Open Thread: Kay's new ads

Via Binker, via Twitter.

Second ad after the break.

Not as hard hitting as I would like to see, but perhaps taking pages from the Obama play book.

Comments

Play book

After watching campaigns more closely this year than ever in my life, I've come to the realization that they are probably the best indicator possible of how someone would actually carry out their responsibilities.

Kay has run an excellent campaign, winning strong support even from people like me who weren't onboard at the start. Dole's campaign has been a fetid feast of lies.

Obama's campaign, as everyone knows, has been masterful. McCain's = chaotic and hate-filled.

McCrory's campaign has been one ugly stream of pathetic whining. Perdue has focused on issues.

Pittenger has said nothing positive about himself whatsoever. Dalton has been invisible.

What we see is what we will get from whomever is elected. The Republican Party has shown itself to be bereft of decency and integrity.
_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

"fetid feasts" and "cut from rotten wood" and "rotten blocks"

Your'e so right! You make such a sensible point, yet it can be easy to overlook during the fever of an election. One really can draw conclusions about the personal integrity of a candidate based on their campaign.

Leigh
http://smuttome.blogspot.com/

"Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war." - John McCain

It's not hard hitting

It's not hard hitting enough. I hope she cuts another one that challenges Doles integrate directly for the ad.

I'm a moderate Democrat.

Here's another one

THAT is what I was hoping for.

Kay, you got my vote yesterday, now you have my support. I don't care if you are a Christian or not, but you came out swinging. That's what I'm looking for in my Democrats.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Great Response

The ad does a great job of showing enough anger, but also showing the type of Senator Kay would make. She obviously is not gonna put up with any nonsense from Republicans in DC.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Always leave 'em wanting more

I know she only had 30 seconds, but something about "I'll represent ALL North Carolinians, of any faith or none" would have been nice.

For bonus points, she could have thrown in something like: "Senator Dole, what thou doest to the least of these, thou doest to me. As a Christian, I can do no less than to stand up for all North Carolinians, even those without religious faith whom you see fit to slander."

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Not during the election

Branden, you idealistic guy you, it's certainly true that we want our public servants to stand up for all constituents, whether they are believers or not, but what we don't want during an election is for Hagan to feed the fire Dole is trying to start by addressing the issue Dole wants people to think about.

Dole wants people to think about Hagan being Godless. That's what people would continue to think about if Hagan were to address the concept of first amendment freedoms instead of attacking the fact that this is just an outright lie and misrepresentation.

THAT is the message -- that Dole stooped to lying and did so while thumping a Bible. Nothing worse than that kind of hypocrisy, and THAT is the point that you want folks to focus on.

I agree with you again

This is about dole calling hagan godless. She isn't. For her to turn that into a fight to protect the godless would be a really bad idea.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Not that there's anything WRONG with that...

I think we'll have made some progress in this country when calling someone godless isn't any more of an insult than calling them Chinese.

Sometimes it's accurate, sometimes it isn't, and in either case, is anyone supposed to have a problem with that?

Remember when when Time or Newsweek (I don't remember which) blacked up O. J. Simpson's mug shot on their cover? Or when the Republicans darkened images of an Indian-American Democrat running for Congress?

Hey, they blackened folks up. Wait, is making someone look black supposed to be a bad thing? Well, no, we can't say that and maintain the respect of our peers anymore, and for good reason. We're poised to deal a potentially crippling blow to race prejudice in America, by elevating someone with moderately dark skin to the highest office in the land.

But describing someone as godless, yeah, it's still safe to piss on THOSE fuckers.

Yeah, I know that's reality. What I am wondering is what Democrats like Kay Hagan will do to CHANGE that reality. As a person whose Christianity is beyond reproach (except by desperate, dissembling politicians—quelle surprise), and as a member of a party which claims to stand up for the downtrodden, as a U.S. Senator she will bear the noblesse oblige to help eradicate prejudice against the faithless.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Maybe we are leaning that way

After all, it seems like the evangelicals are splitting with the republican neoconservatives. There will come a time where religion is not quite as important. But, no time soon.

I think a person stands a much better chance being elected in NC as a muslim than as an atheist.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Guilt by association

Guilt by association is a funny thing.

How many people would Muslims/Jews/Christians have to kill in acts of terrorism before a random politician of each of those faiths would be regarded as equally distasteful to elect as an atheist?

I'm just wondering how much brutal slaughter one's co-religionists get before it starts to actually cost them, and as a corollary how deep a hole an atheist starts in.

(Wingnuts usually dredge up Chairman Mao and Josef Stalin at this point, but people were killed under their regimes in the name of Communism, not atheism per se. One doesn't imply the other--there are capitalist atheists and Christian communists, for example. In fact, as I recall, the gentleman who authored the Pledge of Allegiance in the late 19th Century fit the latter description. And, as we all should know, when he wrote it and for ~75 years afterwards, the words "under God" weren't in it.)

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

I think atheists get a bad rap.

For some reason, people tend to equate atheist with amoral or with anarchist. There were certainly founding fathers who were atheists. Likewise, I think there are a lot of Christians who really don't believe the whole line. How many Catholics really think they are drinking blood when they take communion? How many consider the wafer REALLY a bite out of Jesus' flesh? How many Protestants REALLY believe that every Jew is going to hell?

I think atheists would be better off if they were relabeled as rationalists or naturalists. Folks who think the world exists without the influence of a higher power, but who generally agree that no one knows what came before the big bang. That is where faith begins.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Baptists

How many Baptists really believe that every Jew is going to hell? 100% of them.
_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Really? Do you think Elizabeth Edwards believes that?

I think she's a Baptist.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

If she's a Baptist, she has to believe it

If you're a Baptist, you know that the only way to get to heaven (and avoid hell) is to accept Jesus Christ as your savior and believe that He is the son of God, sent to earth to save us from our sins.

That is the ONLY way. If you don't believe that, you go directly to hell. Period.

Jews don't believe God sent his only begotten son to earth to save us from our sins. Jews therefore cannot be saved - unless they get a religion transplant.

_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Not Baptist

John Edwards was raised a Baptist but the Edwards worship in the Methodist Church so my guess is Elizabeth was raised a Methodist.

Absolutely untrue

There is wide, wide, wide diversity of opinion within the Baptist church.

Are you a Baptist?

If you are, then you know that "opinion" doesn't matter one bit in the face of what the Bible says. The Bible is very clear that the only path to redemption is to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as the son of God and your personal savior. There is no other way. Period.

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

But don't take my word for it

Paul said, "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). But there is no salvation except by grace through faith in Christ.

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved" (Acts 16:31).

Paul said to the Galatians, "Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:26).

Peter said, "Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Right, but supposedly

something like 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel will "see the light" in the final days and convert to Christianity. So I guess you're still correct that becoming a Christian is the only way according to Baptists, but that's 144,000 Jews that "make the cut", as it were.

Bigotry

What we see here is exactly the kind of bigotry being fomented (complete with citation to the Bible) that so many here would be so quick to object to were the word "Muslim" substituted for Baptist.

There is wide, wide, wide diversity in the Baptist church as to how scriptures are interpreted. This diversity of opinion applies to what was meant by "redemption," what was meant by "God," what "Hell" means and what an individual's relationship to his neighbor means.

But you'll still have people making pronouncements about what an entire faith stands for or against. They do it to Muslims and you're doing it to Baptists. Same disrespect to people of faith, same arrogance of assertion, and same disservice to unwary readers.

Are you a Baptist?

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? There is no debate in the Baptist church about the requirement to believe that Jesus is the Son of God, come to earth to save us from our sins. Jesus himself said he is the only way.

This isn't bigotry, it is doctrine.

Show me a Baptist denomination that doesn't accept that fundamental truth. I would love to be disabused of the thirty years of religious training I have experienced.
_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Nope, I'm just extremely well informed (it's a burden)

Can't help what passed for your religious training, James. You're doing exactly to Baptists what people do to Muslims by citing specific scriptures and what would seem to be an absolutely fixed interpretation. But in fact, Baptists have traditionally (going back to colonial and antebellum days) been among the most diverse of congregations.

Again, Baptists disagree about Hell, Baptists disagree about Heaven, Baptists disagree about what it means to accept Jesus as the Son of God, Baptists disagree about redemption; in fact Baptists disagree about quite a lot. The hardening of doctrine that occured in the Southern Baptist churches just prior to and certainly following the Civil War is what most people think of when they think of Baptists, but it's a bit of a bum rap.

Despite the increased strength of the Southern Baptist Conference in insisting upon specific interpretations of, for example, God's perspective toward homosexuality, even southern Baptist congregations retain diversity from church to church. Every now and then one of 'em gets kicked out for it and then others will protest at the hard right direction the conference has taken and how it has been taken over by a bunch of reactionaries. The fact remains that diversity is part of that church's oldest tradition. The northern Baptist churches aren't having this problem.

But do go on. Again, it's exactly lke folks who denouncing Muslims, thumping at passages from the Quran and declaring that all Muslims believe in this or that (without acknowledging that they don't agree on how to interpret the meaning of those same passages).

It's always amusing to see people who call themselves liberal indulging in the same tactics they denounce in others. You wouldn't think about denouncing Muslims the way you are denouncing Baptists, but for some reason think it's perfectly acceptable to speak of one in a manner that you would deplore if applied to the other.

You are wrong on the core question

Talking about homosexuality, etc., is irrelevant to the issue of salvation.
_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

That was an example to help you, dear

I was citing that argument as an example of how the Southern Baptist Conference has begun to bully its member churches on questions that each used to be permitted to resolve by itself.

Pay attention to the point.

Nope, I'm just extremely well informed (it's a burden)

Can't help what passed for your religious training, James. You're doing exactly to Baptists what people do to Muslims by citing specific scriptures and what would seem to be an absolutely fixed interpretation. But in fact, Baptists have traditionally (going back to colonial and antebellum days) been among the most diverse of congregations.

Again, Baptists disagree about Hell, Baptists disagree about Heaven, Baptists disagree about what it means to accept Jesus as the Son of God, Baptists disagree about redemption; in fact Baptists disagree about quite a lot. The hardening of doctrine that occured in the Southern Baptist churches just prior to and certainly following the Civil War is what most people think of when they think of Baptists, but it's a bit of a bum rap.

Despite the increased strength of the Southern Baptist Conference in insisting upon specific interpretations of, for example, God's perspective toward homosexuality, even southern Baptist congregations retain diversity from church to church. Every now and then one of 'em gets kicked out for it and then others will protest at the hard right direction the conference has taken and how it has been taken over by a bunch of reactionaries. The fact remains that diversity is part of that church's oldest tradition. The northern Baptist churches aren't having this problem.

But do go on. Again, it's exactly lke folks who denouncing Muslims, thumping at passages from the Quran and declaring that all Muslims believe in this or that (without acknowledging that they don't agree on how to interpret the meaning of those same passages).

It's always amusing to see people who call themselves liberal indulging in the same tactics they denounce in others. You wouldn't think about denouncing Muslims the way you are denouncing Baptists, but for some reason think it's perfectly acceptable to speak of one in a manner that you would deplore if applied to the other.

It also cracks me up when you ask if I know what I'm talking about. Yes, James, I do. Ya oughtter have figured that out by now.

Wrong. Both times.

I keep asking you if you know what you're talking about because I've found you to be full of bulloney at least half the time. This is one of those times.

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong

Ya ain't never found me to be full of baloney or bulloney. I know exactly what I'm talking about on this particular topic, you just got busted for being a danged hypocrite, and you can't stand it.

The core issue, whether one accepts Christ as the Son of God and personal saviour, is core to ALL Christian churches, not just Baptist. HOWEVER, what it MEANS to accept Christ, what it MEANS to regard him as Son of God, what HELL Is and what HEAVEN is are the subject of wide and very different interpretations, not just throughout Christendom (love that term), but within the Baptist Church. In fact, I'm tempted to say PARTICULARY the Baptist Church because its history of diversity is so strong.

Talk to a few theologians or read a few texts on religion in this country. You'll feel better (and learn something).

The core issue, whether one

The core issue, whether one accepts Christ as the Son of God and personal saviour, is core to ALL Christian churches, not just Baptist. HOWEVER, what it MEANS to accept Christ, what it MEANS to regard him as Son of God, what HELL Is and what HEAVEN is are the subject of wide and very different interpretations,

You mean, mindless superstitions? That's the core of all beliefs.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Now now now

I wouldn't say that. While I am not a believer, I have a great deal of respect for many, many individuals who are, and who are not in any sense "mindless."

Some of the most intelligent people I have had the privilege to know are people of faith.

I would say that. Because

I would say that. Because if an intelligent person believes in the Great Pumpkin or that orbs on digital photos are ghosts that is not enough evidence to justify the belief as valid. This line of reasoning is an appeal to authority and a fallacy in logic. You need to read up on logical fallacies.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Well, of COURSE you would say that

but then your name is "Calamitous Umbrage." One should expect nothing less!

I know all about logical fallacies. But if you honestly believe that intelligent thought is limited to that which can be fit within logical constructs, you have what I would consider a limited appreciation of human intellect.

My experience with people of various beliefs and levels of intelligence has led me to conclude that neither possession of religious faith nor lack of such faith is a reliable indicator of a person's intelligence (or even capacity for reason).

Whatever you think of the faculty some people have for accomodating an illogical belief to their world view, surely you have encountered people of faith whom you believed to be intelligent. No?

Exactly is why thinking

Exactly is why thinking logically a "limited appreciation of human intellect?" Explain. What's gained by sloppy thinking? Further, what is gained by indulging a person's pet belief and elevating it to a national obsession? I'll give you a few things we have gained thanks to obsessing about beliefs in intangible dieties: divisiveness; war; ignorance.

If you know all about logical fallacies, then why not dust them off and start using them to back up your arguments instead of using whatever is the bollocks of the day.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Exactly why

Would be hard to fit on a full page, much less the narrowing column here.

Maybe you're right to say that I can't justify calling something "intellectual" that falls outside of logical construct. Maybe I err in assuming that no logical constructs support religious beliefs, because I seem to recall a lot of text in philosophy class that purported to do that.
(Can't say I stayed interested after we moved past the abortion discussion.)

But you didn't answer my question, either, so if I'm to undertake yours, I'd like you to answer the one I asked you first. Have you never encountered a person of faith whom you thought intelligent, or have you always decided purely on the basis of a person's having faith that he or she is ipso facto unintelligent?

Ok, I'll play. Yes I have

Ok, I'll play. Yes I have met intelligent people with crazy beliefs. No, I do not dismiss them solely because of the belief itself. And go back to class because your question was a logical fallacy in itself. You are engaging in the fallacy of false alternatives or better known as the fallacy of false dilemma.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Maybe

it's because my tiny little brain is squeezed so tightly into this column.

Maybe it's because I can't whip myself into enthusiasm for seriously discussing whether a person may be considered intelligent even if he or she is not thinking logically.

Maybe it's 'cause back in college it was fun for a little while to shout across class discussion which logical fallacy had just been invoked and then get into a long back and forth with professors and classmates about what the nature of intelligence is and what it means yaddy yaddy, but now that I'm old, creaky and cranky that stuff is kinda congealed unevenly against the inside of a skull that drains knowledge each evening and replenishes very little the next day.

And maybe I *should* go back to class but I really don't wanna. My motivation is kinda low. My curiosity was pretty much satisfied with your noting that yes, you have known intelligent people with freaky ideas.

Excuses do not win

Excuses do not win arguments. Try again.

Answer my question. What good is done when personal beliefs in intangible deities are elevated to a national level? In this case personal beliefs in intangible deities (NC Constitution vs US Constitution) is in a direct violation of US law. Name the fallacy legislators are engaging in when avoiding this argument.

Bonus round: Name three (there are more) logical fallacies Liddy Dole is wallowing in with her "Godless" ads.

BTW- I'm old and creaky too. So is James Randi, but that does not slow down his mind.

EDIT:

Of course I do not reject a person's intellect based solely on their personal beliefs. I try not to engage in false dichotomies.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

EEEEK

Ok, hold on.

I'm going to start this conversation over somewhere where I can stretch.

Ok with you?

brb

No screaming please... It's

No screaming please... It's waste of good suffering.

You may continue it elsewhere, but I really have to stop posting for now. Tonight is Halloween and I have to beat the house in shape for Trick or Treat - literally. The time groweth nigh. If you have a Hellraiser box, just solve the puzzle and it will summon me after midnight.

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

Proud Educated Elitist With a Poison Pen

I am a Baptist

and Brunette is right. There are as many factions to the Baptist Church as there are to the Democratic Party. Maybe more.there

***************************
Robin Hayes lied, Robin Hayes cried and thousands of folks lost th



***************************
Vote Democratic, the ass you save may be your own.

I am aware of NO factions

of the Baptist Church that believe salvation can come any way other than through the good offices of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Are you?



_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

All I was saying...

Is that there are surely people who consider themselves baptist who do not believe that.

"You could say, 'Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?' Most of us have never heard of him before." John McCain, following Clinton's strikes on al Qaeda camps

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

diversity within denominations

Brunette--quickly wanted to jump in and say I agree with you 100 percent. My husband, who has been in *few* churches personally--as opposed to me-- is quick to assume that all within a certain church "think alike". I found as a Hospice social worker faith/religious/spiritual issues would come up often and naturally and sometiems I would run into a total agnostic living in the country, going to a conservative church ie southern baptist or pentecostal(for years )etc. From my personal experience: a lot of the diversity of beleif within a particular denomination or congregation (or non belief) may be somewhat 'under the radar'-----but it is frequently there.

Leigh
http://smuttome.blogspot.com/

"Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war." - John McCain

T'anks Leigh

There are definitely a lot of people within a lot of churches who do not necessarily believe everything their pastor says, but just to be clear, I'm talking about the fact that the range of interpretations that are held by and even advocated by theologians within Baptist churches are broader than a lot of people might suppose.

sure

that's what i get for jumping in willy nilly on an interesting conversation, without bothering to really read! :)

Leigh
http://smuttome.blogspot.com/

"Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war." - John McCain

Somebody pull out an ice pick

Muahahahaha

THREE times! Three times in a 24 hour period!

Ah! Ah! Ah!

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Kinda Did

When Dole said that Hagan should return the 2300 her campaign asked if Dole's campaign was in the habit of asking about the religion of every one of their contributors.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Atheists

I just learned from one of the wingnuts at Ed Cone's place that the NC Constitution places this restriction on who may be elected to state office in North Carolina:

Sec. 8. Disqualifications for office.

The following persons shall be disqualified for office:

First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.

Second, with respect to any office that is filled by election by the people, any person who is not qualified to vote in an election for that office.

Third, any person who has been adjudged guilty of treason or any other felony against this State or the United States, or any person who has been adjudged guilty of a felony in another state that also would be a felony if it had been committed in this State, or any person who has been adjudged guilty of corruption or malpractice in any office, or any person who has been removed by impeachment from any office, and who has not been restored to the rights of citizenship in the manner prescribed by law.

Looks like it's time for a US Supreme Court challenge ... or maybe I'll just have to run for office to challenge this lunacy in the first person.

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

This laugher has been a staple of UNC Poli 101 classes

I remember reading this and some other incredible nonsense in NC's Constitution in my undergrad years. I thought all Chapel Hillians would know this by heart.

While they're cleaning up the NC Constitution, might I suggest undoing the last amendment - that idiotic tax increment financing that barely passed.

Even Roanoke Rapids is getting out of the theater business they were duped into.

Oh no, I'm agreeing with the JLFers on something...must...stop..ahhhh!!

 

NC Constitution - Old news

Every other session or so someone points this out and gets shot down for mentioning it because no one at the General Assembly wants to be the one to pass a bill writing GAWD out of the Constitution. Then Dome does a write-up about it and the whole thing dies down until another session or so goes by.

No point, I would think...

Under Art. VI of the U.S. Constitution, any religious test for public office is strictly forbidden. The same article, with the Supremacy Clause, means this trumps the state constitution. So...consider it deleted.

Phillip Hunter Gilfus,
Member(NC), Democratic National Committee

Don't get me wrong, please

I didn't suggest it needed to be amended or deleted. It's old, it's unenforced and unenforceable, and everyone -- almost everyone -- who follows NC politics knows about it.

For those who still want to assert that the DOME or the N&O is irrelevant, they've dutifully reported on this and other legal and quasi-legal relics on our lawbooks for years. Regular Dome readers knew about this a long time ago. THAT was my point.

The clause is irrelevant, and The N&O is still on the decline

You don't have to follow Utd or NC politics to know it. Just stay awake and listen in any Poli or law class. Even at crazy ole UNC.

 

I don't think it's irrelevant.

Whether it's enforceable or not, the words are still there.

Because there is still an automatic assumption that everyone believes in some sort of God - that everyone is a "person of faith", this is dismissed as irrelevant. That's a false assumption, obviously. We wouldn't say it was irrelevant if it were a clause prohibiting African-Americans from holding office, or prohibiting women from holding office. We'd be up in arms.

just sayin'.

Quite true

Which is why I think it amuses members of the media to sort of tweak the noses at the General Assembly on it.

If it were truly irrelevant, no one would feel squeamish about having a news article printed that he or she had just introduced a bill to "ELIMINATE GOD" from our Constitution. Just guess how that would go over.

We're a long way from acknowledging the rights of those in the minority on religious matters. I mean, geez, there are folks who think themselves "liberal" for accepting that Roman Catholics are Christian.

True, Bru!

I feel that people like me have to point out the ridiculousness of such a thing being on paper, though. It's part of that whole "pointing at naked emperors" thing.

Treason against this State

It's an open thread, so what the hell. James's quote of the NC constitution got me a-thinkin'.

Third, any person who has been adjudged guilty of treason or any other felony against this State or the United States, [...]

How would one go about committing treason against the State of North Carolina without also committing treason against the United States?

Has there ever, in the history of the U.S., been a criminal charge filed, or a trial held, for which the offense was treason against a state? If so, were there any instances where there wasn't also a federal treason charge for the same acts? Any that weren't tied up with the Civil War?

As GOP power slips away, and the most febrile of Palin supporters retreat to their bunkers to plot their apotheosis into the next Timothy McVeigh, I wonder if California or the Bay State will end up with a case against someone who "loves" the United States (second only to the defunct CSA, at any rate), but must strike out in righteous wrath against the "Left Coast" or "Taxachusetts".

Besides, how could a federal treason charge be sustained if the building you blew up wasn't in "real America"?

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Great question

Besides, how could a federal treason charge be sustained if the building you blew up wasn't in "real America"?

Blowing up Chapel Hill would definitely not be treason - against either the state or the country. We are an independent city-state unto ourselves. Just ask the ghost of Jesse Hellms.

:)

_____________________________________

Doubts about Dole?

____________________________________

“Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.”
― Joe Biden

Blowing up Chapel Hill!!!!

I would settle for the Dean Dome and Keenan Stadium though.

WaHooWa

“We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe.” ~ Barack Obama

Dole has a 2nd ad

Thanks to Binker, via twitter:

Dole ends her new ad by asking voters, "If Godless Americans threw a party in your honor, would you go?"

Elizabeth Dole is a disgrace.