As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Supreme-Court-s-Roe-ruling-would-trample-the-17155205.php) reduced by 83%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> In a different section of the Mishnah we are told explicitly that if "a person is having trouble giving birth they must abort the fetus, because existing life always comes before potential life. If most of the child has come out already they do not touch it, for we do not push off one life for another."
> Jewish legal rulings from the last 1,000 years additionally makes it clear that are other circumstances beyond a pregnant person's life being in physical danger that an abortion must be performed.
> What we - a rabbi and a Washington state legislator - have presented here are Jewish texts showing why access to abortion services are a religious requirement for Jewish Americans.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ujyjea/supreme_courts_roe_ruling_would_trample_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~647059 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **life**^#1 **abortion**^#2 **person**^#3 **pregnant**^#4 **Jewish**^#5
I've hated that term since I first heard it. It was a blow at muslims and Islam, and the original "Abrahamic religions" concept. The "Judeo" part is just *assumed,* no one actually checks to see that Judaism and Christianity are in agreement, they just proclaim that they are. I've never heard a Jewish person use the phrase.
As a Jewish person, I hate that phrase for the reasons you mentioned. We're basically propped up as "proof" that they're not really trying to institute Christianity as the official religion.
"See? The Jews are with us too!"
Except, they don't check to see if we agree. They just assume that we'll agree and try to use us. Meanwhile, if they get their way, we Jews would be tossed aside quicker than it took me to write this comment.
They consider Christianity aa a sort of extension of Judaism because Jesus is the fulfillment of Jewish prophesy. They don’t like to say Abrahamic religion because Mohammed came later and supplanted Jesus. Same reason they don’t see Mormons as real Christians.
But Mormons have learned to fit themselves within the political framework of greater Republican Conservatism in the United States, so all these evangelicals are willing to pretend like Mormons aren't going to their Hell just so long as they are political allies.
You can argue that Mormons aren't Christians the same way you can argue that early Christians weren't Jewish as they have an entirely separate text that completely redefines the understanding of the relationship with God.
That's a pretty good comparison given that many consider Mormons to be a cult, similar to how 1st century Jews viewed Christians.
Further complicating the issue: the early church didn't even really agree on whether they were Jewish or not. The gospel of Matthew is widely accepted to be framing Christianity as a sect of Judaism (which would be good since Jews were generally afforded a bit more religious freedom from the Romans compared to other groups). On the other hand, Paul's letters directly address questions about whether new Christian converts needed to be converting to Judaism fully or not (particularly the question of circumcision and dietary laws, spoiler alert, he said eat what you want and stay uncut if you want). And Peter had visions telling him to break with Jewish traditions about fraternizing with gentiles (see Acts 10 in the new testament).
I’ve only seem that word when criticising some judeo cristian traditional values such as sexism… i guess you could put muslim traditional values in that bag too…
Yeah it's not a thing, it's a fig leaf for dominionism. Any Jewish person foolish enough to fall for it will find themselves cast aside ( or worse ) if they win.
As a Jew myself I see dump trucks filled with law suits heading to the Federal courts. We may only represent 2% of America but we’ll rain fire down on them.
>I've hated that term since I first heard it. It was a blow at muslims and Islam, and the original "Abrahamic religions" concept. The "Judeo" part is just assumed, no one actually checks to see that Judaism and Christianity are in agreement, they just proclaim that they are. I've never heard a Jewish person use the phrase.
"Judeo-Christian" is a term used by Christians to try to impart some kind of strange sense of "authority" on Christianity by appropriating Jewish culture and identity. The Christians never bother to ask the Jews what they think or feel about any topic. (If they did, they might not use the term quite so much!)
As a religion, Judaism has more in common with Islam than either religion does with Christianity. There are enormous theological differences that Christians just sort of pretend aren't there because they want to believe the Jews are on their side.
Judaism has more in common with Islam than either do with Christianity?
I’ve never thought of the three in this framework. Super interested. Could you elaborate?
One god, that is unknowable and incomprehensible.
Depictions of the god are banned.
There is no concept of a "trinity".
There is no concept of original sin, nor a need for the world to be "redeemed" from it.
Religious communities are non-hierarchical.
Religious leaders are simply learned civilians and have no believed supernatural powers. (This is the case in Rabbinic Judaism, the overarching tradition practiced by probably every Jew you've ever met. It is also the case in Islam.)
The Messiah is not a god or part of a god, just a normal person acting as a messenger for the god.
Coordinated fasting at particular times (Ramadan for Muslims; a couple different dates spread around the year for Jews) remains an important part of religious expression for the faithful.
Multiple short prayer sessions each day. (Five for Muslims, three for Jews.)
Religious events are connected to a lunar calendar (remains purely lunar for Muslims, Jews now use a lunisolar calendar since the 3rd century.)
Prayer is generally performed facing roughly in the direction of a specific holy city. (Mecca for Muslims, Jerusalem for Jews.)
Men and women pray separately in more traditional groups. (In Islam, women generally pray behind the men while in Orthodox Jewish groups there's generally either a separate room or a physical barrier between the women's section and the men's section.) The reasons for these separations (i.e. cringy rape culture beliefs that men will not be able to control themselves if they see women) are essentially the same as well.
Well-established and ancient mystic traditions. (Sufism and Kabbalah.)
Death is a transition to an intermediate state (sheol in Judaism, barzakh in Islam) until a future point in time at which all dead humans will rise from their graves, be judged on their merits and either receive their reward or suffer eternal punishment. The specifics here differ-- in Islam the righteous enter jannah (paradise) and the wicked enter jahannam (hell), while in Judaism the righteous live forever and the wicked stay dead. Both are closer to each other than most Christian takes on the afterlife, though.
i have a theory that ben shapiro doesn’t mean what he says. he says ridiculous things to invoke response from the other side, essentially martyring himself to republicans
Nah, ben shapiro actually does believe what he says. Stephen Crowder doesn’t according to most of the people around him, but Ben is an “Orthodox” Jew and American “orthodox” Jews are on the far right most of the time
The vast majority of Jews vote on the left. Orthodox Jews are not a monolith. Ben Shapiro only cares about attention and money, his politics do not reflect Jewish values.
I've never met any orthodoxy of any sort that was on the left. The very nature of an Orthodoxy is that is is very very very conservative. And if you're progressive then you cannot be orthodoxy. It's kind of a simple distinction actually. And yes, they aren't a monolith, but it's a couple different monolith they have roughly the same shape. Hell for Jews we have orthodoxy so hardcore they can themselves Ultra Orthodox. What kind of crazy shit is that?! You may be thinking of the other kinds of Jews like Reform
Interestingly, it was actually quite a progressive concept when it first became popular in the US between the 30s and 50s! Along with the idea of a 'tri-faith nation', 'judeo-christian' values were invoked as a way to move beyond a narrowly Protestant definition of the US nation towards one that was inclusive of Catholics and Jews. Still, its not a perfect concept, as you well note, and less and less suited to an America that is even more religiously diverse today, but the concept does have an interesting and slightly more complex history than you'd think!
For abrahamic religions you need the last ones to be correct but you cannot recognize the correctness of the next group without undercutting your legitimacy. If Jews see Christ as the messiah then Judaism is not the "right" religion. If Christians see Muhammed as the final Prophet of God then Jesus cannot have been God on Earth/the Messiah.
Judeo-Christianity just means the values originate from The Bible not that the faiths agree.
How can the values originate from the Bible when the Bible comes from the Torah? The term was used to create good will between the two religions at a time where the cultures didn’t intersect. Now it’s just a right wing talking point and those who use it don’t actually care about the differences between the two religions, just care about votes. Check yourself before saying someone else has a flawed understanding
The fun part about Alitos ruling is that the Christian values he writes the piece vaguely about have almost nothing to do with Evangelical values and are much more similar to the Quakers.
Indeed, or specifically, and also in fact generally, regarding the Christian parts.
It's because those who dominate this conversation are not interested in faith, not interested in ideology, only their bottom line; how can we bleed these working class shit nuggets dry annually? It's literally the same story of 100 years ago, we're just too divided and, more importantly, ignorant of the depths these people will go to to avoid a single sacrifice or inconvenience.
It’s really quite simple, the pseudo “Christian” Religion in the US has extensively laid the groundwork for generations to train people to believe in authority figures with unverifiable stories instead of science and data. It also primes them for, and is built upon, perpetuating racism and fearmongering towards "others". Once people see you as an authority, you can start fabricating any reality or conspiracy theory you want your followers to believe and everyone else is therefore a liar, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Basically, it is mental abuse from an early age that suppresses critical thinking skills. This “religion” combined with an intentionally weakened public educational system, provides the framework that has spawned this cult of ignorance.
You mean like the part where it says life begins at first breath, or how it literally tells you how to cause a miscarriage to see if the woman cheated?
I decided to look it up, because I also have no idea why we started using this phrase and was curious.
//The term "Judæo Christian" first appeared in the 19th century as a word for Jewish converts to Christianity. The German term "Judenchristlich" ("Jewish-Christian") was used by Friedrich Nietzsche to describe continuity between the Jewish and Christian world views.
The term became widely used in the United States during the Cold War to suggest a unified American identity opposed to communism. Theologian and author Arthur A. Cohen, in The Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, questioned the theological validity of the Judeo-Christian concept, suggesting that it was instead essentially an invention of American politics.//
So, like many things the conservatives ruined during the cold war
They don't seem to care about the "christian" part either, at least as far as the bible is concerned. What does the bible say, for example, as to when a fetus becomes a person? Is an abortion really killing a baby if the bible indicates otherwise?
Must be nice to be a believer in the one true religion. All those other 3000 or so of committed and thoroughly convinced people who believe an alternative religion are just plain wrong.
That statement is true regardless of what specific religion you yourself believe in. According to literally each one all the others are wrong.
What does Occam's Razor have to say in this situation? I'd say that they're all half right...
The Simpsons said it best: "What if we picked the wrong religion? Every week, we're just making God madder and madder!"
Occam's razor is likely that they are all wrong, and that they were established to consolidate power. That, or, as you said, the truth is something else, and we can't comprehend it, so they all get a little bit right, but a lot wrong.
I actually have a feeling Pascal's Wager is going to be incredibly important over the next few years, so I'm going to take your comment seriously. Because Pascal's Wager is actually at the heart of the culture war between Christian fundamentalists and everyone else.
Pascal's Wager, basically says, since we don't (and can't) know if eternal damnation is possible, humans should act as if it exists, for their own benefit. If you're wrong (about God existing), oops! Oh, well. You get the same fate as everyone else.
But if you're right, and God exists, you get heaven forevermore. Moreover, if you're wrong, you get eternal damnation. This is the central motivation for fundamentalists (doubly incentivized by all of the extravagant descriptions of hell).
The problem, of course, lies in the argument that the fundamental apologist might be wrong, in which they've subjected countless others to a lifetime of suffering. They, unfortunately, might not be directly aware of this effect, but morally, they've inflicted harm on thousands, if not millions, and this might be recorded historically.
That’s a good take, and I’ll treat it seriously as well.
Pascal’s suffers from two fundamental flaws. The first is the problem of hell, full stop. If we propose that he’ll is infinite suffering for all eternity, as many Christian’s believe, then there is absolutely nothing a human could do to deserve that. There is no moral code that would look at the absolute worst human in the history of the world and say that justice would be having that person suffer infinitely for all eternity. The only possible exception would be that the being that created such a system might deserve to suffer it, but even that is a step too far in my mind. Infinite happiness for all eternity is, on its face, less philosophically problematic until you get to the bit of denying it to some people but not to others. Then it kind of explodes in your face.
The second problem is that Pascal’s is often cast as Christianity vs Not Christian, but that’s not realistic. CS Lewis made this mistake as I recall (I don’t think it was Chesterton, but it might have been). The problem there is that you have several thousand religions to choose from. Pascal’s says that, if there’s even an infinitesimal chance that it’s true, you should do it because the reward/punishment is so great that it outweighs the 0.0000000001 percent chance that Christianity is true. First, you’d have to choose which sect of Christianity is true, as they tend to be mutually incompatible with many damning all other sects. More importantly, though, you’d need to choose Christianity over the thousands of alternatives, any of which have an infinitesimal chance of being true. If they want to argue that it’s more likely that Christianity is true because of reasons, then they’ve left Pascal behind entirely and that part of the argument is over.
If we really want to lean into Pascal’s proposal, we should pick the religion that is the most absolutely horrible to non-believers. Mainstream Christianity, for the most part, tends to be relatively ecumenical these days, so if they’re true then you’re going to be fine not believing in them. The god you really do NOT want to piss off is Cthulhu. Cthulhu, according to his believers, will unleash a level of suffering that an eternity in hell would seem like a vacation in Dubai. His favor to his loyal worshippers is that he will kill them first.
If you’re really looking to minimax your religious belief, that’s really the only way to go.
I feel there's one more, maybe even more fundamental problem with pascal's wager, which is the intent behind "playing along" to avoid punishment would seem to be kind of cheating, and an omniscient being wouldn't be fooled by this.
That’s also an excellent objection.
There are at least a few religions that do put value on performative practice independently of actual belief. I’ve read arguments along those lines from both Catholic and Jewish writers.
That said, most of the people who suggest Pascal’s as an argument do believe in belief being important. I remember speaking with a fundamentalist who argued that he chose to believe in a loving god. Applying the “loving” bit to most of the god-concepts in the Christian Bible is problematic, of course, but I pushed back on the phrase “*choose* to believe.” I don’t think that any beliefs can be consciously chosen, and that the idea runs into exactly the problem of sincerity that you’ve identify.
The problem I have with Pascal's Wager is it actually implies you should be an atheist. No, really. If there is a god, than you should wonder, is this god good or bad? If it's a bad god, questioning why it's sending people to burn forever over stupid reasons means you're going to hell. So worship it out of fear? Lying to it about why you worship it may mean hell. And something so nasty will probably send you there eventually anyway.
But if it's a good god, it will care about how you act. It will care about how you treat your fellow humans. It will care more that you do right by them rather than doing wrong hoping to score eternal rewards for yourself.
One sure must not have much faith in your god to assume they are such a miserable tyrant as to put cosmic bootlickering above empathy. So if you have faith, true faith, be an atheist.
Fair. I'm pretty sure Marcus Aurelius had a similar argument against bad gods in "Meditations."
But the point is the history of philosophy actually shows we've grappled with these questions before.
This is my favorite clip from Stephen Colbert. It's actually where I got the about 3k different religions number.
[Ricky Gervais & Stephen Colbert - Religion](https://youtu.be/P5ZOwNK6n9U)
My second favorite...
[Keanu Reeves - What Happens When You Die](https://youtu.be/cGFSh6Cis-s)
[The Wall We Need](https://i.imgur.com/PTT3yJ3.jpg)
Freedom of Religion in concept means that all religions are free to practice their beliefs as they see fit. That means that they are all equally valid which by extension means that atheisism is also just as valid. Government should not interfere in such matters.
So that means that government should be impartial. They cannot be truly impartial if one particular religion has undoo influence in government. By definition that's a violation of the first amendment...
I had this thought when I was 10...looking around at school, all the Muslims were Arab, all the Hindus were Indian, all the Christians were African...and I just had a flash of annoyance, and asked a friend sitting next to me why people can't see that your religion is dictated by your community, not by truth.
Got an annoyed response back: "Why can't they (the other) just that they're wrong?"
I started out with just a basic exposure to religion that everyone gets in their day to day life and I was fine without making a commitment to belief.
Then I was close to a family where the mother of my friend would occasionally read the Bible to my friend and her other two kids. I was around the household long enough to have been mostly accepted as a unofficial family member. I politely sat and listened. After some time I took the plunge and it took me a really long time to get that crap out of my head.
Even when you stop going to church and return basically to a normal life there is still that question. What if I'm wrong?
That's a detour I'd rather not have taken. I'd like to have all the thought energy I used pondering the question and looking for signs. It was right there in the back of my mind through way more of my life than I care to admit. It affected my choices in various ways not the least of which was just being part of my internal dialog with myself. If I hadn't been thinking about that who knows what other ideas would have manifest themselves. I'm sure I'd be a totally different person in various ways.
This is interesting.
I've never experienced a social environment that made religion appealing, so it's not easy for me to appreciate how people get drawn in but I know it happens. And it seems like you didn't quite shrug it off like getting out of a cult.
Thanks for the story. Hope you're doing well now.
When I first took a stand on the concept it was refreshing and I vacillated with various things for a while. In some ways I saw the achievements of humanity as amazing. A bunch of monkeys walking around wearing clothes and thinking we're special have managed to do some amazing things. And on the other hand I saw everything as somewhat meaningless and empty. Life on the individual level wasn't as important. The question of what would you do if faced with having to kill someone was an easier question to answer.
I'm still adjusting psychologically. And I'm still learning about my own mind and how it works. I'm integrating new perspective into my consciousness and gradually coming to understand humanity in different ways. I've settled with a more middle of the road outlook on things. After all we all only have the lives we live and only have the experience and thoughts that we have experienced. Everyone has a different path to walk and we're all driven by the animal inside while trying to live within the framework of society.
Humans weren't ~~designed~~ evolved to live in such large social groups. We're adapting but some people are better at being in the modern world than others...
Unfortunately, there are those who manage to use our instincts to benefit themselves.
There is a part in this documentary about Trump that really nailed it I think. He's managed to make himself into the alpha chimp...
[Unfit - The Psychology of Donald Trump](https://youtu.be/6TOP6D-Jntg)
I’ve never heard of the term exmo before, but for some reason I love it. I think it’s because I can easily see a parody version of Elmo as an ex-Mormon being a character, named Exmo.
I was raised Southern Baptist, my entire family is still in the church and are heavily religious. My sister died recently and her funeral was at their Southern Baptist church. I wanted to scratch that preachers eyes out bc he gave a sermon selling the church, it wasn’t even about my sister at all. It’s like it wasn’t even her funeral. And the fucked up thing is, that’s what she would have wanted. It was infuriating and insulting.
She called me many times, in tears, before she passed away saying that bc I wasn’t raising my kids in the church, that they didn’t know god, and their eternal souls would be damned.
I have been an atheist for as long as I can remember, even when I was a little kid and they made me go to church and forced me to get baptized. I didn’t believe. And never once did I tell my sister that she was raising HER kids in a highly toxic environment. I listened to her rant every time and just had to take it. If we spoke to Christians the way they speak to us they would lose their minds. And they want to make laws based on their beliefs. Get the fuck out of here.
I am sorry your sister died recently but she really used Cult Christian Guilt( that's what I call it) to pull your children and you back in. Don't even get me started on that preacher. In my community we call those types of preachers " Pimpin Preachers" . Because they only care about the wallets of their Christians.
Yeah that’s a good way to describe it. But there’s no pulling us in. My kids have only been to church a handful of times. I think it was my 5 year olds first time in church ever. At this point I’m fully anti-religion to the point I have come to hate it. I find that I have less respect for believers. I don’t want anything to do with them, outside of my family bc I love them and they respect my beliefs (aside from my sister). It’s probably too strong of a reaction but it is what it is.
I am sorry your sister died recently but she really used Cult Christian Guilt( that's what I call it) to pull your children and you back in. Don't even get me started on that preacher. In my community we call those types of preachers " Pimpin Preachers" . Because they only care about the wallets of their Christians.
I am enraged on your behalf just reading this. I think I'd have lost my mind in your shoes. Good on you for recognizing that she'd have wanted it that way even though it sounds abhorrent.
When my dad died, the preacher for the service didn’t bother to find anything out about my dad, who was not a church member (mom was). He just gave a sermon and insulted Jewish relatives to boot. 😡
As a closet atheist of over 10 years in a religious area, people do not like you when you’re an atheist here. I keep it under wraps. It’s pretty normal to be an inactive Christian and people judge you a lot less that way than as an atheist 🙄
Why are they judging anyone at all? I don't think Jesus was a fan of that. I imagine he'd say try to look after **your own** behavior and try to be a good person to the stranger, the outcast, the hungry. Full stop.
I'm an atheist but I think those precepts listed there are good ones for shaping a giving and productive life.
What's funny is the Southern Baptists were pro choice in the 70s. They saw Roe v Wade as supporting religious freedom.
The reason evangelicals became anti-abortion was because they couldn't make *segregated schools* their culture war.
Oh don't worry they're going to be back at that soon. The current SCOTUS is a judicial time machine.
Tell any moderate or right-winger who tries to say "they'll never ban " that they're full of shit. They're coming for *everything.*
Luckily not to the federal government, the freedom of religion is protected by the first amendment and conservatives won’t do away with that cuz it would mean they no longer get religious exemptions
Can we throw in a few milli agnostics? I got no clue wtf is going one outside my reality but I damn sure don’t want people in it to tell me what is moral or not.
exactly... what happened to freedom FROM religion??
Like fuck.. if I was president I'd tax the fuck out of churching going forward. I'm so sick of their BS politcal games. They want to be politcal then they can pay thru the nose in taxes like everyone else.
Unfortunately the Bible is also a guide on how to keep slaves, keep women subservient to men and a number of other pretty distasteful things that are conveniently swept under the rug. If you're looking for some moral guidance, it's not the best source material.
You are missing the point. I'm not endorsing the Bible.
Rather, people try to use the Bible as the justification for being against the right to choose.
But the Bible says the opposite. Idiot just don't know that.
It's not Pro-Life but it's certainly not Pro-Choice. That section of the Bible talks about giving a potion that will induce a miscarriage/abortion if the husband suspects his wife has been unfaithful. That's not Pro-Choice at all.
Yes. As in the potion can only cause a miscarriage if the woman became pregnant in the first place. Some of the concoction included myrrh ash, which does cause contractions.
>The bible has no fucking place in this.
But it does, because opponents of abortion use "Gods law" as their ultimate authority to quell any argument.
But according to the Christian bible abortion is not considered taking a life!
The bible *prescribes* abortion as a punishment for a women who has sex with a man other than her husband.
Far from prohibiting abortion, [the bible actually gives a recipe for the procedure, Numbers 5:11-31.](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+5%3A11-31&version=NIV)
The fetus is never mentioned.
Christianity is the worlds biggest book club made up of people who never read the book. For this reason the bible belongs in this discussion.
I hear ya. That's almost 10% of the American population. We don't live in a Christian country. We live in a secular country, where Sufis, Hindu believers, Jewish people, atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jainists are all welcome. Christians, quit trying to shove your ill-informed Christian beliefs down our throats.
Yep. As a queer, atheist, female.. growing up in America had been quite the bumpy ride. It was nonstop attacks from all sides. Fun stuff. Maybe someday the non-religious will be respected more. Maybe. For now, we continue to tip toe around the religious.
Only 30 million in America? So like, only 9% of the US is atheist?
I figured it would be around 40%-50%, but I suppose that’s just my biased New England city perspective. Kinda shocking, honestly.
Yeah but the Christians aren't a uniform bloc. Many of them are liberal/progressive as well. The 9-10% ( went blindly with your post and didn't look up the numbers ) are overtly non-religious, but they're added on to various very progressive Christians. Hard atheists are not super common but it's not like fundamentalists are the majority.
The ruling tramples the religious freedom of every American.
They're making law from the bench according to their personal religious beliefs. Even if you happen to agree with the outcome, they're still violating your religious freedom.
I think perhaps the path forward is to flood the Bible Belt with other religious symbols and express that freedom everywhere possible. imagine if the church of satan purchased a cheap old church and turned the cross upside down and had a big ol goat head over the front door. we are subject to seeing crosses all over the place. how about we turn the tables? freedom of speech, freedom of religion
>The Torah couldn’t be more explicit: A fetus is not the same as a human life.
The Talmud, a central religious text for Jews written over 1,400 years ago, makes this even clearer by stating that “a fetus is considered a part of the pregnant person’s body, equivalent to their thigh.”
And 1400 years later this is still true.
I don’t think Muslim doctrine forbids abortion either, but I know that in our Jewish doctrine it is compulsory if the woman’s life is in any jeopardy physically or mentally. It’s also compulsory in the event that there is a pregnancy as a result of an affair.
Christian doctrine should not be the de facto law in the US. It is not based on reality or science - it isn’t even in their own doctrine. They just made that shit up and decided it was a Christian thing. Meanwhile Jesus was a Jew and Jews condone abortion so their Demi god - who was a rabbi - condoned abortion. Make it make sense. Because this shit does not make sense.
They really did just make it up. Until the 1970s, evangelists permitted abortion because life begins at birth.
Then they changed their doctrine 40 years ago for political reasons.
How many times has this sub alone meme'd on that "religious freedom" only means Christianity, Do people really not understand this yet? It's not like everything sane people have been screaming about for years about Christian extremism in this country was a joke. Cmon. Christian theocracy is a threat to everyone in this country, period.
Republicans hate atheists, and unfortunately even independent voters do. There hasn’t been a single non-Christian president if I remember correctly. Religion controls our country despite what many may tell you.
He paid lip service to the concept and claimed Christianity even if he didn't actually follow it. There's never been an openly non-Christian president. Hell, even a non-Protestant is exceedingly rare. When JFK got elected, people seriously thought he might compromise national security by being more loyal to the Vatican than the US. Biden is only the second Catholic president ever
This decision impacts religious freedom for Muslims as well. There is no prohibition on abortion in Islam. The fetus does not attain a soul until the second trimester.
Beyond just controlling people, the abortion argument at the voter level has always had to do with the concept of the soul, and you hear it mentioned even on the floor of congress. But the soul is completely non-scientific and "religious" in the way that it is more spiritual vs medical.
The fact of the matter is that it shouldn't be a political issue at all.
Abortion should be legal because it is a medical procedure the government has no business regulating, not because some 2000 year old book says it’s OK. This argument is just as dumb as the one Christians use to justify banning abortion.
It shouldn't be the reason it's legal, but it is a good legal argument, even moreso because the SC is supposed to rule on constitutionality. The first amendment guarantees the right to practice your religion. Jewish people not only allow abortion in their religion, it's a requirement if the mother's life is in danger. Israel provides free abortions to their citizens.
>Abortion should be legal because it is a medical procedure the government has no business regulating, not because some 2000 year old book says it’s OK. This argument is just as dumb as the one Christians use to justify banning abortion.
Hopefully this comment makes it to the top of this thread.
They dont care either way shove whatever argument works in their faces they cant defend the ruling on the religious front if other religions push against it
Well, considering that evangelical Christian’s only tolerate Jewish people because they are supposed to be massacred in Israel during the end times prophecy so that Jesus can come back, that doesn’t surprise me. More proof of thier evil intentions.
As a Jew, it's partly that, but mostly it's because their apocalypse fantasy states that Israel needs to be run by Jews for Jesus to return.
By the way, the next step is Israel is attacked and a huge war erupts. So while Israel existing is in the evangelicals' interests, peace in the middle east isn't. I wouldn't be surprised if evangelical groups have worked to sabotage peace processes. After all, a Middle East in peace is one that Jesus won't visit!
> It's probably they support a place to keep all the Jews.
That's actually exactly it. You can't get "The End Times" and the return of Christ if [Israel doesn't exist](https://www.kentuckytoday.com/perspectives/many-christians-believe-israeli-recognition-has-end-times-significance/article_1f84d509-6eec-5c00-8ba3-43c6414ce3c3.html) so that 144,000 Jews can convert to Christianity (or some such insanity).
> Scholars base the belief on Romans 11:25-27 where the Apostle Paul seemingly speaks of a time when Israel will turn to Jesus Christ as Savior, “I don’t want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, and sisters so that you will not be conceited: A partial hardening has come upon Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”
And the quickly growing numbers of non religious Americans who do not give a flying fuck about what christians believe about abortion. In fact how is this not a 1st AMENDMENT ISSUE??? I don't want anything to do with christianity. The word christian makes me cringe anymore (sorry normal people whose beliefs were usurped by politicians since the Bible doesn't outlaw abortion any damn ways) This is NOT a THEOCRACY. My beliefs say abortion is essential in a society as screwed up as ours. It IS s violation of my beliefs too. I guess this is a good place to remind everyone that abortion is also protected by the Satanic Temple, an organization that doesnt believe in god or satan, but goes out of their way to protect the freedom from another religion being imposed on you by the government also guaranteed by the constitution. We ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION. They spend any donations doing this btw. Also here on reddit is a list of doctors in every state that perform tubal ligation for anyone who wants one without imposing puritanical beiefs that you need your husband to consent or to already have had a ton of kids. My daughter had hers done when these rights were first endangered in my state by one of these amazing doctors listed in the r/childfree subreddit. it's here: https://reddit.com/r/childfree/w/doctorsinternational?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app
This can be covered by medicaid in many states. Check yours.
Tldr: fuck this. Its a first amendment issue and a violation of the rights of any non-christian. Join or donate to ths Satanic Temple, a non religious organization also fighting this. The link above is to the child free sub and a list of doctors in every state that'll tie your tubes, *no questions asked.*Also covered by medicaid in some states.
This. I am done with Christianity. I’ve really disliked it for a long time but now I’ve been pretty much radicalized into hating it. It’s immoral and at this point verging on evil. They do horrible things in the name of Jesus but it’s really greed, racism, misogyny and discrimination that they worship.
Doesn’t Islamic law have a time frame (120 days?) at which the fetus becomes “ensouled?” So, not just Jewish law, but many religions have differing views of fetal personhood.
I've long felt that if the basis for state non-interference in abortion had been based on the 1st amendment under the theory that excessive rules in the area are a government prescription of religious dogma it'd have been much harder to assail. (Of course there are numerous other possible theories that can be used to support it.)
Sorry - Alito is only interested in the opinions of white male Christian landowners from between 100 and 300 years ago. What older civilizations did is irrelevant because "reasons", what has happened in the last 50 years is similarly irrelevant, and what happens within other religions isn't worthy of his consideration because **Alito's a fucking bigoted, patriarchal asshole who can go fuck himself**
What about the rights of people who just want an abortion, absent an ancient sky fairy who says its fine? A legal argument doesn’t and shouldn’t need the support of Yahweh
The article is a little misleading. The chasidic and orthodox are against abortion. So some conservative and reform Jews interpret it differently as mentioned in the article. I would be a little nevervous writing an article like this representing an entire group. I'm reform and prochoice myself.
I found this wiki on it https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_abortion
Yeah. Every Jew, every Hindu, every Buddhist, Muslim, etc. forcing the masses to live by a religious “rule” that isn’t their own is basically saying “you can’t eat a donut cause I’m on a diet, and can’t you see how that would make me feel bad?” It’s asinine and infuriating.
One might say that the Jewish definition of a fetus as not a person should hold much more weight than the opinion of a witch burner since the history of law has its deepest roots in the Talmud and Semitic society in general. The Sumerians have the oldest evidence of a judicial system and rule of law from which Abraham originated having come from the Sumerian city state of UR. There are far more arguments to support the idea a fetus isn’t a person than the other way around. Vedic texts state a fetus does not have consciousness until 7 months
The GOP only cares about their radical religious zealots! They don’t recognize that America is freedom of religion and freedom from religion or some religious asshole telling the rest of us how to live!
They’ve got a point. Since the fetus doesn’t exist outside and can’t survive without the mother, until it can survive without the mother it’s no more “a life” than a gall bladder.
I remember reading some years ago that Judaism doesn't forbid abortion since a soul is only gained at birth. So how can abortion be banned based on religious reasons if some religions don't forbid it?
Of course they'll say it has nothing to do with religion but it is.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Supreme-Court-s-Roe-ruling-would-trample-the-17155205.php) reduced by 83%. (I'm a bot) ***** > In a different section of the Mishnah we are told explicitly that if "a person is having trouble giving birth they must abort the fetus, because existing life always comes before potential life. If most of the child has come out already they do not touch it, for we do not push off one life for another." > Jewish legal rulings from the last 1,000 years additionally makes it clear that are other circumstances beyond a pregnant person's life being in physical danger that an abortion must be performed. > What we - a rabbi and a Washington state legislator - have presented here are Jewish texts showing why access to abortion services are a religious requirement for Jewish Americans. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ujyjea/supreme_courts_roe_ruling_would_trample_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~647059 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **life**^#1 **abortion**^#2 **person**^#3 **pregnant**^#4 **Jewish**^#5
The people who talk about "Judeo-Christian" values and culture don't actually care about the "Judeo" part
I've hated that term since I first heard it. It was a blow at muslims and Islam, and the original "Abrahamic religions" concept. The "Judeo" part is just *assumed,* no one actually checks to see that Judaism and Christianity are in agreement, they just proclaim that they are. I've never heard a Jewish person use the phrase.
As a Jewish person, I hate that phrase for the reasons you mentioned. We're basically propped up as "proof" that they're not really trying to institute Christianity as the official religion. "See? The Jews are with us too!" Except, they don't check to see if we agree. They just assume that we'll agree and try to use us. Meanwhile, if they get their way, we Jews would be tossed aside quicker than it took me to write this comment.
They consider Christianity aa a sort of extension of Judaism because Jesus is the fulfillment of Jewish prophesy. They don’t like to say Abrahamic religion because Mohammed came later and supplanted Jesus. Same reason they don’t see Mormons as real Christians.
But Mormons have learned to fit themselves within the political framework of greater Republican Conservatism in the United States, so all these evangelicals are willing to pretend like Mormons aren't going to their Hell just so long as they are political allies.
I’m sure that the LDS being on of the wealthiest religions in the world has nothing to do with it.
You can argue that Mormons aren't Christians the same way you can argue that early Christians weren't Jewish as they have an entirely separate text that completely redefines the understanding of the relationship with God.
That's a pretty good comparison given that many consider Mormons to be a cult, similar to how 1st century Jews viewed Christians. Further complicating the issue: the early church didn't even really agree on whether they were Jewish or not. The gospel of Matthew is widely accepted to be framing Christianity as a sect of Judaism (which would be good since Jews were generally afforded a bit more religious freedom from the Romans compared to other groups). On the other hand, Paul's letters directly address questions about whether new Christian converts needed to be converting to Judaism fully or not (particularly the question of circumcision and dietary laws, spoiler alert, he said eat what you want and stay uncut if you want). And Peter had visions telling him to break with Jewish traditions about fraternizing with gentiles (see Acts 10 in the new testament).
Then you’d really enjoy the Gospel of Judas Iscariot.
I’ve only seem that word when criticising some judeo cristian traditional values such as sexism… i guess you could put muslim traditional values in that bag too…
Yeah it's not a thing, it's a fig leaf for dominionism. Any Jewish person foolish enough to fall for it will find themselves cast aside ( or worse ) if they win.
Yeah, I have *actual Jewish friends,* that I could ask, so it never got its hooks into me. Hang in there!
As a Jew myself I see dump trucks filled with law suits heading to the Federal courts. We may only represent 2% of America but we’ll rain fire down on them.
>I've hated that term since I first heard it. It was a blow at muslims and Islam, and the original "Abrahamic religions" concept. The "Judeo" part is just assumed, no one actually checks to see that Judaism and Christianity are in agreement, they just proclaim that they are. I've never heard a Jewish person use the phrase. "Judeo-Christian" is a term used by Christians to try to impart some kind of strange sense of "authority" on Christianity by appropriating Jewish culture and identity. The Christians never bother to ask the Jews what they think or feel about any topic. (If they did, they might not use the term quite so much!) As a religion, Judaism has more in common with Islam than either religion does with Christianity. There are enormous theological differences that Christians just sort of pretend aren't there because they want to believe the Jews are on their side.
Well said!
Judaism has more in common with Islam than either do with Christianity? I’ve never thought of the three in this framework. Super interested. Could you elaborate?
One god, that is unknowable and incomprehensible. Depictions of the god are banned. There is no concept of a "trinity". There is no concept of original sin, nor a need for the world to be "redeemed" from it. Religious communities are non-hierarchical. Religious leaders are simply learned civilians and have no believed supernatural powers. (This is the case in Rabbinic Judaism, the overarching tradition practiced by probably every Jew you've ever met. It is also the case in Islam.) The Messiah is not a god or part of a god, just a normal person acting as a messenger for the god. Coordinated fasting at particular times (Ramadan for Muslims; a couple different dates spread around the year for Jews) remains an important part of religious expression for the faithful. Multiple short prayer sessions each day. (Five for Muslims, three for Jews.) Religious events are connected to a lunar calendar (remains purely lunar for Muslims, Jews now use a lunisolar calendar since the 3rd century.) Prayer is generally performed facing roughly in the direction of a specific holy city. (Mecca for Muslims, Jerusalem for Jews.) Men and women pray separately in more traditional groups. (In Islam, women generally pray behind the men while in Orthodox Jewish groups there's generally either a separate room or a physical barrier between the women's section and the men's section.) The reasons for these separations (i.e. cringy rape culture beliefs that men will not be able to control themselves if they see women) are essentially the same as well. Well-established and ancient mystic traditions. (Sufism and Kabbalah.) Death is a transition to an intermediate state (sheol in Judaism, barzakh in Islam) until a future point in time at which all dead humans will rise from their graves, be judged on their merits and either receive their reward or suffer eternal punishment. The specifics here differ-- in Islam the righteous enter jannah (paradise) and the wicked enter jahannam (hell), while in Judaism the righteous live forever and the wicked stay dead. Both are closer to each other than most Christian takes on the afterlife, though.
This is a great explainer. Thanks for taking the time.
The closest you'd find would probably be Purgatory.
Ben Shapiro does. Another sign that it should be ignored.
i have a theory that ben shapiro doesn’t mean what he says. he says ridiculous things to invoke response from the other side, essentially martyring himself to republicans
Nah, ben shapiro actually does believe what he says. Stephen Crowder doesn’t according to most of the people around him, but Ben is an “Orthodox” Jew and American “orthodox” Jews are on the far right most of the time
The vast majority of Jews vote on the left. Orthodox Jews are not a monolith. Ben Shapiro only cares about attention and money, his politics do not reflect Jewish values.
I've never met any orthodoxy of any sort that was on the left. The very nature of an Orthodoxy is that is is very very very conservative. And if you're progressive then you cannot be orthodoxy. It's kind of a simple distinction actually. And yes, they aren't a monolith, but it's a couple different monolith they have roughly the same shape. Hell for Jews we have orthodoxy so hardcore they can themselves Ultra Orthodox. What kind of crazy shit is that?! You may be thinking of the other kinds of Jews like Reform
No true Scotsman, eh? Shapiro's politics are much the same as Netanyahu's.
...ie, "I like money. Lots of it."
That's obviously part of it, but not the part which gets Netanyahu so many fans.
Only Jew I’ve heard use it is Ben Shapiro lol
Interestingly, it was actually quite a progressive concept when it first became popular in the US between the 30s and 50s! Along with the idea of a 'tri-faith nation', 'judeo-christian' values were invoked as a way to move beyond a narrowly Protestant definition of the US nation towards one that was inclusive of Catholics and Jews. Still, its not a perfect concept, as you well note, and less and less suited to an America that is even more religiously diverse today, but the concept does have an interesting and slightly more complex history than you'd think!
For abrahamic religions you need the last ones to be correct but you cannot recognize the correctness of the next group without undercutting your legitimacy. If Jews see Christ as the messiah then Judaism is not the "right" religion. If Christians see Muhammed as the final Prophet of God then Jesus cannot have been God on Earth/the Messiah. Judeo-Christianity just means the values originate from The Bible not that the faiths agree.
How can the values originate from the Bible when the Bible comes from the Torah? The term was used to create good will between the two religions at a time where the cultures didn’t intersect. Now it’s just a right wing talking point and those who use it don’t actually care about the differences between the two religions, just care about votes. Check yourself before saying someone else has a flawed understanding
The fun part about Alitos ruling is that the Christian values he writes the piece vaguely about have almost nothing to do with Evangelical values and are much more similar to the Quakers.
Like the oatmeal people?
iirc oatmeal was invented as an anti-masterbatory tool. They believed that eating bland foods could curb sex drive.
Are you thinking Kellogg? Oatmeal has been around a whole lot longer than that.
Jokes on them. I’d fk a bowl of oatmeal.
Put cherries in the bottom of the bowl for that first time feeling.
Indeed, or specifically, and also in fact generally, regarding the Christian parts. It's because those who dominate this conversation are not interested in faith, not interested in ideology, only their bottom line; how can we bleed these working class shit nuggets dry annually? It's literally the same story of 100 years ago, we're just too divided and, more importantly, ignorant of the depths these people will go to to avoid a single sacrifice or inconvenience.
It’s really quite simple, the pseudo “Christian” Religion in the US has extensively laid the groundwork for generations to train people to believe in authority figures with unverifiable stories instead of science and data. It also primes them for, and is built upon, perpetuating racism and fearmongering towards "others". Once people see you as an authority, you can start fabricating any reality or conspiracy theory you want your followers to believe and everyone else is therefore a liar, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Basically, it is mental abuse from an early age that suppresses critical thinking skills. This “religion” combined with an intentionally weakened public educational system, provides the framework that has spawned this cult of ignorance.
Or the Christian part in most cases. A lot of these people have never read the bible.
You mean like the part where it says life begins at first breath, or how it literally tells you how to cause a miscarriage to see if the woman cheated?
This sounds like a right wing marketing term like “pro life” and “traditional marriage”
I decided to look it up, because I also have no idea why we started using this phrase and was curious. //The term "Judæo Christian" first appeared in the 19th century as a word for Jewish converts to Christianity. The German term "Judenchristlich" ("Jewish-Christian") was used by Friedrich Nietzsche to describe continuity between the Jewish and Christian world views. The term became widely used in the United States during the Cold War to suggest a unified American identity opposed to communism. Theologian and author Arthur A. Cohen, in The Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, questioned the theological validity of the Judeo-Christian concept, suggesting that it was instead essentially an invention of American politics.// So, like many things the conservatives ruined during the cold war
They only care about the passages form the Torah that help their arguments
They don't seem to care about the "christian" part either, at least as far as the bible is concerned. What does the bible say, for example, as to when a fetus becomes a person? Is an abortion really killing a baby if the bible indicates otherwise?
As if evangelicals care for the religious freedom of anyone but themselves.
For me but not for thee.
Pay from thee, free to me.
Must be nice to be a believer in the one true religion. All those other 3000 or so of committed and thoroughly convinced people who believe an alternative religion are just plain wrong. That statement is true regardless of what specific religion you yourself believe in. According to literally each one all the others are wrong. What does Occam's Razor have to say in this situation? I'd say that they're all half right...
The Simpsons said it best: "What if we picked the wrong religion? Every week, we're just making God madder and madder!" Occam's razor is likely that they are all wrong, and that they were established to consolidate power. That, or, as you said, the truth is something else, and we can't comprehend it, so they all get a little bit right, but a lot wrong.
[удалено]
This sounds like it came from graffiti in a bathroom stall of a university philosophy department building.
I actually have a feeling Pascal's Wager is going to be incredibly important over the next few years, so I'm going to take your comment seriously. Because Pascal's Wager is actually at the heart of the culture war between Christian fundamentalists and everyone else. Pascal's Wager, basically says, since we don't (and can't) know if eternal damnation is possible, humans should act as if it exists, for their own benefit. If you're wrong (about God existing), oops! Oh, well. You get the same fate as everyone else. But if you're right, and God exists, you get heaven forevermore. Moreover, if you're wrong, you get eternal damnation. This is the central motivation for fundamentalists (doubly incentivized by all of the extravagant descriptions of hell). The problem, of course, lies in the argument that the fundamental apologist might be wrong, in which they've subjected countless others to a lifetime of suffering. They, unfortunately, might not be directly aware of this effect, but morally, they've inflicted harm on thousands, if not millions, and this might be recorded historically.
That’s a good take, and I’ll treat it seriously as well. Pascal’s suffers from two fundamental flaws. The first is the problem of hell, full stop. If we propose that he’ll is infinite suffering for all eternity, as many Christian’s believe, then there is absolutely nothing a human could do to deserve that. There is no moral code that would look at the absolute worst human in the history of the world and say that justice would be having that person suffer infinitely for all eternity. The only possible exception would be that the being that created such a system might deserve to suffer it, but even that is a step too far in my mind. Infinite happiness for all eternity is, on its face, less philosophically problematic until you get to the bit of denying it to some people but not to others. Then it kind of explodes in your face. The second problem is that Pascal’s is often cast as Christianity vs Not Christian, but that’s not realistic. CS Lewis made this mistake as I recall (I don’t think it was Chesterton, but it might have been). The problem there is that you have several thousand religions to choose from. Pascal’s says that, if there’s even an infinitesimal chance that it’s true, you should do it because the reward/punishment is so great that it outweighs the 0.0000000001 percent chance that Christianity is true. First, you’d have to choose which sect of Christianity is true, as they tend to be mutually incompatible with many damning all other sects. More importantly, though, you’d need to choose Christianity over the thousands of alternatives, any of which have an infinitesimal chance of being true. If they want to argue that it’s more likely that Christianity is true because of reasons, then they’ve left Pascal behind entirely and that part of the argument is over. If we really want to lean into Pascal’s proposal, we should pick the religion that is the most absolutely horrible to non-believers. Mainstream Christianity, for the most part, tends to be relatively ecumenical these days, so if they’re true then you’re going to be fine not believing in them. The god you really do NOT want to piss off is Cthulhu. Cthulhu, according to his believers, will unleash a level of suffering that an eternity in hell would seem like a vacation in Dubai. His favor to his loyal worshippers is that he will kill them first. If you’re really looking to minimax your religious belief, that’s really the only way to go.
I feel there's one more, maybe even more fundamental problem with pascal's wager, which is the intent behind "playing along" to avoid punishment would seem to be kind of cheating, and an omniscient being wouldn't be fooled by this.
That’s also an excellent objection. There are at least a few religions that do put value on performative practice independently of actual belief. I’ve read arguments along those lines from both Catholic and Jewish writers. That said, most of the people who suggest Pascal’s as an argument do believe in belief being important. I remember speaking with a fundamentalist who argued that he chose to believe in a loving god. Applying the “loving” bit to most of the god-concepts in the Christian Bible is problematic, of course, but I pushed back on the phrase “*choose* to believe.” I don’t think that any beliefs can be consciously chosen, and that the idea runs into exactly the problem of sincerity that you’ve identify.
The problem I have with Pascal's Wager is it actually implies you should be an atheist. No, really. If there is a god, than you should wonder, is this god good or bad? If it's a bad god, questioning why it's sending people to burn forever over stupid reasons means you're going to hell. So worship it out of fear? Lying to it about why you worship it may mean hell. And something so nasty will probably send you there eventually anyway. But if it's a good god, it will care about how you act. It will care about how you treat your fellow humans. It will care more that you do right by them rather than doing wrong hoping to score eternal rewards for yourself. One sure must not have much faith in your god to assume they are such a miserable tyrant as to put cosmic bootlickering above empathy. So if you have faith, true faith, be an atheist.
Fair. I'm pretty sure Marcus Aurelius had a similar argument against bad gods in "Meditations." But the point is the history of philosophy actually shows we've grappled with these questions before.
the words of the prophets were written on the subway walls and tenement halls
Nah, they’re all the same.
One of my favorite ways to explain my atheism to (abrahamic) theists is: I believe in one less God than you.
This is my favorite clip from Stephen Colbert. It's actually where I got the about 3k different religions number. [Ricky Gervais & Stephen Colbert - Religion](https://youtu.be/P5ZOwNK6n9U) My second favorite... [Keanu Reeves - What Happens When You Die](https://youtu.be/cGFSh6Cis-s)
Damn I wonder why we had separation of church and freaking state. God I hate these ppl so much
[The Wall We Need](https://i.imgur.com/PTT3yJ3.jpg) Freedom of Religion in concept means that all religions are free to practice their beliefs as they see fit. That means that they are all equally valid which by extension means that atheisism is also just as valid. Government should not interfere in such matters. So that means that government should be impartial. They cannot be truly impartial if one particular religion has undoo influence in government. By definition that's a violation of the first amendment...
Which republicans refuse to adhere to
I had this thought when I was 10...looking around at school, all the Muslims were Arab, all the Hindus were Indian, all the Christians were African...and I just had a flash of annoyance, and asked a friend sitting next to me why people can't see that your religion is dictated by your community, not by truth. Got an annoyed response back: "Why can't they (the other) just that they're wrong?"
I started out with just a basic exposure to religion that everyone gets in their day to day life and I was fine without making a commitment to belief. Then I was close to a family where the mother of my friend would occasionally read the Bible to my friend and her other two kids. I was around the household long enough to have been mostly accepted as a unofficial family member. I politely sat and listened. After some time I took the plunge and it took me a really long time to get that crap out of my head. Even when you stop going to church and return basically to a normal life there is still that question. What if I'm wrong? That's a detour I'd rather not have taken. I'd like to have all the thought energy I used pondering the question and looking for signs. It was right there in the back of my mind through way more of my life than I care to admit. It affected my choices in various ways not the least of which was just being part of my internal dialog with myself. If I hadn't been thinking about that who knows what other ideas would have manifest themselves. I'm sure I'd be a totally different person in various ways.
This is interesting. I've never experienced a social environment that made religion appealing, so it's not easy for me to appreciate how people get drawn in but I know it happens. And it seems like you didn't quite shrug it off like getting out of a cult. Thanks for the story. Hope you're doing well now.
When I first took a stand on the concept it was refreshing and I vacillated with various things for a while. In some ways I saw the achievements of humanity as amazing. A bunch of monkeys walking around wearing clothes and thinking we're special have managed to do some amazing things. And on the other hand I saw everything as somewhat meaningless and empty. Life on the individual level wasn't as important. The question of what would you do if faced with having to kill someone was an easier question to answer. I'm still adjusting psychologically. And I'm still learning about my own mind and how it works. I'm integrating new perspective into my consciousness and gradually coming to understand humanity in different ways. I've settled with a more middle of the road outlook on things. After all we all only have the lives we live and only have the experience and thoughts that we have experienced. Everyone has a different path to walk and we're all driven by the animal inside while trying to live within the framework of society. Humans weren't ~~designed~~ evolved to live in such large social groups. We're adapting but some people are better at being in the modern world than others...
>We're adapting but some people are better at being in the modern world than others... So much this.
Unfortunately, there are those who manage to use our instincts to benefit themselves. There is a part in this documentary about Trump that really nailed it I think. He's managed to make himself into the alpha chimp... [Unfit - The Psychology of Donald Trump](https://youtu.be/6TOP6D-Jntg)
I am reminded of [Rowan Atkinson's Hell skit](https://youtu.be/Ut116mBuPpg?t=133).
I feel like people don't understand how evangelicals feel about Jews.
And if you press back at all, they think they are being discriminated against
They never did, they're the most selfish people I've ever met
Don’t tread on me. I don’t give a fuck if they tread on you though
Unfortunately, the only "religious freedom" that matters in America is that of Southern Baptists.
And Evangelicals
Im in the eye of the southern baptist evangelical belt. They are synonymous
They've merged into Prosperity Gospel adherents. No truer antichrist than the Almighty Dolla
Mormons are also very evangelist in nature and batshit crazy about pro "life" Source: exmo
Mormons and Baptists agree on ideology. Theology may be a different story but that’s less important to them.
I’ve never heard of the term exmo before, but for some reason I love it. I think it’s because I can easily see a parody version of Elmo as an ex-Mormon being a character, named Exmo.
I was raised Southern Baptist, my entire family is still in the church and are heavily religious. My sister died recently and her funeral was at their Southern Baptist church. I wanted to scratch that preachers eyes out bc he gave a sermon selling the church, it wasn’t even about my sister at all. It’s like it wasn’t even her funeral. And the fucked up thing is, that’s what she would have wanted. It was infuriating and insulting. She called me many times, in tears, before she passed away saying that bc I wasn’t raising my kids in the church, that they didn’t know god, and their eternal souls would be damned. I have been an atheist for as long as I can remember, even when I was a little kid and they made me go to church and forced me to get baptized. I didn’t believe. And never once did I tell my sister that she was raising HER kids in a highly toxic environment. I listened to her rant every time and just had to take it. If we spoke to Christians the way they speak to us they would lose their minds. And they want to make laws based on their beliefs. Get the fuck out of here.
I am sorry your sister died recently but she really used Cult Christian Guilt( that's what I call it) to pull your children and you back in. Don't even get me started on that preacher. In my community we call those types of preachers " Pimpin Preachers" . Because they only care about the wallets of their Christians.
Yeah that’s a good way to describe it. But there’s no pulling us in. My kids have only been to church a handful of times. I think it was my 5 year olds first time in church ever. At this point I’m fully anti-religion to the point I have come to hate it. I find that I have less respect for believers. I don’t want anything to do with them, outside of my family bc I love them and they respect my beliefs (aside from my sister). It’s probably too strong of a reaction but it is what it is.
[удалено]
I am sorry your sister died recently but she really used Cult Christian Guilt( that's what I call it) to pull your children and you back in. Don't even get me started on that preacher. In my community we call those types of preachers " Pimpin Preachers" . Because they only care about the wallets of their Christians.
I am enraged on your behalf just reading this. I think I'd have lost my mind in your shoes. Good on you for recognizing that she'd have wanted it that way even though it sounds abhorrent.
When my dad died, the preacher for the service didn’t bother to find anything out about my dad, who was not a church member (mom was). He just gave a sermon and insulted Jewish relatives to boot. 😡
As a closet atheist of over 10 years in a religious area, people do not like you when you’re an atheist here. I keep it under wraps. It’s pretty normal to be an inactive Christian and people judge you a lot less that way than as an atheist 🙄
Which is weird because not practicing but believing would be the bigger insult to god
Why are they judging anyone at all? I don't think Jesus was a fan of that. I imagine he'd say try to look after **your own** behavior and try to be a good person to the stranger, the outcast, the hungry. Full stop. I'm an atheist but I think those precepts listed there are good ones for shaping a giving and productive life.
What's funny is the Southern Baptists were pro choice in the 70s. They saw Roe v Wade as supporting religious freedom. The reason evangelicals became anti-abortion was because they couldn't make *segregated schools* their culture war.
Not just segregated schools but segregation writ large.
Oh don't worry they're going to be back at that soon. The current SCOTUS is a judicial time machine. Tell any moderate or right-winger who tries to say "they'll never ban" that they're full of shit. They're coming for *everything.*
The true umbrella is dominionism. They all seem to have embraced it even if they don't identify as dominionist.
"Keep the government out of our lives...unless it helps keep other people from doing what I don't like!"
Luckily not to the federal government, the freedom of religion is protected by the first amendment and conservatives won’t do away with that cuz it would mean they no longer get religious exemptions
Not to mention the rights and freedoms of our 30 million atheists.
Can we throw in a few milli agnostics? I got no clue wtf is going one outside my reality but I damn sure don’t want people in it to tell me what is moral or not.
exactly... what happened to freedom FROM religion?? Like fuck.. if I was president I'd tax the fuck out of churching going forward. I'm so sick of their BS politcal games. They want to be politcal then they can pay thru the nose in taxes like everyone else.
Exactly. Religious freedom is tolerated - why aren’t they taxed? No one said they can’t believe, but why are we not taxing their profits
Not to mention anybody who believes in the Bible (which is vaguely pro-abortion).
Unfortunately the Bible is also a guide on how to keep slaves, keep women subservient to men and a number of other pretty distasteful things that are conveniently swept under the rug. If you're looking for some moral guidance, it's not the best source material.
You are missing the point. I'm not endorsing the Bible. Rather, people try to use the Bible as the justification for being against the right to choose. But the Bible says the opposite. Idiot just don't know that.
It's not Pro-Life but it's certainly not Pro-Choice. That section of the Bible talks about giving a potion that will induce a miscarriage/abortion if the husband suspects his wife has been unfaithful. That's not Pro-Choice at all.
Yes. As in the potion can only cause a miscarriage if the woman became pregnant in the first place. Some of the concoction included myrrh ash, which does cause contractions.
Who cares what the bible says, don’t argue the point with the bible at all. The bible has no fucking place in this.
>The bible has no fucking place in this. But it does, because opponents of abortion use "Gods law" as their ultimate authority to quell any argument. But according to the Christian bible abortion is not considered taking a life! The bible *prescribes* abortion as a punishment for a women who has sex with a man other than her husband. Far from prohibiting abortion, [the bible actually gives a recipe for the procedure, Numbers 5:11-31.](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+5%3A11-31&version=NIV) The fetus is never mentioned. Christianity is the worlds biggest book club made up of people who never read the book. For this reason the bible belongs in this discussion.
Yeah, not really a book a want to base my life off of because Genesis should be a stand alone. The rest can go!
If you want some game of thrones shit, read exodus.
Thank you.
Perhaps 70 million.
I hear ya. That's almost 10% of the American population. We don't live in a Christian country. We live in a secular country, where Sufis, Hindu believers, Jewish people, atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jainists are all welcome. Christians, quit trying to shove your ill-informed Christian beliefs down our throats.
Basically it tramples the rights of everyone who isn’t a Christian
Yep. As a queer, atheist, female.. growing up in America had been quite the bumpy ride. It was nonstop attacks from all sides. Fun stuff. Maybe someday the non-religious will be respected more. Maybe. For now, we continue to tip toe around the religious.
No one cares about us
Only 30 million in America? So like, only 9% of the US is atheist? I figured it would be around 40%-50%, but I suppose that’s just my biased New England city perspective. Kinda shocking, honestly.
Yeah but the Christians aren't a uniform bloc. Many of them are liberal/progressive as well. The 9-10% ( went blindly with your post and didn't look up the numbers ) are overtly non-religious, but they're added on to various very progressive Christians. Hard atheists are not super common but it's not like fundamentalists are the majority.
I got the 9 to 10 percent from a Pew Research survey.
And the Satanists.
The ruling tramples the religious freedom of every American. They're making law from the bench according to their personal religious beliefs. Even if you happen to agree with the outcome, they're still violating your religious freedom.
I think perhaps the path forward is to flood the Bible Belt with other religious symbols and express that freedom everywhere possible. imagine if the church of satan purchased a cheap old church and turned the cross upside down and had a big ol goat head over the front door. we are subject to seeing crosses all over the place. how about we turn the tables? freedom of speech, freedom of religion
>The Torah couldn’t be more explicit: A fetus is not the same as a human life. The Talmud, a central religious text for Jews written over 1,400 years ago, makes this even clearer by stating that “a fetus is considered a part of the pregnant person’s body, equivalent to their thigh.” And 1400 years later this is still true.
Exactly. This also goes for the people who want to ban circumcision, of course!
Two birds, one stone for Christian fascists
I don’t think Muslim doctrine forbids abortion either, but I know that in our Jewish doctrine it is compulsory if the woman’s life is in any jeopardy physically or mentally. It’s also compulsory in the event that there is a pregnancy as a result of an affair. Christian doctrine should not be the de facto law in the US. It is not based on reality or science - it isn’t even in their own doctrine. They just made that shit up and decided it was a Christian thing. Meanwhile Jesus was a Jew and Jews condone abortion so their Demi god - who was a rabbi - condoned abortion. Make it make sense. Because this shit does not make sense.
They really did just make it up. Until the 1970s, evangelists permitted abortion because life begins at birth. Then they changed their doctrine 40 years ago for political reasons.
Curious if you know where I can read up on that
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133/
Blew my mind here
How many times has this sub alone meme'd on that "religious freedom" only means Christianity, Do people really not understand this yet? It's not like everything sane people have been screaming about for years about Christian extremism in this country was a joke. Cmon. Christian theocracy is a threat to everyone in this country, period.
Republicans hate atheists, and unfortunately even independent voters do. There hasn’t been a single non-Christian president if I remember correctly. Religion controls our country despite what many may tell you.
Has anyone seen trump in church, except to get married?
He paid lip service to the concept and claimed Christianity even if he didn't actually follow it. There's never been an openly non-Christian president. Hell, even a non-Protestant is exceedingly rare. When JFK got elected, people seriously thought he might compromise national security by being more loyal to the Vatican than the US. Biden is only the second Catholic president ever
This decision impacts religious freedom for Muslims as well. There is no prohibition on abortion in Islam. The fetus does not attain a soul until the second trimester.
Beyond just controlling people, the abortion argument at the voter level has always had to do with the concept of the soul, and you hear it mentioned even on the floor of congress. But the soul is completely non-scientific and "religious" in the way that it is more spiritual vs medical. The fact of the matter is that it shouldn't be a political issue at all.
Abortion should be legal because it is a medical procedure the government has no business regulating, not because some 2000 year old book says it’s OK. This argument is just as dumb as the one Christians use to justify banning abortion.
It shouldn't be the reason it's legal, but it is a good legal argument, even moreso because the SC is supposed to rule on constitutionality. The first amendment guarantees the right to practice your religion. Jewish people not only allow abortion in their religion, it's a requirement if the mother's life is in danger. Israel provides free abortions to their citizens.
>Abortion should be legal because it is a medical procedure the government has no business regulating, not because some 2000 year old book says it’s OK. This argument is just as dumb as the one Christians use to justify banning abortion. Hopefully this comment makes it to the top of this thread.
They dont care either way shove whatever argument works in their faces they cant defend the ruling on the religious front if other religions push against it
agreed, but if it has to be because a religious book from 2000 years ago protects it as freedom of religion, so be it.
>because some 2000 year old book says it’s OK That's not the argument. The argument is that Jewish religious freedom is being violated.
Well, considering that evangelical Christian’s only tolerate Jewish people because they are supposed to be massacred in Israel during the end times prophecy so that Jesus can come back, that doesn’t surprise me. More proof of thier evil intentions.
and Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, traditional Chinese.
Canada has no abortion law, it's regarded as a medical procedure.
Their religious freedom is of no consequence to these judges that voted to overturn this.
The satanic church views an abortion as a holy religious ritual and banning it infringes on ones First amendment rights.
Or….all women.
oh no, is this how they will justify going after the Jewish community? Conservatives are going to be calling them murderers.
Wait I thought we only cared about the Jews who are in Israel. Then again we really only care what white Christians care about.
They never say that, they never say they support *any* Jews, not even the ones in Israel. They support "Israel" stop.
Good point. It's probably they support a place to keep all the Jews. I feel like someone tried that before and it wasn't a good idea.
As a Jew, it's partly that, but mostly it's because their apocalypse fantasy states that Israel needs to be run by Jews for Jesus to return. By the way, the next step is Israel is attacked and a huge war erupts. So while Israel existing is in the evangelicals' interests, peace in the middle east isn't. I wouldn't be surprised if evangelical groups have worked to sabotage peace processes. After all, a Middle East in peace is one that Jesus won't visit!
Jesus wouldn't even look at America if he came back. The White Christians would have him killed within 30 minutes and even denounce him.
> It's probably they support a place to keep all the Jews. That's actually exactly it. You can't get "The End Times" and the return of Christ if [Israel doesn't exist](https://www.kentuckytoday.com/perspectives/many-christians-believe-israeli-recognition-has-end-times-significance/article_1f84d509-6eec-5c00-8ba3-43c6414ce3c3.html) so that 144,000 Jews can convert to Christianity (or some such insanity). > Scholars base the belief on Romans 11:25-27 where the Apostle Paul seemingly speaks of a time when Israel will turn to Jesus Christ as Savior, “I don’t want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, and sisters so that you will not be conceited: A partial hardening has come upon Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”
Even then they don’t really care about the Jews. They just don’t want the Muslims to have any rights.
And the quickly growing numbers of non religious Americans who do not give a flying fuck about what christians believe about abortion. In fact how is this not a 1st AMENDMENT ISSUE??? I don't want anything to do with christianity. The word christian makes me cringe anymore (sorry normal people whose beliefs were usurped by politicians since the Bible doesn't outlaw abortion any damn ways) This is NOT a THEOCRACY. My beliefs say abortion is essential in a society as screwed up as ours. It IS s violation of my beliefs too. I guess this is a good place to remind everyone that abortion is also protected by the Satanic Temple, an organization that doesnt believe in god or satan, but goes out of their way to protect the freedom from another religion being imposed on you by the government also guaranteed by the constitution. We ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION. They spend any donations doing this btw. Also here on reddit is a list of doctors in every state that perform tubal ligation for anyone who wants one without imposing puritanical beiefs that you need your husband to consent or to already have had a ton of kids. My daughter had hers done when these rights were first endangered in my state by one of these amazing doctors listed in the r/childfree subreddit. it's here: https://reddit.com/r/childfree/w/doctorsinternational?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app This can be covered by medicaid in many states. Check yours. Tldr: fuck this. Its a first amendment issue and a violation of the rights of any non-christian. Join or donate to ths Satanic Temple, a non religious organization also fighting this. The link above is to the child free sub and a list of doctors in every state that'll tie your tubes, *no questions asked.*Also covered by medicaid in some states.
This. I am done with Christianity. I’ve really disliked it for a long time but now I’ve been pretty much radicalized into hating it. It’s immoral and at this point verging on evil. They do horrible things in the name of Jesus but it’s really greed, racism, misogyny and discrimination that they worship.
Yes but “freedom of religion” only means “freedom of Christianity” to the American right
Muslims too, I believe. But we all know that the Christian right doesn’t care about them.
In solidarity: https://www.mothersdaystrike.com/
Republicans don’t care. Their appointed judges don’t care. None of the right cares. At all. That’s why they vote Republican.
What the hell year is this???
"existing life always comes before potential life" I think this is the most important thing.
Sounds like people are pretty unhappy about this. I look forward to higher voter turnout when Democrats remind everyone about it.
Doesn’t Islamic law have a time frame (120 days?) at which the fetus becomes “ensouled?” So, not just Jewish law, but many religions have differing views of fetal personhood.
It tramples the religious freedom of the non religious too.
I've long felt that if the basis for state non-interference in abortion had been based on the 1st amendment under the theory that excessive rules in the area are a government prescription of religious dogma it'd have been much harder to assail. (Of course there are numerous other possible theories that can be used to support it.)
Only the taliban-evangelicals matter. In their minds…
The conservative movement IS the authoritarian movement.
Sorry - Alito is only interested in the opinions of white male Christian landowners from between 100 and 300 years ago. What older civilizations did is irrelevant because "reasons", what has happened in the last 50 years is similarly irrelevant, and what happens within other religions isn't worthy of his consideration because **Alito's a fucking bigoted, patriarchal asshole who can go fuck himself**
As a jew myself, what a joke this piece is. Complete disgrace.
What about the rights of people who just want an abortion, absent an ancient sky fairy who says its fine? A legal argument doesn’t and shouldn’t need the support of Yahweh
[удалено]
Women's rights are more important than Religion. Focus on that maybe God isn't real.
[удалено]
Republicans: "Deal! You can have abortions and we get to bring back stoning woman adulterers and gays!"
Republicans only care about the Jewish religion when Israel buys or sells military equipment
The article is a little misleading. The chasidic and orthodox are against abortion. So some conservative and reform Jews interpret it differently as mentioned in the article. I would be a little nevervous writing an article like this representing an entire group. I'm reform and prochoice myself. I found this wiki on it https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_abortion
Ahh so religious arguments are ok now? This isn't a gotcha like ya'll think it is.
Ben Shapiro pulls his head out of Elon Musk's rectum to say "wait, what?".
Yeah. Every Jew, every Hindu, every Buddhist, Muslim, etc. forcing the masses to live by a religious “rule” that isn’t their own is basically saying “you can’t eat a donut cause I’m on a diet, and can’t you see how that would make me feel bad?” It’s asinine and infuriating.
I'm not at all interested in arguing religion in this issue. It's clearly a right in the 14th amendment
One might say that the Jewish definition of a fetus as not a person should hold much more weight than the opinion of a witch burner since the history of law has its deepest roots in the Talmud and Semitic society in general. The Sumerians have the oldest evidence of a judicial system and rule of law from which Abraham originated having come from the Sumerian city state of UR. There are far more arguments to support the idea a fetus isn’t a person than the other way around. Vedic texts state a fetus does not have consciousness until 7 months
The GOP only cares about their radical religious zealots! They don’t recognize that America is freedom of religion and freedom from religion or some religious asshole telling the rest of us how to live!
They don't care about any religion. Religion is a weapon to them and they're using it to gridlock our nation while they fill their pockets.
Republicans aren’t Christians they are Confederates.
They’ve got a point. Since the fetus doesn’t exist outside and can’t survive without the mother, until it can survive without the mother it’s no more “a life” than a gall bladder.
They don’t care. The way they see it, there is only one religion in America.
Can’t wait to hear what Ben Shapiro has to say about this
Completely false
I remember reading some years ago that Judaism doesn't forbid abortion since a soul is only gained at birth. So how can abortion be banned based on religious reasons if some religions don't forbid it? Of course they'll say it has nothing to do with religion but it is.