Random Politics & Religion #01

*** Bob Vila. Norm Abrams 4 lyfe!

Please, Norm Abrams has nothing on Bob Vila's beard!

Flannel. Flannel everywhere.

When people tell me PBS is useless, I point them to This Old House. The show my father thought passed as children's entertainment.

Even better!

I know Richard Karn more from Family Feud than Home Improvement. Home Improvement was a weird sitcom for me growing up.

Which laws would you say t has happened with?

This addresses what I said how?
The gay rights obstructionism(as well as the other two examples) is biblical in nature. It's from people who want to legislate religious morality.

AO and spicy both made reasonable cases as to how borderline and arbitrary their topicbans were.

On further reflection, they're right; the first show of "NO MORE" shouldn't have been such a borderline case, and they've both been reinstated.

The system works!

but now you've shown weakness and shall be consumed like a crippled gazelle.

/sics some cheetahs on Rooks.

Let's not go crazy.

But if I'm going to use moderation powers and not just be the route of appeal, then I need to be able to step back and be critical of my own actions. Did I act too quickly? Is this a precedent I want to set?

While I don't think the topicbans were necessarily out of line, they both made a reasonable case that it was sort of out of the blue and hadn't gotten any worse yet than other discussions. I based my judgment a little too much on what I expected to happen, and that's not fair.

So, reversed. Mea culpa.

But...but....the cheetahs....

Won't somebody think of the cheetahs.jpg

They've got bootstraps like everyone else

I absolutely agree with you, but I think It seems like you might be turning a blind eye to any progressive steps within mainland Protestantism or their distaste for the frenzied "Chicken Little" sensationalism of what you read about as far as the religious far-right. The thing is, voter apathy puts places those obstructionist legislators in office. That's everyone's "cross to bear". (The idiom seemed appropriate.)

Also, what I'm wondering is, and don't take this the wrong way, how experienced are you with denominations outside of the Catholic church?

I didn't even attack any religious institution, so this is out of line with what I said.
I very specifically said "people who want religion based laws"(which I also called "few"). And it is not solely an american matter either. Italy for instance only a couple of months ago instituted civil unions and there are still protests and manifestations against it. Likewise the rest of Europe has varying degrees of acceptance towards the matter.

I know it wasn't an "attack". I addressed you, specifically, because you might be a little more receptive to enveloping the message than other participants here, given the route the topic of religion can (and almost always predictably does) take here.

It's really unfortunate that Southern Europe and the US is still grappling with an issue, that only effects the two parties involved, which was adapted into Nothern Europe well.

tbh, i feel like the discussion about religion and politics isn't properly framed. the real issue for me is the bastardization of the conservative right in the country. let's not pretend that there is some 'proud tradition' for either party. their passions have changed and swapped so many times over the last two hundred years it's hard to keep track. atm though, the typical under educated and poverty stricken demographic of rural white americans has been duped into voting against it's own interests for the last 50-60 years. the politicians are usually well educated and wealthy individuals who use emotion over actual policy to whip these people into a frenzy.

not to say that that every poor dumb person is some goofy saint, but when it comes to politics at a national level do you blame them, the circumstance that shaped their world view, or the people that have been systematically taking advantage of them to gain power and influence? the democrats do much of the same thing with minorities. at the end of the day, both parties tend to vote with each other on things that erode protections for the majority of americans, and deflect to emotional issues and create a debate around 'morality'.


i think the more intelligent people need to make a bigger deal about these kind of things and unite to combat it instead of nitpicking over the extremes of either party. we're letting ourselves get duped. is it apathy, or is it really too late to combat and we prefer to ignore it?

You can't really attack just the Republicans and then, in passing, say "Well, democrats do it too, but here's some more attacking points on the Republicans."

Seriously, I'm not sure if you are wanting to talk about this or just making broad statements so you can create arguments with people.

what? the first part was directed at people talking about religion in politics, which i think an important part of the discussion is ignored. i actually was saying that democrats are guilty of the same thing just not from the same angle. if you read my post you'd notice that i didn't go attack republicans again i said " at the end of the day, both parties tend to vote with each other on things that erode protections for the majority of americans, and deflect to emotional issues and create a debate around 'morality'. "


so i'm not sure if you understand my point or if you're trying to create an arguement against something i'm not saying.

Ehhh...Not that religious. Church during Christmas, but that's more for the traditional aspect. In day-to-day life, not even bothered by people around me who are more religious, barring instances with the occasional Jehovah's Witness or a Random-Mouthy-Nosy-Baptist-Lady (but everyone is mouthy and nosy here) pop at the store or something, but I do recognize that many people are marginalized so that makes personal experiences void sometimes.

If there is a God(s), I hope he/she/it/they takes my grievances and applause of religion with the same sense of humor I do and gauges it on the learning experience, or else, I'm going to have a lot of ***to explain. (Childish and self-soothing as that is.) If it's ashes in an urn, oh well.

/shrug

A healthy mixture of both for me. The apathy is obvious, but the loss of the battle lies to me in the necessity of capital to fight a campaign against those whose capital flows as freely as the budweiser into the defeated's mouths. It's been over for a while. Citizens united was the final nail in the coffin.

well, if we're just gonna watch it burn, no reason to not cook something on the fire. i'll bring food, you bring the booze.

Makes mom happy. Should have clarified.

done & done.