Comments on: Reading list for those who are dominionism deniers

By: David Blakeslee

David Blakeslee — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:08:44 +0000

Warren,
Carole makes a good point.
Dominionism is a great topic though, keep going.

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Wed, 30 May 2018 21:08:44 +0000

The “politics of NO” goes beyond the vote to raise the debt ceiling. But yes, Dominionism is a fine topic. Onward!

By: Patrocles

Patrocles — Wed, 30 May 2018 20:09:41 +0000

Warren’s dominion-phobia shows a lot of parallels to the islamophobia of Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller et alii.
First, there’s nothing wrong with being worried about dangerous aspects of Islam (or evangelicalism) and you might try to construct a concept under which to sum up all those dangerous aspects (“islamism”, “dominionism”).
But you mustn’t confound concept and reality. In reality, there’s always a CONTINUUM between extreme defensive and extreme aggressive policies, and religious or ideological movements are just FLOATING between the extremes forth and back.
A fault quite often made is, to fix one’s attention on alleged token words. But “Jihad” doesn’t mean that the speaker will join Al Quaeda, and “dominion” doesn’t mean that he asks for the execution of gays. (“Dominion”, by the way, is the kingdom of God on earth, an idea much beloved by American Christians.)
Rushdoony was overcompensating the relative weakness of mid-20th century evangelicals, dreaming wild dreamsof power (like Isaiah in his time).. DeMar was a lot more pragmatic and realist, nowadays “dominionists” are much more assertive.. If I rely on Warren’s quotes, DeMar asked basically for a limited government, which sets the denominations free to organize their lives along their own ideas. That’s the same kind of policy that Catholics proclaim under the name of subsidiarism and that seculars or Jews proclaim under the name of communitarianism.
It CAN be used as kind of interstate on one party’s way to total power. But mostly that happens, because people get the bleak view that neutrality of the state, pluralism and balance between conflicting ideological groups are IMPOSSIBLE. And we all have to change reality so that people don’t get such bleak views at first.
(As for the execution of aborters, I think that Warren misinterprets DeMar: he doesn’t impose a particular denominational dogma, but he appeals to the law of the land.)

By: carole

carole — Wed, 30 May 2018 20:09:41 +0000

From Politico:

By ALEX ISENSTADT | 8/1/11 9:07 PM EDT
There were 161 members who voted against the deal to raise the debt ceiling – an unusual mix of mostly tea party-aligned freshmen and progressive stalwarts.
Among those who opposed the bill were conservative first-termers like New York Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle, Idaho Rep. Raul Labrador, Minnesota Rep. Chip Cravaack and Louisiana Rep. Jeff Landry, who said in a statement, “I’m sure by Washington standards, today’s deal is a great accomplishment; but by American standards, it comes up short.”
It’s little surprise that South Carolina – a hotbed of tea party activism – was a center of opposition. The state’s three freshmen House Republicans joined GOP Rep. Joe Wilson in casting no votes.
They were joined by several freshmen who’ve distinguished themselves as fiercely anti-Washington figures. Among them were Florida Rep. Steve Southerland and Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh, a combative conservative who said the package “spends too much and cuts too little.”
Of those who voted No, 95 were Democrats – many of whom are liberals like Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen, Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, and Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who called the bill, “the wrong medicine for a sick economy.”
“It is a fake solution to a phony crisis,” said Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, another holdout. “It is an attack on the principle of government of the people. All this in the name of fiscal accountability.”
Nearly two-dozen were members of the Congressional Black Caucus, including California Rep. Barbara Lee, Georgia Rep. John Lewis, and CBC Chairman Emanuel Cleaver, who drew headlines for calling the bill a “Satan sandwich.” Nearly a dozen were members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, including Arizona Rep. Ed Pastor, New Mexico Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, and Texas Rep. Silvestre Reyes.
In some cases, those who opposed the package are looking to run for higher office, including GOP Rep. Denny Rehberg of Montana and Democratic Rep. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, both of whom are running for Senate. Democratic Rep. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, both of whom are considering running for Senate, also voted no.
One of the most noteworthy holdouts was Tom Latham, who also opposed last week’s package proposed by his close friend and ally, House Speaker John Boehner. The Iowa Republican is facing a perilous post-redistricting path to reelection, facing an incumbent-vs.-incumbent race against Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell, who also voted no.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60454.html#ixzz1XExPEX6H

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Wed, 30 May 2018 20:09:41 +0000

Patrocles –

Warren’s dominion-phobia shows a lot of parallels to the islamophobia of Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller et alii.

Actually its within Dominionism that you find a phobia of Islam, but you do a good spin job 😉