Note: My Web pages are best viewed with style sheets enabled.

Why I Voted for Kerry

Copyright © 2004 by David E. Ross

Along with over 54% of California voters, I voted for John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential election. My vote for the Democratic candidate did not result merely from the fact that I am a Democrat. Instead, religion had much to do with how I voted.

*** Begin Right Sidebar ***

Already, less than a month after the election, theocratic legislation is landing on President Bush's desk.

Officials Try to Stop Removal of Cross

Congressmen seek to designate the Mt. Soledad landmark, on city-owned land in San Diego, as a national veterans memorial

SAN DIEGO — Two Republican congressman have put language in a budget bill passed by the House designed to prevent the removal of the cross atop Mt. Soledad, the object of 15 years of litigation between the city and the American Civil Liberties Union.

…

The ACLU has long maintained that having the 43-foot cross on public property violates the constitutional separation of church and state. The city of San Diego has insisted that the cross is not primarily a religious symbol but a memorial to military veterans.

Los Angeles Times
23 November 2004

A cross as a memorial to military veterans?? What an insult to Jewish and other non-Christian veterans!

*** End Right Sidebar ***

Kerry was born and remains today a Catholic. He is secure and committed to his religion, even when he and the Pope disagree on certain issues. Kerry is sufficiently secure in his belief that he does not wave it around like a flag. He is also committed to being a servant of all the people and does not tried to impose Catholic dogma on Protestants, Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, Hindus, or atheists.

In contrast, George W. Bush tried being an Episcopalian and a Presbyterian before Laura forced him to be a Methodist. Insecure in his beliefs, the President misses no opportunity to publicize his faith. And he most definitely wants to impose religious dogma on the whole nation through laws and even Constitutional amendments, even for dogma not universally shared among all Protestants let alone among non-Christians.

With the re-election of Bush, I now fear for my religious freedom.

Early evidence of Bush's intent to merge religion and government is seen in how he successfully prevented any controls against religious discrimination in his Faith-Based Social Initiative, where tax dollars from non-Christians are now being used to support Christian missionary efforts. More recent news stories substantiate my fear that Bush will now lead us into a theocracy where the First Amendment becomes irrelevant and fundamentalist Christian dogma becomes the law of the land.

The result is that George W. Bush has been elected president of the Christians, not President of the United States. How do his views differ from those of my religion? See my The Judeo-Christian Oxymoron. (While the beginning is about theology, towards the end I list formal positions of Reform Judaism on current issues — positions diametrically opposite those of the President.)

revised map showing states supporting Bush as 'Jesusland' and states supporting Kerry as part of 'United States of Canada'

Of course, issues other than religion also influenced my vote:

Bush is a hypocrite in his denouncing Kerry for changing his views on various issues. Bush repeatedly changes his reasons for going to war in Iraq. None of those reasons truly justify attacking a nation that proved no threat to the U.S. And the people of Iraq do not seem better off today than they were before the war. Finally, if Bush were truly concerned about rogue nations with nuclear weapons, why has no real effective action been taken against Iran or North Korea, both of which admit developing such weapons.
Bush demands we surrender our freedoms in order to fight terrorism. As a result, the terrorists are winning by destroying what is truly important in our nation. Today, I am more afraid of Bush than I am of Osama bin Ladin.
Bush's energy policy ignores conservation. Instead, it emphasizes exploitation of domestic resources to the extent that there will be no petroleum for our grandchildren.
I oppose Bush's tax policies that benefit those who need it the least.
Bush's call for diverting Social Security taxes into individual investment accounts perpetuates the myth that IRAs and 401(k) plans do not exist.
During his first two years in office, President Bush didn't have an environmental policy so much as an industrial one. From building roads in national forests (he's for it) to cutting emissions from power plants (against), his administration has favored loggers and energy companies over wildlife or clean air.
From an unsigned editorial in the Los Angeles Times, 2 January 2003
As reported in Scientific American (and elsewhere), Bush uses pseudo-science and junk science to support his policies, stacks scientific committees with political hacks, and ignores clear provable facts when they clash with his preconceived opinions. Thus, he denies the reality of global warming, thinks teenagers who are subjected to "abstinence only" education do not engage in sex, and claims abortion causes breast cancer.
Under Bush's administration, the FDA has been reduced to a stooge for the pharmaceutical industry, not only lying about the safety of drugs imported from Canada but failing to take prompt action against profitable drugs that are truly unsafe.

It's no wonder that, within days after the election, the immigration Web site for the Canadian government nearly crashed because of a record number inquiries. Those of us left behind will suffer 101 more days.

7 November 2004

Link to David Ross's home page
David Ross home