Theism and Bat Shit Crazy American Politics

Penn Jillette on Atheism vs Theism and bat shit crazy American politics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJGxVeQw3SE"]Penn Jillette: An Atheist's Guide to the 2012 Election - YouTube

 

Obama should give us the money market now, and do this by asserting it's worth against the Imperialism of explaining of the commonwealth for everyone being empowered to FIX THEIR OWN PROPERTY. The money market is about the lie that there is a recession going on in the major middle class in the U.S.

 

I agree that American politics is batshit crazy. Beyond that, I'd take issue with some of his musings. His statement that Bill Clinton was the most religious president because of his frequent appearances in churches and mention of the Bible shows a skewed understanding of religion. Jesus had lots to say against the Pharisees of his day who made a conspicuous display of their attendance at worship services and outward observance of rituals. Besides, I'd like to see Jillette back up the claim about Clinton. I find it hard to believe that Clinton mentioned the Bible more often than G.W. did, and G.W. actually seemed to be sincere about his belief that God was guiding his actions--including the military actions in Iraq. That's the kind of religion that scares the hell out of me! I think the most sincerely Christian President we ever had was Jimmie Carter, one of the biggest flops in the Oval Office. We need good people in the presidency, but not hand wringing moralists. Then there's the Gipper, who didn't go to church much and was divorced but projected a Billy Graham style religiosity that went down well with the Evangelicals, who are less concerned about behavior than about pious lip service to fundamentalist beliefs.

When Jillette says Obama is either religious or a liar when he professes to believe in Christian principles, he seems to think that a truly religious person must be a Bible thumping Pharisee like Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich. I think the public figure who best exemplifies what I'd consider to be Christian principles in action is Warren Buffet, who I think is an admitted atheist. I agree with Saint Justin Martyr who said that "those who live according to reason are Christians, even though they are accounted atheists." What would he call the irrationalists who thump their bibles at our political conventions?

But one a question that Jillette raises deserves serious attention. How can apparently rational people--like Obama and Romney--profess to believe in religions that seem "batshit crazy" without being batshit crazy themselves or being liars? Is that possible? Let me take a stab, based on my own experiences and observations as a professed Christian. I was raised a Catholic, and as such was taught that bread and wine were literally changed into the body and blood of Christ at the mass. It looks like bread and wine. Tastes like it, too. But through the process of transubstantiation the wafer and wine literally become Jesus. Is that batshit crazy? I'd say so. How could otherwise seemingly sane people who function at their jobs and carry on intelligent conversations believe anything so batshit insane? Because it's part of an institution and tradition that is important in their lives--has things to say that don't seem that crazy, serves the functions of all religions in providing a sense of meaning and purpose, offers a social network, moving rituals, etc. And of course includes the basic messages of Jesus in the gospels, which I think are good and important. It was the vehicle for introducing morality and meaning to their lives.

I think it's the same with Romney and his magic underwear. I think Mormonism is the most batshit crazy set of beliefs going, but many of my friends admire it because the Mormons seem to be wholesome, decent, hardworking people. Who cares what underwear they're wearing? Then there are the biblical inerrantists with their talking snakes and jackasses. I don't see how it's possible for a person to read the Bible literally, because it's full of obvious contradictions and because many parts, like the stories of Jonah and Job, are obviously meant as allegories. But I know good people who claim to do that, and accuse me of a cafeteria approach to Christianity, which is a point well-taken. I attend Methodist services, but remarked to my girlfriend that I felt uncomfortable reciting the Apostle's creed, since I don't believe in the virgin birth, the literal resurrection of Jesus, and most of the other doctrines. She said "I don't pay any attention. It's just words". I think that's how a lot of Christians feel. Are they liars? I'd say not necessarily, because those details aren't salient to them. And I agree with Jung that religion is a vital expression of powerful unconscious needs.

What I oppose is toxic faith syndrome: the viral memes that promote fear, hatred and exclusiveness. Whether these are expressed in political arenas or in the church, I think it's important to fight them. I think this can be done effectively without throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

Penn kind of contradicts himself a bit at the end. First he was talking about how he thinks Obama might be lying about his faith for public approval and at the end he's like these are smart honest people. I commented on youtube but it was removed. I said because they're NOT honest people... It's completely true that an Atheist would have to lie and pretend to be Christian to ever get elected.

There's something about the religious mind that makes it oblivious to its own dishonesty, religion trumps common sense in otherwise fully intelligent people. I truly believe religion is a trait bred into the populations mind over thousands of generations as a coping mechanism. Religious morality is a false morality filled with hypocrisy and contradictions. The whole forgiveness and final judgment in a fantasy world lends itself to overlooking real justice and accountability.

When is this political system of deception, lying and false morality going to end? It's never going to end as long as the majority vote with religious minds oblivious to true honesty and true morality.

 

Ok...apparently I suck at mulitquotes, so forgive me

His understanding of religion is not skewed. It's just that here he's talking in a certain context and that is of a political arena where Obama has been criticized for the lack of mention of God(or rather acknowledging that non-believers exist) and how he's not a big church man.

The NPR stats that Jillette is using is trying to use the same paintbrush that fundies are wanting to paint Obama with and applying it to other presidents. Lo and behold, by their own talking heads criteria a dem did the God talking and church going better than the others.

The stat has apparently been fact checked.

It's not that Penn believes to be Christian one must be bible thumping (he has a surprising respect for thumpers), or that Obama can't be a quiet Christian. Again it's the context: Obama is or once was a member of a specific Bat Shit Crazy church. The way Obama acts is not even remotely close to the stuff spouted and professed by the bat shit crazy church and so one begins to question why he was apart of that church in the first place.
If Obama had gone to some low-key moderate church, there wouldn't be any reason to question Obama's commitment to his religion as that contrast would not be there.

Mormonism: I don't care personally what crazy shit they believe about underwear, what I care about is the lack of women's rights in the religion. As long as a religion is using itself to subjugate people, I will not tolerate it.

As for those who do believe in god but just pay lip service to a denomination...While I do not agree that religion is vital, I would say that beliefs are vital and if you're going to have beliefs, no matter what they are, don't be a hypocrite about it.
In the case of religion, you're cheapening your denomination by just going through the motions on Sunday. And while that may be fine for the person, it's rude and condescending to the congregation that believes all the doctrine.

 

Thanks for clarifying. But whether NPR or Jillette is responsible, operationalizing religion in terms of church going and God talking is, as I said, skewed in the same way that operationalizing democracy in Iraq in terms of elections held is skewed. These are superficial indicators.

There are many reasons why a person might belong to a church besides agreeing with the particulars of their doctrine. He might think that it's doing good work, or is nearby, or throws good parties. I don't know what would attract Obama to that particular one, but I wouldn't judge him as either nuts or a liar for doing so--unless he says "I really believe all the stuff this church teaches." I take fellowship with several groups with contradictory beliefs, one of which I would characterize as batshit crazy. They watch a lot of random movies and subject them all to intensive Jungian analysis. I've often been tempted to bring Pineapple Express, just to see what they'd do with a dumb stoner movie. But I love them anyway, and wouldn't miss a meeting.

Me neither, nor will I tolerate their position on gays and blacks.

I disagree. Many people who have a sense of allegiance to a denomination disagree with some of the doctrines, and I think that's a good thing. For example, most American Catholics disagree with the Catholic Church's position on birth control, which the Vatican thinks is very important. My Catholic mother used to say that the Church's doctrines on sex were the work of celibate old men who didn't have any experience with what they were talking about. I fortunately have found a small group of Progressive Christians with whom I pretty much agree; but I also attend other groups I don't agree with because they have something to offer in challenging my beliefs or giving me a different slant on reality:an American Orthodox discussion group, an Episcopalian Sunday School class, and a freethinkers group consisting mostly of atheists. They know what my beliefs are, but I think it would be rude and condescending to attend their meetings and keep challenging their positions. I wouldn't want to attend a church that was so closed minded it would require total acceptance of their doctrines. I happen to think mainstream Christianity went off the rails early on when Paul had his vision on the way to Damascus. The transformation was completed by the Council of Nicea and subsequent councils. But even in Oklahoma there are churches like the Mayflower Congregational under pastor Robin Meyers (Saving Jesus From the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus) that hold out hope for remedying the situation. This is what I have in mind by Christianity. But I still believe in pluralism as Diana Eck defines it: respectful engagment with other traditions without abandoning one's own beliefs.