Sick of this Godless party? Atheist ad during Dem debate boasts ‘I’m not afraid of burning in hell’
This is sad that a major political party would take an ad from one saying they are not afraid of burning in hell. A former president’s son no less. The party booed God 8 years ago and has become overtly hostile to one of its former voting blocs.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk responded to an ad featuring Ron Reagan, the son of President Ronald Reagan, advocating for an atheist group, that first aired during the Democratic Party October debate on CNN.
In effect, Reagan mocks Christians, saying he is “not afraid of burning in hell,” as he seeks donations for the Freedom From Religion Foundation — the atheist group has made a name for itself challenging issues like Bibles in schools or crosses on public grounds.
That the ad aired during a Democratic debate being par for the course, as far as Kirk is concerned. And though he tweeted about the ad back in October, Kirk shared the tweet on Sunday night for a second time as CNN hosted another debate for the party.
“This is the left,” he tweeted. “They booed God at their convention They want to defund churches that don’t support progressive views And this is the ad that gets the prime spot at the debate— ‘I’m not afraid of burning in hell.'”
“RT if you’re sick of this Godless party,” Kirk added, including the 30-second ad in his tweet. “Hi, I’m Ron Reagan, an unabashed atheist, and I’m alarmed by the intrusion of religion into our secular government,” Reagan says in the ad. “That’s why I’m asking you to support the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the nation’s largest and most effective association of atheists and agnostics, working to keep state and church separate, just like our Founding Fathers intended.”
“Please support the Freedom From Religion Foundation,” he concludes. “Ron Reagan, lifelong atheist, not afraid of burning in hell.”
The reference to God being booed was from the 2012 Democratic convention, which was held in Charlotte, N.C. The party was looking to reinstate platform language that recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and included the words “God-given” in a passage on employment.
As for the reactions, aside from thinking the President Reagan must be rolling over in his grave, there was also a notion to pray for his son, who is clearly lost in this world.
Here’s a quick sampling of responses from Twitter:
Tags
Who is online
94 visitors
It was Nancy Reagan who coined the term, "Wingnuts", to describe the evangelical wing of the gop whom both she and Mr Reagan considered to be extreme, ignorant and intolerant. The type of people who would gladly condemn even them to eternity in Hell if they knew about Nancy's abortions...plural.
Mest of the extremist religious nutcases on the right worship Ronald and Nancy as if they were some sort of dieties.. Which strikes me as a bit inconsistent-- after all Nancy Reagan regularly consulted an Astrologer! (Oh-- the horror!)
Joan Ceciel Quigley (April 10, 1927 – October 23, 2014), of San Francisco , California , was an astrologer best known for her astrological advice to the Reagan White House in the 1980s.
Joan Quigley discussed her relationship with Nancy Reagan in a book, titled What Does Joan Say? . Quigley wrote, "Not since the days of the Roman emperors , and never in the history of the United States presidency, has an astrologer played such a significant role in the nation's affairs of State."
More
Joan Quigley discussed her relationship with Nancy Reagan in a book, titled What Does Joan Say? . Quigley wrote, "Not since the days of the Roman emperors , and never in the history of the United States presidency, has an astrologer played such a significant role in the nation's affairs of State."
In 1988, Regan published his memoir For the Record: From Wall Street to Washington , revealing that Nancy Reagan had consulted with Quigley, and previously with astrologer Jeane Dixon . Regan wrote:
Virtually every major move and decision the Reagans made during my time as White House Chief of Staff was cleared in advance with a woman in San Francisco [Quigley] who drew up horoscopes to make certain that the planets were in a favorable alignment for the enterprise. [3] [1]
OMG!!!
ANGELS AND MINISTERS OF GRACE DEFEND US!
:
What has the Democratic Party ever said that rebukes God? I'm pretty sure a large percentage of Democrats are Christians or Jews.
Why is this crap polluting this forum?
Because the right wing has nothing else to run on. This is why----this----is on this forum. You know, "Lie speech is free speech," right?
who the fock cares?
The ad is accurate. And yes it took place. I've seen it before. Religion is oppressive, costly and has been transformed into a political weapon used to instill fear, division and ignorance.
Sure they do-- look at Trump's record on... the economy!
(Hehehe)
And, speaking of feeble-minded efforts at derailling this conversation--- what about what happened when Calvin Coolidge was nominated? Or-- if we really want to change the subject* -- how about the nomination of Thomas Jefferson?.
___________________________________________________
*if we really want to change the subject: this is a common tactic used by people on social media sites when they know they are losing an argument!
Of course they are. But one small group of very socially conservative, political, and religious people has managed to spread the idea that they love God better than people who disagree with them. It's nonsense, of course. Unfortunately, I think people in both parties have accepted it in their own way. Too many people on the political left end up thinking that because there are religious nuts on the right, anyone motivated by belief must be a right wing nut. Thus, they are shy about showing their own faith.
But you can be a perfectly fine religious liberal. That's why I do think it's a shame when the Democratic Party seems to run away from that idea. They have been kind of bullied into it and it's not necessary.
But you can be a perfectly fine religious liberal. That's why I do think it's a shame when the Democratic Party seems to run away from that idea. They have been kind of bullied into it and it's not necessary.
I have to agree.
I do think it’s more though than fear of being labeled as unaccepting, or being shy. Just as stated already, the more liberal leaning tend to be more diverse, and not as coalesced or focused in tight religious circles. That is reflected politically. Liberals have more voices, while conservatives have fewer, louder ones.
Democrats are a multi-lingual, mutli-racial, multi-educated collection of people who care about their planet, the rivers and the air. Care about each other and do not put MONEY, wealth and power above all else.
People are more than their party affiliation. They are more than their faith. Democrats are inclusive, Calcified Conservative Republicans are not.
It seems that to be accepted by some members of the GOP, one must share (or pretend to share) the irrational fears of some Christians. That doesn't sound very big-tent to me. In fact, it sounds like exclusion on a very irrational basis.
Articles like this do you no good with conservative nonbelievers.
I'm not afraid of burning in hell either. Are you?
My understanding is that there is no Hell, other than the one created by zealots on Earth that are driven to force everyone one else to think, feel, and believe as they do.
Why would anyone be? It's imaginary. Hell is a religious fable meant to frighten gullible or weak minded individuals into (religious) obedience.
That would mean that I've fallen for the myth of a heaven and hell. Of which I didn't. The whole idea of heaven and hell is almost laughable.
Nothing like using treats to force submission.
Much more afraid of a burning planet due to anthropogenic global warming.
Not being afraid of burning in Hell seems to be a rational position.
Hell is an ancient scare tactic that evolved from early Christianity and eventually took on the fire and brimstone characterization from Dante's 'The Divine Comedy' and further enhanced by Botticelli in his map of Hell.
Many Christians hold that Hell is simply figurative and is essentially separation from God; not literally burning in torture for all of eternity. Many Christians thus do not fear burning in Hell.
Muslims also believe that people burn in Hell for their sins (not surprising as Islam was descended from Christianity):
Mohammed, along with Buraq and Gabriel, visit Hell, and see a demon punishing "shameless women" who had exposed their hair to strangers. For this crime of inciting lust in men, the women are strung up by their hair and burned for eternity. Persian, 15th century.
Contrary to popular belief amongst the "politically correct" in the West, as in most religions Muslims have been making pictures of The Prophet Muhammed (Peace Be Upon Him) for centuries.
True. Note that in Islam (as in Christianity) the beliefs on Hell vary.
I might be mistaken, but in Islam, one only endures hell for a time commensurate with their sins. Kind of like a theistic jail term. Afterwards, they are allowed to enter heaven.
That is one of the beliefs. Like Christianity, Islam has its various sects and contradictory beliefs. As one would expect.
the extremists in all 3 abrahamic cults are peas in a pod
In that they are extremists. But they have very different views.
And yet, they probably all think their views and interpretations are the correct ones.sound familiar?
One of the critical observations that nobody ever seems able to explain.
Actually, in my experience, the same is true of some of the more "Fundamentalist" type Atheists as well!
Such limited viewpoints tend to be intellectually dishonest and possibly logically indefensible.
How do you define 'fundamentalist atheist'?
Pshaw. God or gawd is not the issue. The issues are the teachings of Jesus. And the GOP, TGOP, DJTGOP and conservatism in general, rejects every word from Jesus by their actions and governance.
"Burning in Hell?" The reach of The Deceiver is long. His Shadow is longer.
Reagan is correct. His actions, thoughts and demeanor guarantees 'Hell' is not a prospect for him. Baker, White, Falwell, Graham and others on the other hand are----------prospects.
freedom from religion is an original American concept that predated the US Constitution and most likely inspired the 1st amendment. the reluctance of others not able to grasp that concept probably inspired the 2nd.
For cryin' out loud, once again, NOT all in America believe in your god or any god.....get over it already.
Nice to see that Ron Reagan Jr.,
while not endorsing the Democratic Party
nor his message being endorsed by the Democratic Party,
is still getting some mileage out of a seven year old fund raising ad that is banned from ABC, CBS, NBC and the Discovery Science networks since 2014.
I believe the ban has been removed---shortly after the Trump slimed into the WH and 'certain christians' were claiming the Trump was sent by gawd.
According to their own ( ffrf ) news release, ABC once again refused to air the ad during the Sept 12 Dem debate.
Refusing to air an ad and banning an ad is not the same thing.
One of my favourite quotes:
I know of two things that are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity. And I'm not entirely sure about the former...
Albert Einstein, if I am correct.
His views on religion are just as valid as anyone else's.
Wow, what a dramatic overreaction to somebody not sharing one's religious paranoia.
One might almost think the author (and perhaps those who agree with him) is jealous of those of us who aren't afraid of their chosen bogeyman.
It's ok, Freddy Kruger isn't going to kill you in your dreams. Samara isn't going to climb out of your television. And Satan isn't hiding under your bed, waiting to grab that one uncovered foot and use it to drag you to Hell.
Are you sure? (Do you have a link for that?)
You speak, of course, of Trump, No?
My totally subjective personal experience, which nobody is allowed to question.
his time is up in november and most of his thumper sycophants will follow 6 months later
What nonsense. Using that logic, God wanted Obama to be president for 8 years.
A number of people believe that God appoints all leaders and has done so for all of time. Yet another biblical 'interpretation'.
The rationale is that God is perfect and even though we may not see how these leaders fit into God's plan, He most definitely does.
So Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao, etc. were all part of God's plan.
This is yet another master stroke of religion. Get people to believe that no matter how bad things are, it is all part of God's plan (which is of course perfect) and one should simply accept that we are not smart enough to understand it. Get people to buy that kind of reasoning, and you can get them to believe anything.
You Go, Girl! Lay down that scat. Great job of slap back! Excellent rant! The Fury of Your Poet is stunningly clairvoyant.