Comments on: Michigan thread

By: William Bowe

William Bowe — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:19:50 +0000

I’ve opened a new presidential election thread, so this one is closed.

By: stark

stark — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:30:24 +0000

Mayo, I too am an atheist but if you read the so called 17 commandments (or 16, 15 or 14 for that matter) you will notice that on occasion a few although separate should really be categorised as individual items.

When this is done, 10 categories seems about right (some creative arrangement is needed though) with the difference between the religions being the groupings.

A far as number 10 goes…coveting is OK just don’t take your neighbours ass for a gallop…it’s all far too close to home.

By: Jasmine Pierce

Jasmine Pierce — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:41:29 +0000

MayoFeral

Maybe i should hire you someday to explain to my parents why an atheist cannot have a church wedding

By: Diogenes

Diogenes — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:10:11 +0000

487 MayoFeral- Amen to that brother!

By: MayoFeral

MayoFeral — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:54:58 +0000

466
Ferny Grover @ 466

No they don’t even consider the issue of the current Bible’s formation and the political sculduggery that was behind it. Their eyes don’t see past the leather-bound book in their hand.

The real problem is that most of them don’t get much past that leather-bound cover and actually know little of what is inside. They mostly rely on what their priests tell them it says.

A classic example is the 10 commandments. 99.99% will tell you they’re mostly about coveting your neighbour’s ass, etc. Not so. They, and there are 17, not 10, were on the original tablets as per Exodus 20, but they aren’t called ‘commandments’, and Moses smashes the tablets in a fit of rage before they are presented to the people. So Moses is instructed to shlep another two stone tablets up the mountain and what are, for the first time, called ‘commandments’ are carved onto them. But, with one exception, they are not the same as the 17 of Exodus 20.

Note to all the ass coveters: Hallelujah, brothers and sisters, covet all the ass you want because it ain’t no sin!

IME, us atheist often know more about what is in the good books than the believers whether they be Christians, J*ws or Muslims. Perhaps that’s why we’re atheists.

By: Diogenes

Diogenes — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:11:04 +0000

With the South Carolina primary imminent, amazingly the talk in the US is how the weather will affect the outcome. Evidently it’s freezing in SC except on the coast. McCain’s support is mainly on the coast (evidently lots of military there) and Hucks is inland. One argument is that this will favour McCain coz it’s too cold for Hucks lot to get out and vote. The other argument is it will favour Huck coz the less committed voters favour McCain and won’t be so fussed about not going out to vote for him.

By: Stephen Connor

Stephen Connor — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:42:23 +0000

Jen @ 484

It would appear Hillary has a great deal more support of the Democratic establishment which can be seen by the number of superdelegates who have said they would support her. Superdelegates make up about 20% of the total delegates for the national convention so having their support is a massive advantage. They are however free to change their mind at any time. This mean that a good result by Obama in primaries may get a few to move across. Also Edwards is likely to pick up a large number of delegates before the convention. It may not be enough to win but it could be enough to push Obama over the line if they are pushed in his direction. It is a long way from being over.

By: Jen

Jen — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:48:03 +0000

Thanks Stephen-
looking good for Obama in the vote but not in the delgate stakes. Does this mean ultimately he is a goner, or is it possible that he will gain more delegate support if he polls well. Or are they rusted on for Hillary?

By: Stephen Connor

Stephen Connor — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:28:07 +0000

If anybody is interested in the current state of play.

SC Republican Polls: http://www.ozdemocracy.com/?p=72
SC Democratic Polls: http://www.ozdemocracy.com/?p=73
SC Primary Information: http://www.ozdemocracy.com/?p=68
Nevada Republican Polls: http://www.ozdemocracy.com/?p=79
Current Delegate count: http://www.ozdemocracy.com/?p=76

By: jaundiced view

jaundiced view — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:04:01 +0000

Yes Diogenes – assumptions about any of the candidates are dangerous in the US of A, but I’d be inclined to think that all 3 leading Dems candidates would have a public position on evolution and religion that differs from their personal views. That is, they must be seen to attend church, which to me is pathetic, but they all seem sensible and rational otherwise cf the 3 Repub wierdos. The only one about whom I can’t see any evidence of religious practice is Edwards.

Meanwhile, Clinton has had a crack at Obama before the Nevada vote. Does this mean she’s worried. She might take Nevada, but Obama would appear to have a mortgage (hopefully not sub-prime) on S Carolina:

http://news.smh.com.au/clinton-obama-spat-turns-nasty-on-eve-of-caucuses/20080119-1mw2.html