"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother"
The Birmingham News
On his inauguration day! He flat out said he discriminates. Now of course afterward he said he didn't mean to insult anyone. Well what the hell did he think it would mean to those who aren't christian. Its obvious he is either an idiot, or he slipped. Slipped by in letting it known that his christian biased discrimination exists. There are many implications which reaches out to touch many different people.
Bill Nigut, regional director for the Anti-Defamation League said this
"His comments are not only offensive, but also raise serious questions as to whether non-Christians can expect to receive equal treatment during his tenure as governor"
The Birmingham News
This problem is exactly the kind of attitude that non-believers have had to face for centuries from religion. This "you aren't a believer therefore you are not my equal" stance has been the catalyst for many religious atrocities throughout history, like the Crusades, the Holocaust, 9/11 and many others. This is the exact reason MOST atheists are anti-religious, it screams of anti-social behavior, and sets a precedence in followers for a discriminatory nature in this case toward non-Christians.
When are we going to be able to elect people who have humanism as their moral compass not a mystic being of indeterminate nature or some holy book of fables? When are we going to be free of religious discrimination being in control in this country. When are we going to be free of the BLATANT ignorance of these blind followers?
We live in a country where 48% of the population say they will NOT vote for a non-believer because of the discriminatory nature of religion as a whole. Openly atheist people in this country flat out have no chance to gain elected office in this country to affect change for humanistic values, NONE. When presented this argument every christian I have ever talked to ultimately says its because they,
"cannot in good conscious vote for someone they feel has no moral compass and ultimately has no one to answer for abiding their decisions"
When I point out that we do have a moral compass, and that we have to answer to our fellow human being they state the,
"institutions of man are fallible and therefore cannot be trusted to mediate justice"
They then point toward the history of corrupt politicians and how they have avoided prosecution, because these are mans institution but they will answer to god in the end. What a cope out, you have negated the fact that these instutions were/are instituted, run and perpetuated by? The Religious, faithful believers that in the end THEY had to face judgment of a court much higher than man's. Where is the religious moral imperative in these current cases? Fallible.
Religion is not the be all end all truth is proclaims to be because plain and simply,
Because it is an ancient institute of MAN and therefore fallible.