I would like to do a piece on my blog, Releasing Religion, regarding mixing God & government.  And I'd like to know what opinions people have here about doing such a thing.  Some points to mention are:

Glenn Beck is well known for arguing that we have misunderstood that founding fathers & their desire to keep church & state separate.  Holding his rally on 8/28, he gathered 150.000 people to hear him talk about bringing out country "back to God".  What do you think it would do to our country to "get back to God"? 

The Tea Party has been called racist Chrisotcrats. In their recent convention, most conference sessions began with prayers.  What do you think of the Tea Party?  Do you know very little about them?  Do you know a lot?  Please share your thoughts here.

The piece will be posted on www.releasingreligion.blogspot.com









Tags: 8/28, Beck, Christocrats, Glenn, Honor, Party, Rally, Restoring, Tea

Views: 315

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Talk about bad placement.
Its very interesting, the religious aspect of the 'Tea Party,' because I've been privy to recorded interviews in which the original organizers of the movement (not the corporations but actual individuals) were confronted with bringing god into the mix and they REFUSED to say anything about it. the original intent was to just focus on fiscal issues, a competent strategy because religion is such a divisive element. Now that the movement has been supported and in a way co-opted by Glenn Beck and his ilk, the god element has grown MUCH stronger and will [hopefully] lead to the ultimate demise of this recent surge of support. there is a link on an earlier post, on page 9 I believe, that has a link to an article written by the author of THE AUTHORITARIANS and I found that very informative~the book itself is available for download free, and I found that one of the best reads I've had in a while [consider that I read two or more books a week]
It seems that the least that can be done is consider this movement a social experiment in reactionary political movements; at the most it is a threat to liberties that we may be taking for granted.
Folio magazine essay on the Tea Party. The most recent offering from Hal Crowther isn't available online yet, but is worth the read when it is. His more recent comments about the threats he received and the bile comments screamed at him really show what this demented group of sheeple are made of.

http://www.folioweekly.com/documents/main_060810_000.pdf
"The Washington Post found the much-hyped movement is actually "not so much a movement as a disparate band of vaguely connected gatherings that do surprisingly little to engage in the political process." The newspaper could verify and contact just 647 of the 1,400 Tea Party groups it identified. Some groups consist of a single person, or a handful of family members, and 70 percent have done zero political campaigning. Only half the groups said they wanted to shrink government size and spending, and the culture war was off their radar"

"about the Tea Partiers is that it's an amorphous group of activists with no clear agenda, no leadership, no internal structure, and no real areas of expertise. Its passionate members, while probably well meaning, appear to have no idea what they're talking about. ... There can be little doubt that these activists exist, and that the political world takes them quite seriously. But beyond this, groups and members of this 'movement' don't necessarily even agree with one another about their priorities or beliefs."

." But given that few have actually done any campaigning, "do we know how many will vote and who they will vote for?"
Jim, that would explain why I read so many different and contradictory articles on the Tea Party. What interests me is how this will all evolve. What platforms will they eventually stand on? How will they differentiate themselves from the GOP, if it all? Where will they stand on hot button issues such as abortion & god in the government?
See, thats the interesting thing. Those issues are going to be the dissolvent of the movement~ as their platform develops, there are going to be fissures between people who feel differently on different subjects. Likely, it will fractionalize until it dissolves completely. The strength in the beginning was the few issues that it addressed, but as it evolves it will summarily disintegrate as the many differences become apparent.
~it can almost be viewed as an atheist movement would be. there's only one issue that atheists truly unite over, the disbelief in god. after that, atheists branch off into many different factions. there is no prototypical political atheist, and whilst the 'Tea Party' is a political faction, from what I can see it will go the same way as every other movement bound by few ideas
As I've read this thread and the opinions and what we know about the TP, it becomes more likely that the disintegration you speak of is a main piece of the 'design' by the Rovian forces that created it. Short term success to block a sufficient Dem majority to accomplish major goals, two more years of fear, uncertainty and doubt(fud) and a chance at the next presidency.
That makes sense.... I guess Rove isn't called a Strategist for nothing, huh? A temporary movement to accomplish the same goals as republicans, yet done through proxy with minimal responsibility for the outcome.. If thats true, thats scarier than the rhetoric I hear from the tea-baggers. considering this, does it seem like the republicans are really political super-villains? its starting to seem that way....
Where will they stand on hot button issues such as abortion & god in the government?
Most of the Teapublican candidates have made their position on abortion very clear (with god singing hosannas in the background). Ken Buck in Colorado opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest as does Joe Wilson in Alaska. All of them opposes abortion it's just some of them are not quite as bat shit crazy.
Their future is not very solid - the only thing holding the whole gaggle together is the money of the Kock brothers and their slimy associates. They are no more relavent than any other Astroturf organization - a rerun of the No Nothing Party..
Kock

Please tell me that was an intentional typo? :)
I have followed this thread closely because I have been interested in learning about the Tea Party. I didn't learn too much because all of the posts are so very negative toward them. So I have been surfing the net for a more balanced outlook.

As of now, I feel the Tea Pary are a bunch of really pissed off, frustrated Americans who care about their children's and grandchildren's quality of life down the road. They are nervous about the mounting national debt most of all. Why do none of you see it that way? I am shocked and amazed at the vile and anger that all of you have shown on this thread.

It has really made me question myself and my attitudes. My best friend who I have known for 30 years is a staunch repbublican and so is her entire family. Her parents came here legally from Mexico, learned the language, and are very happy to be here.

They belong to organizations to help Latinos and her father often voluteers his time to go to doctor appointments to help translate for Latino patients yet he is absolutely against illegal immigration. I guess maybe I just live life in a parallel universe from you all. I don't know. I am very confused but leaning toward the conservative take on it.

Wow, it's pretty bad when you were somewhere (this website) where you thought you had found a nice comfy cyber home and found out YIKES - I just got bit in the ass!

It did motivate me to learn some new things. I still love it here. At least no one is going to tell me I will burn in hell forever for not agreeing with them! LOL.
Linda, I don't doubt for a second that many of the Teabaggers are well-intentioned. Unfortunately, they've been sold a bill of goods by the libertarian and plutocratic forces in the country. How else to explain that they are nearly unanimous in opposing government spending and taxation, even though both of those things would primarily benefit the lower economic classes to which they belong? They have been convinced that the "freedom" of billionaires like the Koch brothers is somehow central to their own lives. In reality, they are simply engaged in a fierce competition with each other to "win" the race to the bottom that the plutocrats are wagering on.

Government debt, in and of itself, is not the problem, or even a problem at all, if it is undertaken and managed reasonably wisely (not that I'm arguing that it has been, particularly). And of course, refusing to tax the wealthy, who already pay taxes at a much lower rate than the middle and lower classes (and indeed, than the rest of the industrialized world), only exacerbates the government debt. Yet the Teabaggers (and Republicans and Libertarians) insist on cutting taxes as the only solution to anything. We've been cutting taxes since Reagan, and where has it gotten us? Into The Great Depression 2.0.

In an economic downturn, nobody wants to risk their money, including the wealthy. Lowering taxes on the wealthy doesn't increase their risk tolerance, their willingness to invest and create jobs. They just hold onto a bigger pile of cash. In an economy where everybody is afraid to let go of their money, the government needs to tax the wealthy in order to put that money back into circulation. Further, wealth inequality destroys any economy. Think of it this way: if one person has all the money, it isn't worth anything. The closer an economy gets to that degenerate state, the less efficiently it works.

I agree that illegal immigration needs to be stopped. But again, this is at best a side issue to the fundamental imbalance in our economy of wealth inequality. And of course, agreeing that illegal immigration needs to be stopped doesn't mean we get to treat illegal immigrants inhumanely.

The Tea Party rank and file is as misguided as we might expect for an astroturf campaign funded by robber barons and propagandized 24/7 by Fox News (owned by robber baron Rupert Murdoch) and right-wing talk radio. The most generous possible interpretation is that the Teabaggers are dupes. Why else would they support an ideology that wants to ship their jobs overseas and cut their social safety net? It's a canard to propose that the libertarian agenda is really about responsibility. It's not possible to be responsible for yourself when the economy has been shredded by feudal overlords.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service