I would like to do a piece on my blog, Releasing Religion, regarding mixing God & government.  And I'd like to know what opinions people have here about doing such a thing.  Some points to mention are:

Glenn Beck is well known for arguing that we have misunderstood that founding fathers & their desire to keep church & state separate.  Holding his rally on 8/28, he gathered 150.000 people to hear him talk about bringing out country "back to God".  What do you think it would do to our country to "get back to God"? 

The Tea Party has been called racist Chrisotcrats. In their recent convention, most conference sessions began with prayers.  What do you think of the Tea Party?  Do you know very little about them?  Do you know a lot?  Please share your thoughts here.

The piece will be posted on www.releasingreligion.blogspot.com

Views: 1528

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Linda, the US is a big, complicated mess full of internal conflicts. The US does do a lot of good in the world, on human rights and many other issues, both via government programs and non-governmental organizations.

Sadly, we also have a long, ignoble history of invading countries that don't need it (like The Phillipines, Hawaii, Vietnam, Panama, and Iraq) and propping up petty dictators like the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein (that's right, he was our guy back in the day, a bulwark against Iran after they punted our nasty Shah), Pinochet, and a dozen or two other Asian, South American, and African despots.

Not to mention, of course, "freedom fighters" like the right-wing death squads in El Salvador and Nicaragua during the Reagan administration, and none other than the Taliban and Osama bin Laden himself during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. I knew when we supplied arms to radical Muslims in Afghanistan that it would come back to bite us in the ass. I just thought it would be contained to the Middle East. But we always have had more to fear from radical religious fanatics than from the Soviets. It's only the John Birch Society (and its bastard stepchild the Tea Party) that thinks godless communism is more dangerous than godful madrassa graduates. Commies can be bribed. Religious zealots can't, because their reward is in heaven.
Wow, Park. Wow.
Ok, then I get to share one of my favorite signs from the Rally to Restore Sanity:
It wasn't just on this Forum.
Found two interesting articles on CNN tonight.

The first explores whether the Tea Party is a Religious movement or not.

The second showcases signs, t-shirts, pins and other ways the Tea Party has used to express their beliefs.

Very interesting. Does this shed some light on this group?
wow, I take a trip to southern california (hey, Maia, I'm in your hood! just down the road in Irvine) and I miss all the fun!

and you were celebrating 103 posts Maia? So much for writing an article - it looks like you are going to need a novel to write this up. Not too shabby for your first discussion!

It is a fascinating subject isn't it? Like you, I think the "why" is the really interesting story here. Linda is right in that they certainly are both mad, and afraid. I don't blame them.

Where most of us in this forum disagree with the TP is in who we hold responsible for causing the problems that are making us so mad and afraid. They seem to think that liberal policies are the cause of their ills, despite 30 years of conservative politics. They haven't grasped that it is the policies of the party that they are aligning with that are causing those ills.

It's very similiar to their religous beliefs. They simply don't understand their own religion, their politics or their history. Remember the Pew study a week or two ago where atheist scored the highest in religious knowledge? Well, I bet we could also beat them in political knowedge as well.

Read, or watch, "What's the Matter with Kansas" for an indepth analysis of why people are convinced to vote for the party that is against their very best interest and against the party that is most beneficial to them.

Great discussion Maia. More than you bargained for I bet.
No joke, Larry! But I'm not complaining. Not even a little bit. It means that I'll have to take a bit more time putting the article together, as we're coming at this from so many angles. Maybe I'll read through this thread and highlight the bullet points to start? But let's see where it goes...

Irvine! Whoot! I'm in Diamond Bar. I love to take my daughter to Irvine Park. Peacocks, trains, horses, petting zoo... can't go wrong.

I'm gonna checkout that Kansas Analysis and then get back to you. Thanks for the suggestion.
I should have included links in my previous post

Documentary preview and website here

Amazon book review here

Wiki article here
Jason - good point about McVeigh.

Do you ever wonder what kind of person it will be who decides to push the button?


what kind of person it will be who sets off a terrorist dirty bomb?

I think about that a lot. Because I am certain it will happen one day. It's only a matter of time. Mark my words. No don't mark my words. The last time I said that I was so right. I predicted Steve Irwin would die because of his dangerous life style. I said mark my words. Sigh, I miss that guy. He was quite a character.

Maia - thanks for the CNN articles. I'm going to read them shortly.

About the draw Muhammad day. You people got balls! I am surprised such a thing happened here.

Larry - thanks for the article links. I'll look at them too.

I'm thinking it's a little easier for a president of the United States to commandeer the airwaves than for any imam to do so, regardless of circumstances. And I don't recall any Christian preachers condemning McVeigh for doing what he perceived to be God's work.

Jason - Well they could have Obama standing by his side. That would get ratings! LOL The rating machines would blow up. It would be better than the Paris Hilton/Larry King interview (yes that's some sarcasm there lol).

As to Christian preachers condemming McVeigh - wasn't it just a given or "understood" that no Christians agreed with him (well except for the lunatic fringies maybe). I mean it's not like they showed Christians over in some other country jumping up and down with glee.

So did McVeigh. I'm having a hard time coming up with any significant distinction between the two.

Jason - I can come up with many differences but your point is extremely valid in terms of no matter what precautions you take some nut ball job always throws a spanner in the works. So what's the point of bickering of how close a church is to hallowed (using that term loosley) ground? I guess the point for me is to just be like a little bee in the bonnet. The bee is pissed off and he's going to aggravate the hell out of you. If you don't want bees in your bonnet then request an audience with Obama to do a nationwide televised severe smack down of radical Muslims. And that comes from a person who views herself as quite the diplomat (most of the time). Oh but wait. I keep having to remind myself. The poor Iman guy would be assasinated within 24 hours of such an event. Why can't he just say (With Obama standing at his side - televised) "if you are a terrorist - you are not a true Muslim". Hell, if the world is so sensitive that that statement cannot be uttered in the current circumstances then we don't stand a chance.

It's like a powder keg with an already lit fuse creeping ever so surely toward it's payload. And you want to know why I am afraid and antsy and ranting on a cyber site about the merits of conservatism? At least conservatives have a better grip on reality than liberals when it comes to what is actually coming down the pike. Taxing the rich? What is that going to solve? Where are all these rich people? I don't know any of them. Oh wait, I do drive by that gated community "Country Club of the South" on the way to my brother's house. I'd love to live in a gated community with gates and a guard to keep the riff raff out. But at least I get to dream about it and strive for it. If the Democrats get their way - I fear I might have to throw that dream away forever and for my children and their children. Taxing the rich hmmm, I don't see what good that will do. Please don't give me any stats because for every stat you give me I can go to some other cyber site and get stats from just as reliable sources that say the opposite. Right? I have to decide and utilize my judgement from my common sense and personal life experience the best I can. I tend to go in the conservative direction most of the time. But I will continue to be open minded and continue to try to learn new things in this matter. Of course I could be wrong in my attitudes.

I also did some cyber resarch about conservative atheists - not too many out there from what I can tell (not that want it known anyway). I'm sailing off to the Island of Misfits. I am the white elephant with the pink polka dots lol. I wonder if I will ever change my spots?
"Taxing the rich hmmm, I don't see what good that will do. "

First, it's not "Taxing the Rich". Let's remember that they got a tax cut - we all did, ten years ago. This is not "taxing the rich". It's a return to the same tax rates that had been in existence back in the day when the budget was relatively balanced.

Second, it does a LOT of good.
-Taxes are the "income" of the people (meaning all of us). Taxes fund infrasture improvements, education, security, scientific research, police, etc, etc, etc. Without this income, how can we provide these services that benefit our society?

-The rich do not spend money they gain by not paying their share of the taxes. They save it, or they invest it, mostly in foreign investments, not us investments. This "Job Creation" stuff is a hugh myth.
I will leave it to Linda to do the research, but it is out there in droves, including figures from the GEO, the largest single contributor to the current national debt was the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. This is the first time in American history taxes have been cut during a major war. The real tragedy of this is that the wars were fought to increase America's economic power internationally which is soley for the benefit of the uber-rich. When Shrub took office the budget had a surplus and the national debt was about $4 trillion dollars. When he left office it was approaching $11trillion. If under $2trillion was war, and Rethugs cut aid to American Citizens, then we are looking at a whopping $5trillion dollar gift to the Ruling Class while our economy went into the toilet.
I will leave it to Linda to do the research, but it is out there in droves, including figures from the GEO, the largest single contributor to the current national debt was the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy

You just do that Dan. I'll make you proud.




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service