'No, the Right Doesn't Hate the New Pope. They Hate His Jesus.'

[Lisa]

6th Commandment.

That is for humans that have been born. According to the bible, a fetus isn't a person. Try again.

 

[cpwill]

Nice try, Sweden. You cannot pretend that either you or conservatives writ large actually care about allegations of sexual abuse conducted or condoned by their leaders, especially not that of children.
To be a politically active conservative now and not merely a dispositional conservative (at least in America) is to have either made your peace with sexual abuse or even actively desire it among your leaders.

Respectfully, this is as false now as it would be if I were to say the same of any progressive.

If you like, I can take every progressive who has done evil things and been defended or overlooked by members of the Progressive tribe and explain how therefore you must actually support those abuses. We could go back and forth on it, each identifying abuses by members of the other's ideological tribe, and insisting that all members of the tribe are guilty of (or at least accepting of) the sins of any member of the tribe.

Did sexual abuse allegations keep you from voting for Joe Biden? Did Hillary's past of covering up Bill's abuses keep you from voting for her?

We know that Clinton was a regular down on Epstein's Island. Everyone who voted Democrat is therefore in favor of sexually abusing minors, right?




I'm 100% in favor of absolutely holding Trump supporters feet to the fire when they claim to care about sexual abuse if they are not also willing to condemn him for it. But the argument you've made here collapses all politics down to a single issue, and confuses people who adhere to a broad ideological position with people who both actively support Trump and (know about, and) believe his history of abuse.

 

[cpwill]

That is for humans that have been born. According to the bible, a fetus isn't a person.

Both of those statements are incorrect, as recognized by the early church.

Odd how you say you don't care what the Bible says about this topic, and yet insist on spending so much time and effort insisting that it doesn't oppose your position.

 

[Felis Leo]

Respectfully, this is as false now as it would be if I were to say the same of any progressive.

If you like, I can take every progressive who has done evil things and been defended or overlooked by members of the Progressive tribe and explain how therefore you must actually support those abuses. We could go back and forth on it, each identifying abuses by members of the other's ideological tribe, and insisting that all members of the tribe are guilty of (or at least accepting of) the sins of any member of the tribe.

You know what, cpwill? You are right. I admit I have overstated my case. There are genuinely principled conservatives who are genuinely disgusted by credible allegations (and convictions) sexual abuse and would draw their line at voting for a political candidate they are reasonably certain engaged in sexually predatory behavior, like that of Donald Trump's. I believe such conservatives are in the minority on the American political right as compared to those who abandoned their vaunted moral principles and simply became right-wing reactionaries in choosing to vote for Trump, but they do exist.

But the American non-conservative, non-principled political right overall and the Republican Party apparatus specifically? They are either okay with sexual abuse, or actively desirous of it, as many of their members engage in it or they are trying to court an increasingly disaffected young male misogynistic audience. Just looks at the right-wing commentator class. Look at right-wing entertainers like Kanye West and Russel Brand.

Did sexual abuse allegations keep you from voting for Joe Biden? Did Hillary's past of covering up Bill's abuses keep you from voting for her?

No, I still considered myself a conservative at that time and did not vote Democratic out of principle either back in 2016 or 2020, and never cast my vote ever for Trump ever. I did consider and still do consider marital infidelity a disqualifier for holding public office. And yes, even before I made my journey to the left, Hillary Clinton's cover up of her husband's sexual abuse was a disqualifier for me.

Now, let it be known that I do not jump to believe any sexual abuse allegation. I look at the totality of circumstances to determine whether a sexual abuse allegation is credible. Those against Joe Biden were simply not credible, and I said so at the time.

We know that Clinton was a regular down on Epstein's Island. Everyone who voted Democrat is therefore in favor of sexually abusing minors, right?

Well, there is a distinction there. Epstein was not a publicly known quantity back then during Clinton's presidency. Epstein original criminal conviction related to his child sex trafficking was when? 2008?

But if you think I am trying to worm my way out of this, let me answer your question: I am personally certain that Bill Clinton raped children on Little Saint James. Along with Donald Trump, Bill Gates and Alan Dershowitz. I do not think he was going down to try the daiquiris.

I'm 100% in favor of absolutely holding Trump supporters feet to the fire when they claim to care about sexual abuse if they are not also willing to condemn him for it. But the argument you've made here collapses all politics down to a single issue, and confuses people who adhere to a broad ideological position with people who both actively support Trump and (know about, and) believe his history of abuse.

Indeed. No small amount of my vituperative commentary comes from the discovery that I was helping to maintain unjust power hierarchies after having been convinced by well-paid right-wing liars and grifters for most of my life from the time I was a young teenager to present. Nevertheless, my overstatement is acknowledged. I therefore withdraw it.

 

[Michael Cole]

Who do you have in mind? Anything to do withe Leo XIV?

Thank you for saying it better I could. It's not often that I'm shocked by filth but I was this time.

 

[Hamish Howl]

And yes, even before I made my journey to the left, Hillary Clinton's cover up of her husband's sexual abuse was a disqualifier for me.

You didn't have to make a journey. You only had to stand still.

 

[Nickyjo]

Make America Great Again.
The ruin that the democrats/progressives have left in their wake over the last few liberal terms is embarassing and an affront to God and to mankind. Just so you know, men are not and cannot be, women. Illegal immigrants are coming a federal crime. Violent criminals from other nations need to be deported, now.
American, if you don't like it, get the hell out.

Ruin? The ACA, infrastructure week finally happening, low unemployment, record small business growth. Plus, just about everything that made America great in the last century came from democratic administrations, from the New Deal to Medicare, civil rights, equal pay laws, and environmental protections.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Hello Sunday morning. Even to the fake Christians who use our Bible to hurt people and to hate.

 

[Mithrae]

Hate...that's a bit strong, don't you think?
I get it but not "disrespect" instead?

Jesus for one seemed to believe that the natural consequence of embracing wealth would be to hate and despise God himself:

"No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot work for God if you're working for money. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? . . . ." ~ Matthew 6:24-26​

Seems like that would apply to the overwhelming majority of Christians of course, but billionaire-worshiping MAGA Christians above all. I suppose it's possible that this is one of the things Jesus was simply wrong about

Who hates those things? No one. This is just another case of our resident Christophobic OP posting his own brand of hate.

 

[Sweden]

Jesus for one seemed to believe that the natural consequence of embracing wealth would be to hate and despise God himself:

"No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot work for God if you're working for money. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? . . . ." ~ Matthew 6:24-26​

Seems like that would apply to the overwhelming majority of Christians of course, but billionaire-worshiping MAGA Christians above all. I suppose it's possible that this is one of the things Jesus was simply wrong about

Even if Jesus once existed no one can know what he believed.

 

[Mithrae]

Even if Jesus once existed no one can know what he believed.

Meh. It's fair to point out that some content such as the abstract monologues and rambling dialogues of John are likely the author's own creation, but trying to draw a distinction between [???] and material that has multiple attestations and is consistent with the general content of the synoptic gospels is pointless and meaningless outside academia. If the 'real Jesus' is [???], then for the sake of any non-academic discussion about Jesus we may as well assume that [???] more or less matches the bulk of Mark/Q material. What I quoted is right up near the top in terms of credibility since it's broadly consistent with the Cynic philosophy which was seeing a resurgence during that time period and likely influenced Jesus, even more consistent with numerous other gospel passages of direct teaching (eg. "don't lay up treasures on earth," "give to God what belongs to God," "give us this day our daily bread"), with the itinerant preaching example reportedly set by Jesus and his apostles, and with what we're told about the Judean church from Acts, from Paul and later the Ebionites.

 

[Lovebug]

Jesus for one seemed to believe that the natural consequence of embracing wealth would be to hate and despise God himself:

"No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot work for God if you're working for money. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? . . . ." ~ Matthew 6:24-26​

Seems like that would apply to the overwhelming majority of Christians of course, but billionaire-worshiping MAGA Christians above all. I suppose it's possible that this is one of the things Jesus was simply wrong about

Hatred is such a strong word for those who are being bamboozled by the felon.

 

[Mithrae]

Hatred is such a strong word for those who are being bamboozled by the felon.

They're not being bamboozled; he is very much the embodiment of the values that capitalist and particularly American culture upheld by both Republican and Democratic politics have instilled in them over the decades.

King of the Extrinsics

The deep and crucial reason why Trump could win again.

www.monbiot.com

"Trump exemplifies extrinsic values. From the tower bearing his name in gold letters to his gross overstatements of his wealth; from his endless ranting about “winners” and “losers” to cheating at golf; from his extreme objectification of women, including his own daughter, to his obsession with the size of his hands; from his rejection of public service, human rights and environmental protection to his extreme dissatisfaction and fury, undiminished even when he was president of the United States, Trump, perhaps more than any other public figure in recent history, is a walking, talking monument to extrinsic values.​

​

"We are not born with our values. They are shaped by the cues and responses we receive from other people and the prevailing mores of our society. They are also moulded by the political environment we inhabit. If people live under a cruel and grasping political system, they tend to normalise and internalise it, absorbing its dominant claims and translating them into extrinsic values. This, in turn, permits an even crueller and more grasping political system to develop. . . .​

​

​

"Ever since Ronald Reagan came to power, on a platform that ensured society became sharply divided into “winners” and “losers”, and ever more people, lacking public provision, were allowed to fall through the cracks, US politics has become fertile soil for extrinsic values. As Democratic presidents, following Reagan, embraced most of the principles of neoliberalism, the ratchet was scarcely reversed. The appeal to extrinsic values by the Democrats, Labour and other once-progressive parties is always self-defeating. Research shows that the further towards the extrinsic end of the spectrum people travel, the more likely they are to vote for a rightwing party.​

​

"But the shift goes deeper than politics. For well over a century, the US, more than most nations, has worshipped extrinsic values: the American dream is a dream of acquiring wealth, spending it conspicuously and escaping the constraints of other people’s needs and demands. It is accompanied, in politics and in popular culture, by toxic myths about failure and success: wealth is the goal, regardless of how it is acquired. The ubiquity of advertising, the commercialisation of society and the rise of consumerism, alongside the media’s obsession with fame and fashion, reinforce this story. The marketing of insecurity, especially about physical appearance, and the manufacture of unfulfilled wants, dig holes in our psyches that we might try to fill with money, fame or power. For decades, the dominant cultural themes in the US – and in many other nations – have functioned as an almost perfect incubator of extrinsic values. . . .​

​

​

"When a society valorises status, money, power and dominance, it is bound to generate frustration. It is mathematically impossible for everyone to be Number One. The more the economic elites grab, the more everyone else must lose. Someone must be blamed for the ensuing disappointment. In a culture that worships winners, it can’t be them. It must be those evil people pursuing a kinder world, in which wealth is distributed, no one is forgotten and communities and the living planet are protected. Those who have developed a strong set of extrinsic values will vote for the person who represents them, the person who has what they want. Trump. And where the US goes, the rest of us follow."​

How can you watch the American right cheering as innocents, children and legal residents are kidnapped and sent to foreign torture camps and not think that they are driven by hatred at this point? They're scapegoating based on the intense frustration and disappointment which their value system and economic system more or less inevitably generates for most people. It's hardly an original point, but month by month it's looking increasingly similar to what happened in some countries in the wake of the Great Depression.