Quotes of the Month…

Hello Readers!

Long time no post. Sorry about that. I finally found someone to keep me out of the comically miserable world of online dating. While I’ve thought of many other topics about which to comment since then, I haven’t gotten around to posting any of them.

In an effort to break open my writer’s block, I’ve decided to gather some quotes here that I believe speak to some of the craziness bouncing around the airwaves this month about religion in the public square. In fact, there have been various moments in this unusually long presidential primary season in which God, Christianity, the Bible and differences in creed have emerged. In addition to Romney’s “Faith in America” address on December 6, 2007, one of the more memorable of such moments happened at the May 3, 2007 Republican debate, where one reporter asked the GOP hopefuls the following question:

“Is there anyone on the stage who does not … believe in evolution?”

Of the 10 candidates, three (Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo) raised their hands. Brownback has already dropped out of the race and Tancredo’s numbers are still too low to count, but Huckabee is surging to the front in many polls. He’s become what you might call a “contender.” This actually makes sense, given that according to a recent Gallup poll, 68% of Republican voters  say they DO NOT believe in the theory of evolution (compared to 37% of Independents, 40% of Democrats who don’t and 48% of Americans overall.)

Given that in a 2006 poll, 84% of Americans said that religion played a very or fairly important role in their lives, no one should be surprised to see the candidates for the presidency wearing their religion on their sleeves. Even the candidates of the relatively secular democratic party are testifying about their faith and its importance in their lives. Thus, with candidates on both sides of the “aisle” flinging religiosity at the cameras, I thought it was time to look at some of the things that others have said in the past about God and about religion’s place in society. I’ve gathered quotes from a variety of voices, from various points of view. I’ll leave you to figure out mine from the editorial choices I’ve made, both in selection and juxtaposition. I will open with one of my favorite jokes by Emo Philips, which is exactly on point:

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, “Stop! Don’t do it!”

“Why shouldn’t I?” he said.

“Well, there’s so much to live for!”

“Like what?”

“Well… are you religious?”

He said yes.

I said, “Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?”

“Christian.”

“Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?”

“Protestant.”

“Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”

“Baptist”

“Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?”

“Baptist Church of God!”

“Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you reformed Baptist Church of God?”

“Reformed Baptist Church of God!”

“Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?”

He said, “Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!”

I said, “Die, heretic scum!”, and pushed him off.

QUOTES OF THE MONTH:

Mitt Romney:

“There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church’s beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.”

Quentin Crisp:

“When I told the people of Northern Ireland that I was an atheist, a woman in the audience stood up and said, ‘Yes, but is it the God of the Catholics or the God of the Protestants in whom you don’t believe?’”

Thomas Jefferson, 1816, in a letter to Mrs. H. Harrison Smith:

“I never told my own religion nor scrutinized that of another. I never attempted to make a convert, nor wished to change another’s creed. I am satisfied that yours must be an excellent religion to have produced a life of such exemplary virtue and correctness. For it is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be judged.”

James Madison, 1785, Memorial and Remonstrance:

“Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?”

John F. Kennedy, Address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on September 12th, 1960:

“I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish—where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source—where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”

Dan Quayle:

“…I pledge allegiance to the Christian flag and to the Savior, for whose Kingdom it stands, one Savior, crucified, risen, and coming again, with life and liberty for all who believe.”

Benjamin Whichcote:

“Among politicians the esteem of religion is profitable; the principles of it are troublesome.”

Aldous Huxley:

“At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols.”

Mitt Romney:

“Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom.”

Thomas Jefferson:

“Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.

Wendy Kaminer:

“I don’t spend much time thinking about whether God exists. I don’t consider that a relevant question. It’s unanswerable and irrelevant to my life, so I put it in the category of things I can’t worry about.

Francis Bacon:

“Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all of which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, even if religion vanished; but religious superstition dismounts all these and erects an absolute monarchy in the minds of men.”

George Santayana:

“My atheism, like that of Spinoza, is true piety towards the universe and denies only gods fashioned by men in their own image to be servants of their human interests.”

Margaret Mead:

“We will be a better country when each religious group can trust its members to obey the dictates of their own religious faith without assistance from the legal structure of their country.”

Pat Robertson:

“…There is no such thing as … separation of state and church … in the Constitution. It’s a lie of the left.”

Thomas Jefferson, in a Letter to Connecticut Baptists:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”

John McCain, Campaign Speech of February 28, 2000:

“I recognize and celebrate that our country is founded upon Judeo-Christian values, and I have pledged my life to defend America and all her values, the values that have made us the noblest experiment in history. But public—but political intolerance by any political party is neither a Judeo-Christian nor an American value. The political…”

(APPLAUSE)

“The political tactics of division and slander are not our values, they are…”

(APPLAUSE)

“They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country.”

(APPLAUSE)

“Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.”

George Washington:

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.”

Abraham Lincoln:

“The United States government must not undertake to run the Churches. When an individual, in the Church or out of it, becomes dangerous to the public interest he must be checked.”

Mitt Romney:

“…in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America—the religion of secularism. They are wrong.”

Barry Goldwater:

“Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives.”

Sinclair Lewis:

“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

Martin Luther:

“Religion is not “doctrinal knowledge,” but wisdom born of personal experience.”

George J. Mitchell:

“Although he’s regularly asked to do so, God does not take sides in American politics.”

John Dietrich:

“The President of the United States summons the nation to church on Thanksgiving Day to give thanks to “Almighty God” for the abundant harvest and all other blessings. But what has Almighty God—I have no desire to appear irreverent—what has Almighty God as a personal being to do with the harvests? If it is he who produces our crops, then being Almighty there should never be a failure of crops. But since crops frequently fail, it follows that there is no Almighty person in charge of them—unless he brings failure purposely. Therefore, if God is to be thanked for large crops, he must be blamed when the crops are a failure. . . If God sends the rain and the sunshine which develops and ripens our wheat, who sends the storms and the insects which destroy much of it? And if he sends both, then why not thank him for one and blame him for the other?”

Rabbi Sherwin Wine:

“There are two visions of America. One precedes our founding fathers and finds its roots in the harshness of our puritan past. It is very suspicious of freedom, uncomfortable with diversity, hostile to science, unfriendly to reason, contemptuous of personal autonomy. It sees America as a religious nation. It views patriotism as allegiance to God. It secretly adores coercion and conformity. Despite our constitution, despite the legacy of the Enlightenment, it appeals to millions of Americans and threatens our freedom.

“The other vision finds its roots in the spirit of our founding revolution and in the leaders of this nation who embraced the age of reason. It loves freedom, encourages diversity, embraces science and affirms the dignity and rights of every individual. It sees America as a moral nation, neither completely religious nor completely secular. It defines patriotism as love of country and of the people who make it strong. It defends all citizens against unjust coercion and irrational conformity.

“This second vision is our vision. It is the vision of a free society. We must be bold enough to proclaim it and strong enough to defend it against all its enemies.”

Susan B. Anthony, on the Women’s Suffrage Platform:

“I tell them I have worked 40 years to make the W.S. platform broad enough for Atheists and Agnostics to stand upon, and now if need be I will fight the next 40 to keep it Catholic enough to permit the straightest Orthodox religionists to speak or pray and count her beads upon.”

Thomas Jefferson:

“The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg.”

Ulysses S. Grant:

“Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate.”

Albert Einstein:

“Science can only determine what is, but not what shall be, and beyond its realm, value judgments remain indispensable. Religion, on the other hand, is concerned only with evaluating human thought and actions; it is not qualified to speak of real facts and the relationships between them.”

Anaïs Nin:

“When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow.”

Benjamin Franklin:

“Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.”

Noam Chomsky:

“Three quarters of the American population literally believe in religious miracles. The numbers who believe in the devil, in resurrection, in God doing this and that—it’s astonishing. These numbers aren’t duplicated anywhere else in the industrial world. You’d have to maybe go to mosques in Iran or do a poll among old ladies in Sicily to get numbers like this. Yet this is the American population.”

Albert Einstein:

“Scientists were rated as great heretics by the church, but they were truly religious men because of their faith in the orderliness of the universe.”

Galileo Galilei:

“The intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes.”

Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes trial, Dayton, Tennessee, July 13, 1925:

“I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure—that is all that agnosticism means.”

E. B. White:

“Democracy is itself, a religious faith. For some it comes close to being the only formal religion they have.”

Frederick Douglass:

“I prayed for twenty years but received no answer until I prayed with my legs.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson:

“The religion that is afraid of science dishonors God and commits suicide.”

Galileo Galilei:

“I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reasons, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

James Baldwin:

“If the concept of God has any validity or any use, it can only be to make us larger, freer, and more loving. If God cannot do this, then it is time we got rid of Him.”

Karl Marx:

“Religious suffering is at one and the same time the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

“The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is therefore in embryo the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.”

Mark Twain:

“Man is the religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion—several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat, if his theology isn’t straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother’s path to happiness and heaven.”

Jonathan Swift:

“We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.”

Blaise Pascal:

“Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.”

Albert Einstein:

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

Susan B. Anthony:

“I always distrust people who know so much about what God wants them to do to their fellows.”

Thomas Paine:

“I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe in the equality of humans; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy.”

Jane Wagner, (line from The Search for Intelligent Life in the Universe, performed by Lily Tomlin, 1986):

“One thing I have no worry about is whether God exists. But it has occurred to me that God has Alzheimer’s and has forgotten we exist.”

Gore Vidal:

“I’m a born-again atheist.”

Sigmund Freud:

“Religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis.”

Clarence Darrow

“I do not believe in God because I do not believe in Mother Goose.”

Henny Youngman:

“I once wanted to become an atheist but I gave up . . . they have no holidays.”

On that note… I wish you all a very MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

Best, Noetical.

Are We Still In Iraq?

This is a reeeelllly long email that I wrote in October of 2002 in response to a bunch of impassioned emails that my family was writing to each other at the time about whether or not we should go to war with Iraq (it was right after Bush’s resolution, back when we still thought Iraq might have WMDs.)

The first part is my take on the pros and cons of going to war with Iraq at the time…while I cannot include all of the emails from my family’s exchange, in order to protect their privacy, with her permission, I have included an email my Aunt Jeanine wrote. It is my hope that this will provide the necessary context, as it also includes snippets from some of the emails sent by various family members on the topic, which inspired/instigated my email to them.

(FROM Noetical:)

Dear All:

I will admit that my first thought when I saw all these emails was “oh no, this side of the family is just as dysfunctional as everyone else in my crazy extended family…somehow that had escaped my notice for 36 years.  But as I began to really read, I came to realize that while my initial realization does in fact hold some truth, I am grateful to be a part of a family whose members hold strong, impassioned values and beliefs…and have the intellect and will to express them.

On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry began his famous speech, which inspired Virginia to join in the American Revolution with words reflecting this tradition: “No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.”

It is the very act of engaging in such a dialogue that distinguishes us from many other societies…not just because we are “free” to (there are many over the course of the years since 1776 who could attest to the fact that “freely expressed” ideas led to their persecution, and sometimes even death)…but rather because we are a people who consider it a responsibility to stand up our ideas and ideals.

I might not always feel proud of “America” as a government, world force or world leader…but I always feel proud to be an American. Nationalism, just as most “isms” are, is a movement, sentiment I have come to distrust and even fear. I think of it as a curtain that governments draw so that we cannot see what the “wizard” is up to…as though we can not be trusted to understand or reason in the face of complex issues. I ask not for the right to decide what to do about the situation in Iraq, but rather for the freedom to know, to discuss and to participate in a national debate without being labeled as “Anti-American.”

There has been much talk of Hitler on both sides and personally I think that we should all learn more history…there must be other times, other monsters from mankind’s recorded past from whom we can learn.  Hitler was a manifestation of the particular circumstances that existed during that moment of our past.  While there are many lessons to be learned from our interactions with Germany during that time, please remember that one of the most valuable lessons we have learned from our past mistakes is that history can help us understand the present…but cannot adequately define it.

The world stage and human condition continues to increase infinitely in complexity, making many of our assumptions and responses to a given crisis obsolete each every evolving moment. We imperil ourselves both physically and morally if we try to define our leaders, villains and movements of today with analogies which only serve as limited pieces of rhetoric designed to win our respective arguments…this is made most evident by the fact that BOTH sides are using Hitler to quickly stigmatize each other.  Yes our world has been forged by our past…each war, each momentous event gives form to our thoughts, our understanding. But who we are and what we do is a new and unique entity that merely resembles the progenitors from whom we have inherited this earth. In order to move forward wisely during this crisis, we must strive to understand, to the best of our abilities, the ways in which the unique circumstances of this place in time must be addressed.

Albert Einstein once said, reflecting this very sentiment at the dawn of the atomic age, “The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking…”  He knew that we must begin to comprehend the incomprehensible if we were ever going to survive in a world in which we were newly capable of the incomprehensible…this was back in the 50s when all the existing plans for the Vietnam situation included the use of nuclear weapons.

That said, I think we can look to our past for better understanding of our present. At 7 p.m. on Monday, October 22, 1962, President Kennedy appeared on television to inform Americans of the Cuban missile crisis. In this speech he reveals some of the internal struggle that guided his response to the crisis:

“The 1930’s taught us a clear lesson: aggressive conduct, if allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged ultimately leads to war. This nation is opposed to war. We are also true to our word. Our unswerving objective, therefore, must be to prevent the use of these missiles against this or any other country, and to secure their withdrawal or elimination from the Western Hemisphere.”

Kennedy was not only a product of WWII, but furthermore felt personal shame from the fact that his father had been an active supporter of the early policy of appeasement toward Hitler in the ’30s.  By the time he was faced with the Cuban missile crisis, it had become conventional wisdom that Hitler could have been stopped short and WWII avoided had his aggression been checked years earlier.  No one can know whether or not this is true, but Kennedy wisely saw that whether or not it was true, the situation confronting him had unique aspects which called for a unique response. His belief in the absolute intolerability of a nuclear presence so near our boarders was countered by his fear of retaliation against the people of Berlin, should we act precipitously. There are many ways in which the Cuban missile crisis could have been resolved…but I believe that it was Kennedy’s determination to fully understand the various nuances of the situation in order to respond carefully and appropriately that led to a resolution that did not include nuclear holocaust.

In another part of that same speech by Kennedy, he speaks to concerns that many of us have about Iraq today:

“Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation’s security to constitute maximum peril. Nuclear weapons are so destructive and ballistic missiles are so swift, that any substantially increased possibility of their use or any sudden change in their deployment may well be regarded as a definite threat to peace.”

I do think that while the situation is different, these words reflect the feelings of those who consider Saddam’s actions to similarly constitute a direct and deadly threat.  While I agree with them as well as JFK that the mere possession of weapons of mass destruction by a country like Iraq constitutes a clear and present danger, I am not convinced that Iraq does have these weapons…I’ve seen the U2 surveillance photos of 1962…as did the world when Stevenson argued our position at the UN. I find it difficult to believe that forty years later our technology cannot manage to supply us with comparable evidence if in fact there is any.  If it really is true that Iraq is a direct and active menace to our lives, where’s the evidence…More proof, less rhetoric please. One of the ways our government got the scientists of the Manhattan Project to develop the atom bomb was to convince them (many of them Jewish) that Hitler was hot on the trail of developing the same weapon…which of course turned out not to be true.  Regarding this, Einstein said in 1946: “If I had known that the Germans would not succeed in constructing the atom bomb, I would never have lifted a finger.”

Of course I think we should defend ourselves…but from whom and how?  I think we need to respect the complexity of the situation and respond with a clear understanding of what is actually going on.  Instead all I hear is rhetoric that challenges my patriotism whenever I question the government…

If there is anything I want to learn from the past, it is that we cannot react to situations because our leaders say “just cuz.”  They told us that all communists were evil…so we blacklisted them, feared them and persecuted them. One of the byproducts of the 1950s red scares was that any person with history or understanding of Asia was branded a “pinko” or a “commie” and was “purged” from the “intelligence” community and government. This is one of the reasons that the government so terribly misjudged so much of what happened during the years we fought in Vietnam. Most of the people who could have knowledgeably advised the President had been weeded out of his pool of advisors…Do we really think that Bush is including men in his circle who understand all the nuances of the situation in the middle-east? Yes, he has people who have waged war there, but does he have people who have spent the time to understand what it is to wage peace there? These are my concerns.

Ron Rosenbaum, in his New York Observer Article “Goodbye, All That: How Left Idiocies Drove Me to Flee,” from October 14, 2002, he gets mad when people respond to Sept. 11th with the sentiment that “maybe it’s a wake-up call for us to recognize how bad we are, Why They Hate Us.”  But the truth is that we MUST wake up and endeavor to understand their legitimate grievances, because there is no other way to begin to understand why they do what they do.  How do we fight and win a war if we don’t even understand what we are fighting against…I’m not saying that theirs is a better way of life than ours…not even close.  But my way of life has taught me to question why…and I question why because I have a belief that there is power in knowledge and danger in ignorance.  If I am willing to support a war for anything it will be both of and for knowledge.

Some have quoted Jeanine as saying, “No wonder they all hate us,” and respond by saying, “what one wonders is, how much do the people who say that HATE the USA themselves.  Do you really think that Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and the rest of those people who hate us have a better form of government?”  My point is that there is no point to reacting to Jeanine’s effort to see the other side with a statement you know she doesn’t agree with. Of course she doesn’t think Iraq has a better form of government…and furthermore, I’m sure she doesn’t think that anyone who died on Sept. 11th “deserved it” because of US foreign policy.  But honestly, do you actually want to call off any real investigation into what the complex dynamics of the situation are by dismissing any questions as disloyal?  That just doesn’t sound like my family…and it certainly conflicts with many of the values you’ve managed to instill in me.

So anyway, let’s have a trial…let’s put Saddam on trial for crimes against our nation…and let’s see what he’s done, what he is planning. Did he participate in the conspiracy to blow up the world trade centers? Does he have nukes? Inquiring minds want to know. Pull back the curtain of nationalism and let’s have it out like Americans…freely and openly in pursuit of the truth and a better, safer world.  If Bush can give us facts and evidence to march toward war…I’ll get in line.  But I’m not willing to blindly and “patriotically” accept that Bush knows what’s best for me or my brothers.  We’re talking about asking our sons and even daughters to kill and die for something.  To use your analogy…if we’re going to send our children out to kill the guy who is threatening us…shouldn’t we make sure that it isn’t just a rumor…started by that guy up the street who never really liked him? Our constitution gave congress the responsibility of declaring war because war is a serious thing and the congress is a slow deliberate body that requires the participation of multiple points of view…a process which we have skipped in the past with poor results.

I do believe that this is a struggle between good and evil…I just don’t think that we can say that the US is good and Islam is evil…to me it is much more complicated.  Furthermore, to the extent that any struggle against evil entails good…how can we “fight the good fight” without remaining mindful of what is good?  Surely the sanctity of life, even Muslim life, is paramount.  Cesar Chavez once said of violent action that “…If you use violence, you have to sell part of yourself for that violence. Then you are no longer a master of your own struggle.” Don’t let us loose what is good about America in our fervor to defend it. Chavez also said of violence that it “just hurts those who are already hurt…Instead of exposing the brutality of the oppressor, it justifies it.”  If we really are going to win a war against the ‘Islamo-fascists’ we must also win the war of minds.  You can say to the guy in Baghdad that you’re there to save him from the oppressive regime of Saddam Hussein, but ultimately it doesn’t go over as well when you’ve just bombed his house and killed his wife and children.

All that said, I guess what I’m really saying in response to the poll is that the jury is still out with me…I want to see more than just the opening and closing arguments of the prosecutor before I vote on the verdict.  The whole thing scares me and I hope we survive…sometimes I worry that we won’t…on the same days I think how lucky we were to have Kennedy on the switch in 1962.

Maybe nothing can help America and the ‘Islamo-fascists’ have a meeting of the minds. Voltaire said it well back in 1764: “What can we say to a man who tells you that he would rather obey God than men, and that therefore he is sure to go to heaven for butchering you? Even the law is impotent against these attacks of rage; it is like reading a court decree to a raving maniac.”  But the court of world opinion is populated by many who have yet to come to a verdict.  All I’m saying is that the process is important…even if the maniacs don’t get it.  It isn’t for them anyway, it’s for us.  Well, if you’ve gotten this far, you probably need a nap…I love you all and thanks for reading my rant.

Love, Noetical.

SO THAT WAS MY TAKE. FOLLOWING ARE SOME OF THE THINGS MY FAMILY WROTE THAT LED TO MY RANT:

on 10/10/2002 4:00 PM, Jeanine wrote: I’m taking a poll. A quick “YES” or “NO” will suffice…although a paragraph would be great, too. Thanks.

Q. Do you agree with the passage of the president’s Iraq resolution?

Answers as of 10/11/02:

Noetical’s Grandmother: “No. But I guess it is a done deed now.  We’ll just have to pray that he has sense enough to show a little restraint.”

Noetical’s Uncle: “No. I believe we need to take a strong position. However, we must build consensus and we should use the United Nations. We should do everything possible not to be viewed as an aggressor. I believe the benefit of taking out Iraq does not at this time overshadow the negative of world reaction and the possibility of setting off the entire Muslim nation against us. It will be a short-lived victory, solving little, unless we are reacting to outward aggression by Iraq. I fear that simple minded Bush either doesn’t understand the risk, or is simply using this for political gain, trying to detract from other problems at home, such as the economy. Sorry this wasn’t a short answer.”

Noetical’s Cousin: (He is busy with school and admits he hasn’t enough info to form an opinion, yet. I’ll bias him!)

Noetical’s Other Cousin: (I don’t have his email address. But I have reason to believe he would say “NO!!”)

Noetical: (No response yet.)

Noetical’s Brother, Morgan: “Nuke ‘em says I.”

Noetical’s Sister In-law, Julia: No. I do not agree. I don’t believe we should wage war on Iraq without the support of the UN or the world community. . .”

Noetical’s Sister, Mariah: “No. I’d say more, but I don’t want to convulse and foam at the mouth right before bed.”

Noetical’s Sister, Megan: (taken a bit out of context): “No. …Our government is out of control. I think a riot is long overdue.”

Noetical’s Aunt, Jeanine: “This resolution is more than the ok for Bush to bomb Iraq. It transfers the power vested in Congress (by the constitution) to the President (one man), giving him the right to declare war whenever and wherever HE sees fit—without discussion from we-the-people. It also sets an arrogant, outrageous precedent for other nations to violently aggress against their own enemies (“Well, the U.S. does it.”). If this is not ok for other countries to do, why is it ok for us to do? Have we no shame? No wonder the world hates us!

Should we bomb Iraq right now? Absolutely not. Not without UN support. Not without proof that danger from Iraq is eminent. Not for votes. Not for oil. Not to distract us from the REAL risks to homeland security: an economy, education and healthcare system in shambles.

Can you tell which is the Terrorist Nation? Personally, I think the U.S. needs a regime change.”

END OF FAMILY EMAIL SNIPPETS

OKAY, well…that’s me and part of my family…at least when it comes to politics. I hope you found this interesting.

Best, Noetical.

Quotes for the Day

“Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT’S relativity.”
—Albert Einstein

“Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish and you get rid of him all weekend.”
—Zenna Schaffer

“Of all the things I’ve lost, I miss my mind the most.”
—Mark Twain

“You know when you put a stick in water and it looks bent? That’s why I never take baths.”
—Steven Wright

“You moon the wrong person at an office party and suddenly you’re not ‘professional’ any more.”
—Jeff Foxworthy

“The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you’re still a rat.”
—Lily Tomlin

“Doing nothing is very hard to do…you never know when you’re finished.”
—Leslie Nielsen

“Work is the refuge of people who have nothing better to do”
—Oscar Wilde

“Remember in elementary school you were told that in case of fire you have to line up quietly in a single file from smallest to tallest? What is the logic in that? What, do tall people burn slower?”
—Warren Hutcherson

“Why can we remember the tiniest detail that has happened to us, and not remember how many times we have told it to the same person.”
—François de la Rochefoucauld