I think it's a flaw most strongly evident in those who push self-righteous religious faith. Their self-image pretty much relies on this level of certainty (and delusion of superiority).

So I'd say it's a sliding scale.

They are. Their "best interest" (such as it is) right now is hurting other people.

They aren't trying to make things better for themselves. They are trying to make it worse for everybody.

"Spite" is now a very, very major mover and shaker in politics.

I suppose it depends on how both you and they define "best interest." Many define their best interest in economic terms, and vote for corrupt thieves and liars. Many define their best interest in other terms which are consistently violated by those they support. Better health, freedom, small government, Christian values, and so forth. Of course if you get psychological, you can point out that their best interests are what they support, not what they claim to support, and in that sense, of course, you're bound to be right. The covid denier who dies of covid with denial in his last words can be seen either way, depending on how you slice the term.

I think we are seeing anothr example of the Mr Spock syndrome, where someone assumes humans are like Vulcans, totally logically and rational all the time. Human beings are not Vulcans.
(Yes, I know that Vulcans in Star Trek are not as totally rational as they like to believe, but sitll a good analogy ).

I sort of disagree; militant political ideologues can be as bad as the worst religous beleivers.

Along with laser-equipped bazookas made from balsa wood that can therefore evade airport scanners figuratively shoots holes in their well-regulated militia pronouncement, that's another aspect of modern life the founders didn't anticipate.

Good point - I remember the evangelicals from university. They couldn't have casual sex, but they got engaged very quickly and called their engagements off equally quickly. And whilst they weren't technically married, they were almost in their eyes, so that was perfectly OK :boggled:

No special pleading or double standards there.

I knew Mormons who had pre-marital anal sex but felt morally in the clear because it wasn't vaginal. As they were still technically virgins, it wasn't "real sex".

It was the same crowd as here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbob (Post 13470385) Good point - I remember the evangelicals from university. They couldn't have casual sex, but they got engaged very quickly and called their engagements off equally quickly. And whilst they weren't technically married, they were almost in their eyes, so that was perfectly OK :boggled: No special pleading or double standards there.

I remember my mind boggling when I came across women undergraduates in the 1990s saying that the concept of women vicars was blasphemous.

But the president who got only a blow-job was worthy of a full-press legal attack by the Right.

True, it's all faith-based and more or less arbitrary.

There's a song for that:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

I'm sure that was their theme song!

She isn't doing anything the men who vote for her would object to.

The Loop Hole!!!!!

(look up the loop hole garfunkel and oates on youtube for more details)

Also Saddlebacking.

...or go back to Dr Keith's post #1292, three before yours

Historian Michael Burleigh (who wrote the best single volume history of the Third Reich)
has written a lot about what he calls "Secular Religions" ..mass political movements that have all the charecteristics of religions except they don't center around a Supreme Being.He points out that the mass poltical movements of the 20th century that caused so much suffering..Nazism, Fascism, Communism..all qualify. Heavily dogamtic,blind faith in a infallible source of knowledge (the Leader or the Party, or both); claims to be fighting a dark evil force,persecution of non beleivers, etc.

This is why I hate the fact that Hitler and Stalin were "atheist" is always this huge "gotcha" that religious folk drop.

First all it's a lie for at least one, maybe both them.

But even if it where true, they were anti-religious because they saw religious, organized religion especially, as a threat to their power. They weren't rational or measured people.

Didn't work for me

"Video removed...." error

Hitler didn't see religious people as a threat to his power. He counted on them.

Irrespective of his personal beliefs, he completed presented himself as a good Christian, and got the Christians to support him.

Hitler never personally murdered any Jews or threw anyone in the gas chamber. He just had others do it for him. Good, Christian family men. Who sent Jews to the gas chamber.

Hitler was also a huge dog lover. He adored his GS Blondi. Does that mean we should now hate dogs?

Back to MTG.

Democratic congressman tells Marjorie Taylor Greene to 'shut your seditious, QAnon loving mouth' after she called his party 'the enemy within'

Some other good quotes in the article.

https://news.yahoo.com/democratic-co...175610812.html

Don't they, though? Not only is dear leader effectively a god amongst men, or at least a demigod, but there are often religious overtones in even those cults.

I have got laugh at MTG's retort:

"While you were hiding with your little pen, brave Republican MEN were helping police hold the door, so that ALL of us could get out safely. Coward,"

How conveniently she forgets that those trying to break down the doors in the first place weren't Democrats but people who were supporters of her beloved Trump!

This is how stupid and ignorant MTG is: this is the report of Haley Talbot, a reporter who was in the Capitol on Jan. 6th and reported on Rep. Gallego's actions that day. Unlike MTG's ignorant tweet, Gallego chose to take a group of women reporters to his office because they were refused entrance to the secure location the Congressmembers were evacuated to:

That ***** MTG really does need to shut her seditious, stupid, ignorant mouth. But, like Trump, she suffers from the same foot-in-mouth disease.

It's about time Dems called out the sedition of the domestic enemy in our Congress.

Still works for me. It hasn't been removed but it has been disabled from playing outside of You Tube. Click the "Watch on YouTube" link and it works

Especially with McCarthy trying to kiss and make up.

Gallego as a Marine has been at the sharp end of some real fighting, with real weapons in real danger. Whereas Greene has only ever posed with her semi-auto on Twitter while pretending she is a "patriot".

Who of course the Vatican helped flee from allied trials. So nothing against the catholic church in the holocaust at least.

Ruben Gallego: Combat Action Ribbon - Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment in Iraq 2005-2006. His unit lost 46 Marines (including his best friend) and two USN corpsmen during his ToD.

Marjorie Taylor Greene: QAnon conspiracy theorist who believes Space Lasers secretly launched by the Jews caused the California wildfires, and that the world is controlled by a shadowy cabal of baby-eating abusers operating out of the basement of a DC pizza parlour. The nearest she's has ever come to combat is posing with a gun in a political ad in which she makes implied threats against other politicians, and she wants to be allowed to take her gun into the Congressional chamber where those very same politicians work.

Which one of these is "the enemy within" again?

According to a sizeable minority of the US electorate, the libtard. :mad:

Some people don't read past the headlines.

That's a pretty good answer considering the prohibition on talking about one's ignore list. Well done threading that needle!

While he needed them. Hitler made clear there would be a "reckoning" with the Churhes after the war.
Have to point out many Christians opposed Hitler. Frankly, this sounds like a cheap shot.

Religious people want Hitler to be an atheist. Atheists want him to be super-religious. Truth is, neither of those are true.

Got Mitt Uns

Correct.
Hitler had to tolerate the churches for political reasons, but in private he hated them. He agreed with Bormann and Himmler that Christinaity was a Jewish plot to weaken the Heroic Nordic Warrior with it's stupid idead of love and mercy. He constanly spoke of a reckoning once the war was won.
As it was, Himmler put pressure on anybody in the SS to drop all relatiohsips with the churches, and a couple of Gaulietiers tried to make their districrs the first in Germany to be free of Christian Churches.
He appeared to have no real religous convictions o fhis own.he in private ridiculed Himmler's attempts to revive Pre Christian German religion as silly.

"WE GOT MITTENS TOO!"

Supposedly the reply of a US Doughboy to Germans shouting that in World War One.

Not at all.

Watch a Hitler rally. You really think many of those praising love on him were not Christian?

Of course they were. They were all good Catholics and Lutherans.

Hitler would have gotten no where without the support of Christian Germans.