The real problem: Christianity

[atrib]

The real problem is Christianity religion. Christianity is simply the most powerful flavor locally.

Religion in the public square is nothing new. And atheists don't want to get rid of religion, they want to replace it with their own religion.

And what religion would that be?

The reason we have a cult of Trump is that many Christians are taught to believe in, and submit to an authoritarian figure (Jesus) as part of their religious indoctrination. They are taught to obey without question and act without rational justification. This mindset can be exploited by grifters and con-men (like Trump). They can be lied to, and often made to act against their own self interest, because their natural defenses to being conned (skepticism and rational inquiry) have been worn down through their indoctrination into the cult of Christ. They are ripe for the picking.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Nah. We want to make it what it should be -- a private practice. If I object to prayer leading off a county commissioners' meeting, it's not the case that I want to replace it with an invocation to Bertrand Russell or a short speech on reason. I simply don't think that any religious observance makes sense in a secular government, because the implication is that the Christian citizens' sensibilities deserve a shout-out, but everyone else, not so much. Without the prayer, let's get on to street maintenance and zoning laws. Almighty God and his son can be consulted by the believers at their leisure, but they have no place in a public meeting that is open to all.


(Responding to post #20)

 

[Elixir]

Religion in the public square is nothing new. And atheists don't want to get rid of religion, they want to replace it with their own religion.

All organized religions want to replace all the other religions with themselves.
But atheism is not a religion. I have no objection to religious beliefs, and don’t really care if you have an imaginary friend. I just find proselytizing for organized religions repulsive and dangerous.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Religion in the public square is nothing new. And atheists don't want to get rid of religion, they want to replace it with their own religion.

All organized religions want to replace all the other religions with themselves.
But atheism is not a religion. I have no objection to religious beliefs, and don’t really care if you have an imaginary friend. I just find proselytizing for organized religions repulsive and dangerous.

I think you meant delusional friend. Having an imaginary friend doesn't make one religious or delusional.

 

[ZiprHead]

The real problem in America today remains Christian fascism. As Sinclair Lewis remarked, when Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross of Christ. Well, I give you exhibit A.

LOL, religious nutters are the least of my worries. It doesn't appear to be them cheering on the authoritarians.

Those people that stormed the capital and killed a cop weren't authoritarians?

 

[ZiprHead]

Baseball star Curt Schilling has claimed his insurance policy has been canceled by AIG after the Donald Trump fan tweeted in support of the Capitol rioters. The Red Sox legend tweeted: 'We will be just fine, but wanted to let Americans know that @AIGinsurance canceled our insurance due to my 'Social Media profile'.'

Daily_mail

Christians are the problem.

Would you want to insure someone's life that might participate in a violent riot?

 

[jab]

The real problem in America today remains Christian fascism. As Sinclair Lewis remarked, when Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross of Christ. Well, I give you exhibit A.

LOL, religious nutters are the least of my worries. It doesn't appear to be them cheering on the authoritarians.

Worry--Franklin Graham, for instance, has compared the impeachment Repubs to Judas--therefore Trump is like Jesus. There are other rantign evangelical preachers heavily invested in this.
Some of the insurrectionists were explicitly anti-abortion--a position usually associated with fervent Christianity.

 

[marc]

Some things would be better if christians followed certain portions of their damned bible

Matthew
5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

And a couple of articles:

White Christian Radicalization Is A Violent Threat - Pointing out the 'christian' flags and signs among the rioters.

These Textbooks In Thousands Of K-12 Schools Echo Trump’s Talking Points - The textbooks are used in private schools, making me wonder how many of these schools are generating people who are simply out of touch with reality, resulting in the delusional psychos like we saw last week.

 

[jab]

The real problem is Christianity religion. Christianity is simply the most powerful flavor locally.

Religion in the public square is nothing new. And atheists don't want to get rid of religion, they want to replace it with their own religion.

Take a number and get in line.

define religion. . . you don't get to redefine words for your own purpose. Fake definitions?--take a number and get in line.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Religion in "the public square" is not what American atheists are out to limit. It's protected by the Constitution. We may hope it dies of apathy, education, and self-immolation, sure. But the actual effort is against the constant efforts to legislate godlaws. That's the part we atheists really object to, and we have the Constitution on our side as well.

And 'the Condtitution' includes the document, the amendments, and the SCOTUS decisions about how it applies to changing circumstances, just to circumcise any claims that "the words church/state separation don't appear in..."

 

[Playball40]

It's White Evangelicals who are the problem, not all Christians. I started a thread about this a couple of days ago in the religion forum, based on an article in the NYTImes.

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?23171-The-danger-of-White-Evangelical-Christians-in-the-US

This is what I think. I also think it would be politically dangerous for any politician to claim it's "Christianity" - It's probably safer to say 'rioters, fascists, etc' knowing full well it's uneducated white evangelicals. Hasn't it always been, though?

 

[Playball40]

Baseball star Curt Schilling has claimed his insurance policy has been canceled by AIG after the Donald Trump fan tweeted in support of the Capitol rioters. The Red Sox legend tweeted: 'We will be just fine, but wanted to let Americans know that @AIGinsurance canceled our insurance due to my 'Social Media profile'.'

Daily_mail

Christians are the problem.

Insurance for what? It was probably a smart move on their part. I know my insurance got cancelled due to sink hole activity in Florida - made my property 'high risk'. Guess they figure he's 'high risk' due to his activities.

 

[Bomb#20]

Baseball star Curt Schilling has claimed his insurance policy has been canceled by AIG after the Donald Trump fan tweeted in support of the Capitol rioters. The Red Sox legend tweeted: 'We will be just fine, but wanted to let Americans know that @AIGinsurance canceled our insurance due to my 'Social Media profile'.'

Daily_mail

Christians are the problem.

Would you want to insure someone's life that might participate in a violent riot?

So I take it if somebody tweets support for BLM riots you wouldn't have a problem with his insurer dropping him for it, because he's likely to go vandalize a Target store?

 

[ZiprHead]

Would you want to insure someone's life that might participate in a violent riot?

So I take it if somebody tweets support for BLM riots you wouldn't have a problem with his insurer dropping him for it, because he's likely to go vandalize a Target store?

Nope.

 

[Jarhyn]

Would you want to insure someone's life that might participate in a violent riot?

So I take it if somebody tweets support for BLM riots you wouldn't have a problem with his insurer dropping him for it, because he's likely to go vandalize a Target store?

Nope.

Specifically for the root behavior, I would assume? Like, as an employee, I think I absolutely would sue merely for political speech, conducted in a peaceful and legal manner. That said, the moment I see one of my employees on television looting, they are fired no further questions.

While I have no pity for Target or most of the other businesses looted, I also have no love for anyone engaging in that behavior. They're all shitty, and both Target and the looters are wrong, for different reasons. The only ones who aren't shitty are the ones protesting peacefully.

For the record, there were no peaceful protestors at the DC Attacks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nah. We want to make it what it should be -- a private practice. If I object to prayer leading off a county commissioners' meeting, it's not the case that I want to replace it with an invocation to Bertrand Russell or a short speech on reason. I simply don't think that any religious observance makes sense in a secular government, because the implication is that the Christian citizens' sensibilities deserve a shout-out, but everyone else, not so much. Without the prayer, let's get on to street maintenance and zoning laws. Almighty God and his son can be consulted by the believers at their leisure, but they have no place in a public meeting that is open to all.


(Responding to post #20)

How about we fix indecent exposure laws.

Currently you'll get in trouble for showing your dick in public, change that to showing your religion in public.

 

[ideologyhunter]

But then priests would be charged no matter what they did.

 

[TSwizzle]

Nah. We want to make it what it should be -- a private practice. If I object to prayer leading off a county commissioners' meeting, it's not the case that I want to replace it with an invocation to Bertrand Russell or a short speech on reason. I simply don't think that any religious observance makes sense in a secular government, because the implication is that the Christian citizens' sensibilities deserve a shout-out, but everyone else, not so much.

Agreed, get rid of the mumbo jumbo.

Without the prayer, let's get on to street maintenance and zoning laws.

Alas, those days are gone now. The focus is now on which bathrooms are suitable for the gender fluid, “social justice”, “climate justice” and all the rest. Basically replacing one kind of mumbo jumbo with another.

 

[Bomb#20]

Would you want to insure someone's life that might participate in a violent riot?

So I take it if somebody tweets support for BLM riots you wouldn't have a problem with his insurer dropping him for it, because he's likely to go vandalize a Target store?

Nope.

Sorry, my bad -- shouldn't have asked a complex question. Was that "Nope, I wouldn't have a problem with his insurer dropping him for it.", or "Nope, he's not likely to go vandalize a Target store."?

 

[Bomb#20]

For the record, there were no peaceful protestors at the DC Attacks.

And there's no such thing as an Israeli civilian.