Gallup's Mirror

More likely it’s that oppressed people stick together. The women, being the oppressed, were able to get together once a week or more, for church duties where they knit blankets for the poor whilst bitching about the men and working out better ways to ‘manage’ their husbands.

Any woman who truly believes the man is the head of the household, a…[Read more]

I think it makes sense that if women are charged with the main work of “bringing up the children”, and the Church plays a role in educating children’s characters or whatever – women would be more likely to bring the children to church, than men.

It may be that women enjoy community more than men, who, traditionally, give less of a stuff about…[Read more]

God does have a way of creeping constitutions. I wouldn’t be surprised if all of the nations that recognize QEII as head of state had him somewhere in their constitutions (or comparable documents) given her role as the something-or-other of the Church of England. I know one doesn’t necessitate the other, but it’s hard to say your nation is…[Read more]

Indeed compared with some Western European countries (certainly not all) the U.S. seems to have a whole bunch of religion fused with politics. The near complete non-representation of non-religious politicians at the National level, the number of prayers and prayer groups and the use of God in phrases, motto, the constitution, oaths, your money,…[Read more]

It doesn’t surprise me too much that men would be slightly less likely to have a religious affiliation over women. As a generalization, in Christianity (and likely other religions) it seems like there is more pressure on women to uphold a sense of church community and values.

I’ve known a number of families where the father stayed home during…[Read more]

Reg,

We do have our work cut out for us, but also much in our favor.

The Constitutional ban on religious tests means that government cannot make religious belief a precondition of running for office. While it does not stop individual citizens or legislators from voting their personal religious biases, there are other elements of the…[Read more]

Also, not believing in religion does not in itself deny or disparage the right of others to believe in religion or vice-versa, so both rights can and do exist side-by-side.

In theory and on paper, yes. And in most “everyday” situations it may also be true. But how many Supreme Courts justices are “Nones”? Most are Catholics and there are no…[Read more]

Reg,

Freedom from religion and freedom of religion are both constitutionally protected, not just by the First Amendment, but by the all-too-neglected Ninth Amendment, which states:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

In other words, individual rights…[Read more]

Thanks Reg!

Have a great week everyone!

“Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.”

Terry Pratchett.

When the common knowledge in your locale is that satanist Bill Gates and Hillary Clinton ingest the blood of children, Trans people are forcing sex change operations on adolescents and every Democratic is a communist ‘libtard’ controlled by the ‘deep state’ that will tend to ‘woke me up’. If I  lived in a liberal region perhaps I  would still be c…[Read more]

Reg and Strega,

You two could have been Jay Ward’s top groaner-pun writers, especially for his characters Mr. Peabody and Sherman.  😁

(Sometimes they are called Mr. Peabody and His Boy Sherman, but, even for the “woke,” that is just multiple-smooth levels of wrongness. 🤡🤣)

Fellow Unbelievers,

Man, what a difference a few days makes!  Where do I start with this thread? 😕😁

If it’s any solace, Kristina, if I were an entrepreneur, I wouldn’t have time to shut down or be shut down on a forum or platform.  My business would be open to any paying customer or to a niche market that has nothing to do with immutable t…[Read more]

I’ve got nothing to say that I haven’t said 9 times already.  I shake your hand Kristina.

edit: I’ve decided in hindsight this is my last post in the exchange. By all means, I won’t begrudge you a response to it. No disrespect and no hard feelings, but I feel we’ve run this circle well past the point of absurdity. It feels like you’ve not really addressed what I’ve been saying, and whatever it is you may feel I am missing in your…[Read more]

You posted the same answer twice.

Kristina wrote:
On the issues of equity, equality and human rights, the general population. That’s where it starts. I’ve already been over this. Did you think the stuff I was talking about in my first post was from the extreme right? It’s not. It’s prevalent in the general population.

But two wrongs don’t make a…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
Kristina – that’s fine, and I do take a responsibility to educate myself about marginalised groups and their difficulties.

Do you? You said it took you 3-4 years to come around to ideas that I flat out swear to you were presented reasonably by other activists that were not that difficult to search out. On nearly every iss…[Read more]

I don’t have to explain to you why I wasn’t “woke” enough.  If an idea doesn’t have credibility, I’m not going to be attracted to it.

Simon Paynton wrote:
Kristina – that’s fine, and I do take a responsibility to educate myself about marginalised groups and their difficulties.

Do you? You said it took you two years to come around to ideas that I flat out swear to you were presented reasonably by other activists that were not that difficult to search out. On nearly every iss…[Read more]

Kristina – that’s fine, and I do take a responsibility to educate myself about marginalised groups and their difficulties.  But if someone’s acting like a silly arse, while trying to tell everyone they have problems – people aren’t going to believe they have problems.  That’s the way people are.  It’s not morally wrong.  It just is.  Ther…[Read more]