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: 135
Latest Activity: on Monday

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.

Comment Wall

Comment

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

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on April 6, 2017 at 9:36pm

Hey everyone, we can relax now. The world isn't being run by the vulgar talking yam and his evil henchmen, it's being run by Seth Myers, John Oliver and  Samantha Bee.

Steve Bannon Calls Jared Kushner a ‘Cuck’ and ‘Globalist’ Behind His Back
Donald Trump’s two closest aides are fighting “nonstop” and often “face-to-face,” officials say — and it’s even uglier in private.


Asawin Suebsaeng [Daily Beast]

The Times also reported that “Bannon’s Svengali-style reputation has chafed on a president who sees himself as the West Wing’s only leading man,” and that “several associates said the president had quietly expressed annoyance over the credit Mr. Bannon had received for setting the agenda—and Mr. Trump was not pleased by the ‘President Bannon’ puppet-master theme promoted by magazines, late-night talk shows and Twitter.”

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on April 6, 2017 at 1:15pm

The Honorable (sic) Sen. McConnell won't be losing excessive amounts of sleep worrying about lost integrity.

Comment by Loren Miller on April 6, 2017 at 1:11pm

Those stupid idiots! Any chance they might have had a expressing any kind of integrity with the political process just went straight to hell.

Comment by Grinning Cat on April 6, 2017 at 12:05pm

The Senate just went nuclear. (For Supreme Court appointments, not (yet) for legislation.)

With 'nuclear option,' Senate ends Democratic blockade of Trump court pick (Reuters)

The cloture vote, now requiring only a bare majority, allows 30 more hours of debate, so Gorsuch is expected to be confirmed to Merrick Garland's stolen seat tomorrow.

We'll see cartoons about it tomorrow, but this Cagle cartoon from 2005 is somewhat apropos:

(white smoke above the Vatican) Signals the College of Cardinals, by God's will, has selected a new pontiff. (nuclear mushroom cloud above the Capitol Building) Signals the Senate, by God's will, will confirm every judge appointed by President Bush.

Comment by Grinning Cat on April 6, 2017 at 9:14am

This morning's whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com (with updates from yesterday) reports:

11/ The Senate’s most senior Republicans are split on the going “nuclear” and changing the rules to confirm Gorsuch. McConnell says the “nuclear option” helps the Senate, while McCain says “whoever says that is a stupid idiot.” (Washington Post)

Call your senators today (even if you called yesterday, and even if both of your senators are Democrats who oppose the Gorsuch nomination and support the filibuster -- they need to hear your appreciation -- and especially if your senators are Republicans): 202-224-3121 or look them up at www.senate.gov . Also call Ted Cruz (202-224-5922), Dean Heller (202-224-6244), and Jeff Flake (202-224-4521), all vulnerable in next year's elections. Urge them to change the nominee, from "frozen trucker", "corporations can use 'religious beliefs' to hurt real people" Gorsuch to someone who's acceptable to a broad majority of Americans, rather than changing Senate rules and invoking the nuclear option.

(And thanks, Bertold, for that article explaining why attacks on the arts are part of silencing dissent.)

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on April 6, 2017 at 8:30am

Why Authoritarians Attack the Arts
By EVE L. EWING - APRIL 6, 2017


[NYT]

. . . it is imperative that we understand what Trump’s attack on the arts is really about. It’s not about making America a drab and miserable place, nor is it about a belief in austerity or denying resources to communities in need. Much like the disappearance of data from government websites and the exclusion of critical reporters from White House briefings, this move signals something broader and more threatening than the inability of one group of people to do their work. It’s about control. It’s about creating a society where propaganda reigns and dissent is silenced.

We need the arts because they make us full human beings. But we also need the arts as a protective factor against authoritarianism. In saving the arts, we save ourselves from a society where creative production is permissible only insofar as it serves the instruments of power. When the canary in the coal mine goes silent, we should be very afraid — not only because its song was so beautiful, but also because it was the only sign that we still had a chance to see daylight again.

Comment by Joseph P on April 5, 2017 at 11:55pm

De nada.  I listen to a couple of legal podcasts, in addition to the other topical and educational ones.

Originalism was Scalia's bag, too, by the way.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on April 5, 2017 at 10:07pm

Thanks for explaining originalism, Joseph and Grinning Cat.

Comment by Joseph P on April 5, 2017 at 9:44pm

But given that they want to drag things back to the days of early industrialization, when vastly wealthy robber-barons could abuse the masses, the literal words of the founders almost always come out in their favor.

The US that the constitution was written for is nothing like what we have today.  A great many of the founders wanted an agrarian society without large scale industrialization and without much international trade.  There weren't yet massive, nationwide monopolies ... no machine guns ... no atomic bombs.

The fact that there are people who will argue for the private ownership of atomic weapons never ceases to amaze me.  You'd think that that would be the perfect obscene hypothetical to demonstrate that there have to be some limits to the second amendment, but apparently not.

Comment by Grinning Cat on April 5, 2017 at 1:09pm

Originalism is selective adherence to the letter of the law when it advances your agenda. Well said, Joseph!

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service