The "Christians" are coming! The "Christians" are coming!

We are the land of Ceremonial deism. Forget it, Jake. It’s America.

Non-Christian cults are part of the problem too

More about her here:
JZ Knight Wiki

What galls me is how religious people use existing ceremonial deism as justification for implementing more of it.

I worked with a military officer who wanted to have prayers before certain meetings. When I objected to the injection of religion into government business, she said that it was OK, because we have “In God We Trust” on the money.

But will the children be able to actually READ them?

Is this organization going to go from school to school to ensure that the posters are displayed in a manner acceptable to them?

Yep.

Cults love Trump, and one reason so many people were susceptible to Trump is that they were already in a cult. Two of the biggest Trump supporting news outlets are run by Trump. The Washington Examiner is run by the Moonies and the Epoch Times is the media arm of the Chinese Falun Gong cult. One of Moon’s sons runs a spin-off gun-worshipping cult. Even secular economic cults like Amway ( owned by Dick DeVos, Betsy’s husband,) have inner circles that are militantly conservative.

In the religious cult world, millions of fundamentalist Christians (a subgroup of evangelicals) worship in churches that arguably meet the definition of cults, many of these groups are politically active, and their members have been raised with beliefs that are way outside of mainstream society……self-esteem and critical thinking are the work of the devil, it is necessary to physically abuse children if you want to raise them right, sexual assault is the fault of the victim, democracy is bad, retirement savings are bad, Liberty University is a hotbed of secular humanism….

I want to note that these beliefs are doctrinal in many fundamentalist groups. My source is the largest fundamentalist homeschooling program (ATI) which is used by non-Catholic fundamentalists of multiple denominations……Independent Fundamentalist Baptists, Calvinists, Anabaptists and Amish among others. Their material is available online and it’s insane. Here’s their guide for counseling sex abuse victims.

I’m mentioning all this because I think most of us find the extreme beliefs under discussion ridiculous, and it’s hard for us to comprehend how any one can actually believe this stuff. But when people have been taught crazy-assed stuff from childhood and they get beaten for questioning it and they aren’t exposed to any other belief system, most of them grow up REALLY believing it. And people that REALLY believe crazy stuff can be very dangerous, especially when God is thrown into the mix.

Note: Not all evangelicals are in this group. “Evangelical” is a big tent with lots of dissenting factions, and I’m talking about the ultra-conservative groups.

Note: When I talk about these beliefs I’m not saying all members of the group believe or practice it - for example, I’ve read memoirs from people in those groups whose mothers DIDN’T physically discipline them, although they often had to pretend they did. I’m saying the belief is doctrinal, it’s part of the written teachings of the groups. Even among the strictly religious, compliance varies.

One last note: TLC sucks for running shows like 19 Kids and Counting and Sister Wives, which whitewash these cults.

My memory must be going, because I’m sure I remember that some examples of these “not all” groups were very, very loudly condemning all members of a different religious group (not to be named, but represented on Wheel of Fortune by M_sl_ms) and then, when challenged with the reality of “not all,” asked very loudly why the rest of them weren’t busy every minute of the day and night calling them out and rousting them from the religion by the seats of their pants.

Sorry. I should know better. History is to be cited only when thoroughly cherrypicked and triple washed.

Does anybody think the reason the R/W Media are constantly trying to scare people about the new IRS hires from the Deficit Reduction Act is because they are afraid of this?:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Source: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/churches-religious-organizations

They call it the War On Religion.
That’s why church leaders are fighting so hard.
IMO - It’s not the mighty Donald.
Its the mighty Dollar…

Yeah, Bill Gothard was a hero to the Duggars, and they sent their sons and daughters to his various programs (there was a boot camp for the boys and something called “Journey to the Heart” IIRC for the girls). When Gothard was outed as a big ol’ child molester, the Duggars hid their involvement. Slimeballs.

Well, yeah. The Founders had no concept of a Atheist nation, many were indeed Deists- a believer in a Supreme being , but not any organized religion.

Do note that Queen Elizabeth is “The Supreme Governor of the Church of England” ie the titular head of the Church of England. So the UK has ceremonial Christianity and a State Religion. Note Denmark and Greece also have a state Church. Ceremonial Christianity is not that uncommon.

Good point.

Correct. They skip over the rape, child abuse , brainwashing and incest.

Yes- but not positions. A Church or other Non-profit is perfectly okay to support stuff like the environment, banning drunk driving, and banning abortions. Many such orgs have that as their very purpose.

So, not really. The GOP wants less auditors and agents so they can cheat freely on the Income tax, etc.

I should have said one of the reasons, not the reason.

What you said is true, but sticking with the Christian theme of this thread, if seems like they are also worked up over the Johnson Amendment.

They even have a Pulpit Initiative movement that seeks to allow tax exempt religious organizations to ignore IRS 501(c)(3) and return politics to the pulpit.
I suppose that both sides do it so it doesn’t garner much interest here, but I for one, would rather the Amendment be enforced.

That works for saying you don’t have to remove them an public property. But how well does it work for making it required speech?

No, but it can certainly be argued that what they wanted was a, by and large, secular nation.

If the “Christians” who follow such “prophets” would actually believe what the Bible says.

“If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed” (Deuteronomy 18:22; NIV).

You’re asking them to follow a book they’ve never read, you know.

Oh they’ve read it all right. To quote a great philosopher;
" Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest,…"

No, they were Deiists. What they wanted was a non-denominational nation, free choice of religion, and absolutely no state religion.

Yes, a, by and large, secular nation.

Article VI, Clause 3:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

I’m not at all sure they actually did read it, except portions selected by their pastors.
The fundamentalist in our critique group wrote something about Lot being virtuous. Another member, who is not an atheist, beat me to reminding her that Lot offered his daughters for rape.
Most evangelicals seem to operate at the children’s illustrated Bible level, with the giraffes happily on the Ark and no pictures of the drowned babies.

No- what they meant by that is more of a “Are you Catholic? We don’t take Catholics… or Jews… or several other denominations.” In many areas there was a test to make sure you were part of the “right” religion.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-vi/clauses/32#:~:text=After%20requiring%20all%20federal%20and,as%20the%20No%20Religious%20Test

This prohibition, commonly known as the No Religious Test Clause, banned a longstanding form of religious discrimination practiced both in England and in the United States. In doing so, it provided a limited but enduring textual constitutional commitment to religious liberty and equality that has influenced the way Americans have understood the relationship between government and religion over the last two centuries.

In England, religious tests were used to “establish” the Church of England as an official national church. The Test Acts, in force from the 1660s until the 1820s, required all government officials to take an oath disclaiming the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and affirming the Church of England’s teachings about receiving the sacrament. These laws effectively excluded Catholics and members of dissenting Protestant sects from exercising political power.At the time the United States Constitution was adopted, religious qualifications for holding office also were pervasive throughout the states. Delaware’s constitution, for example, required government officials to “profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost.” North Carolina barred anyone “who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion” from serving in the government

Not 'Do you believe in a “Supreme Being of sorts?” That might have been okay.

Here is one Oath of office;"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.‘’

So, a generic, non-denominational, non-specific Deity of some sort. By no means “secular”. That has changed a bit recently for sure.

Lot’s family had an interesting definition of righteous. First he offers his daughters up for rape so his guests wouldn’t be (I’m sure they appeared to be men, so they were more important than a mere female). And then when they couldn’t find any other men around, the daughters basically raped him.

I forget, was there progeny from that?