Asturian-American Migration Forum

[Art: Para facilitar más discusión de un tema ligeramente distinta, he copiado un parte de un mensaje de Berodia de aquí:
http://www.asturianus.org/forum/viewtop ... =3202#3202 ]


En EEUU siempre metéis a Dios en todo, hasta para ir a la guerra. Bush hablo de su fe, y dijo que rezaba a menudo, por su mujer, sus hijas (nada dijo del perro), y por los soldados americanos.

Si Bush fuera auténticamente cristiano, debería tener piedad del más débil y rezar por las víctimas a manos de los soldados americanos. Eso por lo menos se aprende de la lectura del nuevo testamento. Pero como muchos que se vanaglorian de su fe, y de ir a misa a menudo, luego, en su actuar diario, no se comportan como su fe les pide, sino de manera totalmente contraria. ¿O quizás los líderes cristianos de este mundo tenga una versión especifica de la Biblia, solo para ellos?

También dijo que en "América" cada cual puede rezar al dios que quiera. Yo me pregunto : ¿Cómo se considera en EEUU a los ateos? ¿Existen? ¿Se atreven a confesar públicamente que para ellos dios no existe? ¿No sufren discriminación? ¿Tiene un político ateo confeso alguna probabilidad de salir elegido?

-------------
translated by Art

[Art: To facilitate further discussion of slightly different topic, I have copied part of a message by Berodia from:
http://www.asturianus.org/forum/viewtop ... =3202#3202 ]


In the USA you always insert God in everything, even in going to the war. Bush spoke about his faith, and he said that he was praying often, for his wife, his daughters (he said nothing of the dog), and for the American soldiers.

If Bush was an authentic Christian, he should have piety on the weakest and pray for those who have been the victims of the American soldiers. At the very least, this is what one would learn by reading the New Testament. But like many who boast of their faith and of going to mass often, then do not behave in their every day actions as their faith requires [asks] of them, but in a totally opposite way. Or perhaps the Christian leaders of this world have a specific version of the Bible, only for them?

Also he said that in "America" everyone can pray to whatever god they want to. I wonder: how are atheists thought of [considered] in the USA? Do they exist? Do they dare to confess publicly that for them god does not exist? Do not they suffer discrimination? Does a politician who is a declares him/herself to be an atheist have any chance of being elected?

Yo creo que la religiosidad de los estadounidenses se debe a su historia como refugio de sectas perseguidas en Europa. La (aún) mayoría dominante en EE.UU., los WASPs (blancos, anglosajones y protestantes) consideran que su país lo fundaron los puritanos separatistas ingleses que llegaron a bordo del Mayflower desde Plymouth. (Claro que el Palacio del Gobernador de Santa Fé, Nuevo México, construído por los españoles, ya llevaba ya mas de 100 años allí y lo mismo pasaba con San Agustín de La Florida, etc., pero eso no cuenta.) En sucesivas oleadas fueron llegando otros refugiados de la persecución religiosa en Europa y la religiosidad oficial, a pesar de ser anticonstitucional, es como una telaraña que lo invade todo, incluso la esfera personal.

En algunos estados incluso están prohibidos la venta y el consumo de alcohol los domingos. La gente hace sus barbacoas los sábados, para poder tomar cerveza en el patio sin que se escandalicen los vecinos. Al menos es lo que yo viví.

A mi se me ocurrió decir una vez en el trabajo que no creía en Dios e inmediatamente me prometieron mis dos compañeras de despacho, muy queridas por cierto, que rezarían por mi! No les cabía en la cabeza que si no crees en Díos tampoco crees en los rezos. No fuí capaz de hacerles entender que de verdad no hacía falta que rezaran. Ellas nada: “No te preocupes, reina, que ya rezamos nosotras por tí”. Las pobres estaban consternadas de verdad. Me sentí como una extraterrestre y no se me ocurrió volver a comentarlo a nadie más.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that American religiousness is mainly due to their country’s history as a refuge for religious sects once persecuted in Europe. The (still) dominant WASP majority consider that their country was founded by the English Puritan separatists who came from Plymouth on the Mayflower. (Of course the Governor’s Palace in Santa Fe, NM, had been there for over 100 years, as was St. Augustine, FL., but that doesn’t count). Successive waves of religious refugees kept arriving from Europe and the official religiousness, despite being unconstitutional, is like a cobweb that invades everything, even people’s private life.

In some US States it’s against the Law to sell/buy and drink alcohol on Sundays. People have their BBQs on Saturdays, so they can drink beer in the backyard without shocking their neighbours. At least that was my experience.

I once mentioned at work that I didn’t believe in God and my two very dear co-workers, who shared the same office, immediately promised they would pray for me. They couldn’t grasp that if you don’t believe in God you don’t believe in prayers. They insisted, “Don’t you fret none, hon, we’ll pray for ya!” They were truly concerned. I felt like I was from outer space or something and never mentioned it again to anyone.

Terechu

We have gone from going to church on Sundays and minding our own religious business to a country of closed-minded zealots who are hell-bent on forcing their religious views (and imaginary laws) on others. I want to believe that they're the minority of church-goers, but the evangelical movement seems to grow exponentially, and now even the Catholics are one-issue voting Republican due to religious topics (abortion and stem cell research) instead of voting on issues like jobs and the economy.

It scares the hell out of me, to be honest.

----------------------------------------------
Transl. Terechu

Hemos pasado de ir a misa los domingos y ocuparnos de nuestros propios asuntos religiosos a ser un país de fanáticos religiosos carcas decididos a imponer contra viento y marea sus puntos de vista religiosos (y leyes imaginarias) a los demás. Quiero creer que son la minoría de los que van a misa, pero el movimiento evangélico está creciendo de forma exponencial y ahora incluso los católicos están votando a los Republicanos por un solo asunto debido a los temas religiosos (aborto e investigación con células madre), en vez de votar por asuntos como los puestos de trabajo y la economía.

Me da un miedo de la hostia, sinceramente.

I asked several contacts about Berodia's question about atheist politicians.

One person said, "If an atheist could explain what they believe in, then they could get elected." The other said, "No way! There's too much prejudice." It seemed to me that the first person was worried that an atheist might not have "good" beliefs and values.

I wonder if a person's beliefs make a difference? How many of us really act according to our beliefs? Values seem more important to me, but I'm still pondering this one....

Well, the truth is that, although there have been a few high-profile atheists in America, very few people talk about this topic openly and publicly. It's too unpleasant and risky.

The result is that most people don't know anyone who is an atheist. (Or they don't know that some of their friends are atheists!) It's a lot like the gay "issue", except that atheists are still "in the closet" (do not let others know their orientation).

I'm sure that some of our congress people must be atheists or at least agnostics, but I've never heard one say so. In recent years, most of the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates have talked about their faith as though this was necessary in order to gain the trust of the average person.

-------------

Pregunté a varios contactos sobre la pregunta de Berodia sobre políticos ateos.

Una persona dijo, "Si un ateo podría explicar en qué cree, entonces podría ser elegidos." El otro dijo, " ¡De ningúna manera! Hay demasiado prejuicio." Me pareció que la primera persona estuvo preocupada que un ateo podría existir sin tener creencia y valores "buenas".

¿Me pregunto si las creencias de una alguien hacen una diferencia? ¿Cuántos de nosotros realmente actuamos según nuestras creencias? Los valores me parecen más importantes, pero todavía estoy considerando éste....

Bueno, la verdad es que, aunque hubiera unos ateos prominentes en América, hay muy poca gente hablar sobre este tema abiertamente y públicamente. Es demasiado desagradable y aventurado.

El resultado es que la mayoría de la gente no conocen a nadie que es un ateo. (¡O no saben que algunos de sus amigos son ateos!) Esto se parece mucho a la "cuestión" gay, pero los ateos son todavía "en el armario" (ser de tapadillo o no destaparse).

Estoy seguro que algunos de nuestros diputados del congreso debe ser ateos o al menos agnósticos, pero nunca he oído ní uno decirlo. En los años recientes, la mayor parte de los candidatos Democráticos y Republicanos para presidente han hablado de su fe como si esto fuera necesario para ganar la confianza de la persona ordinario.

Art, I would fall in the "no way" category. Our country is much too steeped in religious culture to elect someone who stands up and says "there is no God."

I can't imagine someone saying "I'm agnostic" getting elected, either.

Of course, there are plenty of these folks in America, even in politics. They just can't talk about their beliefs.

I'm pretty sure that religious conservatives would be amazed to find out that so many of their friends and family are heretics. That lightning hasn't hit many of them. And that they're happy, kind, and decent folks whose mothers are proud of them.

--------------

No puedo imaginarme alguien diciendo "soy agnóstico" quien está elegida, tampoco.

Desde luego, hay mucha gente en América así, hasta en la política. Es solamente que no pueden hablar de su creencia.

Estoy bastante seguro que conservadores religiosos estarían asombrados de averiguar que tantos de sus amigos y de su familia son herejes. Que que muy pocos se alcanza por un rayo. Y que son gente feliz, amable, y decente, cuyos madres están orgullosos de ellos.

You're talking to one.

There's no way that I'm arrogant enough to say that there is no god. Nor would I be naive enough to say without doubt that there is one. I wouldn't presume to know if there were or if there weren't. It's impossible for any of us to know, which is why I consider myself to be agnostic.

Hola, asturianos del mundo:
¡Asustado! si asustado estoy , leo las cartas anteriores mandadas y traducidad (cosa que he de agradecer) y no salgo de mi asombro.
Yo siempre consideré a los americanos de EE.UU. como que estaban mucho mas adelantados y con una formas de pensar , de los mas progresista, y veo por lo que dice Terechu y Art. y los demás que en cuestiones de religión estás, ni mas atras ni mas adelante que Europa, sino que estan en otra dimensión.
Veo que se acercan mucho a lo intolerable, me explico, intolerable , porque si no te atreves a decir ciertas cosas , es que sabes que no se toleran esos pensamientos o ideas. Sencillamente increible.
Luedo veo que los candidatos politicos , o los politicos en general " demuestran publicamente sus condiciones religiosas".
Pero pregunto yo ¿ Que religión practica , alguien que permite que la gente pase hambre, que no tengan asistencia sanitaria, o que sean explotados en el trabajo , o que se pone un pantalos hecho por niños de 10 o 12 años? ya sea en su pais o en otro.
¿Que religíón práctica, una persona que no aprovecha el poder para hacer el bien a los demas, a favorecer las democracias y a favorecer la justicia en el mundo?.
Y asi podriamos estar una hora poniendo ejemplos.
Ademas yo pienso que la politica y la religion , nunca, nunca deberian mezclarse. En españa esiste un devate, de si ponemos la religión como asignatura , o no .

Llegado a este punto debo decir que yo pase 6 años en un colegio de La Iglesia Catolica y las comclusiones a las que llegue son:
1º Las religiones deberian de financiarse , por si mismas,
Ser trasparentes,
No se debe impartir la religión en ningun colegio,como asignatura
Limitar sus funciones a la vida espiritual
Predicar con el ejemplo, y no decir una cosa y ellos hacer otra
y Sobre todo respetar los Derechos Humanos, que muchos de "esos mal llamados gente religiosa" son los que por las mañanas van a misa y por la tarde si pueden promueven una guerra.

¡¡Asturianos de mundo! gracias a todos por ser tan majos

---------------
translated by Art

Hello, Asturians of the world:
Shocked! Yes, I'm shocked to read the previous letters as sent and as translated (something I am grateful for) and I'm still not over my amazement.

I have always thought of Americans of the USA as being much more advanced and with regard to ways of thinking to be among the most progressive. And I see from what Terechu, Art, and the others say that in questions of religion you are, neither more backward nor more advanced than Europe, but you exist in another dimension.

I see that they [Americans] are getting very close to the intolerable. I should explain myself. Intolerable, because if you do not dare to say certain things, it is because you know that they do not tolerate these thoughts or ideas. Simply incredible.

Then I see that the political candidates, or politicians in general "demonstrate publicly their religious positions."

But I ask: What religion would someone practice that would allow people to experience hunger, that they not have health care assistance, or that they be exploited in the workplace, or that they wear pants made by 10 or 12-year-old children--whether that be in one's own country or in another.

What religion would someone practice that does not take advantage of the power to do good works for the rest [others], to favor democracies and to favor justice in the world?

And we could go on for an hour like this giving examples.

Moreover, I think that politics and the religion should never, never be mixed together. In España there is a debate going on, in which we are deciding whether or not to make religion a subject [in school].

Having arrived at this point, I must say that I spent 6 years in a Catholic high school and the conclusions which I arrived at are:

• Religions should be financed by themselves,
• [their accounting books] should be open to the public,
• religion should not be taught as a subject in any high school,
• their function should be limited to the spiritual life,
• they should practice what they preach, and not say one thing and do something else,
• and above all, they should respect human rights, that many of these badly labelled "religious people" are those who in the morning go to mass and then in the evening, if they can, instigate war.

World Asturians! Thanks to all for being so darn nice [or great folks or cool].

Gil,

Los problemas de la fama, de salud, y de pobreza siempre existen, por desgracia. Pero, yo creo que los lidéres de todos de las religiones son malos, porque usan dios para ganar dinero y poder por si mismo. La gente, en general, quieren creer en algún fuerza mas allá de este mundo. Ellos que usa este fé para ganar dinero y elecciones son malditos, seguro.

Xosé


----------------------------------------------------

Gil, The problems of hunger, healthcare, and poverty always exist, unfortunately. But, I believe that the leaders of all the religions are bad, because they use god to get money and power for themselves. The people, in general, want to believe in some force outside of this world. Those that use this faith to get money and elections are evil, for sure.

Xosé

A reflexion about Atheism. In one sense,the first atheists were the Christians, because they said that the pagan gods didn't really existed. The jews didn't said that there were an only god. They adored only a god, but there were others. The pagans (greeks, romans) adored their own gods but they admitted that the gods other peoples adored also existed. In fact, romans added gods of conquered peoples to theirs. Christians were the first ones in saying that some gods didn't exist. But if there aren't a Zeus, a Jupiter, an Osiris, a Mitra, why does a God, a Jehovah exist?. The doubt appeared with Christianism.

It's funny. I wasn't going to post on this matter until I saw that I wasn't the only "atheist", whatever that truly means. After all, in my opinion, while I do not believe in the god that has been forced on me by an ultra-Catholic family and a predominantly Christian society in general, as a student of philosophy, I can know only that I cannot know, and that whatever is out there, if anything, is far more logical than we give it credit for. Maybe that makes me agnostic. Label me as you will.

That said, I have been severely disappointed in politics of late in this country (USA). Christian groups are out there trying to deny others the freedom to worship as they choose. In a nation where separation of church and state is one of the founding principles, we have a president that prays publically, and pushes his own religious agendas. This is also the same administration who claims that this nation was founded on Christianity, when in fact, the founding fathers were deists, atheists, and agnostics for the most part.

I believe strongly in every opinion and belief being respected. I do not argue religion with anyone because it's an argument that few can handle without getting angry, and one that goes nowhere. I am not out to convert anyone. A "militant atheist" is only trying to prove something to themself as far as I am concerned.

What I do have a problem with is the trend I am seeing in America today. I began to see it in the late 80s, when kids in my high school took vows of celibacy until marriage, all in the name of God. These were the same boys that used this public pledge to God in order to get girls alone with them. Their female counterparts were the first to have children out of wedlock.

Lately, I've seen it more pronounced in the hate that Christian leaders have toward homosexuals and other religions, or non-religions. They preach hate. Whatever one believes him to represent, Jesus Christ preached only love and tolerance, and that was a good idea, and a great concept.

And don't get me started on the evolution vs. creationism battle in schools right here in the South! That's for another post!

It puzzles me. I live more like a true Christian than these so-called Christians, who see nothing wrong in assaulting someone because they are Muslim, and therefore, must be terrorists. It makes Americans look bad, because we are not like that. It makes sincere Christians look bad, because they do exist.

Unfortunately, it's the radicals that make the noise and push the scary agendas, and the politicians that do not support these often wealthy organizations are forced to do their bidding.

Art wrote:I asked several contacts about Berodia's question about atheist politicians.

One person said, "If an atheist could explain what they believe in, then they could get elected." The other said, "No way! There's too much prejudice." It seemed to me that the first person was worried that an atheist might not have "good" beliefs and values.

Una persona dijo, "Si un ateo podría explicar en qué cree, entonces podría ser elegidos." El otro dijo, " ¡De ningúna manera! Hay demasiado prejuicio." Me pareció que la primera persona estuvo preocupada que un ateo podría existir sin tener creencia y valores "buenas".

I was going to comment on this before I went on that tangent in my last post.

That seems to be the general worry! People are labeled according to their religion, even if their individual actions to not reflect those beliefs, and as I have mentioned at length, they often do not, especially if they are rabid in their beliefs so as to shut out any other belief system. It may not make sense, but if you say that this politician is a Catholic, there are immediate assumptions made on his political stance.

How do you label an atheist? You can't outright do that. You have to get to know them as people and figure out what they are like then. In a nation of sound bytes and spin doctors, that takes far too much effort, which is a shame to say, but sadly true.

MJ, Bill Moyers has a very interesting article related to this: http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5211218.html
(Let me know if that link doesn't work.)

Or go to www.Google.com and search on:
moyers "there is no tomorrow"

A few quotes:

"One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington."

"As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election - 231 legislators in total and more since the election - are backed by the religious right."

"A 2002 Time-CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the book of Revelations are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks."

---------------

MJ, Bill Moyers tiene un artículo muy interesante relacionado con esto: http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5211218.html
(Avisame si aquel eslabón no vale.)

O vaya a www.google.com y busque sobre:
moyers "there is no tomorrow"

Unas citas:

"Uno de los cambios más grandes en la política durante mi vida es que ahora el ilusorio no es marginal. Ha entrado de la franja, sentarse en la sede de poder en el despacho oval y en el Congreso. Por primera vez en nuestra historia, ideología y teología sostienen un monopolio de poder en Washington."

"Como la Grist aclara, no hablamos de un puñado de los legisladores de la franja que sostienen estas creencias o están en deuda a estas creencias. Casi la mitad del Congreso estadounidense antes de la elección reciente - 231 legisladores en total y más desde la elección - están apoyada por el derecho religioso."

"Una encuesta de Time-CNN de 2002 encontró que el 59 por ciento de Americanos cree que las profecías encontrado en el libro de Revelaciones va a realizarse. Casi un cuarto piensan que la Biblia predijo los ataques de 9/11."

See, Art, now that's just a scary though certainly interesting article. I know it to be true because this is the stuff that is forming policy. It used to be that we were a progressive nation, and we left those fundamentalist views on the farm. Not anymore.

I really see a terrible trend in intolerance coming that hasn't been seen since the Puritans when they were putting people in the stocks for forgetting to go to church!

Not to drag Iraq or Afghanistan into this, but what sort of hypocritical war are we fighting when we are steadily heading toward a religious and intolerant state?

I truly hope that this is one of those revival trends that will undermine itself eventually, and will create an opposite trend. This has happened a few times in American history, and each time, it's burnt itself out.