Church insults American flag (Abraham, Jews, Christians, beliefs)

[Rotagivan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated

Some people disagree with bowing to or saluting any national symbols. This and the baring of heads to a flag or saluting it, often in conjunction with an anthem to some, is viewed as a religious act that ascribes salvation, not to God, but to the State or to its leaders. One such leader was King Nebuchadnezzar of ancient Babylon. To impress the people with his majesty and religious ardor, this powerful monarch erected a great image and compelled his subjects to bow down to it while music, like an anthem, was being played.

National anthems are expressions of patriotic feeling and often include an invocation for divine guidance and protection of the people or their rulers. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to view patriotic ceremonies involving national flag salutes and anthems as religious.

Yes. Patriotism is an expression of separatism. One problem with it is that once it hooks you, the state can change and you are still bound to follow after it...like what happened with Germany that infamous time way back when...

Originally Posted by cupper3

Of course there's that quarrelsome little Bible quote that says something about God and Caesar. Memory serves me correctly one of the other of the Trinity said that.

Yes. Just where to draw the line...

[bUU]

Originally Posted by mensaguy

"In recent months the US government has made it clear that they are not really interested in protecting religious freedoms." What specific religious freedom (you know, something mentioned in some Christian denomination's crede statement of faith) was protected last year that is not protected now?

None. Statements of that sort are generally attempts to claim grievance where none are actual.

Originally Posted by Freak80

The Christian Right defines "religious freedom" as the right to impose their religion on everyone else.

To the extent that's their impetus, it is based on hundreds of years of Dominionism, during which they were effectively able to withhold religious freedom from others with impunity.

[mensaguy]

Originally Posted by mensaguy

"In recent months the US government has made it clear that they are not really interested in protecting religious freedoms."

What specific religious freedom (you know, something mentioned in some Christian denomination's crede statement of faith) was protected last year that is not protected now?

You'll note that I asked you to post something specific that is undeniably a basic function of your religion.

Originally Posted by Vizio

For starters, Obama has attempted to walk on employer's rights regarding buying drugs they have moral opposition to. Recently a pastor in Vermont Then, we have things like the recent SSM ruling. A pastor was sentenced to 1 year in jail in Vermont for refusing to do a same sex wedding. Besides those things, in general, under the Obama administration we've seen an increase in secularism and increased hostility toward Christianity.

Instead, you posted vague stuff like:

• Obama has attempted to walk on employer's rights regarding buying drugs they have moral opposition to. Where is the specific reference to some specific aspect of a recognizable religion in that statement?
• Then, we have things like the recent SSM ruling. Again, where is the basic belief of a major denomination that says that is a rule? You know, like this list for Baptists: What does a Baptist Believe?
• A pastor was sentenced to 1 year in jail in Vermont for refusing to do a same sex wedding. That didn't happen. You might want to check your news sources.
• Besides those things, in general, under the Obama administration we've seen an increase in secularism and increased hostility toward Christianity. Please cite specific sources that have limited person's right to practice his/her religion. This statement is nothing more than an opinion with no support. Exactly what does an "increase in secularism" mean? What is "increased hostility toward Christianity?" Please be specific with references to things like the list of Baptist beliefs I posted.

[TRANSPONDER]

Yep. The Believers are indeed feeling the pressure. They are still wielding tremendous clout, but it is being rolled back from where religious fundamentalism was directing US politics.

So there is the usual cry of persecution, when they can't get their own way every time and in all things. The collation of all sorts of protests, irrelevant, untrue (theists never check) unsupported claims, and blaming of Obama as a handy focus for the feeling of being surrounded by a rising tide of disenchantment about religion, because of the Internet (education never really addressed the matter of religious claims unless they peddled them (1) giving people the questions they never thought to ask and pointing up the false reasoning of the usual apologetics explanation.

I have said before -long ago -that the debate is over. We have the best case and have had the best case for decades. The only problem was in getting a hearing.

The Internet gives us the medium and -finally - people are starting to listen, think and doubt. And crafty suggestions that Satan is leading them astray are not as effective in suffocating doubts as they used to be.

P.s I have had to think about the reactions to the Christian flag flying above the US flag. It certainly suggests to me a view that, since Obama and not the faceless Republican candidate (2) is president and the government os no longer acting as an agent for religious authority, then the 'To hell with man -made law' (3) agenda apples. When push comes to shove, No, I don't think that religious fundamentalists should be considered US citizens or patriots. Yours is a Lawful country under the constitution.

(1) looking back at my R.I classes I now trust that any teacher who acted as a religious apologist and not a very sound one (curative properties of mud prove the miracle of curing blindness indeed) would get his marching orders quick, and would presumably be cited as more Persecution of the faithful.

(2) whose name I can never remember - Sarah Palin got all the attention, because she was so politically inept. The other guy I only recall as claiming that our middle east problem would never have happened if the US had kept troops in Iraq. Yep a modern day crusade with carpet bombing vs. waves of suicide bombers would solve all our problems.

(3) the phrase in block capz on a poster waved by a screaming muslim protester against a cartoon of Muhammad stuck in my mind,

[bUU]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

Yep. The Believers are indeed feeling the pressure. They are still wielding tremendous clout, but it is being rolled back from where religious fundamentalism was directing US politics.

Watching the South Carolina legislature last week, you'd not think that were the case. It seems, at least in certain areas, Dominionism is still in full control.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by bUU

Watching the South Carolina legislature last week, you'd not think that were the case. It seems, at least in certain areas, Dominionism is still in full control.

Since I had other things to do than watch the South Carolina legislature...something clicks on my mind... I'll take your word for it. I'll have to look up Dominionism. A sort of Christian ISIL?

Besides, I have seen one Biblebelt effort after another to get religion in state administration, Creationism in the schools, Christian monuments on government land and funded by government money. None of them seem to have been able to make it stick. And I need not point out how the long battle against gay rights by Christian fundamentalism is being lost, skirmish after skirmish.

No wonder the religious in some areas feels that it is being so persecuted with Government complicity that their loyalties are increasingly towards their religion than to their government.

Religious fundamentalists as a subversive minority. By random factors, that's a turn-around from the McCarthy era!

P.s. Ah gotta say it...Ah gotta dream today... I have heard all the arguments about it isn't really important. and maybe it is just a symbolic thing...just as the Berlin wall was. But when the Berlin wall came down, it was not just a symbolic political earthquake; it was a symbol of the collapse of the campaign for global Communism. When "In God We Trust" comes off US money, that to me will be equally symbolic an achievement and equally symptomatic of the collapse of the religious campaign for US national and state authority.

In the UK, that will be when the bishops walk out of the House of Lords, never to return. And then maybe we can do something about those bloody faith schools.

[Scooby Snacks]

Originally Posted by Rotagivan

Insulting a piece of cloth with another piece of cloth is against the law? !

This. Gotta love American hypocrisy. How could anyone, even patriotic Americans, be outraged over the pastors hanging the religious flag above the American one? Even if you're a patriotic atheist it makes no sense because their thinking in that case would be something like this: The Bible may be imaginary, and it glorifies violence, so we shouldn't pay tribute to it. We're the most warmongering nation in the world, yet patriotic Americans feel offended if someone hangs a religious violent flag above our national violent flag. How's that for illogical?

[bUU]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

Since I had other things to do than watch the South Carolina legislature...something clicks on my mind... I'll take your word for it. I'll have to look up Dominionism. A sort of Christian ISIL?

It was really quite remarkable watching that legislature do its work. It indicated to me that our state legislatures may actually end up being the laggards with regard to progress, and be working to drag us back toward the past rather than leading us in the future.

Dominionism doesn't require the kind of violence that the term ISIL evokes. Dominionism is a Christian conception of the nation governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law. It's been the de facto reality to various degrees since the establishment of the nation. The nation was established on the basis of many ideas, including the idea of religious freedom for all (rather than just for members of the Church of England). Many of these ideas, including that of religious freedom, the nation itself did not fully embody, but instead was working diligently toward throughout the decades. Dominionism, therefore, is an anti-American concept, serving as resistance to the nation pursuing and achieving rightful progress. There were several decades after WWII, especially toward the end of the century, when Dominionism was on the rise in political power in our nation. Much of the childish reactions we see from dogmatic Christians these days to the progress made with regard to religious freedom for all can be tracked back to their inability to admit the anti-American nature inherent in Dominion theology.

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

Besides, I have seen one Biblebelt effort after another to get religion in state administration, Creationism in the schools, Christian monuments on government land and funded by government money. None of them seem to have been able to make it stick.

There is no question that Dominionism has been on the decline. The ascendancy was mostly attributable to the literally unholy alliance between religious reactionaries and egoistic greed-mongers, who came together by the 1970s to try to overcome progressive trends in society, including (with regard to the objectives of the greed-mongers) their efforts to reverse the steady decrease in econonic inequality achieved between WWII and the 1970s. This alliance was very successful in that regard, bringing about substantial regression in economic justice clearly evident in the statistics, but the gains with regard to religious reactionaryism were less significant, and what we see clearly now is that the religious conservatism fostered by the alliance doesn't have the same staying power. The small gains in that regard and the lingering artifacts of the long-standing Dominionism are eroding quite quickly now, and so quickly perhaps that the religious reactionaries are having a very difficult time adjusting their expectations to match what is reasonable.

[TRANSPONDER]

Thanks. a very useful and informative post.

[Rotagivan]

What exactly is being said with the expression 'anti American' and also 'rightful American progress.'

?