Politics Thread

[paulxu]

Banning prayer is a interesting issue. The Senate has a chaplain.
In the Navy, we had chaplains of all different faiths, and you could go to a service of your faith.

Putting a religious symbol of one faith on a government building to the exclusion of others, seem to be favoritism that is problematic.
You may not know white christian nationalists, but just listen to those in congress. They would love just a Christian country.
Not sure if that is helpful.

[Strange Brew]

Banning prayer is a interesting issue. The Senate has a chaplain.
In the Navy, we had chaplains of all different faiths, and you could go to a service of your faith.

Putting a religious symbol of one faith on a government building to the exclusion of others, seem to be favoritism that is problematic.
You may not know white christian nationalists, but just listen to those in congress. They would love just a Christian country.
Not sure if that is helpful.

When you were in the Navy eons ago yes. Not now.

There is now law banning other religions from putting up symbols. The Satanists have had displays at court houses for some time.

Who is advocating for a Christian only country.

No this wasn't helpful at all Paul. Was it helpful to you?

[Strange Brew]

Banning prayer is a interesting issue. The Senate has a chaplain.
In the Navy, we had chaplains of all different faiths, and you could go to a service of your faith.

Putting a religious symbol of one faith on a government building to the exclusion of others, seem to be favoritism that is problematic.
You may not know white christian nationalists, but just listen to those in congress. They would love just a Christian country.
Not sure if that is helpful.

When you were in the Navy could the chaplain lead a voluntary prayer before battle or was religious expression limited to the Chapels?

There is no law banning other religions from putting up symbols. The Satanists have had displays at court houses for some time.

Who is advocating for a Christian only country.

No this wasn't helpful at all Paul. Was it helpful to you?

Edit: It was instructive in that you are attempting to tie Christianity to white nationalism.

[paulxu]

Wonder why some posts go up twice.

Sorry Brew, you lost me. No chaplains in the Navy now? 800 chaplains/100 faiths.
https://www.navy.com/careers/navy-chaplain

(Yes, it was a long time ago I was in the Navy. Not eons, but close)

See post 14170 above for a link to a congresswoman advocating for a Christian nation. Thought we answered this before.
Maybe helpful now.

[Strange Brew]

Wonder why some posts go up twice.

Sorry Brew, you lost me. No chaplains in the Navy now? 800 chaplains/100 faiths.
https://www.navy.com/careers/navy-chaplain

(Yes, it was a long time ago I was in the Navy. Not eons, but close)

See post 14170 above for a link to a congresswoman advocating for a Christian nation. Thought we answered this before.
Maybe helpful now.

Hi Paul, I edited my post to reflect what I meant. Thanks for correcting the "no Chaplain" comment.

I listened to the video. I don't think she meant we need to be a Christian nation. She said, as Republicans, we need to be Nationalists (America first) and Christians. Then said we need to be Christian Nationalists (which was a really inarticulate way of saying what she meant but that's MTG).

She also said nothing about "white" unless YOU think all Christians are white. Which is really stupid.

Again, are you at attempting to tie Christianity to "white" nationalism?

[paulxu]

Again, are you at attempting to tie Christianity to "white" nationalism?

Many do: https://news.yale.edu/2022/03/15/yal...an-nationalism

Probably goes back to our nation's beginning when black people were less than humans; actually property.

[Strange Brew]

Many do: https://news.yale.edu/2022/03/15/yal...an-nationalism

Probably goes back to our nation's beginning when black people were less than humans; actually property.

A professor of sociology. Shocking.

Do you agree with the Prof?

[Masterofreality]

Down where I live they tried the states' rights issue, much to the country's pain in the 1800's.
There are some issues the constitution should cover for all people. People disagree on a lot of them, and privacy is a tough one.
Am fascinated by your insistence on either/or questions. Do you still beat your wife.?

I'm not personally in favor of abortion when people can have unwanted babies adopted.
I would never suppose to put my believe on some one else. Heck, 150 years ago the church supported abortion up to 6 or 7 weeks. Now it's changed.

I for darn sure wouldn't keep women who were in danger of making the choice for their health...that's their and their doctor's choice. Not some state they may live in today and not tomorrow.
I'm certainly against the state telling the woman what to do, regardless of what I believe. If she has been raped or a victim of incest, she should choose.
Not the state. Any state.
Women will suffer now as "states" figure out what to do. They are being asked to suffer ectopic pregnancies and partial miscarriages until they are in danger, because the doctors are afraid of the legal community. We have not served the well being of women with this latest ruling.

“States” are “figuring out what to do” based upon what the people’s elected representatives will decide what to do from their constituent’s wishes. That sounds an awful like what “Democracy” is rather than the people being ruled by some dictate by some unelected party- which is awful like a “Dictatorship”.
Which of those two scenarios sound like Democracy is in Danger? Hmmmm.
And, ok. Let’s see if California or New York wish to secede from the Union over this issue. Not quite the same, but you do you

[noteggs]

A professor of sociology. Shocking.

Do you agree with the Prof?

For some reason I was intrigued by Paul’s fascination using the term white Christian nationalist, so I did a little research on where it came from. Surprise surprise it started in academia and is now being touted by MSM.

My guess is because of the J6 hearing, Trump, and his followers are discussed a lot. Also, it ties nicely into Republicans are well you know racists, xenophobic, and homophobic who hide behind and distort Christianity. Finally, they think SCOTUS is ruling based off religion vs the Constitution.

The names that are most vocal about this conspiracy are Philip Gorski (Paul’s attached article and went to Berkeley), Samuel Perry (both professors in sociology - shocker indeed), and Kristin Du Mez (professor in history and gender studies). All have written books about it and are now quoted or guests on MSM. BTW, their Twitter followers are quite the echo chamber and progressive.

Amazing how people continue to label a class of people based off their own beliefs. Oh yeah, you’re right, MTG is a loon.

[Xuperman]

For some reason I was intrigued by Paul’s fascination using the term white Christian nationalist, so I did a little research on where it came from. Surprise surprise it started in academia and is now being touted by MSM.

My guess is because of the J6 hearing, Trump, and his followers are discussed a lot. Also, it ties nicely into Republicans are well you know racists, xenophobic, and homophobic who hide behind and distort Christianity. Finally, they think SCOTUS is ruling based off religion vs the Constitution.

The names that are most vocal about this conspiracy are Philip Gorski (Paul’s attached article and went to Berkeley), Samuel Perry (both professors in sociology - shocker indeed), and Kristin Du Mez (professor in history and gender studies). All have written books about it and are now quoted or guests on MSM. BTW, their Twitter followers are quite the echo chamber and progressive.

Amazing how people continue to label a class of people based off their own beliefs. Oh yeah, you’re right, MTG is a loon.

Wow, FANTASTIC post!