30 Nov 19
@medullah saidOf course I watched the hearings, I said as much in the post you replied to. The propaganda here is clearly on the right, with Republican congresspersons lining up to add to the Republican fairy tales and to present their false narratives. It's like none of the Republican representatives in the same room paid any attention to the testimony of witnesses. They just keep spewing their lies about "Ukrainian interference in the 2016 elections" to divert attention from the truth of Russian interference. None of them can even correctly identify exactly who in the Ukrainian government was/is corrupt, just as none of them can correctly identify who is corrupt in our own government.
I don't follow why I should let a bias news group shape my opinion when I can observe the hearings for myself, which I did. You clearly didn't, which is which you posted propaganda that you have been fed.
I did better than listen/read the news, I listened to the actual hearings, especially the ambassadors testimonies and the other members of the team that were actually l ...[text shortened]... I can do is look at an political party, and approach a given topic from a disinterested perspective.
So you don't vote and you claim to be disinterested. Given the minimum of attention that you have apparently squandered on these hearings, I'd have to say "thank goodness" you're not among those who are actively trying to destroy democracy in this country. Now if you'd only restrain yourself from naively commenting on something you admit that you have no interest in.
30 Nov 19
@suzianne said"None of them can even correctly identify exactly who in the Ukrainian government was/is corrupt, just as none of them can correctly identify who is corrupt in our own government."
Of course I watched the hearings, I said as much in the post you replied to. The propaganda here is clearly on the right, with Republican congresspersons lining up to add to the Republican fairy tales and to present their false narratives. It's like none of the Republican representatives in the same room paid any attention to the testimony of witnesses. They just keep spe ...[text shortened]... only restrain yourself from naively commenting on something you admit that you have no interest in.
But you can?
"I'd have to say "thank goodness" you're not among those who are actively trying to destroy democracy in this country."
They're out there, but they just won't admit it, right?
Everyone is "actively trying to destroy democracy" in their own way to one degree or the other. Some more than others. For example: the Supreme Court legalized abortion, and now this nation has the specter of the slaughter of over 50 million innocent babies hovering over our collective consciousness. Add to that a whole host of other aberrant and immoral behaviors we've allowed under the guise of freedom, and in the name of "democracy", you can be certain that judgment will fall.
30 Nov 19
@secondson said"Except" Christianity?
All except Christianity.
Christianity is intolerant of all other faiths on the grounds that it is totally exclusive.
That's your answer to the OP?
So the eventual installation of your "revealed" religion - its narratives and traditions - as the world's one and only faith is NOT the ideal and desired outcome in your view? Read the OP again. "All except Christianity"?
I wonder what situation would be of you had two Christians (I'm not trying to pick on Suzi but it's a handy example) that each feels as strongly about the other's political party, one a Democrat and one a Republican?
John 13:35
34A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. 35By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
Note the new commandment that Jesus gives us.
@fmf saidI only have knowledge of three (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) but probably yes.
Isn't the eventual installation of their God figures, narratives and traditions ~ as the world's one and only faith ~ the ideal and desired outcome for proactive devotees of pretty much any and all "revealed" religions?
The exception may be certain strands of Buddhism and maybe the Bahia, but I'm not expert.
If the signed treaties that I've referenced in other posts come to fruition then I believe that we will be taken in some kind of one world naturism direction centring around the environment (you can almost see it coming) but featuring a re-hashed version of Baal worship (cult of the open hole).
Already we are seeing attempts to re-brand paedophilia as "age gap love" so it looks as though we are being set up for an anything goes.
If nobody has read it "Brave New World" it is based on the writings held in the Fabian Society which is one of the driving forces behind the planned new political re-alignment.
30 Nov 19
@medullah saidIf it is a religion ~ in so far as it involves worshipping a superhuman controlling power~ then it will be a matter for theists what religion they subscribe to. If you decide to convert from Christianity to whatever it is you are going on about, then that will be your prerogative.
If the signed treaties that I've referenced in other posts come to fruition then I believe that we will be taken in some kind of one world naturism direction (I'm not suggesting nudity) centring around the environment
30 Nov 19
@fmf saidI edited my post as I think nudity will most definitely be involved.
If it is a religion ~ in so far as it involves worshipping a superhuman controlling power~ then it will be a matter for theists what religion they subscribe to. If you decide to convert from Christianity to whatever it is you are going on about, then that will be your prerogative.
I doubt that there will be a choice - in BNW it was a one world religion controlled by the state.
True Christianity (I distinguish from Christendom) doesn't have a state allegiance which is why it gets banned in authoritarian regimes (e.g. China)