Displaying 1 - 10 of 36 Comments
Dutch -- I am not suggesting in anyway that racism is an inherited trait. But as humans have evolved from our hunter gatherer days, certain traits became more dominant in some individuals through natural selection. The emotion of fear, for example, is much stronger in some individuals than others. Is it fear of the after life that makes so many individuals succumb to religious doctrine?
For mankind's survival certain physical and biological traits including intelligence evolved. The fact that we had "hate" long before biblical times and that genocide is nothing new in today's worldly conflicts, suggest to me that some people are more susceptible to "fear of the other" than others. In modern civilized cultures we have learned to be tolerant of each other and have passed laws to protect people's rights.
When we were born, we did not hate and we were not racists. Those traits were indeed learned, but some people learned more easily than others.
Interesting topic Dutch. Society today largely opposes racism in its many forms, but we also have to acknowledge that we have extremists who fear "the other". If we were to go even much further back in history, we would find many examples of fear of the other in the bible where outright genocidal actions against other ethnic groups were a part of their everyday society. But the bible contradicts itself with many other references that oppose such actions. Different authors at different times with different views. It's why we have so many different denominations of Christianity.
However, we could go even further back in time and speculate why we have traces of Neanderthal DNA in our systems. Did some early humans accept and interbreed with the Neanderthals while others feared them so much that they wiped them out in genocidal actions? Just some far out critical thinking about the origins of our diversity and the way we react to our DNA driven emotions.
Trump's first seven months in office has indeed been a kakistocracy, a government by the least qualified or unprincipled persons. Bannon certainly had a lead role, but a fish rots from the head down.
It's not only "Lyin TedCruz". It's the whole bunch of Republican opponents who ran against him with the exception of Lindsay Graham. "Little Marco" and his wife also had dinner at the White House. "Look at that face" Carla Fiorina met with Trump at Trump Tower looking for a job. She praised his "executive abilities". Sleepy Ben Carson, came crawling to Trump and landed a job after brown nosing him. Even Mitt Romney, who once rightly called Romney a "phony", had dinner with Trump and obligingly praised him afterward. All these Republicans and more came back to kiss his ring...or worse. It's why 88 percent of Republicans approve of Trump's performance... he's secretly admired for doing what he is doing. The "locker room talk" further endears him to the jock crowd. Many of the women who support him are already submissive to their husbands...evangelical women especially. The authoritarian bully has a certain appeal to the authoritarian follower.
While it is uncertain of how long Trump will last in the job before being removed, Republicans for now are supporting him as it is their golden opportunity to undue Obama legislation and enact their own for the benefit of corporations and the rich. The only thing that can really stop him is divisions within the Republican Party itself brought on in part by massive protests. Lesson learned -- when Democrats don't vote, elections have consequences.
Donald Trump is taking notice. His latest tweet: "The so-called angry crowds in home districts of some Republicans are actually, in numerous cases, planned out by liberal activists. Sad!" Keep up the good work liberal activists...you are getting to Trump's head.
One can certainly argue whether Trump won the election or Clinton lost the election. It is a combination of both considering how tight the race was. It is a fact that Obama's base did not turn out in the numbers needed for a victory for Clinton, They didn't vote...or they voted for a 3rd party candidate. On the other hand, Trump's base turned out in big numbers for him, but his base of support was not that much different than Romney's in 2012. Republicans vote with their tribes. Democrats apply purity tests looking for the perfect candidate and sometimes they stay home.
Before writing this article, I spent time in Mormon blogs reading the differing views of Mormons on this issue. It would seem those opposed to MoTab participating are very passionate about adhering to the church's teachings and that participation represents hypocrisy. Others argue that the church is political neutral and that MoTab should participate. The MoTab website itself has zero comments -- you can read into that what you want, but that was the first place I looked. I like unofficial Mormon blogs where Mormons can speak freely.
Here is an excerpt from the petition circulating amongst those Mormons opposed to their choir participating in the inauguration:
Petition: Mormon Tabernacle Choir Should NOT Perform at Trump Inauguration
"We believe the incoming president has demonstrated sexist, racist, misogynistic, and xenophobic behaviors that do not align with the principles and teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
"The Church's participation will harm this spectacularly talented and beloved choir's image, misrepresent the diversity of Mormons worldwide, and sends the wrong message to LDS children as they will perceive the Church's participation as endorsement of a man whose words and actions do not align with our values."
Displaying 1 - 10 of 36 Comments