Obama has pledged to expand on Bush’s faith-based initiatives to the tune of an additional $500 million per year.

The news isn’t all bad; Obama’s plan wouldn’t allow charities to “take religion into account” when hiring, while McCain’s limited words on FBIs indicate that he would allow such discrimination.

In fact, he has been pounding on his Christian faith far more aggressively than McCain has, as a cursory glance of the campaign’s past would show you. Is he really as Christian as he claims to be? Or is he just cynically exploiting the Christian vote? One thing to consider is his march towards the center since the primary season has ended. Is this cynical too? Which Obama is he? If you can still trust his leadership, then you are a far better human than I am. I, however, remain disillusioned after the cold slaps to the face the Obama camp has given me. Some progress is better than none, true, but nothing about the Obama camp inspires me to actively support him.

Yes, we should vote for Obama, there is no doubt of that. But my vote is being cast not because I like the man that Obama is, but because a McCain presidency would would be far, far worse. I find myself watching bitterly as Obama’s army of young idealists pump their fists in the air every time he opens his mouth, reflecting that I could have been in that crowd too, and almost was.

Regardless of other problems one might have with Obama (or with the fact that we can only reasonably choose between him and McCain), he is a candidate with positions that are mostly shared by nonbelievers. To say that he’s a “Christian [leader] who will lead a Christian nation with Christian values towards a Christian world” is simply false.

as an acting major, I am taking a very interesting directing class. We just recently learned about the audition process. Say you are casting a production of Hamlet. Two men show up who you are deciding between to play the title role. One of them seems aggressive. He has the chops, but he could likely take hold of the production and make it into his little show, which most likely is a completely separate show from the one YOU are planning on directing. the next actor is friendly, young, handsome, charming, charismatic, and inspiring to work with. You plan on casting him in a heartbeat, however, when he asks you “to be, or not to be,” you realise that his “chops” are not where they should be to carry this role. You then do what every director in the world would do: You realise that if he can’t perform in an audition, that a few, no matter how pressing rehearsals will never make him ready for opening night. you scrap your audition and start over.

the scary part is that america can’t scrap it’s audition. it can’t start over. it needs to choose one of these two leading men, and our production will no doubtedly sink.

think about how many more cynical children in public schools will scoff when their professors promise them that even though their field trip to see a crappy production of hamlet wasn’t a good example of shakespeare’s brilliance, that hamlet really is an amazing work of literature. right.

I also want warn those who use GLBT rights as a means to explain the causes of secularism. I was once told in a discussion with another Atheist that gay marriage is what GLBT rights advocates essentially seek, and that they should also see it as similar to Secular rights. Please, the GLBT cause is much more complex then that. There are parallels between both causes no doubt. That can also be said of feminism and minority rights. All these causes can’t simply be discussed as being the same! I find it frustrating to hear sometimes that the Civil Rights Movement to include the Womens Rights Movement. Both movements had it’s own advocates and histories, they just happen to occur in conjunction.

Great video by the way!