-----Charles Barkley
The 2008 race for the Senate in North Carolina became especially heated when Sen. Libby Dole ran an attack ad accusing her opponent, Kay Hagan, of associating with atheists and making promises to an atheist lobby. This ad even implied that Hagan could be an atheist herself. Oh, the horror.
Now, Kay Hagan is not only a Christian, but a Sunday school teacher and elder at her church, so it's understandable that she was upset. Dole ran a vile political attack ad that was a bald-faced lie. In response, Hagan filed suit against Dole for defamation of character, and------
Wait. What?! Defamation? What defamation? Being an atheist is somehow a character defect? Associating with atheists is reflects badly on one's character?
Before I get too crazy about this, I should point out that, now that Hagan's fortunes have improved (i.e. she won her election and unseated Libby Dole), she has dropped her lawsuit. You know, because she doesn't want to focus on that horrible attack to the detriment of her Senatorial duties.
Well, okay, but what about the manner in which atheists were treated in the course of this campaign?
I actually wouldn't have had a problem with Hagan's lawsuit had it been filed on the grounds of False Light, a tort in which the defendant tells a non-defamatory, but nevertheless damaging, lie about the plaintiff. If that sounds a like I'm nitpicking over semantics, consider the following:
The ad said,
A leader of the Godless Americans PAC recently held a secret fundraiser in Kay Hagan's honor. [quoted atheist] "There is no god to rely on." "There is no Jesus." [end quoted athiest] [ . . . ] Godless Americans and Kay Hagan. She hid from cameras, and took godless money. What did Kay Hagan promise in return? [quoted atheist] "There is no god."Okay, the ad's obvious implication at the end is that Kay Hagan herself promises that "There is no god" in return for "Godless money." Yes, the ad was despicable. Not to mention desperate, ridiculous and laughable. (What does it mean for a candidate to promise that "there is no god," anyway? It's sort of like promising P.Z. Meyers that there are indeed squid in the sea. What good would it do him?)
But it's not defamatory! Let's change some of the words, shall we?
A leader of the Jewish Americans PAC recently held a secret fundraiser in Kay Hagan's honor. [quoted Jew] "There is no Christ to save you." "Jesus is not the Messiah." [end quoted Jew] [ . . . ] Jews and Kay Hagan. She hid from cameras, and took Jewish money. What did Kay Hagan promise in return? [quoted Jew] "There is no Christ."Get it? Would you be offended if Hagan had filed suit claiming that she was defamed ― that her character was maligned ― for associating with Jews or being Jewish? Hell yes! And you'd demand that the suit be for false light, not defamation. At least, I hope you would.
Anyway, I think Matt Dillahunty of the Atheist Community of Austin has this exactly right. You can listen to him here. {Warning: R-Rated Language.}
1 comments:
Karen,
I like what you've had to say very much because that was the one thing about Kay Hagan's publicized defense that bothered me. In your excellent post, you pointed out the problematic tendencies that people have when they have a view which is solely focused on one religion without a regard for anything else.
I also agree with what Matt Dillahunty said. Although Kay Hagan was wrongfully maligned by Elizabeth Dole, she didn't have to throw atheists under the bus in an effort to fight back. His point was right on about Hagan alienating a part of her base. His comments (which corrected her initial off-putting statement about being labeled as "godless") was great as well.
It makes me question whether people are serious about the separation of Church and State in this country whenever there are instances in which religion creeps into the business of governmental affairs. Even more directly, the Right's prostitution of religion directly leads to why we shouldn't vote for people based on their religious beliefs. We should be more focused on the qualities of a candidate's public record.
What is even more pertinent in this society, is that we must treat all belief systems equally in this country because it would work against the tyranny of the few. The tyranny "based on religion" is often seen through legislation (such as the Prop. 8 ), open discrimination and socialized repression. I have my fingers crossed that the new leadership coming to Washington will set policies that will encourage new ways of thinking about issues related to all the things that make us unique individuals.
Btw, this is a great site filled with a lot of things to ruminate on. As I wrote you before, we need to have as many ideas out there so that people can be encouraged to fight for things that will make a profound difference in the long run. Your site does that beautifully. As always, I wish you the best in your life and work. I will make sure to visit when I can. :)
Again, I thank you for the mention in your blog roll. It is simply wonderful.
Take care,
Ceci
Post a Comment