In his signed editorial today, "Campaigns Like These Make It Hard to Find a Reason to Believe," New York Times reporter turned editorial board member Eduardo Porter came out as a proud atheist and concluded with a bizarre comparison between Saudi Arabia's harsh rules against adultery and the GOP presidential fields' feelings toward gays.
"As I watched Mitt Romney tie himself into a constitutional knot as he argued that religion should provide a guide for public policy but not be used to choose a president, it made me suspect that all the candidates in the race -- Republican and Democratic -- must believe that I lack some essential virtue.
"I'm an atheist. When people trot out the well-worn John Adams quote, 'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people,' I can't help feeling squeezed out of the polity. Mr. Romney was trying to sound ecumenical. But speeches like his confirm the impossibility for an atheist to be elected to national office in this country. Any atheist with political ambitions would have to drop the atheism first."
Porter concluded with a wacky comparison worthy of former "View" talk show host Rosie O'Donnell, comparing extremist Muslim law on adultery to his imaginative take on what Republican presidential candidates must think about gays
"Belief in God too often spawns reasons to punish sinners -- 'adulterers' in Saudi Arabia, gays for some Republican presidential candidates. Through the ages, it has provided people of all sorts of creeds a great argument to kill and maim the people from the next creed over. If it turns out that God doesn't exist -- having bought into the notion, it seems to me, would prove a pretty bad wager indeed."
What's Porter talking about? Which GOP candidate is seeking to "punish" gays, and how? If Porter means the GOP's general stand against gay marriage, it doesn't fit under the rubric of "punishment." It's simply a refusal to extend a right to gays they don't currently possess. Saudi Arabia has a range of harsh penalties for gays, including the death penalty. Which GOP candidate is advocating a similar s ystem?
(In another deep thought from last month, Porter suggested the U.S. raise taxes to help citizens' "pursuit of happiness").
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.


















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Hmm
December 14, 2007 - 14:40 ET by well99I heard there was a sale on stones and whips at Walmart.I cant remember which Repub candidate called for the punishment of gays?I will be ready though./sarc off Does NYT give bonus for lies?If so Eduardo Porter has earned one.Another case of the left wing disease of iamoffmymeds so I say the stupidest things.
Actually, you can get a
December 15, 2007 - 10:11 ET by misterbee241Actually, you can get a better deal on stones and whips at the local Baptist Bookstore.
There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745
Thanks
December 15, 2007 - 10:17 ET by well99I should of know.Since if you listen to Rosie and this clown Christians are on par with Saudi's and Islamic Terrorist./Sarc off
You really have to wonder about some of these folks.
wah-wah-wah
December 14, 2007 - 15:01 ET by ooramp"I'm an atheist...the impossibility for an atheist to be elected to national office in this country. Any atheist with political ambitions would have to drop the atheism first."
Hahahahahahahahahaha tough ain't-it, Kinda like a conservative getting a break in the old dying media! It ain't gonna happen!!!!
I know wiwf
that is the most inane statement I have ever heard!
Eduardo Porter
December 14, 2007 - 15:10 ET by drillanwr"Belief in God too often spawns reasons to punish sinners -- 'adulterers' in Saudi Arabia, gays for some Republican presidential candidates.
Sing along with me, Mr. Porter, that tried and true song from Sesame Street:
One of these things is not like the other(s),
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the other(s)
By the time I finish my song?
Did you guess which thing was not like the other(s)?
Did you guess which thing just doesn't belong?
If you guessed this one is not like the other(s),
Then you're absolutely...right!
et tu brute
December 14, 2007 - 15:13 ET by okiehawk44"Through the ages, it has provided people of all sorts of creeds a great argument to kill and maim the people from the next creed over." -- Eduardo, I guess you would say that your fellow atheists Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao and Pol Pot (their creed was communism -- just to help you out) followed your belief.
Pretty scary bunch of bible thumpers, huh?
December 14, 2007 - 15:15 ET by Captain RepusI can almost sympathize with this guy as those Christians are a pretty scary bunch, what with their moral values and such. Maybe he should moderate a little and become more like me, an agnostic.
Actually, I am an agnostic, dyslexic insomniac. I lay awake all night wondering if there really is a Dog.
What's next, a comparison
December 14, 2007 - 15:15 ET by dscottWhat's next, a comparison to Iran's treatment of gays??? This just another intellectually dishonest angle on false moral equivalence but this time instead of comparing conservatives to NAZIs, they compare us to Muslims. Now who is being polarizing and divissive???? The nerve of the left to Project that we are ones who have ratched up the angry political atmosphere when they are the guilty party.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
If it turns out that God
December 14, 2007 - 15:26 ET by MidAmericaIf it turns out that God doesn't exist -- having bought into the notion, it seems to me, would prove a pretty bad wager indeed."
He's bought into a very unscientific notion. He's postulating that earthly humans are the highest intelligence in an infinite universe. That put's our atheist in the same world view as the Medieval Church that insisted the earth was the center of the universe. Suppose we find out there is 'life' anywhere else. That opens the possibility to there being something out there smarter than us. (good chance I'd say) If there's one thing smarter why not two? Each one a little smarter than the last. With an infinite (or at least a whole bunch) of possible 'things' smarter than us what would the ultimate 'smart' thing be?
Well said, considered
December 14, 2007 - 15:29 ET by dscottWell said, considered writing articles?
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Well...... no. At least
December 14, 2007 - 15:41 ET by MidAmericaWell...... no. At least not any urge I couldn't resist.
I heard....
December 14, 2007 - 15:32 ET by Prester John...that the next execution of gays will be in front of the White House on Christmas morning and broadcast live on all the major networks.
The cable networks will have it on tape delay that evening.
Yet when the Saudis come
December 14, 2007 - 15:36 ET by wiwfYet when the Saudis come and demand footbaths on a college campuses, this columnist bends to their will and allows it.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
"the well-worn John Adams
December 14, 2007 - 16:25 ET by Chris Norman"the well-worn John Adams quote, 'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people,' I can't help feeling squeezed out of the polity."
I'm afraid he's going to have to take his discomfiture up with John Adams - once he's gone to the great beyond. Oops, I guess there's no afterlife for him, so he's out of luck there, too.
I don't see a 'death
December 14, 2007 - 16:53 ET by mattmI don't see a 'death penalty for gays' plank in the GOP. Sheesh! If you want to argue for the moral superiority of Atheism, at least try to get some of your facts right.
BTW Atheism has caused at least as much, if not more, oppression, tyranny and genocide as any other religion (or ideology.)
You wouldn't happen to mean...
December 14, 2007 - 17:41 ET by Prester John....the French Revolution (ah, the Enlightenment)
...the Bolshevik Revolution (collectivization and Utopia on Earth)
...Nazi Germany (Efficiency und das Autobahn)
...Red China (long live the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution)
...and Cambodia (no intellectuals allowed)
by any chance do you?
Which of course begs the question, why did the American Revolution came out differently?
Hmmm, I wonder.
IMO it came out differently
December 14, 2007 - 17:59 ET by sarcasmoBecause of something that's largely-forgotten these days by Washington politicians. The Constitution.
JMR
PS I think the Saudis just might have treated Larry Craig differently...
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Prester John, Don't
December 14, 2007 - 18:28 ET by wiwfPrester John,
Don't forget a certain dictator the US removed from power these past few years. His last name was... Insane? Hussie? Hussein? He was an atheist too!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
seperation of god and freedom.
December 14, 2007 - 17:09 ET by mbuelWhat atheists forget is that our freedoms in america can't exist without a higher power... the minute, that you bring the assignment of freedoms down from God to Man, one second later, the next man in power will take your freedoms away to ensure "true" equality, that the lazy grasshopper deserves as much in life as the hard working ant.
Basically, God is a central tenet in freedom.... Think about it, our freedoms and will are granted by the highest power in the universe and the government (which it's done a poor job of lately) is poorly representing that divinity.
mbuel
December 14, 2007 - 17:11 ET by MrShyI pretty much agree, and I'm an athiest! :p
"No wonder I turned out so amazingly amazing."
-- Leon (Robin to Professor TP&C's Batman)
I Thought you were a musician Shy?
December 14, 2007 - 17:21 ET by MightyMouth"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
I think Eduardo Porter is missing a virtue...
December 14, 2007 - 17:18 ET by szampI think Eduardo Porter is missing a virtue. The virtue of recognizing that he is trying to force his way of thinking "Atheism" on everyone else. According to his views, only the religion of atheism is acceptable, no one else can believe in anything,
Frankly, having led men in
December 14, 2007 - 18:27 ET by jdhawkFrankly, having led men in combat, I can tell you there are no atheists. Sure, men have told me they don't profess belief in God, but as soon as they realize that they may soon be taking their last breath here on earth, they get it.
Meanwhile, doesn't it tell you volumes that the NYT would have an "atheist" on their editorial staff. Is this just one more reason that the paper is failing?
By the way, the NYT's stock used to be $50 a couple of years ago. Recently, it hit a 52 week low of $16.02. Its been wacked to a third of its value in as many years.
A copy of the NYT shows up at the office once in a while. I throw it in the trash without giving it a second glance. All the news that is fit to be a mullet wrapper!
Pick a good atheist next time
December 14, 2007 - 18:37 ET by KC MulvilleAtheists who can defend themselves through reason are usually a lot of fun to read. But atheists who hide behind a haze of self-imagined superiority over the masses are just dull, in every sense of the word. They’re too dull to appreciate the sharpness of real argument, and they’re boring to read.
Believers make a distinction between religious authority and religious values.
I don’t understand the objection that Romney’s speech left out atheists. Atheists are free to promote their values, as much as anyone else. But since atheists have no authorities anyway, no one is afraid that an atheist hierarchy is going to seize the levers of power. When Romney says that what matters is that he’s a Christian, all he’s saying is that he supports a particular value system, the same general value system shared by the overwhelming majority of Americans. Our culture is predominantly a Judeo-Christian value system, and Mormonism easily fits within it. The vast majority of atheists, of course, also fit within it. Most atheists don’t want open prostitution, or rampant drug use, or think women should wear burkas. So I don’t see the problem.
Great Post Mr. Waters
December 14, 2007 - 18:53 ET by Lame CherryMr. Waters, it is very telling in Mr. Porter a trait which apparently is revealing itself among liberals. For a layman's term, I would state it is "You are just like your mother syndrome", which emotional women always slam men with as a trump card.
The discussion with a liberal can be about anything and it will always be twisted into some bizarre comment going down another path.
Mr. Porter is feminine in that regard like most liberals. In a layman's example, A woman asks the man she with, "Do my slacks look ok?"
The man will answer, "Yes they really fit you nice".
A normal person hears a compliment, but for the liberal woman she hears, "YOUR A** IS HUGE. YOU A FAT FRUMP. YOU CAN BE MISTAKEN FOR A WHALE".
This is why your post is so important Mr. Waters as it exposes the Joy Behar syndrome of hearing "hate rich people and punish them with taxes" while Whoopie used to hear it until she figured out it was her money being stolen in taxes.
Mr. Porter in hearing, "Homosexuality is a condition from environment and abuse in which the homosexual needs help to overcome the psychopathy", does not hear a GOP'er in sympathy and fact but instead hears like Kayne West, "George Bush hates black people".
Mr. Porter hears things from a condition of weakness. His immediate seizure upon the John Adams quote makes him feel isolated and afraid. A normal person simply hears Adams state that people of a Christian mode of belief founded a nation of responsible liberty to be moulded after.
Mr. Porter is a perfect public education in what all liberals are. Emotional creatures who are existing in fear and isolation.
This is why Rosie acts so insane in she "hears things no one else is saying", but hears them from fear. (She also has a self destructive mode like most liberals."
But this is a wonderful post and I hope Newsbusters can use it to explore who all liberals are, because while they all operate from this pyschopathy it is not usually so blatant like Mr. Porter exposing all of his inner workings which he hides from daily.
***** 5 star rating Mr. Waters
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS