Hillary - The Gift That Keeps Giving

SCOTUS has already ruled that participation in the pledge cannot be compelled. Different Christian denominations likes Jehovah's Witnesses and Quakers have spiritual objections to those sort of oaths.
 
"Faith advisor".

What's next? Paper-clips advisor?

SCOTUS has already ruled that participation in the pledge cannot be compelled. Different Christian denominations likes Jehovah's Witnesses and Quakers have spiritual objections to those sort of oaths.

I've always found it bizarre that any Christians at all will swear oaths.

Matthew 5:34

But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

It's like these people cannot read. And this isn't an obscure part of the Bible but an absolutely central part of Christianity.
 
Last edited:
Most folks know little to nothing about theology or scripture, and church leadership is obviously willing to lie or teach their flock that certain parts of the scripture don't apply when they become too inconvenient to follow. Only the most pious take everything literally (or as much so as possible).
 
SCOTUS has already ruled that participation in the pledge cannot be compelled. Different Christian denominations likes Jehovah's Witnesses and Quakers have spiritual objections to those sort of oaths.

its still coercive...and I still hear stories of teachers getting mad at students who dont comply

the point is: the state is 'asking' children each school day to stand and pledge their allegiance to an idol representing the state's God
 
We had one teach growing up who would make the two Jehovah's Witnesses' in my 10th grade class leave the room during the pledge. He was a nice guy and a good teach otherwise, but I always wanted to see him get fired for that.
 
As much as I dislike Hillary, at least she did something about the situation and didn't ignore it. Except for the nondisclosure piece she probably should be applauded for this one. She was ahead of her time.
 
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

Had people been tempted to swear by their head? I suppose it means "May something bad happen to my head if I fail to deliver on my oath." But it still sounds funny: "I swear by my head that I'll get those materials to you by Friday."
 
"Faith advisor". What's next? Paper-clips advisor?

I've always found it bizarre that any Christians at all will swear oaths. Matthew 5:34 It's like these people cannot read. And this isn't an obscure part of the Bible but an absolutely central part of Christianity.
Meh. The passage says to honor your word and not embellish. Some sects take it as literally barring oaths, but most read it to mean that oaths should not be freely offered or given lightly. If an oath is requested, that is different. There is a great deal of other verbiage about compliance with lawful authority.

J
 
It's not really my place to determine the bounds of feminism.

Then why are you telling us who is or isn't a feminist?

Meh. The passage says to honor your word and not embellish. Some sects take it as literally barring oaths, but most read it to mean that oaths should not be freely offered or given lightly. If an oath is requested, that is different. There is a great deal of other verbiage about compliance with lawful authority.

J

But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

The passage says dont swear at all... This reminds me of Jesus' condemnation of public prayer, he said dont pray standing in the synagogues and street corners and many Christians ignore him. No, they do worse than ignore him - they defy him and bear false witness changing what he said.
 
It's not really my place to determine the bounds of feminism. I'll say that I largely agree with many of the arguments made in this book:
https://www.versobooks.com/books/2121-false-choices

Looks pretty good, obviously can’t read it from this link. Aren’t these people calling her not a feminist? If you don’t feel entitled to determine the bounds of feminism is Margaret Thatcher a feminist? Is Mother Theresa a feminist? Is Phyllis Schlafly a feminist?
 
Looks pretty good, obviously can’t read it from this link. Aren’t these people calling her not a feminist? If you don’t feel entitled to determine the bounds of feminism is Margaret Thatcher a feminist? Is Mother Theresa a feminist? Is Phyllis Schlafly a feminist?

No, I don't think any of them are feminists. Those people are indeed calling her not a feminist, but they are calling her not a feminist because of their intellectual commitments to Marxism, anarchism, and other ideologies that are incompatible with Hillary Clinton's brand of white corporate feminism. I guess my real answer is that I think white corporate feminism sucks but it's still feminism.

My answer on all three of those individuals would naturally tend to be "no." And it reminds me of a funny meme I saw not so long ago:
do-you-think-margaret-thatcher-had-gi-power-yes-of-27543791.png
 
No, I don't think any of them are feminists. Those people are indeed calling her not a feminist, but they are calling her not a feminist because of their intellectual commitments to Marxism, anarchism, and other ideologies that are incompatible with Hillary Clinton's brand of white corporate feminism.

;)

I guess my real answer is that I think white corporate feminism sucks but it's still feminism.

Hm. I suppose it depends on how you define feminism; I might define it as movements for women that actually materially/socially elevate women, a definition which appears to exclude Hillary Clinton.

My answer on all three of those individuals would naturally tend to be "no." And it reminds me of a funny meme I saw not so long ago:
do-you-think-margaret-thatcher-had-gi-power-yes-of-27543791.png

It won’t load on my phone but I’m guessing it’s that Eric Andre screencap
 
It won’t load on my phone but I’m guessing it’s that Eric Andre screencap

Affirmative

Hm. I suppose it depends on how you define feminism;

Yes, and defining feminism is an intellectual task I'm certainly not up to.

a definition which appears to exclude Hillary Clinton.

Many women who love her would disagree quite vociferously. I'm not saying I agree with them, just that we probably shouldn't dismiss them from the conversation.
 
It's not really my place to determine the bounds of feminism.

Clinton calls herself a feminist and millions of women agree with her. I'm simply relaying that information.

Hillary was never considered a serious feminist 'icon' by anyone with a clue

I think Hillary Clinton is a feminist

Anyone who supported Hillary can't be a real feminist - Berzerker is a real feminist

No, I don't think any of them are feminists.

So you're not deciding who is or isn't a feminist? I never removed a woman from her job for being sexually harassed and then covered it up.
 
Something funny to note here is that a lot of my friends actually hate the word feminism because to them the default definition is white feminism. My friend Ahnayah has always cringed whenever somebody says feminism, but she is still into woman’s liberation, she just thinks of feminism as electoral politics and CEOs and stuff. So it seems like arguing over the definition of feminism might ultimately become moot because Hillary’s will become the only kind of feminism.

Anyway plenty of poor Cubans will insist that Castro was the world’s best socialist, too.
 
Back
Top Bottom