• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism

weaver2

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
14,965
Reaction score
12,333
Location
Oregon's High Desert
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In Kathrine Stewart's new book, “The Power Worshippers - Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism” she defines religious nationalism as a political, not religious, ideology with the goal of gaining political and social power. The movement is anti-democratic. It claims the only legitimate government is based on a strict interpretation of their religion.

The US movement began with Jerry Falwell and other white southern conservative leaders sifting through a list of topics for a central issue that would galvanize and unite conservative white Christians into a political power house. They came to “abortion” saw it’s potential and created the pro-life movement.

As Ms Stewart says, today’s pro-life religion was created for the political purpose of establishing religious and political ascendency over other religions, turning religious freedom into religious privilege for themselves and funneling a substantial and increasing flow of federal money into the churches of their movement: essentially a theocracy.

For those of us who value the secular republic the founding fathers established with the Constitution it is time to counter the power and political meddling of religious nationalism.
 
weaver2 said:
In Kathrine Stewart's new book, “The Power Worshippers - Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism” she defines religious nationalism as a political, not religious, ideology with the goal of gaining political and social power. The movement is anti-democratic. It claims the only legitimate government is based on a strict interpretation of their religion.

The US movement began with Jerry Falwell and other white southern conservative leaders sifting through a list of topics for a central issue that would galvanize and unite conservative white Christians into a political power house. They came to “abortion” saw it’s potential and created the pro-life movement.

As Ms Stewart says, today’s pro-life religion was created for the political purpose of establishing religious and political ascendency over other religions, turning religious freedom into religious privilege for themselves and funneling a substantial and increasing flow of federal money into the churches of their movement: essentially a theocracy.

For those of us who value the secular republic the founding fathers established with the Constitution it is time to counter the power and political meddling of religious nationalism.
Click to expand...

Hopefully she's able to obtain treatment. These sound like rather serious paranoid delusions.
 
AmNat said:
Hopefully she's able to obtain treatment. These sound like rather serious paranoid delusions.
Click to expand...

She’s not completely wrong: the pro-life movement is by definition a political movement in contrast to an individual belief that abortion is wrong.And it was started to politicize conservative Christians and certainly advanced the political influence of several fundamentalist leaders.

But just from the OP description, I suspect the book is a sensationalized work prone to exaggerations and hyperbole
 
pinqy said:
She’s not completely wrong: the pro-life movement is by definition a political movement in contrast to an individual belief that abortion is wrong.
Click to expand...

Well sure. So is the pro-choice movement. Every political movement is by definition a political movement.

The delusional aspect of the OP is thinking that there is any danger of the US becoming a "theocracy" at any point in the foreseeable future. There is, for that matter, no plausible path by which the US might return to the mores of the 1950's (which is what most religious conservatives want). And 1950's America was very far from a theocracy.
 
AmNat said:
Well sure. So is the pro-choice movement. Every political movement is by definition a political movement.

The delusional aspect of the OP is thinking that there is any danger of the US becoming a "theocracy" at any point in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Son, the US has been a theocracy at least since Reagan, and even now the Bush dynasty maintains influence over US politics due to Trump's ineptitude.

path by which the US might return to the mores of the 1950's (which is what most religious conservatives want). And 1950's America was very far from a theocracy.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is noted and laughed at.
 
weaver2 said:
In Kathrine Stewart's new book, “The Power Worshippers - Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism” she defines religious nationalism as a political, not religious, ideology with the goal of gaining political and social power. The movement is anti-democratic. It claims the only legitimate government is based on a strict interpretation of their religion.

The US movement began with Jerry Falwell and other white southern conservative leaders sifting through a list of topics for a central issue that would galvanize and unite conservative white Christians into a political power house. They came to “abortion” saw it’s potential and created the pro-life movement.

As Ms Stewart says, today’s pro-life religion was created for the political purpose of establishing religious and political ascendency over other religions, turning religious freedom into religious privilege for themselves and funneling a substantial and increasing flow of federal money into the churches of their movement: essentially a theocracy.

For those of us who value the secular republic the founding fathers established with the Constitution it is time to counter the power and political meddling of religious nationalism.
Click to expand...

Without the foundation of the Christian religions on our early colonization you liberals wouldn't have the rights you have. Basic moral and ethical beliefs are largely derived from these religious groups.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Son, the US has been a theocracy at least since Reagan
Click to expand...

I seriously hope you're able to get help. It's not healthy to live so disconnected from reality.
 
Integrityrespec said:
Without the foundation of the Christian religions on our early colonization you liberals wouldn't have the rights you have. Basic moral and ethical beliefs are largely derived from these religious groups.
Click to expand...

The behavior of “Christians” during the colonial period lacked any sort of morality whatsoever.
 
Evangelicals and fundamentalists have always been anti-democracy.

Religious nationalism is about their power not the good of the nation.
 
Integrityrespec said:
Without the foundation of the Christian religions on our early colonization you liberals wouldn't have the rights you have. Basic moral and ethical beliefs are largely derived from these religious groups.
Click to expand...

No they are not. Read some of the personal papers of those who wrote the Constitution. Their political ideas came from Greek philosophy, Roman governmental structure, and Enlightenment values on individual freedom. The early Christians that colonized the Americas were disgraceful bigots; anti science adherents, against individual freedoms and held citizens hostage to assorted variations of authoritarian theocracies from Catholicism to Calvinism.

The Mayflower Compact called non-Puritans on board, "Strangers" and reduced them non-citizens with no rights . The Salem Witch Trials , and the Puritan attack on King Phillip and his tribe were two of the most despicable acts of our early Christian forebears. And then there is the hilarious Puritan envoy to Maine to put a stop to a rather large group of people who were dancing, celebrating Maypole festivals, fraternizing with the Indians, drinking rum on festive occasions and not going to church. Never mind that these good time charlies were hunting beaver, sending skins back to England, making money and paying off their charter loan and the Puritans weren't.


You have a very insufficient grasp of our nations history.
 
weaver2 said:
No they are not. Read some of the personal papers of those who wrote the Constitution. Their political ideas came from Greek philosophy, Roman governmental structure, and Enlightenment values on individual freedom. The early Christians that colonized the Americas were disgraceful bigots; anti science adherents, against individual freedoms and held citizens hostage to assorted variations of authoritarian theocracies from Catholicism to Calvinism.

The Mayflower Compact called non-Puritans on board, "Strangers" and reduced them non-citizens with no rights . The Salem Witch Trials , and the Puritan attack on King Phillip and his tribe were two of the most despicable acts of our early Christian forebears. And then there is the hilarious Puritan envoy to Maine to put a stop to a rather large group of people who were dancing, celebrating Maypole festivals, fraternizing with the Indians, drinking rum on festive occasions and not going to church. Never mind that these good time charlies were hunting beaver, sending skins back to England, making money and paying off their charter loan and the Puritans weren't.

You have a very insufficient grasp of our nations history.
Click to expand...

The Pilgrims and Puritans invented American voter suppression: only baptized males in the church could vote.
 
weaver2 said:
In Kathrine Stewart's new book, “The Power Worshippers - Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism” she defines religious nationalism as a political, not religious, ideology with the goal of gaining political and social power. The movement is anti-democratic. It claims the only legitimate government is based on a strict interpretation of their religion.

The US movement began with Jerry Falwell and other white southern conservative leaders sifting through a list of topics for a central issue that would galvanize and unite conservative white Christians into a political power house. They came to “abortion” saw it’s potential and created the pro-life movement.

As Ms Stewart says, today’s pro-life religion was created for the political purpose of establishing religious and political ascendency over other religions, turning religious freedom into religious privilege for themselves and funneling a substantial and increasing flow of federal money into the churches of their movement: essentially a theocracy.

For those of us who value the secular republic the founding fathers established with the Constitution it is time to counter the power and political meddling of religious nationalism.
Click to expand...

Those of us who value democracy and individual rights don't care if someone votes the way they do due to religion, secular dogma, or the voice in their toaster told them who to support. One way or the other, there is going to be disagreements among 360 million people.
 
Drawdown said:
Those of us who value democracy and individual rights don't care if someone votes the way they do due to religion, secular dogma, or the voice in their toaster told them who to support. One way or the other, there is going to be disagreements among 360 million people.
Click to expand...

Disagreement is fine, even creative. Conservative Christian nationalism is not interested in creativity. It's interest is in the power to control. As Paul Weyrich, the founder of the Heritage Institute, said "When political power is achieved, the moral majority will have the opportunity to re-create this great nation.” The Real Origins of the Religious Right - POLITICO Magazine

What do you think Weyrich had in mind about re-creation of the US?
 
AmNat said:
I seriously hope you're able to get help. It's not healthy to live so disconnected from reality.
Click to expand...

That's all your ilk ever has on me, isn't it? Ad hominem logical ****ing fallacies.
 
weaver2 said:
Disagreement is fine, even creative. Conservative Christian nationalism is not interested in creativity. It's interest is in the power to control. As Paul Weyrich, the founder of the Heritage Institute, said "When political power is achieved, the moral majority will have the opportunity to re-create this great nation.” The Real Origins of the Religious Right - POLITICO Magazine

What do you think Weyrich had in mind about re-creation of the US?
Click to expand...

Their delusions of grandeur are no different in the grand scheme of things than any other groups like the environmental extremists, SJW's, etc. There is an ebb and flow to politics.
 
Drawdown said:
Their delusions of grandeur are no different in the grand scheme of things than any other groups like the environmental extremists, SJW's, etc. There is an ebb and flow to politics.
Click to expand...

Somehow I feel more comfortable with environmentalist threatening me with clean water, wilderness, solar panels and reduced CO2 or SJW threatening equality before the law than with a conservative Christian telling me when they get power they are going to re-create the US or the Cultural Impact Team's resource manual telling me that "It is up to Christians to restore once again to America a biblically based legal system.” Ottawa Canada May 12 2011 Thousands Stock Photo (Edit Now) 397434010 or James Dobson saying that "Focus on the Family affirms the importance of social responsibility, supporting government institutions and protecting them against destructive social influences. God has ordained all social institutions, including the government, for the benefit of mankind and as a reflection of His divine nature. The Supreme Court's imposition of the doctrine of separation of church and state distorts the Founding Father's recognition of our unequivocally Christian nation and the protection of religious freedom for all faiths. (“Focus on the Family”position statement on Church and State)

I find being told that the US needs to be a theocracy really upsetting.
 
weaver2 said:
Somehow I feel more comfortable with environmentalist threatening me with clean water, wilderness, solar panels and reduced CO2 or SJW threatening equality before the law than with a conservative Christian telling me when they get power they are going to re-create the US or the Cultural Impact Team's resource manual telling me that "It is up to Christians to restore once again to America a biblically based legal system.” Ottawa Canada May 12 2011 Thousands Stock Photo (Edit Now) 397434010 or James Dobson saying that "Focus on the Family affirms the importance of social responsibility, supporting government institutions and protecting them against destructive social influences. God has ordained all social institutions, including the government, for the benefit of mankind and as a reflection of His divine nature. The Supreme Court's imposition of the doctrine of separation of church and state distorts the Founding Father's recognition of our unequivocally Christian nation and the protection of religious freedom for all faiths. (“Focus on the Family”position statement on Church and State)

I find being told that the US needs to be a theocracy really upsetting.
Click to expand...

The US doesn't need to be anything except a republic and clearly you are unaware of what some of these extreme environmentalist have done to endanger lives. The Earth Liberation Front has been on the FBI radar for decades for reasons having nothing to do with clean air.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Son, the US has been a theocracy at least since Reagan, and even now the Bush dynasty maintains influence over US politics due to Trump's ineptitude.



Your opinion is noted and laughed at.
Click to expand...

The group that sponsors the annual Prayer Breakfast, covered by a Netflix documentary, precedes Reagan. Eisenhower was one of the very early POTUS attendees.
 
Thoreau72 said:
The group that sponsors the annual Prayer Breakfast, covered by a Netflix documentary, precedes Reagan. Eisenhower was one of the very early POTUS attendees.
Click to expand...

Yeah true, but the militarism and terrorist aspect of it began under Reagan. Note Waco, Iraq Liberation ACT, PATRIOT ACT, the mass-surveillance and authoritarianism stuff didn't come until Reagan.
 
Drawdown said:
The US doesn't need to be anything except a republic and clearly you are unaware of what some of these extreme environmentalist have done to endanger lives. The Earth Liberation Front has been on the FBI radar for decades for reasons having nothing to do with clean air.
Click to expand...

"The US doesn't need to be anything except a republic".

I agree, but maintaining a republic requires the majority vote and if you'd rather have your religious beliefs installed as the government and you have the majority vote a republic no longer exist.
The weak spot about about democracy is that everybody has to be well educated and intelligent in order to respect and understand the limits of democracy and know what it takes to maintain it. If there is no reverence for the laws and documents of the US it's easy to over ride, change or warp the law to suit your goals. It will still be called democracy because it was voted into existence through a democratic process. All modern dictatorships, and theocracy is a dictatorship, have been voted into office by a majority of the people.

I'm fully aware of ELF and Earth First. As someone who supports conservation efforts to save what's beautiful of our magnificent country and use resources sustainably I abhor their tactics ;they are violent, illegal and counterproductive. In comparison to the conservative religious groups they are small in number and have very little power. They cannot do what conservative Christianity doing; slowly but legally change America into a theocracy with their brand of religion holding power. American's legal system has already been damaged and they are rapidly changing American culture and character.
 
weaver2 said:
"The US doesn't need to be anything except a republic".

I agree, but maintaining a republic requires the majority vote and if you'd rather have your religious beliefs installed as the government and you have the majority vote a republic no longer exist.
The weak spot about about democracy is that everybody has to be well educated and intelligent in order to respect and understand the limits of democracy and know what it takes to maintain it. If there is no reverence for the laws and documents of the US it's easy to over ride, change or warp the law to suit your goals. It will still be called democracy because it was voted into existence through a democratic process. All modern dictatorships, and theocracy is a dictatorship, have been voted into office by a majority of the people.

I'm fully aware of ELF and Earth First. As someone who supports conservation efforts to save what's beautiful of our magnificent country and use resources sustainably I abhor their tactics ;they are violent, illegal and counterproductive. In comparison to the conservative religious groups they are small in number and have very little power. They cannot do what conservative Christianity doing; slowly but legally change America into a theocracy with their brand of religion holding power. American's legal system has already been damaged and they are rapidly changing American culture and character.
Click to expand...

I would rather have the 10 Commandments in the Courthouse than a spike in a tree I was about to mill, but to each their own.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Yeah true, but the militarism and terrorist aspect of it began under Reagan. Note Waco, Iraq Liberation ACT, PATRIOT ACT, the mass-surveillance and authoritarianism stuff didn't come until Reagan.
Click to expand...

Waco was Bush41/Clinton, Patriot was Bush 43.
 
Drawdown said:
I would rather have the 10 Commandments in the Courthouse than a spike in a tree I was about to mill, but to each their own.
Click to expand...

If a little more effort was made to listen to the disaffected we might have a chance at courthouses free of religious tracts and spike free trees.
 
How could anyone in their right minds consider the U.S. today a "theocracy"?
 
Let me get this straight. You liberals didn't have a problem with leftist Catholic clergy and you currently have no problem with the Catholic church funding illegal immigration, but it's not OK if Protestant denominations promote conservative ideas? NOW it's a problem. NOW even our democracy is at stake !!!..... hypocrites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom