Religion
Related: About this forumIt's interesting to note which threads generate the most
discussion in the Religion Group. I'm not sure what that means, exactly, but it's really interesting. Discussion is the goal of this Group, as it is everywhere on DU. That's why we're here - discussion. It's something to encourage, I believe.
elleng
(131,370 posts)Speaker Paul Ryan just forced the House chaplain, a respected Jesuit priest, to resign - apparently for political reasons.
According to press reports, Republicans were upset with Father Patrick Conroy for not being enthusiastic enough about their tax cut bill and for once inviting a Muslim professor of religion to offer the daily prayer.
Father Conroy is not a left-wing activist; he was originally appointed by Republican speaker John Boehner and confirmed by a unanimous vote.
Congressional chaplains are supposed to be nonpartisan pastors, not Christian figureheads for the GOP agenda.
Tell Paul Ryan: Reinstate the House chaplain.
http://act.faithfulamerica.org/sign/ryan_conroy/?t=1&akid=1085%2E81534%2EpaGlNv
MineralMan
(146,350 posts)Frankly, I can't see the need for a chaplain for Congress in the first place. They are needed in the military, because military people are assigned to many parts of the world, often in remote areas where there is no access to places of worship. But, Congress isn't in that situation. There are plenty of churches and other places to worship in D.C. and in their home towns. They can worship just about any time they choose.
So, I can't see how chaplains are needed by Congress. I don't mind them having chaplains, but this forcing to resign smacks of religious prejudice, somehow.
dameatball
(7,405 posts)But your main point is (I think) that chaplains are not needed in Congress and I agree. They can pray whenever they want to, just like in schools.
MineralMan
(146,350 posts)He's total slime, that one.
dameatball
(7,405 posts)MineralMan
(146,350 posts)Ryan is the devil, incarnate. Widow's peak and all.
Bretton Garcia
(970 posts)Popular topics often by the way, often center around Guil, and older discussions. Notably major philosophical topics relating to compatibilities and incompatibilities between 1) liberal Christians, and 2) liberal atheists.
Guil constantly pushes the notion of an open, generous, allegedly nondogmatic "liberal" church.
The main argument again at him at this time, is probably that the liberal church is not as liberal or good as he alleges.
Your own independent topics are often quite good. Though older topics, agendas, still have some popularity too.