Is Bush Religious?

The current Village Voice has a cover article on Bush's connection to the apocalyptic Religious Right (The Jesus Landing Pad) http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein.php

Bush isn't religious, is he? I keep hearing that he's a born again Christian. But he's not really any more spiritual than a beagle. Seems to me it's all a Texas politician's trick.

Is anybody really taken in by this act?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

He's an ignorant, superstitious goober, so...I guess.

He's not religious like Paul Tillich and Martin Buber were, but I guess his brand of pap is tecnically classified as "belief."

By that test, Bush is about as religious as the chrysanthemum on my front porch.

No offense, but I think you operate from the given that religion is good, or being religious is good, or something like that. I completely disagree, and especially in the case of Christianity. Although many of the precepts are good, and much of the emotional/spiritual draw is too, it has many nifty points for the selfish creep, too. Salvation being a selfish thing, many only focus on what it takes to save their own asses.

To the more selfish version of Fundamentalist who truly believes, other people aren't your problem because god will sort all that out.

Just as I realize that many non-believers are just self-serving dicks, you need to embrace the reality that many believers are users of the worst sort. They'll fleece you at the drop of a hat and feel just fine 'cuz they're straight with the big whosey-what.

Junior fits the mold for a certain type of fundamentalist: not too bright, needing a fixed and ultra-simplistic world with no mysteries, and having a mean streak a mile wide. He's supremely selfish, greedy and perpetually feels betrayed; as such, he knows he's better than you are, and he deserves even more than he has.

He's not the nice side of religion, but I buy his belief without much doubt at all. He's cocksure to such a degree that I actually think he believes with less of a whiff of a doubt than Ashcroft; Ashcroft has that twisted self-hating extreme Protestant paranoia that also includes some doubt of god's existence and a tortured fear that if he does, he doesn't like you and you have to work harder to measure up.

From my jaundiced view, religion is more bad than good, and although this bigotry feeds my assumption of his belief, I think it also stands to the evidence.

yeah right?

Not sure I fully understand your comment. :)

That's basically the gist. Trying to point out pitfalls of faith is an act of hatred and ridicule, and anyone who would even try is a rabid cur unworthy of social contact.

Such knee-jerk reactions are completely justified, though, because god is good, and those who believe are morally and ethically better, regardless of their actions. Belief is better. That's all there is to it: god is good. Timothy McVeigh was a more human, socialized, warm, loving person than I'll ever be because he believed and asked for last rites; he died a good Catholic boy. If somehow it doesn't jibe that a non-believer is nicer than someone like McVeigh, to many believers, it's simply because he "didn't truly believe".

Yes, it's true: god is good; it's just as true as the undeniable fact that there is such a thing. Bush can't truly believe, because he's bad. Ug: god good, Bush bad; me smashem Bush.

Religious faith of this sort, with the unquestioned (and EXTREMELY self-congratulatory) premise of moral superiority strips the mind of its ability to reason, and is a form of bigotry. Don't be upset, though; everyone has his/her prejudices.

Sorry Az, you're a rational person; just thought I'd give a hand here.

Religious belief to the defensive is best summed up by Nigel Tufnel's famous line: "But...this one goes to eleven."

Last time, I didn't mean to offend, and was truly trying to explain foreign concepts from the other side; this time I'm being a snit.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must go run amok.

or rather your explanation of your understanding...or maybe both. I will agree with you that the PRACTICE of Christianity is HUGELY lacking in many who claim the faith and your description in that case is spot on. But the religious practices of some do not define the religion. Unfortunately, Christianity has been hijacked by a few and used to their own benefit (political/monetary/power) and the twisting of the teaching of Christ are often still perceived as Christian. So many people have weak and unquestioning minds that this is easy to perpetrate on the masses.

I don't believe the teaching of Christ should lead anyone to the places that some take it. The thing is, if people don't know the actual teachings of Christ, then it is very easy for someone to come along and cherrypick the scriptures and make it sound just about any way they want...to their own gratification. Christianity is not a selfish religion...it is supposed to be about becoming closer to your God and thereby be able to model God to the rest of the world as a means of spreading the Word and saving others...not just yourself. You don't have to believe in it, but thinking it is a selfish religion shows that you, too, have been corrupted by those who would twist the religion to suit their own desires.

Sorry for the longwindedness of post...
theProdigal

on edit : to make it even MORE confusing

Even with the bible claiming to tell us what Jesus taught there is a great deal of room for questioning what he said.

The Jesus seminar wound up evicerating the bible when it tried to examine it for clarity on what Jesus actually said. Their intent was to affirm what they could safely point to as the real teachings of Jesus and wound up having to dismiss the vast majority of the claims.

but in looking through the gospels and quotes attributed to him, it amazes me what passes for Christianity these days. I guess a huge part of the problem is that people spend too much time analyzing...you spend enough time analyzing anything and eventually it will come aroud to mean exactly what you want it to...

theProdigal

is hardly new. It's been going on, off and on, for at least 1600 years.

I'm not saying Christianity is inherently bad. But I am disagreeing with the notion that it is inherently good. Like any 1900-year-old collection of disparate stories it can be used to justify all kinds of things. My assertion is that one can sincerely believe they are following Christ when they commit acts of evil. Just as you say those people are not "true Christians", they say the same thing about you because you don't advocate stoning homosexuals to death. It's your word against theirs. It may be clear to you that your version of Christianity is the correct one but it certainly isn't clear to me.

but the words of Christ (at least the ones we have and assuming you believe they are true) are pretty clear. Your assertion is correct though...people who have not read the scriptures can be lead to believe that Christ said all sorts of stuff.

For people that justify their crap by claiming that it is OK by Christian standards can usually quite easily be knocked flat on their collective ass with one or two simple citations of chapter and verse.

Do people pervert Christianity? Hell yes...but there are bad Muslims, Buddhists, Jews...take yer pick. I will give you that people tend to pervert Christianity with much more success...

theProdigal

and the interpretation of those words by Paul. And I don't think the message is as clear as you say it is. People of Bush's ilk do read the Bible, but they read the whole thing, including the Old Testament, and view the whole thing as the literal word of God.

but I can read the Godfather and prove the Fredo was in charge of the Five Families and orchestrated the hit on his father...hell the fact that he sat and cried like a baby after the hit only happened because he knew his father was still alive.

Just because some nitwit(s) interpret something one way does not make it so. I suppose I do have to give in on one point...the practise of a religion does a religion make. However, I do not believe it was what Christ came to teach us...and I can usually prove my point pretty well when people are misinterpretting what is written.

theProdigal

This is admittedly cherry picking. But its in there.
From Matthew
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me

but you admitted cherry picking and that is the crux of my argument. If you take verses out of the whole...you can trick someone who is un-read on the topic and make them believe Jesus said just about anything...

And those verses have proven to be very true...

theProdigal

According to the religion that Bush himself professes he falls far short.

I'm of two minds on Bush's religious faith. On the one hand, it's easy for me to believe that he simply speaks in code to appeal to fundamentalists. On the other hand, we know that he flees from serious thought like Superman from kryptonite, so it's also easy for me to believe that Bush's faith is real but every bit as simpleminded and unexamined as all his other ideas.

But in either case, the fact remains that according to the very faith that Bush claims to hold, he is a bad Christian.

my chrysanthemums are very religious and so are my dogs.

Some dogs are more spiritual than others. And some aren't spiritual at all, they're just dogs.

They spend their nights awake comtemplating the existance of dog.

It kinda goes with being a narcissist, which he CLEARLY is.

On the other hand, I don't think it's far-fetched at all to surmise that his religiosity is nothing more than a cynical charade designed to hold the loyalty of religious right.

Either way -- self-delusion or manipulation -- it's bogus.

sw

Just like Torquemada and Cotton Mather were religious and Osama bin Laden is religious. Religious does not necessarily mean "good" and it's time we dropped that ignorant prejudice.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

What do you suppose he was saying? You seem to be reading something into it. I will take the chance and try to interpret what he was saying and ask you if you still have an issue with his statement.

There is an air of moral superiority associated with those of religious persuasion. There is conversely a preception that those who are without a religious calling or even in opposition to religion are morally bankrupt.

Yet there are ample examples of religious individuals exhibiting behaviour that can only be called reprehensible if not out right criminal. It was in the name of a religion that the WTC was brought down. It was while presenting themself as morally unreproachable members of the clergy that many preists (not just catholics) have abused their trust. It is by way of a direct rejection of our progressing societies morality that many in the religious right reject the rights of individuals.

The point he was trying to make is that simply being religious is no indication of ones morality or ones willingness to accept societies definitions of morality. And that those who are not religious are not morally bankrupt.

where's the prejudice in that? Or are you here to defend the reputation of the Inquisition?

Now that belief may be passing through one helluva filter. But I worry that he really does think he is communing with god.

here in the bible belt.

he may not fit into other people's idea of what a christian is...but Shrub is definitely religious. He's also a fundie..and an extremists...he's the type of religious that fed the crusades and the destruction of "native" peoples.....the type that preached slavery was god mandated.

and he's the type of religious many of us are afraid of.that we hold in scorn and contempt...and with very good reason..

Shrub and those like him...as evidenced throughout history...have embraced a good idea that's been corrupted by the very human devices of avarice, hate and ingorance....but there's no doubting the very real belief that went into their crimes against humanity in gods name.
that's what is so scary about people like Shrub...they really believe they are "living right" and "according to god's teachings"

and the teaching of Christ? You bet.

Intolerant, prejudiced, selfish, arrogant, murderous, ...

just now, on this very thing. the absurdity of pointing to him saying christian. let me count the ways he does opposite, as he spews the words.

pbs last nite, both boys 6 and 9 came running to me saying commercial said god liked bush as president. no way i said, no way. the proceeded to tell me about commercial, bush praying and thanking god for being president. ok i say, that isnt god saying..........no yells oldest, then someone came on and said god like bush as president, or something

i didnt see it and boys get things wrong, they bottomline things, and dont always see the play in words, but still..........

i am going to a southern living party friday nite, possibly, with a lot of jr leagurers. will be interesting to see what happens. really surprised this friend would invite me, as harsh as i have been and anal in talking politics, religion and bush the last year. especially if there is wine. and there had better be wine doing one of these things

We are talking about Jesus, aren't we?

with Fundamentalist belief? It's about taking parts of Paul's letters, a little bit of the Old Testament, Revelations (which really makes it easy to make stuff up), accounts after the resurrection (nothing before since what Jesus said before doesn't count or easily fit with the new religion they've created), and fashion something they can believe in and keep any prejudice's, desires for wealth, ignoring the poor, etc. It's a pick and choose "literalism".

Religion is his drug...

imho so are lots of people taken in by any religion

"Is anybody really taken in by this act?"


I'm not in the least, taken in by his phony baloney religious "born again" bushit! His "born again" status is for votes and votes only. Always was!

I think Bush really believes he's doing his god's will, which makes him even more dangerous. It's why he can't even conceive of the idea that he might be wrong about something.

fruits, I do think he will come up a bit short.
Isn't he actually a member of the Methodist Church? And aren't the Methodists opposed to capital punishment?
I guess he is in a tie with Kerry--re: catholic condemnation of abortion--when it comes to following his own conscience.

and then maybe the 'holy see' can consider 'standing off and throwing flames on masses of defenseless people who have, in no way done any harm to anyone'. can people who kill others in this manner take part in communion? when is everyone going to come to senses about this bullshit?

Bush has stolen (or helped his friends steal) trillions of dollars.

Bush has killed 25,000-odd brown-skinned non-Christian civilians.

Bush has killed a thousand or so American soldiers.

Bush has invaded another country in a "war" of imperial conquest.

Bush has eliminated the key civil liberties from our Constitution.

Bush has ruthlessly advocated exploiting the environment.

Bush has turned american foreign policy into a black-or-white, us versus them proposition that, coupled with his illegal military misadventures, has alienated virtually the entire world.

Bush is clearly amoral, likely sociopathic, and frequently delusional.

Bush is laughably ignorant and prefers simplistic dogmatic tripe to a nuanced, accurate view of reality.

Yup. Sounds religious to me!

by the way, I'm the pope.

n/t