What the end of democracy looks like - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15242916
ckaihatsu wrote:The clergy, royalty, and aristocracy of past centuries *benefitted* on a *class basis* from sowing superstitions / religions -- 'groupthink-for-the-masses', basically.

The spread of this religion and its institution are full of opinions. Slaves carried the religion. There are the most ancient Churches in Macedon, 200 ad for instance. Greek Gods were adopted in the Roman Latin tradition . Already called Hellenic religion, what a high commodity among everyone a Greek God in the Greco-Roman world. Now , the people defied all Organized Religion, they defied the aristocracy and royalty, and they defied all social strata, the slaves of Christianity, the Apostles that are all famously martyred. The Persecutions of Christians in Rome are famous in the colosseum. Now if anyone could have tampered down among people and the people themselves alone maintain their ideas and stories. It forms a security that may have maintained any kind of status quo. I don't know about that. But here we are today, and some joke about a single political figure detracting from the fame, prestige and power of their office for anyone else or anything else? Its never happened. Never let any of them direct religion. No matter how perceived , the Bishop was an appointed secular by the King, it is a political Bishop, Separation of Church and State was this bishop is a Loyalty to the King. Separation of Church and State was "Whose image is on this coin, Caesar's". Separation of Church and State as if there were ever the legendary apostolic figure in any politician alive today? No one could note with any authority that President Eisenhower is a political member of a Presbyterian Church, it would be entirely impossible. That is entirely impossible to suggest influence from him on any direction whatsoever. Yet, that who is mentioned is some civil rights clergy and President Eisenhower. What a Muslim does is turn over his faith to a Sayyid of a line of religious Generals and that concept even like the "keys to Peter", total lunacy. There is never some authoritarian in the sanctuary of the religion of the Patristic origins of a Democratic Christianity.
#15242918
Mike12 wrote:
the Bishop was an appointed secular by the King, it is a political Bishop, Separation of Church and State was this bishop is a Loyalty to the King. Separation of Church and State was "Whose image is on this coin, Caesar's".



Going from clerical church authority to secular *crown* authority *was* historically progressive / a-positive-step, but it's still class rule in one form or another, and today, workers aren't allowed to control the very factories that they themselves build.



Peaceful prelude

The Reformation in England had, like the ‘princely reformations’ in parts of Germany, been carried through by royal decree. Henry VIII had broken with the Roman Catholic church for diplomatic reasons and bound the majority of the English ruling class to his policy by selling former monastery lands at knock-down prices.

But there was more to the Reformation in England than just princely self interest and upper class greed. It sank roots among all those open to a new worldview which seemed to make sense of the changing society, especially among the trader and artisan classes but also among some of the landed gentry.

The gap which separated the Reformation from above and the Reformation from below in England was blurred through the latter half of the 16th century. The bitter experience of an attempt to reimpose the old Catholicism by force under Mary Tudor (married to Philip II of Spain) caused lordly recipients of church lands to stand shoulder to shoulder with Puritan burghers in support of her successor, the Protestant Queen Elizabeth I.



Harman, _People's History of the World_, pp. 203-204
#15242921
ckaihatsu wrote:Going from clerical church authority to secular *crown* authority *was* historically progressive / a-positive-step, but it's still class rule in one form or another, and today, workers aren't allowed to control the very factories that they themselves build.

If this is just a 1900's communism poster, you're not very interesting today. Where are classes today? I've seen this on an early communism poster, and they always drag down the king with everything he loved ,a Church, a factory, a wife, a web of international connections.

That would be odd to relate to 300 years earlier, but you do so... The Reformation in England. You twist it around to suggest no groundswell or popularity. The English Reformation hero is Anne Boleyne usually ,an odd 2nd choice for a 2nd wife of somebody who makes Anglicanism an independent competitor at the same game. The King owns what is nominally an arm, a branch, a segment, (disconnection)? Catherine is a disputed wife, or maybe they were never validly married, then Anne Boleyne's child is Elizabeth I. That makes a Protestant popular line of succession in England even after Anne Boleyne's beheading. There was instant recognition and parade of Protestant ascendancy and Bible ownership for Elizabeth I's coronation and notice.

Elizabeth I knocking out Catholic Europe is by no means the earlier settlement. If it were the settlement earlier of Henry VIII supremacy of Anglicanism over his church area, and James I pays lip service to maintaining the Elizabeth I settlement which may not be the case. That is certainly not the settlement during Charles I and the Puritan migration and the USA. By no means could the liberty of the peoples of Europe have been assured outside the military interventions exercised in equal force by England under her (lassez-Faire) reign of military matters for the 1560 formation of the Church of Scotland and revolt against Mary of Scots, the Dutch Revolt against Phillip and the Netherlands Reformed religion as well as Scotland, nor the Huguenots of France that were led to exile in England of the Reformed religion. Virginia and Sic Semper Tyrannis and the name "Virgin Queen" would be popular items of the American people toward Gloriana Elizabeth Good Bess Elizabeth I.
#15242929
ckaihatsu wrote:
workers aren't allowed to control the very factories that they themselves build.



Mike12 wrote:
If this is just a 1900's communism poster, you're not very interesting today. Where are classes today? I've seen this on an early communism poster, and they always drag down the king with everything he loved ,a Church, a factory, a wife, a web of international connections.



No, I don't mean to politically-proselytize, so your stereotyping, though couched, is certainly inappropriate.

I mean to say that the world's polity has been irrevocably affected and transformed by the Industrial Revolution, as it manifested in various national contexts, at various points on the timeline.

*Yet*, despite the now-centuries-long existence of egalitarian-capacity technology -- the means of mass industrial production -- we continue to live in a world, centuries later, of stubbornly entrenched *nationalism*, which is plainly anachronistic to the (technological) *means* that exist, potentially for *everyone*, in the world today.

Incidentally, I've developed a particular focus lately, that of seeing capitalism's economic exploitation of the labor commodity as being simply an inapt *comparison*, and ratioing, of the [1] organic (people's labor), to the [2] *inorganic* ('dead labor', or the physical, non-organic infrastructure that's been built-up over time).


labor and capital, side-by-side

Spoiler: show
Image



material-economic exploitation

Spoiler: show
Image


Spoiler: show
Image
Last edited by ckaihatsu on 14 Aug 2022 04:21, edited 1 time in total.
#15242930
ckaihatsu wrote:No, I don't mean to politically-proselytize, so your stereotyping, though couched, is certainly inappropriate.

I mean to say that the world's polity has been irrevocably affected and transformed by the Industrial Revolution, as it manifested in various national contexts, at various points on the timeline.

*Yet*, despite the now-centuries-long existence of egalitarian-capacity technology -- the means of mass industrial production -- we continue to live in a world, centuries later, of stubbornly entrenched *nationalism*, which is plainly anachronistic to the (technological) *means* that exist, potentially for *everyone*, in the world today.

Incidentally, I've developed a particular focus lately, that of seeing capitalism's economic exploitation of the labor commodity as being simply an inapt *comparison*, and ratioing, of the [1] organic (people's labor), to the *inorganic* ('dead labor', or the physical, non-organic infrastructure that's been built-up over time).


labor and capital, side-by-side

Spoiler: show
Image



material-economic exploitation

Spoiler: show
Image


Spoiler: show
Image

The 1900's factory takes over the discussion with Nationalism. There's no doubt about it. Missionary maps of Civilization of 1900 there's a Europe and a Not Europe. Nationalism of World War 1, there's Europe tearing itself apart to know how to use a factory. The Capitalist-Fascist-Communist and others are not human discussions, they tell you how the factory economy will work, period. Europe should probably break apart at how they are allowed to feel, European Union be damned.

All inter-relatedness of Nations of Europe are repeatedly expelled, the 3rd Century Christianity, the French Revolution took on all Europe even Russia (1812 overture), the Ideology War. Is there a "Free World" Missionary and a "Communist Bloc" missionary? They're not discussed. What about a "Fascist missionary"?
#15242933
Mike12 wrote:
Is there a "Free World" Missionary and a "Communist Bloc" missionary? They're not discussed. What about a "Fascist missionary"?



Maybe you're thinking of 'liberation theology' -- ?



Liberation theology is a Christian theological approach emphasizing the liberation of the oppressed. In certain contexts, it engages socio-economic analyses, with "social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples".[1] In other contexts, it addresses other forms of inequality, such as race or caste.

Liberation theology is best known in the Latin American context,[2] especially within Catholicism in the 1960s after the Second Vatican Council,



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology
#15242935
I think first Christians need to Execute all the MF'ers that own a video game. and what the hell was that made up garbage? There isn't a dogma invasion of Christianity anywhere. There isn't an armed Christian anywhere. There isn't a violent Church member. There isn't an imposition to put down anywhere. There isn't a slave set free when there is no Christianity anywhere. There isn't an attack by the Christians. Now I explained higher up that 90% of all gains of Christianity in all of Europe is the word of mouth of nations in the Roman period. A man that saves life, this is true story. Islam is the record of Generals with all that area the military administration of a government.

Now Spaniards attacked South America would happen without any Church afterward. No Government sponsorship of any Churches under Britain , these are the most apostolic conditions of volunteers of no government post. There is no compulsion. There is no Triangle Trade dogma of Christianity. The association is the discussion, they make people feel associated. The Dixie Flag is directly being fibbed about association of Colonial Americans and Scotland persons. This is a direct folk secret in all directions. You can't pick it up anywhere. Where would the peaceful peoples felt alien cultural or social values existent around them? They couldn't have acted more American, Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, Henry Knox and George Washington, Stonewall Jackson and Robert E Lee, the constellations of the us flag is a patriotic and dear flag. Picking up Patriotism has no place in the modern America. They have not left room for it without Dixie in any quarter of any education.
#15242938
Mike12 wrote:
I think first Christians need to Execute all the MF'ers that own a video game. and what the hell was that made up garbage? There isn't a dogma invasion of Christianity anywhere. There isn't an armed Christian anywhere. There isn't a violent Church member. There isn't an imposition to put down anywhere. There isn't a slave set free when there is no Christianity anywhere. There isn't an attack by the Christians. Now I explained higher up that 90% of all gains of Christianity in all of Europe is the word of mouth of nations in the Roman period. A man that saves life, this is true story. Islam is the record of Generals with all that area the military administration of a government.

Now Spaniards attacked South America would happen without any Church afterward. No Government sponsorship of any Churches under Britain , these are the most apostolic conditions of volunteers of no government post. There is no compulsion. There is no Triangle Trade dogma of Christianity. The association is the discussion, they make people feel associated. The Dixie Flag is directly being fibbed about association of Colonial Americans and Scotland persons. This is a direct folk secret in all directions. You can't pick it up anywhere. Where would the peaceful peoples felt alien cultural or social values existent around them? They couldn't have acted more American, Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, Henry Knox and George Washington, Stonewall Jackson and Robert E Lee, the constellations of the us flag is a patriotic and dear flag. Picking up Patriotism has no place in the modern America. They have not left room for it without Dixie in any quarter of any education.



You're back to talking to *yourself* now -- but I'll return to *this* part:


Mike12 wrote:
Where are classes today? I've seen this on an early communism poster, and they always drag down the king with everything he loved ,a Church, a factory, a wife, a web of international connections.



On this you sound like you're defending the historical *monarchy*, of whatever country or countries, and that's definitely *problematic*, politically.

Note that England, the U.S., and France, and Russia and China, all have histories of overthrowing their monarchies in one way or another.

My standing critique of nationalism (from previously) applies to *monarchies*, too, including nations like Saudi Arabia today -- the world's working class has no use for nation-states since they're a development of the historical European (etc.) kingdoms, and we have *machinery* today, so -- what's the point, obviously.
#15242957
ckaihatsu wrote:You're back to talking to *yourself* now -- but I'll return to *this* part:





On this you sound like you're defending the historical *monarchy*, of whatever country or countries, and that's definitely *problematic*, politically.

Note that England, the U.S., and France, and Russia and China, all have histories of overthrowing their monarchies in one way or another.

My standing critique of nationalism (from previously) applies to *monarchies*, too, including nations like Saudi Arabia today -- the world's working class has no use for nation-states since they're a development of the historical European (etc.) kingdoms, and we have *machinery* today, so -- what's the point, obviously.

I'm confused. Supposedly, a King could be the King of every country in Europe all together, that forms what is known then as "Personal Union" of countries unified by their rule under the King of Europe. Hypothetically. What are we thinking about ,elections? Then Scotland suffered the Darien Scheme and also a Political Union of 1702 that the Kingdoms were in Political Union among each other, it couldn't be disinherited or separated again.
Depends on what it is. " authority of the monarch may vary from restricted and largely symbolic (constitutional monarchy), to fully autocratic (absolute monarchy), and can expand across the domains of the executive, legislative, and judicial."

We're all here to judge the well-coordinated lady with outfits or what? Waste of time...
By becoming a symbol of both peace and opposition to British imperialism, many Indians began to view the British as the cause of India's problems leading to a newfound sense of nationalism among its population. With this new wave of Indian nationalism, Gandhi was eventually able to garner the support needed to push back the British and create an independent India in 1947.

"Nationalism" well, I've heard of "Indian" (possibly). However, with the anti-colonial wars of the 1900s (decade) barely over, new modernizing forms of African Nationalism began to gain strength in the early 20th century with the emergence of Pan-Africanism, as advocated by the Jamaican journalist Marcus Garvey (1887–1940)

Beginning with the emergence of the United States in the 1770s, decolonization took place in the context of Atlantic history, against the background of the American and French revolutions. Decolonization became a wider movement in many colonies in the 20th century, and a reality after 1945.[23]Great Britain's Thirteen North American colonies were the first colonies to break from their colonial motherland by declaring independence as the United States of America in 1776, and being recognized as an independent nation by France in 1778 and Britain in 1783.

I think Nations are fairly stable without the politics in history. How do we count all these separate nations in Arabia as separate nations? Arabs constitute the main socioethnic grouping in the region,[8] followed by Turks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koreans
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_people

Americans are the citizens and nationals of the United States of America.[10][11] Although direct citizens and nationals make up the majority of Americans, many dual citizens, expatriates, and permanent residents could also legally claim American nationality.[12] The United States is home to people of many racial and ethnic origins; consequently, American culture and law do not equate nationality with race or ethnicity, but with citizenship and an oath of permanent allegiance.[13][14][15]

They may be essentially dissolving all sense of the Nation of Americans and its belonging among the League of Nations (never joined) or the Christian Nations (innovating) or the Commonwealth of Nations(British never joined).
#15244076
Looping back to the headline for this thread [Ed.: Are you saying you're loopy, dude?], We can see democracy ending in Hungary in real time. From that example and others, we can draw up a list of indicators common to nations that have changed from democracies to dictatorships, one-party systems, oligarchies, etc.. Then, the United States democracy can be examined and boxes checked where appropriate.

This, incidentally, has already been done in a number of available books.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
#15244078
Torus34 wrote:Looping back to the headline for this thread [Ed.: Are you saying you're loopy, dude?], We can see democracy ending in Hungary in real time. From that example and others, we can draw up a list of indicators common to nations that have changed from democracies to dictatorships, one-party systems, oligarchies, etc.. Then, the United States democracy can be examined and boxes checked where appropriate.

This, incidentally, has already been done in a number of available books.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.

What are the biggest products of Democracy? Its rather underwhelming a list to my mind. Democracy today even, tends to be known by a coded legislated statement agreed upon with the authority of its legislative body. Are humans today in that ancestral mindset ? "Paper allegiance"?
They are wired to respond to the panoply of fanfare of a tyrant by much easier means. It is mere words to say the American is loyal to their Constitution Republic, a man of feeling and depth holds the nuclear launch codes.
The Republic has always fell to an efficient expanding strong man, the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, Star Wars Republic to Empire, the Great Church Creeds Nicene Christianity/Universal Christianity to the autocratic Pope in Rome who failed that High Test of Kingly Allegiance among the Orthodox Christians, the authority to overrule any body of democratic debate and legislative council, the universal creeds of biblical interpretation. How poor was the Byzantine enforcement attempt among Coptics, Monophysites, Miaphysites, Nestorians the resistance that remains eternal.
Eisenhower required no congressional approval in the Federal Secret called Korea. The products of Democracy are so small in their instrumental influence in the world and history as to be a bulletpoint or two.
The output of Democracy is so small
#15244081
Mike12 wrote:What are the biggest products of Democracy? Its rather underwhelming a list to my mind. Democracy today even, tends to be known by a coded legislated statement agreed upon with the authority of its legislative body. Are humans today in that ancestral mindset ? "Paper allegiance"?
They are wired to respond to the panoply of fanfare of a tyrant by much easier means. It is mere words to say the American is loyal to their Constitution Republic, a man of feeling and depth holds the nuclear launch codes.
The Republic has always fell to an efficient expanding strong man, the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, Star Wars Republic to Empire, the Great Church Creeds Nicene Christianity/Universal Christianity to the autocratic Pope in Rome who failed that High Test of Kingly Allegiance among the Orthodox Christians, the authority to overrule any body of democratic debate and legislative council, the universal creeds of biblical interpretation. How poor was the Byzantine enforcement attempt among Coptics, Monosyphites, Miasyphites, Nestorians the resistance that remains eternal.
Eisenhower required no congressional approval in the Federal Secret called Korea. The products of Democracy are so small in their instrumental influence in the world and history as to be a bulletpoint or two.
The output of Democracy is so small


Hi, Mike 12.

A secular humanist, I judge a government by how well it benefits the people in the society it serves. That means not, a priori, setting any specific form of government -- dictatorship, democracy, monarchy, etc. -- as superior. It means judging by the fruits.

On balance, democracies do not score poorly.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
Last edited by Torus34 on 23 Aug 2022 17:22, edited 1 time in total.
#15244082
Torus34 wrote:Hi, Mike 12.

A secular humanist, I judge a government by how well it benefits the people in the society it serves. That means not, a priori, setting any specific form of government -- dictatorship, democracy, monarchy, etc. -- as superior. It means judging by the fruits.

On balance, democracies to not score poorly.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.

Secular humanist or do you mean hedonist? Many hands make quick work of eating itself.

#15244101
Mike12 wrote:Secular humanist or do you mean hedonist? Many hands make quick work of eating itself.




Hi, Mike12.

I meant secular humanist.

Regards, best wishes to you and yours.
#15244102
Torus34 wrote:Hi, Mike12.

I meant secular humanist.

Regards, best wishes to you and yours.

Secular humanism, often simply called humanism, is a philosophy, belief system or life stance that embraces human reason, secular ethics, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma

The phrase has been used since at least the 1930s by Anglican priests,[5] and in 1943, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, was reported as warning that the "Christian tradition... was in danger of being undermined by a 'Secular Humanism' which hoped to retain Christian values without Christian faith."

Positivism and the Church of Humanity
Holyoake's secularism was strongly influenced by Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism and of modern sociology. Comte believed human history would progress in a "law of three stages" from a theological phase, to the "metaphysical", toward a fully rational "positivist" society. In later life, Comte had attempted to introduce a "religion of humanity" in light of growing anti-religious sentiment and social malaise in revolutionary France. This religion would necessarily fulfil the functional, cohesive role that supernatural religion once served.

Although Comte's religious movement was unsuccessful in France, the positivist philosophy of science itself played a major role in the proliferation of secular organizations in the 19th century in England. Richard Congreve visited Paris shortly after the French Revolution of 1848 where he met Auguste Comte and was heavily influenced by his positivist system. He founded the London Positivist Society in 1867, which attracted Frederic Harrison, Edward Spencer Beesly, Vernon Lushington, and James Cotter Morison amongst others.

In 1878, the Society established the Church of Humanity under Congreve's direction. There they introduced sacraments of the Religion of Humanity and published a co-operative translation of Comte's Positive Polity. When Congreve repudiated their Paris co-religionists in 1878, Beesly, Harrison, Bridges, and others formed their own positivist society, with Beesly as president, and opened a rival centre, Newton Hall, in a courtyard off Fleet Street.


A religious reform (from Latin re: back, again, and formare: to form; i.e. put together: to restore, reconstruct, or rebuild) Famous examples of religious reforms The First Council of Nicaea for the clarification of the doctrine of the Trinity, 325 AD. The Protestant Reformation of 1517 by Martin Luther, John Calvin and others.
#15244103
Mike12 wrote:Secular humanism, often simply called humanism, is a philosophy, belief system or life stance that embraces human reason, secular ethics, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma

The phrase has been used since at least the 1930s by Anglican priests,[5] and in 1943, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, was reported as warning that the "Christian tradition... was in danger of being undermined by a 'Secular Humanism' which hoped to retain Christian values without Christian faith."

Positivism and the Church of Humanity
Holyoake's secularism was strongly influenced by Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism and of modern sociology. Comte believed human history would progress in a "law of three stages" from a theological phase, to the "metaphysical", toward a fully rational "positivist" society. In later life, Comte had attempted to introduce a "religion of humanity" in light of growing anti-religious sentiment and social malaise in revolutionary France. This religion would necessarily fulfil the functional, cohesive role that supernatural religion once served.

Although Comte's religious movement was unsuccessful in France, the positivist philosophy of science itself played a major role in the proliferation of secular organizations in the 19th century in England. Richard Congreve visited Paris shortly after the French Revolution of 1848 where he met Auguste Comte and was heavily influenced by his positivist system. He founded the London Positivist Society in 1867, which attracted Frederic Harrison, Edward Spencer Beesly, Vernon Lushington, and James Cotter Morison amongst others.

In 1878, the Society established the Church of Humanity under Congreve's direction. There they introduced sacraments of the Religion of Humanity and published a co-operative translation of Comte's Positive Polity. When Congreve repudiated their Paris co-religionists in 1878, Beesly, Harrison, Bridges, and others formed their own positivist society, with Beesly as president, and opened a rival centre, Newton Hall, in a courtyard off Fleet Street.


A religious reform (from Latin re: back, again, and formare: to form; i.e. put together: to restore, reconstruct, or rebuild) Famous examples of religious reforms The First Council of Nicaea for the clarification of the doctrine of the Trinity, 325 AD. The Protestant Reformation of 1517 by Martin Luther, John Calvin and others.


Hi again, Mike12.

Thank you for posting the information about secular humanism. I'm sure it will be of interest for those unfamiliar with the worldview. The addition of source document references would be a nice addition.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
Last edited by Torus34 on 23 Aug 2022 18:04, edited 1 time in total.
#15244104
Mike12 wrote:
positivism



---



Critical theory

Main article: Critical Theory

Although Karl Marx's theory of historical materialism drew upon positivism, the Marxist tradition would also go on to influence the development of antipositivist critical theory.[60] Critical theorist Jürgen Habermas critiqued pure instrumental rationality (in its relation to the cultural "rationalisation" of the modern West) as a form of scientism, or science "as ideology".[61] He argued that positivism may be espoused by "technocrats" who believe in the inevitability of social progress through science and technology.[62][63]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivis ... cal_theory
#15244105
Torus34 wrote:Hi again, Mike12.

Thank you for posting the information about secular humanism. I'm sure it will be of interest for those unfamiliar with the worldview. Source document references would be a nice addition.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
#15244106
Torus34 wrote:Hi again, Mike12.

Thank you for posting the information about secular humanism. I'm sure it will be of interest for those unfamiliar with the worldview. The addition of source document references would be a nice addition.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

"In other words, our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don't care what it is. With us, of course, it is the Judeo-Christian concept, but it must be a religion that all men are created equal." -- Address at the Freedoms Foundation, 22 December 1952

"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource, in peace or in war." -- Flag Day speech, signing bill authorizing addition of the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance, 14 June 1954

"Well, of course we do have this in our Constitution: the church and the state are not to be brought together; therefore there have been all sorts of rulings that affect the teaching of religion in school. However, I have always felt that the history of religion ought to be taught, because as a historical fact religion has had the effect with us of giving us the undergirding for our whole system of civilization." -- Television Broadcast: "The People Ask the President", 12 October 1956


And so it is that I carry with me from this state to that high and lonely office to which I now succeed more than fond memories of firm friendships. The enduring qualities of Massachusetts--the common threads woven by the Pilgrim and the Puritan, the fisherman and the farmer, the Yankee and the immigrant--will not be and could not be forgotten in this nation's executive mansion.
But I have been guided by the standard John Winthrop set before his shipmates on the flagship Arbella three hundred and thirty-one years ago, as they, too, faced the task of building a new government on a perilous frontier.

"We must always consider," he said, "that we shall be as a city upon a hill--the eyes of all people are upon us."

Today the eyes of all people are truly upon us--and our governments, in every branch, at every level, national, state and local, must be as a city upon a hill--constructed and inhabited by men aware of their great trust and their great responsibilities.

For we are setting out upon a voyage in 1961 no less hazardous than that undertaken by the Arabella in 1630. We are committing ourselves to tasks of statecraft no less awesome than that of governing the Massachusetts Bay Colony, beset as it was then by terror without and disorder within.

History will not judge our endeavors--and a government cannot be selected--merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these.
THE CITY UPON A HILL SPEECH - John F Kennedy '61
Marx declared religion an enemy of the people, a drug, an opiate of the masses. And Lenin said: ``Religion and communism are incompatible in theory as well as in practice . . . We must fight religion.''

All of this illustrates a truth that, I believe, must be understood. Atheism is not an incidental element of communism, not just part of the package; it is the package. In countries which have fallen under Communist rule, it is often the church which forms the most powerful barrier against a completely totalitarian system. And so, totalitarian regimes always seek either to destroy the church or, when that is impossible, to subvert it.
We see this climate in all democracies and in our own political tradition. The founders of our republic rooted their democratic commitment in the belief that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. And so, they created a system of government whose avowed purpose was and is the protection of those God-given rights.

But as all of you know only too well, there are many political regimes today that completely reject the notion that a man or a woman can have a greater loyalty to God than to the state. Marx's central insight when he was creating his political system was that religious belief would subvert his intentions. -Reagan '85 Religious liberty


For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
-Barack Obama 2009

"The Musketeers are officially disbanded" - Cardinal Richelieu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu
2020
#15244107
Mike12 wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism

"In other words, our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don't care what it is. With us, of course, it is the Judeo-Christian concept, but it must be a religion that all men are created equal." -- Address at the Freedoms Foundation, 22 December 1952

"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource, in peace or in war." -- Flag Day speech, signing bill authorizing addition of the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance, 14 June 1954

"Well, of course we do have this in our Constitution: the church and the state are not to be brought together; therefore there have been all sorts of rulings that affect the teaching of religion in school. However, I have always felt that the history of religion ought to be taught, because as a historical fact religion has had the effect with us of giving us the undergirding for our whole system of civilization." -- Television Broadcast: "The People Ask the President", 12 October 1956


And so it is that I carry with me from this state to that high and lonely office to which I now succeed more than fond memories of firm friendships. The enduring qualities of Massachusetts--the common threads woven by the Pilgrim and the Puritan, the fisherman and the farmer, the Yankee and the immigrant--will not be and could not be forgotten in this nation's executive mansion.
But I have been guided by the standard John Winthrop set before his shipmates on the flagship Arbella three hundred and thirty-one years ago, as they, too, faced the task of building a new government on a perilous frontier.

"We must always consider," he said, "that we shall be as a city upon a hill--the eyes of all people are upon us."

Today the eyes of all people are truly upon us--and our governments, in every branch, at every level, national, state and local, must be as a city upon a hill--constructed and inhabited by men aware of their great trust and their great responsibilities.

For we are setting out upon a voyage in 1961 no less hazardous than that undertaken by the Arabella in 1630. We are committing ourselves to tasks of statecraft no less awesome than that of governing the Massachusetts Bay Colony, beset as it was then by terror without and disorder within.

History will not judge our endeavors--and a government cannot be selected--merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these.
THE CITY UPON A HILL SPEECH - John F Kennedy '61
Marx declared religion an enemy of the people, a drug, an opiate of the masses. And Lenin said: ``Religion and communism are incompatible in theory as well as in practice . . . We must fight religion.''

All of this illustrates a truth that, I believe, must be understood. Atheism is not an incidental element of communism, not just part of the package; it is the package. In countries which have fallen under Communist rule, it is often the church which forms the most powerful barrier against a completely totalitarian system. And so, totalitarian regimes always seek either to destroy the church or, when that is impossible, to subvert it.
We see this climate in all democracies and in our own political tradition. The founders of our republic rooted their democratic commitment in the belief that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. And so, they created a system of government whose avowed purpose was and is the protection of those God-given rights.

But as all of you know only too well, there are many political regimes today that completely reject the notion that a man or a woman can have a greater loyalty to God than to the state. Marx's central insight when he was creating his political system was that religious belief would subvert his intentions. -Reagan '85 Religious liberty


For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
-Barack Obama 2009

"The Musketeers are officially disbanded" - Cardinal Richelieu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu
2020


Hi again, Mike12.

Thank you again for the extensive response.

Could you state the point of it?

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.

The protestors need weapons!!! No, then even[…]

If you're majority Christian i'll say European. […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Yes, panic little piggy. Panic indeed. Ukraini[…]