Friday, July 27, 2007

... And that's when Edwards lost my support.

It isn't his religion, it's his lack of faith that really has pushed me away from support. He says that it would be wrong to to use faith beliefs to make any policy decision. That is obviously correct. But, doesn't that make him a liar or at the least dishonest? It would be like me saying, "I fully understand and completely believe in chemistry, but I would never use my chemistry beliefs to inform my political decision." -- So when some bill comes up asking to ban all chlorine from everything, I won't rely on my background in chemistry to say, 'hell no'. 'We need chlorine for water, PVC pipe, and salt'. I will not do such a thing. I will make my decision on fear mongering alone!"

No certainly there's a difference here. Chemistry is real, objective, and science and faith is nonsense. However, he shouldn't know that. In order to be honest, he should rely on his unsound beliefs to make unsound decisions, or he should not have those unsound beliefs to begin with. What good is the belief that Poinsettias are poisonous if you don't rush your child to the emergency room just to find out it's an urban legend. Would you have any support for somebody who believed that, but when their four year old ate Poinsettias told him to walk it off?

No comments: