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: 97
Latest Activity: on Monday

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

You fund Climate Deniers for Congress

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck on Monday. 1 Reply

"I don't contribute to Climate Change Deniers!", you say? But do you use Google, Microsoft, UPS, AT&T, Ford or eBay? (For a more complete list of Climate Denier patrons -…Continue

Tags: corporate evil, corporate hypocrisy, Climate Denier hypocrisy, greenwashing

Neo-Liberal gut of health care soon to hit the fan

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Richard C Brown Sep 7. 2 Replies

Few news reports on the Ebola epidemic include the political and climate change context that created it. Many actually offer bland reassurance that first world countries could easily handle Ebola. In the US, rural areas are especially unprepared for…Continue

Tags: conservative priorities, hospital closings, emergency preparedness, Ebola

Free market creates monopoly - no market, no freedom

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck Aug 22. 10 Replies

Barry Lynn explains that a monopolist doesn't have to control 100% of a market. With the US having thousands of markets controlled as monopolies, we suffer the Economics of Destruction.What monopoly means is that a company has sufficient control of…Continue

Tags: free market economics, monopoly

Turns out that lawsuits have rules (Daily Kos)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Joan Denoo Aug 6. 4 Replies

So ... now that John Boehner and the House of Representatives have decided that the most important thing on their agenda is suing President Obama for having the unmitigated nerve to want to accomplish something during his second term of office, it…Continue

Tags: rules, president, Barack Obama, sue, John Boehner

Comment Wall

Comment

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

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 11:25am

Greg, you give me bone to chew on when you wrote, "Occupy Wall ST was, to me, a better place for the 'in you face' aspects of interaction for (peaceful) change."
Will people who should read and hear the strident voice go to "Occupy"?Thanks for calling this option to my attention. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 11:17am

Richard Wolff - The Call For a New Capitalism

Wolff describes how our economic system developed, how it changed over time, and defines Booms and Busts. Capitalism creates great wealth and great poverty. Some don't wan't to recognize this but denying and deluding oneself does not change what is real. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 3:04am
Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 2:50am

GRATITUDE

I close down this evening with a beautiful piece of moving art with the theme of gratitude. I am so very grateful for each of you who have taken this torturous path of ideas and options and choices with me. We haven't changed the world, but perhaps we could hear each other, recognize our differences and respect each other and all that you bring to the discussion. 

Good night. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 2:33am

Chris, I imagine you had to learn some coping strategies very young to compensate for feelings about your parents. With your recent vision of a preferred future for you and your husband, you reveal it is possible to rise above the wounds and scars of growing up. 

Now, the next step, it seems to me, is to find little and big ways that bring you joy.  You inspire me!

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 2:18am

sk8eycat, your story and countless other women have been faced with their own version of that same challenge. They thoughtfully searched for options and explored ramifications for each option, coming to different conclusion, but the process continues. Faced with reality, most women think and feel their way to a solution that makes the most sense to them. I respect your journey. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 2:08am

Greg, I like what you said because I know it is true, people turn away from strident voices, whether in volume or ALL CAPS. You have always been a strong supporter of my efforts to increase public awareness of serious issues. 

That said, being calm, reasonable, gentle all need to happen, but for those of us who have walked the path out of sick thinking and trying to flourish as fully human, we noisy ones have a place in struggles for human rights.
Martin Luther King, Jr. had a soft voice that stressed peace, but behind him were the more militant one who revealed the numbers and intensity of anger and who demanded justice. 

Gandhi spoke in soft tones and temperament, but behind him were hundreds, if not thousands, of rebellious, angry crowds demanding to be heard. 

If people who suffer under the yoke of oppression and domination ask for permission to speak, or seek approval in what they say, nothing changes. How long did slavery last in this country? and racial discrimination? and how long have women had to struggle with bearing children and trying to figure out how to feed, house, and clothe them. 

Not all men are bad and irresponsible, thankfully; but all conceived children have a father, whether he intended to be a father or not. 

Greg, I just want to be sure you realize how helpful you have been for me over the months, maybe years, and I appreciate you greatly. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 1:33am

Yes, Robert, I am intolerant of intolerable beliefs. No reason for me to dodge that bullet. You probably haven't read some of my earlier stuff, but let me give you just one example. After working with battered children and women, and hearing the stories of hundreds through various jobs, I began to hear a theme: "yield, pray, obey, turn the other cheek, love him to the lord, crucify yourself daily in imitation of the crucified christ and rejoice in your crucifixion." I call that the "Passive Gospel". Faced with challenges of family violence, many women and children have turned to the church community for help and the most common theme they hear is the Passive Gospel. It is sick, dysfunctional, harmful and leaves scars far too deep to understand how seriously they have been hurt until experiencing a lot of pain, guilt, shame and anguish. Why not just stop it at the source and call those dreadful words stupid, ignorant, and unnecessarily harmful. 

Do ALL religious believe such silly nonsense? I don't know, I don't hear anyone objecting to them even when they come from the pulpit and lectern. 

One nice thing about having a reputation of an angry old woman, I don't have to play games or pretend to be something that I am not. 

Comment by Plinius on September 19, 2012 at 1:21am

Nobody is pro abortion - pro choice, yes.   I was an unwanted child and decided at an early age that I wouldn't force another person to go through childhood. And I made sure of it too, got a sterilization before I was 30 and never regretted my decision. I'm not bad or worthless, but rather heavily scarred by hypocritical fundie parents. The best thing we can do is teach the children everything about sex, children, the ways to prevent pregnancy and all about life. They'll work it out for themselves. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 1:00am

Robert, You make sound and rational statements if your concern is only for the unborn child/with potential to grow to be a man or woman. That is one point I am trying to convey.
1. Why should each and every pregnant woman be expected to sacrifice herself for the life of her unborn child without consideration of the price she pays. I would not/could not abort a child, whether at the moment of conception or at the moment of birth, but what I decide is my right and that responsibility resides in me. I cannot make that decision for another woman. I don't know her mental state, or her physical state, for that matter. To expect a woman to make a decision because someone else has a belief makes no sense to me. Each person is entitled to her/his beliefs, not all beliefs are equal, and no one is required to respect the beliefs of others. Beliefs are standpoint specific; one person believes one thing and another a different one. It is not like gravity, a natural law of nature. (Thanks Sk8eycat for Shaw's quote.) 

In primitive cultures, whether a woman carries pregnancy to term is often decided by the needs of the tribe. If there is enough food for another life, the pregnancy goes to term; if there is not enough food, the pregnancy is ended, without consulting the mother. 

In China, with incredible overcrowding, a woman is allowed only one child. If the 1st child is a female, it often is killed, making possible for another child who could be a male. If a woman has two children or more, she loses her rights to access to benefits provided by the state. I talked to many Chinese women in China who had been caught up in that terrible dilemma, and you know what, women that I talked to agreed with the law. Well, if that is what they want, so be it. However, desperate times require desperate thinking. It depends on where you stand on an issue and one standpoint is not right for a person from a different standpoint. 

As to my over-generalizing about christians, you are absolutely correct. I over-generalize. I do so when a fundamentalist christian makes some ridiculous statement, such as the Earth is 6,000 years old, and a rational person does not stand up and say, "Wait a minute, that is not true!" Not all christians are uneducated, but all christians seem to think the old bromide, my religion, right or wrong; or my country, right or wrong; or my family, right or wrong. Such devotion to religion or patriotism or family loyalty is bigoted. By that, I mean,   "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."

Confession time, I am a bigot. I make no apologies for being obstinate and intolerant of beliefs that interfere with evidence. When a person wants to bring creationism or intelligent design into a science classroom, I object, and loudly. If there are those who believe in a god or allah or yahweh or whatever the name, and know that evidence does not support that claim, yet remains silent, I find that more intolerable than a person who loudly claims creationism. Silence implies agreement. 

Have you ever heard a christian confront another christian who believes in spirits and devils and angels and heaven and hell? Silence tells me all I need to know about a person. 

I respect your willingness to debate, Robert, and enjoy the challenge,.

 
 
 

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