Novice level monster on Fox News fails to defeat atheist

In this Fox News segment about the recent U.S. District Court decision banning the National Day of Prayer, Dan Barker (author of Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists) handily parries a Fox News announcer's clumsy blows.

Unless the Fox News character learns how to devour his prey like the Ayperobos and Ghargatulas who command the prime slots on Fox News, he won't be long for the network.

Mark Frauenfelder is the founder of Boing Boing and the editor-in-chief of MAKE and Cool Tools. Twitter: @frauenfelder. Come and hear Mark speak at the ALA conference in Chicago on July 1.

MORE: Culture

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

AirPillo

I remember when people would joke about bias on Fox and it was just poking fun at subtler trends.

Now I swear to God (couldn’t resist the pun) they’re deliberately aiming to become the fundamentalist equivalent of the National Enquirer.

Can’t wait to start seeing Bat-Choir-Boy’s wedding photos and hearing Sean Hannity opine on the latest Elvis/Reptilian scandal.
cindileper

booyah!
andyhavens

Speaking as a Christian, I entirely agree with Mark on this one. Keep church and state completely separate. Two main reasons:

1. “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

2. I don’t want the government to screw up my religion.

Anybody who needs a day of prayer, “God” in the pledge, “God” on the money, creche scenes on the town hall lawn or the Ten Commandments in a courthouse to be a Christian needs to review the handbook.
redesigned

#76 – “National Day of Prayer, recognizes the big part religion (all religion) plays in the lives of americans. It dosn’t establish a religion, or recognize one religion as better than any other.”

BullSh*t! Troll. Read what I post in #71.
Most religions don’t share your christian concept of prayer.
If you educated yourself you’d never make such a ignorant claim.
Anonymous

So, my question is this: was the Fox interviewer being disingenuous?

Did he honestly conflate/confuse the declaration of independence from the constitution?

Does he honestly believe that in these troubled times (yes, all times seem to be troubled, but assuming he believes the positions he puts forth…) that the country needs state sanctioned prayer and that the lack of the US Govt endorsing the prayer will lesson its impact?
Anonymous

Dan Baker 1, Fox “News” Purty Boy 0

I can only imagine the Fox “News” producers screaming in the control room “Interrupt him! Interrupt him!!”

BTW, did you notice Dan Baker was introduced as the author of the book “Godless”, not the complete title “Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America’s Leading Atheists”? Mustn’t let the Fox “News” addicts worry their little heads over the fact that Dan Baker used to be an evangelist, or heaven forbid wonder why he renounced xtianity…

I suspect the Fox “News” guy who was far too civilized for his job has already completed his pink slip departure interview…
Ugly Canuck

Fox News? What’s that?

There is something that looks like a 24/7 propaganda channel for the US GOP, up in the nosebleed tier of my digital TV box – is that it?
People actually pay for this stuff?
I’d pay not to watch it…in fact, maybe I already do.
- Anonymous
  
  Do not watch TV. That’s the one commandment I can get behind.
Viktor

This is seriously the most coherent Dan Barker has ever been on Fox news. I think he should be commended for his efforts to separate the current, seemingly endless, church and state entanglement and I am proud of the valuable work he is fearlessly doing. That is a lion’s den and he was very prepared and the novice level 1 monster was not ready for Dan’s 20 die rolls!
Endo

The Faux Newsman’s flaw here is that, despite his obvious bias, he actually remained civil with his godless opponent, like they were having some type of conversation or something. A skilled demagogue never would have let his opponent form more than a few consecutive words worth of rebuttal, thereby reducing the entire debate to an irrational, emotional battle which the propagandist controls.
irksome

I almost feel sorry for this kid, getting his ass handed to him on a platter.
Emphasis on “almost”…

He’ll eventually lose any and all sense of civility as he hones his skills at smirking and interrupting. Until then, Ailes will exile him to a 3am time slot for not interrupting.
Dewi Morgan

It may have been a novice-level monster, but the poor news guy looked positively apprentice-level. Not a great victory: the news guy didn’t even TRY to talk over the monster, steamroller it, or accuse it of hatred.

Still, I’m sure he’ll learn in time.
Beelzebuddy

I was expecting him to disingenuously claim that the National Day of Prayer was non-sectarian in nature. Barkers assertion that it was strictly evangelical would’ve been pounced on by a more experienced hack.

Personally, I’d have preferred the Flying Spaghetti Monster solution: make the national day of prayer into the national *day* of prayer, for every single religion.

Begin before dawn with an Aztec sacrifice to Xipe Totec (using a rabbit instead of the traditional seasoned warrior, of course), face east to praise Ra’s birth at sunup, toss in a quick bow to Mecca while you’re pointed that way anyway, then keep working your way east through a little Buddhist chanting, and hit up the Hindu pantheon. That’ll last us till sometime after lunch.

In the early afternoon things quiet down so we’ll have a quarter hour of smug gloating for the atheists before starting in on the aboriginal American rites. We can’t show peyote on television, but I think a sweat lodge and peace pipe might be nicely photogenic. Then the kids are getting out of school so we’ll hit up Christianity: a short mass, some dancing in the aisles and a gold old fashioned Quaker apoplexy ought to do it. Next, the pseudo-Christian religions; vodou, Santa Muerte and whatever the hell Carnavale is supposed to be based on.

The evening will largely focus on Africa again. We’ll get us some Bantu, a few South African homophobic prayers (throw in some Southern Baptists here, for theme’s sake), and push off for Indonesia just in time to catch the evening prayer for Mecca, maybe a dream time ceremony and finally wrapping up with another polytheistic extravaganza, this time with a Tongan bent.
adamnvillani

The editors are free to correct me if I’m wrong, but the last time I checked, BoingBoing was not for the exclusive domain of atheists, as much as they’d like to squat on it and claim it as their exclusive domain.

That being said, as a Catholic, bravo for Dan Barker here. I’ll pray in my own way, thank you, and not how a bunch of low-church Evangelicals think I should. And I certainly don’t need any direction from the government on how and when I should pray.
Brainspore

Maybe I’ve just become desensitized to Fox News but nothing that the anchor said struck me as “monstrous.” Ill informed? Sure. Biased? Certainly. But he didn’t yell or accuse the guest of killing babies and he asked questions that the viewers might be reasonably expected to want answers to. Compared to the rest of the ilk on his network he seemed downright courteous.
- Cowicide
  
  Maybe I’ve just become desensitized to Fox News but nothing that the anchor said struck me as “monstrous.” Ill informed? Sure. Biased? Certainly. But he didn’t yell or accuse the guest of killing babies and he asked questions that the viewers might be reasonably expected to want answers to. Compared to the rest of the ilk on his network he seemed downright courteous.
  
  Hence his novice monster level, see?
  
  I think you might be desensitized to D&D-style puns. By the way… he did at least try to show his barely hidden utter disdain for the dirty atheist multiple times.
  
  He sounded and acted like a dick here and here and that was just the introduction. I don’t think he acted downright courteous even compared to his monster ilk. He acted like an eye-fluttering dick.
  
  If anyone got introduced at a party with that dick attitude, they’d turn around and walk out the door and tell the schmuck to go overdose on a bag of closeted, conservative gimp dicks.
mgfarrelly

I’m not an Atheist and the idea of my government sponsoring a “National Day of Prayer” skeeves me out immensely.

When government becomes involved in matters of religious belief it’s good for neither.

Also, Matthew 6, Verse 5-6

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.”

Quoting the New Testament in support of ending a National Day of Prayer feels very much like WWJD.
- Anonymous
  
  You are the first Christian I’ve ever encountered in my lifetime who showed evidence not only of having read Matt 6, but also understood it. It’s almost enough to make me hopeful that the world isn’t turning and turning in the widening gyre.
- mati
  
  Jeez Louise, a lot of angry people on this comment thread. I just signed in to say I agree, mgfarrelly. I think it should be the job of religious groups to protect themselves FROM government endorsement. And while I totally agree with the aims of every self-described atheist/agnostic/rationalist/Pastafarian on this thread, I don’t think your aims are best served by convincing the fundies that their values system is under attack. That’s exactly what gives power to the Pat Robertsons and James Dobsonses.
Deidzoeb

“At times like this, with a bombing attempt at Times Square” and flooding and disaster, aren’t we all emotional enough right now that you should shut up and do whatever I say? Ugh.
Anonymous

OMG…this is so sweet…and to read the comments…people arguing about praying!
proletariat

That adorably naive little piece of tail is Dave Briggs, co-host of Fox & Friends Weekend.
- Cowicide
  
  That adorably naive little piece of tail is Dave Briggs, co-host of Fox & Friends Weekend.
  
  Give it a few years… and if he gets meaner/moves up the ladder and gets invited to share a bungalo with Bill O’Reilly at the Bohemian Grove… he won’t be so naive after that night. Those innocent eyes will get that knowing devilish sparkle to them.
  - proletariat
    
    Give it a few years… and if he gets meaner/moves up the ladder and gets invited to share a bungalo with Bill O’Reilly at the Bohemian Grove… he won’t be so naive after that night. Those innocent eyes will get that knowing devilish sparkle to them.
    
    ..but ..but ..but I wanted to show him the ways of the secular flesh! :(
Bromius

Also, the announcer AND the onscreen graphic repeatedly get Dan Barker’s organization wrong. It’s not “Freedom For Religion,” it’s “Freedom FROM Religion.” Can that be unintentional?
- Pantograph
  
  I think that “Freedom from religion” is so far outside from the Fox reality tunnel that it didn’t pass the mental filters.
AirPillo

If you need this badly to have the government endorse and coddle your religion, I’d suggest maybe you don’t really have much faith in it, and hearing the government validate it isn’t going to change that you’re having trouble believing in it yourself.

It’s either that or you’re allowing it to be more important to you to feel normal and accepted than to actually pray and worship… and in all of the major religions I do believe that’s called idolatry. God is not going to be pleased with you if it’s this important to you to be seen praying on some national holiday.

Either way, get your own acts together. It’s unendingly childish to go whining to congress or the supreme court every time you have an emotional crisis and want to burden someone else to fix it for you by coddling you and saying “It’s okay, we’re (your religion) too”.

If you pack on weight are you next going to ask congress to make the federal government tell you you’re not fat and look good in your favorite pants? Coddling people’s insecurities is below the office of a government. Go pay a counselor.
ill lich

Seems the Fox News guy’s big mistake is letting his guest talk, he could learn something from Hannity and O’Reilly: when your guest starts to make valid logical points interrupt him with a talking point or some kind of insane hypothetical situation (and if necessary question you guest’s loyalty or morals.)
Anonymous

Its been said before, but this guy, and the judge, is wrong in saying this is a evangelical day. National Day of Prayer, recognizes the big part religion (all religion) plays in the lives of americans. It dosn’t establish a religion, or recognize one religion as better than any other. The closes thing that happens, is it becomes obvious from personal participation that Christians are a majority in the country, but thats not the government favoring their religion. And there is no law saying government has to hide the fact Christians are a majority.
ROSSINDETROIT

Yeah, applying separation of church and state should prevent the government from having an event specifically for religions that pray in public because it excludes religions that don’t. That’s pretty clear. OTOH, a majority of Americans think we should anyway because it lines up with their religion. Good luck getting rid of that then. FTR, I’m an Atheist and as of tomorrow I work for/at a church, which I’m fine with. I’m glad someone’s willing to take this issue on and fight for sanity. Me, I’ll just holler at a brick wall for the same effect.
phillydrifter

Religion = control over people who are afraid to think for themselves.

There is no god. Get over it. How audacious to think that after you die you’re somehow magically whisked away where all the women are hot and have nice firm round supple breasts which squirt booze.

Pull your heads out of the sand and accept your short time on Spaceship Earth.
hybrnM

I am beginning to suspect that many viewers of Fox “News” are perfectly aware of the stark bias represented there.

Both of these sides are being disingenuous for their own good reasons. Evangxs want to add to the line of ways in which xtianity is granted exceptional status by the gummint, with a view to expanding the argument that we are a ‘Christin Nation’ and should thus grant further exceptions. Atheists, who suffer not a whit when put in a position of ignoring this, see the same endgame and wish to deny exceptional status to xtianity lest the Mosaic laws come into hard force in some frightening future.

The idea of granting exceptional status to Christianity withers in the sun when people talk and come to agreement. This is underlined in bright red when one tries to accomodate the views of certain more radical sects. The answer for all concerned is talk. The radicals on both sides will be disarmed by their own.
- Anonymous
  
  How is any of that disingenuous? Both atheists and evangelicals are pretty frank about their positions.
Anonymous

Hahaha, i just love this guy. We can clearly see the “reporter” is trying to get him pissed off but damn does Mr. Barker know his stuff. Cheers!
Anonymous

“Novice level monster”

My vote for freakin’ best Heading for a blog post…of all time.
BlackPanda

In the UK, we’re still technically supposed to have “a daily act of collective worship [of a broadly Christian nature]” forced on children in schools.
Nater

On a slightly off topic note, whats with the racist conservative religionuts hanging around BB these days? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought the target audience was rational people who relied on empirical evidence for their beliefs (that means real things get believed in, everything else falls under the heading of fiction for all the religionists out there) and enjoyed reading about interesting aspects of culture, science and the world at large.

Why do all these people who are so greatly offended by the tone/perspective/content of boingboing keep fracking reading?

Haven’t you got anything better to do but pray (to a fictional character from a poorly edited period drama…) and troll here?
Anonymous

What a sign of the times. The founders of our country were indeed god fearing men. Read a biography on George Washington when you get the chance. This is the exact reason that our country is failing. What do we give our time to? Money, cars, women, houses, gadgets, fancy expensive nonsense?

Whether you believe in god or not, there is a principle that transcends human nature. That is to seek what you speak with your mouth and think in your mind. Is it such a horrible thing that people should get together for a day in which we turn our attention beyond ourselves and to this world in which we live? One of the most selfless acts a human could do.

Many of you promote tolerance, but I have not heard a word of it. Ahh if a group sides with your beliefs then you are with them, but if they do not they need to be stopped. There are some good principles out there, too bad people dont follow them.
- Fett101
  
  “The founders of our country were indeed god fearing men. Read a biography on George Washington”
  
  Founders is plural. George Washington is a single founder. Try reading some of Jefferson and Franklin. (Yes they were Deists not atheists but certainly weren’t at all “god fearing”)
  
  “Is it such a horrible thing that people should get together for a day in which we turn our attention beyond ourselves and to this world in which we live?”
  
  Did you watch the video? No one is saying people are not free to pray when they wish, just don’t do it on government dime and time. The churches could and should organize their own Day or Prayer. There’s no need for the government to get involved. And personally I’d say it’s horrible to just pray instead of rolling up your sleeves and getting to work. Beg someone else to do your work for you is pretty lazy.
  
  “Many of you promote tolerance, but I have not heard a word of it”
  
  Really? I don’t see anyone calling for an immediate ban on all public and private prayer.
- teapot
  
  Is it such a horrible thing that people should get together for a day in which we turn our attention beyond ourselves and to this world in which we live? One of the most selfless acts a human could do.
  
  Yeah, paying respent to an imaginary dude/dudet in the clouds is really focusing our attention on the world. I’m not American but if I was I sure as hell would want my elected officials doing you know, THEIR JOB, instead of pissfarting around in the name of religion. I totally agree with your sentiment, but I don’t see why religion has to be involved for us to “turn our attention beyond ourselves and to this world in which we live”.
  
  Your comment seems very one sided…why is that?
  In the wonderful words of Cowicide, “Could it beeeeeeee? ………………. JESUS?!!!!”
  (i’m so stealing that dude – it has the perfect balance of full stops, question & exclaimation marks)
  
  And how is it selfless? Giving to charity is selfless. Praying to an imaginary figure for redemption/acceptance/to demonstrate your faith….seems kind of selfISH to me.
- Felton
  
  Is it such a horrible thing that people should get together for a day in which we turn our attention beyond ourselves and to this world in which we live?
  
  Maybe you’re thinking of Earth Day.
- Ugly Canuck
  
  Tolerance = governmental inaction.
  Silence betokens consent: nobody – the US Government least of all – is stopping people from privately organizing a day of prayer, are they?
Anonymous

Tank god I’m not religious or I’d be upset over this ruling!
Ugly Canuck

A day!
Bah!
How’s about a whole month?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bourbon_Heritage_Month
OrcOnTheEndOfMyFork

Fox News can be pretty unfair and unbalanced, despite the slogan to the contrary. But, if it were really their intention to always be right, they would:
a) not air a lost argument
b) pick an easier target to defeat, and air that victory instead

I’m not defending Fox News, but it’s doesn’t quite live up to its utter infamy (…yet).

Keep watching now and then, though. As much as it makes your blood boil, it’s a good proving ground to sharpen and hone why you don’t believe the things they preach. That’s democracy at its best.
- chgoliz
  
  Keep watching now and then, though. As much as it makes your blood boil, it’s a good proving ground to sharpen and hone why you don’t believe the things they preach.
  
  I wish that were true. I’ve watched my father go from a *thinking* person who read up on as many sides of an argument as he could, to someone who literally parrots Fox newspeak when he talks to people.
  
  Never underestimate the subliminal power of repetition.
- Cowicide
  
  if it were really their intention to always be right, they would:
  a) not air a lost argument
  
  Then they’d have nothing to air at all.
- teapot
  
  black people do indeed exist and, in fact, have a history.
  
  Nah man its shoop! I can see the pixels. They just colour matched some white folks.
  
  But, if it were really their intention to always be right, they would:
  a) not air a lost argument
  b) pick an easier target to defeat, and air that victory instead
  
  Disagree. (a) Airing ‘lost’ arguments just gives redneck conservatives yet another reason to tow their line… The thought process goes something like “Damn liberal, socialist, communist pig! He makes an irrefutable point, but the newscaster is still disagreeing with him so it must be totally acceptable to dismiss fact when forming opinion or argument – after all, the fox news guy did it.”
  
  (b) and risk becomming even more of a laughing stock? People already widely discredit Fox “News” as the trash it is – it would be silly to make their job easier.
Anonymous

Airpillo wins the thread!!! Give that man two internets.
technosean

I think he showed admirable restraint in the face of Fox news’ overwhelming bias. “Poor” Fox news. In the fullness of time they will be laughed about constantly. And well deserved.
Anonymous

Conservatives want government to get more involved in people’s personal affairs as long as the government agrees with conservatives. Their ideal government is one spying in people’s bedrooms to find sexual perversions, demanding citizenship papers and punishing deviants with compulsory Bible study.
Trent Hawkins

Oh Sky Cake…
Felton

If anyone got introduced at a party with that dick attitude, they’d turn around and walk out the door and tell the schmuck to go overdose on a bag of closeted, conservative gimp dicks.

Love it. :^)
Cowicide

Mark, please write Fox News as Fox “News” in quotes there for greater accuracy.
- Anonymous
  
  This is from Fox News & Friends program, which bills itself as entertainment. Context is always important.
- Anonymous
  
  you mean Faux “news” perhaps?
- Anonymous
  
  Oh dude, that is cleeeeveeeeeer.
snakedart

It can be hard to maintain your street cred in conservative circles when it is revealed on national television that you haven’t read the Constitution. But I wish him the best of luck.
Anonymous

Teller:
The link you have provided in order to back up your claims indicates none of the quotes you have shared with us.
As a matter of fact, these quotes are actually acknowledged in the link near the bottom of the article that leads to…oh shit… FAUX “NEWS”. I guess Fox is really more your speed.
Anonymous

Did you know that he used to be a fundamentalist preacher? This man knows the Bible. Support Dan’s book! http://www.amazon.com/Godless-Evangelical-Preacher-Americas-Atheists/dp/1569756775
Random_Tangent

I really didn’t expect him to go with “Hey, I bet you hate Christmas, too, don’t you? Why do you hate Christmas and children and the flag, huh?” line of questioning.
- Cowicide
  
  Well, he’s still learning. He’s only a novice level monster. Put him in there with a master level monster like O’Reilly and it would have been a different story.
  - Anonymous
    
    lol. O’Reilly would’ve just talked over him the whole time and wouldn’t have let him string more than a word or two together. It’s the only way he knows to control a conversation.
  - Cowicide
    
    Well, he’s still learning. He’s only a novice level monster. Put him in there with a master level monster like O’Reilly and it would have been a different story.
    
    I made no fricken sense there. I misunderstood what Random_Tangent was saying. I blame Satan for this mistake.
Xenu

Oh dear…
Anonymous

Is the orange cross to Mr. Barker’s right a coincidence?
- HDN
  
  The orange “cross” to Barker’s right looks like a construction tower crane to me.
Raymee

Huge fail for the Faux News helmet hair. He will likely be shunned by his fellow conservatives:

http://gocomics.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c5f3053ef013480712c11970c-pi
- Cowicide
  
  Awesome cartoon. Best I’ve seen all year so far. Thanks for the link!
Anonymous

I love how evangelicals feel the need to have their rituals be validated by the “evil socialist guvernment”
redesigned

Faux News didn’t stand a chance, the other guy was using something called logic and common sense. He actually had real points with things called facts and information to back them up.

No one is saying people are not free to pray when they wish. I have no idea why these people want government interfering in their religion…validation perhaps? Seems like a bad idea if you know your history.

To those suggesting making it a day of prayer for all religions: That is a very christian centric solution to the issue. Let me remind you that:
A) Not all religions pray or have prayer.
B) Not all people believe in a religion.
C) These same ignorant whiners would be storming washington if they made a national day of meditation or a national day of taking peyote/ayahuasca or a national day of chanting hari krishna or any non christian prayer.
Daedalus

Um, is it just me, or was this a local FOX affiliate, and not the cable juggernaut of inanity that is FOX NEWS?

Maybe I’m missing the big spinning logo or something…

Anyway, it’s good that the reporter allowed Barker to actually argue his counterpoint, rather than choosing from the O’Riley school of “assign a position, and debate the assignation.” It’s a little preachy, but he’s probably speaking for a lot of viewers, so it was amazing to see Barker clearly and persuasively illustrate his points. Maybe a few watchers questioned their own persecution complex there.

Win for freedom of religion!
Anonymous

Anchor got owned! Ouch… Idiot…
wrybread

A truly beautiful drubbing from Dan Barker, but alas, like so many things related to Fox Ruse, this scares the hell out of me. It scares me because its so remarkable that the patsy won for once.
CCSurfer

This was a pretty weak argument on both sides.

One of Barker’s objections was that the existence of a government-sponsored “National Day of Prayer” makes those whom disagree feel like “political outsiders.”

What, exactly, would a system under which there are no “political outsiders” look like? How is this a practical or desirable ideal toward which to strive?

Also, how did Billy Graham “force” congress to urge the president toward the establishment of a “National Day of Prayer?”
- Anonymous
  
  Please read Federalist 10. It will answer your first question.
- Mark Frauenfelder
  
  “One of Barker’s objections was that the existence of a government-sponsored ‘National Day of Prayer’ makes those whom disagree feel like ‘political outsiders.’”
  
  Government neutrality in religion means no one is an outsider. People are free to pray or not to pray on any day of the year without having the government set a day aside to recognize it as a voluntary day of prayer.
  - CCSurfer
    
    Yes, I understand the notion of a government operating from within a religious vacuum, but that wasn’t the point.
    
    My point was that using the “some people feel like outsiders” argument is a slippery slope. Eliminating one “National Day Of ‘X’ on those grounds leads, naturally,to the elimination of all of them. If we validate that that premise, things like Black History Month could be eliminated on the same grounds.
    
    That particular premise was misguided and did nothing to strengthen his argument.
    - Cowicide
      
      Eliminating one “National Day Of ‘X’ on those grounds leads, naturally,to the elimination of all of them.
      
      No, it doesn’t. You should rewatch and listen to what he says. It’s in the context of religion. He also mentions that it’s a good idea to read what the justice said.
      
      Try that too.
    - Ugly Canuck
      
      I have heard it said that Nature abhors a vacuum.
      But what is this “religious vacuum” of which you speak?
      Does it suck?
      Does it suck well?
      Is there room in its bag for the whole government and its operations? Really?
      Al;l of our governments?
      
      You sure you don’t mean “moral vacuum”, rather than “religious vacuum”?
      I mean, some people do or have done or would do the most immoral things imaginable in the name of their religion.
      And people and thus Governments can be very savagely immoral without religion ever coming up at all. At all.
    - Ugly Canuck
      
      And as to yer main arg, there is something special about religion. I feel sure that you would agree.
      It just happens that its uniqueness operates to disqualify it and its practices and beliefs from recieving any governmental sanction at all, no matter how indirect.
      In the USA, the values of Society to be manifested in its Laws and institutions are up for discussion amongst all of the people, and not simply to be dictated by Priests and other religious fanatics.
    - proletariat
      
      If we validate that that premise, things like Black History Month could be eliminated on the same grounds.
      
      Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m fairly certain that everyone can agree that black people do indeed exist and, in fact, have a history.
      - chgoliz
        
        Not everyone agrees that Blacks have a history worth studying. Still.
      - donniebnyc
        
        I’m curious about the reading list your father used to teach you that “Not everyone agrees that Blacks have a history worth studying.” I’m going to guess that it wasn’t too hard for Fox to change him, or you.
        
        PS. Capitalizing the “B” in “Blacks” doesn’t make your statement’s true meaning invisible.
      - chgoliz
        
        Reading comprehension fail.
        
        Read the original post, read my response. Would a bigot end with the single word “still”? And WTF about my father? You have serious comprehension issues.
        
        What does it say about you, that you assumed a woman of color needs to be corrected on issues of race by a white boy?
      - donniebnyc
        
        I admit I misunderstood your response to the original post, but in my defense the word “still” doesn’t indicate your meaning as clearly as you think it does. I guess you would call this a writing precision fail.
        
        Unless there are two users called chgoliz you wrote: “I’ve watched my father go from a *thinking* person who read up on as many sides of an argument as he could…” I guess you would call this a remember what I wrote in the previous comment fail.
        
        You rightly took offense at being called a racist, but in what universe was I supposed to know you are a woman of color? And exactly how did you know I am a “white boy”? I guess you would call this either a don’t make assumptions fail, or a try not to stalk people on the internet fail.
        
        And for the record, I prefer being called a man.
      - chgoliz
        
        What makes you assume someone who emphasized thinking and researching in his prime, then horrifyingly did a 180 and became a Faux News idiot in his old age, was giving me racist things to read when I was growing up? Oh, that’s right: it was part of your ASSUMPTION based on not having read the original post to see how my response fit with it.
        
        Fruit of the poison tree.
  - kc0bbq
    
    “Government neutrality in religion means no one is an outsider.”
    
    This isn’t entirely true. The Establishment Clause makes it so that Congress can’t start their own religion (e.g. The Church of England) and can’t promote one religion over another. (And since 1947 the states can’t, either.) There is no requirement that Congress must pretend that religion doesn’t exist or that they can’t have a generic ‘Day of Prayer’ or anything that is a recommendation and not a command.
    
    There’s just as much requirement to *not* prevent people from carrying out their religions. That leads to rastamen being stuck in solitary because they won’t cut their dreads or prohibiting a bunch of old people from praying before they eat because federal funding subsidizing the meal means prayer is verboten. Telling people they can’t is pretty much the same as telling people they must.
    - oohShiny
      
      “There is no requirement that Congress must pretend that religion doesn’t exist or that they can’t have a generic ‘Day of Prayer’ or anything that is a recommendation and not a command.”
      
      The problem with a National Day of Prayer isn’t as much that it implicitly endorses one kind of religion over another, which it does, but rather that it is an explicit endorsement of religion over no religion.
      
      I mean really, how would people react to a National Day of No Prayer? It’s not a command, sure. But it’d be one hell of an endorsement of atheism. How do you think that would sit?
    - Ugly Canuck
      
      “can’t on the government’s dime”.
      Fixed that for you.
      Government support for religious expression = prescription of that religion by implication.
      Seems clear to me.
      - teapot
        
        Government support for religious expression = prescription of that religion by implication.
        
        A beautiful summary.
        
        How about exchanging the national day of prayer for a national day of inebriation? I’m down for that.
        
        Fox “News”. Fair and balanced comedy.
  - Teller
    
    Gov’t neutrality, Pelosi-style:
    
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday urged Catholic leaders to “instruct” their parishioners to support immigration reforms, saying clerics should “play a very major role” in supporting Democratic policies.
    
    “The cardinals, the archbishops, the bishops that come to me and say, ‘We want you to pass immigration reform,’ and I said, ‘I want you to speak about it from the pulpit…”
    - Ugly Canuck
      
      Amen, Teller.
      
      Heaven forbid that the elected Government should be involved in politics!!
    - Cowicide
      
      She said that crap? I guess she’s just trying to fight fire with fire, but that still stinks to high heaven.
    - jacques45
      
      Sorry, I know the thread’s nearly dead, but I’m not letting that one fly. Can you state your source, outside of fox news (and apparently fuckfrance.com and some other rather extremist blogs, according to google). Because honestly, I see Fox News, and a bunch of blogs who copied their post verbatim (as you did), and nothing else. I don’t normally trust the press on either side, but if your only source is fox, you lose.
      - Teller
        
        How’s USA Today? More your speed?
        
        http://content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2010/05/immigration-reform-nancy-pelosi-catholic-nuns/1
      - jacques45
        
        I still don’t see the quotes about “instructing” their followers to do anything. And this was at a conference of “social justice Catholics” (aren’t those the ones Glenn Beck hates?), not exactly her informing the Vatican what their policy should be.
        While I don’t agree with the tenants of her religion (Catholic), if she wants to say her opinion is guided by her religion, that’s no different than any other politician, left or right. Now, if the churches take that as a cue and tell their parishoners that they need to vote Dem to fix the immigration policies, they deserve to lose their tax-free status.
      - Teller
        
        My instructions were to provide you a source of Pelosi’s remarks other than Fox News. Glad I could help.
- Cowicide
  
  This was a pretty weak argument on both sides.
  
  If both sides are pretty weak, why are you focusing all of your obvious angst against the atheist… and only the atheist…. hrmmmm?
  
  Could it beeeeeeee? ………………. JESUS?!!!!
  - CCSurfer
    
    Oh, please. The deficiencies on the part of Fox News’ analysts go without saying. I didn’t pose any questions about that side of the discussion because nothing thought-provoking was offered.
    
    And, I’m curious. Which part of my comment smacked of “angst?”
    - Cowicide
      
      And, I’m curious. Which part of my comment smacked of “angst?”
      
      The part from the first word to the last word pretty much.
      - CCSurfer
        
        Well, then, I beg you, please try to ignore any perceived anxiety or worry on my part and answer one of my questions.
      - Cowicide
        
        Well, then, I beg you, please try to ignore any perceived anxiety or worry on my part and answer one of my questions.
        
        You had real questions? I’m sorry, I thought you were just espousing your beliefs in the form of questions. You seem to already know the answers anyway, amirite?
      - CCSurfer
        
        Thanks for the link, and I forgive your presupposition.
Cowicide

How audacious to think that after you die you’re somehow magically whisked away where all the women are hot and have nice firm round supple breasts which squirt booze.

Which religion is that? I’m joining it to cover all bases when I die.
Anonymous

young reporter/journalist fails to use weak religious “spin tactic” arguments against a better-educated man. i love it. *thumbs up: i like it*
Dan

It still baffles me that anyone would waste their time with Fox. You’re certainly not going to change the brainwashed minds of their viewers, and you sure as hell aren’t going to convince the self-serving, opportunistic nits asking the questions since, as I’m sure, many already realize the ridiculousness of their assertions and are just saying whatever they need to appease the sponsors.

Fox is not news. Fox is fear-based, exploitative entertainment that capitalizes on (and most times creates) distinct ideological differences so as to make a buck.