politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The fun part is all the people who are gonna come out with hot takes like “what does this ’pope’ guy know about being a good Christian? He could learn a thing or two from Trump.”
We’re doomed.
Someone: says a true thing
AP Wire Service: puts “true thing” in quotes
That's how attributions work. They're in quotes so we can distinguish what he actually said from the general summary of events that the article is providing.
True, but it’s also used to distance the article (“the authority”) from the truth of the word or set of words. The wire service then doesn’t have to commit to (in this case) saying people referenced in the story are replacing religion with ideologies.
Scare quotes.
The ultra conservative Catholics (and “evangelicals” which is what we used to call “tv preachers” but is now so mainstream they have their own Protestant designation,) HAVE replaced faith with ideology. But even if that’s debatable, the word ideology is perfectly acceptable - the quotes are not just superfluous, they’re there to limit the impact of the statement. The statement already said it’s a quote, it already said Who said it, it went further by using the word “accused” instead of “said” (now there’s a word choice - is that how attribution works? No. No it is not.), and then put scare quotes on “ideologies”.
Take out “accused”, put the whole quote in, and I have no problem with it. They butchered it in this way for a reason, and that reason has little to do with the accepted guide for attribution.
I mean, that's how quotes work, yes. I agree with your sentiment, but that's how all news organizations do it.
Right but there’s not a need to quote it if it’s a true single word.
One man’s faith is another man’s ideology.
Ultimately, the problem is religion. Religion should not be part of politics.
Joshua ben Joseph was a religious leader who preached nonviolent resistance against the state. He was eventually executed publicly by the state for this. Do you think He was wrong to bring religion into politics?
If you mean jesus, then yes, desperately. I like stained glass and organ music as much as the next, but how amazing would it be if christianity had never happened
Which one?
I’m gonna go ahead and say “absolutely not”, though, considering that [I assume you’re talking about the Christian man-god] was largely executed for his religious teachings, and the “crowds” that followed him, disrupting their control of the populace.
He might have been executed by the Roman’s, but only after a trial by the Jewish religious leaders - and only because the Roman’s started frowning at all of the other Jewish mystics they were leaving knifed in the ditches. (And that was just… untidy.)
I’m not sure why you think that’s a gotcha. I imagine the actual mystic behind those stories would be quite surprised by all the things they say he said and done.