 "Photo:")
"Coming out" as the first openly nontheist member of the United States Congress, Representative Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-CA) quipped, "I'm pleased that I'm in Cambridge and not in Salem!" On September 20, 2007, Congressman Stark spoke publicly for the first time about his atheism to an audience of approximately 300 members of the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard, the Harvard Law School Heathen Society, and various other atheist, agnostic, secular, humanist, and nonreligious groups. The Boston Globe was also on hand to cover the event.
Stark, who is a Unitarian, is the highest-ranking American politician to openly declare that he is nontheist. Although Stark denies a belief in a god, he was quick to note that the Stark family does recognize a supreme being: Mrs. Stark.
Congressman Stark regaled the audience with anecdotes about his life and his background, noting that he "was born poor enough so that I never slept alone until I was married." Before running for office, Congressman Stark was a successful bank executive, a member of the U.S. Air Force, and a leader of a Unitarian Universalist seminary. As Stark explained it, he was not at all interested in a supreme being, but was instead interested in people.
When Stark won his congressional seat in 1971, religion simply was not at the forefront of most people's minds. Religion only surfaced on occasion, he noted, like when his congressional colleagues wanted to have 'prayer breakfasts'. Religion began to enter the public debate more forcefully in the 1980s, which is, Congressman Stark speculated, when televangelists and politicians discovered that they could use religion to raise money and increase power.
Even with the apparent resurgence of religion in the public debate, Congressman Stark denied that religion has much impact in actual politics. The leading candidates all agree that they believe in a supreme being, Congressman Stark observed, but they all forget about it as soon as they are elected.
Religion does not often enter into discussions of the real issues, observed Stark. He characterized the main political debate as one where Republicans think that government is something from which we ought to be protected, and Democrats think that government is something to make our lives better. Religion may subtly affect the style, but not the subject of debate.
When asked abut how difficult it is for demonized atheists to "come out," Congressman Stark noted that he does not think there is any evidence that atheists are demonized. Although some believers often exhibit an arrogance of certainty, Congressman Stark has never encountered anyone who was "nasty" about it. When someone asks him if he loves Jesus, he replies, "I don't know, but everything I've heard about him is fine!"
Some audience members were skeptical about Stark's optimism that atheists can be accepted by American society at large. As the Globe reported on Saturday, a recent Gallup poll showed that fewer than half of respondents said they would vote for a well-qualified atheist for office. More people were willing to support a woman, homosexual, Mormon, or a 72-year-old.
Despite his downplaying the importance of religion, however, Congressman Stark is notably the only atheist congressman in our history to "come out." Although Americans are increasingly non-believing, many politicians remain leery of "coming out" for fear of public backlash. A representative of the Secular Coalition of America said that the group had spoken to 21 representatives who were nonbelievers, but not yet willing to go public.
Now that 20% of Americans age 18 through 25 identify themselves as having no religion, perhaps politicians will begin to break their silence.
Madison Kitchens, HLS '10, commented, "In a time when the only religious test for office is that one have a religion, Congressman Stark's candor is both surprising and refreshing. I hope that his example will embolden like-minded politicians to break the taboo themselves."
More information about the university and law school groups and upcoming events can be found at www.harvardhumanist.org and www.hlsheathens.org.
My wife's father is hessaby as in www.hessaby.com (they stole his cash and put it there) and my mother-in-law family is related by marriage tot the Pakravans., who headed the SAVAKPan Am was nicknamed PanIran as the Shah's family was the largest shareholder. I have extreme amount of details of exactly was going on
from the Iranians wanting him to return their assets to other coup attempts to 6 months before the Shah son pretended he was bankrupt in a public trial, to my wifes relative coming to our house talking about the coup and we did not know they were in Washington DC, to the Iran Contra hearings trial that was going to start Feb 20 th, 1989 to the tipping of the coup to the Iranian govt, ,to something in writing I can prove the coup to the Salamon Rushtie Feb 14th insult to islam to get the people on the street to avoid the coup to the Iranian govt announcement of a coup by 'dissent mullahs' announced at the time to the negiotations between the Bush people involved pretending they were going to make a deal to the 'nice' stories plant in US newspapers at the time (including the Post) as part of the negotation to the fact the bomb had to placed out of London based on the flight path as I worked at USAir at the time creating the flight plans for the 'planes to fly themselves' to overt CIA agents around me at the time to the fact that Bollier, the guy who made the timer for the bomb's wide was IRANIAN and the Libyans told me and said they were not allowed to say... there were 3 witness only.. the main one was trashed.. Bollier and a guy whom said he soldm the Libyan a suitcase in Malta.. hence, one the suitcase guy would be left.. the Libyans did not put up a defence in exchange for evidence to trash the main witness on the stand to what an overt CIA agent told me in the US 4 years later.. etc. etc and the details of several coups to the new World bank (my wie's cousin involved who used to work at the work bank)and US loans starting May 1990 to Iran to the fact that PANAm was shut down 18 months later as they thought it would be targeted again because of the Shah connection (the US airlines go in and out of bankruptcy all the time - this was the one of the first US airlines - an ICON) etc
I also know where the Iranian govt officials have money in the US, Canada and UK; the back door dealing etccall me for details.. Barry Lanza 00 44 1786831554.. My father-in-law was a convicted spy given amnesty