Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 Secular Coalition of America F***s Up
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/03/2012 :  17:52:45  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
How so? Look at who they picked to be their lobbyist, Edwina Rogers.

I'm not even going to bother to quote: There is just so much wrong here it's not even funny.

What in hell were they thinking? Sure, they picked a republican, that in itself is no big deal; they'd need one to be able to get in the door, pretty much.

But read the article and the links. Look at the track record this person has. This is not a person who was ever on the secularist's side in any issue. She's been supporting the enemies of secularism all this time.

Here's an interview excerpt.

How do you think your Republican background will play into your role here at the Secular Coalition?
My Republican background will help open certain doors that may have been closed to the secular movement before. Itís a misnomer that the majority of Republicans believe in the comingling of religion and government. The Religious Right is a vocal part of the Republican Party, but itís also a minority. Most Republicans donít necessarily agree with them, but may simply take a laissez faire attitude on that particular topic because they havenít been engaged on the issues. If we aim to combat the political influence of those who want to see religion inserted in our secular government we will have to work with decision makers on both sides of the aisleóand I am uniquely qualified to help the Secular Coalition do that.


Read that over..."its a misnomer that the majority of Republicans believe in the comingling of religion and government"?

Is that at all close to reality?

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.

Edited by - the_ignored on 05/03/2012 18:00:08

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13462 Posts

Posted - 05/03/2012 :  18:05:35   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by the_ignored

How so? Look at who they picked to be their lobbyist, Edwina Rogers.

I'm not even going to bother to quote: There is just so much wrong here it's not even funny.

What in hell were they thinking? Sure, they picked a republican, that in itself is no big deal; they'd need one to be able to get in the door, pretty much.

But read the article and the links. Look at the track record this person has. This is not a person who was ever on the secularist's side in any issue. She's been supporting the enemies of secularism all this time.

Here's an interview excerpt.

How do you think your Republican background will play into your role here at the Secular Coalition?
My Republican background will help open certain doors that may have been closed to the secular movement before. Itís a misnomer that the majority of Republicans believe in the comingling of religion and government. The Religious Right is a vocal part of the Republican Party, but itís also a minority. Most Republicans donít necessarily agree with them, but may simply take a laissez faire attitude on that particular topic because they havenít been engaged on the issues. If we aim to combat the political influence of those who want to see religion inserted in our secular government we will have to work with decision makers on both sides of the aisleóand I am uniquely qualified to help the Secular Coalition do that.


Read that over..."its a misnomer that the majority of Republicans believe in the comingling of religion and government"?

Is that at all close to reality?
I don't have the numbers, but I know several republicans who complain bitterly about the RR influence on the party. So it might actually be true. They are kinda stuck playing the game for the base. But I think a whole lot of them wishes that the RR would fuck off. They know it's hurting their party.

But I'm shooting from the hip. Still, generally, I think the RR is a minority of the party. But it's a freaking loud one.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/03/2012 :  19:18:02   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I can but hope that you're right...the SCA must know something of that woman's character when they selected her. As I said: I can but hope.

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/03/2012 :  21:58:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I honestly think PZ jumped the gun on this. He may ultimately be right, but here's why Edwina Rogers' GOP background or even her character has little to do with whether she'd be a good SCA lobbyist:

A lobbyist is a gun for hire, not an official that one elects because the person's character and record reflects the kind of leadership we desire. Hiring a lobbyist is like hiring a lawyer or a tax preparer. If they are effective in doing what we want, that's all we want. If they are not, they are expendable and can be fired at the snap of a finger. Unless a lobbyist performs, their position is a temporary job.

Let's begin with the default position that SCA may know what they're doing in hiring this GOP political hack. Then let's watch carefully, and see if they need to replace her with another mercenary tool.

Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Machi4velli
SFN Regular

USA
854 Posts

Posted - 05/04/2012 :  21:54:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Machi4velli a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I felt he was being unfair all the way until the part where she made campaign contributions to Rick Perry. It's tough to claim to want secularism and also support Rick Perry, the man who led a massive political move of a prayer rally at a football stadium (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/us/politics/07prayer.html) a couple weeks before getting into the race.

But, to be fair, we don't know why she supported Perry. This pool of candidates seemed particularly non-secular, at least those who seemed to have a shot, so a secular fiscal conservative was more or less forced to pick someone they don't like.

Can't give numbers on support for RR among Republicans, but anecdotally at least I know a lot who dislike RR, and I'm one and really detest no decent-sized political bloc (from either party) more.

"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking

"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/05/2012 :  00:14:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I have long felt that Neoconservatism as a collation is inherently unstable. That it's hung together as long as it has is a remarkable demonstration of the use unbridled propaganda from FOX and others as well as the worst kind of public gullibility.

The Neocon coalition essentially stands on three "legs": 1) A purely self-aggrandizing streak of "economic libertarianism" exemplified by "Plutocrats" like the Koch brothers, 2) The rise of international "Adventurists," near-neocolonialists like George W. Bush, and 3) A mix of Religious Right preachers and their flocks advocating everything from imposing Sharia-like "Christian" religious laws to making Genesis a science text.

There is much contempt between many members of these three general groups. Many members of each faction do not share the values of one or both of the other factions, but only see them as (maybe) necessary allies. Each wants to use the other two groups, without letting them gain the upper hand over their own interests. As long as the Neocon coalition is advancing its collective interests, the tensions between its three "legs" is subsumed in the need for unity. But when the three-legged beast is halted, or even driven back, blame is apportioned, the need for the coalition itself is questioned.

The Teabaggers have strengthened both the Religious Right and Adventurist legs, especially at local and state levels -- at the expense of the Plutocrats.

I say, "strengthened," but the Teabagger mob actually scored only a short-term and local gain. By tossing out the Plutocrats, they also threw out any and all sane political guidance and restraint that faction had imposed. The raft of bizarre anti-women, ant-science, anti-education and anti-gay legislation passed in state legislatures recently has set up the Neocons, and the GOP, for a political disaster by deeply alienating everyone from women, to gays, to ethnic minorities, to social (and some economic) libertarians. The Teabaggers are charging ahead to doom like berserkers while old-time GOP "Paleocons" shake their heads in (temporarily) helpless dismay.

If the whole Neocon basis of the GOP is, as I suspect, about to collapse, perhaps the SCA thinks that Edwina Rogers may be able to reason with the remnant Republicans as they begin to put their Party back together, and be able to point to the collapse of Neoconservatism as a cautionary tale for why the GOP should become be a secular party.

Of course, that presumed motivation in hiring Rogers is the purest speculation on my part. Political analyses and predictions have a dismal tack record.

Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 05/05/2012 06:49:15
Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 05/08/2012 :  09:16:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Greta Christina interviews Edwina Rogers.

PZ Myers summarizes the interview:
Did you know 70% of Republicans are pro-choice? And that there is no Republican party position on abortion? Itís only a few elected officials who are anti-gay, not the majority. You shouldnít stereotype Republicans! Republicans believe in the separation of church and state, too. But not a majority now (sheís backed down on this one). Republicans at the federal level have not been promoting creationism and intelligent design. It was OK that she donated money to Rick Perry because a) he used to be a Democrat, b) he was head of the Republican Governorís Association, and c) she was interested in promoting health care. And we all know what a friend to health care Rick Perry has been. She joined the Republican party along with everyone else in the South because she like Ronald Reaganís message, which was about working hard.

I learned many Surprising Factsô about America in this interview. I havenít been thrilled with the Democrats for some time, but apparently the Republicans have an agenda more in tune with my views (!), and I ought to have been voting for them.
In general, Rogers doesn't sound very savvy to me. Yes, she's probably correct that many of these conservative positions aren't personally held by every single politician with an R after their name, but that hardly matters if they ultimately vote along party lines. Therefore it's disingenuous to proclaim that these aren't Republican positions. Most of them, such as opposition to abortion, are quite specifically spelled out in the Republican platform (such as this one from 2008 in a section titled "Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life").

I think a poster named godlesspanther on Greta's blog summarized my feelings best:
Over and over again Rogers keeps doing the ďwe actually agree on so many things, and itís just a misconception on your part that we donítĒ ó insert happy face here. She appears to be completely ignorant of that fact that most of us outside her circle do not find that reassuring, we find it condescending and offensive. She does not know how to talk to us. She is used to talking to people who are satisfied with being told what they want to hear. She is not used to talking to people who will hold her accountable to what she says, look it up to confirm or reject based on research. She does not know how to talk to people who want the truth, even though it may hurt or be really depressing.

"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 05/08/2012 09:26:33
Go to Top of Page

ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf

USA
1457 Posts

Posted - 05/08/2012 :  18:21:42   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit ThorGoLucky's Homepage Send ThorGoLucky a Private Message  Reply with Quote
HH,
Go to Top of Page

Machi4velli
SFN Regular

USA
854 Posts

Posted - 05/09/2012 :  17:58:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Machi4velli a Private Message  Reply with Quote
This godlesspanther wants a lobbyist who tells the hard truth? Since when is that an effective lobbying technique?

"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking

"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus
Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2012 :  20:55:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert

Greta Christina interviews Edwina Rogers.

PZ Myers summarizes the interview:
Did you know 70% of Republicans are pro-choice? And that there is no Republican party position on abortion? Itís only a few elected officials who are anti-gay, not the majority. You shouldnít stereotype Republicans! Republicans believe in the separation of church and state, too. But not a majority now (sheís backed down on this one). Republicans at the federal level have not been promoting creationism and intelligent design. It was OK that she donated money to Rick Perry because a) he used to be a Democrat, b) he was head of the Republican Governorís Association, and c) she was interested in promoting health care. And we all know what a friend to health care Rick Perry has been. She joined the Republican party along with everyone else in the South because she like Ronald Reaganís message, which was about working hard.

I learned many Surprising Factsô about America in this interview. I havenít been thrilled with the Democrats for some time, but apparently the Republicans have an agenda more in tune with my views (!), and I ought to have been voting for them.
In general, Rogers doesn't sound very savvy to me. Yes, she's probably correct that many of these conservative positions aren't personally held by every single politician with an R after their name, but that hardly matters if they ultimately vote along party lines. Therefore it's disingenuous to proclaim that these aren't Republican positions. Most of them, such as opposition to abortion, are quite specifically spelled out in the Republican platform (such as this one from 2008 in a section titled "Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life").

I think a poster named godlesspanther on Greta's blog summarized my feelings best:
Over and over again Rogers keeps doing the ďwe actually agree on so many things, and itís just a misconception on your part that we donítĒ ó insert happy face here. She appears to be completely ignorant of that fact that most of us outside her circle do not find that reassuring, we find it condescending and offensive. She does not know how to talk to us. She is used to talking to people who are satisfied with being told what they want to hear. She is not used to talking to people who will hold her accountable to what she says, look it up to confirm or reject based on research. She does not know how to talk to people who want the truth, even though it may hurt or be really depressing.



Damn straight. Now, a post by Myers that puts the whole thing in perspective.

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1265 Posts

Posted - 05/19/2012 :  23:13:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Wow what a bunch of hypocrites.

Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/19/2012 :  23:42:50   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by On fire for Christ

Wow what a bunch of hypocrites.

Care to explain? Would you want an atheist leading a ministry? Look at the cartoon I linked to in Myer's blog and you'll see the point.

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1265 Posts

Posted - 05/19/2012 :  23:57:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I mean the Secular Coalition of America are hypocrites, not you guys. Sorry for being unclear.

Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/20/2012 :  00:18:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I figured you were talking about them.

How are they hypocrites? As the cartoon points out, would you want atheists in charge of religious organizations?

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1265 Posts

Posted - 05/20/2012 :  00:41:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by the_ignored

I figured you were talking about them.

How are they hypocrites? As the cartoon points out, would you want atheists in charge of religious organizations?


What cartoon? And unless I am a member of that organization I wouldn't care. Other than to look upon them as hypocrites.

Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2557 Posts

Posted - 05/20/2012 :  00:54:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I meant the post I put up here.

And again, [b]how[/url] are they hypocrites?

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.33 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000