Home | About | Donate

Think Religiously Motivated Discrimination Can't Affect You? Guess Again


#21

That makes sense to me. Your readership will change over time. My grandmother did most of the work on mine. She wrote to people that were doing the same thing. They all worked together to develop a story and document it. It is an organic process and a lot more. It is part of the reason I can appreciate your site. Another thing I learned is that you really understand who you are after the process. A total gift from your ancestors as oral traditions use to have their place. I don’t know about INTP so much but being unique has a value too. Thanks so much. One of these days on the trunks.


#22

Agree with your conclusion, but your details are either erroneous or undemonstrated. Start with that, yes, many military chaplains are fundies, but not all. Presbyterian chaplains, for one, are supervised by their presbyteries as well as the military.


#23

Wordpress is free unless you want a fancy site name and stuff, like I did but it didn’t cost too much, go for it while you have the time :slight_smile:


#24

I think you are underestimating their numbers. Even so, they have a disproportionate influence in Congress than their actual numbers might seem to suggest.


#25

Not so much in Congress. Again, the fundy backers and the fundy misrepresentatives are just noisy. And the rest of us go overboard to be polite and not question anyone’s faith.


#26

The Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Methodist Church are indeed much more liberal and
mostly non-political. I do respect them, as well as the Unitarian/Universalists and the Quakers. What I do fear is the combination of Fundamentalists/Evangelicals/Pentecostals/ Dominionists and other assorted “apocalyptic end-timers”, which has grown tremendously in the last four decades or so, as the more moderate mail-line Protestant Denominations have gotten smaller (and older).

Hidebehind’s post which follows yours above illustrates this very well. Southern Baptists are particularly scary because of their sheer size and strength and political influence. The “mega-churches” are scary in their ability to control large numbers. Another fast-growing phenomenon is the rise and popularity of the “Prosperity Gospel” adherents.

I am originally a lifetime Presbyterian (USA) though inactive for the last few years. They are generally well-meaning and decent people.

Overall, though, I am very concerned about the influence of most of today’s so-called “Christians”,
their political power, their motives, and their goals. Again, Hidebehind gives some good examples.
I have to say at this point, that I think most American religion is toxic to democracy, freedom, and tolerance. Many of our fellow Americans are so addled by Religion, Pharmaceuticals, Advertising, Media, and Entertainment, to such a degree that they are losing what few critical thinking skills they may once have possessed. You can feel the meanness and madness increasing.


#27

Meant to say “main-line”. My editing missed that one.


#28

Churches use to also protect themselves by their organization from political influence and that was party because of their tax exempt status. So it is kind of a unholy alliance between politics and religion. The mix actually brings our the worst in each.

The term “have a blessed day” which is a spiritual concept has morphed into “have a brainwashed day”.


#29

You are an optimist. First of all, “public comment periods” are generally just token tips of the hat to legal requirements: if they aren’t interested in what the public has to say, they will just ram their agenda through regardless of the protests, because until someone takes them to court, they can generally do whatever they please. Second, if people can successfully use religion to discriminate against one group, the extension to other groups is a logical progression. Anyone who has a secret bias will come up with a way to justify it based on some religious belief they supposedly have. The courts have opened Pandora’s box.


#30

I know! Every time someone says that to me, I cringe.


#31

God and/or god is a smokescreen for scoundrels, theocrats and neo-fascist groups in the U.S. Always follow the money applies to all these classifications of false prophets, in it mostly for the very real profits offered by businesses of some sort.
It’s a scam with a Bible in its hand.


#32

Yes, indeed, I’m an optimist, but on this topic especially because I have direct experience in the trenches. @nighthawk, I was the last national moderator of Semper Reformanda (Always Being Reformed), which briefly (during the LGBT ordination battles) provided the theological umbrella for all the left parachurch issue groups. I am happy to say that my name and photo appeared repeatedly in the pages of The Presbyterian Layman and was the occasion for eye-rolling when I stepped to the microphone at a GA hearing. We were quite overtly political, internally and ex-. And @fern, you must have missed the hoo-hah over the last PC(USA) general assembly, which voted to divest (billions between Foundation and pension fund) from 3 US corporations that sell products and services used in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. Within a day of djt claiming to be a Presbyterian, the Stated Clerk (top legal officer) stated with the authority of careful research that he was not on the rolls of any PC(USA) church, and that his positions were not in line with what the participator-democracy processes of the church had agreed to.

A megachurch or prosperity-gospelier is a perfect example of bark bigger than bite, and primarily because they’re not connected to other churches through denominations that can hold leaders accountable. None of them is near the size of any of the quieter bodies of faith, but that doesn’t mean we don’t do anything.

And as to public comment periods on regulatory changes, I challenge you to back up your claim. They are indeed legally required, and a matter of public record. And protests stopped the “health care” reconciliations. We must support the court challenges, and make our individual voices heard.


#33

“And as to public comment periods on regulatory changes, I challenge you to back up your claim.”

I have written about and participated in protests against extraction corporations (oil, gas, coal) for years. My experience has been that in general, public comments are ignored. Or, if they are too intrusive, a token acknowledgment and temporary halt is called, only to be circumvented later. If this were not the case, a lot more progress would have been made, considering the DECADES of work being put in by environmental groups in the US. I published an article about one scenaio in western Colorado. it seemed like a victory at the time, but the BLM is right back at it, and all the work seems to have been for nothing. I applaud your successes, but am highly skeptical nonetheless.
http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=jsc


#34

I don’t know about your “scenario,” but it doesn’t seem to have been a matter of national comment on federal regulations. That’s the matter of these “interim final rules.”


#35

Please make it a law. If a business can turn me down as a customer I should be able to stop patronizing a business because they are a**holes.


#36

The happy couple could have given the store a big f-k you and go buy a cake somewhere else.

When i was a permanent resident in the US (not citizen yet) i wanted to buy a handgun. went into a store just to be informed that the owners dont sell to non citizens. Guess what? Drove to another store down the road and got what i needed. No ACLU, no supreme court involved. The business owner has the right to run his business as he or she sees fit. I also have te option to take my business somewhere else.

Then again, at the time i was a straight white male in his late 30s with a full time job. The least protected demographic. The only thing i had going for me, i was an immigrant.


#37

Oh, yeah, tell me about it. The most privileged and smug demographic, don’t you mean?

This baker has happily sold to this very couple over a number of years, including “artistic” cakes for events. It was only when they had the opportunity to legalize their union that he decided he didn’t want their business. Methinks he was looking for a fight, and maybe a test case. It goes both ways, both commerce and litigation of rights.


#38

Correct. I guess we’ll see whose rights are more important. Personally i would have gone to another store and be done with it.


#39

Well, that’s your privilege, isn’t it?