472
submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Rep. Mike Johnson, the newly elected Republican House speaker, used to conduct a seminar in churches premised on the idea that the United States is a “Christian nation.” This ministry, as he has referred to it, is yet more evidence that Johnson is committed to a hardcore Christian fundamentalism that shapes his views of politics and government.

The seminar, titled “Answers for Our Times: Government, Culture, and Christianity,” was organized by Onward Christian Education Services, Inc., a company owned by his wife, Kelly Johnson, a Christian counselor and anti-abortion activist who calls herself a “leader in the pro-family movement.” The website for her counseling service—which was taken down shortly after Johnson became speaker—described the seminar, which featured both her and Johnson, as exploring several questions, such as, “What is happening in America and how do we fix it?” The list includes this query: “Can our heritage as a Christian nation be preserved?” There were different versions of the seminar running from two-hour-long lectures to retreats lasting two days.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Motavader@lemmy.world 85 points 8 months ago

So much for the Constitution, eh, Mike? Can you point to any historical basis for the US being a "Christian nation" or nation of any religion?

Just like the Bible, the guys only cite the Constitution when it suits them, but ignore the rest.

[-] brezel@kbin.social 29 points 8 months ago

it says "in god we trust" on the dollar...oh! you mean the actual constitution?

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 47 points 8 months ago

Which was added in the 50s in response to us shitting our pants over "godless communists." Even that has no real history

[-] mxcory@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 8 months ago

I prefer "E pluribus unum." Why can't I have that on my license plate? I think it should be a better descriptor of what the US is.

Also, "In God we trust," isn't a religious endorsement, if you go with court ruling.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-religion-motto-idUSKCN1LD24K

I personally believe it is, unless you look at "God" in this instance being the money itself. Which could actually track if you wanted.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

The cons want to have it both ways, naturally. Having it on currency provides "proof" that this is an xtian nation and it's also TOTE LEGITZ and doesn't violate the First Amendment!

I've often seen people say that GOD = "Gold, Oil and Diamonds/Drugs" when it comes to it being on currency.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

What's most amusing is that the Christopaths are in general so provincial that when they make such arguments for putting "in god we trust" on our currency, it not only violates a key tenant of their supposed scriptures, but they also fail to realize the "god" in question is not even spelled out.

They just assume the term "god" is equivalent to the Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah of the Abrahamic faiths. That may be the case for their pea-sized brains, I guess...

[-] brezel@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

didn't know that, that's interesting.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

It's about as "historic" as most of those stupid statues put up to honor their Confederate traitors.

The rocket surgeons on the right probably think we should learn about the Constitution from a slogan on currency and history from statues put up to racist traitors.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 0 points 8 months ago

Or the “under God” they added to the pledge and divided one nation, indivisible

[-] SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

What do you think the reasoning was to put it on our coins in the mid 1800s?

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 5 points 8 months ago

Bending the knee to Christians same as now.

[-] SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Were godless communists a concern then? Or do you think the majority of the population was Christian, so it was widely accepted?

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 2 points 8 months ago

Are you trying to make a point?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Also, it doesn't even spell out which god it is. Is it Pan? Zeus? Odin? Shiva?

[-] brezel@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Sure, why not. Could set up a randomizer and select one from here....

https://www.godchecker.com/search/

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Yep. Not one mention of their favorite character from "the" bible. If anything, the First Amendment DIRECTLY contradicts the so-called "first commandment".

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Their favorite biblical character is likely Pontius Pilate.

[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

The most they get is "endowed by their Creator" in the Declaration of Independence. One word in one document that isn't even an official part of our laws and doesn't refer to a specific "Creator." But they're ready to spin that into "this is really a Christian nation and anyone who isn't Christian or our flavor of Christianity isn't really a citizen!"

this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
472 points (98.6% liked)

politics

18069 readers
3975 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS