He really was excellent in his day. I enjoyed listening to him debate.
1 Like
Okay, how about we work on LGBTQ rights? Womanâs healthcare? Income inequality? Immigration? Race? Gender Issues?
Ah, so now we must discuss what we believe to be of benefit. Fair enough.
From what youâve listed itâs difficult to know what you mean by each term/issue. Undoubtedly weâd find common cause in that list. Perhaps, depending on what you mean, weâd be in disagreement as to the benefit of working together on some others. But the discussion would be on the issues not on your atheism.
1 Like
@patrick you are going to like the lutherans. It will be a welcome contrast to the Catholicism you left long ago.
1 Like
My atheism is merely an opinion. Atheism has nothing to do with my purpose in life nor the meaning I get out of life.
1 Like
We tend to be rather frustrating for most folks. Weâre not Roman, but we are catholic (thatâs one of our essential claims of the Reformation). Weâre not Calvinist, Reformed, Zwinglian, etc, etc.
We donât fit anywhere. Weâre full of both/ands, apparent contradictions, and paradoxes.
Itâs what makes us cool 
1 Like
Iâm not quite sure what you mean - but I think weâre in agreement? I was saying your atheism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, Sikhism, or Islam, would be irrelevant to me if we decide to work together to feed the hungry in our community.
3 Likes
Here is what we did in NJ to feed the hungry in our community that had too many old Churches.
This place now pays taxes which is used by the town/state government for social services like education, senior services, community healthcare whereas the remaining most dormant churches pay nothing.
2 Likes
That looks coolâŚthough it looks more like a restaurant than a food bank or kitchen for the hungry/homeless. Iâm glad a beautiful old building that wasnât being used for a congregation to meet in can be used for something good.
1 Like
You now changed from feeding the hungry to a food bank or kitchen for the hungry/homeless.
This is two different things. In todayâs world (or limiting to just US/Canada) the problem is not being underfed but overfed. Being hungry today is more of a metabolic problem like diabetes. Shouldnât we focus our efforts on proper nutrition and exercise? We produce today an overabundance of food. Even the poorest of the poor is fat. Shouldnât programs like SNAP be expanded so that poor families can buy more healthy food?
As for the homeless, Dr. Ben Carson leads HUD. What is HUD doing to eliminate homelessness? In my county in NJ, homelessness is mostly a mental health problem that is not being adequately address.
Ah, yes, this is what happens when we donât define our terms. I didnât âchangeâ anything. My assumption was when discussing âfeeding the hungryâ we were discussing such things as food banks. Thatâs the way it would be generally used in this context in Canada (and I assumed most places), but apparently you use that term differently and when you use the term you mean to communicate concern for an over abundance of food and being overfed and concern for diabetes, proper nutrition, and exercise. Perhaps you can understand my confusion.
I have no argument with any of what youâve written. The concerns you raise are also concerns - particularly the issue of mental health and homelessness. I donât know what SNAP is and I barely know who Ben Carson is, and have no idea what he is doing to eliminate homelessness.
1 Like
In the US at the moment there is a big hypocrisy going on among the Christian majority in this country. Christians are all for âfeeding the poor and hungryâ while cutting social programs like Food Stamps, Medicaid, low income housing. The whole âBuild a Wallâ hypocrisy while being anti-immigrant is being pushed by mostly Christians. Income inequality is being addressed by massive tax cuts for the rich, most who are Christian.
American culture baffles me (not that I believe Canadian culture is any better, just different and messed up in our own way). What I see in the culture is American civil religionâŚwhich often has a whiff of Christianity but is really more like Moralistic Therapeutic Deism (as coined by Christian Smith back in 05). So, Iâm not convinced what youâre reacting to is necessarily Christianity. Though, I suppose you could accuse me of the âthatâs no true Scotsmanâ fallacy.
I also find that Americans view everything through the lens of politics. That seems to lead my American friends to view the world as dichotomies. If only it were that simple⌠This conversation, I suppose, is a good example. Something of a political nature was no where near my thought. Hadnât occurred to me. Perhaps this is because âChristianâ has become synonymous with âright wingâ in the States and youâre reacting to that conflation? The Christians are not without fault in this conflation, from my perspective, either. In fact, that is an area among American Christianity that baffles me - the commingling of the Faith with patriotism and âAmerican values.â Thatâs very unhelpful and dangerous. When I see churches allowing politicians into the pulpit on a Sunday it simply makes no sense to me.
Your perspective of the situation that youâve laid out may or may not be accurate, or accurate in some but not all areas. Everything that you claimed also has another side or sides to consider. Youâve also made some moral claims and assumed bad motives of the âhypocritesâ of the âChristianâ majority. Could there be a more balanced way to try and see the situation?
I stopped listening to American politics about 10 years ago - itâs not a conversation and no one is listening. Itâs nonsensical. I have many friends down south - I hope you all can sort yourselves out.
3 Likes
I agree that everything is distorted in the US politics. All we have now is voices shouting at each other.
4 Likes