Atheist Nexus Logo

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Information

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 101
Latest Activity: 6 hours ago

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

Atheists’ self-defeating superiority: Why joining forces with religion is best for non-believers

Started by Bertold Brautigan on Tuesday. 0 Replies

Steve Newmann's written the above titled article in Slate with the…Continue

There Is No Republican Middle

Started by Bertold Brautigan Mar 20. 0 Replies

In his Esquire politics blog, Charles Pierce today provided a nice bit of Santorum bashing along with an analysis of the unhinging of…Continue

The Most Dangerous Woman in America, Kshama Sawant

Started by Joan Denoo Mar 16. 0 Replies

Slowly, over the past 40-45 years, we have seen a levelling out of wage labor, a widening of the income gap, a reduction of the middle class, an increase of those living below the poverty line, and a takeover of government by moneyed interests. No…Continue

Tags: service, social, housing, tent, encampments.

Steve Shives, reviews "An Atheist Reads God's Not Dead" by Rice Broocks.

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Joan Denoo Mar 13. 3 Replies

Steve Shives, in his usual robust manner, reviews "An Atheist Reads God's Not Dead" by Rice Broocks.Shive covers virtually all the claims of a believer attempting to replace confidence in science with holy scriptures and debunks fables that come to…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by Grinning Cat on January 28, 2015 at 1:35am

p.s.: The Guardian article about Alexis Tsipras refusing a religious swearing-in also quoted a party activist who's a devout Orthodox Christian, who said that the new prime minister's 'choice of a secular oath was, paradoxically, an act of respect for the church and its integrity. Rather than appropriating religious rituals for political ends, as previous leaders had done, he was "ac­knowl­edging the sanctity of church services and behaving with respect to all of us (practising Christians)... Instead of him taking a false oath, we will offer him our sincere prayers."'

Comment by Grinning Cat on January 28, 2015 at 1:24am

In a dramatic break with tradition, Greece's new prime minister took a civil rather than religious oath of office.

From The Guardian: "Here’s the moment that Greek radical leftist party SYRIZA leader Alexis Tsipras signed the official protocols after being sworn in (using a secular oath) by president Karolos Papoulias."

From The Economist:

GREECE'S new prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, made history within hours of his victory by informing the Archbishop of Athens, very politely, that clerical services would not be required for his swearing-in ceremony. An avowed atheist who has nonetheless made a point of dealing courteously with senior clergy, Mr Tsipras lost no time in making known that his oath of office would be a secular procedure. It was also explained that when the whole cabinet was sworn in, a more junior cleric (but not the archbishop) would be invited to assist those who wished to take a religious oath.

It's hard to overstate what a rupture this marks with the ceremonial culture of Greece. For as long as anybody can remember, every senior office-holder, from socialists to right-wing dictators, has assumed the post with a ritual involving Bibles, crosses and often holy water, sprinkled about with a sprig of basil.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on January 26, 2015 at 7:41pm

A few choice words from the Rude Pundit on Sarah Palin's speech at the recent Iowa Freedom Summit:

The most hilarious part of this is that conservatives are saying that the speech wasn't "serious" and that watching it was "painful." Joe Scarborough called it a "tragedy" that she had fallen so far, apparently not understanding the difference between tragedy and comedy.

Really . . .? This was the speech that made you decide Palin was not going to be president one day? 'Cause, see, the rest of us knew she was a fraud and a puffed-up idiot, a wannabe player, and a power-mad gorgon from the start. We didn't need this babbling cartoon character, this monster with a gaping maw, gorging on fame and attention like a snake on a rat, to blither through one more parade of faux folksiness, like Hee-Haw was her Critique of Pure Reason.

Comment by Idaho Spud on January 26, 2015 at 6:04pm

Comment by Idaho Spud on January 26, 2015 at 6:03pm

When I was young, I looked forward to the day that computers and robots did all the boring, unpleasant, unsafe work, and we all benefitted from their production, so we didn't have to work to provide for ourselves, but could do what interested us.

It's sad that the richest 1% have taken most of the fruits of that production, leaving the rest of us with very little.

Comment by Joan Denoo on January 26, 2015 at 6:01pm

Ruth, I am unable to see your most recent post. I know it contains something interesting/important. Can someone else send it to me, please. I am most grateful! 

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on January 26, 2015 at 5:54pm

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on January 24, 2015 at 1:16pm

It looks like we have the Donald and Her Sarahship to look forward to again in the Republican presidential primaries. When it comes to this particular crazy train, the more the merrier methinks. With Mike the Huckster and the two Ricks, the entertainment level should go through the roof. C'mon Michelle, throw in your hat!

Comment by tom sarbeck on January 9, 2015 at 11:19pm

Please, folks, stop describing the US of A as "our democracy"!

From its start it has been, and still is, an oligarchy -- rule by a few.

The question to ask is Who comprises this oligarchy?

Campaign donors (the bribe givers and the extortion payers).

Comment by Grinning Cat on January 9, 2015 at 2:37pm

Wishful thinking, for some... one of the possible answers in Buzzfeed's "The Supreme Court Quiz":

16. Where does the Supreme Court meet? [Answer choices are pictures of the White House, the Supreme Court Building, Washington National Cathedral (highlighted), and the Capitol Building]

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service