"Texas Taliban"??? Cute turn of phrase from someone who claims to be non-partisan. Given the facts on the ground I am not sure who should be more insulted, the Afghan Taliban or Texans. One great thing about our country though (and Texas too for that matter) is we both are free to voice our opinions without fear or favor. Given the march of the authoritarians in the world, however, that space for the free expression of thought and ideas is being nibbled away at the edges.
Ah my friend, your political identity is again clouding your excellent analytical skills, to their detriment.
Yes, I am firmly entrenched in my non-partisanship. I am equally invested in the truth. Per your statement about who is "more insulted," I would suggest that both should be not only insulted but humiliated by their similar styles of governance.
Thanks, Doc, for your compliment on my "turn of phrase."
Yes, as you well know, I have long operated in combat zones and where harsh theocracy was the goal of our adversaries. Since this issue is one that I have long researched and operated against in the field, I have a good understanding of what unethical theocracy looks like, smells like, sounds like etc. The Texas GOP's 2022 Midterm Platform is the actual outline for Christian Nationalist governance.
As for all Texans still having the right to express their opinions... I partially disagree. Our new voting law a year or so ago is so radically gerrymandered and includes some bizarre, uninformed new angles to voter access that it in fact does diminish the right of Texans to be heard at the most important place, the voting booth.
This is a great discussion but as that I've showed my sources, I would politely ask that when challenging, that you include yours as well.
With respect, my friend, my so-called "political identity" is not a factor in play here. I was responding to the cavalier use of inflammatory rhetoric ("Texas Taliban") which I consider terminology more in keeping with militant partisan ideologues than with thoughtful analytical researchers. Again, with respect, it is this use of such incendiary rhetoric that causes me to question your "entrenched ... non-partisanship." All that is to say that I have to make a conscious effort to raise my squelch meter in order to bypass these rhetorical distractions and give your arguments their due consideration.
I understand your points but still must respectfully disagree. There is nothing "cavalier" about my use of the term, "Texas Taliban." I call balls and strikes, without prejudice or passion. When any administration behaves in the immoral and humiliating way that Gregg Abbott and the Texas GOP do, they have shown themselves to be harsh Theocrats. Very few things rile my American identity than theocracy. James Madison was adamant about keeping religion out of government. Abbott and his folks, especially in the Trump era are the cruelest joke played on American democracy since the Civil War. If you like, I will gladly go through the TX GOP platform and outline the theocracy if you care to and debate as well. That's how democracy works after all. Considering your expertise, you should have recognized it far before I have. This is why I have used the phrase, "your political identity." I couldn't be more ashamed of our Texas leadership for the past several years.
And I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of James Madison. Given the centrality of the Church (in many of its diverse and variegated expressions) in the religious, cultural and political development of 18th century American colonial intellectual thought, Madison would appear to be a distinct outlier from his contemporaries on this topic. Thankfully his thoughts on this subject have not prevailed in the history of our country for if they had we would have been much the poorer for it.
I do have an additional question about your point regarding Madison. Do you deny that he was adamant about keeping religion out of government? Surely you don’t disagree that the Constitution he gets the credit for, was not ratified by a large majority of the other delegates or that the Scotsmen from the enlightenment held sway only over Madison?
Normally I would be happy to provide sources that support my conclusions but since you have the recurring tendency of arbitrarily rejecting any data that disagrees with your opinions I will take a pass on your offer. In addition, your last reply changed the subject. This would indicate you had no answer to my central point on the centrality of the colonial Churches in the formation of early American intellectual and political thought and which formed the foundational principles for both the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.
"Texas Taliban"??? Cute turn of phrase from someone who claims to be non-partisan. Given the facts on the ground I am not sure who should be more insulted, the Afghan Taliban or Texans. One great thing about our country though (and Texas too for that matter) is we both are free to voice our opinions without fear or favor. Given the march of the authoritarians in the world, however, that space for the free expression of thought and ideas is being nibbled away at the edges.
Ah my friend, your political identity is again clouding your excellent analytical skills, to their detriment.
Yes, I am firmly entrenched in my non-partisanship. I am equally invested in the truth. Per your statement about who is "more insulted," I would suggest that both should be not only insulted but humiliated by their similar styles of governance.
Thanks, Doc, for your compliment on my "turn of phrase."
Yes, as you well know, I have long operated in combat zones and where harsh theocracy was the goal of our adversaries. Since this issue is one that I have long researched and operated against in the field, I have a good understanding of what unethical theocracy looks like, smells like, sounds like etc. The Texas GOP's 2022 Midterm Platform is the actual outline for Christian Nationalist governance.
As for all Texans still having the right to express their opinions... I partially disagree. Our new voting law a year or so ago is so radically gerrymandered and includes some bizarre, uninformed new angles to voter access that it in fact does diminish the right of Texans to be heard at the most important place, the voting booth.
This is a great discussion but as that I've showed my sources, I would politely ask that when challenging, that you include yours as well.
Cheers my friend and best for your day,
With respect, my friend, my so-called "political identity" is not a factor in play here. I was responding to the cavalier use of inflammatory rhetoric ("Texas Taliban") which I consider terminology more in keeping with militant partisan ideologues than with thoughtful analytical researchers. Again, with respect, it is this use of such incendiary rhetoric that causes me to question your "entrenched ... non-partisanship." All that is to say that I have to make a conscious effort to raise my squelch meter in order to bypass these rhetorical distractions and give your arguments their due consideration.
I understand your points but still must respectfully disagree. There is nothing "cavalier" about my use of the term, "Texas Taliban." I call balls and strikes, without prejudice or passion. When any administration behaves in the immoral and humiliating way that Gregg Abbott and the Texas GOP do, they have shown themselves to be harsh Theocrats. Very few things rile my American identity than theocracy. James Madison was adamant about keeping religion out of government. Abbott and his folks, especially in the Trump era are the cruelest joke played on American democracy since the Civil War. If you like, I will gladly go through the TX GOP platform and outline the theocracy if you care to and debate as well. That's how democracy works after all. Considering your expertise, you should have recognized it far before I have. This is why I have used the phrase, "your political identity." I couldn't be more ashamed of our Texas leadership for the past several years.
My best,
And I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of James Madison. Given the centrality of the Church (in many of its diverse and variegated expressions) in the religious, cultural and political development of 18th century American colonial intellectual thought, Madison would appear to be a distinct outlier from his contemporaries on this topic. Thankfully his thoughts on this subject have not prevailed in the history of our country for if they had we would have been much the poorer for it.
I do have an additional question about your point regarding Madison. Do you deny that he was adamant about keeping religion out of government? Surely you don’t disagree that the Constitution he gets the credit for, was not ratified by a large majority of the other delegates or that the Scotsmen from the enlightenment held sway only over Madison?
Ratified rather than “not ratified “
Well my friend, I look forward to your sources to discuss this.
Normally I would be happy to provide sources that support my conclusions but since you have the recurring tendency of arbitrarily rejecting any data that disagrees with your opinions I will take a pass on your offer. In addition, your last reply changed the subject. This would indicate you had no answer to my central point on the centrality of the colonial Churches in the formation of early American intellectual and political thought and which formed the foundational principles for both the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.