DarkSyd called my attention to this video of S.E. Cupp on her new MSNBC show (she’s one of many hosts that rotate), where she engages in mostly inane blather about religion. And it just makes me ask, once again, why anyone takes her seriously? What I’ve heard her say ranges from the true-but-utterly-obvious-and-trite to the downright asinine.
She claims to be an atheist but she spends most of her time bashing atheists. Now that would be fine if her criticisms were rational — after all, there are lots of atheists whose ideas and behavior deserve criticism, as there are such people in any sizable group — but they’re not. Instead, she goes on and on about how she wishes she could be a religious person and wishes she could have faith, but she wants nothing to do with those “intolerant” and “militant” atheists.
But she shows immediately that she has no idea what intolerance means. In her very first question to her guest, who edited a book that includes Christians, Jews and Muslims talking about their common ground, she says that since religious faiths make exclusive truth claims, one has to be intolerant in order to believe in any of them because they have to take the position that they’re right and someone else is wrong. But this has nothing to do with intolerance. Saying you’re right and another person is wrong is not intolerant; if it was, she would be intolerant every time she engages in an argument of any kind. And that’s just plain stupid (yes, I’m right and she’s wrong).
To make matters worse, later in the clip she declares, with great emphasis, “I would never vote for an atheist president, ever. Never.” Her reason is simply moronic.
I like that there’s a check, okay, that there’s a person in the office who doesn’t think he’s bigger than the state, he doesn’t think that he’s bigger than sort of esoteric…I like religion being a check and knowing that my president goes home every night addressing someone above him and not thinking all the power resides right here.