush actually said, "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
It was so bad that even Ashcroft refused to sign off on some of the stuff, which is why Bush installed his personal lackey, Gonzales.
Maybe you just feel more secure having a president who ignores the law and will look straight into the camera and lie to his people's face, and furthermore commit the impeachable offense of lying to a joint session of congress in a Constitutionally mandated address.
Took the USA from a record surplus to record deficit just within the first term: burning through trillions of dollars--largely due to a war of choice -- while simultaneously cutting taxes. And Republicans are supposed to be fiscal conservatives?
The prosecution of a war of choice and the resultant loss of life, waste of resources, and loss of international good-will.
The war in Iraq has cost $664 Billion--so far, and is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to cost $2 Trillion by 2017......and that doesn't include the indirect costs.
Tax policy, well every policy actually, that favors the wealthy at the expense of everything and everybody else.
The outsourcing and privatization of gov't responsibilities which weakens our gov't, guts the state of its capital, and puts the nation at the mercy of private interests--this is especially acute militarily where now there are more contractors than soldiers in our theaters of operation.
White house lawyers such as Gonzales and Bebe whose disdain for the law is surpassed only by their unconscionable ease in rationalizing others' breaking of it.
For eight long years our country was raped by men who do not love her and now it lies weak and bleeding and vulnerable on the ground. It is time to stop the bleeding, stop the rape, and restore her honor.
It is a sad commentary on just how bad a state America is in when merely speaking honestly about one's country is seen as badmouthing her, as a vocal minority seem to think Obama has done. And as for Obama's "'Apologizing for America' tour," as you put it, this nation, through the actions of the past administration, has behaved reprehensibly and the world deserves an apology.
Oh, Palin is just a nut-job rube unworthy of even this brief mention.
From: Him
Sent: Tue 4/28/2009 7:17 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
I'm laughing so hard as I read this I can barely respond to the email!!
But let me try:
We had 9/11 because Clinton's CIA director George Tenet failed to develop a strategic plan to take out Al-Queda (NY Time article 8/26/2005) Bush was in office a mere 8 months. This is like saying Clinton is at fault for the first World Trade Center bombing in Feb 1993 one month after he took office (the argument is ridiculous)
Next: Global Warming theories + Al Gore = Junk Science. What is ironic about Gore and the other celebrities that want us "regular folk" to reduce our carbon footprint is all the fuel they expend flying their private jets to their various speaking engagements and all the energy spent heating/cooling their multiple homes!! (Fly Commercial First Class!! Sell your excess homes!! No SUV burns THAT much fuel in a year's time compared to a private jet!!) 'Nuff said about the environment
You talk about torture as part of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution:
-Waterboading is NOT torture (Please read last week's news article where Obama's own CIA director stating that useful information was obtained from one of the terrorists (a word that Obama has now outlawed)) to prevent another 9/11 style attack at LAX airport.
MY rights have not been violated (not been arrested, wiretapped, or my house searched) but if I have nothing to hide in the first place, I have nothing to worry about.
On the "record surplus" Clinton got this "surplus" by slashing the military budget and decimating our armed forces.
Afganistan War: Result of 9/11 and extreme Muslim terrorists (there's that word again!)
Iraq: Bush was not the first president concerned about this rogue dictator Saddam. Bill Clinton sent bombs into Iraq in 1998 and also commented that there was real fear that Saddam would have nuclear capabilities within a few years. In case you forgot, we did not start a "unilateral war" with Iraq. There were 17 (count 'em 17) UN resolutions to get Saddam to comply with weapons inspections or face consequences. Result: 25 million Iraqis liberated from a rogue dictator and Saddam and his 2 evil sons: DEAD
So, in answer to your question "Did I feel safe?" Answer: HELL YES Note: No 9/11 attacks since 2001 and numerous foiled attempts by Al Queda from those "fascist" higher ups!
I'm done for now but feel free to discuss all the broken campaign promises by Obama (i.e. 8000 "earmarks" in the porkulus bill)
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:10:26 PM
Subject: RE: Hey
We had 9-11 because of our botched foreign policy and constant meddling in the Middle East going back to at least the 1970s. So, no, it was not Bush's fault directly, however his attitudes, personality, and leadership style embodied all that was wrong with how we are perceived internationally and his policies picked up the worst parts of the botched policy of meddling and only served to further foment anti-American sentiment.
Global warming was not one of the issues that I mentioned. However, Bush's White House denied it for years and only lately, when absolutely forced to, did they admit it was real. Bush's environmental policies set industrial and mining pollution levels back to 1950s levels.
Waterboarding is indeed torture, and has been defined that way for years. The US has itself successfully prosecuted people for waterboarding. Internal Pentagon memos of the Bush era also define waterboarding as torture. The FBI ceased its interrogations of detainees due partly to legal concerns with the techniques being employed. I am not concerned with waterboarding's efficacy (which is wholly immaterial to the legal argument). I am saying the US knowingly, and as a matter of policy, engaged in techniques outlawed by the Geneva Convention, and that this was rationalized through the legal ministrations of the Bush Justice Department.
Your rights as a citizen have certainly been violated. Although you haven't personally been arrested, wiretapped, or searched, you have been stripped of your protection under the law against those things being done to you. To say you have nothing to worry about because you have nothing to hide, is like saying you are safe in Nazi Germany because you are not a Jew. If the society is not free, then the people are not free. I don't know which is more troubling: that you don't seem to mind such a totalitarian state, or that you seem unconcerned about gross violations of the Constitution.
Yes, the record budget surplus may have come largely from cutting the military budget. Exactly! The military budget of the US is larger than the military budget of every other country in the world COMBINED. Enough is enough. Once you are the most powerful military power in the world, it is just wasteful and irresponsible to "run up the score."
Please note, I have not argued against the Afghan war. I may disagree, but I understand the reason for it. Too bad it has not been fully successful and has drug on all these years, but that is due largely to the distraction of the Iraq war.
Ah yes, Iraq is another story. The UN was not allowed to conclude its processes of inspection and enforcement. And guess what? Had it been allowed to, we would have discovered that there were no f'n WMDs after all! But that would have meant no justification for the war, so the administration had to act while it could still claim reasonable doubt.
Also, I find it surprising that in your history you fail to mention that we never halted military operations in Iraq after the first Gulf War. We controlled Iraqi airspace during the entire interim, enforcing no-fly zones and routinely taking out installations we deemed threatening. In fact, we had done a bombing sortie into Iraq just a few weeks before 9-11. The point being that Iraq was completely boxed in diplomatically, economically and militarily and posed no threat to the US whatsoever -- which is why the administration had to lie about it.
The US attacked Iraq without provocation, simply because the administration wanted to, ushering in the "Bush Doctrine" of preemptive war -- which is something I left out of my list of moves in the wrong direction.
How you could feel safer in a totalitarian state which lied to you and stripped you of your civil rights is beyond me. The discourse of such a state is a discourse of fear -- fear of the Dangerous Other -- a constant whipping up of that fear such that the populace doesn't apprehend the real threat: the state itself. You have been duped into watching for Snowball instead of keeping an eye out for what's been erased from the barn wall.
From: Him
Sent: Wed 4/29/2009 7:15 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
Totalitarian state? Honestly, moving back to the university community has yielded some interesting yet very radical views. But I would expect that, considering that college campuses are very liberal in their views.
Waterboarding torture? I suppose that the terrorist that beheaded Americans (Nick Berg) was not torturing him. There are news reports that the methods used were approved by Congress (they deny it now which doesn't surprise me a bit) and once again, useful information was obtained from the terrorists about other 9/11 style plots and because of this, no attacks since 9/11. I do believe we are headed for another attack by our enemies due to Obama's "transparency" and willingness to leak formerly classified documents, effectively weakening the efforts of the CIA, FBI, and our military to keep our country safe. This is not acceptable to me and should not be to you either.
Sarah Palin-Successful, hard working mother of five children, supportive husband-I would think that this would be a feminist's wet dream! Oh wait-she's a conservative! And pro-life! The horror!! Let's just trash her, her family, and the hard work she's done for the good people of Alaska for weeks on end in the liberal media! (nbc, abc, cbs, & my favorite, msnbc.com)
I don't fear the "totalitarian state" What I fear are the next four years from a president who started his political career in the home of a home-grown terrorist (Bill Ayers-who should be in prison, not teaching as a professor!) Or sitting in the church pews for 20 years of Rev Wright, who says "Goddamn America, not God Bless America!"
I fear what looks to be a transition from capitalism, that has worked in our country for over 200 years to socialism (Marxism) which has failed in the USSR and Cuba. I fear this "universal" health care they want to force us into. This has not worked in Britain or Canada, and will not work here, no matter what spin they choose to put on it in the media.
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 11:54:09 AM
Subject: RE: Hey
Going back to college has not radicalized me. The last 8 years radicalized me.
Yes waterboarding is torture disallowed by the Geneva Convention, that is a fact. The US knowingly and as a matter of official policy engaged in it, that is a fact. The Bush Justice Department rationalized it, that is a fact. Prima Fascia case, end of argument.
Perhaps you are right, CIA info, LIKE THE NAMES OF THE F'N OPERATIVES should not be leaked.
Sarah Palin is a successful hard-working mother. So are a lot of other successful business women and successful women politicians. But Palin is also a nut-job who managed to present herself to the country as a complete idiot (i.e. the Couric interviews).
I have nothing against people who are pro-life and actually appreciate Palin's integrity on the pro-life issue. In fact, it would likely surprise you that I am pro-life. I don't kill people and I don't vote for people who do. I have a major problem with hypocrite Republicans who harp and cry about the "value" of life and then go and commit massacre in the name of "freedom." Further, the same "family values" Republicans do absolutely nothing to support the lives of those "precious" babies once they're born--social programs? You're on your own. Finally, you'd likely be surprised to find that I don't particularly like all of Obama's policies either. Despite what you may have been told, none of these issues are easy, simple, or black and white.
Funny, all the uproar about Obama's pastor, but not much mention of Palin's own far-out pastor who led witch hunts--not rhetorical witch hunts, but actual, literal, fucking witch hunts! I have listen to the extended soundclips of some of Rev. Wright's more controversial quotes and I agree with everything I have heard him say. I also listened to Palin's pastor praying over her to keep her safe from witchcraft, as well as Palin's address before her church, which left me slack-jawed in utter shock and disbelief at what I heard. Did she not know it was being recorded? Holy shit, she's crazy! She believes in spiritual warfare between angels and demons and the literal gift of prophesy Furthermore she actually said, on the record, that our troops in Iraq are "Doing God's work." She then proceeded to pray for divine intercession for Alaska's pipeline project.
I'm deeply sorry to hear you no longer believe in the principles of freedom and liberty upon which our county was founded.
I'm equally sorry to hear you no longer seem to believe in the freedom of the press or freedom of thought.
The one thing I am thankful for, however, is that there are only 20% of Americans still brainwashed enough to believe as you do.
P.S.
Brainwashed? Yes brainwashed. You are exhibiting very little independent thought and reasoning and are merely parroting back to me O'Reilly's talking points. You appear to be holding many of your beliefs as matters of faith which you have not interrogated. You seem to be engaging in a Colbertian reliance of "gut over fact."
One should challenge one's beliefs, assumptions, and the stories one is told. Yes, this can be difficult since "we humans tend to marry, date, befriend and talk with people who already agree with us, and hence are less likely to say, 'Wait a minute - that's just not true'" (http://www.factcheck.org/specialreports/our_disinformed_electorate.html). And this is especially true in politics since research shows that "voters, once deceived, tend to stay that way despite all evidence" (ibid).
Now you may think I am being so reactionary just because I disagree with you. But that is not the case. I have conservative-leaning friends whom I do respect (including a major in the Special Forces, a Baptist preacher, and several Libertarians) who are able to rationally explain their beliefs through articulate, reasoned argument, while at the same time remaining open and tolerant to alternative viewpoints. One should have the discernment and intellectual maturity to moderate one's position based on fact and logic. But you have unthinkingly swallowed the entire party line whole. Perhaps you, like Colbert, simply admire the "integrity" of believing the same thing on Wednesday as you believed on Monday -- no matter what happened on Tuesday.
From: Him
Sent: Thu 4/30/2009 1:19 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
Well, for someone who is pro-life and won't vote for people who do kill-does this extend to unborn babies in the womb? I don't know who you voted for as president (and frankly don't care) but president-elect Obama has not only rescinded the ban on stem cell research, but has put the former governor of Kansas in as HHS secretary (just confirmed)!! She has a known record of being pro-abortion, with contributions in the tens of thousands from the infamous Dr George Tiller. Dr. Tiller is widely known for performing late term abortions in Kansas. Obama has acknowledged his support for late term abortions. Seems a little hypocritical, doesn't it? I am also pro-life, including in cases of rape or incest (the baby is the innocent, and should be put up for adoption if not wanted by the mother) the only exception is if the mother's life is in imminent danger, not because it is an inconvenience.
As far as Rev. Wright is concerned, I am shocked you agree with his radical views. No question that as a country that we have erred over our 230 year history. From a historical perspective, slavery was largely accepted until the mid 1800's. Blacks were treated like utter crap from 1865 until 100 years later, despite their invaluable contributions to society during that time, especially during WWII in our fight for freedom against the real "fascists". However, I do not feel that the "hate" rhetoric that he spews serves any real purpose today.
I'd love to know where you get the "20%" figure of brainwashing! That just sounds like you pulled a figure out of thin air. That figure might hold true in the more liberal states like CA and NY, but there are far more conservatives that think like me than you probably care to admit to. Please explain why radio shows like Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Rush, etc. have millions of listeners but Air America has been consistently on the brink of bankruptcy?
Don't insult my intelligence by talking down to me about how I don't believe in principles of freedom and liberty or freedom of the press or thought. I read both conservative and liberal papers online and have seen examples over the years of how the liberal media will manipulate a story to fit with their agenda. How's that for freedom of the press?
I may not articulate my arguments quite like yourself, but don't call me brainwashed. Based on emails from you, I could conclude exactly the same of you as well. We can agree to disagree because you are not going to convert me and I am not going to convert you to my views either. I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am intolerant because of my views because it is blatantly false. The best example I can give you is the fact that I have 2 lesbian neighbors that live across the street from us. I do not agree with homosexuality because it is against God's word in the bible. However, our neighbors have been the nicest, sweetest neighbors we could ask for-they also do not throw their lifestyle in my face and therefore I do not cram my beliefs down their throats. When their house burned down last November, our neighborhood pulled together to help them out during this tough time. I went to the bank at 5 in the morning to withdraw money to
give them so they could stay in a motel until they were able to find more permanent place. Except for you and my wife, no one else knows about this. I don't expect a pat on the back-I just wanted to do right by my neighbors who have been nothing but friendly since we moved in 6 years ago.
Don't bother to write anymore if all I'm going to have to hear from you is my "lack of intellectual maturity to moderate one's position based on fact and logic." Just because you don't agree with the facts and logic that I have presented doesn't mean you can tear me down and label any argument I make as "exhibiting very little thought and reasoning" or "brainwashing". Just remember that the "brainwashing" can lean "left" as well, Kevin.
From: Me
To: Him
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2009 12:54:53 PM
Subject: RE: Hey
Just going to throw some stuff out there:
I'm not a liberal intellectual because I went back to college, I went back to college because I am a liberal intellectual. Actually, I don't claim to be a liberal intellectual. (My wife) is the liberal intellectual. I guess that makes me a progressive pseudo-intellectual. To say I am a secular humanist might be to overstate the case. But for most practical purposes I suppose I behave as one.
Why do liberal outlets and liberal positions seem to get little support compared to conservative ones? I've always wondered that myself. One reason I think is because liberals simply don't see as many things as issues. Like gay marriage for example. It's just such a total non-issue to most (straight) liberals that it just doesn't occur to us that anybody would actually get upset about it. I mean, the solution is so plainly obvious: "Marriage" recognized and controlled by church/religion; and "Civil Union" recognized and controlled by the State. There, done. What's the big deal?
As to media bias.
Well, mostly these are for-profit companies who are courting advertisers and viewers. If there is a market segment out there they are going to go for it. They package their product to be attractive to demographics which are appealing to advertisers. As I said above, right-wingers seem to have more hot-button issues and therefore just have more to talk about on the radio -- and they tend to do it more colorfully than liberals which raises the entertainment value and hence the ratings. Higher ratings means more ads which means more profit, which leads to more shows of that format. Also, liberals have a different value-set and many of their outlets are non-profit as a matter of principle which means they don't have the budget, or reach and scope of the mainstream media. Anyway, the various media all have their own packaging (read: spin). Fox is biased to the right; MSNBC is biased to the left (although not quite so far as Fox is to the right); CNN seems to try to go down the middle, but their political coverage is often so trite as to be painful to watch; NPR tries to go down the middle but on balance is probably biased somewhat to the left (although they seem to piss off liberals and conservatives in roughly equal numbers). But that's the measure isn't it? You can tell the bias of an outlet by who they are pissing off.
Regarding political honesty.
Campaigning politicians say a lot of things they never do. In order to be honest they would have to say: "This is the vision I have for the country and the direction I would like to move in, but of course nothing much will happen because, you know, it's government and politics. But at least if I'm in office I can try to put the other party on the defensive and distract them so they don't accomplish much towards their stated agenda either." But they are never going to say that. In order to rally the people, to motivate them to actually vote, they have to display a certainty about the future and what they can do and promise to get things done. This is true for all campaigning politicians. I gave up holding them to their promises years ago. Political promises are empty.
Ethically speaking, if they all lie, and the lies are utterly transparent, and everybody knows they are lying, then is it really lying if there is no deception? Is there a certain level of dishonesty that serves as a baseline just because that's how the game is played? I accept that there is. I know that half the crap that McCain and Palin said was just sucking up to the base and sticking to the script provided by the party handlers, the same was true for Obama also. The measure of success is: do they stick to the vision they put forward? do they engage in illegal activity and coverups? do they straight-out lie while they are in office?
Every now and then there is a moment of candor and we are allowed a glimpse into this cynicism. Like when Specter jumped over to the Dems. Why did he do it? Not because of principles, or an ideological disagreement, or a belief that the Republicans are moving in the wrong direction. No. He came right out and said that he did it because he thought he might lose the Republican primary and had a better chance of winning the Democratic one. Wow. I guess he figures he's old enough and been around long enough he can dispense with the bullshit.
On the abortion issue.
Well, I hate to talk about abortion since it is so divisive and I can totally see the merit of both sides. Personally I am against abortion and hope that my girls never have one. But I understand why someone would. Since I get both sides and since it is largely a personal moral decision involving a woman, her body, and her god, I decide to err on the side of personal freedom and believe it should be legal and properly regulated. That way everybody has the freedom to choose according to their own conscience. This is also a practical public health decision since I am fearful of back-ally quacks bearing coathangers.
One more, since you asked.
The 20% figure was from the latest Washngton Post poll wherein only 21% of respondents self-identified as Republicans.
Like I said, I am just throwing some thoughts out there in the spirit of dialogue. I realize we are probably not going to be fast friends as we have really nothing in common, and of course we aren't going to convert each other, but at least maybe we can be friendly and understand each other a bit.
From: Him
Sent: Fri 5/1/2009 5:52 PM
To: Me
Subject: Re: Hey
I can actually agree with you regarding the politicians and how ethically corrupt they all are. I am leaning more and more in favor of term limits for politicians at all levels (with the obvious exception of president, which is limited to 8 years) Case in point: Ted Kennedy, Arlen Spector, etc etc. I honestly cannot name a politician that has stayed true to their word 100%.
Unfortunately I can't buy into the argument regarding straight liberals and the issue of gay marriage being a non issue among them. I mean, look at California in the past year, with Prop 8. The judges tried to legislate from the bench when the voters clearly voted (twice) to ban gay marriage in California. The actors and actresses are all out there getting their face time wherever they can to support their cause. The straight activists will argue just as passionately as the conservatives argue against.
I'm going to say one more piece about the abortion issue since I have been on both sides of the issue with my opinion. I started out as believing in the woman's right to her body, etc. Then the issue of the father's rights were raised-women can't get pregnant on their own-if the father wants the child and the woman does not, the issue can be sticky, as fathers have rights too. The more research I have done on the development of the baby, the more I believe life does begin at conception, not just a clump of cells. We are also in the age where contraceptives are so widely available for both men and women, that I don't believe "accidents" happen and if two willing adults choose the action, they also choose the consequence. My last point on the abortion issue is the economical standpoint: Since 1973 we as a country have aborted over 35 million babies. These same babies would likely have entered the workforce as adults and contributed to the economy as well as to social security pool, among other things. Social Security wouldn't be in the bind it is now, having a 1 to 1 ration of worker supporting the retiree instead of 3-4 workers supporting the retiree, as it was in the 1950's and 1960's.
I will still challenge you on the 20% Republican issue and would like either the link to the article or would like to know the questions that the people in the survey responded to. I'm sure you took statistics and are well aware how skewed the numbers can get. This would mean that 80% are liberal or Democrat, which I think the truth is closer to 60% Dems and 40% Reps currently.
I am curious about the path that led you to become a secular humanist. I'm not being judgmental, just knowing that your parents are church going and just wonder what led you away from that path. I'm not fond of organized religion myself, as I have seen the squabbles in the church regarding small things such as new carpeting, new pews, new pastor, etc. My wife and I belong to a home church that our pastor and his wife started when he moved away from such a scenario at our former church. There are about 20 of us that bring potluck dinner and meet in his basement every Sunday night and his wife teaches the little ones Sunday school in an upstairs room. I've actually been most satisfied with this arrangement as this allows us to focus on God's word and not worry about the typical overhead of a church, such as payroll and upkeep. We tithe as well, but the monies go to whoever we want to minister to as a group, or to help a struggling family, or
even to support mission trips, which for me is the ideal situation. This is where I'm at in my life right now.
From: Me
Sent: Mon 5/4/2009 12:36 AM
To: Him
Subject: RE: Hey
Well, we agree that politicians are less than honest. But I guess everybody agrees with that.
We are never going to see eye to eye on gay marriage or abortion. I believe I understand your position on both of them. Further, as I alluded to in my last, I can totally see why you are against abortion, and do not completely disagree with you (on some of your points). But as a matter of policy I believe it should be legal. Gay marriage, though, I see as a total non-issue and don't understand all the hullabaloo. As I said, there is an obvious compromise solution staring us in the face. One would think that Christian conservatives would want to encourage committed familial relationships, and that gay rights proponents would be satisfied with equal rights and protections under the law--no matter what the label. But apparently, neither is the case.
Here is the Survey with the 21% Republican figure: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_042609.html). The methodology is given right at the top and the question is item 901, down towards the bottom. 35% identified as Dems, 21% identified as Repubs. When you add independents that lean toward one or the other you get 53% Democrats and 37% Republicans.
It seems people finally realized that the Republican party was hijacked by neo-cons and so now the party is clinging to a fringe base. For the most part, the only people who self identify as Republicans are either members of that extreme right wing base, or else people who never realized (or admitted, or cared) that the party got hijacked. Lots of Libertarians vote Republican because they don't have viable candidates of their own. This two party system sucks. Glenn Beck did a town hall type show on Friday with a group of his listeners and he asked them "Who here believes in the two party system?" and not one person raised their hand.
Explaining how I arrived at my current religious unfaith will take some doing since that is a lifelong journey which is still underway. Let's just say for now I ALWAYS doubted and furthermore believe an unquestioned faith is a weak faith. It's a house of cards and you shouldn't take the red pill unless you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole is. But doesn't integrity require that you take the red pill? Yes, The Matrix is one of the most cogent religious allegories of our time.
It may be possible to be a person of faith and still have intellectual integrity, but I have not yet been able to reconcile the two. This is not to say I reject the spiritual--you could say I am a spiritual agnostic--but I definitely reject fairy tales presented as dogmatic literal truth. I still respect the teachings of Jesus, and if he said anything at all, he said turn from falsehood and don't be a hypocrite. It is ironic that my internalization of the christian ethic requires my rejection of the christian religion.
From: Me
Sent: Wed 5/6/2009 12:30 PM
To: Him
Subject: RE: Hey
I ended my last post perhaps a bit to abruptly and didn't say all I should have (don't worry, I won't email anymore after this unless you respond).
I do feel I ought to mention my appreciation for your "love the person, although you may hate the sin" approach (if there is a god he is defined by love not wrath).
I also want to say I think it good that you have eschewed organized religion and are part of a small fellowship. That's exactly what the first christians did. So you are reclaiming that part of the tradition, which is much more true to the spirit of the early church.
Religion ought not to matter. Ultimately one religion is no better than another, for isn't every true religion acknowledging the same One? There are many paths up the mountain; many facets of the divine. Unfortunately, people forget that their faith is just a culturally constructed understanding of the unknowable, and instead come to believe theirs is the One True Way. It's very sad that the world should be divided by such meaningless dogma.
OK BACK TO THE BLOG
Well, my (ex?)friend never answered me back.
See how there are two things at the core of the conflict: religion and intellectualism. It's Religious Conservatives versus Liberal Intellectuals. (at least as framed by the right)
The most striking message was his "I'm laughing so hard as I read this I can barely respond" response. WHAT THE FUCK? Every complaint in my list is a serious dead-on true irrefutable substantiated fact. How the fuck is he laughing at it? I knew right then that it was over. How many right-wingers give truth the brush-off like that? Scary to think of, damn.
So, the Culture War is very very real and the switch in the balance of power is making the previously powerful angry and the newly powerful brave. The economy is crumbling and the hate radio is crackling. Our lines drawn, our trenches dug, our culture a no-man's-land.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
stressed
pissed off
relieved
scared
disappointed
geeky
aggravated