Henry, IMO ‘botsex might be an alternative to human sex, no STDs from ‘bots that we know of, and no alimony or palimony.
This is a good piece because it covers the crucial angles.
Now, the religious—take Christians for example—do live moral lives.. or at any rate if Christians are as dishonest as the secular they do live cleaner lives; and it is probably better to live a clean life albeit you may miss out on a great deal of the fun.
Romney’s faith is perhaps the one apparent reason to trust him because what are the other reasons? At any rate, he is, amusingly, what Clinton was: a centrist with the lack of core beliefs that makes smart politicians often fail—if only the Bush dynasty had stood for something besides their dynasty they would have done a bit better—instead we had 12 years of confusion.
Hopefully Romney as president would do better than the Bushes.
Posted by Intomorrow on 10/27 at 05:35 PM
Does Romney’s religious devotion make him more or less trustworthy?
More. It’s not his religion that is the problem; religion in and of itself can’t hurt anyone—how many divisions does the Pope have?
Posted by contraterrine on 10/27 at 07:48 PM
I truly hope that soon after effective IQ enhancing tech in whatever form comes along that elections will no longer be decided by people who believe in imaginary friends living above the clouds.
I’m a Mormon, and I love my religion for many reasons. That said, I share Valerie’s concern that religion, Mormonism and otherwise, too often incents dishonesty, particularly about dogmas and particularly among those concerned with appeasing fundamentalists. Even those of us who dislike fundamentalism are often compelled by practicality to shape our religious expressions in ways to minimize negative social repercussions from fundamentalists. That’s not entirely bad, as it can demonstrate charity (fundamentalists matter too!), but taken too far it can demonstrate mere fearful appeasement.