Giuliani feels sorry for ye of little faith

October 13, 2007

Guest Post by Morbo

A weird, underreported story from the 2008 primary season is the relationship between Rudy Giuliani and TV preacher Pat Robertson.

The two would not seem to have much in common. Giuliani claims to be pro-choice and pro-gay. When he left his second wife, Giuliani moved in with a gay couple and their little dog. He seems to enjoy dressing in drag. Robertson is an unhinged Pentecostal Christian who despises legal abortion, gays and cross-dressing.

Nevertheless, the two are great buddyroos. They apparently bonded because both men have survived bouts with prostate cancer. Robertson has stated that Giuliani is a “great guy” who would make a fine president.

Giuliani has appeared at Robertson’s Regent University and recently sat down for an interview with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network. During that talk, Giuliani discussed his personal faith. He said he prays often and that he regards religion as source of inspiration. (Warning: page opens to a frightening, Nosferatu-like picture of hizzoner.)

I found this Giuliani comment of special interest:

“But I think in a democracy and in a government like ours, my religion is my way of looking at God and other people have other ways of doing it, and some people don’t believe in God. I think that’s unfortunate. I think their life would be a lot fuller if they did, but they have that right.”

How charitable. Atheists have the right to think what they do — but of course it’s “unfortunate” that they think as they do, and they lead lives that aren’t very full.

When I read this, I wondered how the hell Giuliani would know anything about how an atheist lives.

If we are to take his religious history seriously, Giuliani has never been a doubter. One would think that Giuliani, having served as mayor of the largest city in America, might have met a few atheists and observed that at least some of them lead full lives.

Imagine if Giuliani had said this: “My religion is my way of looking at God, and other people have other ways of doing it, and some people are Jewish. I think that’s unfortunate. I think their life would be a lot fuller if they believed in Jesus Christ, but they have the right not to.”

How much you-know-what would be hitting the fan right now?

There was a time in America when Jews could not stay at certain hotels and were not allowed to join certain social clubs. Thankfully, those days are gone, and anyone who engages in rank forms of anti-Semitism is rightly regarded as a boor and a crackpot. The day will come when ignorant comments about non-believers, such as those espoused by Giuliani, will also be considered socially unacceptable.

I’m not saying that day will come soon, but it will come. It will be a happy day. Until then, I recommend that Giuliani get out of the house more often.

I know a couple in their 80s who are completely non-religious. (They consider themselves secular humanists.) The husband worked for the Foreign Service, and the wife was working in sales when they met (a time when few women worked outside the home). They got married, had some kids and traveled the world. They enjoy their retirement in a house full of cool art and mementos they picked up from their travels. They can discourse on just about any domestic or international issue. They are well respected and admired by a large circle of friends.

Maybe Rudy knows better, but this sounds like a pretty full life to me — and it all came about without a belief in God.

I actually feel sorry for people who need that belief structure. Their lives have no meaning (to them, at least), unless there is some higher power directing it. It is an abnegation of self-determination and critical thinking.

Xtianity (and other religions) is basically a cop-out. “I can do anything I want, no matter how reprehensible, but as long as I believe I’m good with god.”

What a piece of bovine excrement.

Those of us who are able to give meaning to our lives and existence without any need for deity are much better off, IMHO. We don’t need the threat of eternal damnation to be good people.

  • What would amaze me would be if “Il Duce” even knew anything about how a Christian lives. The guy is every bad old ethnic joke about the “wops” come to life.

  • Bush 41:
    Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?
    Bush: I guess I’m pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.
    Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?
    Bush: No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
    Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?
    Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I’m just not very high on atheists.

  • It takes a lot of work and courage to come to terms with life and consciousness and the universe on your own. Much easier to buy a pre-packaged belief system that has all the answers for you — even if it means accepting supernatural beings and unsupported explanations, and shutting down any sort of independent or critical thinking about it.

    One of the pivotal moments in my life was realizing that it’s okay to say ‘at this point in time, just don’t know’ about certain things. It’s not necessary to invent answers to questions for which you have no evidence to lead you in one direction or another. Odd as it may seem, there’s a peace in accepting that some things are unknown, and I find I fit better into the universe when I surrender to wonders I can’t explain.

    Rudy and Robertson, on the other hand, seems to be in constant conflict with themselves and the world around them, based largely on their unsupported beliefs.

  • Well as both an atheist and a compassionate human being, I can’t half feeling a certain amount of pity for the religiously deluded; all the poor, misguided people who had all those fairy tales abouts gods, daemons and other imaginary creatures pounded into their trusting minds as children, before they were old enough to develop intellectual defenses against any nonsense and adult might try to feed them, and now can’t get them out. So I guess maybe we’re kind of even on that score.

  • Oops, make that:

    “…I can’t half help feeling a certain amount of pity for the religiously deluded…”

  • Religion or “non religion” can be a good or bad thing.

    Believing and not believing is bad when we judge others, are close-minded, destructive of those not of our belief set, or let others tell us what to think. Good when we are generous with others, are open minded to the possibility that others may be right, that acknowledge we don’t actually have all the answers, when we use our brains to think for ourselves.

    Think about it.

  • “Xtianity (and other religions) is basically a cop-out. “I can do anything I want, no matter how reprehensible, but as long as I believe I’m good with god.” ”

    This type of thinking is hardly representative of all or even most Christians. Many Christians are Christians because their churches given them an opportunity to work for the social justice that Jesus taught us about, you know, feeding the poor, helping the sick, etc., etc. Most also believe in the separation of church and state.

    I can certainly understand there are people who are disgusted with the wingnut Christofascists and the Republicans who pander to them, but I don’t see how it’s helpful to lump all Christians together.

  • All that is just is. And all that is… IS God. The illusion of perception begins when one sees himself as different than or separate from the source which both contains and sustains him.
    If a man is walking in the ocean…looking for the ocean…and all that is, IS ocean…he could walk forever and never find the ocean.@ JBacon.
    Religion is bull shit, but we are spiritual.

  • Joy (#8):

    I’m happy for you that you have a belief structure that works for you. I was raised xtian (of the mormon variety), and even as a child I thought that the teachings of xtianity (as opposed to the teachings of Jesus) were a crock of >expletive

  • Aaargh, damn program doesn’t deal with certain symbols in a non-HTML context. Joy (#8):

    I’m happy for you that you have a belief structure that works for you. I was raised xtian (of the mormon variety), and even as a child I thought that the teachings of xtianity (as opposed to the teachings of Jesus) were a crock of [expletive]. Are you saved through grace or through works? The NT contradicts itself on that, and most denominations going back to the early church opted for the former–i.e. belief is all that is needed for “salvation”.

    Xtians aren’t the only ones guilty of this.

    My personal belief is that if there is a deity, the Taoists are closer than any other group in defining it, not that it needs definition.

  • “Are you saved through grace or through works? The NT contradicts itself on that, and most denominations going back to the early church opted for the former–i.e. belief is all that is needed for “salvation”.”

    I can’t speak for all denominations, but I’ve never been taught belief is all that’s needed for salvation. The only people I know of who believe that are in non-denominational fundamentalist churches. I’m a Methodist, but I think most of the old mainline denominations are similar. We don’t even really use the word “saved.” Being Christian means trying to live a life similar to the teachings of Christ — working for peace and social justice.

    It’s only a group of wingnut fundies who think they just have to say a magic incantation about being saved and it doesn’t matter what they do after that. Most of those churches aren’t even affiliated with a denomination or are Southern Baptist.

    Lumping all Christians together (Catholics, wacky right-wing fundamentalists, Mormons, Quakers, Episcopalians, whatever) and making disparaging statements as if they’re all the same is counterproductive.

    Being a pompous intolerant atheist isn’t really any better than being a sanctimonious intolerant christian.

  • Last rites, anyone? Deathbed repentence? Weekly communion to remove the sins of the past week? Confession? Ritualized cannibalism-by-proxy (bread=flesh and wine=blood)? Sorry, Joy, your statements don’t hold up.

    Let’s just say that I agree with Gandhi when asked what he thought about xtians.

    “I like your Jesus, I think he was a good man. I don’t like your christians; they are nothing like Jesus.”

  • And yes I agree, Joy, that not all xtians are “wacky fundamentalists”. I rather like the Unitarians, almost like the old Deists. Reform Jews are almost tempting to one who feels the need for a deity. Sufi (as opposed to Sunni) seem to be decent sorts. Certain strains of Hinduism seem good. I’ve always admired Buddhism (which is more of a philosophy than a religion).

    Until more moderate xtians, muslims, ba’haiists, jews, et. al. start speaking up and taking back their religion, I’m afraid they are in for nothing but ridicule and derision.

  • “Until more moderate xtians, muslims, ba’haiists, jews, et. al. start speaking up and taking back their religion, I’m afraid they are in for nothing but ridicule and derision.”

    Well, of course this is nonsense. There are quite a few ministers traveling the country speaking out against the wingnuts and trying to take back Christianity. Christians are out in great numbers at Peace marches, rallies on behalf of immigrants, and other issues. Most of the soup kitchens and homeless shelters and other services in my city were created by the churches (together with other reglious groups). The mainstream media loves the wingnut Christian circus, but how is that our fault?

    But regardless, you’re basically saying that in today’s political climate, ridicule and derision are a good thing? So you like Giuliani’s approach; he just took the wrong side?

    Divide and conquer has been the successful strategy of the right for quite some time now. You’re just playing into their hands. As they used to say in the 60s, if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

  • I’m using your nom de plume, Joy, please have the courtesy to use mine.

    You are putting words into my mouth. The extremists of any religion invite contempt and ridicule. Unfortunately, extremists have gained control of the Republican party in this nation. For the most part, I’m happy for people who have found peace with their CHOSEN religion. I’m more than content to live and let live, no ifs, ands or buts. They, on the other hand, do not want to extend me the same courtesy. (Whether or not you fit into that description is not yet known to me.)

    As a homosexual (an orientation, not a preference, by the way–no choice in the matter), I can still be fired for simply being me. The legal marriage my husband and I got in Canada is not recognized by either my state or my country. The reason is religious bigotry. I hope you’ll pardon me if I have some contempt for the institutions that deny my basic human and civil rights.

    Yes, mainstream denominations are currently struggling with the issue. The Anglicans/Episcopalians are on the verge of denominational split. Methodists are trying to come to an amicable compromise. Even Conservative Presbyterians are leaving the church.

    While religion has inspired a lot of good in the world, I’m afraid it has inspired much more evil. On the balance, I think we are better off without it.

  • No idea if anyone is still reading this thread. But, just in case…

    Michael writes: “Until more moderate xtians, muslims, ba’haiists, jews, et. al. start speaking up and taking back their religion, I’m afraid they are in for nothing but ridicule and derision.”

    Well, that’s just what joy and I have been trying to do. I’ve posted several times the past few months on this blog on the issue. Sorry, but I’m tired of being ridiculed for my faith when I have never ridiculed anyone for being an atheist. You simply can’t lump all Christians together. Part of being a “liberal” is being open minded. I try my best, yet am told I believe in fairy tales, can’t think for myself, etc. by people who judge me when they have no idea what they’re talking about.

    As my hubby put it, Joseph Stalin was an atheist. Does that mean that you who are atheists share all of the same beliefs as Stalin? Of course not.

    I think joy put it best: “Lumping all Christians together (Catholics, wacky right-wing fundamentalists, Mormons, Quakers, Episcopalians, whatever) and making disparaging statements as if they’re all the same is counterproductive.
    Being a pompous intolerant atheist isn’t really any better than being a sanctimonious intolerant christian.”

    And Michael, I am truly sorry for your situation. But I would counter that it’s human fear and bigotry, that has manifested itself into the institution of “religion”, that is what is causing harm. Jesus never preached fear or hatred of anyone. Give the mainstream Christians a little more time; some folks are a little slow, but we’re making progress.

  • For years so-called “Christian missionaries” looked into the religious texts of non-Christian peoples and said to the supplicants, “Your books are false and contain nothing but mythology. The correct number of gods is one. Furthermore, there is but one true faith. All others is idolatry.”

    I think the time has come to say unequivocally to the Christians:

    Your holy book contains nothing but mythology. The correct number of gods is zero. Faith is a choice, not an imperative.

  • I rather liked Arthur C. Clarke’s version of religion in “3001: The Final Odessy”. It boils down to two religious camps. “Deists” believe there is no more that one god; “Theists” believe there is no less than one god. The difference is subtle, but profound.

    I also liked his version of deity in the Rama series of books, particularly “Rama Revealed” where he posits a “Prime Mover” who sets things in motion, and then just observes the results.

    Hannah, as I tried to make clear in my posts to Joy, I don’t lump all xtians (or jews, muslims, mormons, et. al.) into one category. Yes, I think your religion is nothing more than a plagiarized compliation of the various “pagan” belief systems around at the time. I try not to show contempt for believers in what I consider to be idiocy. I mean really, talking snakes and donkeys? A global flood story that is physically impossible?

    A deity, like the god of Abraham, who commands genocide is worthy of neither worship or respect. And yet in my interpersonal relations with friends, relatives and co-workers, unless pressed I do not comment on their religious beliefs. I’m a little more free with my opinions on the web, but I still respect your right to your belief, though I don’t share it. I expect the same courtesy. I don’t expect to change your mind, and you surely won’t change mine. Sometimes a stalemate is all we can hope for.

  • “I try not to show contempt for believers in what I consider to be idiocy. I mean really, talking snakes and donkeys? A global flood story that is physically impossible?”

    LOL. Michael, I try MY best to not show contempt to those who LITERALLY believe some of these Biblical stories, when they are but metaphors. So we can agree on that.

    Unfortunately, many fundamentalists seem to stop reading their Bibles at the end of the Old Testament (except for Revelation). The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the most important thing for Christians, or should be. But I can certainly understand why non-Christians think it’s a bunch of malarky. And I’m totally for separation of church and state (I don’t want someone else telling me what to believe either!).

    The goals of the progressives, whether believers or not, are similar. If we work towards them together rather than ridicule each other we can get a lot more done. We have a lot more in common than you might think.

  • Then we can agree, Hannah. Saul of Tarsus (aka Paul) is the worst thing that ever happened to xtianity. He distorted Jesus’ teachings so much so that we are still arguing about circumcision , for cryng out loud. The ancient Gnostics were at least able to look at different sides of an argument. Xtians (at least in today’s environment) won’t even consider anything that might possibly contradict their belief structure. Evolution? Lies, in spite of the evidence. Origin of the universe? Big Bang may be “Let there be light”, but the time frame is all wrong by billions of years.

    I’ll take science over religion any day. Science doesn’t have an agenda (except for truth); religion does.

    • Comments are closed.