This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see
info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of
Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating
neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see
deletion process).
State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
I think the situation detailed here merits inclusion on notabillity grounds (it does have multiple sources). Warning the webpage has popups.
Lots4213:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Security Pacific National Bank
In 1963, Stark founded Security National Bank, a small bank in
Walnut Creek. Within 10 years it grew to a $100 million company with branches across the East Bay.
Stark acknowledged his nontheism in response to an SCA questionnaire sent to public officials in January 2007. In a statement, Stark said he is a "
Unitarian who does not believe in a
supreme being. I look forward to working with the Secular Coalition to stop the promotion of narrow religious beliefs in science, marriage contracts, the military and the provision of social service."
On September 20, 2007, Stark reaffirmed his nontheism by making a public announcement in front of the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard, the
Harvard Law School Heathen Society, and various other atheist, agnostic, secular, humanist, and nonreligious groups.
- Does that mean several successive speeches on that individual day?? Or, throughout September??
" For Miller being in Washington - to long, elected in 1944."
There is no attribution for this quote. The quoted text appears to be grammatically incorrect. It may be "...too long..." not "...to long...". Can anyone either cite the source for this quote as it stands or offer any reason why "to" should not be changed to "too"? 20:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
History amateur (
talk •
contribs)
Ishan Shah
I
removed a reference to a former Stark intern who is considering a political bid, since it did not seem particularly relevant to this article. Thoughts? --
TeaDrinker (
talk)
00:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)reply
"In 1995, during a private meeting with Congresswoman Nancy Johnson of Connecticut, he called Johnson a "whore for the insurance industry" and suggested that her knowledge of health care came solely from "pillow talk" with her husband, a physician. His press secretary, Caleb Marshall, defended him in saying, "He didn't call her a 'whore,' he called her a 'whore of the insurance industry.'""
The Controversial Statements section generally is right-wing POV, but the above is particularly bad. First of all, the "pillow talk" bit is nowhere in the source provided. Otherwise, our editor copied said source--an anti-Stark opinion piece in the Washington Post--word for word without indicating direct quotation. What drew my suspicion was the seemingly idiotic line attributed to Marshall, which incidentally would be an entirely appropriate response to an allegation that Stark had called Johnson a plain "whore". The same break in quotation is in the Post article, suggesting that Marshall was indeed faced with such a misquote and was simply explaining that "whore" was used in the figurative, nonsexual, gender-unspecific sense. The natural assumption is that the other side of Marshall's dialogue is using the same chunk of speech the Post or Wikipedia audience is. If instead simply "whore" was used, it should be noted. Otherwise, Marshall appears to be making a well--at--least--he--didn't--kill--anybody argument. Basically, the Marshall bit should either be deleted or change its focus to the media that would condense "whore of the [blank] industry", a common expression, to "whore".
Tomblikebomb (
talk)
00:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)reply
The Wiki entry stated that he blamed "Jew colleagues" for the first Gulf War, although when I checked the Washington Post source article, the quote read "Jewish colleagues". I made the correction, but the "Jew" quote had already been widely quoted. I suspect this was the work of a Hasbara creep. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.126.62.163 (
talk) 08:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
There was a small misquote from "Jewish" to "Jew," which has the same meaning, and despite the fact that either way this reflects on his anti-Semitism, you blame this typo on "a Hasbara creep"? Wow, that really shows your own bias and anti-Semitism.--
Bobjohnson111980 (
talk)
22:07, 13 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Believes the Federal Government has unlimited powers
The infobox identifies Stark's religion as Unitarian, but the article includes detailed references to his atheism, so shouldn't the infobox say "none" for religion?--
94.173.208.118 (
talk)
17:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)reply
Actually it identifies him as a Unitarian Universalist. It is very common and totally acceptable to be a Unitarian Universalist (i.e., a paid up member of an UU church) and be an atheist. 'none' would indicate he is not affiliated with any religion (btw there are plenty of people not affiliated with any religion yet are still theists). --
Erp (
talk)
04:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)reply
He is a member of the UU, he is an atheist though, so he by definition has no religion. We don't categorize atheist on beliefs whether it be Materialism/Naturism/Humanism in their religion tag. the articles used for proof of his religious affilation say he is an atheist.
IRWolfie- (
talk)
13:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)reply
It depends on one's definition of religion. Articles also state he is a Unitarian Universalist which is a recognized religion for tax and other purposes. It along with some varieties of Buddhism and Judaism do not require a belief in god. As a UU he has been a member of the board for one of their theological schools (Starr King) so it is not just something to hide that he is atheistic. --
Erp (
talk)
06:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I'm confused: How can someone be an atheist and a member of a religion? surely that would make his philosophy not religion to be UU?
IRWolfie- (
talk)
20:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)reply
As I said it depends on the definition of religion but note that atheist is not the same as areligious. In the US legally UU is a religion and one that doesn't care whether you believe in one god, zero gods, or a multitude of gods (a very hefty chunk of UUs are of the zero god persuasion). A few years back the Texas Comptroller claimed a similar group, Ethical Culture, was not a a religion for tax purposes since they did not require a belief in a supreme being, she lost (see
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Comptroller_of_Public_Accounts_v._Ethical_Society_of_Austin), an UU group had also been denied tax status as a church (see
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/7303/texas-official-says-unitarian-church-not-a-tax-exempt-religion) though that was reversed without going to court. Besides UU atheists I also know of Quaker atheists in good standing with their religion. --
Erp (
talk)
07:24, 9 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Unitarian Universalism is a perfectly acceptable religion, but it's his beliefs that would be considered atheism. I think UU should be his listed religion, or at least listed along with his atheism.
Esprix (
talk)
20:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)reply
He has said he is an Atheist, so that is what we should list as his religion, not try to interperate it as "secular unitarian universalism", both can be listed.
Grammarxxx (
talk)
52:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)reply
His religious denomination is UU and he has been quite active within the church (e.g., serving on the board of a UU divinity school). Within the UU community he is one of the many, many atheists. In fact in the
very survey he filled out saying he didn't believe in god he also listed his religion as Unitarian. I don't think it can be clearer.--
Erp (
talk)
07:07, 18 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Please sort it out before adding anything again at the religion parameter in the infobox. One of the sources stated that he is Unitarian, the other sources (of questionable reliability) say Atheist. If he's an atheist, the religion parameter is not to be used, per consensus established at an RfC. In that case, the fact and the sources may be added in the text, not in the infobox, the sources can be retrieved (provided they are RS acceptable in BLPs) from the edit history. If he's a Unitarian, then add again, with sources that support the fact. Either way, please establish consensus first, and only then proceed to changing the article again.
Kraxler (
talk)
15:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on
Pete Stark. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified 5 external links on
Pete Stark. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.