The second I saw the new home page of The Friendly Atheist with Jared Huffman and Jamie Raskin and the headline about "the dangers of Christian Nationalism," I was thrilled. It strikes me as way past time that some serious and formal attention was paid to the threat of Christian Nationalism, and the fact that the panel examining it is associated with the Democratic National Convention is a very big deal to me. Clearly, those involved understand the problem: that Christian Nationalism "denied church/state separation, called for the establishment of religion, rejected the idea of no religious test for public office," and they are prepared to take action to thwart CN.
What needs to happen now is that Kamala and Tim and anyone else who is concerned about CN needs to say so OUT LOUD. Even as they are calling out Project 2025, the same needs to happen with Christian Nationalism, particularly that CN isn't any kind of Christianity as I understood it as a kid. We need to tell the general public what is going on with CN and not blink when we do it.
We have seen the enemy. It's time to kick its ass!
I hope she promotes a healthy separation of church and state, and that she points out that this is good for Christians and yes even evangelicals too. That they benefit when schools and government are free from people trying to get them to pray in ways they don't believe or teach their kids religion they don't agree with.
Trump and Vance regularly attack groups of voters. And it's taken them from a large lead to in the hole in key battleground states. Their political advisors are going nuts trying to get them to 'stop digging.' So while I'm in full agreement on opposition to dominionism, I hope that politically, the Harris team accomplishes this through highlighting the positives of secularism and not attacking conservative evangelicals.
If we're talking about Christian Nationalism, we should ALSO be talking about Church / State separation in the same breath, especially considering that among CN's goals is erasure of that separation.
And so should Kamala and Tim and anyone else who stumps for them.
Okay newsletter then. Or a blog masked as a newsletter. Or a masked newsletter appearing to be a blog or something the aliens from planet 147* uses for mind control.
*) 147 is of course a very wholly number. Everyone who has ever been to India or Britannica knows that.
I want to cry now. 147 is the maximum brake in snooker. Snooker is almost like pool but with weirder rules, bigger table and much more interresting to watch, and much harder to play well.
At least Knight Rider 2000 missed that prediction. Although compared to what we've had since. President Dan Quayle would be an improvement. Of course, so would a brain-damaged chimpanzee.
The most clear difference between the two campaigns was on full display this week. The Democrats were talking about a bright future and positivity. On another station Trump is talking about high crime and a bad economy. His claims that Kamala will destroy our economy by continuing Biden's agenda fall on deaf ears at the DNC precisely because Biden's agenda pulled us back from the brink of a depression that Trump pushed us toward but on that other station they talk non-stop about high inflation and poor jobs reports. The best campaign options for the Dems is to continue to promote reality and get those moderate voters out to vote. The far left will vote for Kamala because they have no choice. The moderates need to realize that Kamala's views align with their views far more than Trump's views. Pushing the reality that Kamala represents a bright future for the US while Trump is a grumpy old man who only sees the worst in everything is the way to win.
Many on the far left will not vote for Kamala. Many are 1 issue voters who think that Israel's actions in Gaza supercede all other issues put together, & regardless of the fact that Trump's policy toward the matter would be even less to their liking, they refuse to vote for Kamala, and declare they will vote for Jill Stein instead, at least unless Kamala renounce the policy to arm Israel, although even that may not be enough for them.
Yes, the Israel issue is a sticking point for those of us with empathy for all of the people, not just the ones that look like us. I know there are some who are mad at the Biden administration for supporting Bibi's genocide. But, the issue is getting stale in the news here in the US and I have little doubt that the Dem's October surprise will have to do with the current peace talks. I really don't think that issue will be as big as it seems today. As for the rest of the left's agenda that Kamala is against? Well, it's a moderate Kamala or a fascist Trump. Personally, I'd rather have some health care than health care for only the rich. I'd rather have young adults pay for education than be denied any at all. I'd rather have a cooling stock market due to regulations on corporate profits than have the oligarchs take over our country. At the very least, we are not making the biggest mistake we did in '16, the mistake of alienating the Bernie Bros.
Harris seems like someone who wants to be progressive but ends up cutting moderate deals. So to the pro-Palestenian protestors, I think they've nailed her. They aren't going to get much more than 'mainstream Democrat' foreign policy out of her administration. (If you aren't a pro-Palestinian type, that may be a relief, but either way, it's my prediction of how her administration would shape up.)
But, as you say, anyone to the left of Mussolini should probably consider her the best of the general election options or the 'least worst' option, because Trump's foreign policy is going to be far far worse than 'mainstream Democrat'.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. There are those of us who are capable of discerning distinctions in the positions politicians take, for whom not everything is black & white, & who don't insist everything has to be just as we want it for us to accept a candidate or party.
Biden has reached out to progressives more than any administration has in many decades, forming partnerships with the likes of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren & AOC to promote progressive legislation, & Kamala is reaching even further, with one of the most progressive running mates we've seen.
The extreme left criticize Bernie all the time for caving in to the Democrats (in their view). Many are hard to distinguish from the MAGAts because the focus of nearly all of their criticism is Democrats. Many are heavily influenced, like the far right, by Russian trolls, if not trolls themselves. They'll be very quick to blame the US for "provoking" Russia, & accuse the US of imperialism, while totally ignoring the aggression, imperialism, provocations & barbarism by Russia on a scale that is orders of magnitude greater than anything the US might be guilty of.
The obnoxious misogynistic hateful jerks That still swarm any article about Hillary with hate, who believed all the Russian propaganda, yes not to be confused with normal voters who voted for Bernie in the primary. I still think the most obnoxious ones online were Russian trolls.
I think the churches are in the process of being distilled down to the true believers, who exist beyond the reach of facts and reason. They appear to have convinced themselves all the country's problems can be solved by slapping the Christian label on everything. If there was ever an idea that was unsupported by history, it's that one. The preachers can talk about their loving Jesus and the glorious afterlife from now on, but there is nothing they crave so much as power and control in this earthly realm. If they ever attained that power, they would begin killing one another over perceived doctrinal errors almost immediately. Giving religion no role to play in government was not an accidental omission on the part of the founders.
It pleases me that the Democratic Party is not burying its head in the sand in regards to Christian Nationalism anymore. Hopefully the issue moves from being a panel during the convention to the wider attention in the prime time speeches. We can’t fight it if we don’t acknowledge it.
We need more than atheistic candidates at the federal level though. We need them at the state and local level as well.
In my state (Nebraska), there are only two openly-atheistic politicians: Senator Megan Hunt (District 8, west Omaha), and me (a village board trustee in the Panhandle in a town of ninety-two).
There is a far larger percentage of atheists or simply people who believe in separation of Church and State regardless of religious stripe. It seems too many good people want "anyone else" to run for office rather than themselves (too busy, have this job or that obligation, &c).
Any time you are talking to a Republican or other right-wing idiot (and I'm not sure why you ever would), be sure to enunciate clearly, as they tend to get confused easily, especially if you're using words that contain more than two syllables. For example, if you mention the DNC, make sure that you talk slowly... otherwise, they may think that you're saying "D&C" and start raving about abortion! Better to be safe and not engage them in conversation at all rather than become frustrated by trying to explain simple concepts such as gravity or shoe laces. And you will definitely lose them as soon as you say words like, "science" or "fact"... trust me on this. At 78, I long ago gave up trying to talk with them, so now if I open my mouth while they are present, it is only to spit.
Somebody should start a Make a Fundie Laugh Brigade. We could stage comic moments in front of them to teach them another coping mechanism. If they knew how to laugh, they wouldn't have to scapegoat so hard.
I can't remember the last time I knew of a Republican who could laugh at himself and/or be self-deprecating. I suspect that's been their problem for at least the last 20 years, if not a LOT longer.
"Religion and politics, Raskin added, can mix just like ethics and politics."
I respectfully disagree. Your current problems stem from mixing politics and christianity. When taking office, everyone should let their faith at the door. Several millenia teached us precisely that (Ancient Egypt and Europe).
Among the most notable products of mixing religion and politics is the concept of ceremonial deism. I observed some time back that, in the final analysis, ceremonial deism is nothing more than poorly disguised Christianity. It amounts to little more than one more attempt by the Christian right to superimpose their beliefs on our government.
I am not sure how this leaving faith at the door thing would actually work. Let's say a Christian lawmaker believes that God charges Christians to be good stewards of the earth, and that's why he promotes environmentalism. And let's say that the atheist lawmaker next to him believes that his Humanist ideology promotes him leaving the environment in as good or better shape for future generations than it is now.
So, okay, they are both supposed to leave those beliefs at the door and...eschew environmentalism? Or are they both supposed to be environmentalist but pretend their support doesn't come from their ideologies? Is this a discrimination thing, where you think Christian lawmakers should not allow their ideology to inform their legislative choices but humanist lawmakers should allow their ideology to inform their choices?
I think there's a much more rational and workable system than "leave your religion at the door." Which is: representatives should represent their constituents interests first and foremost...and 𝑛𝑜𝑏𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 if that representative's religious beliefs are the reason they do the job they are voted on to do. On the voter side, voters should vote for the legislators that will represent their interests, and 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑𝑛'𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 about their rep's religious beliefs so long as that rep can do their job (i.e. represent their constituents effectively).
I can elect a rep who is environmentalist because of their Christianity (or their Hinduism, or their atheism, or their Satanism), and my rep can be environmentalist because of their Christianity (or Hinduism, or atheism, or Satanism), and that's fine. Because their job is to represent my environmentalism, and the motivation behind why their environmentalism aligns with my environmentalism is really kind of a minor aside. Any argument that says 'my rep's ability to match my motivation is more important than the representation they give me' is sheer tribalism.
New Hope Church must use the Revised Standard Version of the bible that first appeared appeared in 1946...the very same year that the word "homosexuality" first appeared in ANY bible.
I keep saying it: Sexual orientation wasn't understood in biblical times.
In the tale about Horus and Seth, la conclusion à en tirer n'est pas que l'homosexualité soit sale mais qu'on ne peut pas pretendre au trone et être le bottom. Sorry, for the French, I couldn't organise my thoughts in English.
Where ? Egypt, with at least one gay couple known ? Mesopotamia, with its LGBTQI+ priests ? China, with male lovers and concubines ?
When what would became the babble was compiled, twice, it was by an irrelevant cultural minority. Too bad it didn't stay that way but it had nothing to do with the more powerful civilisations.
sta, is an inherent part of Zoroastrian oral tradition even though it was compiled far later than the other parts of the Avesta.[6][7][8]
The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is a man that is a Daeva [demon]; this man is a worshipper of the Daevas, a male paramour of the Daevas[9][10]
This passage has been interpreted to mean that homosexuality is a form of demon worship, and thus sinful. Commentary on this passage suggests that those engaging in sodomy could be killed without permission from the Dastur, the high priest.[10]
Zoroastrianism has been said to have a "hatred of male anal intercourse" that is reflected in at least one mythological tale. When Ahriman, the "Spirit of Aridity and Death" and "Lord of Lies", sought to destroy the world, he engaged in self-sodomy. That caused an "explosion of evil power" and resulted in the birth of a host of evil minions.[11]
Apart from the Vendidad, the Pahlavi scriptures, later religious Persian books considered sacred by many Zoroastrians, also strongly forbid sodomy.[12]
Societal attitudes of Zoroastrian communities
Within modern Zoroastrian communities, attitudes towards homosexuality can vary.[13]
While some adherents, especially in Iran and India hold conservative views that align with traditional interpretations, others have adopted liberal stances in diaspora communities, reflecting broader Western societal shifts.[14]
In recent years, debates surrounding same-sex marriage have emerged within Zoroastrian communities, in regions such as India where the religion maintains a significant presence. Zoroastrian religious leaders have historically upheld socially conservative perspectives on marriage and sexuality, and as recently as 2023 they have publicly decried a religious validity for same-sex marriages.[15]
In India, where Zoroastrians are governed by personal laws under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936, same-sex marriage remains unrecognized within the community. Religious leaders, such as Dasturji Dasturji Khurshed Dastoor, the high priest of Iranshah Atash Behram, Udvada have voiced opposition to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage among Parsis. Dastoor, the high priest of Iranshah Atash Behram, Udvada, expressed that Zoroastrian ancient texts do not mention same-sex marriages as they date back to a time when such unions were not recognized. The texts focus on marriage between a male and female. Dastoor acknowledges that legal judgments, including those from the Supreme Court, should be respected and followed and so if same-sex marriage becomes legalized, individuals will marry according to the law. However, Dastoor clarifies that ceremonies for same-sex couples would not be allowed to be conducted in Zoroastrian places of worship.[15]
References
Nanavutty, Piloo (1999). The Gathas of Zarathushtra: Hymns in Praise of Wisdom. Mapin pub. pp. 148–151. ISBN 978-81-85822-56-3.
Humbach, Helmut; Faiss, Klaus (2010). Zarathushtra and His Antagonists: A Sociolinguistic Study with English and German Translations of His Gāthās. Reichert. p. 191. ISBN 978-3-89500-768-2.
Hathiram, Ervad Marzban J. (2014-01-24). "Zoroastrianism, homosexuality & LGBT issues – a lecture recording". Frashogard. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
Nariman, Rohinton F. (2016-09-01). The Inner Fire: Faith, Choice, and Modern-day Living in Zoroastrianism. Hay House, Inc. ISBN 978-93-85827-24-2.
Irani, K. D. (2009). The Gathas: The Hymns of Zarathushtra. K. R. Cama Oriental Institute.
Ervad Behramshah Hormusji Bharda (1990). "The Importance of Vendidad in the Zarathushti Religion". tenets.zoroastrianism.com. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Ervad Marzban Hathiram. "Significance and Philosophy of the Vendidad" (PDF). frashogard.com. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
"Ranghaya, Sixteenth Vendidad Nation & Western Aryan Lands". heritageinstitute.com. Heritage Institute. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Jones, Lesley-Ann (13 October 2011). Freddie Mercury: The Definitive Biography: The Definitive Biography. Hachette UK, 2011. p. 28. ISBN 9781444733709. Retrieved 3 January 2015. "In the sacred Zoroastrian text[,] the Vendidad, it is stated: 'The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is a man that is a Daeva (demon): this man is a worshipper of the Daevas, a male paramour of the Daevas"
Darmesteter, James (1898). "Vd 8:32". Sacred Books of the East (American ed.). Retrieved 3 January 2015. "Ahura Mazda answered: 'The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is the man that is a Daeva; this one is the man that is a worshipper of the Daevas, that is a male paramour of the Daevas, that is a female paramour of the Daevas, that is a wife to the Daeva; this is the man that is as bad as a Daeva, that is in his whole being a Daeva; this is the man that is a Daeva before he dies, and becomes one of the unseen Daevas after death: so is he, whether he has lain with mankind as mankind, or as womankind. The guilty may be killed by any one, without an order from the Dastur (see § 74 n.), and by this execution an ordinary capital crime may be redeemed."
Long, p. 68
"HOMOSEXUALITY i. IN ZOROASTRIANISM". iranicaonline.org. Encyclopaedia Iranica. 15 December 2004. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Singh, Nagendra Kr; Mishra, A. P. (2005). Encyclopaedia of Oriental Philosophy and Religion: Christianity. Global Vision Publishing House. ISBN 978-81-8220-071-5.
"The Rainbow Fravahar: Stories Of The Community | FEZANA". 2021-06-30. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
Long, Ronald Edwin (2004). Men, homosexuality, and the Gods: an exploration into the religious significance of male homosexuality in world perspective. Haworth Press. ISBN 978-1-56023-152-3.
Further reading
AVESTA: Vendidad: FARGARD 8. Funerals and purification, unlawful sex
Collectively setting aside resources in the boom years/boom places so you can use them in the bust years/bust places...yeah, that's pretty much human civilization 101.
Not sure whether the opposed conservatives are the analog of 'doesn't even have a GED' or a more Machievellian 'fully agree you should set aside your resources for my bust times, just not the other way around.' The GOP probably has both.
To add: He's up in Knowa's face. Maybe with all Pillow Boy's probems he's started snorting crack cocaine again. Coke can make a person extremely aggressive.
We follow the teachings of Jesus. We love your approach regarding religion and politics. We usually see your videos recommended on YouTube about the hot mess of a state government here in Oklahoma.
We literally don’t think at all about the faith tradition of politicians because only their actions matter. You’ve done several videos about these white evangelicals tearing up everything they can here in Oklahoma. If you work for the common good we will support you.
Looks like a lot of fun getting to meet some remarkable people who fight to maintain our secular republic - intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable people. Hard to imagine anything like this at the RNC.
Heard Michelle Obama saying tRump is seeking a black job on MSNBC. This time I picked up on that hint of a snarl that Black Women seem to pull off so perfectly.
The second I saw the new home page of The Friendly Atheist with Jared Huffman and Jamie Raskin and the headline about "the dangers of Christian Nationalism," I was thrilled. It strikes me as way past time that some serious and formal attention was paid to the threat of Christian Nationalism, and the fact that the panel examining it is associated with the Democratic National Convention is a very big deal to me. Clearly, those involved understand the problem: that Christian Nationalism "denied church/state separation, called for the establishment of religion, rejected the idea of no religious test for public office," and they are prepared to take action to thwart CN.
What needs to happen now is that Kamala and Tim and anyone else who is concerned about CN needs to say so OUT LOUD. Even as they are calling out Project 2025, the same needs to happen with Christian Nationalism, particularly that CN isn't any kind of Christianity as I understood it as a kid. We need to tell the general public what is going on with CN and not blink when we do it.
We have seen the enemy. It's time to kick its ass!
I hope she promotes a healthy separation of church and state, and that she points out that this is good for Christians and yes even evangelicals too. That they benefit when schools and government are free from people trying to get them to pray in ways they don't believe or teach their kids religion they don't agree with.
Trump and Vance regularly attack groups of voters. And it's taken them from a large lead to in the hole in key battleground states. Their political advisors are going nuts trying to get them to 'stop digging.' So while I'm in full agreement on opposition to dominionism, I hope that politically, the Harris team accomplishes this through highlighting the positives of secularism and not attacking conservative evangelicals.
If we're talking about Christian Nationalism, we should ALSO be talking about Church / State separation in the same breath, especially considering that among CN's goals is erasure of that separation.
And so should Kamala and Tim and anyone else who stumps for them.
What new homepage?
It's the "homepage" which renews every time Hemant publishes a new blog: friendlyatheist.com.
I call it "new," anyway! 😁
Not a ‘blog.’ FA is now a “newsletter.” This is an article at that newsletter. :)
Okay newsletter then. Or a blog masked as a newsletter. Or a masked newsletter appearing to be a blog or something the aliens from planet 147* uses for mind control.
*) 147 is of course a very wholly number. Everyone who has ever been to India or Britannica knows that.
At the top of every FA article, there's a blurb just under the article title that starts with "This newsletter is free..."
Hemant says it's a newsletter so a newsletter it be. :)
I'll try to remember.
Hum. I went to England twice and I have no idea 🤔
I'm part English. Does that count? ;)
I want to cry now. 147 is the maximum brake in snooker. Snooker is almost like pool but with weirder rules, bigger table and much more interresting to watch, and much harder to play well.
😁
https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/
Under the Chinese zodiac, I was born in the Year of the Dragon. The most powerful sign in that zodiac. Lucky me. :)
(Bruce Lee was born in the Dragon Year before me)
You say potato, I say potato-e
At least Knight Rider 2000 missed that prediction. Although compared to what we've had since. President Dan Quayle would be an improvement. Of course, so would a brain-damaged chimpanzee.
Dan Quayle is the worst achievement when you win a game of CIV4. I wonder if there is a possibility to replace him with drumpster.
It's not nice to speak of W Bush that way, even if it is accurate.
New as in #3, with OnlySky #2 and Patheos #1 (as far as I know)?
I call this his blog.
Me too, I seldom remember which platform I am on.
The most clear difference between the two campaigns was on full display this week. The Democrats were talking about a bright future and positivity. On another station Trump is talking about high crime and a bad economy. His claims that Kamala will destroy our economy by continuing Biden's agenda fall on deaf ears at the DNC precisely because Biden's agenda pulled us back from the brink of a depression that Trump pushed us toward but on that other station they talk non-stop about high inflation and poor jobs reports. The best campaign options for the Dems is to continue to promote reality and get those moderate voters out to vote. The far left will vote for Kamala because they have no choice. The moderates need to realize that Kamala's views align with their views far more than Trump's views. Pushing the reality that Kamala represents a bright future for the US while Trump is a grumpy old man who only sees the worst in everything is the way to win.
The Republicans talk about those because they need to push the blame away from them and onto others.
They need to make people forget that THEY caused all of the problems.
Many on the far left will not vote for Kamala. Many are 1 issue voters who think that Israel's actions in Gaza supercede all other issues put together, & regardless of the fact that Trump's policy toward the matter would be even less to their liking, they refuse to vote for Kamala, and declare they will vote for Jill Stein instead, at least unless Kamala renounce the policy to arm Israel, although even that may not be enough for them.
Yes, the Israel issue is a sticking point for those of us with empathy for all of the people, not just the ones that look like us. I know there are some who are mad at the Biden administration for supporting Bibi's genocide. But, the issue is getting stale in the news here in the US and I have little doubt that the Dem's October surprise will have to do with the current peace talks. I really don't think that issue will be as big as it seems today. As for the rest of the left's agenda that Kamala is against? Well, it's a moderate Kamala or a fascist Trump. Personally, I'd rather have some health care than health care for only the rich. I'd rather have young adults pay for education than be denied any at all. I'd rather have a cooling stock market due to regulations on corporate profits than have the oligarchs take over our country. At the very least, we are not making the biggest mistake we did in '16, the mistake of alienating the Bernie Bros.
Harris seems like someone who wants to be progressive but ends up cutting moderate deals. So to the pro-Palestenian protestors, I think they've nailed her. They aren't going to get much more than 'mainstream Democrat' foreign policy out of her administration. (If you aren't a pro-Palestinian type, that may be a relief, but either way, it's my prediction of how her administration would shape up.)
But, as you say, anyone to the left of Mussolini should probably consider her the best of the general election options or the 'least worst' option, because Trump's foreign policy is going to be far far worse than 'mainstream Democrat'.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. There are those of us who are capable of discerning distinctions in the positions politicians take, for whom not everything is black & white, & who don't insist everything has to be just as we want it for us to accept a candidate or party.
Biden has reached out to progressives more than any administration has in many decades, forming partnerships with the likes of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren & AOC to promote progressive legislation, & Kamala is reaching even further, with one of the most progressive running mates we've seen.
The Bernie Bros are now MAGAts. They were never on our side.
Many of us are Bernie supporters. I hope you're not including us.
I'm at the DNC Convention as a Delegate , was Ridin' with Biden, it was an easy small sidestep to be a Harris Delegate for the vast majority of us.
Now RFK and his supporters....they're batshit and about to Jump to Trump this Friday.
Bernie supporters, and his Bros are two very different animals.
The extreme left criticize Bernie all the time for caving in to the Democrats (in their view). Many are hard to distinguish from the MAGAts because the focus of nearly all of their criticism is Democrats. Many are heavily influenced, like the far right, by Russian trolls, if not trolls themselves. They'll be very quick to blame the US for "provoking" Russia, & accuse the US of imperialism, while totally ignoring the aggression, imperialism, provocations & barbarism by Russia on a scale that is orders of magnitude greater than anything the US might be guilty of.
If they are touting we provoked Russia they are definitely trolls.
The obnoxious misogynistic hateful jerks That still swarm any article about Hillary with hate, who believed all the Russian propaganda, yes not to be confused with normal voters who voted for Bernie in the primary. I still think the most obnoxious ones online were Russian trolls.
These were some of the tantrum voters who helped install Trump as President.
We have a far left?
I think the churches are in the process of being distilled down to the true believers, who exist beyond the reach of facts and reason. They appear to have convinced themselves all the country's problems can be solved by slapping the Christian label on everything. If there was ever an idea that was unsupported by history, it's that one. The preachers can talk about their loving Jesus and the glorious afterlife from now on, but there is nothing they crave so much as power and control in this earthly realm. If they ever attained that power, they would begin killing one another over perceived doctrinal errors almost immediately. Giving religion no role to play in government was not an accidental omission on the part of the founders.
Let's pray you are correct in your observation. But it will also result in more harcore, noisy and probably violent xians.
I saw what you did there 🤣
It pleases me that the Democratic Party is not burying its head in the sand in regards to Christian Nationalism anymore. Hopefully the issue moves from being a panel during the convention to the wider attention in the prime time speeches. We can’t fight it if we don’t acknowledge it.
We need more than atheistic candidates at the federal level though. We need them at the state and local level as well.
In my state (Nebraska), there are only two openly-atheistic politicians: Senator Megan Hunt (District 8, west Omaha), and me (a village board trustee in the Panhandle in a town of ninety-two).
There is a far larger percentage of atheists or simply people who believe in separation of Church and State regardless of religious stripe. It seems too many good people want "anyone else" to run for office rather than themselves (too busy, have this job or that obligation, &c).
I'll be posting about this later in the week... :)
Hot damn!
Yay!
HOORAY!
❤️I look forward to it.
Hemant = Friendly Atheist.
Any time you are talking to a Republican or other right-wing idiot (and I'm not sure why you ever would), be sure to enunciate clearly, as they tend to get confused easily, especially if you're using words that contain more than two syllables. For example, if you mention the DNC, make sure that you talk slowly... otherwise, they may think that you're saying "D&C" and start raving about abortion! Better to be safe and not engage them in conversation at all rather than become frustrated by trying to explain simple concepts such as gravity or shoe laces. And you will definitely lose them as soon as you say words like, "science" or "fact"... trust me on this. At 78, I long ago gave up trying to talk with them, so now if I open my mouth while they are present, it is only to spit.
🤣🤣🤣
Somebody should start a Make a Fundie Laugh Brigade. We could stage comic moments in front of them to teach them another coping mechanism. If they knew how to laugh, they wouldn't have to scapegoat so hard.
... 𝑖𝑓 𝑤𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑𝑛'𝑡 𝑙𝑎𝑢𝑔ℎ 𝑤𝑒 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑔𝑜 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑒.
-- Jimmy Buffett
I can't remember the last time I knew of a Republican who could laugh at himself and/or be self-deprecating. I suspect that's been their problem for at least the last 20 years, if not a LOT longer.
I think to laugh at yourself, you have to be willing to believe you're not perfect and that's okay.
My fave philosopher.
It is difficult to smile when you are busy hating anyone not exactly like you.
"Religion and politics, Raskin added, can mix just like ethics and politics."
I respectfully disagree. Your current problems stem from mixing politics and christianity. When taking office, everyone should let their faith at the door. Several millenia teached us precisely that (Ancient Egypt and Europe).
"He suggested impeaching Clarence Thomas"
In that case, alitosis needs to be enpeached too.
Among the most notable products of mixing religion and politics is the concept of ceremonial deism. I observed some time back that, in the final analysis, ceremonial deism is nothing more than poorly disguised Christianity. It amounts to little more than one more attempt by the Christian right to superimpose their beliefs on our government.
And it's one more thing we need to stop.
I am not sure how this leaving faith at the door thing would actually work. Let's say a Christian lawmaker believes that God charges Christians to be good stewards of the earth, and that's why he promotes environmentalism. And let's say that the atheist lawmaker next to him believes that his Humanist ideology promotes him leaving the environment in as good or better shape for future generations than it is now.
So, okay, they are both supposed to leave those beliefs at the door and...eschew environmentalism? Or are they both supposed to be environmentalist but pretend their support doesn't come from their ideologies? Is this a discrimination thing, where you think Christian lawmakers should not allow their ideology to inform their legislative choices but humanist lawmakers should allow their ideology to inform their choices?
I think there's a much more rational and workable system than "leave your religion at the door." Which is: representatives should represent their constituents interests first and foremost...and 𝑛𝑜𝑏𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 if that representative's religious beliefs are the reason they do the job they are voted on to do. On the voter side, voters should vote for the legislators that will represent their interests, and 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑𝑛'𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 about their rep's religious beliefs so long as that rep can do their job (i.e. represent their constituents effectively).
I can elect a rep who is environmentalist because of their Christianity (or their Hinduism, or their atheism, or their Satanism), and my rep can be environmentalist because of their Christianity (or Hinduism, or atheism, or Satanism), and that's fine. Because their job is to represent my environmentalism, and the motivation behind why their environmentalism aligns with my environmentalism is really kind of a minor aside. Any argument that says 'my rep's ability to match my motivation is more important than the representation they give me' is sheer tribalism.
Your premise is based on environmentalism being a belief.
It isn’t, which is where your argument falls apart.
"politicians couldn’t vote in favor of any commandments they’ve ever personally violated. "
That man is clever and has a sense of humour. I think I'd probably vote for him.
I also really, really like the idea of voting on each one individually. I’m stealing that!
Very much so! My favorite member of the House.
He is absolutely wonderful, sharp-witted and constantly calling the CN contingent out on their stupid ideas.
Know the popes.
https://scontent-ord5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/456509218_3300520706768497_8229365356301460828_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p526x296&_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=aa7b47&_nc_ohc=KIx4_iC4xkEQ7kNvgFbSR3p&_nc_ht=scontent-ord5-1.xx&oh=00_AYCM4n5tu3ya8B9lDvDmqb3hZvSlAufQxc0rOQw4jyabcQ&oe=66CBFB16
Talk about saying the quiet part out loud! WHEW!
Love that last line!
I have deep respect for them.
https://scontent-ord5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/455338485_8533024816729610_1739420651986913828_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p180x540&_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=xKS_vQW5IBoQ7kNvgFLgmlA&_nc_ht=scontent-ord5-1.xx&oh=00_AYBktgMY7IjE3_QdOMVlJElRbpXGC45ZK-p_S17GD7DG2w&oe=66CBFE12
New Hope Church must use the Revised Standard Version of the bible that first appeared appeared in 1946...the very same year that the word "homosexuality" first appeared in ANY bible.
I keep saying it: Sexual orientation wasn't understood in biblical times.
A fuckton of things weren’t understood in biblical times.
Or they simply didn't care.
In the tale about Horus and Seth, la conclusion à en tirer n'est pas que l'homosexualité soit sale mais qu'on ne peut pas pretendre au trone et être le bottom. Sorry, for the French, I couldn't organise my thoughts in English.
They cared enough to hate.
Where ? Egypt, with at least one gay couple known ? Mesopotamia, with its LGBTQI+ priests ? China, with male lovers and concubines ?
When what would became the babble was compiled, twice, it was by an irrelevant cultural minority. Too bad it didn't stay that way but it had nothing to do with the more powerful civilisations.
Until Rome. That was a disaster. Mind you, the Roman attitude towards homosexuality was somewhat complex and not outright condemnation.
Emperor Hadrian was openly gay.
Zoroaster:
sta, is an inherent part of Zoroastrian oral tradition even though it was compiled far later than the other parts of the Avesta.[6][7][8]
The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is a man that is a Daeva [demon]; this man is a worshipper of the Daevas, a male paramour of the Daevas[9][10]
This passage has been interpreted to mean that homosexuality is a form of demon worship, and thus sinful. Commentary on this passage suggests that those engaging in sodomy could be killed without permission from the Dastur, the high priest.[10]
Zoroastrianism has been said to have a "hatred of male anal intercourse" that is reflected in at least one mythological tale. When Ahriman, the "Spirit of Aridity and Death" and "Lord of Lies", sought to destroy the world, he engaged in self-sodomy. That caused an "explosion of evil power" and resulted in the birth of a host of evil minions.[11]
Apart from the Vendidad, the Pahlavi scriptures, later religious Persian books considered sacred by many Zoroastrians, also strongly forbid sodomy.[12]
Societal attitudes of Zoroastrian communities
Within modern Zoroastrian communities, attitudes towards homosexuality can vary.[13]
While some adherents, especially in Iran and India hold conservative views that align with traditional interpretations, others have adopted liberal stances in diaspora communities, reflecting broader Western societal shifts.[14]
In recent years, debates surrounding same-sex marriage have emerged within Zoroastrian communities, in regions such as India where the religion maintains a significant presence. Zoroastrian religious leaders have historically upheld socially conservative perspectives on marriage and sexuality, and as recently as 2023 they have publicly decried a religious validity for same-sex marriages.[15]
In India, where Zoroastrians are governed by personal laws under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936, same-sex marriage remains unrecognized within the community. Religious leaders, such as Dasturji Dasturji Khurshed Dastoor, the high priest of Iranshah Atash Behram, Udvada have voiced opposition to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage among Parsis. Dastoor, the high priest of Iranshah Atash Behram, Udvada, expressed that Zoroastrian ancient texts do not mention same-sex marriages as they date back to a time when such unions were not recognized. The texts focus on marriage between a male and female. Dastoor acknowledges that legal judgments, including those from the Supreme Court, should be respected and followed and so if same-sex marriage becomes legalized, individuals will marry according to the law. However, Dastoor clarifies that ceremonies for same-sex couples would not be allowed to be conducted in Zoroastrian places of worship.[15]
References
Nanavutty, Piloo (1999). The Gathas of Zarathushtra: Hymns in Praise of Wisdom. Mapin pub. pp. 148–151. ISBN 978-81-85822-56-3.
Humbach, Helmut; Faiss, Klaus (2010). Zarathushtra and His Antagonists: A Sociolinguistic Study with English and German Translations of His Gāthās. Reichert. p. 191. ISBN 978-3-89500-768-2.
Hathiram, Ervad Marzban J. (2014-01-24). "Zoroastrianism, homosexuality & LGBT issues – a lecture recording". Frashogard. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
Nariman, Rohinton F. (2016-09-01). The Inner Fire: Faith, Choice, and Modern-day Living in Zoroastrianism. Hay House, Inc. ISBN 978-93-85827-24-2.
Irani, K. D. (2009). The Gathas: The Hymns of Zarathushtra. K. R. Cama Oriental Institute.
Ervad Behramshah Hormusji Bharda (1990). "The Importance of Vendidad in the Zarathushti Religion". tenets.zoroastrianism.com. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Ervad Marzban Hathiram. "Significance and Philosophy of the Vendidad" (PDF). frashogard.com. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
"Ranghaya, Sixteenth Vendidad Nation & Western Aryan Lands". heritageinstitute.com. Heritage Institute. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Jones, Lesley-Ann (13 October 2011). Freddie Mercury: The Definitive Biography: The Definitive Biography. Hachette UK, 2011. p. 28. ISBN 9781444733709. Retrieved 3 January 2015. "In the sacred Zoroastrian text[,] the Vendidad, it is stated: 'The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is a man that is a Daeva (demon): this man is a worshipper of the Daevas, a male paramour of the Daevas"
Darmesteter, James (1898). "Vd 8:32". Sacred Books of the East (American ed.). Retrieved 3 January 2015. "Ahura Mazda answered: 'The man that lies with mankind as man lies with womankind, or as woman lies with mankind, is the man that is a Daeva; this one is the man that is a worshipper of the Daevas, that is a male paramour of the Daevas, that is a female paramour of the Daevas, that is a wife to the Daeva; this is the man that is as bad as a Daeva, that is in his whole being a Daeva; this is the man that is a Daeva before he dies, and becomes one of the unseen Daevas after death: so is he, whether he has lain with mankind as mankind, or as womankind. The guilty may be killed by any one, without an order from the Dastur (see § 74 n.), and by this execution an ordinary capital crime may be redeemed."
Long, p. 68
"HOMOSEXUALITY i. IN ZOROASTRIANISM". iranicaonline.org. Encyclopaedia Iranica. 15 December 2004. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
Singh, Nagendra Kr; Mishra, A. P. (2005). Encyclopaedia of Oriental Philosophy and Religion: Christianity. Global Vision Publishing House. ISBN 978-81-8220-071-5.
"The Rainbow Fravahar: Stories Of The Community | FEZANA". 2021-06-30. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
"Mumbai: Religious leaders decry same-sex unison". Free Press Journal. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
Sources
Long, Ronald Edwin (2004). Men, homosexuality, and the Gods: an exploration into the religious significance of male homosexuality in world perspective. Haworth Press. ISBN 978-1-56023-152-3.
Further reading
AVESTA: Vendidad: FARGARD 8. Funerals and purification, unlawful sex
vte
Religion and LGBT people
Categories:
LGBT and religionZoroastrianismLGBT in Iran
This page was last edited on 9 August 2
I know very little of ancient religions. I understand it was tolerated in ancient Greece?
More than that I already posted about the 300 of Thebe. It was an army of gay couples. They equalled the Spartians in ferocity.
Tres interessant!
You are absolutely correct.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-146135575
Well, this is mighty fresh air compared to the RNC’s stale wind blown from their mouths and butt cheeks.
I didn't know there was a difference.
Lol, touché
OMFSM!!! 🤣
????? I just came up with several possibles for this?
Oh My Flying Spaghetti Monster
TY I did! I did! Idid taw puddy tat!!! (AKA FSM)
Republicans have called themselves "The Party of Ideas." Their actions show that they are "The Party of Idea: Tax cuts for the wealthy."
100% And those who think they will become rich someday and “want to keep their money”. Yes, I’ve had people say this to me 🙄
They want to keep their money, and they want to keep their tax-based benefits. Expand them, even.
They want to keep their money, and they want government to do something about their roads, jobs, crime, inflation etc. problems.
They want to keep their money, but they are proud of the US being an economic and military superpower and demand that status continue.
They want to keep their money, and ffs why doesn't the government balance the budget and get rid of the deficit and debt already?
And so on.
I've said before, taxes are the price we pay for civilization.
Given that libertarian experiments have without exception turned out to be complete disasters ...........
Mostly because they want every else to do the work like in the "bob the angry flower" cartoon.
https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project
Abolishing those Reagan Era tax cuts for the wealthy would go a long way, I would imagine.
And those taxes got even lower, the recessions even deeper & deficits even higher in the Bush Jr & Trump administrations.
Collectively setting aside resources in the boom years/boom places so you can use them in the bust years/bust places...yeah, that's pretty much human civilization 101.
Not sure whether the opposed conservatives are the analog of 'doesn't even have a GED' or a more Machievellian 'fully agree you should set aside your resources for my bust times, just not the other way around.' The GOP probably has both.
I think the GOP has a large overlap of the two. Selfish and not educated are not mutually exclusive.
So true they don't want civilization, though,they want anarchy because they think they will be the warlord on top.
America's suburbs are full of temporarily embarrassed billionaires.
I am working on my 4th Billion. I gave up on the first 3.
https://www.alternet.org/mike-lindell-georgia-knowa/
Delicious – and somewhat on topic.
Mike Lindell, according to RationalWiki
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Mike_Lindell
To add: He's up in Knowa's face. Maybe with all Pillow Boy's probems he's started snorting crack cocaine again. Coke can make a person extremely aggressive.
Knowa did great with Mike Lunatic. The kids are alright, indeed.
"Flattened like a cheap pillow." - I'm going to have to remember that one.
He's yelling at a kid. Maybe he should switch to MyCoffee decaf.
"Are You Smarter Than a 12-Year-Old?"
Lindell is too busy acting like a 3-year-old.
3-month-year-old.
My niece was better behaved at that age.
Like his idol.
And it's how mike pilloried groom future Democrats voters.
We follow the teachings of Jesus. We love your approach regarding religion and politics. We usually see your videos recommended on YouTube about the hot mess of a state government here in Oklahoma.
We literally don’t think at all about the faith tradition of politicians because only their actions matter. You’ve done several videos about these white evangelicals tearing up everything they can here in Oklahoma. If you work for the common good we will support you.
Keep up the good work!
Looks like a lot of fun getting to meet some remarkable people who fight to maintain our secular republic - intelligent, thoughtful, reasonable people. Hard to imagine anything like this at the RNC.
All that goes against the RNC’s religion.
Literally!
Heard Michelle Obama saying tRump is seeking a black job on MSNBC. This time I picked up on that hint of a snarl that Black Women seem to pull off so perfectly.
Funny and entirely appropriate.
A most excellent burn!