Just another example of why my thinking differs from Conservatives
Long story short: The Satanic Temple, as they are wont to do, applied for the right to include their holiday display in the capitol building. The state allowed it because, under the First Amendment, if they let Christians erect a display, they have to let everyone do it. So some MAGA nut made the trek from Mississippi to Des Moines to destroy the Satanic altar. He's been charged with vandalism, and Republicans are rallying to his side, because they are fine with desecrating other people's religious displays, even if they would cry bloody murder if someone did this to a Christian decoration.
------
While, I am not particularly keen on Satan, the principles involved seem to escape Rightwingers, Republicans and the conservatives regarding the basic concepts supporting the First Amendment.
Not everything has to meet with your approval to be allowed and accommodated. The idea is to accept those that are different on their terms instead of attempt to amalgamate them on yours. That is a fundamental difference between the progressive and conservative type.
So who is rushing up to the DesMoines state capital to tear down the nativity scene?Yep, Conservatives the world through have a greater tendency to look after their own kind, creating a 'them & us' attitude (prejudice against anyone who is different to them); although American politics seem to have taken it to new heights, which we haven't seen so much of in the Western World since Hitler's racial prejudices.
Happy Holidays, Arthur, thanks for sharing your opinion. It has been a while and I hope that all is well.
Our American Right wing is full of fruit cakes, the appalling part is just how so much the Republican Party is willing to discard the Constitution as one would a chewing gum wrapper, in support of this individual fruitcake. That phony support climbs right up to our illustrious, Governor DeSantis.Yes thanks, all is well; we’re almost ready for Christmas – done the Christmas market; sent all the Christmas presents to relatives in the post, including my cousins in Australia; bought the Christmas tree from our local forestry commission, then spent the rest of the day hanging the Christmas decorations and lights; went out to a local restaurant for our Christmas meal yesterday; I’m making my annual batch of lemon curd chocolate truffles today while my wife and son nips out to do the final Christmas food shopping; and most of the presents are wrapped, ready for opening Christmas morning.
Yep, I get the impression from our British news channels, and these forums, that the American Right wing is full of fruit cakes!
I think this is an excellent argument.
And if you stand by this position, it therefore goes to argue that you cannot support suppression of "hate speech".
You cannot support efforts to make a crime "mis-gendering" a person as that is speech, hateful or not.
"Hate Speech" is protected by the First Amendment, there is no higher law than the Constitution, no State or Federal law has the right to infringe on it.
Brandenburg Vs. Ohio a full blown KKK member gave a speech espousing violence against Blacks and Jews, a classic example of hate speech and violence, and he was convicted in Ohio of 'encouraging crime and hatred' (loosely explained) ... the Supreme Court heard his appeal and reversed his conviction 9 to nothing.
In doing so, this gave the modern understanding of Free Speech (this was in 1969). I think I have said all issues these days seem to stem from actions and decisions made in the 60s, here is another.
All innocuous speech is absolutely protected... and all speech is innocuous... when there is time for more speech to challenge it.
So, whether we are talking about the "shadow banning" of people from their ability to communicate on Social Media (prevalent prior to the 2020 election) or whether we are trying to hold a President who is speaking to a crowd in general terms and who does not espouse directly to take violent action or to give a command to those who are in his service to do so... we are talking about infringing (or punishing) others for exercising what is expressly promised to them in the 1st Amendment.I generally tend to support the First Amendment without reservation, the exception made by a previous justice referring to screaming fire in a crowded theatre would be the only exception that I would take literally. So there is no room for exceptions made for hate speech, or excuses for muzzling the press, etc.
While you can say what you want with impunity, you are not immune to the consequences of what you say. Levels of responsible discourse is not the same for private citizens as it would be for public officials like the President of the United States or the Mayor of Boston. I was not free to insult my supervisor when I was working and think that there will not be consequences.In regards to the President, only true to a point. If there is a direct order given, or one that could be construed as such, then yes. If the President says to a mob: "go and take Congress over, use whatever means necessary to stop this theft of the election!"
Yes, I agree.
Trump said, "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
"Well, thank you very much. This is incredible.
Media will not show the magnitude of this crowd. Even I, when I turned on today, I looked, and I saw thousands of people here. But you don't see hundreds of thousands of people behind you because they don't want to show that.
We have hundreds of thousands of people here and I just want them to be recognized by the fake news media. Turn your cameras please and show what's really happening out here because these people are not going to take it any longer. They're not going to take it any longer. Go ahead. Turn your cameras, please. Would you show? They came from all over the world, actually, but they came from all over our country."
Etc. etc.
You can infer insurrection out of that if you put your biased glasses on just right and allow yourself a little leeway of interpreting the english language.
Buuut... it sure doesn't meet the definition in any objective sense."You can infer insurrection out of that if you put your biased glasses on just right and allow yourself a little leeway of interpreting the english language."
Your point is well taken, and we could argue that point until the cows come home. But the stuff regarding involvement in the corrupting and replacing of Electoral College electors is a clear violation, not just an issue of speech, and one for which he cannot cheat the hangmanThis is something that must be driven home and proven concretely and absolutely in a way that every average American can understand.
The crime has to be reprehensible, not subject to judgement, not 'politics as usual'... not something that so many others are accused of but only he is charged with.
If it is not a concrete criminal act that every common sense (and not so common sensed) American recognizes as a crime worthy of removing him from running for the position of the Presidency (which he has already held)... then it should not be pursued, because it will only be considered proof to the tens of millions of his die-hard supporters that the system is corrupt beyond salvation.
And that will lead to very, very dangerous times when the economic hardships soon to come arrive.
If you truly believe in Democracy, that the people will do the right thing, that Biden won the election by millions of votes last time, then there is no reason not to allow Trump to run again.
If the American people did not elect him last time, when he was the sitting President and could more easily influence the election's outcome... why would anyone think he would not be defeated again?
"And if you stand by this position, it therefore goes to argue that you cannot support suppression of "hate speech"."
Your right ends at the point it impedes someone else's right.How does that platitude apply to speech?
Is banning someone from a public platform for violating what someone else determines "hate speech" an infringement on that person's ability to speak?
If I were to ban anyone who uses the term "white" or "conservative" in what I consider a harmful or hateful way would that be OK or would that be an infringement upon others from expressing their opinion (aka free speech)?
Why does the Christians have the right in the first place to display something in the capitol building.
Is the capitol building not a government building. And should the government not be separated from the church?In America, the government is neither to promote nor hinder religious expression. Displays in the public square if privately paid for can be allowed. It is just that this expression and the opportunity to express this on public property is not restricted to any one religious faith.
Off course religious displays can be in private institutions or on the public square. But I thought the capitol building was a government building.
Yes, the government building is considered public property. Every year at the state Capitol in Denver, with which i am most familiar, the lights and nativity scenes was an annual spectacle and ritual. The City and County building, downtown.
Here is a link to how elaborate it can get, how do you get a Satanic Goat in the midst of all of this fanfare?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5oshADixtYo&noapp=1
Happy holidays to you and yours.....haha, OMG, without words, a culture shock hit me right in the face.
happy holidays to you too! (and everybody else reading this.)
I grew up in an atheistic family and Christmas in The Netherlands meant going to church if you where religious and doing board games if not.
My sisters birthday is on boxing day, so it was more birthday party things.
The American/English Christmas entered pretty late in the Netherlands ('90 I think)
As we celebrate Sinterklaas (Santaclaus) on the 5th of December with giving presents to the children and rest of the family. It's tradition as well to write a poem next to the present about the person you give it to and perhaps a hint what the present contains...
Although I'm an atheist, The Netherlands is a pretty religious country. It has lots of different religions. And it's one of the reasons why The Netherlands is/was pretty tolerant (although it's changing fast) is that historically The Netherlands was open for all kinds of religions and many Jews found a save home from countries like Spain, Portugal, Turkey... As well as the Calvinists and Protestants and smaller Christian groups.
So having lots of different points of view towards life (and death) in a small area forces you to be tolerant. (you can have your own religion and things as long as you do it in your own home..was the policy...This Dutch mentality was adapted towards drugs (soft) too..a tolerance policy.. which comes with a political coalition system too. You always have to negotiate.)
For a long time The Netherlands was religiously organized, like the UK was/is class organized. If you were Catholic you read the Catholic newspaper, went to a catholic sports club, voted a catholic party, watch the catholic broadcasting company etc. Same for Reformed, you watched the Reformed broadcasting etc....voted reformed party, went to a reformed school and sports club, same for socialists.
It's called a pillar system. (But this system is slowly changing as the society is far more fragmented then it used to be. Which is good thing I think)
That's one of the reasons the Dutch have 15 parties in parliament at the moment. And they always have to make a coalition to govern. (most of the time with 3 parties.- at the moment they biggest parties are negotiating to form a coalition government..as there where recent elections were the most populist party (extreme right wing) became the largest party....The Netherlands has been right-wing for over a 20 years now...the last left wing government ended in 2002..)
Anyway, a bit of Dutch funfacts.....
All the best for the coming year. Let's hope the world comes to its senses..Well, Peter, as they say "it's a small world after all"
Has the rise of rightwing parties affected society in the Netherlands?
What do they advocate that would be different from your status quo?
I had the opportunity to pass through Belgium and The Netherlands as a young man and enjoyed the open atmosphere, when compared to the states, immensely. Gee, Discotheques open until 4 in the morning. But, since the late 1970s thing have changed a great deal, virtually everywhere.
The problem with religion here that there is a faction among conservatives that want to impose their religious values on everyone else. That is a tendency of conservatives to seek cohesion over accepting diversity. I don't like being told what to think and believe or that one form of worship should have hegemony over all others. Most of the so called Christians are more of a political faction supporting right wing ideas and concepts, hiding the truth behind "the cross". Don't let that happen in the Netherlands, these people can be most annoying.
Stop the world, I want to get off, all the best to you for a prosperous 2024.Thanks for the cultural and political info for the Netherlands; a most interesting read.
I am surprised that the Netherlands have been ruled by the right for so long – The Conservatives have only been in power in the UK Government since 2010 (just 13 years), and with a General Election looming next year are set to face a humiliating defeat to Labour. The current opinion poll of voting intentions being:-
• Labour (left wing) = 44%
• Conservatives (right wing) = 22%
• Liberal Democrats (centralist) = 10%
• Greens (left wing) = 7%
Although Scotland has been ruled by a left wing Government (SNP – Scottish National Party) since 2007; and the Welsh Government has been controlled continually by Labour since 1999.I think that just after WWII many countries in the west adopted many very social(listic) laws. Like the NHS in the UK was founded in 1948 and the many social projects that were organized in the US. To rebuild the nations and the economies.
As Ford famously said, I pay my labours a salary so they can afford a Ford. (or something like that.)
In The Netherlands after WWII the foundation of a society was build where also the poorest could get a chance to study and improve themselves.
Like the NHS, many of those social structures are still holding the countries in place, but just.
After the countries became richer in the '70s people and companies started to become more selfish and governments reflected this greed.
People saw the society changing with the freedom of sexuality and woman rights and rights for coloured people.
For many reasons to fight back and become more conservative.
The Neo-Liberalism in the world started to overshadow the social constructions. All the dictatorships in South America where right wing Liberal Economics experiments for that matter..(different thread..)
The social constructions, like rental subsidies, study grants, unemployment benefits, basic medical assistance and basic pension, etc. are the legacies of that time.
The Netherlands is seen as a left wing country. But it isn't.
The Dutch are market traders in the core. When in the age of voyages of discoveries the Spanish and Portuguese wanted to convert and spread the word over the globe, the Dutch only wanted to make money.
The Dutch don't give a damn about your religion as long as you will buy something from them. (The Netherlands is also a tax haven for huge companies...)
A classic example is that Amsterdam was selling canons to the Spanish in the Dutch-Spanish war, knowing that they would be used against Antwerp. (which was part of the Dutch Republic at the time, but a competitor as a harbour to Amsterdam....)
So it's a mixed bag. On one side The Netherlands is a classic capitalist country with a merchants spirit. On the other side it is ingrained in their psyche to negotiate and work together no matter what your religious background is, your sexual preferences or colour - but of course there are always BS and prejudices..But as long as you have money no probs.!! (i think this is pretty standard..)
But it's really tough negotiating sometimes.
Like at this very moment political parties are negotiating to form a government.
With
1. PVV - Party who is anti-islam and wants strong border control and is anti EU.
2. NSC - New Social Contract - Christian Party who pledged itself to the constitution that can not be changed and is pro EU
3. VVD - Liberal Party (Republicans/Conservatives) - Pro EU, pro free market.
4. BBB- Framer Citizen Movement - against agricultural change and CO2 reduction.
These are the 4 main parties that have to form a government.
PVV - 37 seats
NSC - 20 seats
VVD - 24 seats
BBB - 7 seats
You need a total of 76 seats to govern (150 seats are there in total)
They all 4 have a different agenda. the PVV is the biggest one, but it wants to forbid building Mosques. and many more restrictions for Muslim people. Which goes against the interest of another religious group, the Christians of the NSC. Because when you start to rally against one religion, who's next is what they will be thinking.
The VVD lost big time this election so in a way they don't want to govern again, ...it would end up worse in the next elections for them if they did.
The BBB wants to govern together with the PPV but they are a new kid on the block.
So this is really tough and nobody knows where this will go.
PvdA/Groen Links - Labour and the Greens are now together and have 25 seats, but there is no way that the left can find a majority to govern. Or it has to scrap all the small parties together..
Anyway it's a pretty Gordian Knot at the moment.
A quick explanation of all the parties in The Netherlands you can find here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p … etherlands
Happy Holidays and let's hope there is less war in 2024.Wow – a complex politic mix; thanks for the link – I note from reading the Wikipedia article that no political party has won a majority of seats since in Netherlands since the 1894 general election – that is quite something – And I thought Northern Ireland was a complex mess.
The civil war in Northern Ireland (The Troubles, from 1968 to 1998) was ended with the signing of the 1998 Peace Treaty (Good Friday Agreement); and as part of that Peace Treaty a ‘Power Sharing’ Government was created, using the D'Hondt method (originally devised by Thomas Jefferson in 1792, and re-invented by Belgian mathematician Victor D'Hondt in 1878), which ensures that both sides, Sinn Féin (the political wing of the IRA) and DUP (the political wing of the terrorist group who fought Sinn Féin) have to share power.
However, it’s been a bumpy ride; and still is:-
1. From 2002 to 2007 the Northern Ireland Government was suspended when DUP withdrew after police raided Sinn Féin's offices, investigating allegations of Sinn Féin's being involved in intelligence gathering for the IRA.
2. The Northern Ireland Government was again suspended from 2017 to 2020 when Sinn Féin withdrew in the wake of the Renewable Heat Incentive scandal e.g. DUP members profiteering from what turned out to be a ‘Renewable Energy’ scam.
Sinn Féin did eventually agree to return to their Parliament, but DUP continued to sulk.
Under the 1998 Peace Treaty (Good Friday Agreement) the UK Government has powers to run Northern Ireland in the event that the Northern Ireland Government collapses; but it’s powers that the UK Government is reluctant to use. However, in the autumn of 2019 Boris Johnson (then UK Prime Minister) did threaten to pass a law in Northern Ireland, allowing same sex marriages, if DUP didn’t return to their Parliament.
However, DUP called Boris Johnson’s bluff, but he wasn’t bluffing, so same sex marriage became law in Northern Ireland at the end of 2019, against the wished of DUP.
DUP is an extremely religious, extreme right wing political party (far more right wing than the UK Conservatives) and as such are anti-LGBT, anti-abortion and anti-same-sex-marriage etc.
Whereas, Sinn Féin is extreme left wing; far more left wing than any other political party in the UK e.g. Sinn Féin is the complete opposite to DUP in every way imaginable – so it is a marvel that they do manage to Power Share at all.
3. Yet again, the Northern Ireland Government became suspended again in 2022, and is still suspended, because DUP walked out of the Northern Ireland Power Sharing Government in 2022 on the grounds that they object to the International border between the EU and UK being in the middle of the sea between the island of Ireland and mainland Britain, effectively separating Northern Ireland from Britain.
But there is nothing the UK Government can do about that as the border between the EU and UK has to go somewhere (two different countries), and it can’t go between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland as that would contravened the 1998 Peace Treaty, and upset Sinn Féin (IRA), which would almost certainly reignite ‘The Troubles’ (civil war) in Northern Ireland – So I, nor anyone, knows what the answer is?
On a less dramatic scale is the continued, and bitter, friction between the Scottish Government and UK Government.
Yes, I will have a happy holiday; and likewise, wishing you a merry Christmas and happy New Year. We’re all now ready for our Christmas celebrations and indulgence, all the presents are wrapped, ready to be opened on Christmas day, and we are well stocked up on luxury foods and drink for the festive season.
Yep, wouldn’t it be nice if there was less war in 2024!!!!
Great video demonstrating the hold Christmas has on the general public as well as support by governments. I think Christmas is simply a day of festivity that is the result of commercialization and public relations. The goal is to some extent a unified position of good will to all, though has a religious theme. If anything it is a historical event most recognize.
One thing, for me, though I tend to say Happy Holidays in public so as not to offend, just in case, I really want to say Merry Christmas. As Peter pointed out different countries celebrate Christmas differently with their own cultural influences.
I have a Dear Friend in Sweden and Sweden has Lucia Day, which is a religious celebration to some extent. It is popular, though the nation is pretty much secular. Everyone has an Advent Star in their window and have Advent candles too. December is the month of Advent. with each of the four Sundays leading up to Christmas has different meanings.
They have a character known as Tomten more popular than Santa Claus. He is a gnome and is legendary in nature.They also have the Yule Goat made of straw. Oh yeah, Saffron buns are big too along with a variety of Christmas cookies.
I wonder if it would make any different if undesirable political leaders and politicians can be sacked in the USA, between elections, as they can be in the UK?
As you know, the UK Conservative Party sacked Boris Johnson as Prime Minister as last summer for consistently lying to Parliament; and subsequently was suspended from Parliament by a majority vote in the House of Commons – at which point he resigned as a politician rather than face the humiliation of being sacked by voters in his own Constituency (seat).
Following the demise of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister the Conservative Party elected Liz Truss as the next Prime Minister; but the sacked her as their leader just 49 days later because she so spectacularly trashed the UK economy within week of coming to power!
Another mechanism of getting rid of unwanted politicians (law introduced by the Conservative Government in 2015) is a law that allows voters in the politicians own Constituency to sack their elected politician if he or she is suspended by Parliament, provided at least 10% of the voters in that seat vote to have him/her ‘recalled’. Recall being the fancy word for being sacked by the voters.
This has just happened to MP Peter Bone, a Conservative MP who was recently suspended by a majority vote in the House of Commons – So the Conservatives face another by-election in the New Year, which if it proves as humiliating for the Conservatives as a string of recent by-elections isn’t going to bode well for the Conservatives (who are already flagging way behind Labour in the Opinion Polls) in next year’s General Election. https://youtu.be/8ikmyoL-glc
So do you think American politics would be so divided if it was as easy to weed out undesirable politicians in America as it is in the UK?Menedez and Santos are examples of congressmen that have been or are going to be expelled. It has to reach a high bar or low bar for politicians to be sacked the way it is done in your Parliament.
Arthur, we are so divided here, that I fear any such attempt would result in a reaction outside of what decorum we are supposed to have as to how the institution is run. There has been a need to remind these representatives who it is that they work for and to whom they are held accountabl. Term limits has been an idea that has been bounced around, but the hide bound never seem to let it get too far.I do find American politics confounding!
We don’t get a great deal of American news on our British News Channels, but we do get the highlights from time to time; which gives an insight in accordance with what you describe.
That is a good point as I see it. I don't know if the actions of one man reflects the whole, yet I agree there is a segment with Christian right that would be in support of what he did. Of course we know the Christian right has a big megaphone. And, they have a large audience.
To get a grasp I read an article by Des Moines Register, Dozens gather at Iowa Capitol for closing ceremony of controversial Satanic display (Dec 16, 2023)
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story … 933177007/
"Through the darkness of tyranny and oppression we commit to our illumination,” Adramelech said. “We shed light on those who would deceive us and burn the bridges leading to ignorance and apathy. We hold a mirror to those who harm the innocent and the marginalized even as they defend the rich, the powerful and the corrupt.
“When they threatened the personal sovereignty of one of us, they threaten the personal sovereignty of all us. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain."Through the darkness of tyranny and oppression we commit to our illumination,” Adramelech said. “We shed light on those who would deceive us and burn the bridges leading to ignorance and apathy. We hold a mirror to those who harm the innocent and the marginalized even as they defend the rich, the powerful and the corrupt.
When they threatened the personal sovereignty of one of us, they threaten the personal sovereignty of all us. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain."
The problem with this is that too much of the Republican Party for political reasons embraced the actions of this madman.
---------
TSmog, The first 2 paragraphs are well stated and appropriate, I don't think that anyone can say it better.
Wow. Coming from a man who has made openly racist statements against white people and Jewish people on this forum, I guess no one should be surprised that this is the best example you can come up with.
True Christians don’t destroy statues. Just so you know.
But hey, moderate “conservatives” will always defend you, even as you fully support Antifa, BLM, and…your old favorite, the Black Panthers, all of whom have committed atrocities, tyranny and yes, plenty of vandalism.
A good discussion started here. I am an Indian but I searched about this incident and solely disapprove of this vandalism of the statue. Is it hate or politics? I think both ways.
An interesting article on Free Speech follows at a link. What caught my attention to it is the title; With the Freedom of Speech, the Responsibility to Listen by the Ford Foundation.
https://www.fordfoundation.org/news-and … to-listen/
"For our freedom of speech to work—to have meaning or the power to improve our democracy—we need to listen to one another.
In fact, we have a responsibility to listen, because listening allows us to extend the freedom of speech to others. This is why the right to assemble is so closely linked to the right to free speech. They share an amendment because speech is meaningless without an audience."I think it wise to listen, it truely gives one a look into the views and gives one the chance to be aware of other's views. Does listening not help one know one's society better?
I think this thread offers food for thought regarding freedom of speech, and it also provides a look into how others perceive a subject that is controversial in the face is Christianity.
I don't feel vandalism should be permitted under any circumstances.I agree with, "I think it wise to listen, it truely gives one a look into the views and gives one the chance to be aware of other's views. Does listening not help one know one's society better?" while saying, listening in general is key even with casual conversation.
Not only listening per se, but giving attention to what a person writes to grasp the content seeking understanding. For instance realizing when something is written with emotion and how that emotion may mask the message. Sometimes one has to reread the content using some detective work to find the actual message.
Related Discussions
- 42
Why do they want to kick out the British PM
by chigoiyke 14 years ago
....soonest it will be; why did they kick out the British PM - what's his name again? Gordon Brown. I have been following the British election with some amount of attention but I still don't get why a serving PM is about get kicked out through the votes (atleast with all indices, polls and...
- 56
Freedom of religion? Conservatives, where do you really stand
by Credence2 10 years ago
Oh yes, boys and girls, I am back, like a bad penny. I wonder what are conservative poster's positions on this topic is; are they really for freedom of religion or should children be hogtied and forced to participate in loyalty tests? I have studied with Jehovah's Witnesses and I say that their...
- 63
Which is more important, freedom of faith or freedom of speech?
by Amanda Littlejohn 10 years ago
Which is more important, freedom of faith or freedom of speech?Many religious folks are decent, good people. Some of my best friends subscribe to institutionalised superstition - and are good humored enough to let me say that without taking offense. But most religions per se enshrine some deeply...
- 41
Really Now-Do You Think That The Government Cares About You?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 19 months ago
Americans, do you believe that the Democratic & Republican parties care for their constituents or do they care to advance their monetary holdings & furthering their own clout? Democrats & Republicans are both sides of the same coin sociopolitically. In reality, they will say...
- 19
Is freedom of speech compromised in America today?
by RealityTalk 11 years ago
Is freedom of speech compromised in America today?It appears difficult to publish articles pertaining to racism, unless the racist in question is white skinned. It also appears difficult to publish articles pertaining to same-sex marriage if the article is anti-same-sex marriage; even if the...
- 54
Trump Supporters Storm Capitol Building at Trump's Urging.
by Allen Donald 3 years ago
This is your President:a man who claims fraud in the 2016 election and organizes a committee to find fraud which fails and disbands.a man who again claims fraud in the 2020 election before the election even happens and does not commit to the peaceful transfer of power.a man who claims fraud after...