This post was edited at 10:48 p.m.
Added February 1, 2006: ADDITIONAL thoughts on this subject by myself are posted in the comments. On further reflection, I stand by everything I said about Governor Brad Henry.
I made a comment on this story which has set off quite a storm of discussion over there and unfortunately a lot of ad hominen attacks against me for daring to say religious freedom means both that the government shouldn’t endorse religious but also cannot discriminate against religion. (and probably also a fair bit of resentment towards me for my past critical comments at Okiedoke.com)
I’m disappointed that things have gone in the direction that they have. I’m probably as much to blame for the mess as anybody. It is hard to keep my mouth shut with folks I disagree with and I argue way too much. (but unfortunately it is a phenomenon that is all of the place, from the factionalism of the left to the vitirol of AM talk radio)
Anyway all of that said, I tried to post a last comment on Okiefunk.com without luck (I think maybe the comment was too long), so anyway I’m posting it here. The comment is a response to DocHoc’s last comment
You raise some good points. I’ll address them briefly and then leave it at that.
With regards to the religious thing, I speak only for myself there. My guess is that about half of Oklahoma Greens are religious, and half are not religious at all. Many members do not agree with me (including folks who are on our state Cooperative Council) but we do find common ground and get along.
I do not believe that my views contradict the party’s stance (except possibly on abortion, but even on that issue I’m reluctantly pro-choice at least when it comes to the criminalization of abortion). I think I am in favor of seperation of church and state, in many ways more radical than that expressed by traditional liberals. You have the right to disagree with me on this of course, but I will hold to what I’ve said.
On the second issue you raised, you bring up a good point. I have probably been unneccesarily critical of your viewpoints. I always assumed that my perspective was helpful and welcome, but I could see how you would see that I’m pooping your ideas.
That said, I think you are wrong to say that I’m still a Republican at heart. I’m a pacifist who doesn’t believe in absolute property rights (I lean heavily in the agrarian socialist direction). I support drug decriminalization. I support open borders. I oppose NAFTA and the WTO. I support expanding welfare. I support univeral health care. I support organic agriculture and think most chemical pesticides should be outlawed. I support the rights of bicyclists. I support gay rights. My views are very clearly in many ways opposed to the GOP.
The problem is that my views are also opposed to many Democrats. Oklahoma elected democrats in many cases support war, support the death penalty, support the pro-corporate agenda, support “free trade”, etc. I guess the Democrats are less to blame for these things than the Republicans, but since Democrats say they are progressive, I do hold them to a higher standard.
So from what I can tell, you think that I’m a closet republican because I call Democrats on the carpet for not being true liberals, and because I approach things from a faith perspective. That does not make sense to me, and it is not a fair thing for you to say about me.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I know you are sincere in what you profess and I respect that even if I disagree with you. I’m sorry to have offended you. I posted comments here because I thought I was welcome to do so (and even encouraged to do so, as I recall from our last in-person conversation). And any criticism contained in my comments was of ideas, not of you.
In the future if I want to address the issues you raise on your blog, I’ll do so in another forum. And unless you tell me I am welcome, I won’t post more comments here.