从这里了解印度人对中国的看法

美媒:无神论者可以被选举吗?

2014-10-02 15:47 31个评论 字号:

猜一猜下个月议员选举中的主要政党候选人,有多少是公开的无神论者?大概一个手指可以数的过来。但是我告诉你,美国的无宗教信仰者大概占到总人口的百分之20,但是几百个皿煮党和共和党的议员里,几乎没有承认自己不信宗教的。不知道是不是因为他们是无神论、不可知论或者其他不关心宗教者,他们就不去参与政治选举;或者是无宗教信仰者欺骗群众,为了政治生存,这就清楚多了:候选人需要假装自己信宗教,以此来获得政治权位,不管宪法的政教分离原则。这种不应该的情况维持了很长时间。

来源:http://fm.m4.cn/2014-10/1247754.shtml
外文:http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/10/01/atheists-election-campaign-religion-secular-column/16558423/

1412223101174

Guess how many of the major-party candidates in next month’s congressional elections are openly atheist. Hint: You can count them onone finger.

猜一猜下个月议员选举中的主要政党候选人,有多少是公开的无神论者?大概一个手指可以数的过来。

It tells you something that in a time when “noreligion” is the category of roughly 20% of Americans,virtually none of the hundreds of Democrats and Republicans vying for congressional seats identify as a religious “none.”

但是我告诉你,美国的无宗教信仰者大概占到总人口的百分之20,但是几百个皿煮党和共和党的议员里,几乎没有承认自己不信宗教的。

Whether it’s because some consider their atheism,agnosticism or indifference a deal-breaker and don’t even try for office, or whether it’s because some non-religious candidates fudge the truth forpolitical viability, this much seems clear: Candidates have to at least feign some religiosity to qualify for prominent political office, despite our Constitution forbidding religion tests of this sort. And atheism and related forms of non-beliefare about the worst thing a candidate can be associated with.

不知道是不是因为他们是无神论、不可知论或者其他不关心宗教者,他们就不去参与政治选举;或者是无宗教信仰者欺骗群众,为了政治生存,这就清楚多了:候选人需要假装自己信宗教,以此来获得政治权位,不管宪法的政教分离原则。

This situation should not, and will not, hold for long.

这种不应该的情况维持了很长时间。

Just in time for the “silly season,” otherwise known as the elections, a coalition of secular organizations is launching a campaign to destigmatize non-belief in the public square. It’s called Openly Secular, and if that brings to mind people coming out of closets as we saw with the gay-rights movement, well, that’s the idea.

那么就来看看这个无聊的选季,一些世俗的组织进行选举,他们在公共场合洗刷泼在无宗教信仰者身上的脏水,名字叫“世俗开放”,给人的印象好像是同性恋权利运动。

Secular vs. adulterer

世俗 vs.通奸者

Explaining the need for the campaign, Carolyn Becker,spokesperson for Openly Secular, points to polling data showing that 53% of Americans think it’s necessary to believe in God to be moral. Other survey data show that being an atheist is more injurious to one’s shot at political office than being an adulterer.

为了解释选举的需要,卡洛琳-贝克尔,“世俗开放”的发言人,指出统计数据显示百分之53的美国人认为必须信上帝才有道德。其他的统计显示,无神论者相比通奸者,更容易被警察射击,很不公正。

These trends would likely bend if more Americans got to know people who were openly non-religious and saw them working hard, taking care of their kids and neighborhoods, and being generally kind and honest in their dealings with other people.

主流或许会逆转,如果更多的美国人知道很多无宗教信仰者,他们工作努力,悉心照看孩子以及邻居,而且品质好且诚实。

In other words, seeing them do what most everyone does,whatever our ideas about God. (It’s useful to remind ourselves, too, that the ranks of rogues and miscreants include plenty of people who tout their religious bona fides.)

换句话说,看他们怎么做的,不管对上帝持什么样的观点。

Not all the leading atheist voices agree it’s a good ideafor secular candidates to show their non-believer stripes explicitly in politics.

并非所有的无神论者都认为候选人应该公开他们无宗教信仰的身份,因为这样或许并非明智之举。

Sam Harris — author of the best-selling atheist anthem The End of Faith, as well as a new book called Waking Up, which explores the benefits of non-religious spirituality — says these candidates should be “rigorously secular.” They should challenge dubious religious ideas when they intrude in public life and protect church-state separation.

山姆-哈里斯,畅销书《结束宗教信仰》的作者;他的一本新书叫《来回走》,说明了无宗教信仰精神的好处,认为这些候选人应当是严格的世俗主义者,他们应当挑战队宗教犹豫不决的态度,保护政教分离原则。

“I’m not recommending that anyone go soft on religion,” Harris says. “I just don’t think we need to identify as avictim group.”

“我不建议任何人说起宗教时遮遮掩掩”哈里斯说,“我不认为我们需要当一个欺骗组织”。

De facto religion test

事实上的宗教测试

That might be smart for the short term, but victimhood aside, will it do enough to change the climate and address the de facto religion test we seem to have in our high-level politics?

那样或许可以在短期取得效果,但是,他们这能改变宗教信仰成为高层政治的门槛的大环境吗?

These days, candidates often rush to out do one another in showing how religious they are. Those who are quieter about such matters are frequently asked where they stand on matters of faith. Non-believers — and you know they’re out there — should not have to lie to remain viable.

这些天,候选人经常表明自己信奉宗教,以期打败对手。但当问他们为什么信仰那么重要时,都保持沉默了。不信宗教者,你知道他们就在那里,他们应该不再用撒谎的办法来保持政治生命。

Get this: Even some conservatives don’t believe in God. The prominent columnist George Will, for instance, recently revealed that he is an atheist — albeit an “amiable,low-voltage” one, as Will put it. Low voltage or high, Will has come out.

理解这点,很多保守主义者不信宗教。接触的专栏作家乔治-威尔,最近显露了他无神论的身份,即使是一个温和者,它也要为此承担,无论温和与否。

So has his conservative column-writing compatriot Charles Krauthammer, who recently distanced himself from conventional belief in Godby saying that reverence for the mystery and awesomeness of the universe was asfar as he could go.

他的同胞,同样是一个专栏作家查理斯,最近与宗教扯开了距离,说他只能对未知神秘敬畏。

These are neither laudable nor lamentable. They are simply examples of overdue candor and, I suspect, a sign of things to come.

既不需要赞美也不需要羞辱,他们仅仅是坦白自己而已,我怀疑,有一些标志性的事情会来。

Decades ago, President Eisenhower articulated a principlethat still holds sway today. “Our form of government,” the World WarII hero and 34th president declared,makes “no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don’t care what it is.”

数十年前,艾森豪威尔总统解析了一项我们至今依然用的原则,“我们的政府形式”,这个二战英雄兼第34任美国总统宣称美国“没有意义,除非她建立在一个深刻的宗教上,我倒不介意哪个宗教。”

Our new, more secular century calls for an update to Eisenhower’s idea: Our democracy cannot function well unless its participant shave deeply felt ethical commitments that get them beyond their own self-interest. And I don’t care where they get them.

但是,现代世俗的社会要求我们更正艾森豪威尔的话,应该是这样:我们的皿煮不能运作,除非我们的参与者有着很好的道德约束,这是超越我们自己喜好的道德约束,我不管他们通过什么方法达到标准(信宗教或不信都无所谓)。

以下是部分美国网友的评论:

★Not believing in a God does not mean not having a moral code that is identical to most of the 10 commandments. I know many atheists who have morals superior to those of professed religious peeps. But no, America isn’t ready to elect an atheist. Pity, because a Secularist could probably do abang up job.

不信上帝不等于没有道德。我知道很多无神论者比一些信教者要有道德。但是,美国还没有做好选无神论者的准备。可惜的是,世俗主义者可能出昏招。

 

★And btw USAtoday. Thomas Jefferson was an atheist.

随便说一下,托马斯-杰斐逊是无神论者。

 

★I could care less about the religion of a candidate…but I do object to candidates trying to pass laws based on their religious beliefs or lack there …

我很少关心一个候选人的宗教信仰,但是我反对候选人企图通过基于宗教信仰的法律。

 

★All laws are based on ones beliefs whether they are biblical or not. You cannot separate what you believe in your heart from how you would create a bill, or vote on a law

所有的法律都是基于人的信仰,无论是圣经的信仰与否。你无法将人的信仰和投票立法等行为分开。

 

★Are you kidding me? We already elected a black Muslim with a wife who hates white people. This country will elect anyone and anything.

开玩笑的吧?我们已经选了一个仇恨白人的黑人msl夫妇,这个国家会无原则的选任何人。

友荐云推荐
  1. 并非是无神论的人不会被选举,而是标榜自己的宗教信仰会更容易赢得同样信仰的人的选票。美国领导人要是都信仰上帝或者任何一个不是邪教的宗教,就不会在世界上到处制造战争,践踏别人的性命。再说了,宗教信仰往往就是领导阶级控制国民的工具

  2. 顾名思义,中国要成为‘天朝’或‘神州’,未来的领导人必须要感受或领悟到“神”的存在!依靠无神论者这个目标是不能实现的,也阻碍了中国升华的步伐。

  3. 所谓信仰就是迷信弄个狗屁上帝,欺骗大众,宗教是低生产力水平下的产物,后来就变成了政治统治的工具。无论如何宗教都是垃圾。 美国鬼子把这个都当成了政治资本了。美国就是一群迷信的家伙。

  4. 人不同于禽兽,人类对道德的追求和爱护异变了很多本来预示着美好的东西了。对道德的追求分化了群体,自我感觉高的人自然的和低级的人拉开了距离。印度的种姓制度可能原始的部分原因就是如此。想象一下,一个书香世家的家族无法做到和一个低级犯罪的人家通婚。体现在有神论者看来,无神论者道德观念非常淡薄,因果不惧,与之打交道可能无法有确定的契约保证,人性无法令人信任。很多原因是可以理解的,但事情是非常复杂的,不能简单的非此即彼看待。。。

  5. 宗教信仰就像中国封建社会时,皇帝自称天子,是上天让他成为统治大众的。这跟美国鬼子说的上帝一个样。只不过现在中国已经没有天子了。美国流氓还有屁上帝。,

  6. 不要把宗教信仰和道德捆绑到一块儿,好像有了宗教信仰自然就道德水准高似的,这个世界上有多少战争都是借宗教之名发起的,十字军东征死了多少人?中东地区为了宗教到现在都打个不停,历史上宗教事件迫害罄竹难书!

  7. 美国就是伪装成国家的教堂。和穆斯林类似,根本就是政教一体的国家。什么民主、自由、人权、平等、宗教信仰自由完全是吹嘘出来的。世界上最多囚犯的国家,最暴力的国家,最愚昧无知的国家。靠着抢劫掠夺全世界的资源人才、贩卖奴隶、靠战争发达的国家。很快将坠落。

  8. 美国是基督教立国的国家,民主只是统治手段,富裕和民主关系不大,富裕主要靠的是美军+美元建立起的霸权。 其他国家想要复制美国的成功,只复制民主制度是不行的,要连X元+X军一起复制,建立起自己的霸权地位才行。