God Bless Ermerica … ye haw!

I’ll be perfectly honest, I do not understand the intricacies of US politics over and above the bare bones of Republican vs Democrat. Red tie and Blue tie.

Therefore, it has always intrigued me why the Republican Party seems to be labelled as representing Christian Values whereas the Democrats are portrayed (by certain Republicans) as between something obnoxious one finds on the sole of one’s shoe and/or Tools of Satan.

Are we to believe there are no Christians whatsoever in the Democrat camp?

Apparently, this might well be the case.

To date I have found it odd to mildly amusing. Then I read this …

A recent post, titled: Democratic Party Passes Resolution Against Christianity,

written by one, Tom Gilson who goes to great lengths to point out that Democrats do not represent Christian Values and thus no  American could or should possibly support this party.

Of course, a great many Americans do support the Democrat party so what does this say of them I wonder? Well, as you might guess, Tom tells us.

This, he claims is the key passage from the Democrat Party’s recent manifesto.

Those most loudly claiming that morals, values, and patriotism must be defined by their particular religious views have used those religious views, with misplaced claims of “religious liberty,” to justify public policy that has threatened the civil rights and liberties of many Americans, including but not limited to the LGBT community, women, and ethnic and religious/nonreligious minorities …

Seems above board to moi. But obviously it  is anathema to Tom.

He goes on and adds this pearler.

In the Democrats’ world, “civil rights” are no longer endowed by our creator. They’re human products, human inventions.

And he ends the piece with this …

Let me repeat that: We can’t vote Democrat and hold to our Christian values and beliefs.

Naturally, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t ask  what these Christian Values were and not once was I offered specifics.

After some back and forth with one particular commenter asking him to be specific about what he saw as Christian Values, he eventually replied with the inevitable :  ”Read the Bible for Christian values. I’m not going to do all your studying for you.”

After telling him I have read the bible and still do on occasion so could he be specific about what he saw were his Christian Values he still refused to divulge and left this ….

”If God be God, then serve him. The bible defines what is Godly and men define where they stand according to that. What is arrogant is defying that. Your rebellion cries out. Explain all that to the Master on the day of judgment or your death, whichever comes first. He is the Most High and you will not be able to stand in his presence. Now is the time to come to him and learn of him and receive him.”

Seriously,these people are not well.

And as Mak will inevitably ask the question I’ll say: No, Mak, I really don’t know where I find these nutters!

 

Ark.

 


82 thoughts on “God Bless Ermerica … ye haw!

  1. Ark, you have just pulled the rug under my feet.
    First, that fellow Tom is not even trying to make sense.
    Two, it is unlikely that in a party of many million people, in a country that has such a religious population, has only godless heathens as members

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Exactly! But this is what he seems to be implying.
      It’s the old …. ”you never were a proper Christian” crap all over.
      But not only is he tacitly suggesting no true Christian could possibly be a Democrat he is setting out this drivel that it carefully disguises what amounts to little more than hate speech.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. If I recall correctly, Kennedy was a Dem and a Catholic. And one need not go so far to find Christians in the democratic party.
        The Tom fellow is ahistorical though. 100 years ago, the Republican party was the party of Ingersoll, the Great Agnostic, Joseph Lewis and others. Were these not true Americans.
        I think Tom is full of it

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Until very recently your religion-as-president mattered a great deal. Protestant, yes. any denomination, (Nixon and Hoover were quakers, only Lincoln and Jefferson had ‘none specified, Kennedy was catholic, everyone else was one branch or another of one church or another) agnostics and atheists (stated or implied) were not welcome. I suspect there were more than a few hidden atheists in there, too. Only one divorce, that was Reagan, but it was okay, because, movie star. Until now.

          It’s been a pretty narrow band of acceptance.

          Like

  2. Are we to believe there are no Christians whatsoever in the Democrat camp?

    I am more inclined to believe that there are no Christians in the Republican party. The very expression “conservative Christianity” is an oxymoron. Christianity — assuming that it has something to do with the teachings of Jesus — in an inherently liberal religion.

    Yes, there are many Republicans who call themselves Christians. But Jesus said “by their fruits ye shall know them.” And it is by their fruits that I know they are not Christian.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. They do indeed .
    The most godly among the Republican Christians would have the ungodly hung from rafters,
    beaten with sticks, and left to die in the cold north wind. It’s their effing Christian duty.

    Please do not lump all of us together with Christian Trump loving fans…And, surprisingly, there
    actually atheists among his adoring fans. I am, sadly, married to one. We do not discuss it.

    Trump is an embarrassment to his party, his mother, his country, and his hair. I don’t much like
    Melania, but I feel sorry for her. She looks angry/puzzled half the time, and ‘stifled’ the rest.

    I’m sorry you have to watch, it’s like watching a boat full of party goers inexorably heading for the
    waterfall, totally aware of that roar in their ears but unable to do anything about it, since the captain
    of the ship is off somewhere, golfing.

    Liked by 3 people

        1. If god created us, it would seem that he would have seen to the perfection of the species, not these flawed beings who keep making excuses for themselves and not pointing to god as a less than perfect creator.
          If he is/was so almightly perfect, and could build an entire universe, why did he bother with a few sticks and some mud to create a human, and then rip out a rib of that human in a kind of major “oops, look what I forgot” effort to construct a ‘helpmeet”. Why not just poof them into existence and be done with it?

          Can anyone say, ‘we didn’t know why, so we just made stuff up’…

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Politics and religion … all good clean fun, like running with scissors. The good Lord famously said, “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. Or did He? Could it be that the scribe taking dictation at the time got it a bit wrong?

    Surely it should really read: “Judge, damn you! Judge like fury, judge full ahead on all engines … your very everything depends on your judgement!”

    (And I say that anyone saying otherwise is trying to insert a wee crowbar into your wallet …)

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Most of your Followers/Commenters have already pointed out Tom Gibson’s disturbingly WRONG sense of what it means to be American and as such a citizen of our Constitutional democracy. Mr. Gibson is also aligning himself with any nation in the world that is ruled by a God or Divine authority via men, e.g. Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Vatican City, Mauritania, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. Perhaps Mr. Gibson should live in those states!

    Most rationale, well-educated, broadly educated human beings in other (fortunate) developed parts of the world know about the blatant human rights violations those people/officials in those theocratic nations inflict on their perceived unholy opponents/people. The abuse of unproven, unverified “authority” is often rampant.

    However, there is also a popular political movement inside America that push hard that the USA is/was founded as a Christian nation by hyper Conservative Evangy-Fundy Christians and strict party-line Protestant and Catholic Conservatives that are Moderate-to-Rightist politically. It is unequivocally WRONG that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation.

    I noticed when looking back at my May 2015 blog-post The Mistaken Identity of the U.S. you had not Liked or commented so you may be unaware of it. My background and education in history eventually enabled me to be a licensed Educator in Social Studies/History in Texas. This HAD to require American history, including our federal Government. I also have been a history fanatic my entire life — I LOVE IT!!! 🙂

    In that post I adequately show that our most icon Founding Fathers, who drafted our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitution specifically intended NOT to make this nation ONE religion, or Christian, but neutral or secular. Period. And I demonstrate this by our six (6) most prolific Fathers’ personal letters of correspondence too as well as several historical U.S. Supreme Court positions/decisions on the matter protecting and enforcing our secular/neutral Constitutional democracy!

    These religious whackos we have here like Tom Gibson and thousands of others possess a less-than-crappy knowledge, education, and understanding of our authentic, Constitutionally supported federal history and its Founding Fathers… probably because they are blinded, deaf, and several/many cards short of a full deck upstairs. They have NO CLUE what bogus unsupported claims they spout. We are not and never have been a Christian democracy. Besides, Jesus, or Christ, or Jesus Christ, or the bible those stories come from… are nowhere to be found in our U.S. Constitution. And Thomas Jefferson used generic terms in our Declaration of Independence, NOT Christian terms/names.

    It is not a debate in the least Ark.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Sorry, this never-ending ridiculousness about us being a Christian, God-fearing nation is a serious PET PEEVE of mine so I forgot to add an excellent link for more factual info…

      https://www.au.org/resources/publications/is-america-a-christian-nation

      Also forgot to say that it isn’t a question of Republican or Democrat, or Christian nation or not, the hard bottom-line is that in the public arenas and state/federal politics and governing, it is ONLY a question of what the U.S. Constitution and its laws, guidelines, and Amendments say and/or don’t say. The End. Done. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

  6. In the Democrats’ world, “civil rights” are no longer endowed by our creator. They’re human products, human inventions”. They are human inventions. Christianity bullied its way throughout the world abusing civil rights and brought misery everywhere it planted its flag. Only when people said enough! did forced conversions and tortures end.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. This is the whole point of the American Experiment. We claimed we need no king or queen with their divine rights to rule over us, that we could do it ourselves. All rights are conferred by human beings in this country, not gods.

      Liked by 4 people

  7. Re “Naturally, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t ask what these Christian Values were and not once was I offered specifics.” #metoo

    If I get the “you’ll have to read the Bible” response, I respond to that “I Have and I cannot follow the god of mistakes. He makes angels and they rebel. He makes humans and they rebel. He makes humans so poorly and doesn’t foresee what we would become, that he “regrets” having created us and wipes out all but eight humans, all animals, and all plants and then expects those eight to start over with no food, no building materials, and up to their hips in decaying animal bodies. What a loser … and these are the things you brag about?

    I can go on and on about all of the millions killed before the great Flood, the genocides, the rapes, the children made into slaves, the sanctioning of slavery, … is that what you mean by Christian Values? If so, I want no part of them or any political party which subscribes to them.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Hah! I knew it—that Godwin’s Law would be invoked sooner or later …

        … so let’s analyse that name: ‘Godwin’:

        two silly ables, God and Win. Ergo God will win, no? It’s a bible-ickle fact. The name itself is a prayer, no? But God shalt win only when the last shred of sense is nailed to a cross or has its unholy head lopped off by God’s tool in some Islamic “paradise on Earth”.

        Terry was a genius (so few of us left).

        Liked by 2 people

  8. I think much of his philosophy seems to stem right from the statement you quoted about whether or not you believe that civil rights are endowed by a creator, or are human products. For the fundamentalist Christian you are simply wrong if you view the world by the latter. Even if the very same things you value, agree with the thing that the Christian values. You are simply prone to error if you don’t believe in the correct source of civil rights and thus cannot be trusted.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. I wonder how the atheists who voted for Trump feel about the civil rights being endowed by ”The Creator”.
      I’ll wager for people like Gilson atheist republicans simply do not register on his radar.

      Liked by 3 people

          1. It does seem like cognitive dissonance correlates well to strong beliefs. I have notice Christian fundamentalists are masters at seemingly not even noticing counter arguments and evidence. It is literally like it doesn’t exist, which is ironic given that they are also very good and making things that don’t exist be real to them! lol

            Liked by 1 person

          2. I have just been accused of being a Democrat: :”Gotcha, Lefty!”
            How do they discern my political views if I don’t reveal them?
            In this country the ''Left'' would be the ANC and as the gods are my witness I have never put a cross by one of their candidates. I even skipped over dear old Nelson! Bless his colourful shirts.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. To the GOP in ‘Murica, anyone who does not blindly follow their edicts and their beloved leader Vladimir Putin, OOPS! I meant Donald Trump, is a Democrat or a lefty, or a socialist pig, or all of the above.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. The US is maddeningly insular — and I say this as an American. Many people here literally seem to be hardly aware that anything outside the US exists. Others never pay attention to what happens elsewhere unless it can be used to score points in arguments about US domestic politics. Maybe this kind of narcissistic solipsism comes with the territory of being a superpower. But it’s annoying.

            Liked by 3 people

  9. this entire ‘experiment’ of a new country was begun on the premise of religious freedom–but only for the first settlers, who were fleeing their own persecution in Britain. In a way it was a sort of self-styled penal colony, run by the inmates, and if you read old, really old histories of the first new england settlements you would find that only ‘our kind’ (meaning Puritans or Pilgrims) were acceptible to live in the settlements. Catholics, Jews (yellow star and all), gypsies, anyone not related to nor recognizable to anyone in the settlement was ushered right out of town. No excuses.
    You needed letters of transport (and this policy lasted well into the early 19th century, possibly even later than that) to get from your town to the place you were aiming for. Someone had to vouch for you.

    It was not “one nation under god”, it was “my way or the highway.”

    And since every man owned a gun, quite literally, because when you live in a wilderness there aren’t many shopping malls or grocery stores, and since he also needed it for protection from the locals who were understandably pissed off with the new neighbors, have the ‘right’ to bear arms was a given, (even as late as the Constitution was written), in the proceedings.
    What it pertained to at that point was the right to bear arms for defending the country from invaders. Not for shooting your neighbor for owning a better car, or his dog for barking all night…

    Civil rights, which has become a weasel word for almost anything, is a man-made construction, intended to allow differing points of view, variations of the theme of color or gender or belief, equalized. Im not sure if ‘civil rights’ was even mentioned in any form in the Bible, and at the time of the supposed events there, the only civil rights were what Rome allowed everyone else to do or get away with. God did not endow anyone with anything, and even his prized creations were finally kicked out of the place he gave them, and devoted themselves to pillaging, war, and incest in order to survive.

    Sorry for the rant. It’s been a long wearying summer, I am now a year older, and feeling verbose and cranky. NOT a good thing in an old(er) lady. And I pulled a muscle in my shoulder. (sulks)

    Liked by 2 people

  10. To the GOP, Trump is the “Chosen One of the Christian God.” With values like that, who wouldn’t want to be a Republican? But for me, I’ll stick with the heathen, evil, cannibalistic Democrats. They’re the ONLY political party in ‘Murica that advocates for the eating of Christian flesh, and I LOVE chomping down on some freshly roasted Christian!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. They are Christians, but set themselves apart both in religion and behavior. There were, in my day, baptists and Methodists and Congregationalists, my dad was episcopalian, and there were Catholics. Distinct. As a kid you could have friends anywhere along the spectrum, but as you grew older, which friends became more important, if not to you, but to your family. ‘My god, what if she marries him? Hes a seventh day advent…”

      I may be wrong but it seems that at that time I knew a lot of Catholic democrats, and not all that many republican.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. It seems to me there was a brief window in time, 60’s-70’s where all differences were swept away. Mostly. And now come back with a vengeance. I went to Grad school in the “good old South”, where (some) Baptists would speak of “them wald an’ loose Catherlics”. 🙂
        Episcopalian is the American version of the “Church of England”, correct?
        And Catholic Republicans? Ain’t never seen none. No ma’am. 😉
        (Actually I think I only know – vaguely – one Republican.
        Take care
        (And thank you for your post on 13 signs…)
        Blue moon…
        Brian

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Hey ark- just a question for you, as serious as a heart bypass surgery.

    Since you have no problem stating who and who is not a ‘proper Christian,’ can you please define what one is.

    Forget your references to Charles Manson, Hitler, or Granny Smith; WHAT is a proper Christian? Tkx.

    Like

        1. The post was about Christian Values. I am sure that Democrats and Republicans have their own particular views on what these values are. I was interested in what this bloke’s specific Christian Values were, but he refused to tell me, which is odd as he seemed vehement that Democrats could not possibly have any Christian Values..
          This suggests that he doesn’t know what his values are and was just spouting nonsense. And he is the one floundering in fog.

          However, I am interested to know what your Christian Values are, if you would care to share them?
          And also if you think Democrats can have Christian Values as well as Republicans?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Last sentence without being too prolix if I may.

            Sure, there are just as many good Democrat Christians as there are lousy and hypocritical Republicans. Politics are not good barometers for spiritual things, BUT they do reveal bias, both good and bad.

            Personally, I find the louder the mouth via camera, the emptier the points.

            There are just as many Republicans that I detest as well as Democrats, but it seems the dems have a leg up.

            While imperfect, my views on politics are odd in that I agree with the Lord’s purposes as to my place in the world- to be a witness/ defender of loved ones/ a model employee/ to owe no man anything/ to not have as much as a parking ticket/ to pay taxes/ and to thank God for everything/ there is more of course but time and space restraints.

            Liked by 2 people

      1. “A proper Christian is one who considers himself or herself to be a Proper Christian” … so if they all follow Christ and radiate His love of fellow Person, then all are proper Christians?

        They would have to be—either that or at each others’ throats, screaming “Me! I’m the REAL one!” (the “all others will be burned at the stake” goes without saying.)

        Now please ponder how you might answer, in Belfast, when strolling down the street with nary a care in the world you feel cold metal against the back of your neck and a harsh voice* rasps “Catlick or Protestant?”

        * Bloody horrible accent. Yeuch~!

        Liked by 3 people

  12. We have an over abundance of religious nuts and breathtakingly ignorant and vicious people in the US and many are found in the Republican Party and in the vast percent of the apathetic and clueless…like it was said…Religion poisons everything

    Liked by 4 people

  13. CS:

    ” I agree with the Lord’s purposes as to my place in the world- to be a witness/ defender of loved ones/ a model employee/ to owe no man anything/ to not have as much as a parking ticket/ to pay taxes/ and to thank God for everything/ there is more of course but time and space restraints.”

    Wow~!

    And maybe, perhaps one (distant) day, The Lord’s purposes will be achieved? By more folks than just your own good self … the delay is obviously His intention; but He knows/knew what He was/is doing.

    I’ve often pondered why The Almighty might need a ‘witness’ … is His holy inferiority complex really that bad? Did He goof when He created Ark, or even my own humble self? I know that it is beyond the ken of the likes of we … but why would the Infinite create a world of suffering, when being timeless and infinite He knew already how it all ended? (Doesn’t it seem just a little bit like a pig-ignorant sadist pulling the wings off flies?)

    Liked by 2 people

          1. CS:

            I’ve never heard a donkey talk (outside of religious meetings) but I’ll accept your word, and I must admit that in the very few circuses I’ve attended I enjoyed the clowns most. Politics? We’re on the same page, here. (Don’t the Islamics have a talking donkey, or horse? There’s just so many miracles all over the place I get a bit lost sometimes—God keeps very busy, even with infidels).

            Like

          2. Argus/

            I’ve never heard one talk either, but I have good sources; then again God does have a sense of humor/ making an ass get to the point-

            If/since He made the tongue/ then it stands to reason he may use it however He wishes.

            Like

          3. I attended a ‘crusade’ (public open air gathering of the flocks) once, to hear an imported Australian Reverend do his thing. I was in deep discussions at the time with a colleague, a ‘charismatic’ Christian who spoke to God in His own tongue. Attend, I was told, hear the words and thou shalt be converted!

            I attended.

            It was indeed fascinating.
            I didn’t get bored—the sales techniques were just too obvious (imported from America) and when the Reverend called for volunteers to come down to the dais and “be accepted into Christ” I got a serious poke in the ribs from a very indignant colleague … I’d genuinely cracked up (bad manners I know, but a lot like trying to stifle a whole-hearted sneeze, better out than in) at the sight of a truly beautiful angel-vision long-haired blonde damsel clad in semi-diaphanous ultra-feminine flowing white leading two angelic cherubic infants down to the stage (all under God’s clear open air at dusk. Theatrics: absolutely top marks for perfect …

            Reverend Clarke-Taylor (or similar … it was a long time ago) from Oz.

            All in all the angelic vision in whiter samite was followed by a (lusting?) (no, heaven forbid!) stampede. At my friend’s insistence (and being of a inquisitive nature myself) I joined the throng for processing. The processing too was exactly what I expected … and I was promptly escorted out of the production line when I explained nicely that I was doing field research for a magazine article. (Was too, but it wasn’t printed.)

            You should try it yourselves sometime … but be careful. Folks tend to get scratchy if you are seen as a threat to their income …

            Liked by 1 person

    1. Great questions Argus, however, should you get any reply — and I seriously doubt you’ll get clear, concise answers — you will still have to play Whack-A-Mole with radical Christologists like ColorfulSprinkles. 🧁🍭 The merry-go-round he’s on never stops. Hear the Doppler-effect on his incessant rambling gibberish? 😄

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Three quick points about religion and religious values. First, many people have a strong innate biologically-driven need to believe and others don’t. Second, you don’t have to be stupid to believe, but it does help……Third, it’s well established that those who know very little about something, often believe they know a lot about it – they’re full of the omnipotence of ignorance as my old English teacher used to say.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. KEN:

      the need for stupidity—and the almost universal acceptance thereof—is amply demonstrated in two places: the ‘house of God’ (pick a flavour, any flavour—there’s oodles) and the polling booth. (Stupid seems a stronger word than gullible but with these topics there’s very little difference).

      Liked by 1 person

  15. In American Christianity there is a huge difference between the Evangelical / fundamentalist element who emphasize adherence to the Old Testament taboo system, and those whose beliefs have evolved away from their Biblical roots as American culture has evolved. The latter include members of so-called “main line” Protestant denominations and also most Catholics, though there’s also a minority of Catholics who are as strict about the taboo system as the fundamentalists.

    Naturally, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t ask what these Christian Values were and not once was I offered specifics.

    For the fundamentalists, those values are:

    (1) God hates fags
    (2) You will have your rapist’s baby
    (3) Everybody who is different from us is depraved

    In practice, that’s pretty much it.

    The moderate non-fundamentalist Christians are less intellectually coherent, but also more tolerant of cultural diversity and far less dangerous. They are culturally modern and maintain their Christian identity and (rather muddled) beliefs out of a kind of generational inertia more than anything else, so the fact that much of their version of Christianity is wildly incompatible with the Bible doesn’t bother them much.

    I have the impression that in South Africa, too, a large part of the Afrikaner ethnic population adheres to a cold, cruel, strictly-Biblical form of Christianity rather like our fundamentalists, while the majority of the country’s people identify as Christian but are not so rigid about it. I don’t know South Africa well enough to say how close the parallel with the US is. In Europe, the nearest equivalent to our strict fundamentalists would be the hard-line Muslims.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. INF:

      wotever happened to the pre-conquest religions? Weren’t they all the unique word of God/gods/godesses too?

      Like

      1. wotever happened to the pre-conquest religions? Weren’t they all the unique word of God/gods/godesses too?

        Those religions went the way of their believers. Most of the indigenous Indian population in what is now the US was wiped out by disease, and the majority of the survivors were killed off during the white expansion. Those that remain are an insignificant percentage of the modern US population, and many of them were converted to Christianity.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Dammit, that question was intended as a universal … throughout history everyone is running around murdering everyone for their god/God/gods/goddesses and little godlings. But I’ll bet the Natives everywhere were closer to the One True Real gods than JC’s merry men with their stakes and strappado.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. INF:

      surely there’s only one Christianity? And that is the unique message of God—the core business; and there’s the problem … too many damned franchises competing for too few bucks.

      We should all let God speak for Himself*, which is a bummer ‘cos I think He’s given up on us.
      Maybe He’s breaking in a few new teams on planet Zug, having taken a few lessons from us.
      Maybe if He’s doing the ‘cross’ bit again He’s insisting on nice sharp nails this time (blunt nails hurt worse, no?).

      * All three of Him—Father, Son, and the Spook.

      Like

      1. surely there’s only one Christianity?

        In theory, yes. In practice, I assume you’re joking. Christians like ColonStorm claim to be in possession of absolute truth, but in 2,000 years they haven’t been able to agree among themselves on exactly what that truth is.

        A religion is a kind of mental parasite. Like any parasite, over time it adapts to its environment (that environment being the population of host brains in which it lives), and evolves into new subspecies as it adapts to different populations of minds which work differently.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. INF:

          I’m joking, yes. All the time. It’s a habit I picked up at sea with the navy—all you can do in a violent tempest is grin and weather it.
          As for the truth, who can judge? The sane will never convince the irrational by using rational arguments. (When you have personally met God it adds a whole new dimension …)

          Like

  16. To address your point about political parties, the Republican party is increasingly just the party of the hard-line Christians. This gives them a large base of motivated and committed voters, but it’s not a good formula for long-term success because the hard-line Christians are shrinking as a percentage of the population over time (each new generation is less religious than the one before it, and people are deconverting from Christianity at a much higher rate than new people are joining it). If it weren’t for various tricks like laws to discourage voting and our weird electoral system which greatly inflates the power of low-population states (which are mostly highly religious), the Republicans would probably be a permanent minority party already.

    In very broad strokes, the Republicans are the party of highly-religious white people, while the Democrats are the party of non-whites and less-religious or non-religious white people.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “and people are deconverting from Christianity at a much higher rate than new people are joining it”

      Deconverting, but what to? The easily led superstitious sheeple often convert from one Godly to another, and I hate to think that Christians are become Islamics. Yeuch … but I can see appeal for slow learners and paedophiles—in Islam you are allowed six-year-old little wives … and more wives than Jesus’s “Just one!”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The easily led superstitious sheeple often convert from one Godly to another

        That’s not what the data say. The main growth over the last twenty years has been in the non-religious category. There’s very little growth in the number of Muslims and other non-Christian religions due to conversion — what growth Islam in the US is experiencing is due to the birth rate. Europe shows the same pattern. There’s very little conversion of indigenous Europeans to Islam, while Muslims are following the same trajectory of loss of numbers to secularism and deconversion as the indigenous Europeans did.

        I absolutely reject the concept that the broad mass of people are dumb easily-manipulated “sheeple” while we ourselves are some sort of clever elite looking down on them. Been there, done that.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Those Islamics aren’t dumb, are they? Their system is The Law, entire of itself (with hideous penalties for transgressions). I’ve never bothered checking (too old to care, really) but I imagine that the laws if not bending in places like the UK and Eu will in fact be changed to “allow religious freedom”.

          So all they have to do is outbreed the natives; and that plus a few converts here and there will swing the balance. Islamic Europe in two generations, do you think? I won’t be here but it would be nice to know …

          Backlash is illegal.
          We had an Australian guy here in New Zealand recently who went into a couple of mosques with semi-automatic weapons and popped off a few of them. Did unto them what they do unto others — but instead of a medal he got growled at and now semi-automatic weapons have been outlawed in NZ. It figures …

          Religious freedom is all very well and good … sometimes … but let’s leaven theory with a bit of Reality. Without invoking history (and Godwin’s Law) … at what stage might Hitler and his cheery band possibly have been stopped?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Most Muslims don’t live in strict accordance with, nor even have a complete knowledge of, all the laws of Islam, any more than most Christians fully understand and live in perfect accordance with the Old Testament. For people everywhere, the religion they identify with is just one part of what they are. There are extremist Muslims as there are extremist Christians, but they aren’t typical in either case.

            So all they have to do is outbreed the natives

            Again, that’s not what the data show happening. The birth rates among Muslim populations in Europe are dropping and becoming more similar to the indigenous birth rates as they assimilate to the indigenous culture. For that matter, birth rates in most Muslim countries are dropping as those countries become more urbanized and economically developed, just like everywhere else. For obvious reasons, the great majority of Muslim men don’t have multiple wives.

            We had an Australian guy here in New Zealand recently who went into a couple of mosques with semi-automatic weapons and popped off a few of them.

            A terrorist is a terrorist. Mass-murdering random civilians who, as individuals, were guilty of no crime is terrorism, whether they’re Muslims or French or Americans on 9/11. Your formulation is disgusting, no less so if you were “joking” again. You’re no better than a Nazi apologist.

            I did not, of course, mean to “like” your comment. I clicked that button by mistake because it’s in the same place as the “reply” button is on most WordPress blogs.

            Like

        2. You have greater respect for the sheeple than I do. The greater political momentum should be applied to Truth and the pursuit thereof—but it isn’t. There’s too much mollycoddling of pelf pursuing people who should be exposed, and pilloried in public rather than tolerated without comment.

          Good manners prevents too many people from exposing the pelfers … although sometimes the urge for survival is a consideration too. I wouldn’t give a peanuts chance in hell for someone to crawl out in one piece from a Billy Graham style ‘event’ after bellowing “BullSHIT!” in an appropriate place. (Bellowing? How else—no time is ever (R) ever given for rebuttal at those things.)

          Like

          1. Well, no one could accuse you of good manners. And as your comments here show, you are far stupider and more ignorant than most of those you dismiss as “sheeple”.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. I reserve good manners for all, until they prove unworthy … and then I’m a wee bit more honest.

            As for my being stupid—hey, I’m working on it.

            Ignorant? Am still working on that too (thank God for the internet and Mr Google, no?).

            “Sheeple” is there anything wrong with that term? I thought that people who behave exactly like sheep can well be described as ‘sheeplike in behaviour’ (don’t flocking think for themselves but follow the leader blindly). No?

            You seem a bit aggrieved, Inf. My apologies if I’ve accidentally offended you—usually if I offend it’s because I damned well mean to—but with you, no offence was or is intended. (Unless the shoe fits, of course~? My offensive is aimed at those who seek pelf and power by invoking falsehoods.)

            Like

        3. They’re allowed four wives and can start banging them at age nine … I’d say at a guess that if nothing else, Reality is going to be outbred.

          Like

  17. INF:

    Your indignation gives me hope for the future … not everyone is a blind idiot. Appreciated. You may have noticed that I often use language in the form pf ‘Devil’s Advocate’—a kind of lying, I guess, but it serves my purposes.

    As for terrorism, I posted a couple of times somewhere on Charlie Hebdo, but that’s all ancient history now and who remembers such? Or even cares? Terrorist—there but for grace of God etc go I, and many others. And the Islamic guys who pounced on the London guy in the street that time, having immobilised him with a ramming attack by car then tried (failed, too) to saw his head off as he lay helpless (got growled at by a passing granny, I believe) … terrorists? Or legitimate warriors for God?

    My own Spouse had just finished her Wimpy burger in a Wimpy bar (London) and was just hoofing around a corner when the place blew—IRA heroes getting their point across.

    Personally, if ‘we’ are to hope to prevent such activities we should look to the Root Causes.
    My own suggestion is often ignored, as it should be where rationality clashes head on with indoctrination; but even that won’t solve the problems.

    Most folks (et tu, Brute?) confuse Islam with religion. Actually the religion bit is only a part of it—Islam is a system for Full Spectrum Dominance, and religion is merely one arm of it. Until people are both taught and given the freedoms to think for themselves … we will be stuck with Islam as our system in the future, all of us. You too, or your descendants — get used to it; it is the will of Allah.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Just had a natter with The Spouse, she had a giggle and said that the explosion was about twenty minutes after she’d left. Memory plays tricks …

      Like

  18. Arkenaten wrote: “Of course, a great many Americans do support the Democrat party so what does this say of them I wonder? Well, as you might guess, Tom tells us.”

    The corret term is “Democratic Party”. Republicans and conservatives use the term “Democrat Party” as a childish slur.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s