=========
JASON -- It sounds like you took everything I said very personally bro. I have nothing at all against you, but I will respond. :unsure:
=========
TOCK-- Not at all . . . I guess it just seems that way, as I have a tendency to be a bit *too* thorough when making a point. Nah, I'm pretty much used to everyday xxxx nowadays, but still get riled over gov't or orher big organization's bullying
=========
JASON--There were also websites that said 1982. The 1987 could have been a typo, I agree with that, but there are still 2 different years out there, therefore there is still no definite proof of the quote. I can also see Dallas cutting the story because he is a Texas boy, but the internet reaches organizations worldwide. No actual media organization website has shown this quote. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying that there is lack of proof of it.
========
TOCK--Huh. Ok . . . I'm sure that if we were to trudge through the video files of CBS or whoever, we'd find the tapes. My guess is if this issue ever comes to the national front burner, yah, we'll see the tape. But if you won't be convinced until you see the actual footage, that's cool. There's lots of things I won't beleive either until I actually see it.
========
JASON -- Personally I'm not uncomfortable if you are atheist or gay. You have the same rights as an American as I do. I honestly do not believe any person running for office has been told they cannot run for office because they are atheist. I understand that is a law on the books, but I want you to find me an example of someone this happened to. There are laws that were done decades ago that are no longer enforced. I can find examples in every state of laws that were made and are not enforced. Let's take Texas since we were talking about it.
---s n i p ---
Don't get so worked up over old laws. I am sure that if you ran for office they would not tell you that you are not allowed to run. I wouldn't even imagine the question coming up during your campaigning.
=======
TOCK-- Check it out--it's been a problem in South Carolina :
www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=2477
Atheist Sues To Become Notary Public Without Swearing To God
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (CWN) - An avowed atheist went before the South
Carolina Supreme Court today arguing that he should be allowed to be made a notary public despite his unbelief.
The South Carolina constitution requires that all public officers must acknowledge the existence of God, but the state said Herb Silverman's application was refused because of technicalities.
.... and in Arizona:
www.aztriad.com/dl051100.html
(an excerpt) The Notary Public may need to place someone under oath, and is advised that the person may 'swear or affirm' their oath, the difference being as follows.
"For an oath, the person is swearing to a supreme being. For a member of one of the Christian religions, the person would swear to God. For a member of a different religion, the person would swear to whatever supreme being was recognized by that religion. If the individual does not believe in a supreme being or doesn't want to swear to a supreme being, the person makes an affirmation. The person being placed under oath must make the decision about which type is appropriate."
However, when Julia herself purchased the bond that allowed her to become a notary public, she was not allowed the choice between affirmation or swearing. She had to swear, using the words, "so help me God.". She felt troubled about it, as she is not to lie, and yet to get the bond, she had no choice, but to lie.
-----------
Here's two recent examples. These are only to low-level official offices, Notary Public, where states require you to take a God oath. But in states where it's in the state constitution, if anyone is elected to any office, school board, dog catcher, etc, all it takes is just for one partisan person in the opposing party to point out they hadn't taken their God oath, and they'd have to either give in, or quit . . . unless they wanted to spend the mega-bucks it would take to pursue such a case all the way to the state supreme court. I have an atheist pal who's been running for local Justice of the Peace without much luck, but with the local decline in republican strength, his time will come in another 10 years or so. And then he's prepared to weather a challenge to his right to hold office from the Republicans on the god-oath issue, and he's prepared to spend the $40,000 out of his own pocket it'll take to pursue the issue to the state supreme court. And there's no reason for that nonsense in the first place . . . the Rule, by simply being in the State Constitution, intimidates people from pursuing elected office, because they don't want to have to pay needless mega-$$$ to have their religious beleifs dragged through the newspapers. Those rules have no place in a democracy, they were put in place by politicians who aparrantly did not appreciate the benefits of keeping religion and politics seperate, and they are left in place by politicians who are too afraid and cowardly to mess with the whole issue.
So, though those anti-atheist rules seem like they are never enforced, they still have their effect, much as the old sodomy laws had their effect by justifing employment discrimination and other abuse against gays and lesbians. IMHO, they need to come down.
===================
Jason wrote-- The government blows a ton of money on things that are ridiculous. I will be the first to admit it. Is it something to yawn about? Of course not, but no one is doing anything about it. $168,000 is a ton of money. I'd love to be the one getting that kind of money, but I also wish that the ones that are serving as a chaplain volunteered their time. I don't know what job they do whenever they are not praying. I would imagine for them to have secretaries, they do more than make a couple of appearance a month. Neither of us have the entire story in order to make a fair judgement.
--------
Lol . . . I got the address of both the Senate and House chaplains several years ago, wrote both of them a letter asking them what they did all day long. Both said that their official duty was to do an opening prayer each day the Senate or Congress was in session. That was it. But they also make themselves available whenever a Senator or Congressman wants to "bend and ear." This is what they said that they do. Pray and chat. You can confirm this yourself, just send a similar note to the House Chaplain at the US House of Representatives in Washington DC, and another to Senate Chaplain, at the US Senate in Wash DC. No need to take my word for it.
But my gripe with this is, if they really need a religious ear to bend, Washington DC and its suburbs are chock full of churches and clergy willing to do the same thing for free . . . and really, it would probably be best if they went to their own clergyman at home, someone they've known a while, to get their advice. Yah, and saved taxpayers some $$$. And not got into the business of using gov't $$$ to provide religious advice to politicians (another bad road to go down). Besides, both chaplains are protestant, not all the politicans are . . . so between the ones they won't help, and the moral scumbags who won't go to clergy for guidance, I can't imagine they have enough to keep themselves busy to justify their fat paychecks.
====================
Jason said--
Personally I feel that you have every civil right that I have, but you are more than welcome to try and prove me wrong. Now we are going to be way off topic with this statement. I feel there is more discrimation in regards to color of skin or gender. I am caucasian and male, but I still feel that there are certain races and females do not always get the same civil rights, and it is very unfortunate.
----
Tock replied--
Yah, being both gay and atheist, we could say that I've got every civil right you have, but some of 'em I don't really get . . . at least, not without putting up a big fight to keep 'em.
. When I got out of the USAF back in 1977, I had considered getting a job with the Dallas Police Dept in the K-9 section, because that's what I did in the military. I found out pretty quick, though, that the DPD did not hire gay people. It was official, written policy. I knew a few Dallas cops who were gay, and they kept their job because they stayed closeted, put up with faggot jokes and stuff like that. Well, there was no way I was going to work anyplace where I had to be a closet case.
After 10 or 15 years, a few folks got the backing of the local and state gay organizations and sued the city over its policy, and the city finally had to back down. But the straight cops made life for the openly gay cops hell for the first few years, then things died down some, now prejudice agains gays is about as bad as it is for blacks. It's a pile of needless stupid crap, I wasn't going to put up with it back then, and I sure as hell ain't gonna put up with it now (BTW-I'm planning on opening my own barber shop sometime next year, and God help anyone who sits in my chair and tells a faggot joke--they're likely gonna get 265 lbs of pissed off faggot to land on them and make 'em fly out the front window, especially if I'm doing Fina at the time).
Anyway . . . I ended up working for a big multinational semiconductor company, and I had to put up with a lot of bs for being gay . . . One funny occasion--I had just transferred from one building to another, and a guy was showing me the ropes of the new job. A guy I knew-a real flaming gay type-floated down the hallway. The guy looked at me across his desk and said, "You know, I just can't stand queers." Surprised, I looked at him and said, "How do you know that guy is gay?" He looked at me and said, "Oh, I can tell a queer from a mile away!" It took an awful lot for me to both keep from laughing and to keep from bopping him on the head for stupidity. But I figured if I was gonna learn the job, I was gonna have to play "straight guy" for him, so I did.
And it was downhill from there . . . I had transferred into a hotbed of "good ol' Texas boys" who I would characterize as being somewhat socially unenlightened. I put up with various crap and transferred back out of there.
Since then, the company has established policies against gay harrassment, but back then, it was considered an acceptable form of entertainment.
. Let's see, civil rights . . . seems to me that civil rights would include the government selecting its employees on the basis of ability, and not sexual orientation. And that should include the military.
. When I was in the USAF, the other guys in the barracks didn't give a rats ass if I was gay. The other guys in the police squadron didn't care. My boss was gay (although closeted). No one really cared. But when they found out about me (long story) they said I had to go "For the morale of the troops." Here recently the military has been complaining because they don't have enough arabic translators--it's supposiedly having a serious negative effect on what they're trying to do over there . . . well, they recently kicked 4 of 'em out of the military for no other reason than because they were gay. They kick out an average of 1000 people a year for no other reason than for being gay. A few years ago the Army gave the "Soldier Of The Year" award to some guy, then during an interview he told the media that he happened to be gay. Of course, the embarrassed Army kicked him out, too.
As things stand now, you can be gay and in the FBI, CIA, and various other secret investigating organizations, hold the highest security clearances, but not join the military.
. As a consequence, you know all those teenagers getting out of school who want to go someplace where they can get a good gov't scholarship for serving 4 years in misery? Yah, well, straight kids can do that, but not gay kids, for no other reason than that they're gay. For no other reason than to satisfy the ignorant prejudice of some feeble-minded out-of-touch idiots running the Defense department . . .
Basically, that's all all of this BS is, be it either religious or gay prejudice, it's just all BS. I still get riled over it, probalby always will. Probably will always be outspoken on the issue, too. At 47, 265+ lbs, and on Fina, I ain't inclined to put up with too much BS. So you'll probalby see future rants on this topic from time to time, probably focusing on the injustice of the situation rather than descend into name-calling and mud-throwing. But yah, I've seen plenty of anti-gay and anti-atheist crap over the years, and have no illusions that a cure is anywhere in sight. Releif, maybe, but no cure.
==============
Jason wrote--
Again, I will reiterate. I'm not sure if I pissed you off or not, but I have nothing but love for you bro. You are entitled to your opinions just like I am. I honesty can't recall any time that I have ever bashed someone because of their beliefs, and that's not going to change.
