Comments on: Sovereignty, choices and trade

By: matt25v40

matt25v40 — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:22:11 +0000

The map certainly does oversimplify. I think the dynamic at play in the last election was very complicated. Different groups voted for different reasons, yet came together to re-elect the President. Some voted out of fear/loathing of homosexuality. Some voted out of patriotism. Some voted out of economic self-interest. Some were voting in favor of prayer in schools, using the word “God” in the Pledge… some were voting based on gun rights issues. Kerry supporters were an equally motley group.

The issues are complex, but we managed to oversimplify them when it came time to vote. Neither party owns morality. The issue is WHICH moral issues are more important to you? Those which concern sexuality? Sanctity of life (the unborn? victims of war? death penalty?) Poverty and hunger? Policies that promote inclusion, love and understanding?

There was too much name-calling and fear mongering on BOTH sides. Too little rational analysis of issues. Gross oversimplification, THAT is what the map reflects. Those who love Jesus and want to do His work had plenty of reasons to vote either way.

By: dh

dh — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:10:19 +0000

Amen Mark and Roy Jacobsen.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:03:51 +0000

“If God is for us, who can be against us?” Proud resident of ‘Jesusland.’

By: Roy Jacobsen

Roy Jacobsen — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 23:31:02 +0000

One man’s opinion: I think that map is such a inaccurate oversimplification of the election results as to be useless. It doesn’t take much browsing on the “right” side of the pundit-sphere to find that many of them are explicitly irreligious (For example, Instapundit.) I’m not offended; I just find it hard to believe someone could miss the mark by so much.

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:53:36 +0000

Joel is right on this… it is more an urban vs. suburban/rural split, than mid-west/central vs the coasts…

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:52:21 +0000

The map should also been seen in the context that Kerry won in places such as Dallas, Austin and El Paso in Texas, Denver, Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, New Orleans, Little Rock, Albuquerue, Tucson, Kansas City, St. Louis, Des Moines, Miami, etc.

By: Ali

Ali — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 01:57:08 +0000

I’ve seen that map elsewhere and it bugs me. The polarisation is not good for America, nor is the illusion that they can just relocate to a Democrat paradise in Canada. I don’t have any solutions, but I’m horrified at the vitriol spouted by both Republicans and Democrats against each other.

By: will

will — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:29:58 +0000

If only it were true. I think we have to wait a little “bit” before we see Jesusland – but that of course doesn’t mean we should try to accomplish the opposite down here while we’re waiting!

Errr, why do I always talk out of both sides of my mouth? “Jesus loves you” – there, I’ll leave it at that Bene.

By: alicia

alicia — Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:54:26 +0000

I think the map was prompted by the threats of many of the now defeated candidates’ supporters – that if they lost they were going to move to Canada where their worldview was respected.
I think that the map reflects the (false?) dichotomy between certain faith based political values and certain social welfare values such as universal (government) health care, taxation as a means of involuntary wealth redistribution, governmental endorsement of sexual license, etc. I think that that map is an insult both to Canada and to the USA. It also misses the point that there was a large portion of the USA electorate who were truly disenfranchised – those of us who did not and do not support Mr. Bush on many of his policies (taxation, war, health care) but were also totally disgusted with Mr. Kerry’s kowtowing to the anti-family values of such groups as NARAL and Planned Parenthood (abortion on demand and sexual license lobbies) or to the homosexual marriage lobby. In the end, I voted for the candidate who least offended my conscience.
Please note that Canada in at least some of it’s provinces endorsed homosexual marriage long before the Massachussets court decision. There is also a continuing concern that some of the anti-hate speech legislation in your country might end up as a form of anti-Christian religious discrimination.
I am not endorsing the kind of flaming stereotyping that that map represents. I am simply trying to point out some of the possible sources for the thoughts and feelings behind it.

By: Mark Byron

Mark Byron — Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:25:14 +0000

The map-maker doesn’t get Canadian politics. If they did, they would have annexed Alberta into Jesusland.

Truckloads of questions, Bene, few quick answers. The general take down here is that Canada’s more secular that the US, making them more compatable with the “Blue State” northeast and west coast that votes Democratic, when compared with the “Red State” ne Jesusland area that votes Republican.

I liked the old book “The Nine Nations of North America.” Distilling it into two is oversimplifying. I feel a post coming on.