And the crowd thanks to their blind faith falls for it.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Blind faith? Or benefit.
Like I have said older people in UK vote for Tories because it suits their pockets and needs.
Asian people traditionally voted labour as it suited their needs.
If religion and blind faith was the key factor most Muslim people in UK should have voted BNP. Simply because theirs was the manifesto that spoke of bringing troops back home and leaving the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan to their own devices. If issues of Palestine and occupation/war was as big an issue that it lead to terrorism then BNP offered what is believed Muslims wanted.
Unfortunately religion is not the ultimate vote winner. Visa for spouses and free TV license etc trump it (no pun intended)
Blind faith. Because they are told bollocks like voting for xyz guy will bring everything closer to how Christ wanted it to be and what not.
Religious people listen to their religious leaders even if it means damaging their own lives in reality.
Case in point: all the evangelical Covid victims in the American Southeast.
Highest death rate of any region in America.
Yeah and it's identical everywhere. Here in India (one of the biggest religious hotbeds in the world) some of the worst covid deathzones were large religious gatherings during early stages when thousands just decided to go to their events without caring about social distancing or isolation. They were told shite like drinking the holy water will protect you or whatever and that was it. Natural selection came to play.
Yep. We had folks just like that. Churches refusing to halt services and the like. “I trust in the Lord to protect me! If it’s my time then it’s my time!”
[Two weeks later their obituary is in the paper]
Yes, but you still call these people Islamic terrorists. You still single out Islamic terrorists as people more worthy of government attention.
So even though you don't think that people like Breivik is acting in a way according to what the religion prescribes, that shouldn't stop you from being able to talk about Christian terrorism.
Breivik was Far Right as far as I know and wanted to wipe out any potential Muslim political leaders.
Islamic Terrorists quite clearly state they are doing it for Allah, so that’s why I said that.
Yes, he was far right. And Christianity was central to his far right worldview.
Risible post.
You’ve got to stop trying to equate religious US & UK people to fashion your arguments. They are about as alike as apples & bicycles. You do not have a solid grasp on American evangelicals.
Too easy? It’s because religion played a large part in it. You are tryi go to say otherwise?
It’s not just you, it’s you & your ilk.
Don’t take it so personally, we all like fairy tales at some point in our lives.
You literally came in and opened the conversation by saying atheists’ morality changes like the wind, the sanctimony is through the roof.
Sorry, but you don’t get to play the ‘I’m the rational one and you are just overreacting’ card after that.
And also centered in the pacific NW as well as the Rust Belt & Midwest. Age runs the gamut. There are also quite a few upper class enclaves who are evangelical, many in the southeast. What’s the common thread? Religion.
You just don’t have a tangible grasp on this topic. It is extremely cylindrical.
Yes I did. Because the only way you can answer that question truthfully without contradicting anything you've said so far is by admitting that the only thing that matters to you when it comes to morality is what your supposed god tells you, even when it goes against what you know is right or wrong.
My equating of the US and UK (and Pakistan under Khan) does have a reason for me. Ultimately what happens in America is copied somewhat in other places. Personality politics in UK under conservatives pretty much used models from the US.
I'm not American or even been there but my grasp on politics is not totally bad.
Because I don't agree I don't have a grasp? Ok.
There will always be exceptions to the rule.
Not totally gone through these. I was hoping for a succinct reply rather than reading material. It's the last day of the football season here and it's been engrossing.
Anyway the second article is interesting and seems to support some of my arguments.
Succinct reply version: the GOP has actively campaigned towards evangelical’s religious beliefs about social issues to turn them into their most reliable voting bloc. It didn’t used to be that way, but it is now, specifically because of their religious views.
Evangelicalism isn’t simply a southern construct. It exists throughout the country with religion as the only true commonality. This is impossible to refute. We can also take it one more step to extremism; this means the epicenter migrates to the north & west & religion is again the common theme.
You’re gonna see more of this in the coming years. Thankfully this wacko isn’t polling high at all…
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Then there’s the super religious conservative voting bloc known as… the Mormons
Does it say Jesus, Guns and Babies to her left?
That’s her slogan / platform.Does it say Jesus, Guns and Babies to her left?
Sounds like a Netflix series.
How can someone still deny clear links between Christianity and right wing extremism in the US when people are literally using such slogans for political movements. (And they will likely work on a lot of people)
I've always told my wife, nothing scares me as much as the extremely religious, of any religion.
Yeah I appreciate the response.
I also agree with what the GOP have done. Again politics is the driving force here no?
Trump, for example didn't believe in some of the issues but remained silent to keep the vote.
The motivation is not religion.
No I agree it isn't simply southern but where are the large parts of it?
The breakdown in other areas doesn't show the large swathes of support for republicans as the south. Broadly/generally speaking. Better education or younger age group all have an effect.
Rust Belt (Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania), Midwest (Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas), NW (Idaho, Montana eastern Washington, eastern Oregon), Utah
All of these areas are rabidly right wing. Some even with Alabama & Mississippi, I think Idaho is more virulent.
You simply know not of what you speak.
Seen this before.
Look I'm not saying that there are not extreme views. Im not saying these views are bought into and realised by politicians looking to gain power.
The main issue was what is the biggest motivator. And to me it's politics. A concerted effort to buy into groups to get votes. Religion is a tool used in that. Not the main effector.
I listened to an interesting view about black churches recently. How their involvement in things like civil rights has been non existent in many since the state/government had an influence on them. I'll try and find it. But the point is religion has become secondary even for them over political and financial gain
Is the rust belt largely evangelical?
We aren’t talking about Trump, we know he believes in nothing but what profits him.
What others have pointed out and you have been trying to dance around is the fact that the driving motivation for that voting bloc named white evangelicals which the GOP courted, and which used to vote solidly Democratic before the 60s, is religion. Kennedy being the first Catholic president was once a big deal, because US Christianity traditions were Protestant and fringe movements.
We can be objective and acknowledge the positive impact that some schools of Christianity had in some of their social movements like the abolitionist movement, the Prohibition (although that turned out rather badly) or the sufferage movement, but to refute the fact that religious beliefs have always informed the political choice of a lot of their population is just burying your head in the sand.
Not as much as the Midwest (although some consider Ohio, etc. midwest, but that’s just weird to me).
You are correct that the south holds the highest population of evangelicals, but they are also concentrated elsewhere.
The true example of their impact isn’t necessarily top of the ticket (but it is evident there), but further down ballot. It is here where the true damage is done.
Think we need to go back to how this discussion started, with me.
In a nutshell the GOP targeting a certain group to win/gain power isn't about religious motivation. The main driver I would suggest is power.
We started about evangelicals and my points were specifically with regards to them.
If the discussion is to be widened then fair enough. But my points specifically about a specific group in a specific area was and is just that.