Consider: Does The Current Republican Party Threaten You? (even if you consider yourself Christian?)
by enorbet from LinuxQuestions.org on (#6Q0A6)
Perhaps is feels like a win if the power base of the 2024 republican Party champions Christian Nationalism, and suffer no illusions, it DOES champion Christian Nationalism precisely according to the plan to expand their base and shed the restrictive moniker of "The Party of the Very Rich". There is crafty strategy in this since there are VASTLY more Middle and Lower Class people/voters (read "Poorer") than wealthy elites.
When "Trickle Down" lost it's head of steam, as a farcical con job, the only strategic choice was to appeal to what poorer people care about and a major win in that regard is to lump all religion into one category. That's a huge bunch of potential votes especially if you accompany with that appearance of appeal with a campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. If enough responders like, we can go into just how successful FUD has been, but this starts with the nebulous appeal of Christian Nationalism and that fiction that all Religions can be as One.
Ask yourself if you've ever heard, or even yourself spoken, the words "That's not a real Christian (insert any major religious category), That's a fake Bible/Religion." Just FTR christianeducatorsacademy.com among others notes that worldwide there are more than 40,000 different Christian sects/divisions, each claiming they have the "inside track to the real truth".
Before but especially during The Inquisition, to cite just one Christian version, when the Catholic Church had major political power and that means literally able to create, destroy and modify Law, among those tortured and murdered by the thousands were not just Jews and anyone seen as non-believers, but heretics and blasphemers with included what would become loosely defined as Protestants. This of course historically has not been solely the domain of Christianity but MOST politically powerful religions, like Islam and Sharia Law, Shining Path, etc.
It's important to realize that Christian Canon and Sharia Law and and any other politically powerful religion in history haven't and don't require objective evidence to convict, just the claim someone is a heretic, a witch, a non-believer. They only need a few accusers. One doesn't have to provide proof that "Jews sacrifice Christian babies" or Shiites/Sunni versus Sunni/Shiites claims of marital impropriety, or Episcopalians versus Baptists versus Methodists versus Mormons versus... you get what I mean, whether it's out and out torture and murder, or just repression and favoritism, Religious Law doesn't require Democratic Law Rules of Evidence against Hearsay. Claims are equivalent to Evidence in religion.
We have zero guarantee that if what is publicly available, and sanitized for wide public appeal, like the 900+ page Project 2025 from the Heritage Foundation which in itself is comprised of well over 100 vaguely Christian organizations, would actually play out in reality once they have even more political power. Historically the most radical and sanctimonious tend to rise to the top and refusal for adoption, bank loans, medical care, commercial service, all the way to real and deadly pogroms, even genocide, tend to follow.
So to attempt to start discussion, I first propose a challenge. Name one instance in history where any Religion rose to political power that didn't usher in extreme discrimination to the point of economic and physical suppression of anyone not exactly like the top leaders or local judges, weren't seen as "fake" and subject to "be dismissed". I'll begin by asking anyone contemplating a response to look up the list of genocides, even just since the 20th Century, many of which were religiosly motivated, all of which contained that as a component, and see the nearly hundreds of MILLIONS murdered and imagine "It can't happen here".
This is the very real threat of Theocracy no matter which division/sect manages to gain political power over Law. I submit The Separation of Church and State may even be more important than Freedom of Speech since Religions once in power, tend to punish uncomfortable speech, often with death threats and actions.
When "Trickle Down" lost it's head of steam, as a farcical con job, the only strategic choice was to appeal to what poorer people care about and a major win in that regard is to lump all religion into one category. That's a huge bunch of potential votes especially if you accompany with that appearance of appeal with a campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. If enough responders like, we can go into just how successful FUD has been, but this starts with the nebulous appeal of Christian Nationalism and that fiction that all Religions can be as One.
Ask yourself if you've ever heard, or even yourself spoken, the words "That's not a real Christian (insert any major religious category), That's a fake Bible/Religion." Just FTR christianeducatorsacademy.com among others notes that worldwide there are more than 40,000 different Christian sects/divisions, each claiming they have the "inside track to the real truth".
Before but especially during The Inquisition, to cite just one Christian version, when the Catholic Church had major political power and that means literally able to create, destroy and modify Law, among those tortured and murdered by the thousands were not just Jews and anyone seen as non-believers, but heretics and blasphemers with included what would become loosely defined as Protestants. This of course historically has not been solely the domain of Christianity but MOST politically powerful religions, like Islam and Sharia Law, Shining Path, etc.
It's important to realize that Christian Canon and Sharia Law and and any other politically powerful religion in history haven't and don't require objective evidence to convict, just the claim someone is a heretic, a witch, a non-believer. They only need a few accusers. One doesn't have to provide proof that "Jews sacrifice Christian babies" or Shiites/Sunni versus Sunni/Shiites claims of marital impropriety, or Episcopalians versus Baptists versus Methodists versus Mormons versus... you get what I mean, whether it's out and out torture and murder, or just repression and favoritism, Religious Law doesn't require Democratic Law Rules of Evidence against Hearsay. Claims are equivalent to Evidence in religion.
We have zero guarantee that if what is publicly available, and sanitized for wide public appeal, like the 900+ page Project 2025 from the Heritage Foundation which in itself is comprised of well over 100 vaguely Christian organizations, would actually play out in reality once they have even more political power. Historically the most radical and sanctimonious tend to rise to the top and refusal for adoption, bank loans, medical care, commercial service, all the way to real and deadly pogroms, even genocide, tend to follow.
So to attempt to start discussion, I first propose a challenge. Name one instance in history where any Religion rose to political power that didn't usher in extreme discrimination to the point of economic and physical suppression of anyone not exactly like the top leaders or local judges, weren't seen as "fake" and subject to "be dismissed". I'll begin by asking anyone contemplating a response to look up the list of genocides, even just since the 20th Century, many of which were religiosly motivated, all of which contained that as a component, and see the nearly hundreds of MILLIONS murdered and imagine "It can't happen here".
This is the very real threat of Theocracy no matter which division/sect manages to gain political power over Law. I submit The Separation of Church and State may even be more important than Freedom of Speech since Religions once in power, tend to punish uncomfortable speech, often with death threats and actions.