He was Sikh.
She doesn’t even know what she’s racist against.
this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
704 points (99.3% liked)
politics
24027 readers
3945 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And here come all the nuts feeling brazen about open christian nationalism in a budding theocracy.
LOL, she should change her name to Karen.
JFC.
if america is evil genocidal country for funding israel, why does she choose to stay and fund the genocide? i mean why not just leave? wouldn't that be the more feasable moral thing to do? it will also impact multiple industries.
just curious
Wow just the fact that she feels emboldened enough to dribble out this poison and post it online is telling.
Who's doing anything about it? Nobody is marching on their representative's homes and offices. No letter-campaigns, we can't even be bothered to vote as a country without it turning into the apathy-olympics.
big oof
America is not a fucking Christian Nation
the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion
-- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797
Sometimes I really wish the founding fathers were around to just say, “Yeah, we were all atheists when we did this America thing. It just wasn’t fashionable at the time. So this idea that American was founded on Christianity, is well, just bullshit”
I mean they were literally fleeing religious persecution. Why would they bake religion into what they were creating?
they were literally fleeing religious persecution. Why would they bake religion into what they were creating?
Because everyone thinks their opinions are the right ones.
Someone persecuting you doesn't mean you'll go somewhere else and not persecute others who are not on your side.
In fairness a lot of the people "fleeing religious persecution" were the nutcases who thought there wasn't enough of it.
Not so much the founders, though.
Well they weren't fleeing persecution at all. Most of them were born in the US, years after the Quakers had stopped being persecuted in England.
Mostly Christians, but in the same way my parents say they're Christian. A churchless general belief in god and heaven. Deists, I think the proper word is.
I tend to call this type "nominal xtians". They might not have thought too much about the topic, don't really know anything at all about "the" bible, the doctrines of the denomination their parents/grandparents were part of, never go to church except maybe for weddings/funerals, etc...but also don't consider themselves agnostics or atheists. Often they may say they are spiritual, but not religious.
While they were fleeing religious persecution, they were not atheists. The original Pilgrims were Christians who believed the church of England to be beyond redemption. All of the founding fathers were raised in some Christian belief system, and more or less practiced their respective branches of Christianity.
They were certainly more open-minded in accepting beliefs that deviated from their own, but also certainly not atheist.
Eh, some were about as close to atheist as the social norms of the time would really permit. If you look at Jefferson, he made his own version of "the" bible in which he excised all the superstition. In their day, the Inquisition was still going on (ended in 1834) and making your own version of "the" bible was exactly the kind of thing that would get you declared a "heretic".
And then there is Thomas Paine...certainly being a Deist is something likely to get you in trouble with the crazy Inquisition types...as well as the Southern Baptists today...
That's the very definition of irony.
The thought path of a short-minded individual: Turban->Muslim.
I'm all for a minimum IQ to enter politics. This would probably disqualify 50% of Congress & Senate. And 100% of the cabinet.
I heard somewhere that one of the first hate crimes against Muslims following 9/11 was against a Sikh person...
IQ is a poor metric (for just about anything).
We do need to work on election reform so that our elected representatives are more representative. Getting more people to vote (turn out in the U.S. is fairly low), avoiding partizan gerrymandering, using something other than FPtP.
That notwithstanding, but being as stupid and uneducated as US politicians regularly appear, such a regulation would be helpful regardless of how they are elected.
I disagree that an IQ restriction would be an improvement. It would just be another tool used by authority to marginalize. Competency tests have been used as such in both the U.S. South and Nazi Germany.
Improving the electorate and having the output of the voting process reflect their will is the only way forward.
My face when I found out the US has opening prayers in the house of government :
Yeah, that's the really fucked up part of all of this. Being a USian, I knew this kind of thing, though.
This Karen is just miffed that xtianity is not given maximum unwarranted special privileges: "oh, we'll allow you people who have not opted in to our chosen lifestyle to exist (for now), but at every opportunity, we'll rub your noses in it that we think our chosen lifestyle's adherents are special little snowflakes that deserve praise for their lifestyle, and use the government to do it."
Seperation of... What was it again? logic and reason?
Money and fools.
(We're the fools, they get the money.)
The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
George Washington's letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, 18 August 1790.
Hopeless.
view more: next ›