Politics, Economics, and Religion

Information

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: 119
Latest Activity: on Friday

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

The Corporate Power Deadlock and Anthropogenic Climate Disruption

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on Friday. 0 Replies

Will Denayer's article thrusts us into startling clarity, by summing up our climate/economic/political situation.How climate change…Continue

Tags: fossil fuel corporations deadlock on governments, climate model failures, Anthropogenic Climate Disruption

Pew: Nonbelievers Make Up Largest "Religious" Bloc (Washington Post)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Plinius Jul 17. 18 Replies

The title rather says it all.  Nevertheless, details matter.  Here's the story from this morning's Plain Dealer (16 July, 2016):…Continue

Tags: plurality, nones, Pew, religious

I have a theory

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Plinius Jul 16. 1 Reply

I have a theory and I have had it for a long time. It started when I realized that religion was nothing more than myths and fables turned into sacraments and scriptures, that they were created by human beings, and they did not tell the truth. From…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

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

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on May 30, 2016 at 5:29pm

Everyone here is probably familiar with the fact that religionists are trying -- in a move as absurd as all their marketing shenanigans but even more brazen than most -- to claim that Christopher Hitchens underwent a last-minute conversion to Christianity. This (it's only a) theory has been laid out in the execrable book The Faith of Christopher Hitchens: The Restless Soul of the World's Most Notorious Athiest by Hitchen's (supposed) friend, Alabama Evangelist Larry Alex Taunton.


In an opinion piece on today's Guardian Website, Matthew

d'Ancona very neatly lays any such delusions to rest.


Christopher Hitchens and the Christian conversion that wasn’t


Entire article here.


This is his wrap-up:

It is tempting to write off this book as no more than an outburst of epic self-deception. But its craven purpose – to claim Hitchens posthumously for evangelical Christianity – is to defame a man who was a champion of the Enlightenment and an enemy of all systems of thought that elevate one caste (priestly, or otherwise) above the rest. It is a shoddy tactic in the culture wars that began in America but are spreading in battles over theocracy, identity and social uniformity.

Far from being the double agent of the author’s addled imagination, Hitchens incarnated the pluralism in which he believed so passionately, revelling in the contradictions that are the hallmark of the authentically modern self.

He had no religion, other than friendship. Laughable in itself, Taunton’s Judas kiss serves notice yet again that the literalists of all faiths respect absolutely no limits in pursuit of their higher cause.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on May 26, 2016 at 7:29pm

from cheezburger

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on May 26, 2016 at 6:50pm

Tom, I agree that Democratic Superdelegates and the Electoral College both function to protect the establishment from voters.

Here's a gif that captures the moment for me.

Comment by Joseph P on May 22, 2016 at 12:55am

Err, was anyone fooled by the purpose of those two mechanics?  I would have thought that even the dimmest bulbs amongst the Fox-News-only voters would be aware of that, at least in regards to the electoral college.

Comment by tom sarbeck on May 21, 2016 at 6:32pm

When you're supporting the 8, and you're left with the decision between the 3 and the 6, you don't vote for the 3 out of spite.

An apt metaphor, Joseph. It will inspire me.

For starters, when I'm denied chocolate ice cream I may grumble a bit and drink chocolate milk; I do not drink castor oil.

Comment by tom sarbeck on May 21, 2016 at 6:05pm

Know this as well as you know anything:

The Democratic Party's superdelegates and the Electoral College serve exactly the same purpose: to protect the establishment from the voters.

How does the Republican Party protect the Establishment? According to Heather Cox Richardson's ironically-named history of the Party, To Make Men Free, they very soon after Lincoln's death made protecting the establishment their chief purpose. But for brief periods of populism, during which the Party enacted consumer protection and child labor laws, the Party has consistently exploited their base. Foe instance, Reagan invited xians to join the Party and the Party is now feeling their anger for decades of exploitation. Trump, probably a pathological liar and narcissist, is for his own entirely selfish purposes performing a public service.

All of the above is, of course, my opinion. I've been following the Party's history since the 1950s, when its far right Birch Society called Eisenhower a communist sympathizer and started expelling moderates. The Party replaced the moderates with 1) the racist Southern Dems (whose ancestors had owned the slaves Lincoln's Republicans freed), and 2) the xians Reagan brought into the Party.

Comment by Joseph P on May 21, 2016 at 11:01am

I'm trying to be a bit more realistic about it.  Sanders still has under 46% in the pledged delegate count, and the superdelegates are mostly establishment Democrats, who like Clinton more.  I've basically given up.

California and New Jersey are the only states left of any significance, and she has a huge lead in the polls in those.  Considering that California is Clinton territory, from a demographic perspective, and New Jersey is practically her home turf, the polls are probably fairly accurate.

At this point, he needs to squeeze what concessions he can out of Clinton by the end of June, then concede.  He's going to have enough trouble getting his more rabid supporters to come out for Clinton, in November.

I just hope that the vast majority of the lunatics who are talking about voting for Trump, when Sanders loses, are completely full of shit.  That sort of thing, voting for the person, rather than the issues, is kind of horrifying.  Liberals are supposed to be issues-voters.  When you're supporting the 8, and you're left with the decision between the 3 and the 6, you don't vote for the 3 out of spite.

Oh, and I never said Gibson was wrong, Bertold.  I just prefer a bit more fiction in my fiction.

I think we still have another layer to peel down to, actually.  The Oklahoma law is only part way there.  A lot of Republicans really want to prosecute both the abortion provider and the woman for first-degree murder.  And while Cruz has declared that he isn't against birth control, because he thinks that men should be able to get condoms, he isn't being straightforward about his patriarchal reasons for his selective approval.

At least the Catholic church is more honest and consistent in their message about birth control, even if their reasons are pretty fucked up.

Comment by Jennifer W on May 21, 2016 at 7:55am
I so want Bernie to win. I think the number one thing we have to do to not fail him is to vote in the smaller elections and make our voices and the message heard. I don't think he's going to get the superdelegates, that's Hillary's game. I'm not really looking forward to reluctantly vote for Hillary.
Comment by tom sarbeck on May 21, 2016 at 12:42am

Hey, folks, you're not seeing something that's real important.

Suppose Bernie beats Hillary and wins in November. Suppose too that Dems win control of both House and Senate.

As president, Bernie will be able to do only what a Congress that's corrupted by money -- Citizens United and more -- will let him do.

A recent interviewer pointed this out and asked him, if he's not elected president, will he ask his many supporters to reform Congress.

He said he will continue to seek the  nomination and, if he loses, consider doing that.

If Hillary is elected president, what will you do to move her in a progressive direction?

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on May 20, 2016 at 7:32pm

@Joseph - But doesn't Gibson get points for being right? Corporations pretty much do have that much power now, and pretty much use it as unscrupulously as he depicted. I guess the main difference between where we are and his dystopias is corporations stiil have to engage in lots of disinformation disseminating to get their way. If the Republicans win the election in November, they won't need to bother. I'm sure you've noticed how they no longer even feel the need to mask their true intentions.

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service