Mike Johnson is a Problem.....
- Thread starter GigGoo
- Start date
Damn, Chitty85…take a step back and calm your feelz a bit. No need to blow a gasket over this place.
Hell no, Jesus was a dirty hippie liberal.
No it was horrible. I went to a soccer event with some friends then met my daughter at home in the evening. Both she and my ex went and were sobbing at the wedding. Bizarro world. My daughter said “oh my god. He’s soooooooo sweet. He hugged me. And said he has heard so many great things about me. And he was so glad mom and I went. And he’s very very religious. Like nothing like us dad.”
I’m so fu*cking crabby
That made me laugh out loud. Maybe the ex-stoker just wanted to be closer to God?
I don’t think she’s knocked up. I think we were wrong. Makes it even worse and pisses me off more
I hope you’re right tho. If she doesn’t get pregnant and have more I’ll be beside myself
Oh, she's gonna have more.
Stay close to her. Once she has that second kid, take her out to lunch often. At Cheesecake Factory. Make sure she doesn't leave the table until she's consumed 3,000 calories. "No, no! Of course we need to have a slice of cheesecake. Come on, we'll split it." You know the drill.
i still think it's possible she's pregnant now. i just don't understand why the rush to marry. and it was a small wedding. probably 50 plus people. my ex and daughter didn't go to the reception so i don't know if she was drinking.Oh, she's gonna have more.
Stay close to her. Once she has that second kid, take her out to lunch often. At Cheesecake Factory. Make sure she doesn't leave the table until she's consumed 3,000 calories. "No, no! Of course we need to have a slice of cheesecake. Come on, we'll split it." You know the drill.
my daughter pissed off my ex wife real bad on the drive home from the wedding. i'm sure my ex was a little crabby to begin with. she's apparently been all over the dating apps. so on the drive back from the wedding my daughter goes: "why don't you get on your dating thing and message all your boyfriends at once - the first one of you who gets to my house with chic-fil-a for my daughter i'll marry." apparently this really pissed my ex off
Sounds like something my daughter would say. Only she'd substitute Cane's.
I don't think you or @CO. Hoosier watched that clip. What CO said about separation of church and state is accurate, but Mike Johnson's rhetoric goes beyond that into Christian Nationalism. That's his end game.
Any yeah-buts, or 'what he really means' retort is splitting hairs. He and others on the far right want to govern according to Christian scripture and make certain things contrary to scripture against the law. At the very least, he's definitely blurring the lines of separation of church and state.
You forgot Middle Eastern.
If real, actual Jesus showed up on the doorstep of the most ardent American Evangelical Christian today, they'd call the cops on him. Or shoot him.
Yes, I watched it.
I’ve got some news. The United States has been governed by Christian values since the day it was founded. We feed and clothe the poor. We provide or offer shelter for those don't have it. We punish murder and theft. We strive to see all people as the same. And more. All of these are in the Sermon on the Mount. They are all Christian principles.
But here is the important part. Christians are not the only group that holds these values. These are universal values of good that many hold.
We now have an overwhelming need to not think about important issues for their own merits. We can only think about values in relation to what other individuals or groups advocate for those values. If the wrong people agree with an idea, the idea doesn’t have merit. Yeah, Johnson has a strong Christian faith and it guides him. You act as though it is a bad thing. It isn’t.
Our country is in the midst of surrogate thinking. We think in terms of surrogate groups or individuals to determine how we should think. The Germans went though this with “Jewish Physics” in the 30’s. We go though it now and we are doing it on a wider and deeper level than the Nazis ever did. Christian nationalism, white nationalism, Black Lives Matter, TRUMPISM! Islamophobia etc. etc. etc. are all techniques used for either advocating for or dismissing ideas based upon some silly surrogate or extrinsic, factor. We have lost the ability to think about stuff based on the stuff. I blame education. Education has taken a sledge hammer to thinking and instead focuses on what groups think and say.
Remember, the Volkswagen was Hitlers idea and it was a good idea.
Only one of those 'surrogate' groups have actual, real federal legislators proposing that their way/beliefs be woven into law. Or at least only one of those groups actually has elected officials with enough political power and clout to actually enact laws based on their beliefs.
And you're right that Johnson's Christian faith isn't a bad thing. If he wants to pray and reflect on his Christian faith in the legislative process, that'll all well and good. When he starts using his faith as justification - or a foundation - for discriminatory or restrictive laws, that's a problem.
What's your point? They're not advocating for any type of state religion as far as I know.
There are strengths and weaknesses in representative democracy. It's a strength when representatives advocate for the views of their constituents. It can be negative when those views become extremely narrow to only certain subsets of their constituents.
The challenging distinction comes in Christian principles vs. principles of Christianity. When a legislator pursues laws because they are the former, that's a negative. When they pursue laws because they support the value (that is a broadly shared value across their constituency), that's a positive.
IMHO, we have too many of the first and not enough of the second.
Well you've certainly got the talking points down. As usual people like MTG,Boebert, Flynn (and apparently you) make an argument which ignores facts...
Have you read the 1776 VA Statute for Religious Freedom (bill 82) drafted by Jefferson, along with Madison? If so you'll see that it preceeded the 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, in which he delineated the need for a seperation between chuch and state. From the official Jefferson Monticello website...
"Bill No. 82 was guided through the legislative process by James Madison while Jefferson watched anxiously from Paris where he was serving as U.S. minister. The bill was also strongly supported by religious dissenters (primarily Presbyterians and Baptists) who had suffered under the established church in colonial Virginia and who desired religious freedom and a separation of church and state. Bill No. 82 was finally adopted in 1786.[4]
"We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact [Be it enacted by the General Assembly] that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act [to be] irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right.[7]"
The terms "no man" and "all men" does not apply only to religious persons, but applies to ALL, Christians,non-Christians,atheists etc...
In the 1802 letter he specifically cited the need for a wall sperating church and state...
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" thus building a wall of eternal separation between Church & State. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect"
Depends on who you ask:
Wokeness and the New Religious Establishment
Woke ideology in its various forms is quickly becoming the established faith of the American elite. But what if that religious language suggests more than an analogy? As its influence grows, might wokeness rise to the level of an actual established f...
nationalaffairs.com
Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America
In his new book, John McWhorter argues that a neoracism, disguised as antiracism, is hurting Black communities in this country. According to McWhorter, the problem is that a well-meaning but pernicious form of antiracism has become, not a progressive ideology, but a religion. In Woke Racism...
news.columbia.edu
cne.news
Where does wokism come from, and what are its foundations? It is like the Evangelical Revival of 200 years ago. French philosopher Jean-François Braunstein explores these questions in his essay “La Religion Woke”.
"The whole point is to keep government from establishing a state religion."
And the "separtists" who had fled to Mass were just as willing to try and impose their particular religion on citizens within the Commonwealth,which is why Rhode Island was established and became the first colony to charter Religious Freedom...
So what's your point? Is the idea of "Christian Nationalism" any different than the establishment of a state religion that some people who were persecuted themselves in England and elsewhere tried to enact in various colonies? In many ways the oppressed became the oppressor, that's why Jefferson was so adamant about a wall of seperation between church and state...
None of the nonsense you've spouted here is an advance of anything taught in a basics civics course. Why in the world would you ASSume that those of us arguing in favor of maintaining that wall are ignorant of basic English history and the battle between Catholics and Protestants for control of the Crown? I do think your analysis is a little lopsided because I'd say the issue for many was that Religion controlled the govt,rather than the other way around. In fact I'd say Henry's relationship with the COE epitomized the danger of mixing politics and religion.
Actually what you posted was right on target. CoH just chose to ignore your points and fly off on one of his tangents...
Just stop it. There is zero chance of the US having a state religion . 200-300 year old ecclesiastical history doesn’t cut it. “Christian nationalism” is nothing but a liberal construct to dismiss a POV you want to disagree with but don’t know how to make the argument other than saying “Christian nationalism” as if that means anything.
I think your distinction between christian principles and principles of Christianity is a distinction without a difference. It simply is a means for non-Christian’s to think about Christianity in public policy without saying that. As I tried to point out, you shouldn’t be concerned about that issue. Whether a principle is a Christian principle isn't relevant.
That's kind of weak, in my opinion. It's playing loose with the term 'religion' and there most definitely isn't any type of church involved.Depends on who you ask:
Wokeness and the New Religious Establishment
Woke ideology in its various forms is quickly becoming the established faith of the American elite. But what if that religious language suggests more than an analogy? As its influence grows, might wokeness rise to the level of an actual established f...
Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America
In his new book, John McWhorter argues that a neoracism, disguised as antiracism, is hurting Black communities in this country. According to McWhorter, the problem is that a well-meaning but pernicious form of antiracism has become, not a progressive ideology, but a religion. In Woke Racism...
cne.news
Where does wokism come from, and what are its foundations? It is like the Evangelical Revival of 200 years ago. French philosopher Jean-François Braunstein explores these questions in his essay “La Religion Woke”.cne.news
What an ass-kisser. I can see why you can't stand him.
Wait until your ex finds out anal is against his religion.
