Joe McCarthy wasn’t a racist or a bigot so it’s pretty ridiculous to refer to “the McCarthy era” in that context.
McCarthy was, aside from his later-on acquired virulent anti-communism, was generally regarded as a moderate Republican and while he was no Javits or Humphrey, was generally supportive of Civil Rights.
By contrast, one of his most vocal critics, Bill Fulbright(whom McCarthy called “Senator Halfbright” was a racist and a staunch segregationist.
Similarly, it’s a bit odd that everyone is blaming “McCarthyism” for something that happened two years after McCarthy was censured by the Senate and was politically destroyed and a national joke.
Unless Trinopus is a sock-puppet, the above comment makes no sense since I wasn’t referring to your comment but to his, so no I wasn’t “pretend[ing] [you] were talking about the man as an individual”.
In what passed for the debate about the contemporaneous insertion of “under God” into the Pledge of Allegiance, Presbyterian minister George Docherty opined that “An atheistic American is a contradiction in terms…If you deny the Christian ethic, you fall short of the American ideal of life.” The part about “atheistic American” being a “contradiction in terms” was quoted by the Congressman (Louis Rabaut) who introduced the bill to change the Pledge. (Rev. Docherty also referred to atheists as “spiritual parasites”.) I suppose that was all an expression of the values of Rev. Docherty and Congressman Rabaut, but it all also strikes me as being pretty bigoted against atheists, and certainly not the sort of values that ought to be enshrined in law by an act of Congress.
That’s interesting, I can understand better where people are coming from now. Without that important bit of context, ranting about it comes across as unhinged.
It’s a genetic fallacy to presume that because it had its root in anti-Communist sentiment the reason it persists is the same. It’s a two wrongs fallacy and false dichotomy to appeal to fighting larger battles rather than this minor trespass.
When did he ever express racist or anti-Semitic sentiments?
His beliefs and actions were odious but being rabidly anti-communist or, for that matter, rabidly anti-capitalist isn’t bigotry.
It’s foolish to use the phrase “the McCarthy era” when referring to beliefs and actions he didn’t support and had nothing to do with.
Moreover, for it to be remotely meaningful, the term “McCarthy era” should refer to 1950-1954 which is after the Peekskill riots and two years before the adding of the phrase “In God We Trust” to the paper currency.
Anyway, while I’d rather it not be on the one dollar bill, having “In God We Trust” being on it doesn’t bother me any more than having the Star of David does, and the Star of David has been on the one dollar bill far, far longer.
No it hasn’t. I mean, there’s a six-pointed star-shaped arrangement of smaller stars (13 of them, natch) above the eagle on the reverse of the bill–I assume that’s what you’re referring to. But that’s not a “Star of David”, which is a specific six-pointed star (made of two interlocking equilateral triangles) used as a symbol of Jewish identity or Judaism. Atheists (and other secularists) don’t object to “This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private” because the phrase contains the letters “g” “o” and “d”.
The House Committee on Un-American Activities and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations were working out if intolerance and trying to force protestant ideals on everyone through shame or force.
There actions were bigiotry, against both atheists and socialists.
The words;IN GOD WE TRUST or UNDER GOD,have little meaning, when one looks at the price that crime costs this country. If the 95% can be called Christians, I wonder, if Jesus would see them as he did the Pharisee’s. Too many talk the talk,but few walk the walk!
Perhaps if we didn’t put so much value on things and more on people it may have some meaning?What good has come from the words being on the money or the pledge?
The words;IN GOD WE TRUST or UNDER GOD,have little meaning, when one looks at the price that crime costs this country. If the 95% can be called Christians, I wonder, if Jesus would see them as he did the Pharisee’s. Too many talk the talk,but few walk the walk!
Perhaps if we didn’t put so much value on things and more on people it may have some meaning?What good has come from the words being on the money or the pledge?