Who Will Harris Pick for VP Running Mate???

[Hans Blaster]

In congress, both parties have been fighting lately. And yes, Christians are not the minority, but in the Democrats, Christians are the minority. And yes, Romans is a hard read, but if one wants to start with a book in the Bible, John, Matthew, Luke and Mark talk about forgiveness and the beatitudes.

From Pew: 5. Party identification among religious groups and religiously unaffiliated voters
View attachment 352063

I use a Catholic bible also, the NRSV-CE. As most folks here are Protestant, I use the Protestant Bibles a lot such as the NIV, NKJV and ESV.

That's not what your chart is telling you. It give party affiliations by "religious group", but not the other way around. If you want to know if the majority of Democrats (or Republicans) are Christians, you need to see the break down of all Democrats (or Republicans) by religion, not religions broken down by party. These groups are not equal in size. That 70% of Jews are Democrats has little impact on the totals since they are only about 3% of all Americans, etc.

 

[BPPLEE]

No, the standard Catholic bible is the "New American Bible" for the last 50 years. The NRSV-CE which includes the books missing from the standard edition, is "OK" for private study, but not for the Mass.

Romans 12:2​

​

New American Bible (Revised Edition)​

​

​

2 Do not conform yourselves to this age but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and pleasing and perfect.

Approved Translations of the Bible

USCCB Approved Translations of the Sacred Scriptures for Private Use and Study by Catholics 1983 - PresentThe 1983 Code of Canon Law entrusts to the Apostoli...

www.usccb.org

I’m not Catholic but would Romans 12:2 come up during Mass?

 

[BPPLEE]

Which one? The NRSV-CE, which is based upon the RSV-CE? Yeah, changes regarding doctrine should not be made to the Bible.

The NRSVue

 

[Hans Blaster]

So, which one is better? Is the NRSV-CE better than the NAB?

I wouldn't know. If I want the official version I'd use the NAB. If I want one I can find, I use the NAB in my office. I've read about 20% of the NAB, none of any other.

 

[AlexB23]

That's not what your chart is telling you. It give party affiliations by "religious group", but not the other way around. If you want to know if the majority of Democrats (or Republicans) are Christians, you need to see the break down of all Democrats (or Republicans) by religion, not religions broken down by party. These groups are not equal in size. That 70% of Jews are Democrats has little impact on the totals since they are only about 3% of all Americans, etc.

Yeah, correlation does not got both ways. My bad.


Clears throat, places graph by 538 into the chat:

Why Democrats Struggle To Mobilize A ‘Religious Left’

For the past four decades, the notion that religious beliefs should guide voters’ decision-making has been largely monopolized by the Republican Party. But the …

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[AlexB23]

The NRSVue

Hmm, sounds different, and not as good as the NRSV-CE

 

[AlexB23]

I wouldn't know. If I want the official version I'd use the NAB. If I want one I can find, I use the NAB in my office. I've read about 20% of the NAB, none of any other.

Nice. For myself, I like the NRSV-CE, as the NRSV's research team has multiple denominations.

Quote from Zondervan: "The ecumenical NRSV Bible Translation Committee consists of men and women who are among the top scholars in America. They come from Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic church, and the Greek Orthodox Church. The committee also includes a Jewish scholar."

Source: New Revised Standard Version - Home

 

[BPPLEE]

Nice. For myself, I like the NRSV-CE, as the NRSV's research team has multiple denominations.

Quote from Zondervan: "The ecumenical NRSV Bible Translation Committee consists of men and women who are among the top scholars in America. They come from Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic church, and the Greek Orthodox Church. The committee also includes a Jewish scholar."

Source: New Revised Standard Version - Home

There’s nothing wrong with you using that translation, even as a Catholic it’s approved for private study. (As far as I can tell anyway, I’m not Catholic)

 

[AlexB23]

There’s nothing wrong with you using that translation, even as a Catholic it’s approved for private study. (As far as I can tell anyway, I’m not Catholic)

Awesome, this works. I have used the NRSV-CE in my devotionals so far. But yes, I do think it is time to let others bring the thread back to the topic of Harris. I am gonna have some dinner now. We are brothers in Christ, regardless of denomination.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yeah, correlation does not got both ways. My bad.


Clears throat, places graph by 538 into the chat:

Why Democrats Struggle To Mobilize A ‘Religious Left’

For the past four decades, the notion that religious beliefs should guide voters’ decision-making has been largely monopolized by the Republican Party. But the …

fivethirtyeight.com

View attachment 352069

The same source you used earlier (Pew) gives the fraction of Dems who are Christians at 63%.

Religious Landscape Study

(538 is oddly alergic to labeled axes.)

 

[BCP1928]

It's mostly taught in colleges. Critical Theory is an "ivory tower" version of Marxism first developed by the Frankfurt School whose proponents eventually moved from Germany to the UK to the US. Critical Theory is the principles of Marxism lifted from economics to be applied in other fields. At this time, it's the basis of Critical Race Theory, Critical Gender Theory, and Radical Feminism. You don't have to believe me on any of this...it's not a secret and it's not a theory...those scholars in all those fields say so themselves in their seminal documents.

Two of the principles lifted from Marxism to Critical Theory is that there is an oppressor whose tendency to oppression is inherent, genetic. The oppressor is relentless, and the struggle against the oppressor must be ruthless. There can be no compromise or treaty or reconciliation with the oppressor. The oppressor must be destroyed or reduced to social irrelevancy. The entire culture of the oppressor is the tool of oppression: His language, history, art, science, philosophy, medicine, everything he has created is for the purpose of oppression and must be discarded.

Yes, I'm sure those views exist in CRT circles, though I doubt very much that the idea of white people being uniquely genetically disposed to racism has any currency. Most of the reading I have done on the subject suggests that racism is purely a social phenomenon, not a biological one.

That's why it's within Critical Theory ideology to state "we are unburdened by anything that came before." That's why "math is racist" and "English is racist" in Critical Race Theory...because Europeans are the oppressor in Critical Race Theory.

Certainly a tempting choice, given our history. Does CRT deny that PoC can be racist?

Does CRT
This is promoted in American universities to the extent that it's soaking even into the sciences.

How so?

 

[AlexB23]

The same source you used earlier (Pew) gives the fraction of Dems who are Christians at 63%.

Religious Landscape Study

(538 is oddly allergic to labeled axes.)

Yeah, 538 does not label the y axis. Total fail by them, Pew is better. 63% is better than 0, so that is good. Would be nice if centrists were included in political surveys though, so I can see the percentage of centrists who are Christian.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yeah, 538 does not label the y axis. Total fail by them, Pew is better. 63% is better than 0, so that is good. Would be nice if centrists were included in political surveys though, so I can see the percentage of centrists who are Christian.

They are on the same chart: No lean - 65% Christian.

 

[AlexB23]

They are on the same chart: No lean - 65% Christian.

Nice. I am part of that 65%. Woo, yeah. Wanna join that 65%? Well, you don't have to, if you don't want to, but there are plenty of Christians who are closer to the center, and some on the left as well.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So are you too young to remember or have you just forgotten about the Clintons?

So are you too young to remember or have you just forgotten about the Clintons? Even if you ignore Whitewater and how it kept going through multiple incarnations, since Republicans just wanted to keep investigating him, you still have the numerous Congressional investigations into Benghazi -- and how some Republicans even admitted the last few hearings, even though they knew she had done nothing wrong in that instance, still held the hearing to hurt her election chances in 2016 (almost 4 years after she left the Secretary of State job).



Are you calling Sen. Manchin dumb? I base that off of this, "Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) is considering re-registering as a Democrat to compete for Democratic presidential nomination."

Not at all...I recall when Clinton never faced charges for exactly the same crime Trump was recently found guilty of.

I recall Hillary Clinton being investigated far too many times for Benghazi. Benghazi needed investigated...maybe even 2 or 3 times....but I don't recall any new facts emerging after that.

I recall Hillary found in possession of hundreds of classified documents, at home, on her private server...and facing no charges for it. It wasn't politically motivated...everyone who emailed her would have known she had a non-government email address. It was motivated by the fact that details of that server were leaked/hacked...classified info out in the open.

I don't recall any former president facing clearly bogus charges by DAs in NY. I don't recall any president, including the sitting one, facing charges for classified documents, in a coordinted effort with the white house. I don't recall any president facing local election charges by a prosecutor coordinating with the white house. I don't recall any effort to remove a valid presidential candidate from the ballot by left wing groups over a post Civil War election clause.

Yes, I absolutely recall the Clintons. 100%.

Much of what happened to them was justifiable. None of it resulted in criminal charges after leaving office.

Are you calling Sen. Manchin dumb? I base that off of this, "Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) is considering re-registering as a Democrat to compete for Democratic presidential nomination."

Tell me when it happens. Mark my words...it's going to be Harris.

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, I'm sure those views exist in CRT circles, though I doubt very much that the idea of white people being uniquely genetically disposed to racism has any currency. Most of the reading I have done on the subject suggests that racism is purely a social phenomenon, not a biological one.

You're not reading CRT or Critical Theory in general.

Certainly a tempting choice, given our history. Does CRT deny that PoC can be racist?

Yes. That's where the modern concept that racism requires social power (which only white people have) comes from. Only the racial oppressor can be racist.

How so?

They all have to take the social training, and all professors are required to kowtow to the Critical Theory ideology that is imposed on them by DEI (which is Critical Theory made praxis).

 

[BCP1928]

You're not reading CRT or Critical Theory in general.

Well, whatever I'm reading I haven't' found any trace of the notion. Do you have a source?

Yes. That's where the modern concept that racism requires social power (which only white people have) comes from. Only the racial oppressor can be racist.

Systemic racism requires it, but that is not the question I asked.

They all have to take the social training, and all professors are required to kowtow to the Critical Theory ideology that is imposed on them by DEI (which is Critical Theory made praxis).

I thought that universities were beginning to reject DEI. It was a dumb idea, anyway. You don't solve the problem of systemic racism by making allowances for people who are victims of it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well, I did say they masked their efforts better.

Even aside from the “racist streak” - all the appeals to religion and family values; all the comments about “real americans”

I'm not sure that's an "identity group".

If you were born and raised here and don't consider yourself a "real American" that's really on you for some reason.

or “coastal elites” were appeals to specific identities.

What specific identity is being appealed to by the term "coastal elites"?

They’re just (usually) not quite as obvious as “vote for me because you’re black”.

Or "everything that you don't like about this nation is the fault of white men".

And it was worse than "vote for me because you’re black" it was "if you don't vote for me...you're no longer black"...a deliberate appeal to "political blackness" which is always racist.

Much of this argument seems built upon excusing the resurgence of racism on the left over the past 10 years.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I'm not sure that's an "identity group".

If you were born and raised here and don't consider yourself a "real American" that's really on you for some reason.

It isn’t about considering yourself a “real American;” it’s about other folks being not “real Americans.” The “real Americans” in these cases are your sort of typical Republican voters: probably white, probably blue collar or at least not knowledge economy workers, probably not residing in or close to a dense urban environment.

What specific identity is being appealed to by the term "coastal elites"?

Similar to the “real American” I described above, though with perhaps more of an educational twist.

Much of this argument seems built upon excusing the resurgence of racism on the left over the past 10 years.

No, it comes from having lived with conservatives for 40 years.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It isn’t about considering yourself a “real American;” it’s about other folks being not “real Americans.”

Ok...I guess "in group" "out group" identities are probably the simplest and easiest possible groupings of identity politics....but still valid.

It's fundamentally a part of politics however, to distinguish yourself apart from the competition in some way.

The “real Americans” in these cases are your sort of typical Republican voters: probably white, probably blue collar or at least not knowledge economy workers, probably not residing in or close to a dense urban environment.

Well that's your personal interpretation amongst many.

No, it comes from having lived with conservatives for 40 years.

Wife?