- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 2
What's up with the illustration that appears with this article? Let's get clear: I detest the idea of Sarah Palin as VP. Nevertheless, the gendered dismissals of her - whip-wielding mistress? - are equally detestable.
I'm not sure why a candidate would have to give a scientific explanation for speaking in tongues, if there were no policy implications for her/his practice or belief.
The age of the earth is relevant to the extent that certain policy-makers seek to teach religious conviction instead of science. And hearing or not hearing the voice of God is again only relevant if one makes decisions on the basis of that voice or a gut instinct in the face of conflicting hard evidence.
As you point out, we all harbor certain irrational beliefs. I am concerned that we not stigmatize the religious ones and create an anti-religious test for office to replace the religious test of Bush and his cronies.
