Yet you would refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils and thereby benefit the greater of two evils - all presumably to make a point. Do you believe the calculus to be justifiable?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
democrat or republican
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
Are you aware how infrequently it comes up in conversation? Blurting out "I'm a Freemason" when there is no reason to say it would indeed kind of seem like one wanted to set oneself apart...
Not to mention, us women Freemasons(or men who are in lodges that admit women) are met with mixed reactions. You must be careful who you tell.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Not a fan of either but am Democrat because FL is a closed primary state. As a centrist, I am voting for centrist Dems because the GOP folks in my area are not centrists. My favorite party is the Forward Party. "Not right, not left, just forward."
Both the Republican and Democratic parties are now out for their own benefit. A pox on both their houses.
Neither is interested in human or environmental policies that would benefit The People, at the expense of their own power and influence, or the status quo that spawned and support them.
My party emphasizes the interests of the majority; the common man, and the planet. Platform
Neither is interested in human or environmental policies that would benefit The People, at the expense of their own power and influence, or the status quo that spawned and support them.
My party emphasizes the interests of the majority; the common man, and the planet. Platform
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I'm interested in the big tent Foreword party as well, but I do still have my reservations.
Let me add something that may clear this up. The Freemasons are viewed differently across cultures. In the West the Freemasons are simply a social institution. They are one of many "secret societies" that are vehicles for social networking, helping sundry public causes and doing "secret" club rites that appear wacky and nonsensical to outsiders. In the West, Freemasons were rarely political in nature. However in non-Western societies the Freemasons served different purposes. In more restrictive, centralized and authoritarian societies they were more political. They filled a vacuum in those societies for political expression because open political organizing by minorities was repressed or even criminalized. For example during the waning Ottoman empire national and ethnic minorities were not allowed to politically organize. The Ottoman Turks were fearful it would lead to fracturing of its power and control. So minorities used social clubs such as the Freemasons to organize to protect their interests. Minorities within the Ottoman empires such as the Arabs, Armenians, Jews and Christians used them with varying degrees of success to organize and gain more freedom and rights. But as a consequence the Freemasons came to be viewed with suspicion and hostility. Both from rival clubs or from political powers or states. An example of this is the inclusion of anti-Freemason and similar groups being condemned in Article 17 of the Hamas charter.
Last edited:
Interesting. News to me.
Got any links to books or historical references that cover this?
Afaik, freemasons have been denigrated by at least the Catholic church since it's inception in the 16-1700's.
Well not necessarily because then the insurers would be out of business, and that's a "working" group too, how many people do those companies hire? (A lot).
The NHS would find them a job.
And by the way, the real profit was made by the owners of these companies.
Not with conspiracy theorists like you around. Why should they? Why should they trust you, or anyone else for that matter?
Maybe? But we wouldn't know because it won't ever be put to vote. And draft legislation never comes forward on it.
I didn't know there was no such a thing in the US.
We are a socialist state...
The State takes care of anything, whenever there are privatizations or nationalizations, as for the employment of the people. They are moved from the private to the public sector and vice versa.
I didn't know there was no such a thing in the US.
We are a socialist state...
The State takes care of anything, whenever there are privatizations or nationalizations, as for the employment of the people. They are moved from the private to the public sector and vice versa.
The NHS is something many of us would like to see started.
There have been attempts by both parties from the beginning of the Republic, but economic opportunists have sunk or slowly attenuated each attempt.
"The business of America, is business!" -- President Calvin Coolidge.
Private healthcare and public healthcare can coexist.
Some kind of guaranteed, universal healthcare always polls very high among the general public, but packaged as a political initiative, the 'economic royalists' shoot it down as some kind of existential threat every time.
And usually do.
I am further left than either party will afford me so I generally vote Democrat because their measures are closer if still falling quite short. I'm consistent with green parties overall.
It absolutely can.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
I think it does in the other developed nations.