Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[Professor Tiger]

An excellent article:

http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/0 ... game/?_r=0

Salient excerpt:

Unless something dramatic changes in the drift of public opinion, the future of religious liberty on these issues is going to depend in part on the magnanimity of gay marriage supporters — the extent to which they are content with political, legal and cultural victories that leave the traditional view of marriage as a minority perspective with some modest purchase in civil society, versus the extent to which they decide to use every possible lever to make traditionalism as radioactive in the America of 2025 as white supremacism or anti-Semitism are today. And I can imagine a scenario in which a more drawn-out and federalist march to “marriage equality in 50 states,” with a large number of (mostly southern) states hewing to the older definition for much longer than the five years that gay marriage advocates currently anticipate, ends up encouraging a more scorched-earth approach to this battle, with less tolerance for the shrinking population of holdouts, and a more punitive, “they’re getting what they deserve” attitude toward traditionalist religious bodies in particular.

I'm guessing the winners of the culture wars will be a lot more "scorched earth" and a lot less "magnanimous."

[Dr. Strangelove]

An excellent article:

http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/0 ... game/?_r=0

Salient excerpt:

Unless something dramatic changes in the drift of public opinion, the future of religious liberty on these issues is going to depend in part on the magnanimity of gay marriage supporters — the extent to which they are content with political, legal and cultural victories that leave the traditional view of marriage as a minority perspective with some modest purchase in civil society, versus the extent to which they decide to use every possible lever to make traditionalism as radioactive in the America of 2025 as white supremacism or anti-Semitism are today. And I can imagine a scenario in which a more drawn-out and federalist march to “marriage equality in 50 states,” with a large number of (mostly southern) states hewing to the older definition for much longer than the five years that gay marriage advocates currently anticipate, ends up encouraging a more scorched-earth approach to this battle, with less tolerance for the shrinking population of holdouts, and a more punitive, “they’re getting what they deserve” attitude toward traditionalist religious bodies in particular.

I'm guessing the winners of the culture wars will be a lot more "scorched earth" and a lot less "magnanimous."

We've already seen how "magnanimous" the religious folks are when THEY have a firm grip on society.

[Owlman]

so that it has not ruled that states cannot make laws limiting marriage to one man, one woman.

That's coming next. A gay couple that got married in Massachussetts or Washington and then moved to Alabama or South Carolina will demand that their new state recognize their gay marriage performed in their old state. When that demand is refused, they will sue, and they will win in SCOTUS.

I agree, full faith and credit are next main issue for the SCOTUS, but I don't think they have the votes yet. Kennedy has been supportive but has been reluctant to go that far.

[Jungle Rat]

This whole gay marriage debate is stupid. Who fucking cares? If a dude wants to bang another dude in the ass so be it. If two chicks want to munch each others carpet, so be it. I don't care. It has no effect on me and my daily life.

[AugustWest]

This whole gay marriage debate is stupid. Who fucking cares? If a dude wants to bang another dude in the ass so be it. If two chicks want to munch each others carpet, so be it. I don't care. It has no effect on me and my daily life.

exactly. The world would be a much better place if people would just mind their own fucking business and keep their nose out of other people's lives.

[Jungle Rat]

Yep.

[AugustWest]

btw, I think you're spoiling your kids a little too much and would it really hurt you to slow down on the drinking?

[Professor Tiger]

You're putting too much carbon in the atmosphere. You need to start riding the bus to work. I'm also going to tax coal burning power plants to skyrocket your power bill to help you be socially responsible.

You are also drinking too many large soft drinks. You must limit them to 12 oz. from now on. You may not eat veal or patte. And don't even THINK about smoking.

You must also wear a helmet when you ride a bicycle. You must buy politically approved light bulbs.

[innocentbystander]

I suspect that nouveaux Christianity is the last stage of pre-atheism. It takes about one generation for people to figure out there's not much point in paying much attention to a Jesus that was merely a really cool dude.

I think we are in the End Days because (truthfully) there isn't much point paying attention to Jesus, particularly if the people who are supposed to be in authority on the words of Jesus have chosen to disregard and infact, penalize those who honor Jesus. Take the following:

http://leticiamary.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... f-jackson/

What was your immediate feeling towards the women in the that church (who organized that little tribunal) after you read that?

What was your immediate feeling towards the Pastor after you read it?

I don't know about you Tiger, but I have never been a member of a church where the Pastor had ANY AUTHORITY to remove anyone. Ever. The only person who could be removed from the church is the Pastor. He (or she) could be fired. But not in this situation. Here you have a Pastor (with real power) who is booting a member of the church out the door which in and of itself would not be so terrible if ONLY the person he was booting wasn't teaching the Scripture.

Joe: Care to explain the military tribunal?

Head Pastor: It’s not as simple as you think.

Assistant Pastor: There’s a lot of people that got very angry with you. It threatened to put a rift in the church.

Joe: Is a church that exists knowingly in sin worth keeping whole?

An EXCELLENT question! Now anyone with even half a brain would understand the paradox here, the divide by zero error, the conflict of spiritual interest the Pastor is put in with the above commentary. The answer of course is No. But for the Pastor (who gets a check from the church so long as there IS a church) shit just got real!

Here is my conspiracy theory. I'm thinking what happened is the feminsts of that church formed a UNION of sorts. They went to the Pastor, told them that this guy was teaching Patriarichal beliefs to the single men in the church, that pissed them off (because the women run not only their own homes, but also their church) and they got their beta-male husbands to do their bidding and threatened the Pastor to walk (and take their tithes and offers to God with them) if he didn't bring the hammer down on Joe. That would be my guess.

I don't think situations like this are all the unusual.

[Jungle Rat]

btw, I think you're spoiling your kids a little too much and would it really hurt you to slow down on the drinking?

I only spoil them when I drink. That wouldn't be fair to them.

[sardis]

This whole gay marriage debate is stupid. Who fucking cares? If a dude wants to bang another dude in the ass so be it. If two chicks want to munch each others carpet, so be it. I don't care. It has no effect on me and my daily life.

exactly. The world would be a much better place if people would just mind their own fucking business and keep their nose out of other people's lives.

And that's fine, but also keep your fuckin' nose out of the church's business as well.

[Jungle Rat]

I have no dealings with any church, temple, mosque or Dennys.

[sardis]

No Denny's? Are you insane?

[Jungle Rat]

We have none here.

[Professor Tiger]

IB, that sounds like a typical church squabble that is as common as grass.

[bluetick]

An excellent article:

http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/0 ... game/?_r=0

Salient excerpt:

Unless something dramatic changes in the drift of public opinion, the future of religious liberty on these issues is going to depend in part on the magnanimity of gay marriage supporters — the extent to which they are content with political, legal and cultural victories that leave the traditional view of marriage as a minority perspective with some modest purchase in civil society, versus the extent to which they decide to use every possible lever to make traditionalism as radioactive in the America of 2025 as white supremacism or anti-Semitism are today. And I can imagine a scenario in which a more drawn-out and federalist march to “marriage equality in 50 states,” with a large number of (mostly southern) states hewing to the older definition for much longer than the five years that gay marriage advocates currently anticipate, ends up encouraging a more scorched-earth approach to this battle, with less tolerance for the shrinking population of holdouts, and a more punitive, “they’re getting what they deserve” attitude toward traditionalist religious bodies in particular.

I'm guessing the winners of the culture wars will be a lot more "scorched earth" and a lot less "magnanimous."

Traditional marriage will be a scourge akin to white supremacy by 2025? Lessee... so me and the missus have less than a dozen years where we can hold our head high?

petticoat-nation, mongrelization, miscegenation ... who doesn't love a good slippery slope?

[Professor Tiger]

No. The author is saying that the winners of the culture war may try to make opposition to gay marriage as radioactive as white supremacy. They won't go after hetero marriage. You and the Mrs. are safe for now.

[Toemeesleather]

Opposition to pretty much anything that comes out of the White House is and has been radioactive/racist for going on 5 years now.....also gets you extra scrutiny/profiling from the IRS.

[Toemeesleather]

..............and.....it's Bush's fault.

[innocentbystander]

IB, that sounds like a typical church squabble that is as common as grass.

Very true, but also very much a strawman.

While the situation is common, it does clearly explain why people are increasingly turning their back on Jesus (like you said.)