Author Topic: Trump outrage of the day  (Read 104005 times)

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #750 on: January 20, 2020, 11:31:44 PM »
The fact that large swathes of your country believes in the literal truth of the Bible and intelligent design is sufficient for me.

Australia's current PM is sadly religious but in the past decade we have had a female atheist PM and another agnostic PM on both sides of the political divide.

Australia not diverse? 1 in 2 have an overseas born parent:
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/education/face-facts-cultural-diversity

I lived in the U.S., so I understand what American politics is like - it's barbarous.

You can find studies that measure diversity in a multitude of ways. Australia does not rank near the top. Half the figures on that diagram mean diddly squat. Especially when the majority of immigrants come from the UK: An equally "un"diverse country.

I guess most of the religious fundies on your side of the world come from New Zealand then? I'll grant you that Australia is marginally less religious than the US, but that makes our politics barbaric? Again you're just saying things without actually backing anything up. I can list ways that I think Australian politics is dumber than the US. But I don't for a second think that somehow the US has attained a higher level of nirvana beyond other western culture. Get off your high horse.

What you lived in Georgia for a year and think you have Americans all figured out?

Goodness, not even the US elects people like Fraser Anning.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3086
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #751 on: January 21, 2020, 07:15:47 AM »
It sounds like you think the fact that Evangelical Christians have such a remarkable control of politics in the US is what is barbaric. The Democratic candidates are also people of faith here. In 2004, George Bush was a practicing United Methodist (Kerry a catholic), and Hillary Clinton in 2016 is also United Methodist.

Truthfully, I could not imagine a confirmed, public Atheist winning the Presidency. Many atheists are Democrats here, but many people of color are still quite religious: Latinx people are often catholic, and African Americans are quite religious (choosing to vote with Democrats rather than Republicans because of civil rights issues). Neither major party here would nominate an atheist.


GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #752 on: January 21, 2020, 07:50:59 AM »
The US, for all of it's talk of 'freedom of religion' is very much a Christian-first nation.  As talltexan mentioned, it is not possible for a person who doesn't loudly and publicly proclaim that he believes in Christ (or at a bare minimum the Christian God) to win the highest office of the land.  I suspect that it's also not possible for a gay man or woman to become president - again for the same reasons.  A great many laws are enacted based either solely or at least partly on religious reasoning - marriage/monogamy, abortion, homosexuality, transgender rights, doctor assisted suicide, cloning animals, etc.

That's why it always cracks me up when I hear Americans railing against how unfair Islamic law is in other countries.

GreenEggs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 947
  • Location: Here & There
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #753 on: January 21, 2020, 08:56:41 AM »
I keep forgetting how Trump is such a religious man. 




talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3086
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #754 on: January 21, 2020, 08:58:10 AM »
It's not about his own religious practice, it's about how consistently and reliably he gives Evangelicals exactly what they want.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #755 on: January 21, 2020, 09:05:07 AM »
The US, for all of it's talk of 'freedom of religion' is very much a Christian-first nation.  As talltexan mentioned, it is not possible for a person who doesn't loudly and publicly proclaim that he believes in Christ (or at a bare minimum the Christian God) to win the highest office of the land.  I suspect that it's also not possible for a gay man or woman to become president - again for the same reasons.  A great many laws are enacted based either solely or at least partly on religious reasoning - marriage/monogamy, abortion, homosexuality, transgender rights, doctor assisted suicide, cloning animals, etc.

That's why it always cracks me up when I hear Americans railing against how unfair Islamic law is in other countries.

There are religious politics in the US, though I think you're overstating a bit how much power the most extreme bloc has. This is like the undue attention that groups like the Westboro Baptists get. A group of what 40 people at most? And there name is highly well-known. But based on how often they made the news you'd believe that they were a growing denomination of thousands. You can go to a political rally and find people saying stupid stuff, but does that actually translate into actual power? I don't think so.

That and you're conflating presidential politics with particular state legislation. The electoral college/ Senate does gives an advantage to small states but even then most senators are just run of the mill conservatives. Not religious zealots. They aren't too far off from the kind of politicians running Australia. So yeah, I have no idea what Bleep Bloop is talking about.

I would say America already had a gay president (James Buchanan), and most of the founders of our country were Deists. Lincoln was likely an Atheist.

Nor would I undersell the position that Nancy Pelosi has. If America were truly worried about a woman in leadership, we wouldn't have a woman at the 2nd most powerful position in the country.

Australia's legislature is currently 30% female
Canada is around the same.
The US is around 23%

Again, I don't see anything other than maybe other western countries are marginally better at a few things. But not by much. Definitely not enough to claim we are "uncivilized" in comparison.

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 921
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #756 on: January 21, 2020, 09:13:05 AM »
The US, for all of it's talk of 'freedom of religion' is very much a Christian-first nation.  As talltexan mentioned, it is not possible for a person who doesn't loudly and publicly proclaim that he believes in Christ (or at a bare minimum the Christian God) to win the highest office of the land.  I suspect that it's also not possible for a gay man or woman to become president - again for the same reasons.  A great many laws are enacted based either solely or at least partly on religious reasoning - marriage/monogamy, abortion, homosexuality, transgender rights, doctor assisted suicide, cloning animals, etc.

That's why it always cracks me up when I hear Americans railing against how unfair Islamic law is in other countries.

There are religious politics in the US, though I think you're overstating a bit how much power the most extreme bloc has. This is like the undue attention that groups like the Westboro Baptists get. A group of what 40 people at most? And there name is highly well-known. But based on how often they made the news you'd believe that they were a growing denomination of thousands. You can go to a political rally and find people saying stupid stuff, but does that actually translate into actual power? I don't think so.

That and you're conflating presidential politics with particular state legislation. The electoral college/ Senate does gives an advantage to small states but even then most senators are just run of the mill conservatives. Not religious zealots. They aren't too far off from the kind of politicians running Australia. So yeah, I have no idea what Bleep Bloop is talking about.

I would say America already had a gay president (James Buchanan), and most of the founders of our country were Deists. Lincoln was likely an Atheist.

Nor would I undersell the position that Nancy Pelosi has. If America were truly worried about a woman in leadership, we wouldn't have a woman at the 2nd most powerful position in the country.

Australia's legislature is currently 30% female
Canada is around the same.
The US is around 23%

Again, I don't see anything other than maybe other western countries are marginally better at a few things. But not by much. Definitely not enough to claim we are "uncivilized" in comparison.

Neither of these are confirmed and neither openly expressed those ideas.

Do you believe (pun intended) that an open, avowed atheist could win the presidency or other prominent national political position? If yes, do you believe that they would or would not face intense scrutiny over that 'belief'?

For me, living in Texas, I would say no to the first question.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #757 on: January 21, 2020, 09:31:31 AM »
The US, for all of it's talk of 'freedom of religion' is very much a Christian-first nation.  As talltexan mentioned, it is not possible for a person who doesn't loudly and publicly proclaim that he believes in Christ (or at a bare minimum the Christian God) to win the highest office of the land.  I suspect that it's also not possible for a gay man or woman to become president - again for the same reasons.  A great many laws are enacted based either solely or at least partly on religious reasoning - marriage/monogamy, abortion, homosexuality, transgender rights, doctor assisted suicide, cloning animals, etc.

That's why it always cracks me up when I hear Americans railing against how unfair Islamic law is in other countries.

There are religious politics in the US, though I think you're overstating a bit how much power the most extreme bloc has. This is like the undue attention that groups like the Westboro Baptists get. A group of what 40 people at most? And there name is highly well-known. But based on how often they made the news you'd believe that they were a growing denomination of thousands. You can go to a political rally and find people saying stupid stuff, but does that actually translate into actual power? I don't think so.

That and you're conflating presidential politics with particular state legislation. The electoral college/ Senate does gives an advantage to small states but even then most senators are just run of the mill conservatives. Not religious zealots. They aren't too far off from the kind of politicians running Australia. So yeah, I have no idea what Bleep Bloop is talking about.

Possibly.  From the outside of the US, it certainly seems like the more extreme Christian religious hold an outsized hold over American politics.  They completely control one of the two political parties in the country.


I would say America already had a gay president (James Buchanan), and most of the founders of our country were Deists. Lincoln was likely an Atheist.

Can you provide evidence where either of those claims were proven?


Nor would I undersell the position that Nancy Pelosi has. If America were truly worried about a woman in leadership, we wouldn't have a woman at the 2nd most powerful position in the country.

Pelosi was not elected to her position by the American people.  I'm not sure she would have the position if a public election determined it.


Australia's legislature is currently 30% female
Canada is around the same.
The US is around 23%

15/31 (48%) members of the 2015 federal cabinet in Canada were women.  Currently 17/35 (48%) are women.  This is a relatively new development though.

It's not just an absolute numbers game though . . . look at the women appointed by the political parties.  Typically the religiously controlled Republicans have less than half the numbers of women as democrats (in senate and the house).


Again, I don't see anything other than maybe other western countries are marginally better at a few things. But not by much. Definitely not enough to claim we are "uncivilized" in comparison.

I missed the 'uncivilized' comment, but agree that it doesn't apply to the US.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #758 on: January 21, 2020, 09:51:55 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #759 on: January 21, 2020, 09:52:18 AM »

Neither of these are confirmed and neither openly expressed those ideas.

Do you believe (pun intended) that an open, avowed atheist could win the presidency or other prominent national political position? If yes, do you believe that they would or would not face intense scrutiny over that 'belief'?

For me, living in Texas, I would say no to the first question.

We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one. So is Bernie Sanders (though maybe he'd be classified as more of a deist?). I don't think it would be impossible. Is there a huge difference between how an Atheist would run the country compared to a Unitarian or Episcopalian?

I mean the Atheist would at the very least have to be amenable to religion, which would force them to present at the very least as a Deist (Which honestly, is basically American Atheism). They would have to well-versed in using vocabulary that can appeal to a religious crowd.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #760 on: January 21, 2020, 09:52:54 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

Your assumption is incorrect.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #761 on: January 21, 2020, 10:06:10 AM »

I would say America already had a gay president (James Buchanan), and most of the founders of our country were Deists. Lincoln was likely an Atheist.

Can you provide evidence where either of those claims were proven?


From Buchanan's Wiki Page:

Quote
Buchanan had a close and intimate relationship with William Rufus King, an Alabama politician who briefly served as vice president under Franklin Pierce. Buchanan and King lived together in a Washington boardinghouse, from 1834 until King's departure for France in 1844. Though such a practice was then common, King also referred to the relationship as a "communion,"[103] and the two attended social functions together. Contemporaries also noted the closeness. Andrew Jackson called King "Miss Nancy" and prominent Democrat Aaron V. Brown referred to King as Buchanan's "better half," "wife" and "Aunt Fancy" (the last being a 19th-century euphemism for an effeminate man).[105][106][107] Sociologist Loewen noted that "wags" described Buchanan and King as "Siamese twins," that Buchanan late in life wrote a letter acknowledging that he might marry a woman who could accept his "lack of ardent or romantic affection," and also that Buchanan was expelled from his Lancaster church, reportedly for pro-slavery views acquired during the King relationship.[108][109] Catherine Thompson, the wife of cabinet member Jacob Thompson, later noted that "there was something unhealthy in the president's attitude."[103] King became ill in 1853 and died of tuberculosis shortly after Pierce's inauguration, four years before Buchanan became president. Buchanan described him as "among the best, the purest and most consistent public men I have known."[103] Baker's biography notes that his and King's nieces may have destroyed correspondence between the two men. She opines that the length and intimacy of their surviving letters (one written by King upon his ambassadorial departure being specifically cited by Loewen) illustrate in her view only "the affection of a special friendship."

Make of that what you will.


Pelosi was not elected to her position by the American people.  I'm not sure she would have the position if a public election determined it.

By this same token then, no PM is elected by the people of their country? You could say that you can't know for sure who the Speaker will be after an election, but she was Speaker after the 2006 election and was re-elected in 2008. People knew who the Speaker was going to be.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #762 on: January 21, 2020, 10:09:57 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

Your assumption is incorrect.
That the US is racist? Come on, there are probably more black people killed by US police while doing nothing dangerous in their home / backyard /car / public place than police fires shots in the whole of Germany. You could make a whole series with "killed by police while weeding in his garden and being black".
Not to mention the Muslim Scare.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #763 on: January 21, 2020, 10:14:58 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

Your assumption is incorrect.
That the US is racist? Come on, there are probably more black people killed by US police while doing nothing dangerous in their home / backyard /car / public place than police fires shots in the whole of Germany. You could make a whole series with "killed by police while weeding in his garden and being black".
Not to mention the Muslim Scare.

Lol no. Your assumption that "The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is."

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11876
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #764 on: January 21, 2020, 10:18:08 AM »
So much going on that specifically relates to Trump - let's jump back OT, eh?

Trump used Davos to push his isolationist viewpoints, take full credit for the "greatest economy in history", berate climate change warnings as "prophets of doom" and "foolish fortune tellers", and accused many of the countries in attendance of ripping off the United States. 

At a conference who's theme this year is: Stakeholders for a Cohesive and Sustainable World, Trump touted the US's standing as the largest producer of oil and natural gas.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4934
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #765 on: January 21, 2020, 10:18:52 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

1) Slavery, y'all
2) Massacring Indians so that "we" could take their land and establish the Free-est Country On Earth (tm).

Racism is built into the foundation of our country. Even the "all men are created equal" opening lines of our founding document stipulates men, and only means white dudes at that.

Slavery officially ended in 1865, but many white folks fought tooth and nail against it. Black people who wanted equality risked their lives for decades. Even the voting rights acts and the civil rights acts didn't really clean everything up.

And let's face it, there are tons and tons of people who don't believe in the aspirational melting pot idea. There's a ton of coded language in what people say about whether or not immigrants are "blending in" or "accepting our culture" etc. And that language is coded pretty freakin' white, and Christian.

White native-born people are always "more" American than anyone else. Which is why you get ludicrous scenarios like a white second-generation person yelling at a black person whose ancestors have been here for a couple centuries due to having been brought over as slaves to "go back to your country" if you don't like the way we do things here.

Or even more ludicrous, when Native Americans are told to "go back to where they came from."

It's baked in, man.






OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2517
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #766 on: January 21, 2020, 10:55:41 AM »
The US, for all of it's talk of 'freedom of religion' is very much a Christian-first nation.  As talltexan mentioned, it is not possible for a person who doesn't loudly and publicly proclaim that he believes in Christ (or at a bare minimum the Christian God) to win the highest office of the land.  I suspect that it's also not possible for a gay man or woman to become president - again for the same reasons.  A great many laws are enacted based either solely or at least partly on religious reasoning - marriage/monogamy, abortion, homosexuality, transgender rights, doctor assisted suicide, cloning animals, etc.

That's why it always cracks me up when I hear Americans railing against how unfair Islamic law is in other countries.

There are religious politics in the US, though I think you're overstating a bit how much power the most extreme bloc has. This is like the undue attention that groups like the Westboro Baptists get. A group of what 40 people at most? And there name is highly well-known. But based on how often they made the news you'd believe that they were a growing denomination of thousands. You can go to a political rally and find people saying stupid stuff, but does that actually translate into actual power? I don't think so.

From my perspective as a Mexican-American atheist, I don't think the stranglehold of white prosperity gospel Evangelicalism on this country can be overstated. I think it's the greatest threat to our democracy.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3086
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #767 on: January 21, 2020, 11:14:53 AM »
This is coming from a person from Australia one of the least diverse countries in the world?
The more diverse a region is, the less racist it generally is.
So why is the US, peopbably the most racially diverse country on earth, so racist?

Your assumption is incorrect.

The diversity of the US shows up in national level data. When you go down to the community level, you find things are very sorted. Individual people are MUCH LESS LIKELY to encounter people who are not like them than abroad because of car culture and suburbs.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #768 on: January 21, 2020, 12:12:26 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #769 on: January 21, 2020, 12:28:45 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

Trump has publicly said that the Bible is is favorite book.  Which seems like an odd comment for an atheist to make.

"I'm a Protestant. I'm very proud of it, Presbyterian to be exact. ...[but] bad things are happening, very bad things are happening."

- https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/266234-trump-christianity-under-siege
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 12:33:53 PM by GuitarStv »

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #770 on: January 21, 2020, 12:37:37 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5906
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #771 on: January 21, 2020, 12:41:38 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

And would those people who supported Trump because of the smokescreen have supported Trump if he was openly atheist?

EvenSteven

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 373
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #772 on: January 21, 2020, 12:46:32 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

If an atheist needs to pretend to be Christian to be elected to high office, isn't that evidence in favor of America being a "Christian first nation"?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #773 on: January 21, 2020, 12:48:26 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

I don't see a contradiction here.  It's not possible for a person could actually follow the teachings of Jesus and vote Republican . . . but there are many folks who claim to do both.  Trump's telling his truth . . . just as those 'religious' Republicans are telling theirs.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #774 on: January 21, 2020, 01:00:51 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

If an atheist needs to pretend to be Christian to be elected to high office, isn't that evidence in favor of America being a "Christian first nation"?

It proves that there is an Evangelical voting bloc that is amenable to voting for Trump. Trump also had a number of "indiscretions" from his past that needed public approval from those religious leaders in order to make it "ok" to vote for Trump. If there were an Atheist that did not have these same issues, Trump may have not needed to kneel to the Evangelical leaders.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #775 on: January 21, 2020, 01:06:46 PM »
I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

And would those people who supported Trump because of the smokescreen have supported Trump if he was openly atheist?

This right here was exactly my point. You (FIPurpose) were claiming that Christians don't have an unreasonable stranglehold on politics in this country, and that an atheist could win the presidency, and using Trump as your example. My point is that he's actually a counterpoint against your position.

As for whether Trump is a "real Christian" or not: that's as unknowable as it is irrelevant as it is an undefinable term.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 01:11:56 PM by sherr »

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2782
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #776 on: January 21, 2020, 01:18:44 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

If an atheist needs to pretend to be Christian to be elected to high office, isn't that evidence in favor of America being a "Christian first nation"?

It proves that there is an Evangelical voting bloc that is amenable to voting for Trump. Trump also had a number of "indiscretions" from his past that needed public approval from those religious leaders in order to make it "ok" to vote for Trump. If there were an Atheist that did not have these same issues, Trump may have not needed to kneel to the Evangelical leaders.

It wouldn't matter. All a Republican has to do is say "God" a couple times and the candidate has their vote. An Atheist Republican would have to have impeccable policies and opinions on every other subject to have a chance. An Atheist Democrat might as well have a hammer and sickle on their foreheads. The Religious Right doesn't care about a candidate's morals - they want someone who they feel won't diminish their influence.

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5906
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #777 on: January 21, 2020, 01:21:16 PM »
I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

And would those people who supported Trump because of the smokescreen have supported Trump if he was openly atheist?

This right here was exactly my point. You (FIPurpose) were claiming that Christians don't have an unreasonable stranglehold on politics in this country, and that an atheist could win the presidency, and using Trump as your example. My point is that he's actually a counterpoint against your position.

As for whether Trump is a "real Christian" or not: that's as unknowable as it is irrelevant as it is an undefinable term.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/479087-trump-announces-the-us-will-join-1-trillion-tree-initiative

Quote
President Trump

DONALD JOHN TRUMP
Sanders apologizes to Biden for supporter's op-ed
Jayapal: 'We will end up with another Trump' if the US doesn't elect progressive
Democrats: McConnell impeachment trial rules a 'cover up,' 'national disgrace'
MORE
 on Tuesday announced the United States will join the One Trillion Trees Initiative launched at the World Economic Forum as world leaders seek to combat climate change.

Trump made the announcement during an address to global business leaders gathered for the annual event in Davos, Switzerland.

"We're committed to conserving he majesty of God’s creation and the natural beauty of our world," Trump said, adding that the U.S. "will continue to show strong leadership in restoring, growing and better managing our trees and our forests.

Yeah, def not presenting as an atheist. At all.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #778 on: January 21, 2020, 01:33:40 PM »
I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

And would those people who supported Trump because of the smokescreen have supported Trump if he was openly atheist?

This right here was exactly my point. You (FIPurpose) were claiming that Christians don't have an unreasonable stranglehold on politics in this country, and that an atheist could win the presidency, and using Trump as your example. My point is that he's actually a counterpoint against your position.

As for whether Trump is a "real Christian" or not: that's as unknowable as it is irrelevant as it is an undefinable term.

To make this easier for our Parliamentary counterparts, you have to imagine the 2 major parties both as actually coalitions of smaller factions. So often politicians are then subdivided down into what kind of Dem. or GOP that they are.

In Parliamentary elections when there is a minority government, suddenly much smaller parties have a much bigger say in what gets down. The size of their own party hasn't changed much, but the 2 main parties were unable to gain enough traction to form their own government. We saw this possibility in both the last UK and Canadian election. But with a majority government, (even a difference of 2-3% of seats) the minority parties go from deciding legislating to being sidelined MP's.

The GOP federally can be roughly thought of a coalition between Neoconservatives, Christian Right, Tea Party, Moderates, Libertarian, etc. The GOP has been floundering as demographics have been slipping away from them. While the Christian Right isn't the smallest group, the relative minority position the GOP has in both the Senate and a tenuous re-election for president means that all minority factions will be given full attention.

Consider the other factions of the GOP, I would say that the Moderates have also made up a smaller portion of the caucus more recently. However John McCain along with a few other Moderates yielded huge influence by being the deciding vote against repealing Obamacare. The Moderates have also been able to throw their weight around to some extent. The problem is that the GOP is living on the edge, so they have to do everything that appeases everyone in their party even to the detriment of independent/swing voters.

So I believe the Christian Right is currently influential because the GOP is in many respects a "minority government", not because the Christian Right provides a majority of the GOP electorate.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11876
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #779 on: January 21, 2020, 01:39:08 PM »
It may be unknowable whether a person is a "true Christian" in the sense of: do they truly believe in Jesus Christ and follow his teachings.

It can be argued persuasively that Trump is a particularly bad Christian.

EvenSteven

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 373
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #780 on: January 21, 2020, 01:42:26 PM »
It may be unknowable whether a person is a "true Christian" in the sense of: do they truly believe in Jesus Christ and follow his teachings.

It can be argued persuasively that Trump is a particularly bad Christian.

I think it could also be persuasively argued that Trump is a typical Christian.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11876
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #781 on: January 21, 2020, 01:46:52 PM »
It may be unknowable whether a person is a "true Christian" in the sense of: do they truly believe in Jesus Christ and follow his teachings.

It can be argued persuasively that Trump is a particularly bad Christian.

I think it could also be persuasively argued that Trump is a typical Christian.

Either you have a very dismal view of the typical Christian, or you have a much better view of Trump and his actions than I do.

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 921
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #782 on: January 21, 2020, 02:04:25 PM »
We've had Reps and Senators that are atheists. As far as 'national' goes, there is only 1 national election: the POTUS. Could an atheist win? Well, Trump is basically one.

This is very selective memory. Trump had an army of prominent evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and James Dobson explicitly telling their followers that Trump was a real Christian and that, in fact, he was God's chosen candidate. Trump ran an explicitly religious campaign, constantly playing up how Christian he was and claiming that no one knows whether Hillary was or not (untrue). He constantly claims to be the only one willing to fight for Christian this-or-that.

He very explicitly does not "present" as an atheist. He says he is a Christian (Presbyterian, specifically), and he talks about just how wonderful of a Christian he is. Just because you don't think he's very good at it doesn't make him "basically an atheist".

I'm sorry. Is there someone out there that doesn't believe Trump "became a Christian" simply to get their vote. Does a Catholic grandma care if her new son-in-law is actually a Catholic? He gets baptized and that's good enough for grandma. Grandma knows, but it makes her feel better anyways.

I come from an Evangelical Christian background. Everyone that I know that's still in that group and go to church regularly don't have any confusion on the matter. Trump pretended to become a Christian in order to get some key endorsements. In return, Graham and Dobson get to continue to claim some political relevance.

It's not that I just disagree with the theology or doctrine, it's simply that I don't think Trump actually believes anything and uses at as nothing more than a smokescreen. And the majority of Christians that I know seem to recognize it as a smokescreen.

If an atheist needs to pretend to be Christian to be elected to high office, isn't that evidence in favor of America being a "Christian first nation"?

It proves that there is an Evangelical voting bloc that is amenable to voting for Trump. Trump also had a number of "indiscretions" from his past that needed public approval from those religious leaders in order to make it "ok" to vote for Trump. If there were an Atheist that did not have these same issues, Trump may have not needed to kneel to the Evangelical leaders.

Cool. As you initially responded to me, let's return to the original goalpost:

Do you believe (pun intended) that an open, avowed atheist could win the presidency or other prominent national political position? If yes, do you believe that they would or would not face intense scrutiny over that 'belief'?

For me, living in Texas, I would say no to the first question.

Bonus: I added a Strike through as you are right, we don't have another nationally elected position, so I will amend the second half: Do you think that an open, avowed atheist would win a statewide contest in the following places:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
West Virginia
Wyoming

That's a little over half the states where (in my opinion) an openly Atheist candidate would get completely destroyed, which leaves another half where i think electability would be doubtful to unlikely in outcome.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #783 on: January 21, 2020, 02:31:22 PM »
Well we do have currently serving atheists from other states.

Senator Sinema from Arizona states that she is a "non-theist".

Oklahoma also had a blind Atheist Senator 1907-1921, 1931-1937. A different time, but an amazing guy to read about: Thomas Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Gore

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #784 on: January 21, 2020, 02:38:48 PM »
Well we do have currently serving atheists from other states.

Senator Sinema from Arizona states that she is a "non-theist".

Oklahoma also had a blind Atheist Senator 1907-1921, 1931-1937. A different time, but an amazing guy to read about: Thomas Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Gore

Hmm.  Easy to check representation then.  What percentage of US politicians are atheists and what percentage of the population are?

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #785 on: January 21, 2020, 03:05:54 PM »
Well we do have currently serving atheists from other states.

Senator Sinema from Arizona states that she is a "non-theist".

Oklahoma also had a blind Atheist Senator 1907-1921, 1931-1937. A different time, but an amazing guy to read about: Thomas Gore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Gore

Hmm.  Easy to check representation then.  What percentage of US politicians are atheists and what percentage of the population are?

Not quite so easy. As it's such a highly personal topic many people will ascribe their own labels to themselves. (Christian Atheists?) Meaning that someone could be an atheist but still take on the cultural title of Christian or label themselves by their religious heritage.

So Atheism/Agnostic/etc as best I could find is somewhere around 3-8% of the US. 14 (3.2%) Reps refused to identify, but there's also another 69 "Unspecified Protestants". How many of those people if pressed would also admit to some level of Atheism? You can see this as anti-atheism bias, or just as people who don't think too hard about these things and just use the labels and monikers their culture and communities use.

Here's as best as I could figure out for more easily categorical religions
               House          US Pop.
Hindus:     0.7%           ~1%
Mormon:   1.4%           1.8%
Catholic:    31.5%         23%
Jewish:      6%              2.1%
Muslim:     0.7%            0.8%
Protestant: 53.8%           49%
Orthodox:   1.1%           <1%

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #786 on: January 21, 2020, 03:39:33 PM »
The Christian Right has also had to give up on certain things in order to maintain their power in the GOP. Gay marriage has more or less been legalized, and there doesn't seem to be any desire from the GOP to fight against that. The Christian Right knows that they cannot demand the GOP to take it on. You see a few states that have a few laws around trans-rights or other similar things, but they'll be stamped out by the courts over time. Even conservative judges aren't willing to undo the Supreme Courts previous decision.

I don't think the Christian Right has that many political wins from the last 3 years. I think Gorsuch and Kavanaugh will actually vote with conservatives less than they anticipate. They weren't able to undo Obamacare. The only thing Trump has done is lowered Corporate taxes. So the GOP moderates and evangelicals can't find a middle ground on social issues, so only the fiscal conservatives ("corporate elites") were able to get anything done.

If the Christian Right has accomplished something policy wise in the last 3 years, please fill me in.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #787 on: January 21, 2020, 04:49:41 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

ixtap

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1893
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #788 on: January 21, 2020, 05:10:16 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #789 on: January 21, 2020, 05:19:11 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

What lifestyle exactly, is that?

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11876
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #790 on: January 22, 2020, 06:36:21 AM »
At Davos, Trump is back to threatening our allies with tariffs - 25% on autos and "up to 100% on French Wines."  The reasons given have been scattershot, but include a wish that France not tax US technology companies in Europe (some irony there) and fallout from the other countries not backing out of the Iran Nuclear treaty.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4934
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #791 on: January 22, 2020, 11:35:48 AM »
This isn't even an "outrage," it's a "how in the everliving F*** does anyone still support this moron?"

In an interview with CNBC, President Donald Trump appeared to claim that the wheel [yes, the wheel] was created by an American inventor. In the interview, Trump goes on a tangent about American inventors needing ‘protection’:

"We have to protect all of these people that came up with, originally, the light bulb and the wheel and all of these things."

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/in-interview-trump-claims-an-american-was-responsible-for-inventing-the-wheel-lGxww7SAC0qkZKTbl5dMwQ?fbclid=IwAR1tK_V2RPkVIXhmYcbYJfRtDsMcAXZpQMaYETChJi98lpg61ixAGwSX3VU

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #792 on: January 22, 2020, 11:41:35 AM »
At Davos, Trump is back to threatening our allies with tariffs
A term that has gotten more and more hollow. btw.
I don't think anybody (at least in Europe) will follow you into another war in that Iran/Iraq etc. region (at least not openly). The resistance against the Iraq war was already very big, and with the revelation that the proof of WMD was not only very skim, but practically drawn out of thin air, that business has become deeply poisened. Any politician that sends troops down there will be out of office the next election.
And since your record-breaking bombing that is still going on in Afghanistan, and the reserves running dry, I don't think you can wage one more drone war.

Still, many Republicans will propably applaud that something is done against terrorists.

Quote
Trump goes on a tangent about American inventors needing ‘protection’:
Just another btw: Until about 100 years ago the US was a great believer in in not protecting inventors. I don't think any other country in the 19th century "stole" so much "intellectual property" as the US. Strange that is always those who are technologically behind that think protection is bullshit (or theft), and always those ahead think that protection is God's Order.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3086
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #793 on: January 22, 2020, 12:26:48 PM »
At Davos, Trump is back to threatening our allies with tariffs

Just another btw: Until about 100 years ago the US was a great believer in in not protecting inventors. I don't think any other country in the 19th century "stole" so much "intellectual property" as the US. Strange that is always those who are technologically behind that think protection is bullshit (or theft), and always those ahead think that protection is God's Order.

Wait, does this mean that if I look up patents, they'll all begin in the 1910's? Can you go into more detail about how you concluded this?

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1556
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #794 on: January 22, 2020, 05:34:35 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

What lifestyle exactly, is that?

That would be the lifestyle where the woman is not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.   Cooking and cleaning.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #795 on: January 22, 2020, 06:53:56 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

What lifestyle exactly, is that?

That would be the lifestyle where the woman is not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.   Cooking and cleaning.

When a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she's pretty despicable right?  That's why we're punishing her by forcing her to have the baby?

Or when a woman wants a baby, but finds out that the kid has a disease that will cause death shortly after birth . . . and wants to spare the fetus a short life of intense suffering . . . what a disgusting lifestyle.


RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12182
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #796 on: January 22, 2020, 07:02:37 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

What lifestyle exactly, is that?

That would be the lifestyle where the woman is not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.   Cooking and cleaning.

When a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she's pretty despicable right?  That's why we're punishing her by forcing her to have the baby?

Or when a woman wants a baby, but finds out that the kid has a disease that will cause death shortly after birth . . . and wants to spare the fetus a short life of intense suffering . . . what a disgusting lifestyle.

Or since no birth control method is 100% effective, she is in the failure group through no fault of her own. Or is using birth control a moral failure too?  Even if you are married, and even if you already have all the children you want?



On a side note, I've been watching "Call the Midwife" and it's a good reminder of pre cheap reliable birth control life.

js82

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 224
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #797 on: January 22, 2020, 07:27:11 PM »
Do you believe (pun intended) that an open, avowed atheist could win the presidency or other prominent national political position? If yes, do you believe that they would or would not face intense scrutiny over that 'belief'?

I think the following link is highly relevant:  https://www.pewforum.org/2017/02/15/americans-express-increasingly-warm-feelings-toward-religious-groups/


An atheist can contend in deep blue states, and potentially purple states(if the opposition is lousy), but on a national level they'll be fighting an uphill battle in some of the traditional battleground states that have been critical in the past several elections (See: Florida, Pennsylvania, the midwest).

Given the overall attitudes of Americans, an Atheist or Muslim is objectively fighting an uphill battle in an election when compared with a Christian or Jew.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15222
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #798 on: January 22, 2020, 07:44:48 PM »
The 9 states in 2019 that banned early abortion spring immediately to mind.

Giving Dr.'s the right to refuse to give care to someone whose lifestyle they disagree with.

What lifestyle exactly, is that?

That would be the lifestyle where the woman is not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.   Cooking and cleaning.

When a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she's pretty despicable right?  That's why we're punishing her by forcing her to have the baby?

Or when a woman wants a baby, but finds out that the kid has a disease that will cause death shortly after birth . . . and wants to spare the fetus a short life of intense suffering . . . what a disgusting lifestyle.

Or since no birth control method is 100% effective, she is in the failure group through no fault of her own. Or is using birth control a moral failure too?  Even if you are married, and even if you already have all the children you want?

No. Sex is a sin that deserves to be punished by childbirth.

ysette9

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6349
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • The Best Is Yet To Come
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #799 on: January 22, 2020, 09:00:04 PM »
It is a steep punishment. Even really wanting kids pregnancy was awful for me and little babies were even worse. I wouldn’t wish them on anyone who was less than 110% gung ho about parenthood.