Is MAGA-ism a Religion?

[metis]

It’s a free country.

Then why does it cost so much to live here?

 

[Muffled]

One more reason to favor the Dems, then.

You mean along with the need to murder babies?

 

[Muffled]

Successful at what? Being a sexual abuser and boasting about it on tape? Being a serial liar? Being a moron? Being ignorant? Being vindictive and childish? Being a criminal? An insurrectionist? Generally not respecting democracy, the law, or the constitution?

He's very good at rabble-rousing and demanding unquestioning loyalty, but I'm not sure that's what you want in a leader, really.

Probably a lot better at bull droppings than you are.

 

[Muffled]

The saying "Make America Great again" is a superficial political motto.

I do not believe you can call MAGA a religion, but it is a frightening fundamentalist Christian movement based on the establishment of Christian Theonomy. It includes radical movements and beliefs like QAnon, and movements to greatly constrict the democratic process in favor of extreme religious beliefs. The appointment of Federal judges by Trump reflects this religious agenda throughout the court system.

I believe the motto comes from a belief in America first as opposed to the internationalism that the Democrat party has espoused.

 

[shunyadragon]

I believe the motto comes from a belief in America first as opposed to the internationalism that the Democrat party has espoused.

There are far more issues with Trump than a simplistic meaningless motto. such as his isolationism and his devoted love of Putin and everything he stands for. There is also his endorsement of QAnon,

 

[The Hammer]

You mean along with the need to murder babies?

It's my favorite pass time. Wanna watch? /s

Edit: to explicitly clarify sarcasm

 

[Soandso]

It's my favorite pass time. Wanna watch?

Too bad you aren't an atheist cause if you stick around for the post abortion show potluck the baby back ribs are just killer

 

[shunyadragon]

Too bad you aren't an atheist cause if you stick around for the post abortion show potluck the baby back ribs are just killer

Hope you enjoyed them!

 

[shunyadragon]

You mean along with the need to murder babies?

Christians have been doing that for thousands of years.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes… where we intersected, we agreed.

We intersect on the pertinent parts.

That would vary person to person. For Christians, the word of God is the beginning point as we believe that Jesus was the way, the truth and the life.

How do you decide if faith is misguided?

This is my question to YOU. The person who uses faith.
Maybe you could answer it sometime.

I’m not sure if we have a communication gap. I keep repeating that, when it happens, we do agree. You basically said that when you say “overlap” - not equal but they do overlap.

I've pointed out in which parts we overlap and why I think they are pertinent to the conversation we're having.

Are you just wanting to argue for arguments sake?

Please stop asking me this. We're on a debate forum.

I’ve already pointed out that you are incorrect on that interpretation. Why?

And I've countered it and explained why I've countered it.

You will have to enumerate which ones I didn’t answer.

Good grief.

How do we tell the different between "real" faith and "misguided" faith?
How is faith useful as a pathway to determining what things are true and what things are not true?

I disagree. You gave a different viewpoint but didn’t refute mine.

I did.

How so? I am pretty sure I said “Truth is the pathway to faith”. Would you like me to find my quote?

This was in response to, "You've helped demonstrate that faith is not a pathway to truth, because anything can be believed on faith."

You seem to think just declaring that "truth is the pathway to faith" actually means something. Without actually explaining what it's supposed to mean.

That is answered above here.

No, it's not. If you look above, all you did was return the question back at ME, rather than answering it.

It’s prophetic accuracy. It’s message. It’s composition.

This was in response to, "How did you determine you've got the "right" faith and not some kind of "misguided" faith?"

Your response appears to be word salad.

It’s prophetic accuracy, It’s message. It’s composition. Not to mention that when i have accepted the truth therein, built my faith on that truth — I received the manifestations thereof.

Whatever that means. Sounds like confirmation bias to me.

That is a progression that each person has to travel. You will have to review all the different religions and decide whether they are all hogwash or one is the truth. Obviously you can also decide to put faith in humanity’s capacity… or your capacity.

So there is no way and it's just up to personal interpretation and confirmation bias.

I answered the question correctly. We aren’t robots, we have minds of our own as I do in my own journey. It is up to the individual to decide which “interpretation” is correct.

This was in response to, "And who's interpretation?
How did you determine that?"
This is not a response that addresses my questions. HOW do you determine "which one is correct?" Do you use faith, or do you collect evidence?"

So your response is basically just, well it's whatever you personally want it to be. Confirmation bias. Wishful thinking.

That being said, there are no real variations of interpretations on the foundational truth that Jesus came, died on the cross for our sins, resurrected from the dead, is seated at the right hand of the Father and is coming again.

There are hundreds of different sects of Christianity for the very reason that there are so many variations of interpretations on this supposed "foundational truth." If you guys can't even figure out amongst yourselves, how are the rest of us supposed to figure it out? Especially when you can't even explain the different between "real" faith and "misguided" faith in any sort of useful way. Your answer is that it's just up to the individual. That's the perfect recipe for confirmation bias and demonstrates yet again that faith is not a pathway to truth, and that anything can be believed in faith.

Which I do.

Not really.

Answered in above statements.

Your response basically is, because I want it to be.

That is more of a “what you interpreted in what you read isn’t what I meant” type of a situation.

Then clarify for me. Just stating "you got it wrong' gets us no where.

It’s a free country.

Yep it is. That's why I'm free to point out that you haven't refuted it, and therefore, my points stand in this debate forum we're typing in.

 

[Kenny]

We intersect on the pertinent parts.

Pertinent to you - but it all pertinent to the subject

This is my question to YOU. The person who uses faith.
Maybe you could answer it sometime.

I did… I also notice the two step as you did above.

I've pointed out in which parts we overlap and why I think they are pertinent to the conversation we're having.

This is a debate… everything concering this subject is pertinent.

Please stop asking me this. We're on a debate forum.

Yes… good debate but arguing just for arguing sake is not debate.

And I've countered it and explained why I've countered it.

Good grief.

LOL… I will echo… good grief.

How do we tell the different between "real" faith and "misguided" faith?

If it is based on truth your good. If not, it is misguided.

How is faith useful as a pathway to determining what things are true and what things are not true?

You seem to ignore what I said thus “arguing for arguing sake”. I said truth is a pathway to faith and not visa versa. I think this is the fourth time I have said it but maybe its the third.

I did.

This was in response to, "You've helped demonstrate that faith is not a pathway to truth, because anything can be believed on faith."

And I said I didn’t.

You seem to think just declaring that "truth is the pathway to faith" actually means something. Without actually explaining what it's supposed to mean.

Actually, this is a display of continual ignoring of what I said. I explained it.

No, it's not. If you look above, all you did was return the question back at ME, rather than answering it.

This was in response to, "How did you determine you've got the "right" faith and not some kind of "misguided" faith?"

Your response appears to be word salad.


Whatever that means. Sounds like confirmation bias to me.

So there is no way and it's just up to personal interpretation and confirmation bias.

This was in response to, "And who's interpretation?
How did you determine that?"
This is not a response that addresses my questions. HOW do you determine "which one is correct?" Do you use faith, or do you collect evidence?"

So your response is basically just, well it's whatever you personally want it to be. Confirmation bias. Wishful thinking.


There are hundreds of different sects of Christianity for the very reason that there are so many variations of interpretations on this supposed "foundational truth." If you guys can't even figure out amongst yourselves, how are the rest of us supposed to figure it out? Especially when you can't even explain the different between "real" faith and "misguided" faith in any sort of useful way. Your answer is that it's just up to the individual. That's the perfect recipe for confirmation bias and demonstrates yet again that faith is not a pathway to truth, and that anything can be believed in faith.

Not really.

Your response basically is, because I want it to be.

Then clarify for me. Just stating "you got it wrong' gets us no where.

Yep it is. That's why I'm free to point out that you haven't refuted it, and therefore, my points stand in this debate forum we're typing in.

I stopped there. If this is what you call debate, I will bow out of this sixth grade effort on your part.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Pertinent to you - but it all pertinent to the subject

Yes to both.

I did… I also notice the two step as you did above.

You didn't. You threw it back and me and asked me to define misguided faith.

This is a debate… everything concering this subject is pertinent.


Yes… good debate but arguing just for arguing sake is not debate.

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing and I'll thank you to stop accusing me (and everybody else) of doing so.

LOL… I will echo… good grief.

No response to my counter though.

If it is based on truth your good. If not, it is misguided.

If it is based on truth your good. If not, it is misguided.

This was in response to, "How do we tell the different between "real" faith and "misguided" faith?"

You seem to ignore what I said thus “arguing for arguing sake”. I said truth is a pathway to faith and not visa versa. I think this is the fourth time I have said it but maybe its the third.

Please stop with the accusations.

"Truth is a pathway to faith" doesn't make any sense to me. This is the fourth time I'm asking you to explain what that means.

And I said I didn’t.

Except that you did. Which is why our definitions keep overlapping. That's what I'm pointing out to you.

Actually, this is a display of continual ignoring of what I said. I explained it.

This was in response to, "You seem to think just declaring that "truth is the pathway to faith" actually means something. Without actually explaining what it's supposed to mean."

What. Does. It. Mean?

I stopped there. If this is what you call debate, I will bow out of this sixth grade effort on your part.

Cool, so you're ending on an attempted insult.
That's fun.

I get it, you don't want to explain yourself. Just say that instead of trying to insult me.

 

[Kenny]

I get it, you don't want to explain yourself. Just say that instead of trying to insult me.

Like I said… and above is a good example!

As I said "I stopped there. If this is what you call debate, I will bow out of this sixth grade effort on your part."

 

[SkepticThinker]

Like I said… and above is a good example!

As I said "I stopped there. If this is what you call debate, I will bow out of this sixth grade effort on your part."

Yes, the above is a good example of your stellar debating techniques. Don't explain yourself, give up, and then accuse your opponent of being at the level of a sixth grader.

Bravo! You've really made your case. I bet everyone is changing their minds about faith as we speak!

 

[Kenny]

Yes, the above is a good example of your stellar debating techniques. Don't explain yourself, give up, and then accuse your opponent of being at the level of a sixth grader.

Bravo! You've really made your case.

If that makes you happy! You can now go to bed satisfied!

I bet everyone is changing their minds about faith as we speak!

No proselytizing

 

[crossfire]

We could order MAGA hats but they'd be blue.

The Blue MAGAs.

Is it time to make blue pussyhats for the cat ladies?