Atheist Tea Party Patriot

Why do so many people think an atheist has to be a liberal? Isn't an atheist allowed to believe in the Constitution, free markets, civil rights, low taxes, limited government, national security and individual responsibility?
pho144 pho144
61-65, M
5 Responses Nov 26, 2012

"CaptainA", if you're still out there, you must really be embarrassed by the trial of Kermit Gosnell. I guess you could argue that Gosnell didn't really do partial birth abortions, because he actually delivered live babies, then murdered them. I suppose Obama will call him and congratulate him.

Sure; but last I checked, liberalism in the United States was doing much better on most of that score. (Taxes, for example? Obama gave the American middle class one of the biggest tax cuts in history.) Given that atheists tend to be of higher intelligence, they tend to look at the facts and realize liberalism is a better bet for all those things.

...Oh wait. I just scrolled down and realized you've had all that explained to you, but don't believe in facts for some strange reason. Well, nobody said that ALL atheists are smart.

Another duped dem. It's truly sad to see this. NO!!!! NO Americans have had a tax cut under Obama. I realize he keeps claiming it, along with his other lies. It's almost as believable as the claim that four Americans were murdered in Benghazi because of an internet video that no one saw. You can "explain" falsehoods to me forever. That doesn't make them true. The demokkkrats are not doing ANYTHING good on any of the issues I mention. Liberalism has always been on the wrong side of every issue, and remains there. I'm sure you don't remember the demokkkrat Congressman Hank Johnson who, just a few years ago, suggested to a U.S. Navy Admiral that we had too many people on the island of Guam, and that it was likely to flip over and they would all drown. Just yesterday that same Congressman, who the dems continue to re-elect, suggested that we need to pass laws to limit the freedom to criticize President Obama. Germany did that in 1938. Oh yeah, liberalism is a great bet, as it was for Germany, Italy, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, the Soviet Union, and on and on.

I may be totally wasting my time. But, I HAVE to keep trying to educate those who have been duped into following the liberal lies.

<p>&nbsp;<p>As an Atheist Tea Party Patriot, I am not into name-calling. That tends to be demokkkrat terrain. But, this clown who disingenuously calls himself "captainA" is simply a vicious, hateful, liar. He has the unmitigated gall to call me a moron, brain damaged, and of all things, a child-molester. And all because we disagree on an unrelated issue. He should be banned from the site.</p><p></p>

<p>I guess I should stand corrected. Obviously left-wing extremists ARE religious:</p><p>http://www.ijreview.com/2012/11/23174-actor-jamie-foxx-barack-obama-our-lord-savior/</p>

Other than the fact that almost no "liberals" disagree with anything on that list (it was a false dichotomy perpetrated by both sides of the media equation -- arguably, liberals believe that there is also a collective social contract, something every last one of the founding fathers also believed), yes! An atheist can hold any other beliefs one finds palatable. An atheist can even be religious. It's just that higher education levels and functional knowledge bases are positively correlated with both "liberalism" and atheism -- the more you learn, the more likely you are to be either of those things. Not a value judgment, mind you, just a statistical fact.

That said, any two middle class Americans, regardless of political affiliation, will have far more in common with each other than they will with upper class Americans of any stripe. Don't let the media definition of being a Tea Partier lull you into a false understanding that those who do not share the designation really think any differently about any of those subjects than you do. In reality, they don't.

Actually, they DO feel differently about some, if not all, of those. Obama thinks the Constitution is a speed bump and that he can violate it at will. Liberals have been opposed to every one of those issues for 200+ years. They always want higher taxes. They always want bigger government. They always want more government control of business. They have historically opposed every bit of legislation that promoted civil rights. They always want to decrease national security. They always want to decrease personal responsibility in many ways. I'll loosely agree with you that liberals BELIEVE themselves to be not only higher educated, but, more intelligent. They tend to be phony intellectuals.

Again, none of that is true. Can you point to a single time Obama has violated the Constitution? Rhetoric is fine, but truth, facts and evidence are necessary. The facts show us that government grew less under Carter than it did under Reagan or Ford, less under Clinton than either of the Bushes. No liberal has EVER raised middle class tax rates. Liberals want government oversight of the economy, because history has taught us that too little is just as bad as too much. Find me one liberal (not Democrat, and even then, it's patently false) that opposed a single piece of civil rights legislation. Hint; they don't exist. Almost all of the Democrats (again, not liberals) who opposed civil rights left for the Republican party over the issue. No liberal has ever decreased overall military spending except as a drawdown from war. Define personal responsibility and find me one instance of a liberal opposing it. Hell, find me one instance of anyone opposing it. And, again, it's not that liberals believe themselves to be more educated and intelligent, but it IS factually accurate to say that most educated and intelligent people tend to become liberals. Almost all of your points of disagreement are based on false premeses. I don't disagree with your politics in 90% of cases, and neither do most "liberals". The people you are fighting against are a fiction; they simply don't exist, no matter how both sides may want to parse it. There is such little actual space between most liberals and conservatives that I find it funny sometimes. Liberals see conservatives as untrustworthy, racist, warmongering, uneducated bigots. But we both know those things to be typically untrue. There are vested interests in keeping us divided. I assure you that those divisions are slight, and 90% pure fantasy. I can't put this all on you, because many liberals are just as confused about what you stand for as you are of them. Looked at objectively from the outside, most politically savvy people from around the world can find little to know difference between our two factions. And that, sir, is a fact.

Sorry, not picking on you. I tell liberals the same things, like how Clinton had more foreign warfighting actions than Reagan did, and also signed DADT and DOMA, both things the Bush Sr. opposed.

Wow, you were obviously educated in the liberal public schools. I'll just briefly mention a couple of things. Violating the Constitution? How about him declaring that he will not enforce certain laws, like immigration laws? Clinton raised everyone's tax rates. Robert Byrd (KKK member) filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which the republicans pushed through. Think about Byrd, Al Gore, Orval Faubus, Lester Maddox, George Wallace, and more. All racist dixiecrats who went back to the demokkkrat party. Of course this is not to mention President Johnson, who also opposed it, and finally signed it under duress. The demokkrats ARE the party of racism, and have been for 200+ years. There is a huge difference between them and the republicans, as there has always been. The problem is that boh have moved to the left. That's why we created the Tea Party Patriots, who are now the true Party of Lincoln. It's sad that so many of you demokkkrats have been so badly deluded. You should try to do some real research and learn some real history, instead of the demokkkrat rewrites.

More to the point; sure, you can point out a few southern democrats that voted against civil rights legislation. Most left the party of did not seek re-election. Now, just ask yourself one question; who do the overwhelming majority of the modern KKK vote for? Oh, they have a 98% rate of support for the Republican party? Really? And the Neo-Nazis too? But, no, the democrats are the real racists, here. Absolutely delusional...

AND, shock of shocks, not only did Clinton not raise federal tax rates on the middle class, according to the Tax Foundation, none of the marginal tax rates changed even once from 1992 to 2000.

Sorry, I just get a little angry when people make assumptions about me. So many of the liberals I know deride me as a conservative, which I also am not.

Quote from captainA: "Find me one liberal (not Democrat, and even then, it's patently false) that opposed a single piece of civil rights legislation. Hint; they don't exist."
Later quote from captainA: "sure, you can point out a few southern democrats that voted against civil rights legislation."

Again, none of those southern democrats were liberals. Not one. Learn to read, please. All of that information is within those quotations you provided. I asked for liberals, not democrats. You provided conservative democrats. My point still stands.

Though I can see where, taking the "...even then, it's patently false" portion completely out of context might lead one to believe that I was saying there were no democrats who opposed it. My original meaning, which was clear in my response, was to your assertion that ALL liberals (or Democrats, by implication) opposed civil rights legislation. Which is, as a matter of course, patently false.

I agree, phony-captain, not EVERY liberal opposed civil rights legislation. It follows the old saying: "Not all liberals are racists, but, all racists are liberals". And actually, that's not totally true. I've actually met a few conservatives in my life who were racists. And by the way, demokkkrats ARE liberals, by definition. If they weren't, they wouldn't be dems.

...
...
...
Really? That old chestnut? So, the KKK and Neo-Nazis don't vote 98% for Republican candidates? Saying all "demokkkrats" are liberals is like saying all "republicons" are conservative. Neither is true. The world is not black and white. I know zero self-described liberal racists. None. I know several racist conservatives. I know liberal republicans and conservative democrats. Your worldview is severely limited and, frankly, childlike. I think you just like hating people and being angry.

First, I don't "hate" anyone. Hate is demokkkrat terrain. And NO, the KKK and Neo-Nazis don't vote republican. By their very history and definition, they are both liberal groups. You need to understand that there are varying degrees of liberalism and conservatism. Liberals disagree with the Constitution and what America is all about, but, to varying degrees. Conservatives believe staunchly in the Constitution. I would be considered to be a "right-wing extremist", because I am an adamant defender of our Constitution. Part of that is believing in free markets, civil rights, low taxes, limited government, individual responsibility, and national security, all things today's demokkkrats oppose. Of course, today's demokkkrats are so liberal that they consider anyone to the right of Karl Marx to be a right wing extremist. And by the way, it is demokkkrats who are like children. Despite the historic success of America, they think they can "fix" it by making it like the socialist governments which always fail. Dems are reminiscent of children who KNOW the world is flat, because that's the way they see it, and nothing can change their minds.

I really can't even respond to that. There is so much factually and cognitively wrong with almost every single point you made there that I am frankly flabbergasted. Have you ever actually met or spoken to a "liberal"? By your description, I'd have to say that chances are quite low. Your description sounds like the caricature that Glenn Beck likes to pretend "liberals" actually live up to. Sorry, but those people really don't exist. Free markets are great, but even Adam Smith knew (and wrote extensively about) the need for governmental oversight. The free market left alone will always result in a market failure. Civil rights include votes for women and marriage rights for gays and lesbians, something both opposed at their times by "conservatives". Low taxes, sure. Except that taxes are lower under Obama than at any time in the past century. He wants to raise them to the second lowest marginal rate, which was previously held under Clinton. Limited government, you say? Clinton and Carter shrank government, including welfare reforms, while Ford, Reagan and both Bushes grew it. These are realities which can be easily verified. In fact, there are fewer government employees per capita under Obama than any president in history. Individual responsibility, to a conservative, only applies to the poor and middle class. The rich somehow deserve to pay lower effective tax rates than the rest of us. And national security? More embassy and terrorist attacks occur under Republican presidents than Democrats. Again, a verifiable fact. Obama has lost 12 diplomatic personnel in his 4 years; at this point in his presidency, Bush II was up to 26, and ended with 51 dead. Saying that people that you do not like believe things that they do no is not constructive, and does not make it true, no matter how much you repeat it. If I were to say that "not all conservatives are child molesters, but all child molesters are conservative" over and over, would that make it true? No. And the same is true of your statements. You may believe them, and you are, as an American, entitled to that, but my free speech rights allow (in fact, require) me to point out that you, sir, are dead wrong on all counts.

This thread has gone far enough. No one will ever convince you of the lies in the demokkkrat rewrites of history. I won't waste my time on correcting all of your errors. But, I have to inform you that it was, in fact the republicans who promoted womens' right to vote and the dems who opposed it. Calling gay marriage a civil rights issue is just a silly attempt by dems to claim they finally believe in some sort of civil right. It's right up there with claiming that the "right" to summarily execute partially born children is a civil right, as Obama has done. Equating gay marriage and unlimited abortion with eliminating slavery is a typical idiotic demokkkrat tactic.

And by the way, unless you are an ex-military captain, as I am, your screen name is just another example of how liberals make stuff up to try to make themselves respectable.

Probably for the best. At least we have atheism in common, and that's enough for me! Although, I have to point out that I never mentioned partial-birth abortions (of which there have been 3 since 1972 when it was made illegal, all in cases to prevent undue suffering of a child that would have been dead within minutes of birth). I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors, and hope that you can someday come to terms with the idea that we are not different enough for you to harbor such feelings of animosity toward half of your fellow Americans.

13 More Responses