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: 129
Latest Activity: yesterday

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 phony "freedoms" Republicans promise

Started by Grinning Cat. Last reply by Grinning Cat on Tuesday. 5 Replies

That's the title of Neil Buchanan's article in Newsweek (complete with irrelevant autoplaying video), reprinted from Justia's Verdict site where it has the title "…Continue

Tags: minimum wage, anti-abortion, anti-choice, scams, civil rights

Economics and Community values as to real estate owned by religious groups

Started by jlaz. Last reply by jlaz on Tuesday. 6 Replies

I've been wondering off and on for a long time as to two inter-related (as I see it) issues: 1) evolving how people find community interaction when they want it. 2) real estate values of Churches and similar. 1) So, what I mean by the first is…Continue

California Deregulation as Foreshadow

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Mar 8. 0 Replies

How the Energy Boys Fucked Over CaliforniaEven partial deregulation of the electricity market was a nightmare for California.In 2000 and…Continue

Tags: deregulation

More Pieces Of Donald Trump Russia Dossier Check Out (Rachel Maddow)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Joseph P on Tuesday. 6 Replies

Originally when I first heard that there may have been a relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russians who were hacking the DNC and John Podesta, I wasn't sure whether to take those reports seriously.  With the information supplied here…Continue

Tags: John Podesta, Rachel Maddow, Russians, hacking, Drumpf

Comment Wall


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

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.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on May 12, 2016 at 6:46pm

Joseph P, you really hit the nail on the head there!

Gotta love Citizens United.  It's the best in Orwellian doublespeak, calling a consortium of special-interest corporations a group of "citizens," with the stated objective of returning the government to citizens' control ... by which they mean the billionaires and multinational corporations.
Comment by Joseph P on May 12, 2016 at 6:44pm

Yeah, I've read a few of Gibson's books.  Did he do a single one that wasn't dystopian?  The guy has issues.

Sort of like SMBC, when we get a run of 7 or 8 comics in a row which are just dark and messed up as hell.  Makes me want to shoot him an e-mail: "Zach, you doing alright, man?"

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on May 12, 2016 at 5:43pm

>by which they mean the billionaires and multinational corporations.

Who continually make obscene profits and aren't even willing to help foot the bill for infrastructure that keeps them going. Back in the 80s sci fi writer William Gibson did a great job of projecting what (then) future corporatocracy would look like. In short, they've already drowned government in the bathtub and the 99% are reduced to fighting over the scum in the soap ring.

Comment by Joseph P on May 12, 2016 at 5:32pm

I'm all for Bernie staying in it until the end of the primaries, on June 14th.  But if he's still down more than 5 points then, it's time to suspend his campaign.

Sure, he can try to extract some concessions from Hillary, in exchange for going away.  I hope he can help push her further to the progressive end of things, on the issues for which she's less so than he is, but he needs to think of the good of the party and progressivism in general.

And he really needs to freaking lay off of any more negative ads against Hillary.

I'm afraid that we're a long way from the sort of electoral reform that you're talking about.  Before we even worry about that, we should get rid of the freaking electoral college and overturn Citizens United.

Gotta love Citizens United.  It's the best in Orwellian doublespeak, calling a consortium of special-interest corporations a group of "citizens," with the stated objective of returning the government to citizens' control ... by which they mean the billionaires and multinational corporations.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service