Why is christianity not the state religion of the USA?

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,431
Caribbean
And you don't advocate for colonialism explicitly, but your comments about Latin America are fundamentally different than those about the Islamic world, making you an implicit supporter of White settler colonialism in Latin America
This is worse than McCarthyism. That is, there were (and are) actual card carrying members of the Communist Party. No one claims to be part of the vast white settler colonialist jihad.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,431
Caribbean
Freedom is not a trivial pursuit, and a state religion stomps all over peoples' freedom.
Not necessarily. Stomping stomps.

The early state Constitutions had establishment clauses and had anti-persecution clauses. Here is North Carolina: establishing that no office holder can deny the truth of Protestantism and yet there is freedom of conscience (no stomping).
XIX. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.
XXXII.That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.
 
Last edited:

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,494
I understand your point about US imperialism etc. However, maybe it belongs in another thread. It doesn't have much to do with the US not having an established religion. I think you have a good point, but it is maybe more politics than history. I understand the poster discussed countries officially Muslim being worse.
 
Oct 2019
124
West Virginia
The term "White" is bogus despite millions of US and Latin Americans identifying as such? Also, calling the US invasion of Iraq a "blunder" is in the same level as calling Cortés's invasion of Mexico or Alvarado's invasion of Guatemala "blunders". These are not "blunders", which implies that there was a correct way to lead what in reality are wars of aggression that lead to the deaths of millions. Also, I find it hilariously ironic that you decry "terrorist jihadis" while being "glad Saddam is dead" when Saddam Hussein was not a "jihadi" even in his more conservative Islamist years and was never allied with Al-Qaeda or the Taliban (indeed, Al-Qaeda only became strong after Bush's invasion, as did other "jihadists") and never financed "terrorism", a term that like "totalitarianism" is nothing but a pejorative used to justify violence and repression especially directed against Third World movements and before the 1990s at least was mostly used to demonise revolutionary Communists rather than Muslims of all political ideologies. Saddam Hussein was a tyrant (and one who could be said to have committed genocide against Kurds), in the same way Bashar al-Assad is a tyrant, but being tyrannical is not the same as being "jihadi" or a supporter of "terrorism" and doesn't justify any imperialist war (for example, I don't think a "humanitarian intervention" led by the West to stop Lucas García or Ríos Montt in Guatemala would have been justified).

And you don't advocate for colonialism explicitly, but your comments about Latin America are fundamentally different than those about the Islamic world, making you an implicit supporter of White settler colonialism in Latin America since it's clear you see it as ontologically superior to the non-White, non-Western Islamic world and its religious "terrorists". Then you come and praise colonial powers like France and their secularism, the same France that like I said has recently invaded and devastated Mali and bombed Syria and Iraq (and, should be added, still owns colonies, including the only remaining continental colony in Latin America, French Guiana). It's what Asad Abu Khalil -himself no fan of Islam as a whole and an atheist who once said there should be a sect against all religious sects- calls colonial secularism.
You're talking nonsense. Blunder, error, debacle, outrage, atrocity, it was all of those things. You're just looking for reasons to argue, yet you really have no argument. Saddam Hussein was a mass-murdering psychopath, and he deserved to die. That doesn't justify the USA occupation, as I said, but good riddance to that devil. Believe me, if Trump goes from a heart attack tomorrow I will be glad about that also.

Yes, terrorist jihadis are devils, also. There IS terrorism in the world, and the word is valid. Whether they are Islamicist or other, terrorists all deserve to die also. Are you suggesting that I should not dislike Daesh simply because they are not Europeans?

As for Guatemala (where I lived when Lucas García was President), what Carter did was good... cutting off military aid. Since I had friends tortured and killed by the govt death squads there, I'm not opposed to any intervention which would have stopped it, however, since the USA was the root cause of the problem I'd hardly have expected Reagan to do it. He was arming, training and funding Ríos Montt! Obviously USA corporations make big profits in Latin American countries and so they're perfectly content with bloody rightwing dictators running things, as long as the profit keeps flowing.

You are confusing "the Islamic world" with Islamicist jihadis! I support the freedom and peace of the former, and the utter extermination of the latter. They are 2 different things. I praise French laïcité, not their imperialism, which I condemn, as I am also very aware of how they control the economies of countries like Mali, to cite one example. French laïcité to which I refer speaks to the internal policy of France, their separation of church and state. And back to Mali, you say nothing against the foreign al Qaeda devils who pulled the rug out from under the Tuareg independence movement, then began killing people and destroying historical treasures. Your silence regarding the extensive crimes of devils like Daesh, al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram, etc., is despicable. Somehow if the murdering oppressors are Islamic, you seem to think that's just fine.

I know all about "whiteness" and what BS it is. I do not identify as such, though I was raised being told that I was "white". My ethnicity is Appalachian. "White" (and "black" for that matter) is nonsense.

Are you in fact Mayan? As I've known many Mayan people, that is a group I especially support. There are Mayans now being held in detention facilities at the border, their children abused, and some have died. I was attempting to work on economic projects with people in Guatemala, mostly Cakchiquel speakers, when the violence started up, people began to disappear, and then I was warned by a leftist ladino college student that they were coming for me. He told me to get to Mexico quickly, which I did, partly walking through the jungle to Belize.

I've had friends from Cambodia, Iran, Mali, Jordan and many places and I do not want any of them oppressed, ok, nobody anywhere. The world is a big mess and if you have a notion of how to fix it, please let me know. Let us all know.
 
Oct 2019
124
West Virginia
Not necessarily. Stomping stomps.

The early state Constitutions had establishment clauses and had anti-persecution clauses. Here is North Carolina: establishing that no office holder can deny the truth of Protestantism and yet there is freedom of conscience (no stomping).
XIX. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.
XXXII.That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.
When has a state religion NOT led to abuse? And as such is prohibited by the 1st Amendment in the USA, let's just keep it that way.

I'm quite sure that Jefferson, Madison, et al., had the right idea.
 
Oct 2019
124
West Virginia
This is worse than McCarthyism. That is, there were (and are) actual card carrying members of the Communist Party. No one claims to be part of the vast white settler colonialist jihad.
Well, we're all stepping over the 1991 rule here... though I don't think I started it.

But to your point, yes, his sort of extremist dogmatism reminds me of campus radicals for whom everything is construed in very simplistic dichotomies. Historically, for example, not all oppressors have been "white" Europeans, certainly, and all non-Europeans are not always the good guys. I would have thought everyone knew that.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,431
Caribbean
Well, we're all stepping over the 1991 rule here... though I don't think I started it. But to your point, yes, his sort of extremist dogmatism reminds me of campus radicals for whom everything is construed in very simplistic dichotomies. Historically, for example, not all oppressors have been "white" Europeans, certainly, and all non-Europeans are not always the good guys.
I thought "white settler" expansionism started in 1492. But I am now what they call "old school" when campus radical meant tie-dyed T-shirt, man. Once they went from "man" to "dude," I get a little lost in the translation, which they used to call a generation gap, man.

I would have thought everyone knew that.
I take it you mean "everyone" on the forum knows, not dichotomous "campus radicals" know. lol.

I took it that you and he were not arguing all, but mplicitly arguing percentages.
 
Oct 2019
124
West Virginia
I thought "white settler" expansionism started in 1492. But I am now what they call "old school" when campus radical meant tie-dyed T-shirt, man. Once they went from "man" to "dude," I get a little lost in the translation, which they used to call a generation gap, man.

I take it you mean "everyone" on the forum knows, not dichotomous "campus radicals" know. lol.

I took it that you and he were not arguing all, but mplicitly arguing percentages.
I would have to consider the actions of the Teutonic Knights in the Baltic region to be an example of what we can for lack of a better term call "white settler expansionism". And wouldn't the Roman Empire have been guilty of it as well? But by its nature, it is not a "white" or European thing, it is simply the usual abuse powerful empires visit upon whomever they can conquer.

There is no real argument, as he's making no sense. I can't argue with illogical statements.

By campus radicals, I don't mean of a particular generation, but simply the naive simplistic enthusiasm of those who think they've just become part of the vanguard in saving the world. It's a syndrome, across all generations, apparently.

One characteristic of USA campus radicals is they turn against anything Western, and become incapable of criticizing non-Europeans. So when I mention Arab or Turkish imperialism, this fellow has a fit. Oh no, I must be "racist", because only "whites" (though he agrees that is a bogus designation) can be evil. This is what I mean by "simplistic".
 

Angelica

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
2,765
Angel City
The Catholic Church tried to make it state religion failed miserably. Why politicize religion that opens the doorway to corruption and formality.
 
Feb 2017
313
Latin America
You're talking nonsense. Blunder, error, debacle, outrage, atrocity, it was all of those things. You're just looking for reasons to argue, yet you really have no argument. Saddam Hussein was a mass-murdering psychopath, and he deserved to die. That doesn't justify the USA occupation, as I said, but good riddance to that devil. Believe me, if Trump goes from a heart attack tomorrow I will be glad about that also.

Yes, terrorist jihadis are devils, also. There IS terrorism in the world, and the word is valid. Whether they are Islamicist or other, terrorists all deserve to die also. Are you suggesting that I should not dislike Daesh simply because they are not Europeans?

As for Guatemala (where I lived when Lucas García was President), what Carter did was good... cutting off military aid. Since I had friends tortured and killed by the govt death squads there, I'm not opposed to any intervention which would have stopped it, however, since the USA was the root cause of the problem I'd hardly have expected Reagan to do it. He was arming, training and funding Ríos Montt! Obviously USA corporations make big profits in Latin American countries and so they're perfectly content with bloody rightwing dictators running things, as long as the profit keeps flowing.

You are confusing "the Islamic world" with Islamicist jihadis! I support the freedom and peace of the former, and the utter extermination of the latter. They are 2 different things. I praise French laïcité, not their imperialism, which I condemn, as I am also very aware of how they control the economies of countries like Mali, to cite one example. French laïcité to which I refer speaks to the internal policy of France, their separation of church and state. And back to Mali, you say nothing against the foreign al Qaeda devils who pulled the rug out from under the Tuareg independence movement, then began killing people and destroying historical treasures. Your silence regarding the extensive crimes of devils like Daesh, al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram, etc., is despicable. Somehow if the murdering oppressors are Islamic, you seem to think that's just fine.

I know all about "whiteness" and what BS it is. I do not identify as such, though I was raised being told that I was "white". My ethnicity is Appalachian. "White" (and "black" for that matter) is nonsense.

Are you in fact Mayan? As I've known many Mayan people, that is a group I especially support. There are Mayans now being held in detention facilities at the border, their children abused, and some have died. I was attempting to work on economic projects with people in Guatemala, mostly Cakchiquel speakers, when the violence started up, people began to disappear, and then I was warned by a leftist ladino college student that they were coming for me. He told me to get to Mexico quickly, which I did, partly walking through the jungle to Belize.

I've had friends from Cambodia, Iran, Mali, Jordan and many places and I do not want any of them oppressed, ok, nobody anywhere. The world is a big mess and if you have a notion of how to fix it, please let me know. Let us all know.
Glad to see you at least revised and clarified your comment about "blunder". I don't condemn Islamic fascists except when I did when I explicitly mentioned how Al-Qaeda became strong after Saddam's death, clearly as something negative. The "murder of Islamic jihadi devils" (love your dehumanising language) you speak is by invasions of wholesale countries and the killing, maiming and displacing of millions of civilians, who are also the victims of these fascists that the US created in the 1980s to fight Afghan Communism and give the Soviet Union its own Vietnam War. I don't however go around mentioning the atrocities of the likes of ISIS and Boko Haram as much for the simple reason that I don't see the need to as everyone knows they're evil and commit atrocities. It's like condemning Nazis or condemning Trump. Their atrocities are well-known and there's no need to repeat them. You would have a point there if I defended them, except I never did.

What I'm doing is criticising imperialist wars done in the name of secularism and in the name of fighting religious fanaticism, which should indeed be counted as part of French laicite and other versions of Western secularism espoused by countries allied with the US. I don't do any bogus separation of "internal" and "foreign" policies and practices. It is true I do support a non-confessional, non-sectarian state that treats believers and non-believers equally, but French laicite is not that, it is instead colonial secular sectarianism that gives justification for genocidal wars like the 2013 French invasion of Mali or the 2015 French bombing of Syria, which you don't mention (only a hilariously vague comment about "French economic domination of Mali") and which, far from killing Islamic "jihadi devils" (imagine if I called Israeli Zionist soldiers who kill Palestinians "satanic kikes", that's pretty much the equivalent here), kills the victims of Islamic jihadism instead.

Your comment about Ríos Montt is also instructive because you are ignoring the fact that the US and its allies created jihadist fascism in the 1980s and revived their support against the regime of Bashar al-Assad, and also allowed for it to find a save haven in Iraq after the invasion that deposed Saddam (and you don't say anything about how, despite eventually becoming an Islamist conservative, his regime was still ultimately a secular one, showing both that there's tyrannical secularism and that you're not applying your standards about fighting religious fanaticism as consistently, since had Saddam not been deposed, there wouldn't be any Al-Qaeda or Daesh or Zarqawi in Iraq; as bad as Saddam was and he was certainly horrible, you're not going to say ISIS was preferable, do you?). In fact, the US has been arming Al-Qaeda to fight Assad and the French basically gave air cover support for Al-Qaeda. It's the equivalent of Reagan doing a humanitarian intervention to stop the same Lucas García and Ríos Montt he himself illegally armed (through Israel, and I will remind you again that calling jihadists "devils" is the equivalent of calling Zionists who are no less murderous "satanic kikes").

And no, I don't know all solutions, but clearly humanitarian imperialism which is genocidal and straight up neocolonialism is not one of them. I would rather support regional interventions for extreme cases. For instance, I think Iran's intervention in Syria (not Russia's though) was ultimately right, as was Hezbollah's. They're Syria's neighbours and also official allies sanctioned by the Syrian government and with wide support from the Syrian people, especially Hezbollah. In Mali, an intervention by its direct neighbours in the conflict against Al-Qaeda sanctioned by the African Union was for me the solution. In the case of Guatemala, a Cuban intervention would have been something I would have supported. These interventions are fundamentally different than the imperialist wars that the US and its allies wage and which only kill en masse, especially since they only involve mobilisation of soldiers, and not heavy weaponry like tanks and jets that destroy wantonly with no regard for human life, infrastructure or the environment.
 
Last edited: