“The conservative principles on which this country was founded?” The US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are two of the most liberal political documents ever created. By the standards of their time, they were down right radical. I’m sick to death of the people who convince themselves their religiosity entitles them to rule the country. The evangelicals crave power, and few groups would be more ill-equipped to handle it.
And all anyone has to do to prove that to themselves is to actually READ the Constitution. Problem is: these days, they don't want anyone to read ANYTHING. That would tend to spoil their plans just a bit.
Article VI specifically bans religious tests for holding public office, and it predates the Bill of Rights. This speaks to how the founders felt about the issue. The conservatives of 1776 were the people who never stopped being loyal the the King of England.
The REALLY disturbing part of this whole business is that we (or at least I!) had to read it HERE, rather than finding it within the pages of the New York Times or my local newspaper. One way or another, Pressler's people have managed to keep his story mostly under wraps and away from the public eye. Probably a good thing for them, too, considering the falling numbers of general church attendance.
Ordinarily, I'd say, "Hello, CBS News 60 Minutes? Boy, do I have a story for YOU!" Sadly, with Bari Weiss running (and RUINING) the show there, I doubt they'd consider this one.
“I’ve dedicated my life to the conservative principles on which our country was founded, and I know Ted Cruz has done the same thing and that he will stand firm.”
I’m sorry, what!?!
Conservative principles the country was founded on? If the country was founded on conservative principles, we would still be a colony of Britain. The very thought of building a new country is progressive. Never mind the ideas the founders baked into the constitution, a government for the people and by the people rather than the monarchies the rest of the world operated under. The progressive principles of democracy and freedom changed the world, they didn’t conserve anything.
You might argue that the puritans were conservative, but they didn’t get to “found” the country. And while they’ve had far too much influence on how the country was governed, you know being the people of the country, they didn’t get much of the conservative control they wanted in the country’s foundation.
The principles of the USA are not the least bit conservative, even though conservatives want to rule as though they were.
No useful purpose? Catholics get to munch on little dried squares of Jesus’s transubstantiated flesh and sip his 20-proof blood. That’s not nothing, it's ritualized divine snack time.
Bro, you and I both know that completely doing away with religion would be like actually GETTING to Absolute Zero degrees, Kelvin. You can get VERY DAMNED CLOSE, but the rules of the road say that getting there is an impossibility. Same thing with religion. There are people out there who will hang onto their irrational beliefs, regardless of the facts, and they won't be argued out of those beliefs.
That being the case, at least one viable path may be to render religion irrelevant and/or impotent. Neither one of those goals is trivial or easy, but they may be more reachable. Regardless, that process is a LONG SLOG, and we may have only started down that path.
For the sake of humanity and for getting it shut of bad behaviors that hold it back, I think the effort is worth it.
And how many time do they rant and railed against homosexuality, lesbianism, adultery, and other sexual sins they happily engaged in behind closed doors? Sheesh!
It's a tale as old as time: use people's fear of ostracization as a coercive measure to get them to endow you with power. Power, power, power. It's always about power.
Judging by the staggering number of Christian tribes, what the Bible says isn't exactly clear, and I have to think the genuine word of God would be incontrovertible.
I think it's called: "cherry-picking." 😝 Also compartmentalization and looking the other way at verses and scriptures that are inconvenient to one's world view.
Grotesque isn’t a strong enough word for this. Even a gargoyle — a moist grotesque — isn’t gross enough.
The real failure is what happens when a religious institution convinces itself that protecting its own authority is the same thing as protecting God, truth, or morality.
In olden times, they might have called that hubris. Blasphemy, even: placing yourself in the position of God’s avatar until God effectively becomes yours. In the words of a book: “God created man in his own image and, man, flattered, returned the compliment.”
Once this merge happens, victims become threats to the church, threats to the church become threats to the leadership, and threats to the leadership become threats to God Himself.
Dissent becomes heresy. Accountability becomes “an attack on the mission.”
From the institution’s perspective, this is not a scandal. It’s the system defending itself as designed.
“The conservative principles on which this country was founded?” The US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are two of the most liberal political documents ever created. By the standards of their time, they were down right radical. I’m sick to death of the people who convince themselves their religiosity entitles them to rule the country. The evangelicals crave power, and few groups would be more ill-equipped to handle it.
The 7 key founders made damn sure that religion played no part in governance.
And all anyone has to do to prove that to themselves is to actually READ the Constitution. Problem is: these days, they don't want anyone to read ANYTHING. That would tend to spoil their plans just a bit.
Article VI specifically bans religious tests for holding public office, and it predates the Bill of Rights. This speaks to how the founders felt about the issue. The conservatives of 1776 were the people who never stopped being loyal the the King of England.
Ba-da-bing!
The REALLY disturbing part of this whole business is that we (or at least I!) had to read it HERE, rather than finding it within the pages of the New York Times or my local newspaper. One way or another, Pressler's people have managed to keep his story mostly under wraps and away from the public eye. Probably a good thing for them, too, considering the falling numbers of general church attendance.
Ordinarily, I'd say, "Hello, CBS News 60 Minutes? Boy, do I have a story for YOU!" Sadly, with Bari Weiss running (and RUINING) the show there, I doubt they'd consider this one.
“I’ve dedicated my life to the conservative principles on which our country was founded, and I know Ted Cruz has done the same thing and that he will stand firm.”
I’m sorry, what!?!
Conservative principles the country was founded on? If the country was founded on conservative principles, we would still be a colony of Britain. The very thought of building a new country is progressive. Never mind the ideas the founders baked into the constitution, a government for the people and by the people rather than the monarchies the rest of the world operated under. The progressive principles of democracy and freedom changed the world, they didn’t conserve anything.
You might argue that the puritans were conservative, but they didn’t get to “found” the country. And while they’ve had far too much influence on how the country was governed, you know being the people of the country, they didn’t get much of the conservative control they wanted in the country’s foundation.
The principles of the USA are not the least bit conservative, even though conservatives want to rule as though they were.
𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑙𝑒𝑟—𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒, 𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑤 ℎ𝑖𝑚—𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑦𝑒𝑑 𝑎 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟. 𝐹𝑜𝑟 𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑠 ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑒𝑡 𝐺𝑂𝑃 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒𝑟, ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑠 𝐿𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒, 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑙 𝐻𝑖𝑙𝑙, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒.
I guess we now know which denomination expects to be the official Church of the United States if they can finish bulldozing the Wall of Separation.
There can be little doubt but that Pressler is one of the major kingmakers of the Republican party.
Racist, misogynist, sexual predators and pedophiles to be exact
It's long past time to do away with religion. It serves no useful purpose and never has.
Just the opposite: It has had a detrimental effect on humankind since the institution was invented. A plague upon it.
No useful purpose? Catholics get to munch on little dried squares of Jesus’s transubstantiated flesh and sip his 20-proof blood. That’s not nothing, it's ritualized divine snack time.
20-proof? Meh. That's for Caspar Milquetoast! Getcha some 12-year-old Glenlivet or MacAllan or Aberlour or Glendronnach or...! 😉
Bro, you and I both know that completely doing away with religion would be like actually GETTING to Absolute Zero degrees, Kelvin. You can get VERY DAMNED CLOSE, but the rules of the road say that getting there is an impossibility. Same thing with religion. There are people out there who will hang onto their irrational beliefs, regardless of the facts, and they won't be argued out of those beliefs.
That being the case, at least one viable path may be to render religion irrelevant and/or impotent. Neither one of those goals is trivial or easy, but they may be more reachable. Regardless, that process is a LONG SLOG, and we may have only started down that path.
For the sake of humanity and for getting it shut of bad behaviors that hold it back, I think the effort is worth it.
And how many time do they rant and railed against homosexuality, lesbianism, adultery, and other sexual sins they happily engaged in behind closed doors? Sheesh!
The phrase 'over compensating closet case' comes to mind.
Never mind: "Every accusation is a confession!" Digging into that could make for a career!
“Do what I say God says, not what I say God allows Me to do.”
The louder they shout GOD! at us, the louder we shout AMORAL HYPOCRITICAL CRIMINALS! back at them.
It's a tale as old as time: use people's fear of ostracization as a coercive measure to get them to endow you with power. Power, power, power. It's always about power.
Another pack of pedophile traitors that need dealing with in the harshest terms possible.
"the notion that Christian scripture is the perfect, literal word of God"
In all of its internal contradictions and ridiculous denial of reality. How the everloving fuck can people believe that shit?
Judging by the staggering number of Christian tribes, what the Bible says isn't exactly clear, and I have to think the genuine word of God would be incontrovertible.
I think it's called: "cherry-picking." 😝 Also compartmentalization and looking the other way at verses and scriptures that are inconvenient to one's world view.
Grotesque isn’t a strong enough word for this. Even a gargoyle — a moist grotesque — isn’t gross enough.
The real failure is what happens when a religious institution convinces itself that protecting its own authority is the same thing as protecting God, truth, or morality.
In olden times, they might have called that hubris. Blasphemy, even: placing yourself in the position of God’s avatar until God effectively becomes yours. In the words of a book: “God created man in his own image and, man, flattered, returned the compliment.”
Once this merge happens, victims become threats to the church, threats to the church become threats to the leadership, and threats to the leadership become threats to God Himself.
Dissent becomes heresy. Accountability becomes “an attack on the mission.”
From the institution’s perspective, this is not a scandal. It’s the system defending itself as designed.
OT: putting this here again ;)
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DX0Pxdalfls/?igsh=MWplanVyM2I5eHN4bQ==