this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
837 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3757 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 217 points 11 months ago (211 children)

Despite a long track record of anti-LGBTQ+ comments and advocacy, he has insisted he can’t be a hateful person because he’s a Christian.

I think he's got it backwards. He can't be a Christian because he's a hateful person.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 11 months ago (169 children)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 11 months ago (127 children)

I totally get your point, but I think there is validity in calling into question your right to identify as a member of a given religion when you go directly against your religion's teachings.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There is no such thing as a religion having objective "teachings."

It's always been subjective.

Normal people are Jews and Muslims, and extremists like the genocidal Israeli colonizers, and the similarly genocidal Wahhabist/Salafi terrorists are still Jews and Muslims.

There is no "true" understanding of these religions.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

There is no such thing as a religion having objective “teachings.”

So what is the Bible? Or the Qur'an?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Aggregations of objective teachings which contradict each other (within the same book).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

The Bible is an assembled collection of curated religious stories and traditions. I can't speak to the history of all of it but the first books of the OT were drawn from religious stories and traditions of north and south Judah and adapted to create religious (and thus political) unity by the king at the time in the face of the threat of rival, neighboring countries. Of the many gods worshipped at the time the OT books essentially retcon two of them to be one god, denounce polytheism, and create a mythical historical narrative of the country's population. Mythical because archaeological evidence contradicts a great deal of the stories.

The NT is a collection of Epistles, gospels, etc., chosen from a large pool of similar sorts of writings and assembled into what we have today. I don't know a great deal about what drove those selections and only vaguely know that some of the other writings were quite different theologically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago
load more comments (125 replies)
load more comments (166 replies)
load more comments (207 replies)