The Right Wing On Campus

[SMM]

This is a story (http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Mar2007/crane0307.html) I found very disturbing - but it explains a lot.

It is dated in March, and some may have seen it.

[ham_man]

Seems to me that those folks are bitter that there are some college students that *gasp* aren't liberal.

[adrianblaine]

Seems to me that those folks are bitter that there are some college students that *gasp* aren't liberal.

To be honest, I hate the terms liberal and conservative. They are basically stereotypes when you think about it. I'm fairly certain that if we were able to find out the beliefs of the American people, that it would look much like a "bell curve" where the majority of americans fall in the middle.

Going off of this stereotype though, what bugs me about "conservatives" is the narrow focus. College campuses I think have a reputation of producing "liberal" people because they learn a lot about the world they live in. Not that "conservatives" don't know anything about the rest of the world, but like I said, they appear to be focused much more on themselves.

[OutThere]

there are some college students that *gasp* aren't liberal.

Rest assured, I'm diligently working to correct that.

[63dot]

in my undergrad years, i spent them at a very liberal campus and a politically neutral campus

in grad school in the bay area, my school boasted the most corporate managers of any school in the region and thus the school was very pro "business" and very "conservative", unlike any school i had seen or heard of in california

being a liberal, i sometimes found myself way out of step with the majority of the students who were already pretty far up the corporate ladder and any clubs the school had were accounting clubs, finance clubs, and business entrepreneur clubs...no fraternities and no sports teams except for the san jose sharks which the alums started to...you guessed it, to make money, and the local watering hole for the school was a place where all the men sported ties and rolexes

i kind of got the feeling around the alums like it was something from the movie "the skulls" and b-school grads were referred to as the university's "mafia" as a tongue in cheek reference to a sort of good old boys network

i did go to some alumni events and i could tell when i pulled up to them because there were so many posh cars...and the main topic of conversation was money, of course

and nobody drank beer, for god's sake, it was high end wine...the yuppie stuff and something you would expect rove and bush to drink after a long day at the white house :)

in the end, i did get a good education, and it made me realize i was a true liberal, but one who could still mingle and be cordial with business blue bloods...and i made some good friends, too

[SMM]

Seems to me that those folks are bitter that there are some college students that *gasp* aren't liberal.

You sir, lack anything credible to substantiate anything that "...seems to YOU". However, I do like the way you were able to get your driver's license picture on your Tar. Very nice!

[Ugg]

Seems to me that those folks are bitter that there are some college students that *gasp* aren't liberal.

*gasp* it's amazing these college students can't see they're merely pawns for their corporate masters!

The 60s left movement was very much grass roots. This movement by the right has been pushing and prodding from the boardrooms of corporate America. It's amazing that you could even hold your head up knowing that you're being bought and sold based on some Madison Avenue ad campaign.

[63dot]

*gasp* it's amazing these college students can't see they're merely pawns for their corporate masters!

The 60s left movement was very much grass roots. This movement by the right has been pushing and prodding from the boardrooms of corporate America. It's amazing that you could even hold your head up knowing that you're being bought and sold based on some Madison Avenue ad campaign.

first of all, I AM A LIBERAL, i voted for clinton-gore twice, kerry, and i will cast my vote for obama

but guys, stop picking on ham-man!

corporations not only take their future workers from high schools, but also from colleges, so what is the big deal?

when i was in high school, coca-cola sponsored a fun event...is that evil? the rival high school has a mcdonald's on it...so what?

and for my unnamed university, due to the hostility to corporate america from this thread, should my university thus ban the alums who went on to become ceo of bank of america, raytheon, silicon graphics, president of microsoft, and chief of staff of the united states air force? and yes, my guess is that they are more likely to be republicans or at the very least very conservative democrats

for many years, our university was the chief educator of senior air force officers on the west coast...wouldn't you want one of the nation's branches of service to have their colonels and generals to have a master's degree, or should we just get anybody off the street to protect our skies? i believe the more educated our generals are, the less likely they are to charge into battle since history and logistics (ops mgt) are likely to be taught

somewhere along the line, bush ignored all history and military management and rode into iraq with his lame duck horse and a six shooter not quite full with bullets and now look at the quagmire we are in (but that's another thread)

these university alums from my school, especially the prominent corporate ones, give a lot of money to the school, and yes, are asked to speak at functions and are a very integral part of the school's alumni

and they are not trying to make us into nixon's "president's men" :)

[dswoodley]

"How much has the right wing invested in this project?

A dozen right-wing institutions have spent nearly $40 million each year over the last 30 years."

Golly, for that much money, they could have just bought an annual superbowl ad!

[LethalWolfe]

*gasp* it's amazing these college students can't see they're merely pawns for their corporate masters!
So if it's right wing propaganda being propagated that makes students pawns, but if it's left wing propaganda being propagate that makes students enlightened? Why not just encourage people to think for themselves and make up their own minds instead of trying to limit them by saying "their agenda is bad so don't pay attention to them, but our agenda is good so pay attention to us." This kind of "us vs. them" attitude makes things worse not better and demeaning people isn't a way to have a worthwhile discussion (don't people here like to trash neocons for using tactics like that?).

I think the most interesting part of the article was the end because in spite of "the right wing being on campus" students are still speaking out/protesting against "the machine" and I think the roughly equal split of of Rs and Ds going into college stays roughly the same once they get out. The last 20 years of presidential elections haven't exactly been landslide victories for the Republicans. A one termer, a two term Democrat, and a by-the-skin-of-his-teeth two termer in Bush (and most likely a Dem president next).

I think there is definitely a potential for conflict of interest when outside groups or companies give money to schools, but it's the responsibility of the administrators of those schools to make sure everything that is done is done in the best interests of the students and their education. This is a similar situation to newspapers selling ad space, IMO. I'm note going to get mad at Coke for putting in a full page ad in the paper, but if the paper gives Coke favorable coverage because of that ad I will get mad at the paper.


Lethal

[mactastic]

I know an awful lot of the top GOP operatives rise from the ranks of College Republicans, but I don't recall hearing much about College Democrats taking leading roles in the party. Has that happened often?

[63dot]

time out here

can anybody identify the blond haired lady on the cover of fortune magazine?

[dswoodley]

time out here

can anybody identify the blond haired lady on the cover of fortune magazine?

Damn, I was hoping it was Naomi Watts.

[63dot]

Damn, I was hoping it was Naomi Watts.

it's hillary, of course, and usually wall street is pro republican, unless they really know the gop does not stand a chance, and in that case, they back the democrat the way they did with bill in '92 and '96, and the way they are with mrs. clinton for '08

wall street is certainly not behind obama, and definitely not behind any of the lackluster republicans

if i were a major ceo, which i am not, i would back both sides to cover my butt....just look at rupert murdoch who backed hillary when he knew she was going to be senator again

it's no exaggeration when some third party types think that the dems and gop are cozy with wall street...he he...but i think the gop is a little more cozy with big business

[dsnort]

The 60s left movement was very much grass roots.

Don't forget the movements LSD and speed roots......:eek::D

[SMM]

*gasp* it's amazing these college students can't see they're merely pawns for their corporate masters!

The 60s left movement was very much grass roots. This movement by the right has been pushing and prodding from the boardrooms of corporate America. It's amazing that you could even hold your head up knowing that you're being bought and sold based on some Madison Avenue ad campaign.

Yes Ugg, the 60's and 70's political movements on campus were very much grassroots. I was a Poly Sci major at San Diego State. I would rate it as moderate. I had friends up at Berkley. It was definitely liberal. USC was the home of future republicans. I think the school's political climate were largely influenced by the composition of the student body.

It is important for schools to teach, but not limit education to self-serving dogma. Universities have long been known as the home of liberalism. They also can become the center of dissent. I definitely feel we need new thinkers, artists, activists, environmentalists, social workers, writers, etc., to lead us into the new millennium. We are not going to achieve that if we castrate their desire to learn.

[63dot]

Yes Ugg, the 60's and 70's political movements on campus were very much grassroots. I was a Poly Sci major at San Diego State. I would rate it as moderate. I had friends up at Berkley. It was definitely liberal. USC was the home of future republicans. I think the school's political climate were largely influenced by the composition of the student body.


i can't really imagine a full fledged university, usc, being conservative...think of all the majors...math, business, biology, english, social work, physics, etc

i can see a good percentage of the student body being upper middle class or rich, however, but that wouldn't automatically make that student a republican

now my school, who i won't mention, was mostly a one trick pony with 80% percent being business majors...the remaining 20% percent were law students and very liberal, so overall the balance of the school was very right wing

i could imagine maybe a theological university, with christianity being the only "major", being just as heavily conservative, but more in a socially conservative sense

but it's the business school only type of university who is lockstep with big corporations

i remember sitting in class listen to students who thought that outsourcing to china and india was a great idea, and the trend to follow, and that a good cost cutting measure was to fire american employees...i sat there while my blood boiled

the right wing business school students, who was almost everybody, called the outsourcing thing as "remaining competitive" and protecting the "bottom line"

i only saw these right wing ideas as shortsightedness that would get us into trouble in the future, but any mention of my ideas, which only a few fellow students shared, sounded like foolishness to the majority

i wish i could go back in time 12 years and say, "i told you so" and give them a glimpse of what the reality is today...i bet of lot of mbas did not get in on the gold rush of outsourcing

what will happen is that a percent or two in america will get very rich while the middle class vanishes and much of our wealth will be pumped into china, india, and mexico

what empire (business empire) america once had will be gone, done in by greed, which did all empires in

EDIT/CORRECTION: i spent some time actually trying to find a non all business university or non theological university that had a reputation for republicanism/right wing emphasis and the only one that showed up on my search was was claremont mckenna college and they don't focus only on business like some republican universities do, or only on christian theology like other republican universities do, but are a multi-disciplined liberal arts college

that school is a rare exception being both conservative/republican and multi-disciplinary

[TimJim]

...omg A Right Winger. Attack!

[63dot]

...omg A Right Winger. Attack!

are you referring to me :)

i am a democrat, a liberal as i have mentioned earlier

but some liberals attack conservatives unfairly

half of america are republicans, or just under half last time i heard from the cnns and fox networks out there

when i was born, a long time ago, only a third of americans were republicans so there has been a shift...but things will swing back and the dems will reclaim ground and 2006 was the start of that movement

mrs. clinton is probably going to win...even helms' and lott's advisor said so...and mentioned that the gop is focusing their firepower on senate and house seats for 2008

[leekohler]

Hmm- where I went to college back in the 80's, it was probably 80% ultra right wing and it was a state school. It was scary if you were in any way different than everybody else, African American folks were scared s***less there. God forbid if you were gay- then you were basically everything-that-is-wrong-with-the-world. Funny how things don't change all that much, isn't it? ;)

[63dot]

Hmm- where I went to college back in the 80's, it was probably 80% ultra right wing and it was a state school. It was scary if you were in any way different than everybody else, African American folks were scared s***less there. God forbid if you were gay- then you were basically everything-that-is-wrong-with-the-world. Funny how things don't change all that much, isn't it? ;)

hi lee,

jefhatfield here

you know from my seven years of posts here that i am 99% percent in agreement with you, especially on political stuff

but what school did you go to that was a state school and republican? i spent a lot of time researching for a "multi-disciplinary" or "ordinary" college or university with an overwhelming republican presence and they are as rare as hen's teeth

there are many "republican" counties in the south with a liberal oasis in the middle which usually tends to be a university...athens, GA with it's college presence is a well known example, so is austin, texas

from a previous post, i found claremont mckenna, a multi-disciplinary school to be rumored to be "mostly" republican, but not overwhelmingly so like a business only school or theology only school (but some famous theological schools, yale and harvard, are more neutral, and even liberal according to some fundamentalists) :)

[leekohler]

I'll give you three hints, it's in northwest Ohio, but not in Toledo and there's lots of cornfields. Come on Jeff, I'm not gonna make it easy for you. :) Trust me, that place was wacky. Reagan came to campus and you'd have thought it was the Second Coming.

[63dot]

I'll give you three hints, it's in northwest Ohio, but not in Toledo and there's lots of cornfields. Come on Jeff, I'm not gonna make it easy for you. :) Trust me, that place was wacky. Reagan came to campus and you'd have thought it was the Second Coming.

lee,

jef here again

ohio, are you freakin' kidding

that's a battle ground state not any different historically than penn or nj

it was ohio that put clinton over the top in '92...and kerry was close to taking that state and if he did, we would have him

the ohio university?

ohio state?

who? i am curious now

my guess is two things:

the republicans were a vocal minority

any president would make people come up to see him, just out of curiousity

[Sobe]

yes we're all in danger from right-wing groups infiltrating college campuses...

In related news, The New York Times endorsed all of Bush's judicial appointments, Barack Obama called for Cap Gains tax reductions, and the Democratic Party offered a real alternative to anything Bush wants.

[mozmac]

To be honest, I hate the terms liberal and conservative. They are basically stereotypes when you think about it. I'm fairly certain that if we were able to find out the beliefs of the American people, that it would look much like a "bell curve" where the majority of americans fall in the middle.

Going off of this stereotype though, what bugs me about "conservatives" is the narrow focus. College campuses I think have a reputation of producing "liberal" people because they learn a lot about the world they live in. Not that "conservatives" don't know anything about the rest of the world, but like I said, they appear to be focused much more on themselves.

You hit it right on about the stereotypes. Most politicians are moving towards that bell-curve already. Even though they must still choose a party, they do things that appeal to both sides (at least during elections). And why shouldn't they? America is the most diverse country in the world, so why is it that we try to divide ourselves into two categories? I think it'd be great it smaller political parties gained steam and actually stood a chance against Dems and Reps. When's the last time a Whig was elected? Early 1900s?

We need to vote for the person that will make the best decisions for Americans, not their party. We tried to have two different countries 150 years ago, and it didn't work.

As for me, I lean more on the conservative side of things, but am one of those people stuck in the middle of the bell curve. I vote Republican most of the time, but listen to both sides of every debate and will vote for whoever I feel best represents my beliefs and the future of America. I attend probably the most conservative university in America, maybe the world. Brigham Young University "the Mormon school" where many people don't even know how to have a political debate in class, because they don't know why they're Republican. "He questioned President Bush. Can you do that?" Things are getting better, and many of the students have their heads on straight, but it's sad to see so many students casting their votes (like many Dems do, too) for their party's candidate just because that's what they've grown up with.

[63dot]

You hit it right on about the stereotypes. Most politicians are moving towards that bell-curve already. Even though they must still choose a party, they do things that appeal to both sides (at least during elections). And why shouldn't they? America is the most diverse country in the world, so why is it that we try to divide ourselves into two categories? I think it'd be great it smaller political parties gained steam and actually stood a chance against Dems and Reps. When's the last time a Whig was elected? Early 1900s?

We need to vote for the person that will make the best decisions for Americans, not their party. We tried to have two different countries 150 years ago, and it didn't work.

As for me, I lean more on the conservative side of things, but am one of those people stuck in the middle of the bell curve. I vote Republican most of the time, but listen to both sides of every debate and will vote for whoever I feel best represents my beliefs and the future of America. I attend probably the most conservative university in America, maybe the world. Brigham Young University "the Mormon school" where many people don't even know how to have a political debate in class, because they don't know why they're Republican. "He questioned President Bush. Can you do that?" Things are getting better, and many of the students have their heads on straight, but it's sad to see so many students casting their votes (like many Dems do, too) for their party's candidate just because that's what they've grown up with.

very interesting

we will see how "conservative" or "republican" byu will be after the nasty attacks many protestant fundamentalists will wage on mitt romney

i could actually see another party starting after this election coming up

[nbs2]

Having been to schools that were solid right and solid left, I'm not sure where this article is coming from. I don't think there was much external pressure on the students. Rather, it was the student body and the administration that worked to quell the opinions of the other side.

BYU was solidly on the right, and there was some corporate presence, but it wasn't trying to push anybody. The student body, on the other hand, was pretty clear in expressing their beliefs regarding liberals. As more liberals have matriculated, there has been a moderation. The administration still isn't the more tolerant, but they are still better than the administration (and professors) at the University of Maryland School of Law. There, the administration and faculty do enough to make clear that conservative points-of-view are unwelcome that external movement don't have much work to do and whatever minor discomfort the liberal student body has is thoroughly overshadowed.

Edit: 63dot - I don't see BYU or Mormons becoming less conservative or Republican after the expected nasty attacks. But, you will see a heavier persecution complex than we already have. But, after the Baptists swarmed Utah to try and save the Mormons is 1998, I would hope that the kind reception they got would dissuade them (and others) from attacking the religion.

[mozmac]

very interesting

we will see how "conservative" or "republican" byu will be after the nasty attacks many protestant fundamentalists will wage on mit romney

i could actually see another party starting after this election coming up

What kind of party? You've got me curious.

I also will not be voting for Mitt simply because he's Mormon. I know many people won't vote for him for the same reason. I'm looking at him as a politician and will make my choice there. He's fighting the same religious battle JFK did back in the 60s, except The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is much smaller than the Catholic church in numbers of members here in the States.

I can't get mad at those who say, "I won't elect a Mormon president" if I vote for the guy simply because he IS Mormon.

[63dot]

Having been to schools that were solid right and solid left, I'm not sure where this article is coming from. I don't think there was much external pressure on the students. Rather, it was the student body and the administration that worked to quell the opinions of the other side.

BYU was solidly on the right, and there was some corporate presence, but it wasn't trying to push anybody. The student body, on the other hand, was pretty clear in expressing their beliefs regarding liberals. As more liberals have matriculated, there has been a moderation. The administration still isn't the more tolerant, but they are still better than the administration (and professors) at the University of Maryland School of Law. There, the administration and faculty do enough to make clear that conservative points-of-view are unwelcome that external movement don't have much work to do and whatever minor discomfort the liberal student body has is thoroughly overshadowed.

Edit: 63dot - I don't see BYU or Mormons becoming less conservative or Republican after the expected nasty attacks. But, you will see a heavier persecution complex. But, after the Baptists swarmed Utah to try and save the Mormons is 1998, I would hope that the kind reception they got would dissuade them (and others) from attacking the religion.

being a former law student myself...i decided not to be an attorney though...the law is so at odds with how "king" bush and the neo cons wants to run things :)

i get angry when i hear christians (i am one) who attack mitt and call him a member of a cult...some may see mormonism as another branch of christianity or another religion, maybe, but not a cult out to rob you of your independence and money

sometimes a mormon missionary would come to my door, but never did anybody from that church try and "sell" me something or ask for a monetary donation, so in my view, the church of latter day saints is not a cult like so many fundamentalists charge against mitt romney

my run ins with true cults ultimately ended up in their wanting my money...like a business, basically...he he...cults should have three letters behind their church name...INC.

[Ugg]

What kind of party? You've got me curious.

I also will not be voting for Mitt simply because he's Mormon. I know many people won't vote for him for the same reason. I'm looking at him as a politician and will make my choice there. He's fighting the same religious battle JFK did back in the 60s, except The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is much smaller than the Catholic church in numbers of members here in the States.

I can't get mad at those who say, "I won't elect a Mormon president" if I vote for the guy simply because he IS Mormon.

I wouldn't vote for Milt for the same reasons I didn't vote for bush and wouldn't have voted for Kennedy.

bush's born againness was a guarantee he'd be an easy mark for the neocons. Kennedy's ties to the catholic church heavily influenced our presence in Vietnam.

gawd only knows how milt would be pressured by those in SLC.

Electing those who wear their religion on their sleeve is a sure recipe for disaster.

[63dot]

What kind of party? You've got me curious.



two conservative parties

1) pro business, for small government, for less taxes, pro corporation

vs.

2) a socially conservative party against abortion, gay marriage, and anti-mormon, and against other churches which they deem cults, or even liberal

in california we had a three way race between republican pro business schwartzenegger, fundamentalist socially conservative mcclintock, and democrat bustamante...and it was basically a three way mud slinging race

fundamentalist mcclintock came in third place, but got a respectable 20% percent of the vote and he spent more time attacking schwartzenegger!

it was interesting towards the end when many fundamentalists ditched their man mcclintock and backed arnold, because they didn't want to split the conservatives so evenly down the middle that bustamante would win in a fluke

[mozmac]

I wouldn't vote for Milt for the same reasons I didn't vote for bush and wouldn't have voted for Kennedy.

bush's born againness was a guarantee he'd be an easy mark for the neocons. Kennedy's ties to the catholic church heavily influenced our presence in Vietnam.

gawd only knows how milt would be pressured by those in SLC.

Electing those who wear their religion on their sleeve is a sure recipe for disaster.

Who do you think founded this country and wrote the Constitution? They were so vocal about their religion, that they started their meetings with a prayer. Last time I read through it, the Constitution was not a recipe for disaster.

Around election time, the head LDS church in SLC always issues a statement that is read at every meetinghouse around the country. It says something to the effect of, "The church does not endorse any political candidate and church time is not to be alloted for such activities. Members are encouraged to be involved in the political process and vote for the candidate that will lead the country in the right direction." And one of the core beliefs, or "Articles of Faith", is to obey the law of the land.

A politician can by all means be religious. Religion helps define a person's core values. However, the politician should not let the head of their religion dictate the decisions they make in office.

[63dot]

Electing those who wear their religion on their sleeve is a sure recipe for disaster.

very well said

and in W's case, i think his born again antics are acting in order to get votes from the bible belt

religion should be a personal issue

let's have our politicians talk about taxes, the environment, government waste, foreign policy and trade, elections, etc.

[mozmac]

two conservative parties

1) pro business, for small government, for less taxes, pro corporation

vs.

2) a socially conservative party against abortion, gay marriage, and anti-mormon, and against other churches which they deem cults, or even liberal

in california we had a three way race between republican pro business schwartzenegger, fundamentalist socially conservative mcclintock, and democrat bustamante...and it was basically a three way mud slinging race

fundamentalist mcclintock came in third place, but got a respectable 20% percent of the vote and he spent more time attacking schwartzenegger!

it was interesting towards the end when many fundamentalists ditched their man mcclintock and backed arnold, because they didn't want to split the conservatives so evenly down the middle that bustamante would win in a fluke

Well, the socially conservative party couldn't be anti-mormon, too, because most Mormons are pro-life and anti gay-marriage. The only times they feel abortion is okay is incase of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is at risk.

[63dot]

..... However, the politician should not let the head of their religion dictate the decisions they make in office.

now i can totally agree with that

imagine what a mess it would be if our president was also our pope or archbishop

if a person wants their political leader to run the country and the religion, they can move to iran

but personally, i like america better with its separation of church and state

[nbs2]

I wouldn't vote for Milt for the same reasons I didn't vote for bush and wouldn't have voted for Kennedy.

bush's born againness was a guarantee he'd be an easy mark for the neocons. Kennedy's ties to the catholic church heavily influenced our presence in Vietnam.

gawd only knows how milt would be pressured by those in SLC.

Electing those who wear their religion on their sleeve is a sure recipe for disaster.

I'm sure Mitt won't have Milt's problems. :)

Would you say that the Senate has been influenced by SLC? While church membership may have expectations, the Church generally doesn't get involved in politics. Even politicians that don't toe the church line on more cut/dry issues at ok. I ran on a platform that if the legislature couldn't cut spending then slots were an option to consider, while the Church encourages members to oppose gambling.

[63dot]

Well, the socially conservative party couldn't be anti-mormon, too, because most Mormons are pro-life and anti gay-marriage. The only times they feel abortion is okay is incase of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is at risk.

jehovah witnesses are socially conservative and so are many other churches that are non-trinitarian in their theology

but many trinity based conservative christians (not all of course) are extremely bigoted against mormons or any other christians they deem against a holy trinity

personally, i believe christ was god in the flesh, but some christians don't share my belief, but one thing we usually hold in common is that he died for our sins as john 3:16 points out

today, few who believe that christ lived here on earth consider him a showboater who had messianic delusions of grandeur, or was out to start an armed resistance against rome

[it5five]

Who do you think founded this country and wrote the Constitution? They were so vocal about their religion, that they started their meetings with a prayer.



Certainly not bible-thumpin' Christians you think founded it.

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must approve more of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by both parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

[leekohler]

Certainly not bible-thumpin' Christians you think founded it.

I knew somwone would call that out. Thanks. A lot of people don't know their history.

[it5five]

Luckily I haven't made a trip to the library to return some overdue books, so I had the sources sitting right on my desk. Putting something off has actually helped.

[mactastic]

I went to a solidly red college as well. Heavy presence of College Republicans, lots of Krusaders for Khrist. Janitors who would tear down LGBT flyers. Easily half my professors were conservatives.

My most vivid memory is of some members of the College Republicans hiding behind protest signs while hurling eggs at the Gay/Straight Alliance folks who were trying to have a rally.

[dswoodley]

Certainly not bible-thumpin' Christians you think founded it.

Oh boy. I can only answer quote for quote:

John Adams and John Hancock:
We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus! [April 18, 1775]

John Adams:
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”

“[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”
–John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

"I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." December 25, 1813 letter to Thomas Jefferson

Samuel Adams:
“ He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776. Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]

“ Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity… and leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system.” [October 4, 1790]

Charles Carroll - signer of the Declaration of Independence
" Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." [Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]

Benjamin Franklin:
“ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787 | original manuscript of this speech

“In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered… do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?” [Constitutional Convention, Thursday June 28, 1787]

In Benjamin Franklin's 1749 plan of education for public schools in Pennsylvania, he insisted that schools teach "the excellency of the Christian religion above all others, ancient or modern."

In 1787 when Franklin helped found Benjamin Franklin University, it was dedicated as "a nursery of religion and learning, built on Christ, the Cornerstone."

John Hancock:
“In circumstances as dark as these, it becomes us, as Men and Christians, to reflect that whilst every prudent measure should be taken to ward off the impending judgments, …at the same time all confidence must be withheld from the means we use; and reposed only on that God rules in the armies of Heaven, and without His whole blessing, the best human counsels are but foolishness… Resolved; …Thursday the 11th of May…to humble themselves before God under the heavy judgments felt and feared, to confess the sins that have deserved them, to implore the Forgiveness of all our transgressions, and a spirit of repentance and reformation …and a Blessing on the … Union of the American Colonies in Defense of their Rights [for which hitherto we desire to thank Almighty God]…That the people of Great Britain and their rulers may have their eyes opened to discern the things that shall make for the peace of the nation…for the redress of America’s many grievances, the restoration of all her invaded liberties, and their security to the latest generations.
"A Day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, with a total abstinence from labor and recreation. Proclamation on April 15, 1775"

Patrick Henry:
“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses]

James Madison
“ We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.”

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

I guess it's a matter of opinion as to whether or not the Founding Fathers were thinking about Jesus.

[63dot]

I went to a solidly red college as well. Heavy presence of College Republicans, lots of Krusaders for Khrist. Janitors who would tear down LGBT flyers. Easily half my professors were conservatives.

My most vivid memory is of some members of the College Republicans hiding behind protest signs while hurling eggs at the Gay/Straight Alliance folks who were trying to have a rally.

i spent my first 2.5 years of college at cal poly, and they are liberal compared to where i graduated from as you can see from my descriptions in earlier posts on this thread (if you are curious, i can pm you on who they are) :)

-jef

[Sobe]

Try a liberal arts campus in the north east.

[mozmac]

The diversity in these quotes proves my point exactly. You aren't misquoting our founding fathers here. They are saying exactly what I said earlier. Religion defined these men. They were Christian and believed that God himself established this country through them. However, they were very wise to make the distinction that it was not a religious country and that church would not decide the law for them. Religion made them who they are, but they were the ones who made the choices.

Separating church and state does not mean that a politician can't be religious. Vote for a person based on their political views, the fact that they're religious, atheist, gay, female, black...should not matter. Their background has shaped their political stance, but does not blindly lead them along.

[dswoodley]

The diversity in these quotes proves my point exactly. You aren't misquoting our founding fathers here. They are saying exactly what I said earlier. Religion defined these men. They were Christian and believed that God himself established this country through them. However, they were very wise to make the distinction that it was not a religious country and that church would not decide the law for them. Religion made them who they are, but they were the ones who made the choices.

Separating church and state does not mean that a politician can't be religious. Vote for a person based on their political views, the fact that they're religious, atheist, gay, female, black...should not matter. Their background has shaped their political stance, but does not blindly lead them along.

I agree mostly. The issue is not whether the US was intended as aChristian theocracy, it's a question of Christian influence, which was clearly quite heavy and impossible to separate from their political philosophies.

[adrianblaine]

The diversity in these quotes proves my point exactly. You aren't misquoting our founding fathers here. They are saying exactly what I said earlier. Religion defined these men. They were Christian and believed that God himself established this country through them. However, they were very wise to make the distinction that it was not a religious country and that church would not decide the law for them. Religion made them who they are, but they were the ones who made the choices.

Separating church and state does not mean that a politician can't be religious. Vote for a person based on their political views, the fact that they're religious, atheist, gay, female, black...should not matter. Their background has shaped their political stance, but does not blindly lead them along.

The United States is based on the idea of freedom of religion though, not Christian rules. I honestly don't care what religion any politician is, but they need to respect every other belief as well. Politicians represent people. While they are entitled to their own beliefs, they should be doing what the people want, and not what they think is "better".

[imac/cheese]

I went to a solidly red college as well. Heavy presence of College Republicans, lots of Krusaders for Khrist. Janitors who would tear down LGBT flyers. Easily half my professors were conservatives.

My most vivid memory is of some members of the College Republicans hiding behind protest signs while hurling eggs at the Gay/Straight Alliance folks who were trying to have a rally.

If half your professors were conservatives, doesn't that mean that your college was a good representation of society? If I remember correctly you are an engineer and most engineering departments are more conservative than liberal (well actually mine was more foreign than American but that is not really the point). From my experience with various engineering schools, if only half your professors were conservative, that would be a liberal engineering school.

That being said, it is still horrible for anyone to hurl eggs at a group trying to hold a rally.

[mozmac]

I knew somwone would call that out. Thanks. A lot of people don't know their history.

Thanks, but I do. If I didn't, I wouldn't have made such a bold claim. I didn't have the quotes to back it up, but it appears others did.

[dswoodley]

gawd only knows how milt would be pressured by those in SLC.

Electing those who wear their religion on their sleeve is a sure recipe for disaster.

Not to take us too far off topic, but this reminds me of an old joke.

A cardinal rushes in to visit the Pope. Frantically he says, "Your Holiness, I have good and bad news!"

The Pope says, "What's the good news?"

The cardinal says "The Second Coming has happened, Jesus is back!"

"That's wondeful!! What's the bad news?" asks the Pope.

He responds, "She's in Salt Lake City, and boy is she is pissed at you!"

[leekohler]

That being said, it is still horrible for anyone to hurl eggs at a group trying to hold a rally.

The same types of people did a lot worse to people like me when I was in school. You'd be horrified that those kinds of thing goes on in the US.

[Sobe]

The same types of people did a lot worse to people like me when I was in school. You'd be horrified that those kinds of thing goes on in the US.

such behavior has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. It's just rude, illegal, and cruel.

[Swarmlord]

Oh boy. I can only answer quote for quote:

I guess it's a matter of opinion as to whether or not the Founding Fathers were thinking about Jesus.

Nice summary. Thanks. Kind of puts that whole thing to bed as far as I'm concerned.

[leekohler]

such behavior has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. It's just rude, illegal, and cruel.

Hmm- funny how it was just the conservatives doing it to us at the time. It wasn't liberals. You'd also be surprised at just what illegal acts they got away with.

[63dot]

he he....con law 101 here

first there was ecclesiatical law...church based law that existed in many european countries long before our constitution

then judge made law...or common law which was predominant but fading around the time of the revolutionary war in the 13 colonies

then the newly minted usa came up with, through the early 1800s, statutory law, based on statutes to avoid judges and their religious/personal preferences in their decisions

so you could have religous views in a country that lets you practice any religion, but cannot let that dictate law or public policy lest we fall back into ecclesiastical law

law is an ever evolving field

[Sobe]

Hmm- funny how it was just the conservatives doing it to us at the time. It wasn't liberals. You'd also be surprised at just what illegal acts they got away with.

heh ok, if you want to think that conservatives have a monopoly on boorish or illegal behavior then by all means enjoy your delusion.

[dswoodley]

Nice summary. Thanks. Kind of puts that whole thing to bed as far as I'm concerned.

No problem. Yeah, it's debatable as to how much the FF wanted to "Christianify" the nation government. There's lots of evidence on both sides. But to say the FF as a whole were not influenced or motivated by Christianity is silly at best and revisionist at worst.

The bigger question of course still is not what the country was intended to be by racist, sexist white males 200-250 years ago, but how to deal with the reality of the republic today.

[leekohler]

heh ok, if you want to think that conservatives have a monopoly on boorish or illegal behavior then by all means enjoy your delusion.

I was referring to a specific post about a specific situation. Of course no one has a monopoly on bad behavior, but I have yet to see a group of liberals attack a group of gays and lesbians with eggs or do much worse.

You can twist it all you like. Talk about delusional.

[mactastic]

If half your professors were conservatives, doesn't that mean that your college was a good representation of society? If I remember correctly you are an engineer and most engineering departments are more conservative than liberal (well actually mine was more foreign than American but that is not really the point). From my experience with various engineering schools, if only half your professors were conservative, that would be a liberal engineering school.

That being said, it is still horrible for anyone to hurl eggs at a group trying to hold a rally.
Roughly half my professors were architecture, half were construction types.

And I guess thinking about it, half were openly conservative, probably a quarter were openly liberal, and the rest kept it to themselves. I much prefered the latter catagory.

[Sobe]

I was referring to a specific post about a specific situation. Of course no one has a monopoly on bad behavior, but I have yet to see a group of liberals attack a group of gays and lesbians with eggs or do much worse.

You can twist it all you like. Talk about delusional.

Not twisting anything at all. The posts began to take on a tone of extrapolation, meaning that this is representative behavior of conservatives.

If no one else is willing to disabuse people of that notion, I'm quite fine doing so.

People who engage in that behavior are religious zealots not conservative. They define the ideology about as much as the Earth Liberation Front defines liberalism.

[imac/cheese]

Roughly half my professors were architecture, half were construction types.

And I guess thinking about it, half were openly conservative, probably a quarter were openly liberal, and the rest kept it to themselves. I much prefered the latter catagory.

Architecture... I was close, but that is a little more liberal major than engineering. I agree with your preference of those who kept it to themselves. While I was a professor, I was often asked what my personal political beliefs were (during the Kerry/Bush election) and I refused to let my students know where I stood. I would encourage debate and discussion and often play the devil's advocate but I didn't feel it was my place to influence their opinions.

I was referring to a specific post about a specific situation. Of course no one has a monopoly on bad behavior, but I have yet to see a group of liberals attack a group of gays and lesbians with eggs or do much worse.

I have seen a group of liberals attack and harass ROTC cadets just trying to go to class.

[leekohler]

Not twisting anything at all. The posts began to take on a tone of extrapolation, meaning that this is representative behavior of conservatives.

If no one else is willing to disabuse people of that notion, I'm quite fine doing so.

People who engage in that behavior are religious zealots not conservative. They define the ideology about as much as the Earth Liberation Front defines liberalism.

You misinterpreted what I was posting about then.

[63dot]

People who engage in that behavior are religious zealots not conservative. They define the ideology about as much as the Earth Liberation Front defines liberalism.

that's a great point

many today equate religious zealots as true conservatives and "enviromentalists" as true liberals

when i went to moderate/moderate-liberal cal poly, slo in the 80s, most students i talked to said they were there to learn something, and believe it or not, to have fun and we usually tooled around with the student who had a car, usually a modest one like a honda accord...i met only one student who said he was there to get a skill to make money and maybe buy a new volvo once he opened up a successful architecture firm...and he loved reagan because he said he would get taxed less

when i went to another, true blue conservative school, the students i met talked about stocks, business deals, and making tons of money...not about education or learning...many wore business suits to class and had fancy cars...200 of the 300 richest dot.coms in northern california were within six blocks of the campus and it was not unusual to have a millionaire or ceo in the class

and if there was a true conservative who also happened to be a christian, i could see him/her trying to garner a deal to make the next 700 club, with all the trimmings and $100,000 dollar a year interior decorators on retainer :)

there is a difference between someone who wants to go to college and learn a skill and maybe make a good living someday and one who wants to be a "master of the universe"...a class full of wanna-be "masters of the universe" is sickening for a liberal person like me

when you are a "master of the universe", you don't get there through merit or hard work, but by your connections, many of whom were there before you even hit campus, and once bush held a dinner for those types (who come in all races and religions but who have connections and money in common) and he called them his "base"

when the fundamentalists heard of this, they were not too happy

make no mistake, true conservatives want small government, less taxes, and laissez-faire and don't have the interest of the majority of america on their minds

[ham_man]

there are many "republican" counties in the south with a liberal oasis in the middle which usually tends to be a university...athens, GA with it's college presence is a well known example, so is austin, texas
While Travis County is most definately liberal, the Daily Texan (UT's newspaper) did a poll that found, IIRC, that the student body felt that the University staff and students were overwhelmingly liberal, while, in the same poll, they determined that political leanings on campus were in fact very balanced (or tilted just slightly liberal).