Rubio nails question from Atheist trying to trip him up.
- Thread starter 86Hawkeye
- Start date
The first part was drivel. The real answer was in the last 20 seconds.
I actually liked his demeanor when he starting talking about people being ignorant of history (dumb) but quickly pointed to the person asking the question and indicated he wasn't talking about him (smart). And that he remained respectful and pointed out that it takes courage to express a minority view in a hostile environment. Completely unlike Trump, who would have ridiculed him and turned the crowd against him.
Which is why I hope a candidate like Rubio gets the nomination over Trump or Cruz.
Last bit was good, but I contend that "faith" shouldn't be what "teaches" you those things. These things should be simply human. Faith teachings like this shouldn't get so much credit, as if without faith people don't have the capacity to care for one another.
By the way, that last bit was some seriously socialist-type sh/t.
You know, Jesus-like.
By the way, that last bit was some seriously socialist-type sh/t.
You know, Jesus-like.
I thought the atheist asked a very logical question and that the question wasn't intended to trip Rubio up. I wish Rubio truly did care about the unfortunate and truly believed that religion shouldn't be pushed into society, his stances on abortion and gay marriage would be totally different. He can say we were founded on Judeo - Christian values all he wants, but the constitution doesn't back him up on that. Our Creator is all encompassing, it can be whoever or whatever each individual believes it to be and it certainly doesn't specifically mean the Christian God. I'm not anti religion, I'm pro constitution and to each his own, just don't push your beliefs onto society and don't insinuate America is anything but a secular society.
I think you're missing the point.
Our culture is based on Judeo-Christian values.
Not really a Constitutional issue.
Yea, I'd say he nailed it. He very clearly stated what he believed, and made it very clear that he didn't believe anyone should be forced to believe like he does or any other way. He also stated why he thought beliefs similar to his were used by the forefathers in creating the nation, but didn't tell the atheist he had to agree.
He answered that question like a well-trained...politician.
On another note, no sane person believes any candidate is going to come in and say you can or can't believe however you want when it comes to religion. There may be some who would like to regulate how much you talk about it.
See, this is problematic, I think -- this idea that "our culture" is based on Judeo-Christian values.
First, "our" "culture" is ever-evolving. It's not static. Otherwise "our culture" would still be one of slave-owning presidents, witch trials, whatever awful weird crap that we've thankfully moved away from. Though I might argue there are some groups hating on LGBT as though they are witches. I digress.
I put those words in quotes because "our" for some is not all-inclusive -- rather it is often not-so-covertly exclusive. And "culture" is in quotes because it's usage so often implies one culture. The America that I was sold on as a kid was one of many cultures living, or at least trying to live, in some sort of mutually beneficial harmony.
Second, many of the founders of this country rejected organized religion. They accepted much of the rational thought/teachings presented by Christianity, while rejecting the irrational/supernatural stuff. There was some serious secularism in those fellas.
Third, whatever values you label Judeo-Christian -- as though these values are solely ascribed to the Judeo-Christian faith, are arguably common to all faiths/religions. I just call them human.
So why is this problematic? Ascribing what's good about the USA to one faith fundamentally undermines what's good about the USA, because "the good" is then "owned" by one group (Judeo-Christians) to then be merely "enjoyed" by others. Which essentially makes everybody who identifies as something other than Judeo-Christian guests in their own house.
I think the sooner that America -- certainly its leaders but really all of us -- moves away from trying to credit one faith with its fundamental morality, the better.
Last edited:
Rudolph nailed it in his answer above; Judeo-Christians do not have a monopoly on 'morality'.
Christian Conservatives like to THINK that our system of democracy and voting is 'Judeo-Christian', but it's not. It's based on the Greeks, who worshipped a whole bunch of 'gods'. Our nation's 'values' have arisen from literally DOZENS of different cultures, not Jews and Christians specifically.
Our system of government was specifically created to be secular, because MOST of the people who came to America early on came because they wanted to ESCAPE the tyranny imposed on them by organized (Judeo-Christian) religion in the 'Old World'. Many of the tenets and 'values' we see in our Bill of Rights that Christians try to identify as 'Judeo-Christian' based are actually common to many forms of religions (the right to free speech, probably the most important of all is really common to NO religions). But confirmation bias leads Christian Conservatives to incorrectly think those values/rights are rooted in Judaism and Christianity.
But to the original post, I had no problem with Rubio's answer, and I thought he made lots of good points - he was very candid and honest.
Sure it is, the constitution is the cornerstone of America, not The Bible. Atheists have morals and values that are actually inherent, they're not due to religion.
I read somewhere that procrastination breeds creativity. We'll see tomorrow when today's work, which didn't get done, is due.
If Rubio were a Muslim who was talking about how great his faith is and how nobody should be afraid of him because of all the great things it leads him to do, I wonder who the room would have sided with.
Yeah, but if Rubio were a Muslim the Atheists would never have asked the question.
Well, some of our cultures are built on that, including many politicians. Yes, that would be true.
1. Never said Judeo-Christians have a monopoly of morality.
2. I agree, Greek culture had an influence as well, particularly related to governance.
Its a free gift? I guess he can say that, but he forgot to mention if you dont accept the "gift" you will burn in hell for eternity.
If you need faith to teach you to be kind to others, then you're a weak minded idiot.
Probably true, because living in a country with so many Christians we're going to be annoyed by Christians far more frequently than by other religions, and we're more likely to have discussions with Christians then with others, so the conversation is going to center on Christianity moreso than Theism.
I'm sure if we lived in Israel we'd be more anti-Judaism, or if we lived in Saudi Arabia we'd be more anti-Islam. In fact, I'm quite certain that the typical American Atheist is not keen on any of those religions. Personally, I'm less offended by Christianity than by Islam, simply because Christians have almost entirely abandoned the nastier portions of they mythology while a significant portion of Muslims still rabidly support theirs.
If there's any truth to that, and I think there is to an extent, it's because Christianity is the dominant religion in America. Its the same reason Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an atheist from Somalia, is primarily concerned with Islam.
True.
But, it seems the American Atheist is so anti-Christian that they have become Pro-Muslim.
I don't see that. We tend to care more about the rights of minorities than conservatives, and Muslims are ripe political targets, so you probably see us standing up for them a lot. But do you really think the typical Atheist views Islam as a preferable religion to Christianity? I am nearly certain that's not true.
Not true. Most of us are just fine with people believing what they want. About 20% of the population is like me, a non-believer. Only a few of the vocal ones create the impression you have. I'm ok with you believing in God, and a Muslim believing in Allah. You're both wrong, but I'm fine with it.
BTW - as a non-believer, I thought Marco nailed it. If all Christians took that approach, we'd be much better off.
No, you don't. Some people might tell you that, but it's just a sales pitch. Don't buy it.
This sums it up quite well. When Islam is such a minority, people will seek to protect it from the majority. That doesn't mean defending the religion itself.
Ok, now let me say that I have no problem with Rubio's answer, it was well spoken and mostly to the point (for a politician).
But, he is wrong in an important way, in my opinion. Now before that, I reiterate what was said before, much of America was founded on the traditions and values passed down through judeo-christian peoples, even if it wasn't actually founded on those values, nor were all of the values agreed upon. Still today the majority of our politicians follow those passed down traditions/values therefore much of our morality laws stems, at least tenuously, from those ideals.
But, our rights did not come from a creator, and the founders damn well knew that. This is why the Constitution and the Bill of Rights was created, it is why we fought a revolutionary war. WE, the people, "created" those rights and made sure we drafted the legislation to support them. This is for the most part common sense, if it came from a "creator" there isn't a reason to a) debate them or b) write them down at all, because they are somehow inherent. WE damn well knew that WE were creating a set of standards (which largely came from judeo-Christian, amongst many others) that WE wanted our new nation to follow.
Hell, think about it. Why would a creator (who is the judeo-Christian creator) want freedom of religion? Why freedom from search and seizure? Many of our rights are not consistent with what a creator would have had us inherit.
Our fathers were smart, they knew that we didn't want our rights coming from a crown, so we won a war. They knew we wanted a specific set of rights, many of which were to specifically contradict those from the crown, so WE created our rights.
Rubio asked, "where else did those rights come from"? We know exactly where they came from and we should appreciate our forefathers for their now nearly 250 year old documents.
But, he is wrong in an important way, in my opinion. Now before that, I reiterate what was said before, much of America was founded on the traditions and values passed down through judeo-christian peoples, even if it wasn't actually founded on those values, nor were all of the values agreed upon. Still today the majority of our politicians follow those passed down traditions/values therefore much of our morality laws stems, at least tenuously, from those ideals.
But, our rights did not come from a creator, and the founders damn well knew that. This is why the Constitution and the Bill of Rights was created, it is why we fought a revolutionary war. WE, the people, "created" those rights and made sure we drafted the legislation to support them. This is for the most part common sense, if it came from a "creator" there isn't a reason to a) debate them or b) write them down at all, because they are somehow inherent. WE damn well knew that WE were creating a set of standards (which largely came from judeo-Christian, amongst many others) that WE wanted our new nation to follow.
Hell, think about it. Why would a creator (who is the judeo-Christian creator) want freedom of religion? Why freedom from search and seizure? Many of our rights are not consistent with what a creator would have had us inherit.
Our fathers were smart, they knew that we didn't want our rights coming from a crown, so we won a war. They knew we wanted a specific set of rights, many of which were to specifically contradict those from the crown, so WE created our rights.
Rubio asked, "where else did those rights come from"? We know exactly where they came from and we should appreciate our forefathers for their now nearly 250 year old documents.
That's probably perception for no other reason than the American Atheist confronts Christianity more than any most other faiths.
Say what??
I thought an acceptance of Jesus as your Lord and savior is the only way to the afterlife to join Murderers, Catholic Priests Pedophiles and the republican voter base? Its the ultimate get out of Hell card for people who commit evil acts.
I dont believe in illogical myths. My hard core Christian friends seem to think the only way to heaven is through the acceptance of Jesus as their Lord and savior.
So why are you acting like you do believe it - just so it gives you a chance to be butt-hurt about something some Christians are doing?
Similar threads
