[quote] We know from polling data that the Tea Party movement includes a disproportionate number of white evangelicals. And while taxes and big governmen..."/>
Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Is the Tea Party a religious movement?
Sunday, September 5, 2010 7:30 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote: We know from polling data that the Tea Party movement includes a disproportionate number of white evangelicals. And while taxes and big government are the manifest motives, virtually all the politicians supported by the movement are on board with the agenda of the religious right. If we're looking for historical precedents for the conservative, anti-establishment populism of the Tea Party, I'd propose the Know-Nothing Party of the 1850s. Officially called the American Party, it was a semi-secret movement arrayed against the existing political powers-that-be (Whig and Democrat). While their agenda varied from state to state, the Know-Nothings shared a deep hostility to the Roman Catholic immigrants who had begun flooding into the country from Ireland and Germany. They called themselves Native Americans, and they represented a white Protestant longing for the imagined stability of their forebears' pre-industrial communities. For them, religion was of part-and-parcel of the program. Mutatis mutandis, the Tea Partiers are the Know-Nothings of today: latter-day Nativists who long for an imagined past of small government (with Medicare, to be sure), of Christian values, of heterosexual white people running the show and people of color knowing their place. Yes, Virginia, it's a religious movement.
Quote:Initially the tea partiers (at least at times) sounded like they came more from the libertarian wing of the right as opposed to the religious right. Unfortunately it was a populist sort of anti-government viewpoint which lacked understanding of the issues. Such an intellectually weak movement risks being taken over by those who better understand their goal. From the beginning, of course, there’s been overlap between the tea parties and the Christian right. Both have their strongholds in the white South, and both arise out of a sense of furious dispossession, a conviction that the country that is rightfully theirs has been usurped by sinister cosmopolitan elites. They have the same favorite politicians — particularly Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck, the media figure most associated with the tea-party movement, has a worldview deeply shaped by apocalyptic Mormonism; he is contemptuous of the idea of church-state separation and believes the United States was founded to be a Christian nation…
Quote:A Politico story today makes me think that someday in the not-too-distant future we’ll look back on this moment and find it almost quaint that we thought the tea party movement was the be-all and end-all of GOP-affiliated right-wing extremism. The story suggests that there are some areas of extremism where many teabaggers don’t want to go — but there are plenty of other people willing to do what the Tea Partiers won’t.
Sunday, September 5, 2010 8:31 AM
WHOZIT
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Quote: We know from polling data that the Tea Party movement includes a disproportionate number of white evangelicals. And while taxes and big government are the manifest motives, virtually all the politicians supported by the movement are on board with the agenda of the religious right. If we're looking for historical precedents for the conservative, anti-establishment populism of the Tea Party, I'd propose the Know-Nothing Party of the 1850s. Officially called the American Party, it was a semi-secret movement arrayed against the existing political powers-that-be (Whig and Democrat). While their agenda varied from state to state, the Know-Nothings shared a deep hostility to the Roman Catholic immigrants who had begun flooding into the country from Ireland and Germany. They called themselves Native Americans, and they represented a white Protestant longing for the imagined stability of their forebears' pre-industrial communities. For them, religion was of part-and-parcel of the program. Mutatis mutandis, the Tea Partiers are the Know-Nothings of today: latter-day Nativists who long for an imagined past of small government (with Medicare, to be sure), of Christian values, of heterosexual white people running the show and people of color knowing their place. Yes, Virginia, it's a religious movement. http://blog.beliefnet.com/religionandpubliclife/2010/06/religion-and-the-tea-party-movement.html#ixzz0yfyFEnlH Quote:Initially the tea partiers (at least at times) sounded like they came more from the libertarian wing of the right as opposed to the religious right. Unfortunately it was a populist sort of anti-government viewpoint which lacked understanding of the issues. Such an intellectually weak movement risks being taken over by those who better understand their goal. From the beginning, of course, there’s been overlap between the tea parties and the Christian right. Both have their strongholds in the white South, and both arise out of a sense of furious dispossession, a conviction that the country that is rightfully theirs has been usurped by sinister cosmopolitan elites. They have the same favorite politicians — particularly Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck, the media figure most associated with the tea-party movement, has a worldview deeply shaped by apocalyptic Mormonism; he is contemptuous of the idea of church-state separation and believes the United States was founded to be a Christian nation…Quote:A Politico story today makes me think that someday in the not-too-distant future we’ll look back on this moment and find it almost quaint that we thought the tea party movement was the be-all and end-all of GOP-affiliated right-wing extremism. The story suggests that there are some areas of extremism where many teabaggers don’t want to go — but there are plenty of other people willing to do what the Tea Partiers won’t. http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/08/18/will-the-tea-parties-descend-into-dangerous-religious-extremism/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet Personally, I think the religious right is making use of the Tea Party, capitalizing on some of their agendas while rejecting their social agenda...but if too many of them get in office... Are they just using the Tea Party, like they used George Bush, to gain power, and will it work this time? Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani, Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”, signing off
Sunday, September 5, 2010 8:45 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Quote: Is the Tea Party a religious movement?
Sunday, September 5, 2010 10:14 AM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Sunday, September 5, 2010 10:24 AM
Quote: Religious folks will see everything as a means to promote their religious views. But that doesn't have any bearing on what lies at the core of the tea party movement.
Quote: do feel they are susceptible to having their agenda derailed.
Sunday, September 5, 2010 12:29 PM
Quote: The stuff about “no abortion, not even for incest or rape” and their attitude toward gays, among other things, seems kind of religious to me.
Sunday, September 5, 2010 12:50 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Sunday, September 5, 2010 1:34 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: To be consistent you'd have to equally support no medical care, no medical research, no medical benefit of ANY KIND for ANYONE on the government dime. Show me where that message is just as strong as the abortion one and I'll CONSIDER if you have a point. But in order to do that you'd have to call for no Social Security, and that won't go over very well with the rank and file who are too poor to retire on their own dime. So I don't think you can, and I don't think you do.
Monday, September 6, 2010 6:30 AM
Monday, September 6, 2010 7:00 AM
Quote:Because of the split between federal and state law, legal access to abortion continues to vary somewhat by state. Geographic availability, however, varies dramatically, with 87 percent of U.S. counties having no abortion provider. Moreover, due to the Hyde Amendment, many state health programs which poor women rely on for their health care do not cover abortions; currently 17 states (including California, Illinois and New York) offer or require such coverage. The most common prevention strategy is the manning of "pregnancy help centers", also called Crisis Pregnancy Centers or CPC's. These centers provide pregnancy tests and present women with information intended to lead them to reject abortion. They also provide practical help, ranging from help obtaining public assistance to providing housing and medical care. However, many CPCs have been accused of dishonest tactics, such as promising help that is then not given, providing medically false information about pregnancy and contraception, telling women that they are not pregnant when they are, and falsely claiming to provide abortion services.
Monday, September 6, 2010 7:07 AM
KANEMAN
Monday, September 6, 2010 8:23 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Monday, September 6, 2010 8:44 AM
Monday, September 6, 2010 9:15 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Hence my original question. I guess it should more accurately be "Does religion have too much influence in the Tea Party?"
Monday, September 6, 2010 9:54 AM
Monday, September 6, 2010 10:04 AM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Hey, from my perspective, religion has too much influence in ALL our lives, whether we want it or not. Beer and wine can't be sold here on Sundays, in package or grocery stores. We can go to a bar or restaurant ( after 12noon ) and drink as much we'd like. Of course, then you get to drive home, and the DUI laws are designed to make a mint for the state. I wonder how the Baptist red necks would feel if they couldn't buy hot dogs or hamburgers on Saturday.
Monday, September 6, 2010 10:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by kaneman: You love the word tea-bagger, it's hilarious that you fags like bringing your lexicon into the national debate....I think I'm going to tea-bag your mother and make your dad watch. Talk to me in November if you don't have your mouth stuffed full of dicks...you gay shipping-clerk. Let the revolution continue......I think I'll dunk my balls in your mouth could be a blast.....Just one girls opinion.
Monday, September 6, 2010 5:13 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: The term "tea bag" was coined BY THE TEA PARTY.
Monday, September 6, 2010 8:02 PM
HKCAVALIER
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 1:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by HKCavalier: I'm sorry, it was the right wing mailers that started it with their "tea bag your congressman" stuff. They new it was offensive, they just got it wrong. But, I guess, that makes me dishonest in your book. Fun times. Carry on. HKCavalier Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 1:30 AM
Quote:... like school children who think they're pulling one over on the clueless adults...
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 2:04 AM
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 3:01 AM
DMAANLILEILTT
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 4:21 AM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Smaller, more responsible gov't, more freedom and less spending, across the board.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 4:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by dmaanlileiltt: Cause nothing convinces people more than saying you're going rape their mother. And I'm not sure how it works over there, but down here girls don't have balls. I think I see why "kaneman is tagged as offensive." "I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 4:41 AM
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 6:53 AM
Quote:One of the most common statements from the "Religious Right" is that they want this country to "return to the Christian principles on which it was founded". However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a lie. The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the bible was true. When the Founders wrote the nation's Constitution, they specified that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." (Article 6, section 3) This provision was radical in its day-- giving equal citizenship to believers and non-believers alike. They wanted to ensure that no single religion could make the claim of being the official, national religion, such as England had. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention religion, except in exclusionary terms. The words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not once. The Declaration of Independence gives us important insight into the opinions of the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the power of the government is derived from the governed. Up until that time, it was claimed that kings ruled nations by the authority of God. The Declaration was a radical departure from the idea of divine authority. The 1796 treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was "in no sense founded on the Christian religion" (see below). This was not an idle statement, meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams. None of the Founding Fathers were atheists. Most of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books. They spoke often of God, (Nature's God or the God of Nature), but this was not the God of the bible. They did not deny that there was a person called Jesus, and praised him for his benevolent teachings, but they flatly denied his divinity. Some people speculate that if Charles Darwin had lived a century earlier, the Founding Fathers would have had a basis for accepting naturalistic origins of life, and they would have been atheists. Most of them were stoutly opposed to the bible, and the teachings of Christianity in particular. Yes, there were Christian men among the Founders. Just as Congress removed Thomas Jefferson's words that condemned the practice of slavery in the colonies, they also altered his wording regarding equal rights: "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." Congress changed that phrase, increasing its religious overtones: "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." But we are not governed by the Declaration of Independence-- it is a historical document, not a constitutional one. If the Christian Right Extremists wish to return this country to its beginnings, so be it... because it was a climate of Freethought. The Founders were students of the European Enlightenment. Half a century after the establishment of the United States, clergymen complained that no president up to that date had been a Christian. In a sermon that was reported in newspapers, Episcopal minister Bird Wilson of Albany, New York, protested in October 1831: "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism." The attitude of the age was one of enlightened reason, tolerance, and free thought. The Founding Fathers would turn in their graves if the Christian Extremists had their way with this country
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 6:57 AM
Quote:"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?"
Quote:It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov't from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others." James Madison, "James Madison on Religious Liberty"
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 7:10 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Hero: Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Smaller, more responsible gov't, more freedom and less spending, across the board. Ronald Reagan. H
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 7:34 AM
Quote:None of the Founding Fathers were atheists. Most of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books. They spoke often of God, (Nature's God or the God of Nature), but this was not the God of the bible. They did not deny that there was a person called Jesus, and praised him for his benevolent teachings, but they flatly denied his divinity. Some people speculate that if Charles Darwin had lived a century earlier, the Founding Fathers would have had a basis for accepting naturalistic origins of life, and they would have been atheists. Most of them were stoutly opposed to the bible, and the teachings of Christianity in particular. Yes, there were Christian men among the Founders. Just as Congress removed Thomas Jefferson's words that condemned the practice of slavery in the colonies, they also altered his wording regarding equal rights. His original wording is here in blue italics: "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." Congress changed that phrase, increasing its religious overtones: "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." But we are not governed by the Declaration of Independence--it is an historical document, not a constitutional one.
Quote:"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." ...to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814 "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." ... "Notes on Virginia" "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." ... to Baron von Humboldt, 1813 "On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind." ... to Carey, 1816 "Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself." ...in his private journal, Feb. 1800 . "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." ...letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT ..."The Complete Jefferson" by Saul K. Padover, pp 518-519
Quote: ". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind." "The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning. And ever since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality, is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes." ... letter to John Taylor "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" ...letter to Thomas Jefferson "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."
Quote:Historian Barry Schwartz writes: "George Washington's practice of Christianity was limited and superficial because he was not himself a Christian... He repeatedly declined the church's sacraments. Never did he take communion, and when his wife, Martha, did, he waited for her outside the sanctuary... Even on his deathbed, Washington asked for no ritual, uttered no prayer to Christ, and expressed no wish to be attended by His representative." ...New York Press, 1987, pp. 174-175] Paul F. Boller states in is anthology on Washington: "There is no mention of Jesus Christ anywhere in his extensive correspondence." ...Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, pp. 14-15] A century ago it was the custom of all classes, irrespective of their religious beliefs, to attend church. Washington, adhering to the custom, attended. But when the administration of the sacrament took place, instead of remaining and partaking of the Lord's Supper as a communicant would have done, he invariably arose and retired from the church. ...John Remsburg, “Six Historic Americans”, Chapter 3 "The question has been raised as to whether any one of our Presidents was a communicant in a Christian church. There is a tradition that Washington asked permission of a Presbyterian mister in New Jersey to unite in communion. But it is only a tradition. Washington was a vestryman in the Episcopal church. But that office required no more piety than it would to be mate of a ship. There is no account of his communing in Boston, or in New York, or Philadelphia, or elsewhere, during the Revolutionary struggle." ... The "People's Library of Information" In the political documents, correspondence, and other writings of Washington, few references to the prevailing religion of his day are found. In no instance has he expressed a disbelief in the Christian religion, neither can there be found in all his writings a single sentence that can with propriety be construed into an acknowledgment of its claims. Once or twice he refers to it in complimentary terms, but in these compliments there is nothing inconsistent with the conduct of a conscientious Deist. ...John Remsburg, “Six Historic Americans”, chapter 3. "Dr. Rush told me (he had it from Asa Green) that when the clergy addressed General Washington, on his departure from the government, it was observed in their consultation that he had never, on any occasion, said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion, and they thought they should so pen their address as to force him at length to disclose publicly whether he was a Christian or not. However, he observed, the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address particularly, except that, which he passed over without notice" ...Jefferson’s journal; Jefferson's Works, Vol. iv., p. 572
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 7:39 AM
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 10:56 AM
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 7:30 PM
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 6:54 AM
Quote:times like this I wonder if Joss knows some of the kinds of people he attracts through his creations.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 8:21 AM
STORYMARK
Quote:Originally posted by kaneman: You love the word tea-bagger, it's hilarious that you fags like bringing your lexicon into the national debate....
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 8:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by HKCavalier: Holy crap, AURap, how can you be so gorram proud of your ignorance?
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 8:45 AM
BYTEMITE
Quote:(Vanillia Creme Angel Food Cake, yay!)
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 10:56 AM
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 11:30 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Personally, I'm surprised Cav is surprised...
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 11:40 AM
Quote:But, yeah, there's a political movement afoot that does take pride in ignorance, revels in prejudice and wholeheartedly defies logic and reason.
Quote:I think most reasonable people find such a movement frightening and I think that's the key. Folks who hitch their horse to that wagon are desperate to be feared, one way or another. They want the sense of power being feared can bring.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 4:56 PM
Thursday, September 9, 2010 2:17 AM
Thursday, September 9, 2010 11:22 AM
Quote:I do not feel that the Tea Party is a religious movement, but I do feel they are susceptible to having their agenda derailed.
Quote:The tea party is a religious movement to the same degree as any political ideology is.
Quote:I heard a right good quote at a local politician who's kind of overreligious this morning when he started using religious talk as a responsibility-dodge, the ole if-god-wills-it craploa. "Hey, god didn't run for this office, YOU did!" If I wanted some diety in charge I'd fuckin vote for em, yanno ?
Quote:you can try to label the tea party as religious if you'd like, i'll be laughing at you for being pathetic
Thursday, September 9, 2010 12:40 PM
Friday, September 10, 2010 6:18 AM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL