https://www.usnews.com/news/national...nformation-rec

Should liberals agree with Sanders? After all similar arguments could be made to reject a Muslim nominee who thinks Christians who don't convert are going to hell.

This entire line of questioning should be irrelevant, but as "conservatives" have openly erased the line between church and state, Sanders has a point. If his "Christian" views impact his decisions in his position, yer darn tootin they matter

Edit: don't agree with Bernie, but lol at standing on principle with these monsters anymore

Nah. That's weaksauce. Gotta throw them to the lions.

This guy isn't a Christian. He's a c***.

I'm sick of Christians being tarred with the same brush as crazed American evangelical sociopaths.

While I know almost nothing about any of the organized religions, Sanders argument here seems to me essentially an argument against a bunch of them, probably including Judaism. Adherents get special standing with God, as opposed to followers of "false" religions.

Btw, we now know the line of attack against Bernie 2020.

Bernie's probably wrong here, but it's a marginal case. Certainly it raises a red flag as to whether this guy can be professional in working with people of different faiths.

People's religious beliefs should not be used as a criterion for public office as long as they do not interfere with their carrying out the duties of that office. I don't see how Vought's views about the necessity of Jesus to salvation are relevant to being deputy director of OMB, so no, liberals shouldn't agree with Sanders.

Seriously? No it doesn't.

Bernie, Bernie, Bernie, this is what happens when you sell your soul. You didn't need to go all Latino judges can't be impartial in illegal immigrant cases.

It is my understanding that Jews, and more recently, Catholics, believe that good people, not of their faith, are not doomed to hell.

You can never be sure that an incorrect belief does not in some way, either consciously or subconsciously, have a detrimental effect on what that person is expected to accomplish.

The number of good Christians pales in comparison to the latter group, and they don't speak out harshly against their crazed views, either. It's why you get lumped in together.

What do you think I just did?

Let me guess, you are an American who gets his knowledge of Christianity from TV and the internet....

I agree with this and don't think it should change my view of whether Sanders did the right thing. If I hire an electrician, I'm going to see how good an electrician they are, not whether or not they agree with me about religion. The information value of their religious beliefs is too low to override formal qualifications, recommendations, job performance, etc. In fact, I would argue that religious identification is exactly the kind of tribalistic information that often lead to worse decision-making (eg like how soft factors in college admission often lead to more upper class students). Since partisan allegiance is particularly strong in political appointments, it is wise to strongly discount such information.

"Engaging in some advanced publicity for his new global warming film spectacular, “An Inconvenient Sequel,” Gore told Interview Magazine that God didn’t create global warming and wants us to fix it."

http://americanlookout.com/rms-al-go...#ixzz4jeC65E4x

Bernie's right that Christianity has vile and repugnant elements like believing that everyone else is condemned to eternal torture and that that belief is something likely to impact how Christians treat people.

But, there's a competing issue. In the real world there are a lot of people who are religious. They are very wrong, but still, that's the real world. Generally we are all better off if we let people believe (or pretend to) in religion as long as they can compartmentalize it sufficiently.

Bernie shouldn't have touched it.

I agree with Bernie in that I too am sick of religious extremists in government. Regardless of what religion he or she is, if they're an outspoken ******* about how their religion is better than someone else's religion, I don't want them working in my government.

If you ran a company, would you make a rule that religious exclusivists can't work for you?

absolutely. and no outspoken racial supremacists either

and no men who can't shut up about how much better men are than women

How do you know whether they are really compartmentalizing it?

You don't really know, but if you do something like file a discrimination suit you have to produce some evidence and some other people have to make a judgment about it.

So you think we should overturn the Civil Rights Act that prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of religion?

No I'd not hire them on the basis of them being an ******* to other employees or customers. If they want to contend they have to be an ******* because of their religion, and therefore I can't not hire them, I'd take it to the Supreme Court.

When the dude is prefacing every response with, "I am a Christain", he's not sufficiently compartmentalizing it tho, right?

This is just good politics imo. Being right all the time is worthless unless we win elections. Bernie knew goddamn well that he wouldn't see single payer in his lifetime, but he ran on it anyway because it was the politically expedient thing to do.