• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trump Presidency: Sweet/Sweat 16

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Retweeted
The White House
@WhiteHouse
President @realDonaldTrump just delivered a critical message on religious freedom and global persecution.

"Our founders understood that no right is more fundamental to a peaceful, prosperous, and virtuous society, than the right to follow one's religious convictions."

"With one clear voice, the United States of America calls on the nations of the world to end religious persecution." #UNGA
Click to expand...

Unless you're a Muslim or a non-white Christian, then **** you in the ear.
 
a_unique_person said:
There have to be more fundamental rights than religious freedom. Religious freedom would be an emergent right based on other freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom of association.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think the U.S. founders believed freedom of religion was the most fundamental right but it is kind of baked in along with speech, assembly etc.
 
a_unique_person said:
There have to be more fundamental rights than religious freedom. Religious freedom would be an emergent right based on other freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom of association.
Click to expand...

Minoosh said:
Yeah, I don't think the U.S. founders believed freedom of religion was the most fundamental right but it is kind of baked in along with speech, assembly etc.
Click to expand...

And the right to bear arms?
 
Minoosh said:
Yeah, I don't think the U.S. founders believed freedom of religion was the most fundamental right but it is kind of baked in along with speech, assembly etc.
Click to expand...


The appropriation of religion of that list as the most fundamental is a concern. That implies the other freedoms derive from freedom of religion. That is, we are talking religious fundamentalism here.
 
Last edited:
a_unique_person said:
The appropriation of religion of that list as the most fundamental is a concern. That implies the other freedoms derive from freedom of religion. That is, we are talking religious fundamentalism here.
Click to expand...
I think that was a shout out to the evangelical crowd, made specifically because Trump said such nice things about Modi.
 
a_unique_person said:
The appropriation of religion of that list as the most fundamental is a concern. That implies the other freedoms derive from freedom of religion. That is, we are talking religious fundamentalism here.
Click to expand...
If you also read it as freedom from religion it sounds a bit less odious. However, I'm sure that's not how Trump meant it.

Fast Eddie B said:
And the right to bear arms?
Click to expand...
Well, it's a close 2nd, or 6th, to the 5-way tie for the top spot. Yep, Americans have the right to bear arms, but I wouldn't mind there being records of ownership which always sends hardcore gun-rights activists into a tizzy. Do they worry about the government coming to take away their cars? Maybe some of them do.
 
The Atheist said:
And why not?

The pledge is to one nation under god; not Allah, Vishnu, Zoroaster or Satan.

G-d gets a free pass because Israel.
Click to expand...

Added to the original poem. It should never have been added. What the hell has God got to do with pledging loyalty to a country? For that matter, I don't approve of making kids pledge allegiance to their country anyway. I never said it and never will.
 
Craig4 said:
Unless you're a Muslim or a non-white Christian, then **** you in the ear.
Click to expand...
Or a Roman Catholic. Or Eastern Orthodox, other than Russian Orthodox, of course. Or one of those liebural protestant sects like Methodists, Episcopalians, Congregationalists, or about 2/3 of Lutherans. Those are No True Christians.
 
Stacyhs said:
Added to the original poem. It should never have been added. What the hell has God got to do with pledging loyalty to a country? For that matter, I don't approve of making kids pledge allegiance to their country anyway. I never said it and never will.
Click to expand...
I've mentioned this elsewhere, and agree entirely. Of course the insertion of the gratuitious phrase "under God" as done under Eisenhower as a sop to the anti-communists, to distinguish us from those godless Russians, which is bad enough but it also vitiates the otherwise fairly plain pro-union phrase "one nation, indivisible." The original form of the pledge was not actually even US specific, and I think it amusing that flag-idolatrous patriots solemnly intone the words originally written by a socialist to be applied to any country.

I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of a pledge of allegiance, but as performed in schools it is devoid of meaning. Every day students drone it without understanding, a trivial commonplace of the school day, and grow up believing one need not think about what one is saying, just wave the damned flag. Or hug it with a **** eating grin like our president who thinks it has blue stripes.

If they are going to pledge, I think first someone should teach them what it all means, and let them decide whether it's something they think worth doing, and then do it with their eyes open once a year.
 
Minoosh said:
My sample size is tiny, but I don't think it's true that evangelicals only care about white Christians. I mean, maybe they do, but that's not the official line. They need to believe in persecuted Christians in Africa, the Middle East, China etc. to sustain one of their key narratives, that of the "war on Christianity" or whatever you want to call it. That said, evangelicals probably will not push back on Trump because he is just a poor sinner demonstrating mankind's perpetual need for redemption.

<snip>
Click to expand...


Those two things are not mutually exclusive. They can quite easily not particularly care about the plight of non-white Christians while still using said plight as a tool to advance their political goals.

For white Christian fundies, who have spent decades developing hypocrisy to a fine art, this would be trivially easy. Almost obligatory.
 
Minoosh said:
Yeah, I don't think the U.S. founders believed freedom of religion was the most fundamental right but it is kind of baked in along with speech, assembly etc.
Click to expand...


I think they believed it was a fundamental right. The history of Europe in general and Britain in particular in the period of colonization building up to the American Resolution explain such a POV.

I don't know that they weighed their fundamental rights on some sort of a scale of importance. Somehow considering one fundamental right to be in some way more fundamental than some other. I question whether they would feel such a need.

Which is more fundamental to a water molecule, the hydrogen atoms, or the oxygen atom?
 
quadraginta said:
I think they believed it was a fundamental right. The history of Europe in general and Britain in particular in the period of colonization building up to the American Resolution explain such a POV.

I don't know that they weighed their fundamental rights on some sort of a scale of importance. Somehow considering one fundamental right to be in some way more fundamental than some other. I question whether they would feel such a need.

Which is more fundamental to a water molecule, the hydrogen atoms, or the oxygen atom?
Click to expand...

While I'm sure their own limited frame meant overall "Christian", the purpose was pluralism as they understood it. They did not want to replicate Europe's seemingly endless religious wars (the states all had varying degrees of having fled oppression in Europe only to institute it in their own corner, so the potential was there) nor get dragged into said wars with a national religion.

Keep in mind this was a right demanded by states of the new government in order to agree to ratify, jealously guarding against any potential cabal of heretics who might band together to direct the instruments of state to persecute them.
 
The reality is, of course, that no Christians in the USA are being "persecuted" for being Christian. Having been the only horse in the race, and other peoples' religious rights different which from theirs recognised and tolerated, is the "persecution" they are railing against.
 
Many right-wing Christians believe that they should have the freedom to oppress non-Christians and that if they aren't allowed to do so, then they, themselves, are being oppressed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom