I too am a believer. And I think religion ritualizes and sets social parameters to human irrationality. The leap of faith is essential in the pew or on the prayer rug. It is toxic to the body politic.
While government can translate the Golden Rule into civic care for the general welfare, it ought not be in the business of instituting religious creed.
I too am a believer. And I think religion ritualizes and sets social parameters to human irrationality. The leap of faith is essential in the pew or on the prayer rug. It is toxic to the body politic.
While government can translate the Golden Rule into civic care for the general welfare, it ought not be in the business of instituting religious creed.
I was at my chiropractor's this week and he told me that he had two patients die in the last three weeks, in their 40s, to COVID. Three children each. Were they vaccinated I asked. No. Then it turned out they were members of the COVID central church in our neighborhood. God and horse medicine (which they obtained from some naturopath here in Salem) would save them. This same church had had an outbreak some time ago of something like 83 people and it sounds like they are still going strong. Someone, maybe one of them, brought my chiro antivax literature and he was polite but firm. Then last night someone posted a heads up about something written by a local truck driver who was threatening to join a truck brigade to shut things down. Lots of places are lifting or will soon lift mask mandates, so why now.
Craziness exists everywhere these days. My husband and I have an acquaintance (white male) who is into the Big Lie. I ventured onto his FB page just to see what he was saying. Oh boy, he was just spewing garbage about how ivermectin is the way to go and that he will never ever get any of these Covid shots! These people forget that they were inoculated as babies and kids throughout their very being. So all I can say is “hasta la bye bye” to making idiotic decisions.
makes for weird church going. I sort of subscribe to Mark Twain thought that the "easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also." I try to suspend judgment...
... separation of church and state ... is that written into the Constitution ...? Is that one of the things they want to change with a Constitutional convention? If they succeed in mandating laws that only "true Christians" will be accepted in this society, what will be defining characteristics of what it means to be a "true Christian" ... and who will define and enforce/force those standards ...?
Ask William Barr, who asserts that the Constitution was only intended for people of faith:
"Instead, social order must flow up from the people themselves – freely obeying the dictates of inwardly-possessed and commonly-shared moral values. And to control willful human beings, with an infinite capacity to rationalize, those moral values must rest on authority independent of men’s will – they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.
In short, in the Framers’ view, free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people – a people who recognized that there was a transcendent moral order antecedent to both the state and man-made law and who had the discipline to control themselves according to those enduring principles."
To appreciate Barr's fallacious rhetoric and sophistry, read his speech. Executive Summary: The Founders believed human beings are stinkers, government is oppressive, only acceptance of god and religion can save society
The Trump regime was (and still is) crammed packed with Christian Nationalists and Evangelical hucksters of every stripe. They are, excuse the expression, Hell bent on making this “Christian Nation” vision of their specific and terrifying Calvinist meets PT Barnum and Torquemada a reality.
Seriously, these are not our parent’s whackos and Bible Thumpers. It is full on Theocracy
Brian Book did not suggest in any way that government 'be in the business of instituting religious creed' as you wrote in your reply to him. If you are open to self-reflection, I recommend that you reread Brian Book's comment and then read your reply to him. Your response implied that he suggested a church-state partnership, which was not the case.
No of course Brian Book did not suggest the church state partnership which you seem to have pulled from thin air. Nor did I suggest he did. In fact, I was contrasting Brian Brook's devout and ethical stance honoring both Christ and the Constitution, with those government officials like Bill Barr, Amy Coney Barrett, et al who do want to use their government positions to institute their own interpretation of Christianity.
You did not differentiate as you now claim. I was not alone in comprehending your response as stated. Another liked my response to you, so, at least the two of us are in agreement. This is not the first time that I experienced and read you initiating and responding with hard, aggressive and misdirected attacks. One wise subscriber recently suggested that you take a 'cold shower'. What is this about? It keeps company with you lin, as far as I know, a focused, hard working person determined to do good. Overdetermined, occurred to me as a possibility. This trait of yours as I see it, is foreboding and mean. While I cannot think of a bridge, your learning and lucidity are appreciated as well. Salud.
What's with the Cat-Fight trying to be disguised by your clumsy patronizing fractiousness.
Play nice, Eh!?
This is a community of intelligent loquacious friends that seek improved knowledge about American democracy and the threat to its existence.
tRump and his minions are not American but, instead are treasonous pigs who do not deserve to live in these United States of America.
We are ALL committed to doing all we can to rid America of every evil minded bigoted R by conducting free and fair elections based upon advocacy to improve a law or legislation.
Fern, if you are so consumed with the negative labeling of the good people supporting this news letter, then, perhaps you will find a better outlet for pontificating your disrespect for us on a maggot, whooops, maga hate spewing link.
It is often difficult to suss out from your writing exactly what you do mean, lin. While occasionally something comes through that people connect with, by and large you generate rambling discourses that sound intellectual but are not: they are distractions. This is not a debate forum, but you seem determined to make it one. I'm sorry for that, because at its best, this forum offers the opportunity for great growth in awareness and to foster real action in the real world. In other words, real change and not just a blather of words that don't quite fit together. I hope you will join us in that. It's clear that you are intelligent, but also that you seem most interested in pulling other people down rather than creating a common bond. I agree with what Fern said (as of my writing her post is below mine, but this being substack that could change).
This is the old, "He said, she said, yadda yadda yadda" discourse about books written for a profit, (and I don't mean of faith).
In discussions of this type the generalizations categorizing people as either government employees or people practicing a shared love in Church is forgetting "They" are all people who may be both govt employed and members of a faith preaching love is the way.
So to argue about Church vs. State misses the point entirely.
In order to speak to this relationship the discussion must be centered upon people not entities composed of people. Entities either of Church or Government do not pray to our FATHER in Heaven or curse one or the other as unfit for a partnership.
It is obviously the people who compose each entity that seek the love that is a Church or the power that is a government.
It is those people who are either the same or anathema to each others proclivities, and it is what they either strive for or pray for that needs to be the point of any such discussion.
I too am a believer. And I think religion ritualizes and sets social parameters to human irrationality. The leap of faith is essential in the pew or on the prayer rug. It is toxic to the body politic.
While government can translate the Golden Rule into civic care for the general welfare, it ought not be in the business of instituting religious creed.
In many, the leap of faith has jumped the shark
In too many
I was at my chiropractor's this week and he told me that he had two patients die in the last three weeks, in their 40s, to COVID. Three children each. Were they vaccinated I asked. No. Then it turned out they were members of the COVID central church in our neighborhood. God and horse medicine (which they obtained from some naturopath here in Salem) would save them. This same church had had an outbreak some time ago of something like 83 people and it sounds like they are still going strong. Someone, maybe one of them, brought my chiro antivax literature and he was polite but firm. Then last night someone posted a heads up about something written by a local truck driver who was threatening to join a truck brigade to shut things down. Lots of places are lifting or will soon lift mask mandates, so why now.
Craziness exists everywhere these days. My husband and I have an acquaintance (white male) who is into the Big Lie. I ventured onto his FB page just to see what he was saying. Oh boy, he was just spewing garbage about how ivermectin is the way to go and that he will never ever get any of these Covid shots! These people forget that they were inoculated as babies and kids throughout their very being. So all I can say is “hasta la bye bye” to making idiotic decisions.
Couldn't agree more
❤️❤️❤️ You were clear Michele and to, sanity. May yours spread.
Can’t ❤️ you, Fern!
Thank you, Marlene. ❤️ It is mutual.
Tried to correct where to were with the edit ... No luck.
Now I see that it is correct...must take time.
It’s been glitchy for weeks. I’ve had similar issues.
By definition, it always must jump the shark.
makes for weird church going. I sort of subscribe to Mark Twain thought that the "easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also." I try to suspend judgment...
... separation of church and state ... is that written into the Constitution ...? Is that one of the things they want to change with a Constitutional convention? If they succeed in mandating laws that only "true Christians" will be accepted in this society, what will be defining characteristics of what it means to be a "true Christian" ... and who will define and enforce/force those standards ...?
Ask William Barr, who asserts that the Constitution was only intended for people of faith:
"Instead, social order must flow up from the people themselves – freely obeying the dictates of inwardly-possessed and commonly-shared moral values. And to control willful human beings, with an infinite capacity to rationalize, those moral values must rest on authority independent of men’s will – they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.
In short, in the Framers’ view, free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people – a people who recognized that there was a transcendent moral order antecedent to both the state and man-made law and who had the discipline to control themselves according to those enduring principles."
To appreciate Barr's fallacious rhetoric and sophistry, read his speech. Executive Summary: The Founders believed human beings are stinkers, government is oppressive, only acceptance of god and religion can save society
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-remarks-law-school-and-de-nicola-center-ethics
Any "blatherer" of such self-righteous religious clap-trap defines himself as a weaponized imbecile in my book.
The Trump regime was (and still is) crammed packed with Christian Nationalists and Evangelical hucksters of every stripe. They are, excuse the expression, Hell bent on making this “Christian Nation” vision of their specific and terrifying Calvinist meets PT Barnum and Torquemada a reality.
Seriously, these are not our parent’s whackos and Bible Thumpers. It is full on Theocracy
I won't be a Koch Christian
Brian Book did not suggest in any way that government 'be in the business of instituting religious creed' as you wrote in your reply to him. If you are open to self-reflection, I recommend that you reread Brian Book's comment and then read your reply to him. Your response implied that he suggested a church-state partnership, which was not the case.
No of course Brian Book did not suggest the church state partnership which you seem to have pulled from thin air. Nor did I suggest he did. In fact, I was contrasting Brian Brook's devout and ethical stance honoring both Christ and the Constitution, with those government officials like Bill Barr, Amy Coney Barrett, et al who do want to use their government positions to institute their own interpretation of Christianity.
You did not differentiate as you now claim. I was not alone in comprehending your response as stated. Another liked my response to you, so, at least the two of us are in agreement. This is not the first time that I experienced and read you initiating and responding with hard, aggressive and misdirected attacks. One wise subscriber recently suggested that you take a 'cold shower'. What is this about? It keeps company with you lin, as far as I know, a focused, hard working person determined to do good. Overdetermined, occurred to me as a possibility. This trait of yours as I see it, is foreboding and mean. While I cannot think of a bridge, your learning and lucidity are appreciated as well. Salud.
Wow!
Fern!
Hold your horses!
What's with the Cat-Fight trying to be disguised by your clumsy patronizing fractiousness.
Play nice, Eh!?
This is a community of intelligent loquacious friends that seek improved knowledge about American democracy and the threat to its existence.
tRump and his minions are not American but, instead are treasonous pigs who do not deserve to live in these United States of America.
We are ALL committed to doing all we can to rid America of every evil minded bigoted R by conducting free and fair elections based upon advocacy to improve a law or legislation.
Fern, if you are so consumed with the negative labeling of the good people supporting this news letter, then, perhaps you will find a better outlet for pontificating your disrespect for us on a maggot, whooops, maga hate spewing link.
Thanks!
It is often difficult to suss out from your writing exactly what you do mean, lin. While occasionally something comes through that people connect with, by and large you generate rambling discourses that sound intellectual but are not: they are distractions. This is not a debate forum, but you seem determined to make it one. I'm sorry for that, because at its best, this forum offers the opportunity for great growth in awareness and to foster real action in the real world. In other words, real change and not just a blather of words that don't quite fit together. I hope you will join us in that. It's clear that you are intelligent, but also that you seem most interested in pulling other people down rather than creating a common bond. I agree with what Fern said (as of my writing her post is below mine, but this being substack that could change).
This is the old, "He said, she said, yadda yadda yadda" discourse about books written for a profit, (and I don't mean of faith).
In discussions of this type the generalizations categorizing people as either government employees or people practicing a shared love in Church is forgetting "They" are all people who may be both govt employed and members of a faith preaching love is the way.
So to argue about Church vs. State misses the point entirely.
In order to speak to this relationship the discussion must be centered upon people not entities composed of people. Entities either of Church or Government do not pray to our FATHER in Heaven or curse one or the other as unfit for a partnership.
It is obviously the people who compose each entity that seek the love that is a Church or the power that is a government.
It is those people who are either the same or anathema to each others proclivities, and it is what they either strive for or pray for that needs to be the point of any such discussion.
Amen. This!