politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
christians have loved what trump has done. but selling bibles is their limit? pathetic.
Some Christians, I'm sure. The Evangelicals that already loved him are currently trying to figure out how to shove a Trump Bible in their anus while describing it as "God's plan".
“I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holey and acceptable to God, place his word into thy rectum, which is your spiritual worship.”
-Romans 12:1 maybe
Christians isn't a monolithic entity, the way the headline pretends. There's liberal Christians and conservative Christians. Hell, there's an LGBTQ church down the street from here with a trans pastor and a church trauma support group.
i.e. Not all Christians love what Trump has done and not all Christians hate that he's selling bibles.
So called "liberal Christians" just enable the fascist ones.
ACAB.
How?
Because if it was all bad it would just be abandoned. It is like smoking tobacco vs consuming botulism. Each time you smoke a tiny bit of damage is done and a lot is pleasure is delivered every time you consume botulism you get very ill and risk dying. That's why people aren't consuming 20 capsules of botulism a day.
The liberal Christianity tried to offer a different route. A Christianity that doesn't depend on bigotry. A Christianity not supported by the texts or thoughts of the faith for the past 20 centuries because they are doing that they are offering cover for the the branches aligned with Christianity. They are holding out the possibility of reform. If they don't exist people would see Christianity for what it is, and not what in theory it could be.
The problem with your analogy is either the people of the religion need to view it as botulism or the vast majority of society needs to view those people as botulism.
The people of the religion are at best going to see it as tobacco. I hate tobacco; smoking isn't pleasurable, it just makes me feel sick. But there are people who love it. You and I may see their religion as devoid of anything good, but to them it's good. They are often born into it and want their religion with the negatives you and I see. It has nothing to do with liberal Christians.
And it is not liberal Christians that make it so we don't reach the threshold of the vast majority of society not tolerating the bad Christians. The bad Christians are a sizeable enough part of society on their own to guarantee that. And as a society, we're fairly geographically sorted. So even if they were only 5% of the population, they'd still often be surrounded by like-minded individuals and be able to wield political power. Plus, they're still people. Even the most evil people generally have some redeeming qualities.
People forcing them all into one box enable the fascist ones. Anytime someone says "that's fascism and not Christianity" they're met with screeches of "nO tRuE sCoTsMaN!"
I can back up my arguments with their holy texts as well as the Greek thought most of it was stolen from. At its core it is a fascist faith. Beginning with Plato's blueprint for a spiritual dictatorship ruled by mystics who don't have to explain themselves, to Jesus declaring that his path was the only way, to the City of God telling us that torture in this life was better than hell and thus justified.
None of that explains how Christians who say "Fascism is bad" are enabling fascists.
Do you know that an enabler doesn't have to be intentionally doing it?
Do you know for someone to be an enabler there should be some evidence/argument for it other than "you're speaking against the thing I'm accusing you of enabling"?
I spelled it out. Quite clearly. Don't waste my time.
I'm just relieved there is a limit
It's not a limit. It's manufactured outrage. If they supported him prior to now, 99% of them will support him until the end.
Well over 50% of Americans identify as Christian or Catholic. Trump did not receive 50% of the popular vote. Even if every person who voted for Trump identified as Christian, there is still a large percentage of Christians that did not.
Look, i can excuse the racism, having no clue what he's doing as a president, the rape allegations, he's super into minors, probably his own daughter, stealing and selling sensible documents, the nepotism, the lies, grifting his voters, swindling taxpayer money, not paying any fees ever, not paying for venues that he rents out, using his golf course to, again, steal taxpayer money, he might be a blatant russian asset, he's also way too much into dictators, he didn't furfill ANYof his campaign promises, selling beans from the oval office.
But selling an old ass novel about my imaginary sky daddy? You crossed the line there buckaroo.
Limit? No, trigger.
Please pass the popcorn.