Iraq vote

However I feel about the war, and the misdirections that allowed it; I do not hesitate to praise the other day’s election in Iraq.  60% of the nation lining up, placing their lives at risk — truly at risk — for a chance to take control of their destiny. Very moving. I don’t see how one can live in a free country and NOT be moved by that. I’ve heard us liberals accused of hoping for disaster, of wanting only more suffering in Iraq, hoping the vote would be a huge failure to embarrass the neocons. Nonsense, it’s just spin put out there to increase ratings for Rush and his ilk.  Liberals don’t want further chaos and violence in Iraq; liberal’s wants peace and rebuilding to take place. And I myself couldn’t care less if Bush or Rumsfeld gets the credit, deserved or undeserved. Let’s me get that straight right now, before others continue helpfully trying to articulate my thoughts for me.  Forget politics, forget what goes into the history books; that’s impossible to predict. Barring break-through research into free-radicals and cell rejuvenation, we’ll all be gone by the time sober judgments are made about the insane times we live in. Since the end of the cold war I believe we are witnessing the last gasps of religious fundamentalism in all its guises, (well, I can dream anyway). But the lasts gasps of dying scourges are the cruelest and bloodiest.


3 thoughts on “Iraq vote

  1. I echo the sentiment expressed here.

    I just want to say that one huge mistake that liberals have made historically and continue to make is the pointless attacks on religion. Yes, there is separation of church and state and all that, but religious people–and I can speak for them as I used to be one of them–mainly want to be left alone to their beliefs. If you mock them then they will get really emotional and any discussion is dead.

    The way to go is to push for programs, but stay away from the religion. For example, fight to make abortion more accessible rather than to get rid of the ten commandments. In fact, if we could have safe free abortions on demans, I’d help to set up the ten commandments in the court room. Also, note that some things I am against like the death penalty are prohibited by the ten commandments. So they are not all bad.

  2. Mike Canfield says:

    I disagree about the pointless attacks. Saying anything against religion is still one of the great taboos. There are alternatives to superstition. I think it’s time to speak up about the drawbacks of religion.The assumption is irreligiousity means immorality. I’m trying to educate myself so I can argue more effectively for the rationalist point of view.

  3. I don’t disagree with you here. I am not saying that one should go along with superstition, I am just saying that we have to be smart about it. To pick one’s battles and to make them worthwhile.

    Here’s an example. Instead of fighting against the creationism in schools, I think we should be _for_ it, but in a smart way.
    In the history of science, how many creationists know that ALL scientists were creationists at one time? Darwin was a creationist. The Bible was accepted as a scientific text. Darwin didn’t set out to disprove the Bible, but that’s where his research wound up. If things were taught this way then people would be less defensive.

    Oh, the adults would never permit this, but this would open the door to the children. I speak from my experiences dealing with children at a youth home in Baja during my trip to Mexico. They were creationists, but when I explained things to them in a logical, rational way, they really responded positively.

    If I had said that Darwin was right, God is wrong, they would have been turned off. That’s all.

    We don’t need Pink Elephants or Shiva or idols of Christ in the governement building, but some of them are there so we have to deal with it. That’s all. I

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: