Happy Atheist Forum

General => Politics => Topic started by: Recusant on April 14, 2019, 02:50:51 AM

Title: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on April 14, 2019, 02:50:51 AM
The US is moving away from what these creeps would like the country to be, recognizing civil rights for previously oppressed groups, becoming more diverse, with public attitudes tending more toward tolerance. Yes, there is a minority of the population that supports people like Mike Pence and the president whose championing of right-wing Christian causes is purely opportunistic and hypocritical, but overall they're losing ground and they know it.

So what to do? They're not going down without a fight. They're writing up model legislation to give to willing Republican controlled state legislatures, enacting parts of the Dominionist dream.

"The plot against America: Inside the Christian right plan to 'remodel' the nation" | Salon (https://www.salon.com/2019/04/13/the-plot-against-america-inside-the-christian-right-plan-to-remodel-the-nation/)

Quote
On April 3, USA Today published an array of stories under the banner, “Copy, Paste, Legislate (https://www.usatoday.com/pages/interactives/asbestos-sharia-law-model-bills-lobbyists-special-interests-influence-state-laws/),” exploring the political impact of model bills on state-level legislation — more than 10,000 bills from 2010 to 2018 — based on a two-year joint investigation with the Arizona Republic and the Center for Public Integrity (https://publicintegrity.org/topics/state-politics/copy-paste-legislate/). The lead story headline said it all: "You elected them to write new laws. They’re letting corporations do it instead (https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/04/03/abortion-gun-laws-stand-your-ground-model-bills-conservatives-liberal-corporate-influence-lobbyists/3162173002/)."

OK, it wasn't quite all. While corporate influence was the strongest, figures revealed that conservative groups weren’t far behind: There were 4,301 bills from industry and 4,012 from conservative groups, far more than the 1,602 from liberal groups or the 248 classified as “other.” The hidden origins of these bills often hides their true intent. The most notorious such group, the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, for instance combines business interests with movement conservatives.

But within the fold of “conservative groups” there’s a whole other story to be told about the organizing of extremist religious conservatives, whose political mobilization, as I’ve noted in the past (https://www.salon.com/2018/04/01/donald-trump-defender-of-christian-america-its-not-as-ludicrous-as-it-sounds/), played a crucial role in electing Donald Trump. Indeed, just the day before “Copy, Past, Legislate” was published, the Texas Senate passed SB-17 (https://www.texasobserver.org/sb-17-license-to-discrimate-passes-senate-lgbtq/), a bill that would protect anti-LGBTQ discrimination by all licensed professionals who claim to act on a “sincerely held religious belief.”

“It’s time for Americans to wake up to the harsh reality that the religious right, fueled by their fear of loss of power from the changing demographics in our country and their support from the Trump administration, is emboldened and aggressively pursuing all means possible to maintain white Christian power in America,” Rachel Laser, the president of Americans United For Separation of Church and State, told Salon. “Project Blitz, for example, has already introduced over 50 bills in at least 23 states this year alone,” she added.

One spin-off story (https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2019/04/04/tennessee-copycat-bills-target-same-sex-adoption/3357287002/) published in the Nashville Tennessean dealt specifically with an anti-LGTBQ adoption model bill. (Simultaneously, NBC reported (https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/anti-lgbtq-adoption-bills-snowballing-state-legislatures-rights-group-says-n991156) such bills were “'snowballing' in state legislatures.”) The Tennessee bill came from Project Blitz, which was described as “a legislative effort with the stated aim to ‘bring back God to America.’" But as Salon has reported in the past (https://www.salon.com/2018/04/29/onward-christian-soldiers-right-wing-religious-nationalists-launch-dramatic-new-power-play/), Project Blitz is much more sinister than that.

[Continues . . . (https://www.salon.com/2019/04/13/the-plot-against-america-inside-the-christian-right-plan-to-remodel-the-nation/)]

One of my personal bugbears, the deceitful shitweasel David Barton, is one of the Dominionists mentioned in the story.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Bluenose on April 14, 2019, 03:48:19 AM
You know, I'm getting pretty tired of hearing "sincerely held religious beliefs" being used as a justification for discriminating against other people.  A person is entitled to believe whatever they want, whether sincerely or not (I'm a Pastafarian, after all...)  But once they attempt to use that belief to influence or deny service to or otherwise disenfranchise other people because they don't follow that belief, then the person has crossed a bright line that should never be crossed.  The religious right, quite rightly, recognise that their time of controlling society is coming to an end.  They don't like it.  Well, boohoo, sucks to be them.  I have precisely zero sympathy for these people and will fight their attempts to continue their milieu with all my being.  It is well time humankind woke up to the reality of life and cast away its childish preoccupation with imaginary spirit beings, none of which exist in the real world.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on April 15, 2019, 01:54:28 AM
^  :this:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on April 15, 2019, 02:45:04 AM
You know, I'm getting pretty tired of hearing "sincerely held religious beliefs" being used as a justification for discriminating against other people.  A person is entitled to believe whatever they want, whether sincerely or not (I'm a Pastafarian, after all...)  But once they attempt to use that belief to influence or deny service to or otherwise disenfranchise other people because they don't follow that belief, then the person has crossed a bright line that should never be crossed.  The religious right, quite rightly, recognise that their time of controlling society is coming to an end.  They don't like it.  Well, boohoo, sucks to be them.  I have precisely zero sympathy for these people and will fight their attempts to continue their milieu with all my being.  It is well time humankind woke up to the reality of life and cast away its childish preoccupation with imaginary spirit beings, none of which exist in the real world.

In the US, the Supreme Court has determined (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burwell_v._Hobby_Lobby_Stores,_Inc.) that sincerely held religious beliefs can indeed be used to avoid compliance with laws (in this instance paying for insurance that provides contraception to employees) as long as there is a "less restrictive means" by which those affected might gain access to that which had been withheld. It has also taken a step (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colorado_Civil_Rights_Commission) toward protecting the ability of those with sincerely held religious beliefs to discriminate based on those beliefs.

Meanwhile the Trump administration Department of Justice has issued guidelines (PDF) (https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1001891/download?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery) on protecting those with sincerely held religious beliefs from governmental interference with those beliefs.

With the two justices appointed by the Trump administration to the Supreme Court of the US, a solid conservative majority has been protected, and challenges to the above don't stand much chance of succeeding. In addition, the Trump administration and the Republican controlled US Senate has been confirming a large number of solidly conservative judges to positions in the federal judiciary (after Republicans spent years preventing the previous administration from getting judges into those same positions).

So while the country is moving toward a less discriminatory attitude, the federal judiciary is likely going to be doing its best to protect those who don't agree with these changes for a long time.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on October 16, 2019, 12:26:29 AM
OK, we had the current US president's toady Attorney General ranting about how "secularists" are responsible for many of the ills that beset the country ("Attorney General Barr Rages Against Secularist 'Assault' on Religion | Mother Jones (https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/10/attorney-general-barr-rages-against-secularist-assault-on-religion/)). Now the US Department of State on its official site publishes a speech by the current Secretary of State on "Being a Christian Leader."

"Atheists, Secular Groups Up in Arms Over State Department Boosting Pompeo’s ‘Christian Leader’ Speech" | Daily Beast (https://www.thedailybeast.com/atheists-secular-groups-up-in-arms-over-state-department-boosting-pompeos-christian-leader-speech?ref=home)

Quote
The U.S. Constitution protects the separation of church and state—but evidently not church and State Department, which came under fire for promoting a “Being a Christian Leader” speech Monday on its website.

The speech, delivered by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at a meeting of American Association of Christian Counselors on Friday, saw Pompeo discuss the influence of his faith on his work as a U.S. official. On Monday, the State Department shared the speech at the top of its website, ahead of more pressing department issues, like U.S. involvement in Turkey’s invasion of Syria. The speech and the State Department’s promotion of the video breached the divide between church and state, leaders from secular and atheist communities say.

“Secretary Pompeo’s speech was pure proselytization,” Sarah Levin, director of governmental affairs at the Secular Coalition for America told The Daily Beast.

[Continues . . . (https://www.thedailybeast.com/atheists-secular-groups-up-in-arms-over-state-department-boosting-pompeos-christian-leader-speech?ref=home)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: No one on October 16, 2019, 01:09:00 AM
My imaginary friend can beat the shit out of your imaginary friend!

True story.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Bluenose on October 16, 2019, 02:31:50 AM
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

    Isaac Asimov, Column in Newsweek (21 January 1980)

As time goes by I am afraid Isaac's conservation  observation seems to be more and more true.  IMHO actual education is the only remedy.


edited for correct word choice 18 Nov 2019
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 16, 2019, 03:12:07 PM
"New Ohio Law Lets Students Give Wrong Answers on Tests for Religious Reasons" | Newsweek (https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-student-religious-liberties-act-1472008)

Quote
The Ohio state House of Representatives has passed the Student Religious Liberties Act (https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/legislation-summary?id=GA133-HB-164), which prevents teachers from penalizing students for giving incorrect answers on tests or other schoolwork if those facts would conflict with their religious beliefs.

The relevant section reads "No school district board of education (...) shall prohibit a student from engaging in religious expression in the completion of homework, artwork, or other written or oral assignments. Assignment grades and scores shall be calculated using ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, including any legitimate pedagogical concerns, and shall not penalize or reward a student based on the religious content of a student's work."

In practice, this means that the extremely broadly-defined "religious expression" can be present in the content of an essay, test or other assignment and the teacher cannot grade down or otherwise correct the student for it.

[. . .]

The bill's sponsor, Republican representative and ordained minister Timothy Ginter, has a history of attempting to write his religious beliefs into legislation.

[Continues . . . (https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-student-religious-liberties-act-1472008)]

It's only fair--to do otherwise would necessitate harshly curbing the precious religious freedom of the citizens of Ohio.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Tank on November 16, 2019, 04:19:17 PM
OFFS!!!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Siz on November 16, 2019, 08:32:57 PM
You know, I'm getting pretty tired of hearing "sincerely held religious beliefs" being used as a justification for discriminating against other people.  A person is entitled to believe whatever they want, whether sincerely or not (I'm a Pastafarian, after all...)  But once they attempt to use that belief to influence or deny service to or otherwise disenfranchise other people because they don't follow that belief, then the person has crossed a bright line that should never be crossed.  The religious right, quite rightly, recognise that their time of controlling society is coming to an end.  They don't like it.  Well, boohoo, sucks to be them.  I have precisely zero sympathy for these people and will fight their attempts to continue their milieu with all my being.  It is well time humankind woke up to the reality of life and cast away its childish preoccupation with imaginary spirit beings, none of which exist in the real world.


^  :this:
^  :this:

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Tom62 on November 17, 2019, 10:59:10 AM
^
:postoday:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on December 30, 2019, 04:24:23 PM
An editorial which makes the claim that William Barr, the current Attorney General of the United States, is motivated in his various policy decisions by a thorough committment to what they call "Christian nationalism."

"Bill Barr Thinks America Is Going to Hell" | DNYUZ/The New York Times (https://dnyuz.com/2019/12/29/bill-barr-thinks-america-is-going-to-hell/)

Quote
[A]t least since Mr. Barr’s infamous speech at the University of Notre Dame Law School, in which he blamed (https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-remarks-law-school-and-de-nicola-center-ethics) “secularists” for “moral chaos” and “immense suffering, wreckage and misery,” it has become clear that no understanding of William Barr can be complete without taking into account his views on the role of religion in society. For that, it is illuminating to review how Mr. Barr has directed his Justice Department on matters concerning the First Amendment clause forbidding the establishment of a state religion.

In Maryland, the department rushed to defend taxpayer funding for a religious school that says same-sex marriage is wrong. In Maine, it is defending parents suing over a state law that bans religious schools from obtaining taxpayer funding to promote their own sectarian doctrines. At his Department of Justice, Mr. Barr told law students at Notre Dame, “We keep an eye out for cases or events around the country where states are misapplying the establishment clause in a way that discriminates against people of faith.”

In these and other cases, Mr. Barr has embraced wholesale the “religious liberty” rhetoric of today’s Christian nationalist movement. When religious nationalists invoke “religious freedom,” it is typically code for religious privilege. The freedom they have in mind is the freedom of people of certain conservative and authoritarian varieties of religion to discriminate against those of whom they disapprove or over whom they wish to exert power.

This form of “religious liberty” seeks to foment the sense of persecution and paranoia of a collection of conservative religious groups that see themselves as on the cusp of losing their rightful position of dominance over American culture. It always singles out groups that can be blamed for society’s ills, and that may be subject to state-sanctioned discrimination and belittlement — L.G.B.T. Americans, secularists and Muslims are the favored targets, but others are available. The purpose of this “religious liberty” rhetoric is not just to secure a place of privilege, but also to justify public funding for the right kind of religion.

Mr. Barr has a long history of supporting just this type of “religious liberty.”

[. . .]

The great evildoers in the Notre Dame speech are nonbelievers who are apparently out on the streets ransacking everything that is good and holy. The solutions to society’s ills, Mr. Barr declared, come from faith. “Judeo-Christian moral standards are the ultimate utilitarian rules for human conduct,” he said. “Religion helps frame moral culture within society that instills and reinforces moral discipline.” He added, “The fact is that no secular creed has emerged capable of performing the role of religion.”

Within this ideological framework, the ends justify the means. In this light, Mr. Barr’s hyperpartisanship is the symptom, not the malady. At Christian nationalist gatherings and strategy meetings, the Democratic Party and its supporters are routinely described as “demonic” and associated with “rulers of the darkness.” If you know that society is under dire existential threat from secularists, and you know that they have all found a home in the other party, every conceivable compromise with principles, every ethical breach, every back-room deal is not only justifiable but imperative. And as the vicious reaction (https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/23/politics/christianity-today-faith-leaders-response/index.html) to Christianity Today’s anti-Trump editorial demonstrates, any break with this partisan alignment will be instantly denounced as heresy.

[. . .]

Mr. Barr’s constitutional interpretation is simply window dressing on his commitment to religious authoritarianism. And that, really, gets to the heart of the matter. If you know anything about America’s founders, you know they were passionately opposed to the idea of a religious monarchy. And this is the key to understanding the question, “What does Bill Barr want?”

The answer is that America’s conservative movement, having morphed into a religious nationalist movement, is on a collision course with the American constitutional system. Though conservatives have long claimed to be the true champions of the Constitution — remember all that chatter during previous Republican administrations about “originalism” and “judicial restraint” — the movement that now controls the Republican Party is committed to a suite of ideas that are fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution and the Republic that the founders created under its auspices.

[Continues . . . (https://dnyuz.com/2019/12/29/bill-barr-thinks-america-is-going-to-hell/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 03, 2020, 12:18:58 AM
Take it as read, "not all Christians . . ."

Yet, some of them are willing to say things that plenty of others agree with but would not say, or are not self-aware enough to articulate. The Dominionist strain of US evangelical Christianity overlaps to an extent with racist bigotry, and that overlap is probably greater than anybody would admit. Saying right out loud:

"Christian Activist: When They Attack White Supremacy, They Attack Christianity" | Patheos (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2019/08/christian-activist-when-they-attack-white-supremacy-theyre-attacking-christianity/)

Quote
Christianity is white supremacy: Christian activist Sandy Rios claims that when the left criticizes white supremacy, they attack Christianity.

Rios, the American Family Association’s Director of Governmental Affairs and a popular defender of extreme conservative Christian values, suggested that criticism of white supremacy is criticism of Christianity while speaking on her radio program, “Sandy Rios in the Morning” on American Family Radio.

On her program Rios said (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/sandy-rios-when-the-left-talks-about-white-supremacy-theyre-talking-about-christianity/):

Quote
It’s not about your skin color and when they go further and compare President Trump to Nazis and their white racism, it’s really silly because, remember, the Nazis killed thousands, hundreds of thousands, of people, but guess what? They were white. The Nazis were Aryan supremacists. They had a certain superhuman race they wanted to develop and most white people did not qualify.

Rios continued:

Quote
So when the left is talking about white supremacism, they’re talking about the roots of this country. They’re talking about Christianity. They’re talking about hard work, about capitalism and free-market values. They’re talking about everything that has made America what it is. That’s what they mean.

[Continues . . . (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2019/08/christian-activist-when-they-attack-white-supremacy-theyre-attacking-christianity/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on January 03, 2020, 11:38:33 AM
the connection between fundamentalust christianity and western capitalism has always puzzled me. jesus was specifically anti- materiakism ans specifically preached that seeking economic prosperity was a hindranc e to following him.

what humans seem to.look for in a god is a reassurance yhat the social, political, and economic systems tbey embrace as part of their culture are founded in and justified by their religion, even when that religion specifically denies the connection.

very odd
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Bad Penny II on January 03, 2020, 12:34:26 PM
Quote from: billy rubin link=topic=16150.msg395664#msg395664
very odd

There's a lot of very odd to do with religion Billy.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on January 03, 2020, 03:00:06 PM
Quote from: billy rubin link=topic=16150.msg395664#msg395664
very odd

There's a lot of very odd to do with religion Billy.

yes.

i used to go to the thai pusam celebrations in kuala lumpur.

odd iz relative maybe

https://imgur.com/a/qqLBVHQ
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 21, 2020, 03:47:28 PM
A good article on those who are opposing the march of Christian soldiers in the US seeking to push the country toward theocracy. There is plenty of further reading to explore in the links, as well. Speaking of links, the first two in the article as published take you to generic pages of the Federal Register. I've changed them here to provide in the first instance an example of the changes taking place across several agencies, and in the second, the actual rule described.

"Religious wars: With the Christian right on the offensive, activists are fighting back" | Salon (https://www.salon.com/2020/01/20/religious-wars-with-the-christian-right-on-the-offensive-activists-are-fighting-back/)

Quote
Last Thursday, Jan. 16, was Religious Freedom Day. As befits his mendacious nature, Donald Trump "honored" it by promoting two policies profoundly at odds with the original meaning of what religious freedom is all about: a license to discriminate with federal funds (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/17/2019-26923/ensuring-equal-treatment-of-faith-based-organizations), both in employment and in provision of services, and new pressure on public schools (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/21/2020-00876/updated-guidance-on-constitutionally-protected-prayer-and-religious-expression-in-public-elementary) to allow student prayer and religious use of school facilities.

The actual substance of the second policy was vastly over-hyped, noted Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. Religion had never been banned from education by the Supreme Court in the 1960s, she pointed out — only "mandatory Bible readings and prayers written by the government. It should not be controversial to oppose government-dictated religious practice." But that's clearly the direction Trump was signaling toward, and the public pressure of presidential posturing has real-life consequences, regardless of written laws and regulations.

Trump's actions drew swift condemnation from Americans United for Separation of Church and State (https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/trump-uses-religious-freedom-day-to-violate-religious-freedom-for-public), and the Center for Inquiry (https://centerforinquiry.org/press_releases/trump-religious-freedom-rules-encourage-discrimination-and-intimidation-says-center-for-inquiry/), among others. As CFI noted:

Quote
[I]f a homeless atheist or LGBTQ teenager went to a federally-funded Catholic soup kitchen seeking nutritional aid, the organization could turn them away without so much as notifying them that alternative sources of aid exist.

This amounts to a religious litmus tests to access public services. Welcome to "Handmaid's Tale" America.

But this was no surprise, given Trump's dependence on Christian nationalist support (https://www.salon.com/2018/04/01/donald-trump-defender-of-christian-america-its-not-as-ludicrous-as-it-sounds/), and the fact that he's touted their line before, as I noted last year (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/17/progressives-fighting-hard-to-reclaim-religious-freedom-from-trump-evangelicals/) at this time. As Americans United president Rachel Laser said to Salon, "The Trump administration's constant entanglement of church and state should make our founders turn over in their graves."

So what is surprising is the dramatic growth of a broad progressive pushback against this attempt to kidnap the meaning of America's most distinctive contribution to the history of human freedom.

[Continues . . . (https://www.salon.com/2020/01/20/religious-wars-with-the-christian-right-on-the-offensive-activists-are-fighting-back/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 22, 2020, 10:07:41 PM
The fight to oppose the dreadful discrimination against Christians in the US continues. Time for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch (https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/28/politics/kavanaugh-gorsuch-deliver/index.html) to step up.

"Supreme Court Poised to Overturn 38 State Constitutional Amendments on Church-State Separation" | The Daily Beast (https://www.thedailybeast.com/supreme-court-poised-to-overturn-38-state-constitutional-amendments-on-church-state-separation?ref=home)

Quote
Religious conservatives asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to overturn 38 state constitutional amendments and require taxpayers to fund religious schools.

You read that right. The case, Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue isn’t about whether a state may fund religious schools through a school choice, voucher, or similar program. It’s about whether it must.

And the conservatives might just win.

At issue in the case, probably the most significant church-state case on the 2019-20 docket, is Montana’s “no-aid” amendment to its state constitution, which was revised and passed in 1972. Like similar amendments in 37 other states, it prohibits “direct or indirect funding” for any “sectarian purpose.”

In 2015, the state legislature passed a law that gave a tax credit of up to $150 for donations to a school scholarship program. But in 2018, the Montana Supreme Court struck down the program, saying it violated the 1972 constitutional provision.

That’s when a group of religious organizations upped the ante. They went to the Supreme Court, seeking not just to reinstate the program but to toss out the “no-aid” amendment entirely – and, as a consequence, invalidate 37 similar amendments across the country.

That would open the floodgates to the funding of religious schools, especially since the plaintiffs argue that not funding them—previously the constitutional norm—is actually a form of discrimination.

[Continues . . . (https://www.thedailybeast.com/supreme-court-poised-to-overturn-38-state-constitutional-amendments-on-church-state-separation?ref=home)]

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on February 08, 2020, 09:20:14 PM
Ensuring that Dominionists/evangelical "Christian nationalists" will continue to support the current US administration.

"Amid Reality-TV Gimmicks and Xenophobic Rhetoric, Trump’s SOTU Appeals to Evangelicals" | Religion Dispatches (https://religiondispatches.org/amid-reality-tv-gimmicks-and-xenophobic-rhetoric-trumps-sotu-appeals-to-evangelicals/)

Quote
Since late December, 2019, when retiring editor-in-chief of Christianity Today Mark Galli published his infamous “Trump Should Be Removed from Office” editorial (https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html), there’s been a great deal of buzz in the pundit class over whether Trump, after a highly publicized impeachment trial, needs to be concerned with possible defections in his white evangelical base. From an analytical standpoint, the buzz is mere noise, horse race politics nonsense from people who don’t understand that most white evangelicals have long since come to regard CT as “too liberal.” As John Stoehr observed (https://religiondispatches.org/christianity-today-pro-impeachment-editorial-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-means/) on RD back in December, “It’s not going to change much.”

And, what many failed to notice or recall, is that the editorial itself was entirely milquetoast, attacking only Trump’s “gross immorality and ethical incompetence,” while agreeing with Trump-supporting evangelicals that “his Supreme Court nominees, his defense of religious liberty, and his stewardship of the economy” are among “the president’s positives.”

Although this editorial was never going to make a dent in the unflagging support Trump counts on from his white evangelical base, he seems to have been scared enough by the furor around it to start ramping up (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/03/trump-florida-evangelical-rally-king-jesus) his evangelical outreach. It’s probably no coincidence that Trump recently became the first U.S. president to address (https://religiondispatches.org/a-pro-life-buttigieg-ambush-trumps-corrupt-counsel-and-more/) the radical anti-choice “March for Life” event in person.

Given that the vast majority of white evangelicals, America’s single most right-wing demographic (https://religionandpolitics.org/2019/01/22/we-are-all-evangelicals-now-race-politics/), are Christian nationalists (https://academic.oup.com/socrel/article/79/2/147/4825283), we should have expected a substantial presence of Christian nationalist rhetoric in yesterday’s State of the Union Address, along with coded nods to specific evangelical concerns about abortion, schooling, and “religious freedom.”

Indeed, all these elements were present in a speech packed chock-full of “lies, damned lies, and statistics (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12306419),” along with reality-show gimmicks including a surprise reunion of Trump guest Amy Williams and her husband, Sgt. 1st Class Townshend Williams, and awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to right-wing radio charlatan Rush Limbaugh, whose advanced lung cancer diagnosis does nothing to erase his substantial contributions to the destruction of America’s information ecosystem.

Trump’s appreciation for post-truth bluster and militarism are certainly among the characteristics that endear him to the Christian Right. And while he remains most in his element with the jingoistic rhetoric of borders, “heroes,” economic protectionism, and “criminal” immigrants, over the last few years Trump has become visibly more comfortable using language that more directly appeals to the conservative, mostly white evangelicals and radical traditionalist Catholics who represent his base, and with whom he has surrounded himself.

[Continues . . . (https://religiondispatches.org/amid-reality-tv-gimmicks-and-xenophobic-rhetoric-trumps-sotu-appeals-to-evangelicals/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on March 01, 2020, 07:39:01 PM
Egad :watching:

I think the questions on which Whitehead and Perry based their conclusions were more in-depth than those he mentions in the interview.

"Sociologist Andrew Whitehead: How Christian nationalism drives American politics" | Salon (https://www.salon.com/2020/02/29/sociologist-andrew-whitehead-how-christian-nationalism-drives-american-politics/)

Quote
In early 2018, after a year of confusion over why Donald Trump had been elected, Clemson sociologist Andrew Whitehead and two colleagues provided compelling evidence (https://academic.oup.com/socrel/article/79/2/147/4825283) — which I wrote about here (https://www.salon.com/2018/04/01/donald-trump-defender-of-christian-america-its-not-as-ludicrous-as-it-sounds/) — that "voting for Trump was, at least for many Americans, a symbolic defense of the United States' perceived Christian heritage." That is, it represented "Christian nationalism," even when controlling for other popular explanations such as "economic dissatisfaction, sexism, anti-black prejudice, anti-Muslim refugee attitudes, and anti-immigrant sentiment." The puzzle of why white evangelicals voted for Trump so overwhelmingly turned out to have a simple explanation: It wasn't their religion that he championed — Trump is conspicuously not a person of faith — but rather its place in society.

Now, Whitehead and one of those colleagues, University of Oklahoma sociologist Samuel Perry, have a new book taking their research approach much further: "Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States (https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/taking-america-back-for-god-andrew-l-whitehead/1133083625#/)." Donald Trump doesn't figure as a central subject in the book, but then, he doesn't have to. By exploring and explaining the power of Christian nationalism, Whitehead and Perry provide one of the best perspectives possible on the 2020 race, and the larger forces that will continue to polarize America for some time to come.

Significantly, the authors explore Christian nationalism's influence on society as a whole — not just on those who embrace it, but on those across the whole spectrum, from adherents to opponents — while not forgetting how extreme its animating vision is. They cite Corey Robin's "The Reactionary Mind" and Jason Stanley's "How Fascism Works," for example, in making the point that while "Christian nationalism seeks to preserve or reinstitute boundaries in the public sphere," its believers are "most desperate" to influence "Americans' private worlds," as is true of "all reactionary movements."

[. . .]

Your book is about "Christian nationalism." Let's start with explaining what you mean by that.

When we talk about Christian nationalism, we identify it as a cultural framework that is all about trying to advocate for a fusion between Christianity, as they define it, and American civic life. This Christianity is something more than just orthodox Christian belief — it contains and overlaps with a number of other things. It operates like a signal to those that hear it, to a certain population, to say "people like us," which is generally white, native-born, culturally Christian. So it intertwines not only with narratives about the Christian heritage of the United States, but also different traditions and symbols and value systems, and really is a fusion of these identities, put together to create what they see as the "ideal" America.

[Continues . . . (https://www.salon.com/2020/02/29/sociologist-andrew-whitehead-how-christian-nationalism-drives-american-politics/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on March 07, 2020, 06:53:44 PM
If things go on as they have been in the US, I think this element will fail to achieve its objective. That's a significant "if."

"Trump's Christian right worships power more than they worship God" | Salon (https://www.salon.com/2020/03/03/trump-christian-right-power-worshippers-katherine-stewart/)

Quote
It's one of the most enduring conundrums of the Donald Trump era: How is it that the Christian right, the self-appointed monitors of American morality, have come to so enthusiastically back a thrice-married chronic adulterer who lies as easily as he breathes?

Author Katherine Stewart has the answer: Because the true god these folks worship is power. In her book, "The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism," Stewart details how she traveled around the country, getting to know the various Christian conservative figures that are whipping support for Trump and his agenda. She deems the "Christian nationalists" and demonstrates how their supposedly Christian values always come second to their endless quest for power.

[interview follows]

When you dig a little deeper into what the movement leaders talk about when they talk with one another, they actually advocate for a very wide range of policy issues that don't just have to do with abortion or same-sex marriage. A lot of it has to do with economic policy. A lot of it has to do with foreign policy, social policy. It's important to look at the movement in this broader fashion as a political movement that wants power.

Tell me more about that. How does someone argue that there's something Christian about, say, low tax and low regulation?

They say that the Bible favors minimal government or no government. The Bible is against regulation, against the social safety net. Unless the social safety net is managed by the church.

Someone like Ralph Drollinger — who targets political leaders at the top levels of government — he's got this Bible study group in the Capitol that's been attended by at least 11 members of Trump's cabinet, including Mike Pence. He also has Bible study groups targeting the Senate and House of Representatives, and they're very well-attended. So he's arguably one of the most politically influential pastors in America.

[Continues . . . (https://www.salon.com/2020/03/03/trump-christian-right-power-worshippers-katherine-stewart/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on March 07, 2020, 08:10:13 PM
if you listen to americn chrtistian radio, they will explicitly link christianity with capitalism. i don't know of any support for any particular economic system in the gospels, but its certinly there in the christian radio world.

very odd.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on March 14, 2020, 10:42:06 PM
Topical, but also deserves a place in this thread. The image of Tucker Carlson that accompanies the piece is amusing, but I prefer his perennial "dumbfounded and deeply concerned" look.

Don't bother if you know what I'm talking about: ShowHide
(https://i.imgur.com/Pr1Xoro.png)


"Coronavirus Exposes the Religious Right’s Racism" | Religion Dispatches (https://religiondispatches.org/coronavirus-exposes-the-religious-rights-racism/)

Quote
On March 10, President Trump retweeted a post from conservative political activist Charlie Kirk, who referred to the coronavirus (COVID-19) as the “China Virus.” Kirk also exclaimed in his tweet, “Now, more than ever, we need the wall…the US stands a chance if we can get control of our borders.” Trump retweeted this and added the comment, “Going up fast. We need the wall more than ever!”

At first blush, this exchange might seem like the garden-variety white nationalist xenophobia characteristic of Trump or many of his influential supporters. Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and GOP House Representative Kevin McCarthy, in fact, have both insisted on continuing to call the disease the “Chinese Coronavirus.” But Trump’s retweet, and where it originates, helps shed light not only on the Right’s brazen xenophobia, but on the link between America’s supposed religious heritage and fears of ethnic pollution.

Charlie Kirk is co-founder of Liberty University’s Falkirk Center for Faith and Liberty. The Falkirk Center is described by Liberty’s newspaper as a “modern think tank set to renew and defend God-given freedoms and Christian principles throughout American politics and culture.”

That an ambassador of Christian nationalism like Kirk would hold xenophobic attitudes should be no surprise. In Taking America Back for God, we show that such views are fundamental to the Christian nationalist framework. One of the most consistent findings in research on Christian nationalism over the past decade is that Americans who more strongly subscribe to this ideology are more likely to be staunchly anti-immigrant―especially if those immigrants are non-white and/or non-Christian.

But Kirk’s repeated “China Virus” tweets, and Trump’s powerful retweet, both connecting the spread of disease with the need to keep immigrants out, are a clear reminder that white Christian nationalism has always connected non-white immigrants with social and biological contamination. Immigration is framed as an issue of purity or contamination; a righteous body politic or pathological disease.

Chinese immigrants have long been the target of such attacks. The Immigration Act of 1882 included the Chinese Exclusion Act, which all but banned immigrants from anywhere in Asia, who were perceived to be plagued with “the social and political diseases of the Old World.” Asians in particular, and to a lesser extent Eastern Europeans, were deemed less worthy than immigrants from parts of Europe populated by those more likely to be “White” and “Protestant,” which have often been historically been understood  to mean the same thing.

[Continues . . . (https://religiondispatches.org/coronavirus-exposes-the-religious-rights-racism/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Magdalena on March 15, 2020, 08:25:32 PM
Topical, but also deserves a place in this thread. The image of Tucker Carlson that accompanies the piece is amusing, but I prefer his perennial "dumbfounded and deeply concerned" look.

Don't bother if you know what I'm talking about: ShowHide
(https://i.imgur.com/Pr1Xoro.png)


...

(https://media.giphy.com/media/L8XuphFGqlSfe/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 23, 2020, 11:50:15 PM
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition campaign contributions.

"Inside the Influential Evangelical Group Mobilizing to Reelect Trump" | The Intercept (https://theintercept.com/2020/05/23/coronavirus-evangelical-megachurch-trump/)

Quote
“The COVID virus has been a gift from God,” began Ken Eldred. “The kingdom of God advances through a series of glorious victories, cleverly disguised as disasters.”

In response to the coronavirus pandemic, Eldred noted, millions of Americans are turning to Christ, Walmart is selling out of Bibles, and online church broadcasts have hit record numbers.

But while religiosity was growing, there have been setbacks from the disease outbreak. “Satan has been busy too,” Eldred, a major donor to evangelical and Republican causes, explained. “The virus has messed up many of our plans involving our in-person meetings with voters.”

And the rise of mail-in ballots, Eldred added, would undercut voter identification laws, which have been a pillar of GOP election strategy. “The children of the darkness put early voting into this CARES package,” he grumbled, a reference to the $400 million for election assistance programs to states included in the $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief bill.

Following a brief prayer led by Eldred, in which he declared that “we have now turned the corner on the virus” and asked God for an end to coronavirus deaths, the business of the call got started: How Christian voters can be a force to reelect Donald Trump.

[Continues . . . (https://theintercept.com/2020/05/23/coronavirus-evangelical-megachurch-trump/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on May 25, 2020, 04:03:15 PM
I hope we can vote the bigot out of office. The thing that comes to mind is, assuming we do, how do we undo the damage? As stated before when lies are told often enough they seem true. (I paraphrased.)

What are the chances of getting a democratic house and senate as well? It doesn't seem to be about what is good for the country anymore. It seems to be an "us" versus "them" mentality. It is difficult to get anything passed when congress and the White House are of opposing parties.

Also, I thought the reason for not taxing churches was an agreement that they stay out of politics. If we start taxing them maybe it would help our national debt.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 25, 2020, 04:23:43 PM
The Johnson Amendment was never really enforced. Trump was lying when he said he "got rid" of the Johnson Amendment (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/jul/18/donald-trump/trump-claims-he-got-rid-johnson-amendment-true/) with an executive order but it's pretty much in abeyance anyway.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Old Seer on May 26, 2020, 07:22:13 PM
The constitution of the US wouldn't allow a dominionist based government. Actually the Constitution doesn't allow a capitalist state either. Capitalism is a personal choice so it cannot be favored over any other personal choice of sustenance endeavors. (material gathering/needs)
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 26, 2020, 08:39:26 PM
The constitution of the US wouldn't allow a dominionist based government. Actually the Constitution doesn't allow a capitalist state either. Capitalism is a personal choice so it cannot be favored over any other personal choice of sustenance endeavors. (material gathering/needs)

With a compliant US Supreme Court in place the government could go a considerable way down that road. Trump and McConnell are working steadily to pack the federal courts with right wing Christian judges who are ready and willing to write decisions favoring the Christian religion. They will create precedents for the Supreme Court to point to, especially if the Republicans put another Kavanaugh or two on the bench.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Old Seer on May 26, 2020, 11:12:18 PM
The constitution of the US wouldn't allow a dominionist based government. Actually the Constitution doesn't allow a capitalist state either. Capitalism is a personal choice so it cannot be favored over any other personal choice of sustenance endeavors. (material gathering/needs)

With a compliant US Supreme Court in place the government could go a considerable way down that road. Trump and McConnell are working steadily to pack the federal courts with right wing Christian judges who are ready and willing to write decisions favoring the Christian religion. They will create precedents for the Supreme Court to point to, especially if the Republicans put another Kavanaugh or two on the bench.
I agree, that if that's what they're up to then they are stepping outside the Constitution. The Court on a constitutional basis would have to decline making any decision, or even taking on the case for a ruling.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 26, 2020, 11:17:22 PM
The constitution of the US wouldn't allow a dominionist based government. Actually the Constitution doesn't allow a capitalist state either. Capitalism is a personal choice so it cannot be favored over any other personal choice of sustenance endeavors. (material gathering/needs)

With a compliant US Supreme Court in place the government could go a considerable way down that road. Trump and McConnell are working steadily to pack the federal courts with right wing Christian judges who are ready and willing to write decisions favoring the Christian religion. They will create precedents for the Supreme Court to point to, especially if the Republicans put another Kavanaugh or two on the bench.
I agree, that if that's what they're up to then they are stepping outside the Constitution. The Court on a constitutional basis would have to decline making any decision, or even taking on the case for a ruling.

If the US Supreme Court declines to hear a case, the lower court ruling stands.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Old Seer on May 27, 2020, 03:25:16 AM
I have doubts it would even get past a lower court.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 27, 2020, 04:17:24 PM
We have seen the US Constitution flouted repeatedly in the past few years, and no decrease in support by the citizenry has been observed. This was done basically to advance personal political interests. The indication is that your faith in the Constitution as an effective bulwark against creeping Christian theocracy is misplaced. The same element of the population that's willing to cheer on those who have circumvented and undermined the Constitution for their personal political benefit will be overwhelmingly in favor of actions that promote Christianity, Constitution be damned. 
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Old Seer on May 27, 2020, 07:49:01 PM
I don't think I have misplaced faith in the constitution. I fully realize there are those that would prefer it to be taken away. I understand that getting around the constitution is not an easy thing to do, but do not have blind faith. I may have some faith in the constitution but little faith to none in those that interpret it.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 27, 2020, 08:16:23 PM
I don't think I have misplaced faith in the constitution. I fully realize there are those that would prefer it to be taken away. I understand that getting around the constitution is not an easy thing to do, but do not have blind faith. I may have some faith in the constitution but little faith to none in those that interpret it.

You're beginning to get to the gist of it in your last sentence. None of the people I wrote about in my post express a preference that the US Constitution be done away with. Rather the contrary. They believe that it supports their actions, just as the Dominionists believe that (aside from a couple of grievously misinterpreted parts) the US Constitution fully supports their vision for the country.

Dominionists would tell you that your interpretation of the US Constitution is faulty. What they need to "get around" is not the Constitution. It's the godless falsehoods about the Constitution that have prevented the US from being the fully Christian nation that it was always intended to be.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Old Seer on May 27, 2020, 08:53:11 PM
Basically what I understand is- it would be against the constitution for the lower court or the supreme court to allow religiousness intrusion into government. Whether they do or not is a matter of speculation.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 27, 2020, 09:19:59 PM
The US Supreme Court is the final arbiter on interpretation of the US Constitution. If a lower court rules in favor of a theocratic law and the Supreme Court either affirms the ruling of the lower court or declines to hear the case, the lower court interpretation of the Constitution stands. You and I can grouse about it all we like, but how members of the public interpret the Constitution is not particularly relevant.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on May 28, 2020, 12:08:13 AM
That is what scares me. Can you imagine the chaos that would erupt if we went into a theocracy? With all the other religions and our kind there would be turmoil with violent protests and so-forth. It would be a dangerous country to live in.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 28, 2020, 03:43:03 AM
That is what scares me. Can you imagine the chaos that would erupt if we went into a theocracy? With all the other religions and our kind there would be turmoil with violent protests and so-forth. It would be a dangerous country to live in.

Not to worry. The Christian militia, with their god's help and some funding from the government, will take on the task of ensuring the security of the republic.  :lol:

It seems unlikely that a full-blown Christian theocracy will arise in the US. That doesn't stop people like those mentioned in this thread from doing whatever they can to push the country in that direction. Right now they're on a roll because the current administration wouldn't have existed without solid votes from the right wing Christian evangelical demographic. There is no question that they've seen this administration support and enact policies that they enthusiastically endorse.

I don't think that the majority of the citizenry of the US are in favor of these policies, but there is a definite political imbalance built into the US Constitution. We won't dive in to voter suppression and gerrymandering, but they're also part of the political reality that has helped the Christian right to gain such prominence.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on May 28, 2020, 01:24:45 PM
That is what scares me. Can you imagine the chaos that would erupt if we went into a theocracy? With all the other religions and our kind there would be turmoil with violent protests and so-forth. It would be a dangerous country to live in.

there have been good and bad theocraciez, although i think most have been pretty bad. pennsylvania was a quaker theocracy, and while it wasnt perfect, it did pretty well. lasted some 80 years, until it the quakerz seceded from government rather than fight in the french and indian war.

did away with capital punishment for one thing, except for treason, which was imposed by the king of england. ill have to go reread the charter. its not very long.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 31, 2020, 06:38:16 PM
People may think that I'm overstating Justice Kavanaugh's bias. We can look to his dissent from the latest ruling by the US Supreme Court on the question of church vs government for evidence. In his dissent he dishonestly presented the facts and sided with churches. This was over a relatively minor question, but shows clearly that Kavanaugh does not consider his duty to impartiality as a restraint. Apparently he believes that his duty to the cause of Christianity (as he sees it) is of prime importance. Truth and justice be damned.

Let President Trump put another Christian ideologue on the bench for life and we'll see rulings like this go the other way. It takes no imagination at all to see that it's likely the same will happen with more significant rulings as well.



"Roberts Upholds COVID-19 Restrictions on Churches, Scolds Kavanaugh" | Slate (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/supreme-court-coronavirus-california-churches.html)

Quote
Friday at midnight, the Supreme Court rejected a church’s challenge to California’s COVID-19 restrictions by a 5–4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts joining the liberals. In a pointed opinion, Roberts indicated that he will not join conservative judges’ escalating efforts to override public health measures in the name of religious freedom. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent, by contrast, falsely accused the state of religious discrimination in an extremely misleading opinion that omits the most important facts of the case. Roberts went out of his way to scold Kavanaugh’s dishonest vilification of the state.

[. . .]

“The precise question of when restrictions on particular social activities should be lifted during the pandemic,” Roberts declared, “is a dynamic and fact-intensive matter subject to reasonable disagreement.” The Constitution leaves such decisions “to the politically accountable officials of the state,” whose decisions “should not be subject to second-guessing” by judges who lack “background, competence, and expertise to assess public health.” Multiple coronavirus outbreaks in California have been traced back to religious services. California has good reason to treat churches more like concerts—where people “congregate in large groups” and “remain in close proximity for extended periods”—than grocery stores, where they can social distance. For courts, that should be the end of the matter.

Kavanaugh, in dissent, viewed the case through a different lens. Whereas Roberts began by noting that COVID-19 has “killed thousands of people in California and more than 100,000 nationwide,” Kavanaugh crafted a narrative of invidious religious discrimination. His dissent reads like a brief by the church, not a judicial opinion. Kavanaugh alleged that Newsom’s order “indisputably discriminates against religion” in violation of the free exercise clause. For support, the justice insisted that “comparable secular businesses,” like grocery stores and pharmacies, “are not subject” to the same restrictions imposed on churches. California must have a “compelling justification” for this disparate treatment, and he saw none.

But Kavanaugh’s assertion that California treats churches and “comparable secular businesses” differently begs the question: what is a comparable secular business? When it comes to the spread of infectious disease, is a church really just like a grocery store, where people spend as little time as possible, separated by aisles and shopping carts, rarely speaking to one another? Or is it more like a concert, where people congregate for lengthy periods, shoulder to shoulder, often speaking or singing and thereby spreading droplets that may contain the coronavirus?

What is genuinely shocking about Kavanaugh’s dissent is that he does not even address this question. The dispute lies at the heart of the case, and Kavanaugh ignores it. He simply takes it as a given that churches are “comparable” to grocery stores when it comes to risk of spreading COVID-19. By warping the facts, Kavanaugh paints California’s rules as irrationally discriminatory, when in fact they are based on medical advice Newsom has right now. If the justice wants to override public health measures during a pandemic, shouldn’t he at least admit that he’s substituting his own scientific judgment for that of a democratically elected lawmaker’s?

[Continues . . . (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/supreme-court-coronavirus-california-churches.html)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on May 31, 2020, 10:09:14 PM
Kavanaugh has failed to account for all those "secular" businesses who are shut down.  Theaters, concerts, sports events, live TV audiences, titty bars, and nearly every other business that might involve crowds who would be in close contact with one another.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 31, 2020, 11:05:09 PM
I don't think that was his failure. He deliberately ignored the facts to promote a specious argument in favor of the churches. What he failed to do is come up with any legitimate, constitutionally based argument in favor of the churches. If somebody as well motivated and qualified as Kavanaugh fails, it seems likely that there is no such argument.

I'm not saying Kavanaugh is a legal genius. However, he has people on his staff who are probably far more competent than he is. Kavanaugh failing to produce a legitimate argument means that an office of legal minds with excellent skills and knowledge failed.

That did not stop him from making the argument. Put another cut from the same cloth on the bench and Kavanaugh's specious argument would carry the day.

This sort of thing is why I don't discount the power of Christofascists in the US.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 08, 2020, 10:29:16 PM
Two decisions from the US Supreme Court that will be pleasing to the Christian soldiers.

"The Supreme Court Just Gave Religious Employers a License to Discriminate Against Workers" | Slate (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/supreme-court-ministerial-exception-religious-employers.html)

Quote
The Supreme Court stripped civil rights protections from hundreds of thousands of American workers on Wednesday in a sweeping decision (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-267_1an2.pdf) that exempts countless religious employers from nondiscrimination statutes. Justice Samuel Alito’s 7–2 majority opinion carved a huge loophole in the employment laws in all 50 states and the federal government, allowing religious employers to discriminate against any worker they deem “ministerial.”

Wednesday’s ruling in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru involves a doctrine called the ministerial exception (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/religious-employers-supreme-court-argument-discrimination.html). This principle, which courts derived from the First Amendment, bars the government from telling a religious institution whom to choose as its faith leaders. Respecting that principle sometimes requires the courts to butt out of employment disputes, even when a worker claims unlawful discrimination.

The basic premise makes sense; no one seriously argues that the government should be able to tell a church it can’t fire its priest. But  religious institutions employ a lot of people, and not all of them play a key role in the overarching spiritual mission. Consider, for instance, the two plaintiffs here. Kristen Biel was a fifth grade teacher at a Catholic school that classified her as a lay employee. It did not require these employees to have religious training, and she had none. Biel primarily taught secular subjects; her chief religious duty was joining the class in twice-daily prayer. Agnes Morrissey-Berru was also a fifth grade teacher at a different Catholic school. Like Biel, she was considered a lay employee, taught secular subjects, and had no religious training. She also led her students in a brief prayer once a day.

After Biel was diagnosed with breast cancer, the school terminated her contract. She sued for disability discrimination. Morrissey-Berru’s school terminated her contract, as well—because, she asserted in an age discrimination lawsuit, it considered her too old. Neither school provided a religious reason for its decision. Yet when each woman sued, both schools raised the ministerial exception, suddenly announcing that, in fact, Biel and Morrissey-Berru amounted to “ministers” and thus had no right to sue for discrimination.

[Continues . . . (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/supreme-court-ministerial-exception-religious-employers.html)]

* * *

"U.S. Supreme Court permits broad religious exemption to birth control coverage" | Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-contraception/u-s-supreme-court-allows-broader-religious-exemption-to-birth-control-coverage-idUSKBN24929B)

Quote
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday endorsed a plan by President Donald Trump’s administration to give employers broad religious and moral exemptions from a federal mandate that health insurance they provide to their workers includes coverage for women’s birth control.

The court ruled 7-2 against the states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which challenged the legality of Trump’s 2018 rule weakening the so-called contraceptive mandate of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, commonly called Obamacare. Christian conservatives, a key constituency for Trump as he seeks re-election on Nov. 3, had strongly opposed the Obamacare mandate.

The federal government has estimated that up to 126,000 women could lose contraception coverage through their employer-provided health insurance under Trump’s regulation.

The Obamacare mandate requires employer-provided health insurance to give coverage for birth control with no co-pays. Previously, many employer-provided insurance policies did not offer this coverage. Republicans have sought to repeal Obamacare, signed by Trump’s Democratic predecessor Barack Obama in 2010, and Trump’s administration has chipped away at it through various actions.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany called the ruling “a big win for religious freedom and freedom of conscience.”

[Continues . . . (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-contraception/u-s-supreme-court-allows-broader-religious-exemption-to-birth-control-coverage-idUSKBN24929B)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 09, 2020, 12:23:22 AM
Well that's just great!  >:( I wonder what is next to fall.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on July 10, 2020, 01:33:21 AM
That is what scares me. Can you imagine the chaos that would erupt if we went into a theocracy? With all the other religions and our kind there would be turmoil with violent protests and so-forth. It would be a dangerous country to live in.

Not to worry. The Christian militia, with their god's help and some funding from the government, will take on the task of ensuring the security of the republic.  :lol:

It seems unlikely that a full-blown Christian theocracy will arise in the US. That doesn't stop people like those mentioned in this thread from doing whatever they can to push the country in that direction. Right now they're on a roll because the current administration wouldn't have existed without solid votes from the right wing Christian evangelical demographic. There is no question that they've seen this administration support and enact policies that they enthusiastically endorse.

I don't think that the majority of the citizenry of the US are in favor of these policies, but there is a definite political imbalance built into the US Constitution. We won't dive in to voter suppression and gerrymandering, but they're also part of the political reality that has helped the Christian right to gain such prominence.

A most interesting book has recently become available.  The title is; Unholy, by Sarah Posner.  The author tells the reader why the Evangelicals are so desperately and stubbornly tied to Trump. The short answer is that they believe, really believe, that Trump was sent by God. Though he is a demonstrated pigs ass, lying son of a bitch, there are bible passages that describe saviors who behave badly.  They actually believe that he is the embodiment of Jesus or Noah or Paul or whomever. .  The author is pretty persuasive and backs her claims with a fair degree of evidence.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: MadBomr101 on July 11, 2020, 01:57:44 PM
As if regular Xians and Fundamentalists weren't enough now we have the Dominionists who want to take us back to the good old days of the Bronze Age.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 16, 2020, 07:47:39 AM
Secretary of State Pompeo out there spreading the good word, representing the True American™ policy agenda.

"Mike Pompeo and the Global Holy War Against Liberal Democracy" | Daily Beast (https://www.thedailybeast.com/pompeos-idea-of-religious-freedom-sounds-like-heaven-to-the-worlds-authoritarians?)

Quote
In Russia, where President Vladimir Putin wants to insert references to God and heterosexual marriage into the constitution, certain forms of violence against women have been decriminalized—so long as the violence takes place within a traditional marriage. In Poland, where abortion access is already severely restricted, President Andrzej Duda has promised to sign draft legislation that would compel women to carry to term fetuses with severe congenital deformities, and a third of municipalities have declared themselves “LGBT-free zones”—all in order to “defend Christian values,” as one leader of the ruling party puts it. In Turkey, reports of gender-based violence have risen sharply under the auspices of a president who has derided women’s equality and railed against birth control while claiming to champion traditional families.

In the United States, we should become increasingly familiar with this pernicious form of religious nationalism—because, under the banner of “religious freedom,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo appears to offer his blessing to these kinds of initiatives. In 2019, Pompeo established the Commission on Unalienable Rights, a commission ostensibly intended to reformulate America’s commitment to advancing human rights abroad. But the secretary of state already seems to know which rights may take preference, and at whose expense. “There are those who would have preferred I didn’t do it and are concerned about the answers that our foundational documents will provide,” Pompeo commented last fall at a gathering of the Concerned Women for America, a conservative women’s group, at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. “I know where those rights came from. They came from the Lord.”

[. . .]

Around the world, the formulas of religious authoritarianism are remarkably consistent. The leaders convince their followers that their religion is under threat from a despicable or demonic force. The invisible enemy usually involves some combination of globalism, secularism, liberalism, feminism. In many Christian-dominated countries, “gay ideology” plays a prominent role; in Islamic countries, the “secular West” is a popular bogeyman. The leaders promise to grant followers the “freedom” to direct their hate against these deviants. And then the regime goes on to strip everyone else of their rights, bolster hyperconservative religious allies with public funds, and consolidate a kleptocracy where religion is too often reduced to organized hypocrisy.

Women and LGBT people are the canaries in the coal mine of human rights. Wherever their rights start to collapse, you can be sure, the freedom of the press, the freedom from corruption, and the freedom from fear will soon fall, too.

[. . .]

Although the American public often has trouble accepting what is going on at the highest levels of the American government, religious authoritarians abroad have no such trouble. They see it—and they like what they see. Over the past several years, alliances between America’s Christian nationalists and like-minded religious nationalists in in other countries have grown in strength, with links forged through groups, such as the International Organization for the Family, that couch their advocacy for regressive social positions as a defense of the “natural family.”

It is hard to imagine anything worse for the American national interest than making the U.S. a leader of such a regressive agenda. Pompeo’s commission and other efforts to promote “religious freedom” will not only undermine the rights of many people around the world; it will also promote some authoritarian regimes at the expense of democratic movements and diminish still further America’s credibility as a champion of democracy at home and abroad.

[Continues . . . (https://www.thedailybeast.com/pompeos-idea-of-religious-freedom-sounds-like-heaven-to-the-worlds-authoritarians?)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 16, 2020, 09:01:43 PM
And backwards we go. Why do they have to push their feeble minded madness on everyone else? It won't just stop there. They never seem to be satisfied unless they are fighting for a return to the Bronze Age.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 16, 2020, 10:03:12 PM
Yeahbut who could possibly be against religious freedom?  :mustache:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 17, 2020, 03:20:32 AM
A lot of people -- so long as it is their particular religion that gets free reign.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Dark Lightning on July 17, 2020, 04:25:52 AM
They're going to keep pushing it, but the internet (Thanks, Al Gore  ::) )is going to keep informing people despite their worst interests. I'm a member of several wood working forums. A few years ago, a guy made a silhouette of a woman from 1/4" plywood, ala what one sees on the mudflaps of trucks. Tacky, to be sure, but my amusement came from some guy posting into that forum that his 13 YO son looks at that forum. Yes, I went there and told him that if that is the worst thing his son has ever seen on the internet, he should consider himself fortunate. :lol:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 17, 2020, 04:18:59 PM
:lol: That is true! I mean, I've been to the beach many times. He doesn't want his thirteen year old son seeing some of the women I've seen. They may not have the impossible body if the wood cutout but they are in 3-D and animated in real time!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Dark Lightning on July 17, 2020, 10:35:07 PM
Yeah, 300 Lbs, disappearing bikini straps and a snake around her neck.  :cracked:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 18, 2020, 06:16:28 AM
No surprises here. Property rights and religious rights are more equal than other rights.

"Pompeo Panel Pushes 'Radical, Isolationist, Anti-Rights, Anti-Scientific, Religious Agenda' With Human Rights Report" | Common Dreams (https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/17/pompeo-panel-pushes-radical-isolationist-anti-rights-anti-scientific-religious)

Quote
Human rights advocates denounced as "dangerous" a draft report released Thursday by the U.S. State Department's controversial Commission on Unalienable Rights that paints property rights and religious liberty as "foremost among the unalienable rights that government is established to secure" while casting doubt on other liberties, including reproductive freedom.

"Make no mistake: this report was not designed with principles of equality, justice, and rights in mind. Instead, it serves as another stepping stone in the White House's radical, isolationist, anti-rights, anti-scientific, religious agenda," Serra Sippel, president of the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE), said in a statement.

"The Commission on Unalienable Rights is a thinly veiled religious fundamentalist panel, and the people on it should have absolutely no say about the human rights of people all over the world," Sippel declared, calling the panel "a dangerous distraction from the fact that this administration does not believe that all people are equal and entitled to human rights."

[Continues . . . (https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/17/pompeo-panel-pushes-radical-isolationist-anti-rights-anti-scientific-religious)]

The hot, steaming pile:

"Draft Report of the Commission on Unalienable Rights" | U.S. Department of State (https://www.state.gov/draft-report-of-the-commission-on-unalienable-rights/)

The reality of attempts to carry this initiative forward should be interesting. For instance I'm curious  how they're going to manage to forbid Islamic madrasas in the US from getting taxpayer funding, just as Christian schools do, what with "religious freedom" and all. 
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on July 18, 2020, 02:35:07 PM
recusant, we re beyond even lip service to legality in this culture now.

theywill simply not give the madrassas money and leave it at that

we are at a turning point this year in which the united states will choose between a republican democracy or the first steps into creeping totalitarianism.

the choice appears in all walkz of civic life
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 18, 2020, 02:53:30 PM
Yeah, 300 Lbs, disappearing bikini straps and a snake around her neck.  :cracked:
You're talking about my daughter-in-law! :lol:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 29, 2020, 03:47:55 AM
Hey, in a second Trump administration (nobody should kid themselves that it won't happen; it certainly could) we might get to see this bright light in a prominent and powerful position. Maybe it's too soon for the Supreme Court, but perhaps a US federal appeals court, or US Attorney General.

"Trump Campaign Adviser Jenna Ellis: Separation of Church and State Is a Liberal Lie" | The Daily Beast (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-campaign-adviser-jenna-ellis-says-the-separation-of-church-and-state-is-a-liberal-lie)

Quote
The notion that the United States observes a separation of church and state is a lie, according to President Donald Trump’s senior campaign legal adviser.

“The left is going to tell you there’s this separation of church and state, and that’s just nowhere in the Constitution, nowhere in American law,” Jenna Ellis declared Monday evening during a Zoom event hosted by Asian Pacific Americans for Trump. “That’s nothing that our founding principles ever, uh, derived whatsoever.”

The concept of a firewall between church and state authorities, Ellis claimed, is a mere “twisting a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Church that was simply talking about the three tiers of authority that God himself ordained—the church government, the civil government, and the family government.”

Such an interpretation of Jefferson’s 1802 letter—which the Supreme Court affirmed in 1879 as an “authoritative declaration” of the First Amendment clause prohibiting government entanglement in religion—has long been a key argument of conservative Christian leaders seeking to end the separation, which serves as the basis for America’s historically pluralistic society. But it’s not altogether common for a top official of a presidential campaign to so forcefully adopt such a position and it’s further proof that Trump—hardly an observant man himself—has strategically allowed his presidency to become a vessel for the religious right.

Ellis has made such an argument before. In late April, while reacting to local bans on church gatherings amid the coronavirus pandemic, she argued that “‘separation of church and state’ is a myth perpetuated by liberals to pretend morality and religion cannot be part of government.”

During Monday evening’s remarks, Ellis advanced her argument against the separation of church and state by invoking and defending the president’s now-infamous walk from the White House to St. John’s Episcopal Church for a Bible-holding photo op—which was made possible by police tear-gassing a crowd of peaceful protesters—as a valiant stand against those who forsake religious authority.

“As faith-based Christians and pastors and faith leaders, we need to be telling truth about protecting and preserving religious freedom in our country… and especially protecting and preserving the church’s authority in our society,” she said. “And so that’s what President Trump so remarkably with his walk from the White House over to St. James [sic] Church.”

She concluded: “For him to go out and hold up that Bible in front of the church and acknowledge that religious liberty prevails in America like no other society and nation that ever existed in the face of the Earth—that is what our freedom is all about.”

[. . .]

“While the literal words ‘wall of separation between church and state’ don’t appear in the Constitution, the concept of church-state separation certainly does,” Americans United for Separation of Church and State has written (https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/the-religious-right-says-church-state-separation-isnt-in-the-constitution) in response to the religious-right argument against a firewall. “If you doubt that, just read the writings of Jefferson, James Madison and generations of U.S. Supreme Court justices tasked with interpreting and applying the Constitution. We’re gonna take their word for it.”

[Continues . . . (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-campaign-adviser-jenna-ellis-says-the-separation-of-church-and-state-is-a-liberal-lie)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on July 29, 2020, 02:35:15 PM
I have thought about the possibility. After all, who would have thought he would get elected in the first place? Everyone was sure that Hillary would win. The polls aren't always right.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on August 06, 2020, 11:02:10 PM
Out there rallying the Christian soldiers. As if anybody who'd take this seriously would be voting for somebody else, or would fail to vote.

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: No one on August 07, 2020, 03:56:42 AM
President Pot has just met Senator Kettle.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Dark Lightning on August 07, 2020, 04:12:49 AM
:lol: So true!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on August 09, 2020, 09:00:57 PM
The claims about Joe Biden were what I thought worth including in this thread. For instance "Hurt the Bible, hurt God. He’s against God, he’s against guns, he’s against energy, our kind of energy."

The Trump administration is completely willing to wrap themselves in the mantle of the "Christian nation" narrative, and paint all who oppose them as godless (subtext: of the Devil). Of course many of  the Dominionist types claim that Trump was "chosen" by their god (https://religioninpublic.blog/2020/05/11/trump-the-anointed/) to advance their agenda.

Part of the narrative is the idea that the Christian god personally guided formation of the US government.

Defending an action of the president, one of his flacks (trade advisor Peter Navarro) claimed that “The Lord and the Founding Fathers created executive orders because of partisan bickering and divided government. That’s what we have here, but the president has taken action.” (source (https://www.thedailybeast.com/peter-navarro-claims-the-lord-created-executive-orders-because-of-partisan-bickering))
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on August 09, 2020, 11:54:20 PM
I'm certain quite a few evangelicals will vote for him already. I don't think he is reaching too many others with his rhetoric.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on August 17, 2020, 10:52:40 PM
By citing religious beliefs, you can legally exclude certain members of the public from using the services of your business. Well, as long as those certain people happen to be gay, and you happen to consider your service "art." Because, you know, religious rights must be protected, and "art" equals speech, and nobody should be compelled to support ideas their religion doesn't agree with. Expect to see similar rulings from other judges appointed by this administration. For many years to come.

"Trump-Appointed Judge Rules Photographer Can Reject Gay Couples Despite Ban on LGBT Discrimination" | Towleroad (https://www.towleroad.com/2020/08/trump-appointed-judge-rules-photographer-can-reject-gay-couples-despite-ban-on-lgbt-discrimination/)

Quote
A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump ruled Friday that a Christian photographer in Louisville can turn away same-sex couples despite the city’s ordinance prohibiting LGBT discrimination.

U.S. District Judge Justin Reed Walker issued an injunction blocking the city from enforcing its Fairness Ordinance against Chelsey Walker, who claims she can only photograph weddings between a man and a woman due to her religious beliefs.

“America is wide enough for those who applaud same-sex marriage and those who refuse to,” Judge Walker wrote in a 27-page opinion, according to the Courier Journal. “The Constitution does not require a choice between gay rights and freedom of speech. It demands both.”

[Continues . . . (https://www.towleroad.com/2020/08/trump-appointed-judge-rules-photographer-can-reject-gay-couples-despite-ban-on-lgbt-discrimination/)]

Some rights are more equal than others.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on August 18, 2020, 05:36:18 AM
Peter Navarro and a few other unhinged Trumpites make my ass want to suck a lemon.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on August 18, 2020, 12:01:08 PM
One step forward and two steps back. :( This is the proverbial slippery slope we're on now. What class is next?
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on September 19, 2020, 12:11:26 AM
The head of the US Federal Elections Commission, charged with overseeing federal elections, is apparently a rabid god-botherer, and sees the presidential election as a "spiritual war" (of course we know who's on the side of "good"). According to him, the US constitutional separation of church and state is a fallacy. The US needs four more years of this, and then President Pence. Joy to the world.

"Head of Federal Election Commission calls separation of church and state a 'fallacy' and 2020 election a 'spiritual war'" | National Catholic Reporter (https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/head-federal-election-commission-calls-separation-church-and-state-fallacy-and-2020)

Quote
The head of the Federal Election Commission chastised Catholic bishops during a pair of interviews this week, accusing church hierarchy of "hiding behind" their nonprofit status and declaring that this year's U.S. election amounts to a "spiritual war" that threatens the country's "Christian moral principles."

FEC Chairman James E. "Trey" Trainor III made the remarks during an interview released on Sept. 16 by Church Militant, a controversial conservative Catholic media outlet, and in a separate phone interview with Religion News Service.

[. . .]

Trainor insisted to Voris [of "Church Militant"] that he was speaking "privately" and not as FEC chairman, but answered several questions about the upcoming election. For example, he said he does not expect a protracted legal debate similar to what occurred in the 2000 election, saying, "I don't think that this election is going to be that close."

Trainor later clarified with RNS [Religious News Service] that he expected the winner of the presidential election to win by a significant margin, but did not know which candidate would claim victory.

[Continues . . . (https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/head-federal-election-commission-calls-separation-church-and-state-fallacy-and-2020)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Tank on September 21, 2020, 09:59:54 AM
Holy fuck!!!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on September 30, 2020, 05:10:56 AM
Well, it's just, like, their opinion, man.  :grrr:

"How Christian Nationalism in the US Legislates Evil and Punishes the Poor" | Common Dreams (https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/09/28/how-christian-nationalism-us-legislates-evil-and-punishes-poor)

Quote
On August 26th, during the Republican National Convention, Vice President Mike Pence closed out his acceptance speech with a biblical sleight of hand. Speaking before a crowd at the Fort McHenry National Monument in Baltimore, he exclaimed, “Let’s fix our eyes on Old Glory and all she represents. Let’s fix our eyes on this land of heroes and let their courage inspire.” In doing so, he essentially rewrote a passage from the New Testament’s Book of Hebrews: “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross.”

There’s nothing new, of course, about an American politician melding religion and politics on the campaign trail. Still, Pence’s decision to replace Jesus with the Stars and Stripes raised eyebrows across a range of religious and political persuasions. Indeed, the melding of Old Glory and Christ provided the latest evidence of the rising influence of Christian nationalism in the age of Trump.


It’s no longer hard to find evidence of just how deeply Christian nationalism influences our politics and policymaking. During the pandemic, the Bible has repeatedly been used (and distorted) to justify Covid-19 denialism and government inaction, not to speak of outright repression. In late March, as cities were locking down and public health officials were recommending strict quarantine measures, one of Donald Trump’s first acts was to gather his followers at the White House for what was billed as a “National Day of Prayer” to give Americans the strength to press on through death and difficulty.

Later in the spring, protests against pandemic shutdowns, funded with dark money from the likes of the Koch Brothers, demanded that states reopen for business and social distancing guidelines be loosened. (Forget about masking of any sort.) At them, printed protest signs said things like: “Even Pharaoh Freed Slaves in a Plague” and “Texas will not take the Mark of the Beast.” And even as faith communities struggled admirably to adjust to zoom worship services, as well as remote pastoral care and memorials, President Trump continued to fan the flames of religious division, declaring in-person worship “essential,” no matter that legal experts questioned his authority to do so.

[Continues . . . (https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/09/28/how-christian-nationalism-us-legislates-evil-and-punishes-poor)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on October 01, 2020, 11:46:41 PM
Well, you can count me in the poor status. I really want Trump and Pence out of there and their associates too!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on October 07, 2020, 06:04:03 AM
The "religious freedom" zealots on the US Supreme Court might take a shot at shoving people back in the closet, but it could be rough going. The country has left them behind. I would not put it past the Christian ideologues to make the attempt though, given the large majority they're going to have to play with when Trump puts his latest Christofascist justice on the bench. Religious freedom!  :lynch:

"Justices Thomas and Alito lash out at the decision that cleared way for same-sex marriage" | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/05/politics/clarence-thomas-samuel-alito/index.html)

Quote
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

Thomas wrote that the decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, "enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss."

Thomas' strong opinion came down on the first day of the court's new term, and reflects the fact that critics of the landmark opinion from five years ago that was penned by now retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, are still infuriated by its reasoning. They believe the court should have left the decision to the political arena and have long said that it will infringe upon the rights of those who have religious objections to same-sex marriage.

[Continues . . . (https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/05/politics/clarence-thomas-samuel-alito/index.html)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on October 09, 2020, 03:01:00 AM
And thus it begins, a return to the Dark Ages.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on October 09, 2020, 06:24:42 AM
I don't know that the US Supreme Court can magically put the toothpaste back in the tube. The majority of the country agrees with marriage equality; the supporters of "religious freedom" aren't going to change that.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Bluenose on October 09, 2020, 08:28:59 AM
I've never understood the "religious freedom" ideologues. They are already free to practice their religion and if they don't believe in abortion, or same sex marriage and so on, then I say don't get an abortion and don't marry someone of the same sex.  What other people do is none of their damn business and these people can fuck the hell off.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Dark Lightning on October 09, 2020, 03:33:03 PM
The guy I used to car pool with was quite religious, and when the vote came up for marriage equality, he was vehement that it not be allowed. I told him that it was equal rights and he wasn't going to be able to stop it, and that it really wasn't anyone's business what people do behind closed doors, anyway. That didn't sit well with him, at all. :lol:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on October 09, 2020, 05:16:04 PM
that's the nature of moral questions in general. th eproblem always boils down to distinguishing right from wrong, and people disagree.

take any particular example. a good one might be cruelty to animals. most people consider animal cruelty to be wrong (to varying degrees) and believe that society should force people who disagree to comply. if it is valid for someone to demand that another person cease being cruel to animals, then it seems equally valid for someone to tell someone else to cease same sex marriage or abortion. the arguments are usually the same:

animal cruelty is wrong
society should prohibit things that are wrong
society should prohibit animal cruelty.

versus

same sex marriage/abortion is wrong
society should prohibit things that are wrong
society should prohibit same sex marriage/abortion

the arguments are the same, and assert that society has the right to interfere in your business. so if they are valid in one place they should be valid in th eother. where the real difference in opinion occurs is in the first premise of both syllogisms:

<something> is wrong . . .

^^^that's where agreement needs to be found, else the argument will go on forever. i don't see a lot of common ground there, because people disagree on right and wrong.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on October 10, 2020, 12:42:24 AM
I've never understood the "religious freedom" ideologues. They are already free to practice their religion and if they don't believe in abortion, or same sex marriage and so on, then I say don't get an abortion and don't marry someone of the same sex.  What other people do is none of their damn business and these people can fuck the hell off.
I think they believe that marriage is a holy thing (hence holy matrimony) and it's blasphemous to their god and if they don't strike against it gawd will punish everyone.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on October 11, 2020, 03:09:12 AM
I've never understood the "religious freedom" ideologues. They are already free to practice their religion and if they don't believe in abortion, or same sex marriage and so on, then I say don't get an abortion and don't marry someone of the same sex.  What other people do is none of their damn business and these people can fuck the hell off.

I agree with Bluenose.  But the Jesus people and other religionists are incapable of minding their own damned business.  They believe themselves to be right and guided about Gods will. My position is that they cannot know what Gods will is and whether there is actually a God to issue his will..
 
The religious tell us that we cannot prove that God does not exist. Is it not equally true that they cannot prove that he/she/it does in fact exist. They tell me that in order to believe; I must have "faith"............Really?   WTF is the foundation of this faith that they keep referring to?

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: No one on October 11, 2020, 03:55:51 AM
Thinking is hard. Faith replaces thought, the uglies of their particular magic sky pixies are supplanted with pleasant, agreeable, and attractive visions.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on October 11, 2020, 05:13:59 PM
I must have "faith"............Really?   WTF is the foundation of this faith that they keep referring to?

the old quakers held that you had know things "experimentally . . ." a concept we would call "experientially" these days, in order to have any kind oof belief.

you had to experience things yourself in order to believe them, and god was not excluded. books, old myths, and things people told you that they had experienced thaemselves were all useful, but could not substitute for actual personal revelation. quakerism spread throughout england pretty quick on this basis, but over the centuries faded out.

the experiences were often called "conviction" and it meant what it sounded like, not a pleasant thing.

today, quakers sgenerally don't describe things they experience, but rather things they would like to have experienced, as justification for faith. didn't work for me. i had belief for a while on what i thouught was experience, but over time i decided i was mistaken.

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on October 12, 2020, 01:15:03 AM
They tell me that in order to believe; I must have "faith"............Really?   WTF is the foundation of this faith that they keep referring to?
Faith = wishful dreaming. Like No One said, "Faith replaces thought."

I was once told that I had to have the Holy Spirit in me in order to understand the Bible. I asked how am I supposed to do that to which he opened his Bible and started quoting scripture. Um, I can't understand anything you are saying because I don't have the Holy Spirit. Good day.

The exchange didn't go quite that way. It was a little more elaborate than that but that was the gist of it.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on October 12, 2020, 04:56:56 AM
They tell me that in order to believe; I must have "faith"............Really?   WTF is the foundation of this faith that they keep referring to?
Faith = wishful dreaming. Like No One said, "Faith replaces thought."

I was once told that I had to have the Holy Spirit in me in order to understand the Bible. I asked how am I supposed to do that to which he opened his Bible and started quoting scripture. Um, I can't understand anything you are saying because I don't have the Holy Spirit. Good day.

The exchange didn't go quite that way. It was a little more elaborate than that but that was the gist of it.

It would be swiftly modified to "proper" understanding if the unbeliever reports having read the Bible and coming to a different view of it. Maybe a Holy Ghost sized hole in a person's consciousness is helpful--the desire to make a connection with the divine. On the other hand, wanting to believe doesn't always work, apparently.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 09, 2020, 07:49:13 PM
Oh, the Christofascists are not pleased. Nor is their god, of course. If Trump manages to stomp or blunder into some significant catastrophe in the next two months, they'll point to it as a sign of that divine shithead's wrath at the "horrible" results of the presidential election.

"Bachmann Goes Berserk: ‘I Ask God’ to ‘Take Your Iron Rod’ and ‘Smash the Delusion That Joe Biden Is Our President’" | New Civil Rights Movement (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2020/11/bachmann-goes-berserk-i-ask-god-to-take-your-iron-rod-and-smash-the-delusion-that-joe-biden-is-our-president/)

Quote
In the name of Jesus Christ former U.S. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is calling on God to “smash the delusion, Father, of Joe Biden as our president. He is not.”

Right Wing Watch published the viral video Monday morning featuring the Tea Party Republican from Minnesota. In it, Bachmann also urges God to “smash” the “delusion” that Nancy Pelosi will retain the House of Representatives and “smash” Chuck Schumer becoming Senate Majority Leader.

“I ask, Oh God, that you would take your iron rod and I ask that you would smash the clay jar of deceit in America, smash the clay jar of delusion in the United States of America, smash the delusion, father of Joe Biden as our President. He is not,” Bachmann says.

“Would you take your iron rod and smash the strong delusion that Nancy Pelosi does have her House of Representatives, we don’t know that. Smash it, in Jesus name. Smash Lord the takeover of the Senate, by Chuck Schumer, Lord smash it with your iron rod. I asked Oh God, that you would take your iron rod. And I asked that you would smash the claim of just.”

The video has been viewed nearly 88,000 times in just one hour.



Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on November 10, 2020, 06:08:54 AM
 Bachmann is a religious lunatic, Also a nut case with or without her mysterious man in the sky who, in her mind, hears and responds to her supplications.   
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 10, 2020, 03:42:39 PM
She and her ilk are abundant on the ground in the US though. They're not mistaken--Trump is their man, and has advanced their cause. While it's obvious that his devotion to repressive theocratic Christianity is a political decision rather than a matter of sincere belief on his part, that is irrelevant to them and to the rest of us, for that matter. The Dominionist program will have to wait for the next Republican president.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on November 13, 2020, 06:33:18 PM
If you want to argue with an evangelical about Biden v Trump, cite the first few verses of Romans 13.  It says that whoever is in power was put there by God. If Biden wins, then it was God’s will.  Remind them that they should accept God’s will and pray for Biden and Harris. 
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 14, 2020, 03:15:27 AM
There's a convenient answer to that commendable approach.

What could it be?: ShowHide
(https://media.giphy.com/media/3oriOaLBINGcizAdJm/giphy.gif)


Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 14, 2020, 03:24:03 AM
Meanwhile, back at the Federalist Society, a Dominionist fellow traveller (at least) proudly pronounced upon topics that could very well come before him. That shining beacon of modern constitutional jurisprudence, Religious Freedom, figured prominently. Oh yeah, he's a Justice of the US Supreme Court.

"Alito’s politically charged address draws heat" | Politico (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/13/alito-speech-religious-freedom-436412)

Quote
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito delivered an unusually inflammatory public speech Thursday night, starkly warning about the threats he contends religious believers face from advocates for gay and abortion rights, as well as public officials responding to the coronavirus pandemic.

Speaking to a virtual conference of conservative lawyers, the George W. Bush appointee made no direct comment on the recent election, the political crisis relating to President Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge his defeat or litigation on the issue pending at the Supreme Court.

However, Alito didn’t hold back on other controversial subjects, even suggesting that the pressure Christians face surrounding their religious beliefs is akin to the strictures the U.S. placed on Germany and Japan after World War II.

“Is our country going to follow that course?” Alito asked. “For many today, religious liberty is not a cherished freedom. It’s often just an excuse for bigotry and can’t be tolerated, even when there is no evidence that anybody has been harmed. ... The question we face is whether our society will be inclusive enough to tolerate people with unpopular religious beliefs.”

Alito argued that some recent Supreme Court decisions, including the landmark ruling upholding a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, fueled intolerance to those who believe marriage should be limited to unions between one man and one woman.

“Until very recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now, it’s considered bigotry,” he said.

Alito also seemed to minimize the significance of a refusal of a Colorado baker to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The justice noted that the couple involved “was given a free cake by another bakery” and that the high-profile standoff prompted “celebrity chefs” to come to their defense.

[Continues . . . (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/13/alito-speech-religious-freedom-436412)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on November 16, 2020, 04:48:29 PM
It doesn't seem to me that the New York Times writer quoted below is telling us anything we don't already know. However, the more people are aware of the connection between Dominionism and Trumpism/Republican Party politics, the better.

I found a reprint source. The New York Times throws up a paywall after you've seen a few articles from them. In interest of verification, here's a link to the piece at the Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/16/opinion/trump-religion-authoritarianism.html).

"Trump or No Trump, Religious Authoritarianism Is Here to Stay" | The World News (https://readnews.us/us-news/trump-or-no-trump-religious-authoritarianism-is-here-to-stay)

Quote
Will President-elect Joe Biden’s victory force America’s Christian nationalists to rethink the unholy alliance that powered Donald Trump’s four-year tour as one of the nation’s most dangerous presidents? Don’t count on it.

The 2020 election is proof that religious authoritarianism is here to stay, and the early signs now indicate that the movement seems determined to reinterpret defeat at the top of the ticket as evidence of persecution and of its own righteousness. With or without Mr. Trump, they will remain committed to the illiberal politics that the president has so ably embodied.

[. . .]

The core of Mr. Trump’s voting bloc, to be clear, does not come from white evangelicals as such, but from an overlapping group of not necessarily evangelical, and not necessarily white, people who identify at least loosely with Christian nationalism: the idea that the United States is and ought to be a Christian nation governed under a reactionary understanding of Christian values. Unfortunately, data on that cohort is harder to find except in deeply researched work by sociologists like Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry.

Most pollsters shoehorn complex religious identities into necessarily broad labels, so they fail to separate out the different strands of Mr. Trump’s support. There are indications that the president in fact expanded his appeal among nonwhite evangelical and born-again Christians of color, particularly among Latinos. Mr. Biden, on the other hand, who made faith outreach a key feature of his campaign, appears to have done well among moderate and progressive voters of all faiths.

Conservative voters of faith “came in massive numbers, seven and a half million more above the 2016 baseline, which was itself a record,” Ralph Reed, head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition and a longtime religious right activist, said at a postelection press briefing. “We believe they’re the reason why Republicans are going to hold the Senate.”

[. . .]

After processing their disappointment, Christian nationalists may come around to the reality of Joe Biden’s victory. There is no indication, however, that this will temper their apocalyptic vision, according to which one side of the American political divide represents unmitigated evil. During a Nov. 11 virtual prayer gathering organized by the Family Research Council, one of the key speakers cast the election as the consequence of “the whole godless ideology that’s wanted to swallow our homes, destroy our marriages, throw our children into rivers of confusion.” Jim Garlow, an evangelical pastor whose Well Versed Ministry has as its stated goal, “Bringing biblical principles of governance to governmental leaders,” asserted that Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris are at the helm of an “ideology” that is “anti-Christ, anti-Biblical to its core.”

The comments pouring in from these and other figures may be forgotten when Mr. Biden takes office. But they are worth paying attention to now for what they say about the character of the movement. While many outsiders continue to think of Christian nationalism as a social movement that arises from the ground up, it in fact a political movement that operates mostly from the top down. The rank-and-file of the movement is diverse and comes to its churches with an infinite variety of motivations and concerns, but the leaders are far more unified.

[Continues . . . (https://readnews.us/us-news/trump-or-no-trump-religious-authoritarianism-is-here-to-stay)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on November 22, 2020, 01:31:54 PM
All Christians are not authoritarian dominionists, but we need to continue to resist these mistaken ideas.  Most mainline denominations understand the fallacies of this way of thinking.  At the foundation is the idea that American was founded as a Christian nation.  This mistaken idea does not see that Christianity is not mentioned in the Declaration or the Constitution, and the Treaty of Tripoli specifically says it is not a Christian nation.  Christian majority does not mean Christian nation.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on November 23, 2020, 12:57:58 AM
The founders had a Christian bent, if we can define that term loosely. The King James bible had only recently been invented by the King and his 54 scholars who authored the book. . The original invaders of North America were here to pursue a commercial enterprise, not Christianity. .  The Thanksgiving myth that so many of us enjoy is not quite.....or even close, to the story book bullshit that had the Indians making peace and breaking bread with the Plymouth colonial settlers.

The first ones were well before the Plymouth Rock Mayflower group that are so much accorded as original settlers.  Well before that, the Jamestown settlement in Virginia was a commercial enterprise financed by the London Company. That did not work out so well.  The Jamestown community did not even have a minister of God for more than a year.  Never mind that the whole endeavor went to Hell in a hand basket.

European invaders, mostly British, were here in the now state of Maine to gather the magnificent, tall, and sturdy trees that made such exceptionally strong masts for their sailing ships. Tha was not a Christian endeavor, it was a ractical one.

Sure enough the new world settlers were God fearing. They even believed that it was necessary to burn witches.  Actually very few witches, or accused witches, were burned.  but the story lives on.

Before the pilgrims and Jamestown settlers arrived the Spaniards had pillaged Florida and set up forts to defend their conquests.  The Spaniards were not motivated evangelistic Christians, they were looking for gold and other riches and maybe even the fountain of youth. The heathanous Indian inhabitants lost a lot lives before they drove the damned Spaniards and Portuguese to distraction. The Mikasoukis and other tribes were much better at navigating the swamps of Florida than the invaders were. 

Farther south In Mexico and Central America, the quest was for the gold that was surely in abundance there. The invaders had no qualms about slaughtering the indeginous people.  Eventually the Mexicans had their revenge with the improbable success of  the Cinco de Mayo massacre of the French invaders.  None of that had anything to do with the intent to spread the word of the lord.  It was presumed opportunity and greed on the part of the invaders. 

 I have precious little patience with the otherwise, well at least sometimes,  rational citizens who are so adamant about the history and intent of  this nation. 

Icarus is off on one of his rants.  My esteemed colleagues are asked to forgive this ancient old fool for being  so loquacious and single minded.

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on December 11, 2020, 07:35:07 AM
Saw a quote attributed to Barry Goldwater in a book by John Dean. There's a twitter image (https://www.comicsands.com/michele-bachmann-satan-stole-vote-2649434867.html) that features it:

Quote
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

Back to the present day in a big ol' banana republic:

My apologies, I can't help being an anti-fan of Michele Bachmann. She was the "Moe" of the original contemporary Republican Three Stooges in my personal view. Steve King (who won't be missed) was Larry, Louie Gohmert was Curly. It came to me when the three of them went on their ridiculous jaunt to Egypt (https://www.businessinsider.com/michele-bachmann-louie-gohmert-steve-king-egypt-2013-9). Even in the midst of biting dismay, humor can be found. I got a good laugh from the three of them, and I appreciate that.

Before the election, she proclaimed that she knew that her god had locked down the final result (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/michele-bachmann-declares-god-has-already-sealed-the-results-of-this-election-in-heaven/). Not that she's a false prophet (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A15-16&version=NIV) or anything.

Upthread, I noted an earlier post-election rant. It seems likely she hasn't commented on her prediction, but maybe she has--in the minds of Trumpists, there's still a chance that President Bogus will manage to triumph. Her latest ravings are below. Again my apologies, but be forwarned, I expect at least one more eruption when Satan wins and Biden is sworn in, and I'll probably post it.  :sadnod:

In this performance, we have a full cast of Dominionist gobshites, including David Barton and Rick Green. If you don't know who they are, you could bless the fates for smiling on you. There's video. I only watched a few seconds--I can get along on very small doses of these dreadful buffoons.

"‘My Vote Was Stolen!’: Michele Bachmann Will Never Be a ‘Chump’ Who Accepts Biden’s Win" | Right Wing Watch (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/my-vote-was-stolen-michele-bachmann-will-never-be-a-chump-who-accepts-bidens-win/)

Quote
“From the political point of view, from the legal point of view, from the moral point of view, America is not on board with Joe Biden as the next president of the United States,” Bachmann said. “We’re not there. And the reason why we’re not there is because we’re not that dumb in the United States because we know, without a shadow of a doubt, this man did not get the votes on election night. It didn’t happen. Donald Trump got the votes on election night. So, why would we be like drones, chumps, and fools to go along with this?”

Bachmann said that election night was “when Satan was snatching away from America rule by the consent of the governed.”

“In other words, [Satan was] stealing from us our right to vote,” she proclaimed. “I am highly offended, insulted, angry, and I’m not going to stand for the fact that my vote was stolen!”

[Link to full article. (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/my-vote-was-stolen-michele-bachmann-will-never-be-a-chump-who-accepts-bidens-win/)]


Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Magdalena on December 11, 2020, 01:40:11 PM
...

In this performance, we have a full cast of Dominionist gobshites, including David Barton and Rick Green. If you don't know who they are, you could bless the fates for smiling on you.
...
:snicker:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on December 11, 2020, 11:55:08 PM
Bachman, Palin, Cruz, and several others truly need to be committed to the asylum.  Trump too. He is the antagonistic ring leader. While we are at it lets give Jim Jordan and Mitch McConnel at least honorable mention for nut case qualification.  The McEnaney (sp)  woman will also qualify for therapy on account of her impressive capacity for lying in her preety teeth.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on December 12, 2020, 04:50:30 AM
McEnany is an excellent mouthpiece for the soon-to-be-ex-president though. Nearly everything she says when speaking as the soon-to-be-ex-president's Press Secretary is either a lie or a ridiculously delusional partisan talking point. She seems really comfortable with it too, which speaks to a commendable (in a particular context) absence of scruples on her part.

I had to chortle when she first took to her official podium and said, "I will never lie to you." That qualifies as an instant classic, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Bad Penny II on December 12, 2020, 02:18:09 PM
McEnany is an excellent mouthpiece for the soon-to-be-ex-president though. Nearly everything she says when speaking as the soon-to-be-ex-president's Press Secretary is either a lie or a ridiculously delusional partisan talking point. She seems really comfortable with it too, which speaks to a commendable (in a particular context) absence of scruples on her part.

What does delusional mean Green?
an erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary

The contrary evidence is fake.

What does this wiggly scruple word mean?

Motivation deriving logically from ethical or moral principles that govern a person's thoughts and actions

So that could be motivation deriving logically from ethical or moral principles that are beyond the twist.

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on December 12, 2020, 03:30:08 PM
Saw a quote attributed to Barry Goldwater in a book by John Dean. There's a twitter image (https://www.comicsands.com/michele-bachmann-satan-stole-vote-2649434867.html) that features it:

Quote
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

Back to the present day in a big ol' banana republic:

My apologies, I can't help being an anti-fan of Michele Bachmann. She was the "Moe" of the original contemporary Republican Three Stooges in my personal view. Steve King (who won't be missed) was Larry, Louie Gohmert was Curly. It came to me when the three of them went on their ridiculous jaunt to Egypt (https://www.businessinsider.com/michele-bachmann-louie-gohmert-steve-king-egypt-2013-9). Even in the midst of biting dismay, humor can be found. I got a good laugh from the three of them, and I appreciate that.

Before the election, she proclaimed that she knew that her god had locked down the final result (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/michele-bachmann-declares-god-has-already-sealed-the-results-of-this-election-in-heaven/). Not that she's a false prophet (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A15-16&version=NIV) or anything.

Upthread, I noted an earlier post-election rant. It seems likely she hasn't commented on her prediction, but maybe she has--in the minds of Trumpists, there's still a chance that President Bogus will manage to triumph. Her latest ravings are below. Again my apologies, but be forwarned, I expect at least one more eruption when Satan wins and Biden is sworn in, and I'll probably post it.  :sadnod:

In this performance, we have a full cast of Dominionist gobshites, including David Barton and Rick Green. If you don't know who they are, you could bless the fates for smiling on you. There's video. I only watched a few seconds--I can get along on very small doses of these dreadful buffoons.

"‘My Vote Was Stolen!’: Michele Bachmann Will Never Be a ‘Chump’ Who Accepts Biden’s Win" | Right Wing Watch (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/my-vote-was-stolen-michele-bachmann-will-never-be-a-chump-who-accepts-bidens-win/)

Quote
“From the political point of view, from the legal point of view, from the moral point of view, America is not on board with Joe Biden as the next president of the United States,” Bachmann said. “We’re not there. And the reason why we’re not there is because we’re not that dumb in the United States because we know, without a shadow of a doubt, this man did not get the votes on election night. It didn’t happen. Donald Trump got the votes on election night. So, why would we be like drones, chumps, and fools to go along with this?”

Bachmann said that election night was “when Satan was snatching away from America rule by the consent of the governed.”

“In other words, [Satan was] stealing from us our right to vote,” she proclaimed. “I am highly offended, insulted, angry, and I’m not going to stand for the fact that my vote was stolen!”

[Link to full article. (https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/my-vote-was-stolen-michele-bachmann-will-never-be-a-chump-who-accepts-bidens-win/)]

I thought her god assured her the votes were locked in. Could he be lying to her? Is Satan stronger than him? The absurdity of it all.


[Pardon the edit to repair quote. - R]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on December 23, 2020, 06:56:36 PM
Striking some last blows for religious freedom on the way out the door.

"The Trump Administration’s Final Push to Make It Easier for Religious Employers to Discriminate" | ProPublica (https://www.propublica.org/article/religious-freedom-policies-trump-administration)

Quote
It was the hectic week before Thanksgiving, and Amrith Kaur — the legal director of an advocacy group called the Sikh Coalition — was not prepared for a surprise update from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that could have dramatic consequences for her clients.

With little warning, the EEOC published a 112-page overhaul of its guidance (https://beta.regulations.gov/document/EEOC-2020-0007-0001) on religious discrimination in the workplace. The feedback period was proceeding with no time to spare — she would have to file any comments by Dec. 17.

[. . .]

As she dug into the document’s dense language and footnotes, Kaur was particularly distressed because of what she found to be a slant toward large Christian employers like colleges and social service agencies, rather than smaller religions like Sikhism, which face widespread prejudice. For example, in recent days, she’s had to focus on advising health care workers who keep long beards as part of their religious practice. Some hospitals and nursing homes ban facial hair to ensure a proper fit for face masks, but Kaur has been able to work out accommodations that are both COVID-19-safe and allow medical staff to observe their faith — which the new guidance doesn’t address.

[. . .]

Some of the freshly finalized rules codify an executive order that Trump issued in 2018 declaring that faith-based organizations should have full access to government grant programs without having to modify their operations. They deliver on the promises that Trump made to evangelical Christians during his presidential run, and which he and Vice President Mike Pence campaigned on again in 2020 — the White House’s website contains 228 mentions of “religious freedom,” in posted speeches, press releases and other official statements.

[. . .]

In an October interview with the Religion News Service, Trump touted his administration’s work to install religious freedom liaisons in every Cabinet agency. “Led by Pastor Paula White, this Initiative is working to remove barriers which have unfairly prevented faith based organizations from working with or receiving funding from the federal government,” Trump said in a written Q&A.

On that front, the first big change finalized Dec. 7 was at the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, an agency within the Labor Department that enforces compliance with civil rights laws among recipients of federal dollars. The new rule clarifies that private companies can qualify as “religious employers” under certain conditions, and that religious employers may deny positions to people who do not subscribe and adhere to their faith. That could include not hiring people in same-sex relationships or someone of a different religion.

[Continues . . . (https://www.propublica.org/article/religious-freedom-policies-trump-administration)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 12, 2021, 08:13:14 PM
Josh Hawley, the US Senator who gave a clenched-fist salute to the Trumpist crowd just before they stormed the US Capitol Building and who, after they had been escorted back out, proceeded to carry on with a purely symbolic attempt to legislatively overturn the US presidential election, is "deeply religious."

I admit I hadn't paid any attention to him and his ideas before this. The opinion piece below examines Hawley's ideology. The author calls it a "neo-medieval vision." To me it appears to be vision that closely conforms to the tenets of Dominionism.

Originally published in The New York Times, I found an alternate source to avoid the paywall.

"The Roots of Josh Hawley’s Rage" | The New York Times/bt24 (https://bt24news.com/analysis-comment/opinion-the-roots-of-josh-hawleys-rage/)

Quote
How did we get to the point where one of the bright young stars of the Republican Party appears to be at war with both truth and democracy?

Mr. Hawley himself, as it happens, has been making the answer plain for some time. It’s just a matter of listening to what he has been saying.

In multiple speeches, an interview and a widely shared article for Christianity Today, Mr. Hawley has explained that the blame for society’s ills traces all the way back to Pelagius — a British-born monk who lived 17 centuries ago. In a 2019 commencement address at The King’s College, a small conservative Christian college devoted to “a biblical worldview,” Mr. Hawley denounced Pelagius for teaching that human beings have the freedom to choose how they live their lives and that grace comes to those who do good things, as opposed to those who believe the right doctrines.

The most eloquent summary of the Pelagian vision, Mr. Hawley went on to say, can be found in the Supreme Court’s 1992 opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Mr. Hawley specifically cited Justice Anthony Kennedy’s words reprovingly: “At the heart of liberty,” Kennedy wrote, “is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” The fifth century church fathers were right to condemn this terrifying variety of heresy, Mr. Hawley argued: “Replacing it and repairing the harm it has caused is one of the challenges of our day.”

In other words, Mr. Hawley’s idea of freedom is the freedom to conform to what he and his preferred religious authorities know to be right. Mr. Hawley is not shy about making the point explicit. In a 2017 speech to the American Renewal Project, he declared — paraphrasing the Dutch Reformed theologian and onetime prime minister Abraham Kuyper — “There is not one square inch of all creation over which Jesus Christ is not Lord.” Mr. Kuyper is perhaps best known for his claim that Christianity has sole legitimate authority over all aspects of human life.

“We are called to take that message into every sphere of life that we touch, including the political realm,” Mr. Hawley said. “That is our charge. To take the Lordship of Christ, that message, into the public realm, and to seek the obedience of the nations. Of our nation!”

Mr. Hawley has built his political career among people who believe that Shariah is just around the corner even as they attempt to secure privileges for their preferred religious groups to discriminate against those of whom they disapprove.

[Continues . . . (https://bt24news.com/analysis-comment/opinion-the-roots-of-josh-hawleys-rage/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on January 13, 2021, 01:54:16 AM
Reference Recusant's reference to Mr Hawley.   I think I am going to be sick now.   :puke:





Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 14, 2021, 06:39:22 AM
I hope you feel better now, Icarus!   :snicker1:

In this thread it helps if you have a strong stomach.

The New York Times further chronicles the Christofascist element in US society (linking to another off-brand re-post of the piece):

"How White Evangelical Christians Fused With Trump Extremism" | The New York Times/USANews (https://usanews.top10.casa/how-white-evangelical-christians-fused-with-trump-extremism/)

Quote
The presence of Christian rituals, symbols and language was unmistakable on Wednesday in Washington. There was a mock campaign banner, “Jesus 2020,” in blue and red; an “Armor of God” patch on a man’s fatigues; a white cross declaring “Trump won” in all capitals. All of this was interspersed with allusions to QAnon conspiracy theories, Confederate flags and anti-Semitic T-shirts.

The blend of cultural references, and the people who brought them, made clear a phenomenon that has been brewing for years now: that the most extreme corners of support for Mr. Trump have become inextricable from some parts of white evangelical power in America. Rather than completely separate strands of support, these groups have become increasingly blended together.

This potent mix of grievance and religious fervor has turbocharged the support among a wide swath of Trump loyalists, many of whom describe themselves as participants in a kind of holy war, according to interviews. And many, who are swimming in falsehoods about the presidential election and now the riot itself, said the aftermath of Wednesday’s event has only fueled a deeper sense of victimhood and being misunderstood.

Lindsay French, 40, an evangelical Christian from Texas, flew to Washington after she had received what she called a “burning bush” sign from God to participate following her pastor urging congregants to “stop the steal.”

“We are fighting good versus evil, dark versus light,” she said, declaring that she was rising up like Queen Esther, the biblical heroine who saved her people from death.

“We are tired of being made out to be these horrible people she said, acknowledging there was some violence but insisting on the falsehood that Antifa was behind it.

[Continues . . . (https://usanews.top10.casa/how-white-evangelical-christians-fused-with-trump-extremism/)]

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on January 14, 2021, 02:36:33 PM
Regarding Hawley: It sounds to me like he is ready for the crusades to start again.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Dark Lightning on January 14, 2021, 03:30:41 PM
Well, he can just go to the Middle East and off a couple of ISIS soldiers then. :smilenod:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on January 15, 2021, 02:09:51 AM
If this is an accurate accounting then we are in more trouble that we first imagined,,,,,,,,,

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/11/military-right-wing-extremism-457861?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on January 15, 2021, 03:41:44 AM
If this is an accurate accounting then we are in more trouble that we first imagined,,,,,,,,,

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/11/military-right-wing-extremism-457861

As the article mentioned, the Pentagon is aware of the issue and has taken measures to deal with it. About a year ago I spoke with a high-ranking officer in the Air Force and brought up the issue. He said basically the same thing. However, the lack of accurate data is certainly problematic, and I hope they're more proactive about it going forward.
Title: https://dinosaurized.com/pages/praetorian-sRe: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on January 15, 2021, 10:36:06 PM
Roaming around on you tube, I encountered this advertisement at several different places.  It is all about how badly we need concealed, quick draw, holsters for our pistols.  What the hell is my country coming to?

https://dinosaurized.com/pages/praetorian-shoulder-holster-yt?gclid=CjwKCAiAl4WABhAJEiwATUnEFyMrYtngbkYWiLLaibTIXYv7bz9SFakOGyd9vmf5P0ySCzvqV6-AXRoC3l4QAvD_BwE
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on March 31, 2021, 08:26:43 PM
A minor setback for Christofascists. I think we can be sure that Pompeo's formulation won't be forgotten, though.

"Blinken rejects Pompeo’s human rights rankings in rollout of global report" | Politico (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/30/blinken-pompeo-global-report-478513)

Quote
Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday rejected his predecessor’s efforts to create a ranking of human rights as he unveiled the State Department’s annual global report on the topic.

Blinken didn’t utter former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s name, but it was clear whom he was referring to when he said, “There is no hierarchy that makes some rights more important than others.”

During his time as the nation’s top diplomat, Pompeo set up the “Commission on Unalienable Rights,” which issued a report that helped him argue (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/16/mike-pompeo-human-rights-hierarchy-366627) in favor of the notion that some rights are more important than others. In particular, Pompeo claimed that religious freedom and property rights were the “foremost” rights.

Many human rights scholars chided Pompeo, saying that having a hierarchy of rights could ultimately lead to efforts to erode the rights of certain groups, like women and LGBTQI people, by saying they simply mattered less.

[Continues . . . (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/30/blinken-pompeo-global-report-478513)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on April 18, 2021, 10:17:48 AM
This is apparently intended to serve as a means to get the US Supreme Court to rule in favor of teaching Creationism as science. It's not an outlandish plan, given recent appointments of Supreme Court justices who prioritize religious rights.

"Creationism can be taught as science in Arkansas classrooms, lawmakers say" | Arkansas Times (https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2021/04/07/creationism-can-be-taught-as-science-in-arkansas-classrooms-lawmakers-say)

Quote
A bill to allow Christian beliefs to be taught in Arkansas classrooms easily passed the state House Wednesday. House Bill 1701 now heads to the Senate side for a vote.

The bill will allow kindergarten through 12th grade teachers to teach students about the Christian theory of creationism, which claims that a divine being conjured the universe and all things in it in six days. The bill specifies that creationism can be taught not only in religion and philosophy classes, but “as a theory of how the Earth came to exist.”

As with so many pieces of legislation churning out of the Arkansas Capitol this session, if HB 1701 passes, a quick court challenge on this blatant mixing of church and state is all but inevitable. The United States Supreme Court already considered this issue in 1987 and ruled in no uncertain terms that teaching creationism in public school classrooms is unconstitutional. But blatant unconstitutionality hasn’t dissuaded Arkansas lawmakers so far this session. One Senate bill that passed recently, for example, declared all federal gun laws null and void within our state’s borders, in clear opposition to the Supremacy Clause that says federal laws take precedence over state laws.

[. . .]

“Why would we do this when the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that it’s illegal to do that,” asked Rep. Deborah Ferguson (D-West Memphis). Ferguson pointed out that Arkansas has been down this road before in 1982 when state lawmakers tried to force creationism into the state’s curriculum. U.S. District Judge William Overton put a stop to it with his ruling in McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education.

[Rep. Mary] Bentley [R-Perryville, sponsor of the bill] told Ferguson she believes the Supreme Court might rule differently this time.

[Link to full article. (https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2021/04/07/creationism-can-be-taught-as-science-in-arkansas-classrooms-lawmakers-say)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on April 19, 2021, 12:52:16 AM
Not all the Okies and Arkies are as dumb as a basket of rocks........ Unfortunately, It appears that the ones elected to political office are, might we say; intellectually challenged ?   Not their fault of course.......  Too many of their ancestors  had been banging their cousins and/or sisters.



 

 

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Randy on April 20, 2021, 01:49:40 AM
Not all the Okies and Arkies are as dumb as a basket of rocks........ Unfortunately, It appears that the ones elected to political office are, might we say; intellectually challenged ?   Not their fault of course.......  Too many of their ancestors  had been banging their cousins and/or sisters.
So you're saying a basket is mentally challenged? I've not met many intelligent rocks although there have been one or two.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 20, 2021, 02:12:46 AM
Not all the Okies and Arkies are as dumb as a basket of rocks........ Unfortunately, It appears that the ones elected to political office are, might we say; intellectually challenged ?   Not their fault of course.......  Too many of their ancestors  had been banging their cousins and/or sisters.

lol

i are an okie

born in the deepest blackest center of tornado alley

my folks have been in oklahoma since that murderous bastard andrew jackson walked them there in the 1830s.

still, i also am surprised at how stupid the politicians are. not everybody there is a moron, but too many work hard at it
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 22, 2021, 05:12:55 PM
Not all the Okies and Arkies are as dumb as a basket of rocks........ Unfortunately, It appears that the ones elected to political office are, might we say; intellectually challenged ?   Not their fault of course.......  Too many of their ancestors  had been banging their cousins and/or sisters.

lol

i are an okie

born in the deepest blackest center of tornado alley

my folks have been in oklahoma since that murderous bastard andrew jackson walked them there in the 1830s.

still, i also am surprised at how stupid the politicians are. not everybody there is a moron, but too many work hard at it

Okies have been stealing our best football players for years.  I say we ought to build the wall around OK, not on the Rio Grande.  But Tulsa is OK.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 22, 2021, 05:30:16 PM
tuck fexas
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 24, 2021, 03:46:14 AM
tuck fexas

The battle lines have been drawn.   ;D
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: xSilverPhinx on April 24, 2021, 03:05:37 PM
tuck fexas

The battle lines have been drawn.   ;D

:watching:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on April 25, 2021, 02:15:12 AM
Damned Okies are trying to recruit our Florida high school football stars. Alabama too!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Magdalena on April 25, 2021, 05:47:35 AM
tuck fexas

The battle lines have been drawn.   ;D

:watching:

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/8c/7c/458c7cc23448a220eeea9b07c4944976.gif)
So...Now...What happens?
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 25, 2021, 06:33:33 PM
tuck fexas

The battle lines have been drawn.   ;D

:watching:

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/8c/7c/458c7cc23448a220eeea9b07c4944976.gif)
So...Now...What happens?
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 25, 2021, 06:35:05 PM
tuck fexas

The battle lines have been drawn.   ;D

:watching:

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/8c/7c/458c7cc23448a220eeea9b07c4944976.gif)
So...Now...What happens?

Two old men shake their virtual sticks at each other across the Red River, and then declare victory and take a nap.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 25, 2021, 06:36:47 PM
Or, they begin lobbing jokes - why doesn’t Texas fall into the Gulf of Mexico?  Because Oklahoma sucks.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 25, 2021, 11:10:01 PM
hmmm

did you hear about the arkie that moved from oklahoma to texas?

the average IQ of both states went up
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 26, 2021, 01:15:52 AM
i stepped into quicksand once on the red river, in the middle of the night, stark naked. on the texas side.

thats all i have to say about it.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 26, 2021, 01:56:33 AM
i stepped into quicksand once on the red river, in the middle of the night, stark naked. on the texas side.

thats all i have to say about it.

In them Oklahoma hills where you were born, stark naked in quicksand is the norm, isn't it?

Do you know this song?

"She ran 'round the wood pile, I ran 'round to meet her;
She pulled up her petty coat, and I pulled out for Tulsa;
Take me back to Tulsa, I'm too young to marry,
Take me back to Tulsa, I'm too young to marry.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 26, 2021, 02:29:07 AM
weren't no hills nowhere.

you  wanted hills you drove miles to the arbuckles.

but not as many miles as in texas.

texas:

miles and miles

of miles and miles.

acres andacres

of acres and acres.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 26, 2021, 02:38:12 AM
Yes, there are miles and miles or nothing but miles and miles in some places here.  In Texas, it’s all about heading in the right direction.  Otherwise, you will end up in nowhere places like Mentone or Mertzon.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 26, 2021, 10:08:02 AM
mentone is indeed unique.

in oklahoma we have wahington

but washington makes dibble looklike new york city
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Magdalena on April 27, 2021, 08:22:58 AM
I think I've seen this kind of confrontation before... :notsure:
I think I know how it will end...
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/fe39816b3691ec2aabd5265e9b466a69/tenor.gif)

 :grin:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on April 27, 2021, 05:58:22 PM
Ha!
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: xSilverPhinx on April 27, 2021, 06:16:33 PM
I think I've seen this kind of confrontation before... :notsure:
I think I know how it will end...
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/fe39816b3691ec2aabd5265e9b466a69/tenor.gif)

 :grin:

:lol:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: billy rubin on April 27, 2021, 09:39:24 PM
i would nev3r wear whitesocks with shorts

i am a quaker so all mysocks are gray
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Magdalena on April 27, 2021, 11:33:59 PM
i would nev3r wear whitesocks with shorts

i am a quaker so all mysocks are gray
:snicker:
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on May 11, 2021, 10:39:50 AM
It's not as if the Dominionists are coy about their agenda. One of the creeps in charge of former US Secretary of State Pompeo's pet project "religious freedom" commission is happy to tell you what's up.

"Vice Chair of US Gov’t. Religious Freedom Group Boasts ‘Warriors for Christ’ Were Created to ‘Take Over the World’" | New Civil Rights Movement (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/05/vice-chair-of-us-govt-religious-freedom-group-boasts-warriors-for-christ-were-created-to-take-over-the-world/)

Quote
Tony Perkins, the vice chairman of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a U.S. federal government commission, says men were created to be “warriors for Christ” and should be “waging warfare” and trying to “take over the world.”

Perkins, who was appointed to the Commission by then-Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, has served for decades as the president of the Family Research Council, which appears on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of anti-LGBTQ hate groups.

“We should be, you know, happy warriors. We were created for this,” Perkins can be seen saying in a video (below) posted by Right Wing Watch.

“It wasn’t like this is just something that happens to fall upon us at this moment. We were created to be warriors for Christ – especially as men – we’re to lead our families as warriors. Now that terminology has been, you know, maligned by the culture that we’re, you know, these ‘Christian warriors’ from a standpoint of, we’re ‘trying to take over the world,'” Perkins said.

“Yeah, we are,” he admitted, adding, “the kingdom, the kingdom of God.”

It’s unclear how Perkins can admit to trying to “take over the world” as a “Christian warrior,” and “wage warfare” – and yet be trusted in his USCIRF role with working to ensure religious freedom – freedom for all religions – around the world.

“We want to see everyone come to the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and experience the abundant life. And that means we’re going to have to wage warfare. It’s not physical warfare,” he insisted. “The weapons of our warfare, they’re not carnal, but they’re spiritual, for the tearing down of strongholds, so we shouldn’t make any apologies about that.”

[Twitter video, for the masochists. (https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/status/1389681292439171072)]

"Allahu akbar!"

Oh, sorry, my mistake. "For the greater glory of God!"

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on May 11, 2021, 03:12:21 PM
Their weapons are spiritual, such as political parties and legislatures and courts.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on June 16, 2021, 03:38:20 AM
This article seems somewhat incoherent to me, perhaps because it tries to pull in a number of different themes. What I see as the gist is quoted below.

"Trump's army of God: Doug Mastriano and the Christian nationalist attack on democracy" | Salon (https://www.salon.com/2021/06/12/trumps-army-of-god-doug-mastriano-and-the-christian-nationalist-attack-on-democracy/)

Quote
On May 9, the New Yorker published a feature story (https://www.newyorker.com/news/on-religion/a-pennsylvania-lawmaker-and-the-resurgence-of-christian-nationalism) by Pulitzer winner Eliza Griswold about Pennsylvania state Sen. Doug Mastriano, who could well be the Republican nominee for governor next year, as a flagship example of the swelling power of Christian nationalism within today's GOP. That's an issue I focused on in a 2018 story (https://www.salon.com/2018/04/01/donald-trump-defender-of-christian-america-its-not-as-ludicrous-as-it-sounds/) largely driven by a paper called "Make America Christian Again (https://academic.oup.com/socrel/article/79/2/147/4825283)," co-authored by sociologist Andrew Whitehead. I described this phenomenon as "an Old Testament-based worldview fusing Christian and American identities, and sharpening the divide with those who are excluded from it," and quoted from the paper:

Quote
Christian nationalism … draws its roots from "Old Testament" parallels between America and Israel, who was commanded to maintain cultural and blood purity, often through war, conquest, and separatism.

[. . .]

The hard right in all its manifestations (cultural, religious, militarist, etc.) has always held that liberalism — if not democracy itself — is illegitimate. What's new about 4GW [fourth generation warfare] is that it provided the right a shared model of how to systematically delegitimize an opponent. Although 4GW theory's claims of historical accuracy have been severely criticized (https://css.ethz.ch/en/services/digital-library/publications/publication.html/22592), it works well as an organizing mythology for its proponents.

In brief, 4GW theory holds that the three prior "generations" of modern warfare involved massed manpower, massed firepower and non-linear maneuver, but we have now reached a new phase: "4GW expands warfare beyond the physical level to include the mental and moral dimensions," Scaminaci explained. "At the highest level of combat — moral conflict — the central objective is to undermine the legitimacy of one's opponent and induce a population to transfer their loyalty from their government to the insurgent." In other words, 4GW normalizes the concept that political opponents are enemy combatants, building on generations of religious conservatives demonizing liberals as evil or demonic.

This mentality and its fruits — if not the explicit theory itself — now informs Trump and his allies' relentless claims that the 2020 election was stolen, along with the GOP's ongoing efforts to make it easier for them to steal the next one. When legitimate office holders use their powers illegitimately to change the system, simultaneously claiming that they're the ones doing everything correctly, that's 4GW at work. It's also the logic behind the "constitutional sheriffs" movement noted above, as well as the state legislatures that tried to interfere with the 2020 election and are now trying to rig all future ones. The same applies to the "Oath Keepers," with their selective list of which oaths they will keep and their assumption of a unilateral right to interpret their meaning and act accordingly.

Christian nationalism helps support all of this, deploying its warped and selective version of Christian faith to attack all other Americans, not to mention other Christians. While pretending to represent the ultimate in Christian belief and American patriotism, it is really a fundamental attack on the core values of both.

[Link to full article. (https://www.salon.com/2021/06/12/trumps-army-of-god-doug-mastriano-and-the-christian-nationalist-attack-on-democracy/)]
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Icarus on June 17, 2021, 05:09:11 AM
More than a grain of truth in that article Rec. Scary stuff to be sure.
Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 11, 2021, 05:39:30 AM
Yeah, not that it's news, but more along the lines of those scientific papers which finally put numbers to something that people in the field had previously been well aware of.

"White evangelical support for Donald Trump wasn't about partisanship -- it was about animus toward minorities" | Raw Story (https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evangelicals-2653738345/)

Quote
In the wake of the Pew Research Center's findings (https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/) that 84 percent of the white evangelical Protestant vote went to former President Donald Trump in 2020, it is more important than ever for the American public to face the uncomfortable truth (https://conversationalist.org/2019/11/14/if-we-want-to-save-american-democracy-we-must-have-a-very-difficult-conversation-about-evangelical-christianity/) about the authoritarian Christian right's deleterious impact on society, culture and politics.

Some of us have been pushing for this conversation for years, with various iterations of relevant data and scholarship helping to elucidate key points. During the 2016 primaries, a few political scientists drew attention to a link (https://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism) between authoritarian personality traits and support for Trump. For Religion Dispatches, I wrote at the time, "if 'a desire for order and a fear of outsiders' predicts Trump support, the question of why white evangelicals are backing a trash-talking billionaire can be easily answered."

Although the mainstream press (https://religiondispatches.org/have-white-evangelicals-finally-lost-control-of-the-narrative/) has only haltingly begun to take such analysis seriously, my conclusion, which was intuitive to me as someone who grew up in white evangelical subculture (https://cstroop.com/2018/06/14/escape-from-jesus-land-on-recognizing-evangelical-abuse-and-finding-the-strength-to-reject-the-faith-of-our-fathers/) and attended Christian schools (https://apnews.com/article/4202bedd44b54572a74dc152dbb65b72), aged well over the next few years, as the rubric of "Christian nationalism" became an important part of the relevant discourse. No one should have been surprised by evangelical Trump support, and that the American public has done such a poor job of grappling with the issue is a sad commentary on the fundamental weakness of American civil society.

[. . .]

Could the national discussion of right-wing, white Christians as a distinct authoritarian "faction" that transcends party help us to escape from the trap of bothsidesism? Lilliana Mason, associate professor of government and politics at the University of Maryland, seemed to suggest as much in a recent Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/LilyMasonPhD/status/1411053651054010378?s=20) exploring some of the implications of a new paper (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/activating-animus-the-uniquely-social-roots-of-trump-support/D96C71C353D065F62A3F19B504FA7577) she and colleagues Julie Wronski and John V. Kane recently published in American Political Science Review.

The main finding of the paper, "Activating Animus: The Uniquely Social Roots of Trump Support," is that support for the former president was driven primarily by negative feelings toward discrete social groups primarily associated with the Democratic Party: African Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, and gays and lesbians.

[Continues . . . (https://www.rawstory.com/trump-evangelicals-2653738345/)]

Title: Re: Dominionists in the United States
Post by: Recusant on July 13, 2021, 10:29:50 AM
Oh my! The Washington Post is shocked to learn that there are Dominionists in the United States.

"‘How Theocracies Are Born’: Experts Warn of ‘Trump’s Jesus Fascists’ After Report on Christian GOP Churches" | The New Civil Rights Movement (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/07/how-theocracies-are-born-experts-warn-of-trumps-jesus-fascists-after-report-on-christian-gop-churches/)

Quote
Experts, journalists, and chroniclers of religious extremism are sounding alarm bells over a Washington Post exposé on “a growing Christian movement that is nondenominational, openly political and has become an engine of former president Donald Trump’s Republican Party.”

As The Post explains, “It is a world in which demons are real, miracles are real, and the ultimate mission is not just transforming individual lives but also turning civilization itself into their version of God’s Kingdom: one with two genders, no abortion, a free-market economy, Bible-based education, church-based social programs and laws such as the ones curtailing LGBTQ rights now moving through statehouses around the country.”

This is not just the world they want to create for themselves, as damaging and dangerous as that might be. This is a world they want to mandate for America.

In short, one could say, an American theocracy. Or worse, something that looks a bit like a scene from Margaret Atwood’s dystopian work, The Handmaid’s Tale.

“This is the world of Trump’s spiritual adviser Paula White,” The Post explains, “and many more lesser-known but influential religious leaders who prophesied that Trump would win the election and helped organize nationwide prayer rallies in the days before the Jan. 6 insurrection, speaking of an imminent ‘heavenly strike’ and ‘a Christian populist uprising,’ leading many who stormed the Capitol to believe they were taking back the country for God.”

[Continues . . . (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/07/how-theocracies-are-born-experts-warn-of-trumps-jesus-fascists-after-report-on-christian-gop-churches/)]