Politics, Economics, and Religion


Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 143
Latest Activity: on Wednesday

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

Mueller gathers evidence that 2017 Seychelles meeting was effort to establish back channel to Kremlin (Washington Post)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Joan Denoo Mar 8. 6 Replies

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gathered evidence that a secret meeting in Seychelles just before the inauguration of Donald Trump was an effort to establish a back channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin — apparently…Continue

Tags: Seychelles, meeting, Putin, Russia, collusion

Amazon is taking over the world

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Mar 1. 5 Replies

Taking over the world of commerce isn't just about economics. It's also control of ideas.Amazon…Continue

Tags: Amazon, monopoly

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by Grinning Cat on Wednesday

Satire from the Borowitz Report:

House Republicans Say Japanese Did Not Meddle in Pearl Harbor

Reaching the opposite conclusion of many of their committee peers, Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee said on Tuesday that the Japanese did not meddle in the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. [...]

Conaway said that while there were Japanese bombers in the vicinity of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, their role in the attack there has been “blown out of proportion.”

“Is it possible that some of their planes were flying in places they shouldn’t have flown and dropping some things that they shouldn’t have dropped, by accident?” Conaway said. “Absolutely. Does that prove that there was intent to meddle in Pearl Harbor? Absolutely not.” [...]

Comment by Patricia on March 9, 2018 at 10:02pm

How do you recognize sincerely as opposed to insincerely?

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 9, 2018 at 9:39pm

10 Things You May Not Know About the Puritans

They believed in fairies.

A groom put a thimble on a bride's finger. 

They were kind to scholars.

They called for the death penalty in cases of adultery.

They cut off ears of Quaker and drove red-hot pokers through their tongues.

They drank beer, brandy, wine, and gin.

None of their hats had buckles.

Children, abducted and brought up by Native Americans refused to return to their hard life with Puritans.

They named their children with moral names, i.e. Praise-God, Fear-God, If-Christ-had-not-died-for-thee-thou-hadst-been-damned.

These were sincerely held religious beliefs. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 9, 2018 at 9:04pm

What about those who sincerely hold the religious belief that: God is a woman? 

Poisonous snakes can be safely handled?

Christians can cut off the hands and feet of wives and children of slaves? 

Blood transfusions are the same as drinking blood?

Husbands have the right to beat a wife with a stick if it is no wider than the thickest part of his thumb? 

Fathers have the right to kill a disobedient child? 

Native Americans have the right to use peyote? 

A man has a right to multiple wives? 

What Are ”Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs?” Nobody Really Knows.


Comment by Tom Sarbeck on March 9, 2018 at 9:38am

Bert; when the SCOTUS majority put together the term “sincerely held religious belief” they fucked up.

It’s a fuckup like the Court’s 1896 “separate but equal” ruling and America’s racists pushed their advantage. Trump is now letting his allies push the same advantage.

In 1985 the SCOTUS majority fucked up when they made anal sex, legal for straight couples, illegal for gay couples. They took twenty years to repair the damage.

It’s America’s theocrats who are now pushing an advantage the SCOTUS majority gave them. 

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on March 9, 2018 at 8:03am

GOP Senators Promote Christian Theocracy With First Amendment Defense Act

March 8, 2018 by Michael Stone

  • In fact, The First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) is a draconian policy advocated by conservative Christian extremists eager to install a de facto Christian theocracy. The legislation is designed to be a vehicle to allow Christian conservatives the legal ability to discriminate against those who do not share their conservative Christian values.
  • For example, FADA explicitly promotes anti-LGBT discrimination by providing special protections for people who wish to claim their religious faith prohibits them from performing certain acts, including baking a cake for a same-sex wedding, or allowing a child to be adopted by a same-sex couple.
  • In addition, FADA would allow discrimination against single mothers, unwed couples, interfaith couples, and interracial couples. In fact, the policy is so broad that one could refuse to marry two short people if their view against short people marrying is a “sincerely held religious belief.”
Comment by Patricia on March 7, 2018 at 6:16pm

Yeah, well we know what he can do with his ''love''....

Comment by Jotham Timothy Bessey on March 7, 2018 at 6:13pm

"done with love" is a common statement for covert narcissists 

Comment by Patricia on March 6, 2018 at 7:22pm

He says the tariffs are done with ''love''.....

Comment by Loren Miller on March 6, 2018 at 7:09pm




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