Holier Than They »
Posted by: Spadecaller 8 months, 4 weeks ago180 Comments Report this Story
The Puritans' intolerant vision of religious freedom is still alive and well. For all the talk of religion, the absence of care and compassion, love, acceptance and inclusion -- the essence of Christianity is missing. Here's a look at the religion of politics in America today.
Read Full Story at warner.blogs.nytimes.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 180
-
0%
Spadecaller8 months, 4 weeks ago
ONE good look at what religious intolerance has done to nations and empires contradicts all the spiritual values any sect or denomination can rightfully claim.
Reply-
0%
Spadecaller8 months, 3 weeks ago
Do you believe the claims the Presidential candidates make about their religious scruples? Is it good for the nation?
In light of all the corruption by those who do the most talk about family values, have politicians truly represented the religious values they claim to cherish?
Why do some Americans actually believe the politicians who use religion to garner their support?
Reply-
0%
jordan118 months, 3 weeks ago
Last night I watched the evidence provided on evolution vs 'intelligent design' when a school board was on trial for unconstitutionally making teaching ID the policy of their schools. The evidence was irrefutable that evolution has been proven over and over again. The evidence was irrefutable that the ID pushers were actually a group trying to push religious creationism....just repackaged with a new name. The judge was a republican, appointed by a republican, & even george chimed in that ID should be taught. The judge said it was unconstitutional in the end, & went to far as to say those pushing it should be indicted for lying to the court about their motives. Most in the town 'got it.' They threw out the school board. But some 'wouldn't' get it. They deride the judge despite the evidence, and he & his family had to be given protection for death threats. This is just the tip of the iceberg of the kinds of people we're 'dealing' with over religion in our government.
Reply -
0%
jordan118 months, 3 weeks ago
Nothing is going to sway them. If the founders came back and talked to them, they wouldn't listen. If they were forced to sit in a classroom with the thousands of founders papers/letters/rulings that make it crystal clear of their intentions to separate church and state, and were forced to study them for months and months, they would deny what they were reading. They will forever fall trap to those who try to rewrite our history, and nothing will change that.
The wrong 'group' is being pandered to. We wouldn't need to worry about those who vote with their religion, if someone came along & woke up those who don't vote at all. If someone gave a reasoned explanation of how they could lose everything if this minority got power, this 'group' would have no power.
Reply
-
-
0%
SonOfTheMask8 months, 3 weeks ago
Not at all.
First, if you're going to suggest that religion be suppressed in the name of tolerance, you're going to have me and millions of others shaking the Constitution in your face while booting you in the rear.
Second, anti-religion intolerance in the 20th century claimed far more lives than religious intolerance. And don't produce the canard that Stalin, Hitler, etc. weren't acting from a political perspective, anti-religion is anti-religion.
Reply-
0%
Bkumm8 months, 3 weeks ago
Why not trot that out, you've trotted out the canard that anti-religion intolerance has killed more people than religious intolerance?
If you don't get the point that the killing was a means to a political end, then why should those that disagree with you get your point that killing people that are religious is anti-religion?
As for your first point, I agree that religion should not be suppressed in the name of tolerance.
Reply -
0%
mcgrievysr8 months, 3 weeks ago
SonOfTheMask---"First, if you're going to suggest that religion be suppressed in the name of tolerance, you're going to have me and millions of others shaking the Constitution in your face while booting you in the rear"
We don't want to have your religion suppressed. What we don't want is to have you shove it down our throats. What we don't want is to have a politician use religion to send us off to war.What we don't want are "bible-thumpers" in office who use their brand of "faith" to rule over a nation that is eclectic in its beliefs. We want moral politicians and not intolerant hypocrites who pontificate and condemn and show no compassion. This nation was founded on the concept of religious tolerance. I do not want religious intolerance from my government. Why has that become so hard?
Reply -
0%
Jaydee408 months, 3 weeks ago
"First, if you're going to suggest that religion be suppressed in the name of tolerance, you're going to have me and millions of others shaking the Constitution in your face while booting you in the rear."
How about the enlightened people who don't fall prey to the trappings of religion, should they be subjected to the outdated idea that some religions preach such as women being second class citizens or the refusal to let a woman control her own fertility. How about the desire many so called christians who wish to relegate homosexuals to second class status. Religion rares it's ugly head in everyday life more than many realize and I for one am sick and tired of it, if you want to impose your belief structure on me it had better be bulletproof and I have yet to see any religion that is. This is a view on religion, not a personal attack on you SOTM. Jay
Reply -
0%
Natureboy8 months, 3 weeks ago
"And don't produce the canard that Stalin, Hitler, etc. weren't acting from a political perspective, anti-religion is anti-religion."
Hitler, Mussolini,Franco, they all used the church; they couldn't have kept power without the support of Lutheran and Catholic churches, respectively.
Reply
-
-
0%
Dionys8 months, 3 weeks ago
"ONE good look at what religious intolerance has done to nations and empires contradicts all the spiritual values any sect or denomination can rightfully claim."
That's a nice opinion. Only that, though. Catholicism with all its troubles and horrors can lay claim to the foundations and continuance of modern day education, especially as it relates to the poor. The arts, philosophy, government, science, all the humanities can all essentially be traced back to Christianity in the west.
Sure a lot of horrible things happened, but to claim that religious intolerance is the only dominant thing to come out of Religion seems kind of silly.
In fact it almost seems.. intolerant.
Reply-
0%
Spadecaller8 months, 3 weeks ago
Dionys
If you read the full statement and did not take it out of context, you would have discovered that I was referring to religious zealots involved in politics who exploit their religions to further their selfish goals.
I have repeatedly clarified that because of one poster who started off this thread assuming and accusing me of all kinds of absurd things.
There are some religious zealots who feel threatened by those of us that challenge the role of religion in politics, as I believe we should because we are Americans.
Now, if you disagree with my disdain for corrupt messengers of religion in our government, that's fine too. You can try all you want to mischaracterize my comments and to villify me as the religion hater, which I'm not. But do what you have to. Is that the Christian way that you so passionately need to defend?
Reply
-
-
-
0%
SonOfTheMask8 months, 3 weeks ago
As far as the article itself, it is true that the "religious left" has been less organized than the "religious right" as a political force. Other than that point, the article is not much more than a predictable political op/ed.
Reply-
0%
SonOfTheMask8 months, 3 weeks ago
FTA: "I am not referring to atheism â;; the one belief system that clearly had no place in the vision of America Romney painted in his much-anticipated speech on faith last week." Baloney. Nice hit job on a great speech. Implicit in religious freedom is the freedom to not believe. Romney was talking about faith, why would he necessarily have to mention atheism by name?
Reply -
0%
Jaydee408 months, 3 weeks ago
You just listed your own countries poison, religious left and religious right. True religion doesn't have a right or left, thats politics, not religion. The country is already a shadow of it's former self because of the political divide, a religious divide would finish the job in my opinion.
Reply
-
-
0%
canadianrancher578 months, 3 weeks ago
When you mix religion and politics together you get nothing but trouble. To many times I have seen were people who say they have faith start to quote scripture to bach a decision that they make, quoting scripture is like taking a single scene from a movie and try to tell one what the movie is about. This is quite often done in times of hostilities against another nation, the Bible or any other religious text has a theme and it is the theme that is important. To me the saddest part of religion is those who are led by others when I doubt that any two persons beliefs are identical. If you are going to vote for a politician based on religion, look closely to his actions and not his words, and do not forget to look at other religions as well for the underlying theme of all religions is very similar.
Reply-
0%
blinkers8 months, 3 weeks ago
Good points cr57. ("When you mix religion and politics together you get nothing but trouble")
It's often forgotten that a national religion (Shinto-ism) powered much of the Japanese war hysteria between 1931 and 1945. "State Shinto" was promoted to underpin much of the nationalist fervor which fuelled the barborous rampages across much of Asia.
One of the great successes of the Allied (principally American) Occupation was to effectively destroy the links between Shinto and the central government, enabling it to put peaceful relations with other countries as the cornerstone of its foreign policy, from the 1950s onwards.
Reply
