A Question from an Outsider: How far is the USA away from "Westborozation" and cult control?

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Actually the thought police and the US becoming a theocracy is my fear,

It's amazing to me that you have that notion. The US a theocracy???? MY worry is that it will become a leftist dictatorship with liberals in charge who tell us all what is politically correct to believe.

Oh, wait.......we're already there!

So you'd then concur with Pat Robertson, Hal Lindsay and TBN (which runs 5000 global Christian stations) that Hurricane Katrina was an omen of God, or/and a deliberate punishment for America's sins?
mediamatters.org...

I mean they don't stand at funerals like Westboro and directly infuriate people, but the message is the same.
Or how is it different?

One could go further back into the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, or more recently to Rick Warren (although at least in such cases there's been withdrawals)?

How is any of that indirect, totally perplexing blame different to Westboro blaming gay rights or divorce on demand for the death of US soldiers?

Perhaps it's all about the medium, while the message is the same.

People just don't want to recognize it as equally offensive.

But that's understandable.

The one group is tiny and says these things while defaming patriotism, while the other waves flags and has massive political clout.
The one group thinks only they are chosen, while the other thinks if everybody bowed to their solutions which they sell as "God's solutions" they will all be chosen.
A difference in the taste of the pie in the sky?
What else?

reply to post by halfoldman


Am I to assume that last post was for me?
I am not associating Hurricane Katrina necessarily as result of sins, as I also have considered the effects of HAARP and weather manipulation as part of TPTB program. However, abortion is considered by some to be an abomination of desolation spoken of in the bible and how can a people who subscribe to it be protected from it's karma?

www.faithwriters.com...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

No, not necessarily just or specifically for you, I didn't specify the post as a reply.
It's a general debate, although you did give a more general (including Eastern tradition) argument of collective punishment by some unproven, "supernatural" force.

However, as far as I know the abomination of desolation was sacrificing to pagan gods in the temple in Jerusalem.

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

No, not necessarily just or specifically for you, I didn't specify the post as a reply.
It's a general debate, although you did give a more general (including Eastern tradition) argument of collective punishment by some unproven, "supernatural" force.

However, as far as I know the abomination of desolation was sacrificing to pagan gods in the temple in Jerusalem.

edit on 27-7-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

Science is a purely materialistic view of creation and the marvelous mysteries of nature. But seriously how can you prove there is no God behind the activity of Wind? All you can prove is the physical action of it.
Why are scientists looking for the "God Particle"?
Perhaps you have taken the word "God" as literal as imagining some Zeus figure up in the sky using his hands to physically create the earth and the animals. This is much too childish a concept for people who study metaphysics.

reply to post by schuyler

No, I said that there is a fear of the US becoming a theocracy.

There is resistance.

Especially in science, I think both liberal believers and atheists/agnostics are beginning to take a stand.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Well, people can say God created wind.
That's their science then.
God did it - case closed on wind.
(And whatever energy and benefit we may get from this scientifically known motion.)

And if you're sick and dying, lay on some hands and pray, and it will all go away.
If it doesn't, well that's just God's will.

That's not science.
That's the end of science.

God intervened, God did it, it's a miracle and that's it.

Of course I think you actually propose a far more humane synthesis between science and religion.
I'd also like that.
But for that to happen, science needs a certain space to operate that is not contaminated by profoundly meaningful narratives (like Genesis, for example) that are reduced to fairy-tales by religious literalists.

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by schuyler

 

No, I said that there is a fear of the US becoming a theocracy.

There is resistance.

Especially in science, I think both liberal believers and atheists/agnostics are beginning to take a stand.

And I am saying, "On what objective basis do you believe this?" From what I see, it's exactly the opposite. The "liberal believers and atheists/agnostics" are conducting a concerted campaign to marginalize not just fundamentalist believers, but all and any churches and anyone who does not toe the line that the scientific rationalist is not 100% accurate in claiming all religions are false.

Science has already killed religion.

I don't care for and do not believe fundamentalism any more than anyone else, but I am quite certain that turning science into a religion is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The US is in NO DANGER of becoming a theocracy, no danger at all. There is no good evidence to bolster this view. The fact that a few Westboro-like small churches make a lot of noise is not evidence except for their desperation. Nobody likes 'em, including members of other churches.

You asked the question. Presumably you did not have a pre-conceived answer. If you did, your question is not an honest one. We have given you your answer: The USA is WAY FAR AWAY from "Westborozation" and cult control.

And there you have it. You're welcome.

I don't think science and religion were ever in a war, this is a fantasy, and part of the propaganda.
Religion argues this when it cannot get its intrusion on science.

Neither can science marginalize people.
It can restrict them from a peer group or the core of science when they write outside science, but it has no social means of marginalizing people, and it seems like nowadays it is indeed science that is marginalized within wider society.

Thanks for your views on US politics, much appreciated, although not quite reassuring (to say the least).
But then again I don't live in the US, hence my curiosity.

And I've based my thread on a subjective question ...

However, I've already begun introducing links as the debate demands, and there's obviously proof that some want religious domination - I just don't know how many, and what kind.

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Well, people can say God created wind.
That's their science then.
God did it - case closed on wind.
(And whatever energy and benefit we may get from this scientifically known motion.)

And if you're sick and dying, lay on some hands and pray, and it will all go away.
If it doesn't, well that's just God's will.

That's not science.
That's the end of science.

God intervened, God did it, it's a miracle and that's it.

Of course I think you actually propose a far more humane synthesis between science and religion.
I'd also like that.
But for that to happen, science needs a certain space to operate that is not contaminated by profoundly meaningful narratives (like Genesis, for example) that are reduced to fairy-tales by religious literalists.

edit on 27-7-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

You somehow completely sidestepped what I said about the childish view of God as a Zeus type figure physically up in the sky making the earth and so on. I view God from the very deep Hindu concepts of God as both the formed and formless. Both the formed material Universe and the unformed must be taken into consideration. God is original Thought or Mind.. I do have somewhere to be but I can take this up deeper upon my return.
Suffice it for now to say that I believe in both God and science but I do not make science my god as scientific materialists do.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

That's fantastic, but how relevant is Hinduism to US politics?

Do you think that when a Christian-based mind-control cult takes over it's going to allow your spiritual views?
Then you're very naive.

What do the mega-churches say on other faiths, along with all their global media?
They think other faiths are from Satan, just like science and gay people.
So I'm not sure why I'm the target of your fantastic efforts, and not their theology.

The truth of it is we are exactly the same distance from the "Westborozation" of this country as the Republican Party getting control of the Senate and White House. If those two things happen it is all over for science and education in this country and back to serfdom for the citizens.

Estimated numbers for evangelical (once called fundamentalist) Christians are unsure, but this link safely estimates them at 100 million people in the US.
www.economist.com...

Much more subtle (perhaps to some, although it's quite direct) is their introduction of Biblical discourse into wider society, and their blatant and unwavering attempts to ruin any opposition in society from the bottom up, from the science class to sexual issues and other faiths.

In fact, they try to mislabel any aspects of science they don't like as a competing "religion".

This does not mean the group is necessarily politically unanimous.
They can get applause from both camps for certain faith-based actions, and some are maybe even outside politics.
But I'd think most would go broadly conservative.
Political changes and Presidents can be reversed.
However, damage done to fundamental freedoms and science can probably never be reversed.

Telling people they're proven by science to be born with "original sin" and lower than dirt in the eyes of some invisible cloud person who created them, and can destroy them if they don't obey certain preachers, is just dreadful.
Is that what people want their kids to hear in science class?

So if PhDs don't agree with that, then they're all atheists and libertines?
Oh please.

Everything looks so spectacularly reversed through religious interpretation.
One "expands" human rights by telling other adult couples what kind of relationship they can have, or one tells a woman what she can do with her body during pregnancy.
One meddles in other people's lives and creates situations - and then, one turns it all around and says they created the problem!
How curious.

Westborozation - I'd say it's the deliberate creation of disjuncture between any provable cause and effect that links the lack of a perceived faith or world-view to undesirable consequences.

I'd link Westborozation to any religious group that claims a human sin caused a natural disaster.

In wider politics I'd call blaming evolution for public crimes blatant Westborozation.

On the other hand, I'd say that banning guns without proof of cause and effect is also Westborozation.
Perhaps some would say that historically e.g. blaming religion for slavery is also Westborozation.
I'd say that linking pet owners to "animal cruelty" and "animal slavery" by animal liberation groups like Peta is Westborozation.

So the Westboro group encapsulated standing with posters that somehow connected certain sins with major public events, which had no direct relation to each other.

Of course they did it in a very annoying way, but they were certainly not the only ones.

Here's one documentary I watched recently on the clash between Intelligent Design and Evolution in US schools and communities.
There's a plethora of such programs.

This one is by Nova.
It seems the "real hurt" people were the ones willing to compromise.



Here's another one by the Penn and Teller duo, which includes some strong language, but is very compelling and to the point:



However, the real nitty-gritty as far as culture wars go is at 20 minutes into the clip.
A scientist asks why they (the literalist creationists) want to destroy science.
And he answers his own query by saying it is because fundamentalist religion associates science with atheistic materialism and every sin, evil and wickedness.
A creationist seems to follow that with a similar statement - kids are exposed to PhDs who don't believe in God, and thus teach them they are only responsible to themselves.
But is any of that fact?
Is what people teach as a profession supposed to reflect a private belief?
Since when?
Imagine applying that to other professions, like journalism or emergency services.

And since when is being responsible for yourself a bad thing?
I'd say a certain type of religion just loves power.
They don't want people to feel responsible for themselves.
Defeating science and other paradigms is just a means to power and social manipulation.
It's a case of: endorse our mind-control or else ...

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

That's fantastic, but how relevant is Hinduism to US politics?

Do you think that when a Christian-based mind-control cult takes over it's going to allow your spiritual views?
Then you're very naive.

What do the mega-churches say on other faiths, along with all their global media?
They think other faiths are from Satan, just like science and gay people.
So I'm not sure why I'm the target of your fantastic efforts, and not their theology.

edit on 27-7-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

A Christian based mind control cult is not going to take over. If it were it would have by now. I think we have far more to worry about with radical Islam. When did a Christian church ever make women wear face coverings and black robes all over their entire bodies and keep them from driving cars or going to school? When did the Christian churches in the US behead women for adultery?
But the point of the Constitution and separation of church and state is that the State cannot tell us what kind of religion we can pursue and no church is going to tell me what to think or believe. That's the great thing about the USA, I can practice whatever religion I want. We are far more likely to be overrun by radical Islam if the liberals keep allowing the ideas of Sharia law to come in and take over the Constitutional law here. If that happens where is there to run? I have already gone to the hills here by the way.
Communism is that ideology which in the beginning part of the century sought to undermine free will and remove the choice to even practice religion. In the former Soviet Union the communists destroyed the churches and controlled religion. I find it ironic that you view Christianity as a threat to secularism when it's always been the other way around, where the communists and socialists have sought to get rid of religion, or as Karl Marx called it, "the opiate of the masses".

By the way, you are not the target of my fantastic efforts. It just happens this is your thread and I am answering your points with my counterpoints. I thought it was a decent discussion as you are free to have any thoughts or ideas you wish. I don't consider myself to be a fundamentalist though, as I am a very unusual person who embraces the truth found in many different religious systems. I can just as easily criticize error in Christian dogma as I do the atheist secular system or political worldview.

most regard them as insulting and they are ignorant.

reply to post by halfoldman


I will tell you what the problem is with the theory of evolution as a Christian sees it. A Christian sees the human person evolving as a spiritual being created by God with an individual soul, whereas in the theory of evolution, it is stipulated that humans somehow evolved from a very primitive single cell organism and then as some kind of ape creature and then somehow we got intelligent enough to build fires. The idea that humans are just animals who came out of a primitive organization of cells goes against the understanding we have of ourselves as having been created as intelligent beings with souls in the image and likeness of God. In other words evolution denies the divinity of God within the human and reduces use to animals with base instincts for sex and survival.
why do you think TPTB would want to reduce us to unthinking animals who do not know and understand our own divinity and creative powers? They can more easily control us that way if we are constantly seeking sex and mindless recreation.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Good points, and "fantastic efforts" was used as a compliment.

However, I'm not sure US evangelicals are contained to that country.
They have a huge sphere of influence in countries where people take their pronouncements very literally.

I'd just add that as much I love the debate with yourself, you are not actually the person I wrote this thread about.
So please don't think I'm attacking all religious people or all Christians.
But we can debate further on God and science, if you like.

reply to post by halfoldman


I see, well thank you for that. I understand your concern is more with the Westboro type people. They do seem to be the anomaly though. I don't believe the average Christian relates to that extreme kind of thinking. Many are quite afraid in fact of anything cultish. But these anomalies do exist in various places.