FDR quote

52 posts / 0 new

"The Four Horseman of the Republican apocalypse: Destruction, Delay, Deceit and Despair." - Pres. Franklin Delano Roosevelt October 25, 1932
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=88402#axzz1towyaIBZ

Fenian Bastard's picture
Fenian Bastard
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Comments

"I am a Christian and a Democrat, that's all." I like this one.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

[...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose."[...]

F. D. R. from the same site.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

[...]"Now, Therefore, I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, in consonance with the joint resolution of the Congress approved December 26, 1941, do hereby proclaim Thursday the twenty-third day of November 1944 a day of national thanksgiving; and I call upon the people of the United States to observe it by bending every effort to hasten the day of final victory and by offering to God our devout gratitude for His goodness to us and to our fellow men."[...]

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=72460#axzz1uOXOoSFX

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

[...]"The problems which we all face—the problems of so-called economics, the problems that are called monetary problems, the problems of unemployment, the problems of industry and agriculture—we shall not succeed in solving unless the people of this country hold the spiritual values of the country just as high as they do the economic values.

I am very sure that the spirit in which we are approaching those difficult tasks and the splendid cooperation which has been shown, are going to be exemplified in the lives of all the people calling themselves Christians who believe in God and uphold the works of the Church."

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Extemporaneous Address at the Hyde Park Methodist Episcopal Church.," September 29, 1933. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14519. 

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

May 27, 1941 [...]"We reassert our abiding faith in the vitality of our constitutional Republic as a perpetual home of freedom, of tolerance, and of devotion to the word of God."[...]

[...]'I repeat the words of the signers of the Declaration of Independence—that little band of patriots, fighting long ago against overwhelming odds, but certain, as we are now, of ultimate victory: "With a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."'

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Radio Address Announcing an Unlimited National Emergency.," May 27, 1941. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://​www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/​?pid=16120.

https://twitter.com/​BedRockDocs/status/​206782558179049472
https://plus.google.com/u/0/​111162167780696853281/posts/​jfk5odFHAtm

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

[...]"Always I have been certain that we would conquer, because the spirit of America springs from faith—faith in the beloved institutions of our land, and a true and abiding faith in the divine guidance of God."

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Address to the National Conference of Catholic Charities.," October 4, 1933. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14522 

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

I have a question. Do you think politicians have to engage in a lot of god talk to get through to people that allowing the poor to starve is wrong? What is missing from the godly that they can't come to a moral conclusion without a biblical comandment to do so? Why must all politicians invoke the super natural to convince us that our natural world is unfair? Don't they see the hypocricy in stating that god's creation isn't godly enough? It's things like that that make some believe that religious programming is not good for the moral human. If people can't figure out, without Jesus' help, that the poor and the sick deserve our love, and stand up for what is obviously right, then they are not "good" people, they are robots.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

It doesn't matter since Obama has shown he's no FDR.

lovecraft
Joined:
May. 8, 2012 12:06 pm

You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does. I'm perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths...FDR, May 1941

- FDR A Biography, 1985, Ted Morgan. page 550

THISAA's picture
THISAA
Joined:
Dec. 16, 2011 6:49 am

If Obama had the overwhelming support of the congress as FDR did, he might have been FDR. FDR may not have been FDR even with the congress if not for Marriner Eccles and Francis Perkins.

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote THISAA:

You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does. I'm perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths...FDR, May 1941

- FDR A Biography, 1985, Ted Morgan. page 550

In an article about FDR, Nixon, and others I think "David Gergen | May 13, 2008; 4:24 PM ET" said it best:

"If there is any line to be drawn, perhaps it is this: the public is much more prepared to accept deception in the White House if they think the president is acting in the national interest but not if they think he is acting in his self interest. Even though the press was in an uproar over Nixon’s lies about bombing Cambodia, for example, the general public seemed more accepting as a price of war. But when the public saw him lie over Watergate in order to protect himself, they turned against him.

As a general proposition, voters want a president in the White House they can trust, but they also want someone who is effective as a leader – and once in a while, Machiavelli may trump the Marquis of Queensbury."

http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2008/05/deception_...

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

That is a serious misreading of history.

FDR had empathy - something that Obama has not shown the poor in America.

FDR had Harry Hopkins and Francis Perkins working for him Before the White House when he was Govenor of NY during the early days of the Great Depression.

Those 2 were among the most famous Progressives in the country. Obama has ZERO leading progressives of that stature in his administration. And sorry but Van Jones is not on the level Perkins or Hopkins were on.

FDR had many of the New Deal policies enacted on a statewide basis pror to his time in the White House .

He didn't just 'maically' turn into a liberal like people want Obama to do. There was a track record there that IS NOT THERE with Obama.

And being wealthy he wasn't beholden to the oligarchs like Obama obviously is.

Please quit insulting history and the record and memory of FDR by comparing Obama to FDR.

Scappoose's picture
Scappoose
Joined:
Mar. 30, 2012 7:49 am

'I ask you to join with me and the Eagle Scouts and our President and Chief Scout Executive who are here with me in the White House in giving again the Scout Oath.

All stand!

Give the Scout sign!

Repeat with me the Scout Oath!

"On my honor I will do my best:

To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;

To help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight."'

Good advice then, good advice now.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm
Quote chuckle8:

If Obama had the overwhelming support of the congress as FDR did, he might have been FDR. FDR may not have been FDR even with the congress if not for Marriner Eccles and Francis Perkins.

Exactly. FDR came to power at the depth of the Great Depression, in 1932, as shown by the Dow Jones chart of the time.

Barack Obama came to power in the equivalent of 1928/1929, during the first crash and rebound. He inherited the equivalent of the Hoover economy.

People were not panicked enough yet to give Obama the Roosevelt majorities that allowed FDR to push through his policies.

Roger Casement's picture
Roger Casement
Joined:
Nov. 22, 2011 11:07 am
Quote mjolnir:

'I ask you to join with me and the Eagle Scouts and our President and Chief Scout Executive who are here with me in the White House in giving again the Scout Oath.

All stand!

Give the Scout sign!

Repeat with me the Scout Oath!

"On my honor I will do my best:

To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;

To help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight."'

Good advice then, good advice now.

How do I do my duty to "god and my country"? The nature of my country is that it accepts that any number of gods or no god at all could exist. Furthermore, the pledge does not account for the inconsistencies between the natural desires of theists and patriots.

Isn't there a group of non-homophobic, non-sanctimonious non-pediphiles that we can aspire to emulate? Or, would that be non-american?

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

That is the beauty of this country. Within the framework of our laws you are free to follow any system of morality (or none) and worship any god (or none) that you please. In regard to the Boy Scouts I suspect that a great many of the 80% +/- of this country that self-identifies as Judeo/Christian and feels, as did Jefferson, that at a minimum the MORAL precepts of the Bible are the basis of our ethos, that group is just fine with the creed.

If you or I don't like it we are free to start our own association. Me, I support them whole heartedly.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm
Quote mjolnir:

That is the beauty of this country. Within the framework of our laws you are free to follow any system of morality (or none) and worship any god (or none) that you please.

I agree, but when you say "duty to god and country", it is inherently a contradictory statement, unless you either believe that there is a god and He prefers the USA so much He excuses its misdeeds or that the USA does absolutely nothing that the one biblical god would disapprove of. I find either scenario hard to believe. Duty to ones country-especially this one- could very easily step on judeo/christian ethical toes. Duty to the judeo/christian god, on the other hand, could very easily get you committed or imprisoned under US law.

In regard to the Boy Scouts I suspect that a great many of the 80% +/- of this country that self-identifies as Judeo/Christian and feels, as did Jefferson, that at a minimum the MORAL precepts of the Bible are the basis of our ethos, that group is just fine with the creed.

Yes, but that group doesn't give a crap about making sense. We can say we subscribe to the Judeo/Christian ethic but that can't possibly include wars of choice and leaving massive banking fraud unpunished. If these things happen in contradiction to the will of the 80%, then this democracy ain't democratic. Either Americans-or the 80% you mentioned-don't know what their country does or they don't care if there is any consistency between their rhetoric and their deeds.

If you or I don't like it we are free to start our own association. Me, I support them whole heartedly.

Whole heartedly? You prove my point. Supporting the boy scouts whole heartedly is like supporting the Roman Catholic Church whole heartedly. The whole hearted support ignores the negative components of the group supported. I don't support any groups with such histories of covering up crimes against children...even part-heartedly.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:I agree, but when you say "duty to god and country", it is inherently a contradictory statement,[...]

I see no contradiction and I do believe in God and American Exceptionalism. God doesn't excuse misdeeds, faith requires repentance. This country has done a lot of bad things and an incredible amount of good. The Roman Catholic Church and Christianity in general has, arguably, fed, clothed, healed, and housed more poor people world wide than any organization in the history of man. The heirarchy and misguided zealots of the churchs, not the faith, has also caused untold misery. Thru the viewport of MY faith this happens because the nature of man is sin. There is no perfect country, no perfect organization and only one perfect human.

Quote D_NATURED:[...]The whole hearted support ignores the negative components of the group supported.[...]
Not at all. If "people" in the Church or the Scouts protects pedophilia punish them in both criminal and civil courts but to ME these organizations do far more good than harm. Very few decisions about organizations whose actions are viewed thru the prism of one's morality can be sharply deliniated as good/evil, black/white or right/wrong.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

[...]"We have in the darkest moments of our national trials retained our faith in our own ability to master our destiny. Fear is vanishing and confidence is growing on every side, faith is being renewed in the vast possibilities of human beings to improve their material and spiritual status through the instrumentality of the democratic form of government. That faith is receiving its just reward. For that we can be thankful to the God who watches over America."

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Fireside Chat.," April 28, 1935. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15046. 

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm
Quote D_NATURED:

I have a question. Do you think politicians have to engage in a lot of god talk to get through to people that allowing the poor to starve is wrong? What is missing from the godly that they can't come to a moral conclusion without a biblical comandment to do so? Why must all politicians invoke the super natural to convince us that our natural world is unfair? Don't they see the hypocricy in stating that god's creation isn't godly enough? It's things like that that make some believe that religious programming is not good for the moral human. If people can't figure out, without Jesus' help, that the poor and the sick deserve our love, and stand up for what is obviously right, then they are not "good" people, they are robots.

In a nation as religious as ours, it's not hard to see why our politicians speak in religious terms so easily. Even a politician who is not very religious will do so for electoral reasons. If our nation was overwhelmingly anti-religious it would follow that even the most religious politicians would minimize religious rhetoric for electoral reasons. That does not mean that most of our leaders (including FDR) did not have heartfelt religious beliefs that influenced their actions, they just have been able to openly express them more easily.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

[...]"Learned as Jefferson was in the best of the ancient philosophers, he turned to the Bible as the source of his higher thinking and reasoning. Speaking of the lofty teachings of the Master, he said: "He pushed His scrutinies into the heart of man; erected His tribunal in the region of his thoughts, and purified the waters at the fountain head." Beyond this he held that the Bible contained the noblest ethical system the world has known."[...]

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Statement on the Four Hundredth Anniversary of the Printing of the English Bible.," October 6, 1935. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14960. 

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

We elected Obama hoping to get Franklin Roosevelt and we got Franklin Pierce instead. My mistake was reading the book he wrote about his father and not realizing how far from that he had moved. Of course, against Sarah Palin, there was no choice. And now, against Romney? Gag, gag, gag. You'd have to waterboard me to get me to vote for Obama again. So I suppose I shall.

Oliver Steinberg's picture
Oliver Steinberg
Joined:
Jun. 4, 2012 1:10 pm

Just take some time in the spa and forget about the torture. What we have not gotten is the movement that FDR rode so well. Don't blame Obama for the system or its shift to the Right. I suggest a good Wall St. mouthwash followed by a nice cold Obama while we get the movement moving.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

"You'll never find the highest form of morality in God. You can however find God in the highest form of morality."

Bush_Wacker 2012

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

A million alibis can't provide Obama a spine. He lacks either any progressive convictions (he had 'em once, back when he wrote his first book) or the courage of his convictions, or the political skill to sustain them. Talk about "not having a movement to ride as FDR did"---baloney! Remember those two million citizens who descended on Washington for Mr. Obama's Inauguration? That was a movement. Remember the 50-state strategy? That was a winninig movement! The FIRST thing Obama's crowd did after the 2008 election was to get rid of Howard Dean, architect of the 50-state strategy. Now they're going back to the "key state" strategy which is exactly how John Kerry lost!

As for "forget about the torture"----why? Why are evil deeds or vicious policies condoned by the Democrats excusable, when the same things under Bush were outrageous? I won't buy it. Not because I'm a perfectionist idealist without any notion of how real-life politics works. No, I don't buy it because I don't buy the "ends justify the means" rationalization for moral transgressions; and on top of that, I DO buy Harry Truman's warning about not throwing away a winning hand. Don't think that the people will prefer a watered-down attempt to appease the Republicans rather than a candidate who will stand firmly for the principles and policies of the New Deal and the Fair Deal. As Thom used to play that Truman speech on the show, you should remember it: The people will choose a real Republican over a fake Republican. That's the lesson of 2010. The lesson of 2012 is that Obama hasn't really learned the lesson of 2010. And the moral of 2012 is that the voters have reached the point where they won't be won over by rhetoric and vague promises of "hope." Words lose their allure when actions are lacking, or when the perception is that the actor is weak and spineless.

Remember, Obama did come in with a Congressional majority. It won't do to alibi that he needed to have a "super majority" in the Senate. Baloney again. If the GOP was blocking the Senate, then the majority should have changed the Senate rules---which was precisely the threat the GOP itself made in order to prevail a few years earlier. It seems to me that the Democrats weren't serious about the things which the people thought they were voting for. For all the talk on the handful of liberal radio programs about the GOP "filibustering" in the Senate--there's no sign of that happening! The American People don't see it. They're unaware of it. Change the Senate rules back to where it was in earlier years---you know, the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" scene where a filibuster meant the obstructor had to stand and speak on the floor. Now it's just "file a motion" and that's all that they have to do. It's a stealth filibuster. And the Democrats allow that? Total baloney. You're not looking at a filibuster but at a conspiracy. Today's Democrats are just Doughfaces. As I said--- Franklin Pierce not Franklin Roosevelt. Case closed.

Oliver Steinberg's picture
Oliver Steinberg
Joined:
Jun. 4, 2012 1:10 pm

Your 2 Franklins theory is amusing and we have much to be disillusioned with. However, anyone who was truly expecting the second coming of FDR was delusional from the start. Perhaps comparing Obama to Romney might be a more useful endeavor than comparing him to FDR. Those expecting a messiah tend to feel shortchanged when they don't get it. Look at Obama as the forerunner to our liberal messiah to arrive in 2016. Our John the Baptist, if you will. We are merely keeping the evil one(s) from getting a stronger grip around our throats before 2016. Despair is not an option.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote mjolnir:

[...]"Learned as Jefferson was in the best of the ancient philosophers, he turned to the Bible as the source of his higher thinking and reasoning. Speaking of the lofty teachings of the Master, he said: "He pushed His scrutinies into the heart of man; erected His tribunal in the region of his thoughts, and purified the waters at the fountain head." Beyond this he held that the Bible contained the noblest ethical system the world has known."[...]

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Statement on the Four Hundredth Anniversary of the Printing of the English Bible.," October 6, 1935. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14960. 

First, I have never heard anyone who claims he is a Christian refer to Jesus as "the Master." Certainly the disciples referred to Jesus that way in the Gospels. Was FDR not "really" Christian or was that the way people spoke in that era.

Second, I was unaware that Thomas Jefferson was a "Christian." And while he may have "held that the Bible contained the noblest ethical system" he also held that it contained a lot of other stuff that was contradictory (at least in the New Testament,) hence his Jefferson Bible.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

"Don't they see the hypocricy in stating that god's creation isn't godly enough?"- D_NATURED

That was just too good to go unacknowledged

good one from bush-wacker too...it's like a koan

MEJ's picture
MEJ
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

@chilidog I don't see that FDR's reference to Jesus as "the Master" has anything to do with his religiousity, one way or another. Concerning the use of that term in that era I have no idea. I would also note that nothing in this quote that I can see has FDR imputing Christianity to T. Jefferson. He uses the words "higher thinking and reasoning", "lofty teachings", and "noblest ethical system". "He pushed his scrutinies into the heart of man; erected his tribunal in the region of his thoughts, and purified the waters at the fountain head.", from "Syllabus of an Estimate of the Merit of the Doctrines of Jesus, Compared with Those of Others."

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mtbHPP_nPv8J:facult...

I certainly don't believe T.J. was a Christian but it is hard to tell since he deliberately tried to obfuscate his religion, or lack there of. My own belief is that he believed in the Judaeo/Christian God and an afterlife. Witness an elderly Jefferson to a young Thomas Jefferson Grotjan:

Jan. 10,1824 [...]"Adore God. Reverence and cherish your parents. Love your neighbor as yourself and your country more than life. Be just. Be true. Murmur not at the ways of Providence, and the life into which you have entered will be the passage to one of eternal and ineffable bliss."[...]"And if to the dead it is permitted to care for the things of this world, every action of your life will be under my regard. Farewell."[...]

http://www.lib.virginia.edu/old-press/97-98/letter.html

It is of course impossible to "prove/disprove" any point of view by cherry picking selected quotes. On a side note this thread is about FDR quotes if anyone wants to discuss T.J. quotes I suggest we do it here: http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/03/jefferson-quotes

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

When I see the reference to "the Master" what immediately came to mind was George W. Bush's remark that his favorite "philosopher" was Jesus. And W took some heat for that, from both the evangelicals (the son of god, merely a philosopher?) and the from the left (separation of church and state.)

I've just never heard "Master" used in my lifetime.

And when FDR says "he held that the Bible contained" I get the impression that TJ was a real Bible thumper, which he was not. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

But there is a concerted effort on the right to claim that the Founders were all evangelicals, or something like that.

Sorry to stray off topic.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I had forgotton W's remark. He did catch a lot of heat for that.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth, thinking about how stupid this planet's inhabitants are and always have been. We need god to solve our human relations problems about as much as we need Jesus to change the oil in our cars. If WE don't do it, it don't get done. That goes for peace AND war.

Politicians can appeal to the sky for whatever change they like, FDR included, but it's the actions of humans that effect real change. Given that fact, the blabbering about god, as a catalyst for human change, may be a validation to you, but it's something much more insidious to me. It takes the good deeds that you and I do and gives credit to the clouds. DANGEROUSLY INSANE!

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth, thinking about how stupid this planet's inhabitants are and always have been. We need god to solve our human relations problems about as much as we need Jesus to change the oil in our cars. If WE don't do it, it don't get done. That goes for peace AND war.

Politicians can appeal to the sky for whatever change they like, FDR included, but it's the actions of humans that effect real change. Given that fact, the blabbering about god, as a catalyst for human change, may be a validation to you, but it's something much more insidious to me. It takes the good deeds that you and I do and gives credit to the clouds. DANGEROUSLY INSANE!

Hey D, you gotta admit FDR had some righteous human actions that effected real change in spite of his vomit-inspiring prayer. As I said in an earlier post (post #21): American politicians tend to use and abuse religious rhetoric because such a large percentage of their electorate are religious. That damned 1st Amendment simultaneously restricts religion and allows it to flourish.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

"In the same way, there are two theories of prosperity and of well-being: The first theory is that if we make the rich richer, somehow they will let a part of their prosperity trickle down to the rest of us. The second theory — and I suppose this goes back to the days of Noah — I won't say Adam and Eve, because they had a less complicated situation — but, at least, back in the days of the flood, there was the theory that if we make the average of mankind comfortable and secure, their prosperity will rise upward, just as yeast rises up, through the ranks."

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Campaign Address at Detroit, Michigan," October 2, 1932. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=88393.

A reference to "trickle down" economics in 1932.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm
Quote Laborisgood:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth, thinking about how stupid this planet's inhabitants are and always have been. We need god to solve our human relations problems about as much as we need Jesus to change the oil in our cars. If WE don't do it, it don't get done. That goes for peace AND war.

Politicians can appeal to the sky for whatever change they like, FDR included, but it's the actions of humans that effect real change. Given that fact, the blabbering about god, as a catalyst for human change, may be a validation to you, but it's something much more insidious to me. It takes the good deeds that you and I do and gives credit to the clouds. DANGEROUSLY INSANE!

Hey D, you gotta admit FDR had some righteous human actions that effected real change in spite of his vomit-inspiring prayer. As I said in an earlier post (post #21): American politicians tend to use and abuse religious rhetoric because such a large percentage of their electorate are religious. That damned 1st Amendment simultaneously restricts religion and allows it to flourish.

The prayer did nothing. It was and is a human-invented placebo. Only god's love, as in a human action, can effect change. Even when FDR pandered to christ-o-holics seventy years ago, nothing got better until someone DID something. I think our species is pretty pathetic that we can't find a logical, earthly reason to be good to each other and have to wait around for someone to threaten our immortal soul before we'll act. I hate to think we're that horrible that we only respond to threats.

It's not a "damned" first amendment, Laborisgood, it is not that we have the right to threaten each other in the afterlife that matters to our species. It is that we actually use it to such a counterproductive end. To continually allow the good works of men to be claimed as miracles performed by god instead of the proof of the potential good of mankind is to be self-dismissive, not spiritual. If groveling to the supernatural ever becomes a valid substitute for real action, we're screwed.That politicians treat it as valid is a crime.

Thank god so many DON'T believe. We'd never get anything done.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote Laborisgood:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth, thinking about how stupid this planet's inhabitants are and always have been. We need god to solve our human relations problems about as much as we need Jesus to change the oil in our cars. If WE don't do it, it don't get done. That goes for peace AND war.

Politicians can appeal to the sky for whatever change they like, FDR included, but it's the actions of humans that effect real change. Given that fact, the blabbering about god, as a catalyst for human change, may be a validation to you, but it's something much more insidious to me. It takes the good deeds that you and I do and gives credit to the clouds. DANGEROUSLY INSANE!

Hey D, you gotta admit FDR had some righteous human actions that effected real change in spite of his vomit-inspiring prayer. As I said in an earlier post (post #21): American politicians tend to use and abuse religious rhetoric because such a large percentage of their electorate are religious. That damned 1st Amendment simultaneously restricts religion and allows it to flourish.

The prayer did nothing. It was and is a human-invented placebo. Only god's love, as in a human action, can effect change. Even when FDR pandered to christ-o-holics seventy years ago, nothing got better until someone DID something. I think our species is pretty pathetic that we can't find a logical, earthly reason to be good to each other and have to wait around for someone to threaten our immortal soul before we'll act. I hate to think we're that horrible that we only respond to threats.

It's not a "damned" first amendment, Laborisgood, it is not that we have the right to threaten each other in the afterlife that matters to our species. It is that we actually use it to such a counterproductive end. To continually allow the good works of men to be claimed as miracles performed by god instead of the proof of the potential good of mankind is to be self-dismissive, not spiritual. If groveling to the supernatural ever becomes a valid substitute for real action, we're screwed.That politicians treat it as valid is a crime.

Thank god so many DON'T believe. We'd never get anything done.

But FDR did DO something. Perhaps the prayer was just pandering to the people. FDR did DO what had to be done in spite of the political use (or abuse) of religion in the process. You gotta give FDR some credit.

For the record D, I love the 1st Amendment more than anyone. "Damned" was used facetiously.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Laborisgood:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote Laborisgood:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth, thinking about how stupid this planet's inhabitants are and always have been. We need god to solve our human relations problems about as much as we need Jesus to change the oil in our cars. If WE don't do it, it don't get done. That goes for peace AND war.

Politicians can appeal to the sky for whatever change they like, FDR included, but it's the actions of humans that effect real change. Given that fact, the blabbering about god, as a catalyst for human change, may be a validation to you, but it's something much more insidious to me. It takes the good deeds that you and I do and gives credit to the clouds. DANGEROUSLY INSANE!

Hey D, you gotta admit FDR had some righteous human actions that effected real change in spite of his vomit-inspiring prayer. As I said in an earlier post (post #21): American politicians tend to use and abuse religious rhetoric because such a large percentage of their electorate are religious. That damned 1st Amendment simultaneously restricts religion and allows it to flourish.

The prayer did nothing. It was and is a human-invented placebo. Only god's love, as in a human action, can effect change. Even when FDR pandered to christ-o-holics seventy years ago, nothing got better until someone DID something. I think our species is pretty pathetic that we can't find a logical, earthly reason to be good to each other and have to wait around for someone to threaten our immortal soul before we'll act. I hate to think we're that horrible that we only respond to threats.

It's not a "damned" first amendment, Laborisgood, it is not that we have the right to threaten each other in the afterlife that matters to our species. It is that we actually use it to such a counterproductive end. To continually allow the good works of men to be claimed as miracles performed by god instead of the proof of the potential good of mankind is to be self-dismissive, not spiritual. If groveling to the supernatural ever becomes a valid substitute for real action, we're screwed.That politicians treat it as valid is a crime.

Thank god so many DON'T believe. We'd never get anything done.

But FDR did DO something. Perhaps the prayer was just pandering to the people. FDR did DO what had to be done in spite of the political use (or abuse) of religion in the process. You gotta give FDR some credit.

For the record D, I love the 1st Amendment more than anyone. "Damned" was used facetiously.

I know you were being facetious and I know FDR was a great president. We didn't pray our way out of the republican depression, though.That part of human behavior during that time or this one does not effect the economy at all. If it served any purpose it was to sustain hope in a people who could have found a better hope sustaining force in a rational plan for the future of mankind that doesn't involve massive war and death and suffering.

Like I said, the first amendment gives people the right to cast judgement upon the immortal souls of others, if they want to. It is a basic right that is used by many for an ego-centric gratification, and I still wouldn't take that away from them. The right of conscience is vital to a free society, even if people want to take that gift and piss it away on speculations and finger pointing about what happens after you are no longer able to exercise any rights, much less speech. Valuable time is wasted with each "amen".

Here we are together on this planet, in this solar system, in this galaxy, blah blah. We can agree on that. We just can't agree on whether or not it's OK for people to interject fantastical, regional myths into our discussions of the reality of our situation as humans and Americans. They will never have to worry that I will suddenly reference an invisible, arbitrary religious force, that they doubt, in our dealings, but I can't trust them to do the same. That's the bottom line. They know this condition exists between us and they don't think I deserve the same consideration that I give them. There is an inherent lack of equality in a country when one group reserves the right to invoke beings that have no context in our shared experience and demand that those with no claim to an exceptional, supernatural "reality" honor theirs. It isn't fair that people think their spiritual quest can tread upon mine because theirs invokes the "all mighty", a force so strong and so localized within the spirit of their god that it trumps my right to exist outside it. Do you see how insulting that idea is to me?

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

Why are our "greatest" Presidents the ones who get the most citizens killed? FDR was great for the New Deal and attempting to get us out of the 19th Century, but WWII? Demanding unconditional surrender from psychopaths?

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Good point Chilidog, let's not forget Lincoln ..... his war had our citizens on both sides of the carnage.

D-Natured, I do see how insulting religion is to you, but you did allude to the not-so-insulting side of religion for the purpose of sustaining hope through difficult circumstances. I have strong disdain for hateful people who do so in the name of religion. Perhaps as strong as you, but I just don't lump all of religion into one pile so much as I lump hateful people into one pile.

FDR did offer a national prayer and he was instrumental in entering WWII which killed many US citizens, BUT he did help defeat Hitler who was possibly the most hateful man of all time. You take the good with the bad. Much bad has certainly been done in the name of religion, but also much good.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Was FDR really instrumental in entering WWII because he responded to an attack on Pearl Harbor? Would any other president done it differently? I would ask the same about Lincoln. Would any president have done things differently considering the way things played out? Would any president have done differently than G.W.B? Somehow I think that is debateable.

I'll agree than presidents of either party of capable of terrible decisions but sometimes there is more behind the story than just decideing to go to war or not.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am

FDR and both did what was right and necessary. However, Chilidog did have a point w/ how "great" leaders tend to have many dead citizens attached to them.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Laborisgood:

FDR and both did what was right and necessary. However, Chilidog did have a point w/ how "great" leaders tend to have many dead citizens attached to them.

This is very true but I also acknowledge the fact that every great leader drank water as well. I also wonder how many MORE dead citizens might have on the history ledger if we didn't have those "great" leaders. Especially in the case of WWII. Without the particular leadership we had at the time we might be having this discussion in German.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am
Quote Laborisgood:

Good point Chilidog, let's not forget Lincoln ..... his war had our citizens on both sides of the carnage.

D-Natured, I do see how insulting religion is to you, but you did allude to the not-so-insulting side of religion for the purpose of sustaining hope through difficult circumstances. I have strong disdain for hateful people who do so in the name of religion. Perhaps as strong as you, but I just don't lump all of religion into one pile so much as I lump hateful people into one pile.[/quote]

Religion gives the religious the right to discriminate. I claim no similar supernatural justification. That's my point. There is an inherent inequality when one group of people reserve the right to claim such supernatural justification and another doesn't.

And, for any who would suggest I adopt one of the existing competing traditions, I would say that the answer to a problem shouldn't involve becoming part of that problem.

FDR did offer a national prayer and he was instrumental in entering WWII which killed many US citizens, BUT he did help defeat Hitler who was possibly the most hateful man of all time. You take the good with the bad. Much bad has certainly been done in the name of religion, but also much good.

The thing is, religion doesn't brand itself as something with a "bad" part. The list of ingredients doesn't show anything toxic to humanity, yet a large percentage of consumers of these products inevitably turn into raving assholes. What's worse is that they treat their toxic religion and their attitude as unquestionable under first amendment freedoms. The first amendment doesn't give us the right not to make sense or be jerks to each other, but that's how it's been used.

The defense that much good has been done in the name of religion is exactly what I was talking about. The good deeds of men have been co-opted by the users of a toxic product, who claim that those good deeds are the only natural result of their product's use. This excuses inhumanity by putting the "good" stamp on the bad things that religion does and it also legitimizes the positive work of non-theists as the inescapable puppetry of Yaweh.

It's funny to me that the "religion does a lot of good" argument is rejected as a judgement method for humans. It takes only one sin to get an individual thrown into their Hell, but the church itself should be judged by humanity according to some weighted system of good and bad? Or are we allowed to judge it at all? For people, we get defined by the worst thing we've ever done but the church doesn't deserve to be similarly judged. Bullshit!

Any organization that has enjoyed such a vacation from the same moral judgement that the rest of us humans endure daily will find itself corrupted by its immunity from said judgement. Those who act above the law are doomed to become criminals. That individual criminality is an indictment of individuals (and their souls) but group criminality isn't an indictment of groups is logically inconsistent. The church could have murdered a fraction of those it actually has and would still be illegitimate. The numbers of victims could be far less than they are and the church would still be an immoral actor in the world. Furthermore, all of the good deeds done by the fearful followers of supernatural salesmen could have been delivered, just as easily, from a simple humanist perspective. Instead, their good has to bear the false, corporate label of "God LLC". Their deeds are tainted by the REALITY of what has been done by those who serve the same god in different ways. God is such an abstract thing, though, that no real measure of Him exists. In that way, He fits into the moral voids of lunatics as well as He does that of saints.

If we don't take the magic out of our decision making processes, we will excuse much more war, oppression and suffering. Let the magic be that beings who are free to do bad things, don't. Good is good enough when it heals a sick person or feeds a starving person. What is bad is obvious enough to any who witness or endure it. Neither need be a merit badge for us to wear around in Heaven. Let's take some responsibility and make some moral judgements for ourselves. Let's quit blaming/thanking god for everything.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

You can always kill somebody tomorrow if you can't resolve your conflict today.

I've heard that it's "wrong" to judge a society in the past, based on our perspective today. I disagree. The notion that vengeance should be tempered is millenia-old.

And there were probably legitimate concerns that German scientists were getting close to developing atomic weapons (because we were getting close.) So the carnage in Europe 1944-45 might be less offensive.

Everything related to Japan after Midway is vengeance, IMO.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote mjolnir:

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Prayer on D-Day," June 6, 1944. [...]"And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen." Part of a great Prayer offered up by a great President on one of the most momentous days in world history.

With every pious syllable you repeat, I vomit a little in my mouth,[...]

Please don't vomit in your mouth, I hear it is bad for your teeth.

'I say with Lincoln, "Having thus chosen our course, without guile and with pure purpose, let us renew our trust in God and go forward without fear and with manly hearts."'

APP Note: In the Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, this document is sub-titled, "A Concert of Action, Based on a Fair and Just Concert of Interests."
Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Address at Jefferson Day Dinner in St. Paul, Minnesota," April 18, 1932. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=88409 

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

"I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, do set aside and appoint Thursday, the thirtieth day of November, 1933, to be a Day of Thanksgiving for all our people.

May we on that day in our churches and in our homes give humble thanks for the blessings bestowed upon us during the year past by Almighty God.

May we recall the courage of those who settled a wilderness, the vision of those who founded the Nation, the steadfastness of those who in every succeeding generation have fought to keep pure the ideal of equality of opportunity and hold clear the goal of mutual help in time of prosperity as in time of adversity.

May we ask guidance in more surely learning the ancient truth that greed and selfishness and striving for undue riches can never bring lasting happiness or good to the individual or to his neighbors.

May we be grateful for the passing of dark days; for the new spirit of dependence one on another; for the closer unity of all parts of our wide land; for the greater friendship between employers and those who toil; for a clearer knowledge by all Nations that we seek no conquests and ask only honorable engagements by all peoples to respect the lands and rights of their neighbors; for the brighter day to which we can win through by seeking the help of God in a more unselfish striving for the common bettering of mankind.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT"

Happy Thanksgiving.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

Sigh, all the Sacred Mystery of Reality asks is that we not accept any false claimants to realism and that we express our interdependence along with our individuality in moral relationships of mutuality.

OK, if religion has done a lot of bad things, so has lack of religion. It is not so much that religion is toxic as it is that life involves living and nobody has the existential dance steps down before we go onto the dance floor. In real life, we learn our heritage, we explore ourselves and our world, then we "forget it all and blow." "Just do it" is about what we do after all the preparation and practice. It is when it all comes together.

Whatever ties it all together for you is your theology, your universal field theory, your narrative. The challenge of faith is to be yourself, who you really are, and not some projection of established authority and enforced 'realities.' It is all about intellectual and moral integrity, about doing the truth in love at the same time and being part of the healing and joy of life. It involves paying a price when confronting the "principalities and powers of this world." These false 'realities' have a lot of money and guns propping them up and terrorizing people into obedience. The power of love and justice in conflict with demonic powers does not fit binary stereotypes or our moral demands. There is a history of martyrs in this "god" story. It is complicated like human nature and reality are.

As to FDR and Obama, I tend to avoid direct historical analogies because the times really are different even though much of the same cycle is present. FDR had no Empire to run. He was just creating it in the Pacific and ending isolationism with regard to Europe. BTW, there is a lot of evidence that FDR knew the Japanese were headed toward Hawaii, and he certainly knew that our naval presence in the China Sea threatened their essential oil supply route to Indonesia. The very active China Lobby was rabid about the Japanese Empire which earned a lot of contempt for sure.

Then there are all those social movement veterans FDR could call upon to serve because they had popular support as well as vision. What Van Jones has to be about is a very different kind of organizing, and what has been framed as our national discourse for decades has not given the public a decent appreciation of the economics involved. FDR surfed a historical wave of Progressive action beginning decades before him. Can we give Obama anything like that wave? He is supposed to be a decent surfer.

I had to laugh at the idea that FDR was freer to be progressive because he was wealthy and Obama was just beginning to make any big bucks. For those who are certain that Obama lacks compassion for poor people or single mothers, I think you have to rethink your conclusion here. Whatever reasons he has for compromises, it is more likely to be about getting something rather than nothing where we are demanding more. He may be guilty of gradualism and short on confrontation, but he is not out to make as much money as he could easily have done going private and corporate.

But going back to religion and FDR, I think FDR in this instance is dealing with the cultural Christianity of America rather than with religion per se. The great WASP Mainline brought Protestant religious culture in their label. Manifest Destiny can be either the doctrine of Providence or an interpretation of historical forces and meaning. In either form it leads to a toxic sense of "exceptionalism" and to the justification of conquest and domination of others in the name of "Good." However, the people FDR was talking to in the Methodist Church were also the leaders of the peace and justice movements in America, and we have no idea what the churches meant in our age of the vanished from public space Mainline.

We, on the Left of Center, lack the religious institutions in the political mix the Right presumes today. In the first half of the 20th Century, the National Council of Churches and the social justice ministries of the Mainline denominations were powerful players supporting the New Deal and a peaceful vision of world citizenship against the crusaders for war. No question that much of what was good was exploited by the imperialists as the Myth of America the Good Empire has replaced the democratic leader of a free world coalition of equals. FDR was speaking the language of a major constituency of support for the New Deal in this speech.

Exceptionalism is a toxic concept. It is not about what makes America special or what it means to be an American. We could do ourselves a big favor by returning to the idea of Creation Stories being about "the People" universally. Our American 'destiny' can be our internal discourse about who we are rather than a warrant to do unto others what "we think" God intends. Every "nation" is special in the sense that it has its own narrative to work out, and that narrative ought to place "the people" in the middle of the earth at the place where important things happen. If your national narrative is about being a shithole with nothing happening, you are screwed. Fortunately, human beings have found ways to embrace where they live in an amazing diversity.

What makes America different and even special is ours to explore and develop. We have this Age of Reason beginning with a strong dose of Anglo-Saxon religious and racial mythology. We get a continuing stream of European influences through immigration while we go through a terrible process of unresolved conflict dealing with race and slavery. We conquer a continent in the belief that the primitives barely rated human classification in our taxonomy. We play out the Reformation in our taking of the Mexican lands for our American West, protecting democracy from Papism.

Triumphalism, along with the bankster economy and Rail Barons leads us into the 20th Century where we see the Age of Greed collapse into the Middle Class American Dream of the post-Depression. GI Bill, WWII after the collapse of the Crusade in WWI. Critics say the New Deal is only possible because of war. Ironically untrue, but here comes the MIC anyway. It will put the New Deal in the shadow of Empire, and as we see today, when the Empire fails it will not cash in its own chips if it can shift the costs to the vulnerable.

We get an increasingly diverse America with no dominant demographic "Mainline" anymore. It drives the White Christians crazy because they have this narrative of their own destiny and we don't fit in it. We get an American Empire based in entropic energy and narratives of delusion, and while Christianity is mixed up in it, it would be ridiculous to pin what has happened in America to the influence of religion instead of what pervades American culture and identity. Here one would find a union of Christians and atheist critics of religion about how religion and Christianity were being misused and perverted in the damage and toxicity of real issues.

I am not here to convert anyone to religion. I would like to sharpen the criticism of religion to what is wrong with it in practice rather than the nature of religion because I find the latter blind to the way we think and imagine whether it be science or religion. I reject the idea that we are supposed to agree on the religious rhetoric or the "under God" addition to the Pledge of Allegiance. As a theologian and a Christian, I cringe when politicians call for God to bless America. In addition to being public piety and false, such rhetoric supposes that God really does not exist or does not care what we are doing because we are His special favorite and our violence is blessed. As a citizen, I also cringe because such rhetoric feeds this national myopia and narcissism.

On the other hand, we get prophets like Chris Hedges who depends upon there being some worth and meaning to his voice out there in the wilderness speaking truth to power. He has every reason to question God and to wrestle with His Word. He does not tolerate our favorite myths and flattering lies. He does not tell us what we want to hear. To call him a Prophet of God is to affirm his real world authenticity, not to brand him with some magic insight or revelation other than what is utterly real to us as well. No false gods, no false realities, and no empty pieties. But something more than a secularist at work.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

"And so let us make the spirit of Christmas of 1934 that of courage and unity. It is the way to greater happiness and wellbeing. That is, I believe, an important part of what the Maker of Christmas would have it mean.

In this sense, the Scriptures admonish us to be strong and of good courage, to fear not, to dwell together in Unity.

I wish you one and all, here and everywhere, a very, very Merry Christmas."

Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Christmas Greeting to the Nation.," December 24, 1934. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14799.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15379&st=st.+patrick&st1=

"Yes, I am always thrilled by St. Patrick's Day, the day that Irishmen the world over garner to their hearts and souls their tenderest memories, recall the ancient glories of Erin and renew their allegiance to the great Apostle of fifteen hundred years ago. Through all the vicissitudes of these fifteen centuries, through tramplings and burnings, through war and slaughter, in times of plenty and in times of famine—Ireland, and the descendants of Ireland, have been faithful to the heritage of St. Patrick."

"Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Radio Greeting on St. Patrick's Day. Warm Springs, Ga.," March 17, 1937. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project."

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 12:42 pm

Currently Chatting

Green World Rising

In two previous videos narrated by Leonard DiCaprio and available over at GreenWorldRising.org, we’ve seen the dangers that global warming and climate change present for our planet and the human race.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system