This Mike Johnson who now holds what is arguably the third most powerful elected seat in the federal government of the ‘United’ States, seems to think that the country is a ‘Christian nation’ rather than the secular one called for by both the Constitution and precedent. In a number of articles I’ve read in the past few days, I’ve seen him referred to as a ‘christofascist’ … perhaps a bit hyperbolic and who even knows precisely what that means? But some things do come to mind when I see a picture of him and his cronies on bended knee within the Capitol, or hear him speak of his wife spending “weeks on her knees in prayer …”, or unnecessarily invoking the word ‘god’ multiple times in interviews and speeches.
On the subject of religion, the 1st Amendment to the Constitution states that …
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
That’s it. “Congress shall make no law.” This can mean a lot of things, but let’s make it perfectly clear … the United States is not a ‘Christian nation’. The United States is a secular nation where any and all religions are welcomed and none are prohibited, nor are any sponsored by the state. Get that?
It seems to me that ‘freedom of religion’, as the 1st Amendment clause has been dubbed, means each of us are free to believe as we will, to consider ourselves Christians or Muslims or Hindus or Jains or Jews or atheists or agnostics. You cannot say there is freedom of religion … but only so long as you are Christian!!! More and more this is what it seems the Republicans, as now personified by Donald Trump and Mike Johnson, are saying to us. Where does that leave those of us who are not believers in the Christian religion?
What I would ask Mike Johnson regarding his desire to turn this nation into a Christian nation:
- What would you say to the one-third of this country who are citizens, taxpayers and voters but are not Christian? What would you say to my neighbors who are U.S. citizens and followers of Islam? What would you say to my good friend who is a U.S. citizen and a Jew? And what would you say to me, a citizen, taxpayer and voter who is an atheist? How would you reassure us that our rights and freedoms in this nation are as important as those people who are Christians?
Throughout history much harm has been done in the name of religion – ALL religions. Each religion seeks to impose its will upon all, to force its tenets and beliefs upon every single person within its realm. It’s rather like saying … my favourite colour is green, and therefore everyone’s favourite colour must be green, else … BANISH THEM! Because Christians think their holy book (written by men) tells them that women should be subservient to men, that women were created only for the pleasure of men, then men should be able to tell us what to do with our own bodies.
Look, I don’t care … I honestly do not care what anybody chooses to believe, whether a person ascribes to a religion or not, believes in a deity or not, and if so which one. In my view, all religions are designed to control and manipulate people, but that’s my opinion and I don’t attempt to force it on others — in fact I typically avoid discussing religion at all or tippy-toe into it as I’m doing today. By that same token, though, I will not have others force their views on me. That’s why I find it so disturbing that Mr. Johnson brings his religious views to work with him and tries to slip them into the communal coffee pot.
This nation began as a democratic republic, not a theocracy. While it is true that we seem to have shifted toward becoming an oligarchy – rule by the wealthy – we must guard against religion playing a role in the decisions by our government that affect ALL of our lives. I hear people mock and shun the very idea of the Islamic traditional Sharia Law, and yet … isn’t that the same direction in which we are headed if we force school children to say Christian prayers and read only those books that are approved of by Christian standards, if our lawmakers are guided by their own religious beliefs rather than the good of all people?
I have no doubt that Speaker Mike Johnson is sincere in his religious beliefs, and I respect that, but they are his beliefs and he has no right to force them upon a diverse nation. This is not Iran or Saudi Arabia … it is the United States of America. We need to remind certain of our elected officials of that, it seems.
Discover more from Filosofa's Word
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Beautiful post ✉️
LikeLike
From a post I sent you a link to earlier…
And that’s the problem with Mike Johnson believing in this stuff. Evangelicals don’t support Israel because they’re big fans of the Jewish people or value democracy in the Middle East. They support Israel because Jews are essential characters in their End Times horror movie. And now one of them is Speaker of the House.
An election denier and insurrectionist, Johnson opposes abortion of any kind, no-fault divorce, LGBTQ rights, and big government; has a big hard-on for guns and more tax cuts for the wealthy; and doesn’t much care for democracy. All of this is awful, but he’s no more awful than any other MAGA Christian nationalist. Most Americans don’t want the United States to be a theocracy, and I have faith that Johnson and his ilk will be removed from power in 2024.
The danger of Mike Johnson is that—again, assuming he really believes all of this, and only he knows that for sure—he has a vested interest in there being a gigantic war in the Middle East where Russia and the Arab States invade Israel. He wants that more than anything. The Rapture is so close, he can taste it. How can we expect this belief, of all religious beliefs, not to inform his foreign policy as Speaker—the guy who brings aid bills to the floor, who sits in on intelligence= and armed forces meetings, who is two heartbeats from the presidency?
LikeLiked by 1 person
💕💕💕
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jill, understanding that Mr. Johnson holds an important role in government, I think he has earned the right to be ignored when he spews nonsense. When he has something of import to say, I will pay more attention. After reading Cassidy Hutchinson’s book “Enough,” election deniers like Messers, Johnson, Jordan, Gaetz, etc. should be embarrassed to still support the former president. By the way, another Trump attorney pleaded guilty today. I think that is four, but it might be five. Keith
LikeLiked by 2 people
I would agree … except that ignoring him could be dangerous, for he has some radical ideas that are not consistent with what the majority of this nation hopes for. I fear if we turn our back on the enemy, we may find ourselves in his jaws before long. Sigh. Yes, they SHOULD be embarrassed to support Trump, but I think they are afraid not to. I’ll never understand his grip on the GOP!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jill, of course you are right. But, like with Trump much of what he says is quite ignorable as its basis in truth is low. Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
PS – Jill, you may be interested in seeing what former Rep. Liz Cheney said about the new Speaker:
“The new Republican speaker of the US House, Mike Johnson, is “dangerous” due to his role in Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, the former Wyoming Republican congresswoman and January 6 committee vice-chair Liz Cheney said.
‘He was acting in ways that he knew to be wrong,’ Cheney told Politics Is Everything, a podcast from the University of Virginia Center for Politics. ‘And I think that the country unfortunately will come to see the measure of his character.’”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think Liz Cheney is spot on with what she says. In the past two years, I have come to respect both her and Adam Kinzinger since their work with the J6 committee, and Adam is also speaking out … in case you missed it, he was on PBS NewsHour this evening with some views on the current GOP.
On another note, I hear that Ken Buck has had enough of today’s GOP and is retiring next year. All the moderates are jumping ship … this cannot be a good thing for the nation.
LikeLike
Agreed … and it becomes a distraction that we can ill afford, too.
LikeLike
Speaker Johnson famously said: “What does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun? Well, go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it – that’s my worldview.”
I decided to take Johnson at his word and went to a bible to find out about his worldview. I did it by opening to a random verse. The first time, I got Psalms 137:9 – “Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” Ouch! That’s not very pro-life!
So I tried it again and got Hosea 13:16: “The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”Again with “dashing the little ones”, and “ripping open” pregnant women to boot. I thought the bible that guys like Johnson blather on about is supposed to be “pro-life” where babies are concerned, especially fetuses.
So I gave it another try, and got 2 Kings 6:28-29: “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.” So it’s cannibalism now? I thought it was Hillary Clinton and the demonic Democrats who ate children.
So just for fun I did the same thing with my pocket edition of the US Constitution, and I opened it up to Article VI: “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” Finally! Something that makes sense! But, of course, Speaker Johnson doesn’t believe in that. Maybe he should be following the law of the land instead of an ancient holey book.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Whoa … you did your research!!! Great job! I do so want to tell Mr. Johnson that I really don’t give a hoot whether he reads or can quote the bible … I only care whether he understands and upholds the Constitution. I wonder if he has even read the U.S. Constitution? Thanks for doing the research on what Mr. Johnson really believes, E.A. !
LikeLike
Totally and absolutely agree, Jill. Hugs ‘n cheers, M
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hugs ‘n cheers to you, my friend!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I totally agree with your rant, but I sometimes wonder … how are we going to stop the train wreck?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ahhhh … ’twasn’t meant to be a rant, but rather just a bit of introspection. But as to your question … I wish I had an answer, my friend. Unfortunately, I don’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Adherence to religion – any religion – can be dangerous. I read some time ago that more than 1,500 of the past 2,000 years have seen conflicts somewhere in the world which had religion at their roots. Maybe Johnson, DeSantis and the like should ban all religions? Then the lunatics would have to find something else to do with their guns.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I think that when you get down to the root cause, most wars’ beginnings are caused by religion in one way or another. And speaking of guns and religion … I keep hearing from the uber-religious crowd that gun ownership is a “god-given right”. HUH??? That’s like saying Julius Caesar sanctioned automobiles!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think the stats of history back that up. It seems strange: why should something which is meant to be a power for good cause so much strife?
It’s like the Hooters song Satellite says: “Jump in the river and learn to swim, God’s gonna wash away all your sins.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good question. The only answer I can come up with is human nature. I sometimes think people invent reasons to fight.
I don’t know if I’ve ever heard that one … I’ll check it out in a bit.
LikeLiked by 2 people
A good answer.
I think you’ll like the video. It makes its point in a fun way.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just watched it … and yes, it was a fun video and made the point perfectly!!! Thanks, Clive!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I thought you’d enjoy it. It should be required viewing for GOP politicians 🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, but it would probably go over some of their heads! They aren’t, after all, the brightest bulbs in the pack 🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
How true. MGT would think it is a commercial 😊
LikeLiked by 1 person
No doubt!
LikeLiked by 1 person
God has nothing to do with religions. Religions relationship with God rests solely on the need of authority to wield power. Look I didn’t make the rules, God made the rules, I’m just the guy telling you what the rules are! It is the anarchists not the atheists that can explain why this idea stinks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really? I thought religions were based on the belief in a deity, whether God, Allah, Buddha, Jehovah, or whomever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All I have ever heard is men describing something that always conveniently matches some goal they wish to achieve. You have suggested that a deity is nonexistent. Yet you seem to have some idea of what does not exist. I have wondered what you think of cold, something that also does not exist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nah, I just know what other people seem to believe, though sometimes I think they believe in their deity because it gives them something — hope, maybe — to hold onto, to keep them from jumping off of a tall building. What do I think of cold? Well, for one thing I think that cold is the absence of heat, and when heat is absent, my fingers hurt, as they do tonight. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting, I have heard the opposite reported.
In the Encyclopedia of War only 7% of the 1763 recorded wars they mention in the book were fought primarily on religious grounds using the Index that classified wars as specifically religious.
So I would be very interested in a citation where you got your opposing information.
Thanks!
Source:
Encyclopedia of Wars,ed. C. Phillips and A. Axelrod, 3 vols.(New York: Facts on File, 2005)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is anyone going to respond to this comment about only 7% of wars were fought on religious grounds? Sounds like a fair critique.
Also, aren’t most wars really “political” in nature under the guise of religion? In the end, people are sinful and want more land and power. They will use religion to fulfill their sinful desires.
As a Christian, Jesus called us to be peacemakers and to love those who persecute us. I think this type of religion would flourish if we would just listen to the words of Jesus. Blessings!
LikeLike