Is America heading for theocracy?

[nhboy]

Link

Is America heading for theocracy? How worrying is the rise of the Tea Party? Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins discuss God and US politics.

The 2011 Christmas issue of the New Statesman was guest edited by Richard Dawkins. This is his interview with Christopher Hitchens from that issue. It was to be Hitchens' final interview; he died as it was published. A sensation at the time, it is now available to read online for the first time."

 

[Chuckt]

No. I think he worried. If you read the news every day, there is bound to be something you don't like in it. If we worry about everything that we don't like, is it really something to worry about? And if you wrote down everything you worried about, what do you have? You have a list of things that don't mean anything tomorrow because they are just a passing worry that never happened. How many people or groups are powerful enough to make what they want happen? There is this thing called democracy and if the majority of people don't want something then they won't vote for it.

 

[Larry Gude]

Odd title for the thread given how CH resoundingly states theocracy as the least of our internal worries. He does go on to express concern over us becoming a Muslim theocracy and express mild concern that absent Christianity thag may be more likely. However, Hitchens, mistakenly in my view, sees little concern for that because of the abject failures of Islam.

 

[Gilligan]

Odd title for the thread

Yep.

 

[glhs837]

Am I the only one confused by the connection of the Tea Party with any thoughts of theocracy? From what I know of them, seems like this would be the last bunch to support any such thing. I know the left has spent a ton of money and time trying to aint the TP folks are synonymous with the hard right Christian fundamentalists, but I've seen no evidence of that, has anyone else?

 

[GURPS]

Am I the only one confused by the connection of the Tea Party with any thoughts of theocracy?

The Tea Party = Progressive DOG Whistle ... like saying the boggey man

 

[Larry Gude]

Am I the only one confused by the connection of the Tea Party with any thoughts of theocracy? From what I know of them, seems like this would be the last bunch to support any such thing. I know the left has spent a ton of money and time trying to aint the TP folks are synonymous with the hard right Christian fundamentalists, but I've seen no evidence of that, has anyone else?

Well, in a larger sense ANY group represents its own theology so, from there it makes sense. That said, the new theology in America, the one that IS taking over the nation and dictating what we think at the earliest age is the 'man made global cool warming changey thingy' faith. It's not science based. It is a religious institution with it's own theology and dogma. THAT is the example the writer COULD have successfully used but, as Hitchens says in the article, we do well at convincing ourselves that OUR faith is THE way.

It's really a good read as is most anything that has to do with Chris Hitchens; thought provoking and thoughtful.

 

[seekeroftruth]

Well recently they have jailed a clerk because she stood up against Gay Marriage..... and Congress is refusing [so far] to take those selling baby body parts off the budget. Doesn't seem to me that the atheists and agnostics have anything to worry about any time soon.....

 

[Amused_despair]

We also have Presidential candidates and politicians saying it is admirable to violate secular law if you feel it is against God's wishes. I really feel bad for all the shrimp fish boat captains if this catches on.

 

[GURPS]

.... but I've seen no evidence of that, has anyone else?

only posted on the internet by progressives, hosting a funding drive ...

in the last few days,

Darth Cheney - Wrong then, Wrong Now, Iran lie, and a 3rd
Tea Party - Theocracy Taking over
Kim Davis for President - aka Lowering the Bar, Kim Davis goes to Jail
Numerous Trump Articles - bottom feeder
Countdown to Shutdown and Thank You - for supporting PPH - even though there was never going to be a shutdown or fight
What Progress looks like - taking credit for doing nothing
#BLM and Fredie Gray

and a Right Wing Crusade against the 1st lady

 

[Chuckt]

We also have Presidential candidates and politicians saying it is admirable to violate secular law if you feel it is against God's wishes. I really feel bad for all the shrimp fish boat captains if this catches on.

Large percentages of the country are 95% Christian so if you have a town and 95% have a faith whether it is Christian, Amish, Mennonite, etc., business close down on Sunday because there is no one to work. They live this way and they are happy. So if you have one atheist or someone else who wants accommodating, you're saying that the town has to change or the majority of people have to bend to your beliefs.

If this was World War II or a draft during war time, if I want to be a conscientious objector, you can't make me fight but you can make me assist and do everything else in war time. Why is there an exception for war? In other words, during war time, you can't make me kill another person if I am a conscientious objector so if people can object during war time then why can't they object when they work?

And the way I thought about it, gay people have the same rights as heterosexual people so why should they have extra rights to be able to marry someone of the same sex? I thought about it and if someone has extra rights, isn't that like being white where you have a vote and where black people were counted 3/5ths of a vote? They are accounted extra rights? What if I want rights that effect you and make you bend to my beliefs?

 

[Amused_despair]

Large percentages of the country are 95% Christian so if you have a town and 95% have a faith whether it is Christian, Amish, Mennonite, etc., business close down on Sunday because there is no one to work. They live this way and they are happy. So if you have one atheist or someone else who wants accommodating, you're saying that the town has to change or the majority of people have to bend to your beliefs.

If this was World War II or a draft during war time, if I want to be a conscientious objector, you can't make me fight but you can make me assist and do everything else in war time. Why is there an exception for war? In other words, during war time, you can't make me kill another person if I am a conscientious objector so if people can object during war time then why can't they object when they work?

And the way I thought about it, gay people have the same rights as heterosexual people so why should they have extra rights to be able to marry someone of the same sex? I thought about it and if someone has extra rights, isn't that like being white where you have a vote and where black people were counted 3/5ths of a vote? They are accounted extra rights? What if I want rights that effect you and make you bend to my beliefs?

So we can mark you down as being ok with following personal beliefs instead of the law when you are a part of government then, right?

 

[Chuckt]

So we can mark you down as being ok with following personal beliefs instead of the law when you are a part of government then, right?

If you have inalienable rights then when does the government have the right to dictate to you your religious beliefs if there is a separation of Church and State? Second, she is an elected official so by putting her in jail, you are basically depriving the people of representation whom many may be Christians and whom they want her to dictate her beliefs.

 

[seekeroftruth]

So we can mark you down as being ok with following personal beliefs instead of the law when you are a part of government then, right?

In Daniel we saw the leaders convince government that praying to anyone but the king should be illegal. Daniel was thrown into the lions den.

In Daniel we saw the leaders convince government that everyone should bow down to the king [or his likeness]. Shadrak, Meshak, and Obindigo [sorry for mispelling] refused to bow down and they were thrown into the smelting fire.

God calls us to do what is right. There isn't a change in the law concerning marriage. There's an interpretation change.

If I were Kim Davis.... I'd be in the same boat.

I would refuse. I know I would have to do so....

 

[ProximaCentauri]

In Daniel we saw the leaders convince government that praying to anyone but the king should be illegal. Daniel was thrown into the lions den.

In Daniel we saw the leaders convince government that everyone should bow down to the king [or his likeness]. Shadrak, Meshak, and Obindigo [sorry for mispelling] refused to bow down and they were thrown into the smelting fire.

God calls us to do what is right. There isn't a change in the law concerning marriage. There's an interpretation change.

If I were Kim Davis.... I'd be in the same boat.

I would refuse. I know I would have to do so....

And in doing so, you would fail to carry out your duty as a government official, willfully break the law, and subjugate your fellow citizens to a status beneath your own. All in the name of your god.

 

[Chuckt]

And in doing so, you would fail to carry out your duty as a government official, willfully break the law, and subjugate your fellow citizens to a status beneath your own. All in the name of your god.

That is your interpretation.
If the writers of the marriage law in Kentucky meant for anyone to get married then why does it need an official's approval and if the voters wanted everyone to be able to get married then why didn't they vote for an atheist? If she gets re-elected, how would you feel about that?

I looked up MOREHEAD, Ky and found out it is a Home Rule city. That means they can make some of their own rules.

Section 156b of the Kentucky Constitution authorizes the General Assembly to grant broad home rule powers to cities, but does not require it. Fortunately, in 1980 the General Assembly did decide to grant home rule authority to cities through the adoption of KRS 82.082. This statute gives all classes of cities broad home rule powers. Prior to the enactment of the home rule statute, cities, which have no inherent right of self-government, depended almost exclusively upon specific acts of the General Assembly to authorize various functions.

Now, under KRS 82.082, a city may exercise any power or perform any function that is:
1) Within the boundaries of the city;
2) In furtherance of a public purpose of the city; and
3) Not in conflict with a constitutional provision or statute.

For a full explanation of the home rule principal, please see Chapter 3 of the 2011 City Officials Legal Handbook.

http://www.klc.org/news/474/What_is_Home_Rule

 

[cheezgrits]

Davis did not go to jail for her religious beliefs, she went to jail for using a government position to force her beliefs on others. Big difference. No one jailed her because she doesn't believe in or support gay marriage because of her religious beliefs. She is still and always has been free to practice her religion. Just not from an elected office. If she had refused to issue marriage licenses to mixed race couples, y'all would be screaming racists at her.

 

[Chuckt]

Davis did not go to jail for her religious beliefs, she went to jail for using a government position to force her beliefs on others. Big difference. No one jailed her because she doesn't believe in or support gay marriage because of her religious beliefs. She is still and always has been free to practice her religion. Just not from an elected office. If she had refused to issue marriage licenses to mixed race couples, y'all would be screaming racists at her.

How did she force them by not doing anything? They couldn't go to the next town to get married? You mean someone was forcing themselves to get married in her town of 6,000 people to get married? You mean to tell me it was easier for them to pay a lawyer than to go somewhere else to get married? There are a lot of times I am inconvenienced but I don't fork out thousands of dollars to sue.

And you have to pay for health care or you pay a penalty which is a tax. Who is forcing you to pay?
It is okay if you are at the top enforcing but not okay if you are at the bottom? Health care laws benefit the rich because they are making you pay so they don't feel it when they have to help cover your costs.

There is a couple flying from San Francisco to get married in Kentucky to make a statement. Who is enforcing their beliefs on others? Aren't the thousands of activists calling up and screaming forcing their beliefs on others? Kentucky has home rule which means they don't want outsiders forcing their beliefs on them.

 

[seekeroftruth]

And in doing so, you would fail to carry out your duty as a government official, willfully break the law, and subjugate your fellow citizens to a status beneath your own. All in the name of your god.

In NOT doing so I would be failing my God.

I choose God.

 

[Chuckt]

Davis did not go to jail for her religious beliefs, she went to jail for using a government position to force her beliefs on others. Big difference. No one jailed her because she doesn't believe in or support gay marriage because of her religious beliefs. She is still and always has been free to practice her religion. Just not from an elected office. If she had refused to issue marriage licenses to mixed race couples, y'all would be screaming racists at her.

When I got married, the office issuing a marriage license told me what I could and couldn't do in marriage. Who is enforcing their beliefs on me?