Today's Christian Fundamentalists are direct ideological descendants of the Puritans. What we were taught about them was a myth that bore no relationship to who and what they really were. Their persecution of Quakers, for example - the most peaceful Christians one could find - was bloody, brutal and ruthless. As per usual, the women were…
Today's Christian Fundamentalists are direct ideological descendants of the Puritans. What we were taught about them was a myth that bore no relationship to who and what they really were. Their persecution of Quakers, for example - the most peaceful Christians one could find - was bloody, brutal and ruthless. As per usual, the women were stripped, whipped and sexually shamed. The men were also whipped and many Quakers were hung, while many more were put in prisons and starved to death. But really, anyone with differing ideas was persecuted.
If fear that iIf theocrats regain control, this is the sort of thing we can expect from them.
Excellent article, Thom. Don't know how I missed it. This point, I found very interesting: "It’s estimated that between 5 and 20 percent of all Americans are sadists or have sadistic tendencies, depending on how tightly defined the term is."
My take is that they were raised with brutality. I grew up in a brutal family, the men claimed scriptures gave them the right to beat their wives and children. Most still believe they have this right and that God insists upon it. But they aren't really religious; they don't go to church. They don't support religious causes and they certainly don't model Christian behavior. It's simply about control and power. This is why I don't give them a pass based on widespread right-wing propaganda. They aren't misled. They chose to be violent, controlling bullies and use scripture as justification.
Here we go: from that post:" If reducing the number of abortions was their singular and primary goal, they’d be putting much of their time, effort, and money into sex education, birth control, universal healthcare (particularly for fertility-age women), and government support for low-income families with children. Instead, most in the forced birth movement oppose all of those things." Today's news https://apnews.com/article/arizona-senator-senate-abortion-eva-burch-280e95049fa230e83c6edb3724b244a7#:~:text=Democratic%20Sen.%20Eva%20Burch%20of,pregnancy%20is%20no%20longer%20viable. She is a women's doctor, and one of the things she said to MSNBC was : failed pregnancies are incredibly common. This is an education that has been brought to the front post-Dobbs. Also today's news that there is a new record high number of abortions.
Yes! Somehow, European-descended colonizing not-Americans have never been able to shed the "fundamental" pattern of simultaneously claiming victimhood ("We fled persecution in Europe.") and aggressively pursuing oppression of whatever poor not-them dared to quibble. (I did not know specifically about the Quakers, so I learned something today!) I have repeatedly beaten the drum that I think there is an actual chromosomal link to what has been termed "authoritarianism."( Is that more farfetched than the "Cohen gene?") The DNA predisposition would be concentrated, no matter how faintly, amongst the self-selected fanatics who emigrated to what they assumed (since they were god's chosen!) was a blank slate territory awaiting transformation into a latter-day Promised Land. So I would second your prognostication. Fortunately, genes are flighty, and I seem to have escaped heavy programming on one side. Why the subject has been of interest to me for a long time. On the "nurture" side, maybe big, big education came into play. Very understandable why the Puritans really hate education.
To be honest, I only recently learned about the persecution of the Quakers by the Puritans, but I've known about their beating of children for some time. However, Christians still beat their children, a practice I believe is the root of deep dysfunction in our society. It seems that the persecution of Quakers by the Puritans was primarily because Quakers believed an individual could have a direct relationship with God without going through a priest/pastor. Despite protestations of religious purity, the most logical reason is that this threatened the men who rigidly controlled the community. It was never about God or "righteousness" but then, as now, it was about power over others. In Europe, the Puritans were considered dangerous zealots. To my mind, that is exactly what they were (and still are.) Truly, they terrify me.
Oh, lordy. (To coin a phrase.) "Prime Directive" of medieval Church was, you only get love from Jesus if you pay us! I joke about, don't make me mad, I still hold a grudge about the Siege of Montsegur! Well, some "minds working alike" going on: just moved down to Farrar comment. Voila!
Today's Christian Fundamentalists are direct ideological descendants of the Puritans. What we were taught about them was a myth that bore no relationship to who and what they really were. Their persecution of Quakers, for example - the most peaceful Christians one could find - was bloody, brutal and ruthless. As per usual, the women were stripped, whipped and sexually shamed. The men were also whipped and many Quakers were hung, while many more were put in prisons and starved to death. But really, anyone with differing ideas was persecuted.
If fear that iIf theocrats regain control, this is the sort of thing we can expect from them.
Amen!
https://hartmannreport.com/p/do-religious-sadists-want-to-see
Excellent article, Thom. Don't know how I missed it. This point, I found very interesting: "It’s estimated that between 5 and 20 percent of all Americans are sadists or have sadistic tendencies, depending on how tightly defined the term is."
My take is that they were raised with brutality. I grew up in a brutal family, the men claimed scriptures gave them the right to beat their wives and children. Most still believe they have this right and that God insists upon it. But they aren't really religious; they don't go to church. They don't support religious causes and they certainly don't model Christian behavior. It's simply about control and power. This is why I don't give them a pass based on widespread right-wing propaganda. They aren't misled. They chose to be violent, controlling bullies and use scripture as justification.
Here we go: from that post:" If reducing the number of abortions was their singular and primary goal, they’d be putting much of their time, effort, and money into sex education, birth control, universal healthcare (particularly for fertility-age women), and government support for low-income families with children. Instead, most in the forced birth movement oppose all of those things." Today's news https://apnews.com/article/arizona-senator-senate-abortion-eva-burch-280e95049fa230e83c6edb3724b244a7#:~:text=Democratic%20Sen.%20Eva%20Burch%20of,pregnancy%20is%20no%20longer%20viable. She is a women's doctor, and one of the things she said to MSNBC was : failed pregnancies are incredibly common. This is an education that has been brought to the front post-Dobbs. Also today's news that there is a new record high number of abortions.
Yes! Somehow, European-descended colonizing not-Americans have never been able to shed the "fundamental" pattern of simultaneously claiming victimhood ("We fled persecution in Europe.") and aggressively pursuing oppression of whatever poor not-them dared to quibble. (I did not know specifically about the Quakers, so I learned something today!) I have repeatedly beaten the drum that I think there is an actual chromosomal link to what has been termed "authoritarianism."( Is that more farfetched than the "Cohen gene?") The DNA predisposition would be concentrated, no matter how faintly, amongst the self-selected fanatics who emigrated to what they assumed (since they were god's chosen!) was a blank slate territory awaiting transformation into a latter-day Promised Land. So I would second your prognostication. Fortunately, genes are flighty, and I seem to have escaped heavy programming on one side. Why the subject has been of interest to me for a long time. On the "nurture" side, maybe big, big education came into play. Very understandable why the Puritans really hate education.
To be honest, I only recently learned about the persecution of the Quakers by the Puritans, but I've known about their beating of children for some time. However, Christians still beat their children, a practice I believe is the root of deep dysfunction in our society. It seems that the persecution of Quakers by the Puritans was primarily because Quakers believed an individual could have a direct relationship with God without going through a priest/pastor. Despite protestations of religious purity, the most logical reason is that this threatened the men who rigidly controlled the community. It was never about God or "righteousness" but then, as now, it was about power over others. In Europe, the Puritans were considered dangerous zealots. To my mind, that is exactly what they were (and still are.) Truly, they terrify me.
Oh, lordy. (To coin a phrase.) "Prime Directive" of medieval Church was, you only get love from Jesus if you pay us! I joke about, don't make me mad, I still hold a grudge about the Siege of Montsegur! Well, some "minds working alike" going on: just moved down to Farrar comment. Voila!