2024

[twocoach]

If religion adds something positive to your life personally then that's great for you but this notion that our giant melting pot of a country needs to be governed by Christian doctrine is fucking ridiculous.

[MICHHAWK]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

[KUTradition]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

except it’s actually the exact opposite of that

nobody is trying to shove godlessness down your throat. reasonable people don’t want anything shoved down their throat, be it christianity, deism, atheism, hinduism, etc

stop being a hollow victim

[jfish26]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

Giggle. 180 degrees from reality.

[MICHHAWK]

the godlessness routine is all fun and games until you are on your deathbed. then you find religion real quick.

[jfish26]

the godlessness routine is all fun and games until you are on your deathbed. then you find religion real quick.

I am neither pro nor con religion. I am neither pro nor con godlessness.

But I am very pro separation of church and state.

The team you vote for is not.

[twocoach]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

As I overhear a discussion on the TV in the other room about the backlash of the Alabama Supreme Court defining IVF embryos as "children", I'll kindly ask what fucking planet you're living on? I am talking about the laws that govern our society, not any societal factors.

[twocoach]

the godlessness routine is all fun and games until you are on your deathbed. then you find religion real quick.

Again, if religion gives you some sort of PERSONAL comfort at that moment then good for you. I am discussing the laws that all members of our society have to live under. A Christian God has no more place in legislature than a God of any other religion. There is no one God that should rule over all of us, especially since it would require humans to "determine" what the rule of God should be and how it should be applied. Who the fuck is Mike Johnson to think he knows how to apply to US legislative policy the stories of God in whatever translated version of the Bible he chooses to read?

[DCHawk1]

the godlessness routine is all fun and games until you are on your deathbed. then you find religion real quick.

I am neither pro nor con religion. I am neither pro nor con godlessness.

But I am very pro separation of church and state.

The team you vote for is not.

Have you/do you read Spinoza?

[jfish26]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

As I overhear a discussion on the TV in the other room about the backlash of the Alabama Supreme Court defining IVF embryos as "children", I'll kindly ask what fucking planet you're living on? I am talking about the laws that govern our society, not any societal factors.

So, ah, do I get to count all of my embryos as kids, for tax purposes?

[jfish26]

the godlessness routine is all fun and games until you are on your deathbed. then you find religion real quick.

I am neither pro nor con religion. I am neither pro nor con godlessness.

But I am very pro separation of church and state.

The team you vote for is not.

Have you/do you read Spinoza?

Not the first clue. You're better read than me.

[twocoach]

you mind your religious business. and i will do the same.

the godless heathens are trying hard to ram their godlessness down our throat.

As I overhear a discussion on the TV in the other room about the backlash of the Alabama Supreme Court defining IVF embryos as "children", I'll kindly ask what fucking planet you're living on? I am talking about the laws that govern our society, not any societal factors.

So, ah, do I get to count all of my embryos as kids, for tax purposes?

And can unmarried women now sue to have the man who impregnated them start paying child support from the second it is verified that they are pregnant?

[jfish26]

As I overhear a discussion on the TV in the other room about the backlash of the Alabama Supreme Court defining IVF embryos as "children", I'll kindly ask what fucking planet you're living on? I am talking about the laws that govern our society, not any societal factors.

So, ah, do I get to count all of my embryos as kids, for tax purposes?

And can unmarried women now sue to have the man who impregnated them start paying child support from the second it is verified that they are pregnant?

And on and on and on.

This is fucking TERRIFYING:

During a recent interview on the program of self-proclaimed “prophet” and QAnon conspiracy theorist Johnny Enlow, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Tom Parker indicated that he is a proponent of the “Seven Mountain Mandate,” a theological approach that calls on Christians to impose fundamentalist values on all aspects of American life.

Enlow is a pro-Trump “prophet” and leading proponent of the “Seven Mountain Mandate,” a “quasi-biblical blueprint for theocracy” that asserts that Christians must impose fundamentalist values on American society by conquering the “seven mountains” of cultural influence in U.S. life: government, education, media, religion, family, business, and entertainment.

Enlow has also repeatedly pushed the QAnon conspiracy theory, sometimes even connecting it to the Seven Mountain Mandate. Per Right Wing Watch, Enlow has claimed that world leaders are “satanic” pedophiles who “steal blood” and “do sacrifices” and that “there is presently no real democracy on the planet” because over 90 percent of world leaders are involved in pedophilia and are being blackmailed.

On February 16, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are people, with the same rights as living children, and that a person can be held liable for destroying them, imperiling in vitro fertilization treatment in the state. In a concurring opinion, Parker quoted the Bible, suggested that Alabama had adopted a “theologically based view of the sanctity of life,” and said that “human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God.”

In the interview on Enlow’s program — which was uploaded the same day as the ruling was issued — Parker claimed that “God created government” and said it’s “heartbreaking” that “we have let it go into the possession of others.” Parker then invoked the Seven Mountain Mandate, saying, “And that's why he is calling and equipping people to step back into these mountains right now.”

Parker suggested a familiarity with Enlow’s work, telling him, “As you've emphasized in the past, we've abandoned those Seven Mountains and they've been occupied by the opposite side.”

Parker discussed his “call” to what Enlow called the “mountain of government,” and later told Enlow that he appreciates what he’s done by “giving us the overview and the vision that allows us to really contemplate what God is calling each of us to for our role on those Seven Mountains.”

Enlow praised Parker, telling him he’s “in such a key place that we don't want to have any conversations that hurt you in any kind of way, but we appreciate who you are, who you are in the kingdom.”

Parker also claimed that God “is equipping me with something for the very specific situation that I’m facing,” and responded affirmatively when Enlow asked if “the holy spirit is there” when he’s “arbitrating a session” and performing his job as chief justice.

Parker’s ties to extreme right-wing Christian and “prophetic” media figures extends beyond the interview with Enlow.

Last year, Christian nationalist media figure Sean Feucht said Parker had invited him into the court’s chambers for a worship session. Parker also joined a prayer call in March 2023 with supposed prophets and apostles, and he prayed that “there will be a growing hunger in the judges of Alabama, and around the nation for more of God. And that they will be receptive to his moves toward restoration of the judges, so that they can play their forecast role in revival in this nation.”

https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-cons ... t-rhetoric

[twocoach]

Terrifying

[DCHawk1]

I am neither pro nor con religion. I am neither pro nor con godlessness.

But I am very pro separation of church and state.

The team you vote for is not.

Have you/do you read Spinoza?

Not the first clue. You're better read than me.

So...Baruch Spinoza is the early Enlightenment Dutch philosopher best known for his work criticizing the religious components of European governance and the divinity of Jewish and Christian Bibles. For his efforts, he was roundly attacked as an atheist agitator and was officially expelled from the Jewish community in Amsterdam.

It is largely thought that his influence on the American Founders was minimal, but that he did help form the foundations of their beliefs about the separation of Church and state.

There are some contemporary writers (whom I find convincing), however, who argue that much of Spinoza's work and much of his influence has been ignored. In spite of his personal atheism, he wrote admiringly of the ancient Israelis, praising their penchant for federalism, equality under the law, and the importance of virtue-based morality. Moreover, they argue (again, convincingly) that much of what he wrote actually was absorbed by the (much better-educated than we) Founders, especially John Adams.

In short, Spinoza made the case (and Adams made it more explicitly) that the ability to maintain a republic free from the interference of Church in state business is, ironically, dependent upon the inculcation and practice of virtues that most people (wrongly) consider purely religious in nature.

Franklin's famous quip about the government the Founders crafted being "a republic, if you can keep it" makes much more sense in this context.

The fate of our liberty and our ability to maintain the separation of the Church and state (with a very broad definition of "church") is entirely in our own hands. To do so, however, we have to agree upon a list and encourage the practice of a specific set of virtues. We have to judge behavior and discourage misbehavior. Or, as CS Lewis put it (echoing Plato):

The little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred at those things which really are pleasant, likeable, disgusting and hateful.

[jfish26]

Have you/do you read Spinoza?

Not the first clue. You're better read than me.

So...Baruch Spinoza is the early Enlightenment Dutch philosopher best known for his work criticizing the religious components of European governance and the divinity of Jewish and Christian Bibles. For his efforts, he was roundly attacked as an atheist agitator and was officially expelled from the Jewish community in Amsterdam.

It is largely thought that his influence on the American Founders was minimal, but that he did help form the foundations of their beliefs about the separation of Church and state.

There are some contemporary writers (whom I find convincing), however, who argue that much of Spinoza's work and much of his influence has been ignored. In spite of his personal atheism, he wrote admiringly of the ancient Israelis, praising their penchant for federalism, equality under the law, and the importance of virtue-based morality. Moreover, they argue (again, convincingly) that much of what he wrote actually was absorbed by the (much better-educated than we) Founders, especially John Adams.

In short, Spinoza made the case (and Adams made it more explicitly) that the ability to maintain a republic free from the interference of Church in state business is, ironically, dependent upon the inculcation and practice of virtues that most people (wrongly) consider purely religious in nature.

Franklin's famous quip about the government the Founders crafted being "a republic, if you can keep it" makes much more sense in this context.

The fate of our liberty and our ability to maintain the separation of the Church and state (with a very broad definition of "church") is entirely in our own hands. To do so, however, we have to agree upon a list and encourage the practice of a specific set of virtues. We have to judge behavior and discourage misbehavior. Or, as CS Lewis put it (echoing Plato):

The little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred at those things which really are pleasant, likeable, disgusting and hateful.

Ok. I have the sense I am stumbling into some sort of trap, but: sure, I agree.

And I would suggest this is precisely what the rule of law is intended to achieve, and further that the fragility running through your post is reflected in seeing, over the last ten years especially (but of course further back than that), the result of the erosion of norm-following.

[DCHawk1]

Ok. I have the sense I am stumbling into some sort of trap, but: sure, I agree.

And I would suggest this is precisely what the rule of law is intended to achieve, and further that the fragility running through your post is reflected in seeing, over the last ten years especially (but of course further back than that), the result of the erosion of norm-following.

No trap-setting (for a change). Your post just reminded me of Spinoza and Adams and how difficult what they advocated is in society today. I agree with you as well that the erosion of norm-following is significant, although I'm likely far more expansive in my time frame and culprits than you. (You say decade, for example. I say century.)

[jfish26]

Ok. I have the sense I am stumbling into some sort of trap, but: sure, I agree.

And I would suggest this is precisely what the rule of law is intended to achieve, and further that the fragility running through your post is reflected in seeing, over the last ten years especially (but of course further back than that), the result of the erosion of norm-following.

No trap-setting (for a change). Your post just reminded me of Spinoza and Adams and how difficult what they advocated is in society today. I agree with you as well that the erosion of norm-following is significant, although I'm likely far more expansive in my time frame and culprits than you. (You say decade, for example. I say century.)

Well that's because you're better-read than me!

[KUTradition]

Have you/do you read Spinoza?

Not the first clue. You're better read than me.

So...Baruch Spinoza is the early Enlightenment Dutch philosopher best known for his work criticizing the religious components of European governance and the divinity of Jewish and Christian Bibles. For his efforts, he was roundly attacked as an atheist agitator and was officially expelled from the Jewish community in Amsterdam.

It is largely thought that his influence on the American Founders was minimal, but that he did help form the foundations of their beliefs about the separation of Church and state.

There are some contemporary writers (whom I find convincing), however, who argue that much of Spinoza's work and much of his influence has been ignored. In spite of his personal atheism, he wrote admiringly of the ancient Israelis, praising their penchant for federalism, equality under the law, and the importance of virtue-based morality. Moreover, they argue (again, convincingly) that much of what he wrote actually was absorbed by the (much better-educated than we) Founders, especially John Adams.

In short, Spinoza made the case (and Adams made it more explicitly) that the ability to maintain a republic free from the interference of Church in state business is, ironically, dependent upon the inculcation and practice of virtues that most people (wrongly) consider purely religious in nature.

Franklin's famous quip about the government the Founders crafted being "a republic, if you can keep it" makes much more sense in this context.

The fate of our liberty and our ability to maintain the separation of the Church and state (with a very broad definition of "church") is entirely in our own hands. To do so, however, we have to agree upon a list and encourage the practice of a specific set of virtues. We have to judge behavior and discourage misbehavior. Or, as CS Lewis put it (echoing Plato):

The little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred at those things which really are pleasant, likeable, disgusting and hateful.

thanks for this

i don’t care what japhy says about you, you’re alright

[ousdahl]

Dang did fish already make the embryo joke