Funny events in anti-woke world

[tstorm823]

Well no, there was nothing in the post to which I replied that mentioned the religious nature of the perpetrators. And you brought it up in direct response to someone who had disputed your association of "atheist societies" with violence and repression.

And the comment that started it all was freedom from religion was "FORCED onto Christianity (and all other religions) so they would stop killing people." But there isn't and has never been a predominantly atheist place where the atheism wasn't enforced. France is relatively irreligious, but atheist is more specific than that, and also they have a history of forced irreligiosity, so it's not a counterpoint in multiple ways. Deists being able to commit violence and oppression doesn't mean atheists have ever had a country without doing so.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Did you forget about the Reign of Terror?

While there is notably low religiosity in France at the moment, calling it atheistic is a stretch, and it's also one of the historical poster children for "tried to reign in Christianity, ended up murdering more people than ever."

I'm curious what your definition is for an "atheistic country" because mine is any country where the majority does not believe in the existence of god.

Also while I would consider modern France atheistic by the definition above, France was very much a Catholic country during the Reign of Terror. While the Reign of Terror had a lot of anti-clerical sentiment (mostly regarding how the church horded wealth) the population was still majority Catholic at the time, and definitely believed in god. The Reign of Terror period was far from atheistic.

 

[Silvanus]

But there isn't and has never been a predominantly atheist place where the atheism wasn't enforced.

According to various polls, a plurality or an outright majority of people are agnostic or atheist in Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Belgium, Czechia, and quite a few others.

France is relatively irreligious, but atheist is more specific than that, and also they have a history of forced irreligiosity, so it's not a counterpoint in multiple ways. Deists being able to commit violence and oppression doesn't mean atheists have ever had a country without doing so.

Of course it doesn't mean that. Which makes it so odd that you'd bring up an example of religious persecution of another religion, when speaking about "forced irreligiosity" and atheism, when it doesn't constitute either of things.

 

[Bedinsis]

But there isn't and has never been a predominantly atheist place where the atheism wasn't enforced.

Sweden is 54 % atheist.

Spoiler: image

 

[Agema]

Sweden is 54 % atheist.

Although, if I were quite honest, I'd tend to count "not sure" and "don't know" as de facto atheist.

 

[tstorm823]

I'm curious what your definition is for an "atheistic country" because mine is any country where the majority does not believe in the existence of god.

It starts with the definition of atheist, because it's not just not believing in God, but rather believing there is no God. The "new atheists" did their best to try to muddy the waters and claim basically any philosophy (including several religions) that doesn't subscribe to the idea of a creator as atheism, but they quite thoroughly failed. If you ask people if they believe in God, many more will say no than those who would ever call themselves atheists. This is not an contradiction, they aren't in denial, it's just a different thing. The question "do you believe in God" is very different than "do you believe there is no God", and it is the latter that defines atheism, not the former.

You find me a country where the majority identify as atheists, I'll accept that definition of an atheist. Google results suggest to me that number for France is more like a quarter than it is more than half.

Sweden is 54 % atheist.

That is not what that says.

Although, if I were quite honest, I'd tend to count "not sure" and "don't know" as de facto atheist.

That is the opposite of honest.

According to various polls, a plurality or an outright majority of people are agnostic or atheist in Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Belgium, Czechia, and quite a few others.

That's a mighty big qualifier you've got there.

Of course it doesn't mean that. Which makes it so odd that you'd bring up an example of religious persecution of another religion, when speaking about "forced irreligiosity" and atheism, when it doesn't constitute either of things.

They tried to make their own calendar to remove religious influences. That's not religious persecution of another religion, that is state enforced secularism.

 

[Gergar12]

Columbus is so inclusive.

 

[Bedinsis]

It starts with the definition of atheist, because it's not just not believing in God, but rather believing there is no God. The "new atheists" did their best to try to muddy the waters and claim basically any philosophy (including several religions) that doesn't subscribe to the idea of a creator as atheism, but they quite thoroughly failed. If you ask people if they believe in God, many more will say no than those who would ever call themselves atheists. This is not an contradiction, they aren't in denial, it's just a different thing. The question "do you believe in God" is very different than "do you believe there is no God", and it is the latter that defines atheism, not the former.

Wikipedia calls that negative (or weak) and positive (or hard) atheism, meaning both positions are labeled as atheism. Why would it be the latter that defines atheism?

 

[Agema]

That is the opposite of honest.

It seems to me that most religions have a great deal to say about belief in god(s).

It's very hard to interpret "don't know" - the absence of belief - as belief.

 

[Satinavian]

Now there have been societies that pushed back very heavily and forcefully against religion in favor of atheism. But they were all some flavor of dictatorship that took issue with religious groups having influence and not being very aligned with the official policy.

But that is not a mark of atheism. Rulers have always been threatened by the power of religion and always suppressed those religious movements they couldn't get to support them. It is just the same as always.

In general atheists are not particulerly bothered by religious people, don't feel too much companionship with other atheists and are not interested in partaking in religious struggles. Unless they are inconvenienced by whatever a religious comunity does.


Of course atheists are as prone to fall for prejudices, or take part in discrimination as everyone else. When foreigners with a minority religion come you can pften see local atheists and local deists join hands in acting against the "foreigners wiith their barbaric culture and religion wanting to take over the country". Sometimes racism is in the mix as well.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Now there have been societies that pushed back very heavily and forcefully against religion in favor of atheism. But they were all some flavor of dictatorship that took issue with religious groups having influence and not being very aligned with the official policy.

But that is not a mark of atheism. Rulers have always been threatened by the power of religion and always suppressed those religious movements they couldn't get to support them. It is just the same as always.

Also, such societies tend to form cults of personality which look a lot like state religions anyway.

 

[Cicada 5]

The introduction to Gina Carano's legal team's filing for her lawsuit against Disney needs to be seen to be believed.

A short time ago in a galaxy not so far away, Defendants made it clear that only one orthodoxy in thought, speech, or action was acceptable in their empire, and that those who dared to question or failed to fully comply would not be tolerated. And so it was with Carano. After two highly acclaimed seasons on The Mandalorian as Rebel ranger Cara Dune, Carano was terminated from her role as swiftly as her character’s peaceful home planet of Alderaan had been destroyed by the Death Star in an earlier Star Wars film. And all this because she dared voice her own opinions, on social media platforms and elsewhere, and stood up to the online bully mob who demanded her compliance with their extreme progressive ideology.


Defendants’ wrath over their employees’ social media posts also differed depending on sex. Even though “the Force is female,” Defendants chose to target a woman while looking the other way when it came to men. While Carano was fired, Defendants took no action against male actors who took equally or more vigorous and controversial positions on social media.

But the rule of law still reigns over the Defendants’ empire. And Carano has returned to demand that they be held accountable for their bullying, discriminatory, and retaliatory actions—actions that inflicted not only substantial emotional harm, but millions of dollars in lost income.

 

[Silvanus]

That's a mighty big qualifier you've got there.

Even excluding agnostics, you're still wrong, because several of those examples don't rely on them to make the numbers.

Although agnostics are irreligious.

They tried to make their own calendar to remove religious influences. That's not religious persecution of another religion, that is state enforced secularism.

Secularism =/= irreligiosity or atheism, and who the fuck cares about the calendar anyway. The body that undertook the Reign of Terror-- the actual repression, the repression you cited-- were explicitly religious.

But hey, if you want to expand to talk about secularists as well, I'd be happy to-- because there are dozens more examples of secularist countries that haven't repressed or forced their people to be irreligious. Secularism seems to offer the best chance for personal religious freedom.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Why would it be the latter that defines atheism?

Because that better suits Tstorm's narrative that religion (and more specifically, his religion) is the only thing keeping humanity from murdering itself.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

No idea why is so difficult for certain American self-described atheists to not indulge in racism, though have some observational guesses swirling about for now. Wasn't till recently learnt the ol' "intellectual dark web" group of naval-gazing dog-whistling twats just named themselves that, which is such a behemoth red flag am surprised nobody appeared to call it out at the time: self-labeled "intellectuals" are more interested in brand building, selling and ego self-soothing than educating themselves from an honest point of curiosity, Is super easy to not believe in religions or spirituality while not being racist, effortless even.

No rest on Sunday for the wicked, time for far right militia welfare check. unpleasant to look at understandably, yet might be worth kinda keeping an eye on? Especially the sheriff ones?

Election denier behind “Pence Card” theory says he’s coordinating with far-right sheriffs group to get “a little bit of retribution”

www.mediamatters.org

Election denier behind “Pence Card” theory says he’s coordinating with far-right sheriffs group to get “a little bit of retribution”


In an X Space that included discussion about grassroots mobilizing for the campaign of Donald Trump, Ivan Raiklin, a former military officer who tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election with his “Pence Card” plan, claimed that he was “brainstorming” with the head of a far-right sheriffs group about “getting a little bit of retribution.”

Raiklin was reportedly involved with former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Flynn’s family has denied being involved with Raiklin, despite Flynn previously lauding him as a “digital soldier,” a term often used by QAnon supporters to describe themselves and which Raiklin has himself apparently invoked.

The “Pence Card” refers to the theory that then-Vice President Mike Pence could have effectively blocked the January 6, 2021, certification of the 2020 election results. That theory was subsequently embraced by Trump, who in December 2020 retweeted Raiklin pushing the Pence Card theory, activity which was later noted by the House January 6 Committee. Around this time, the former military officer agreed with a QAnon influencer that a military coup could be an option to overturn the 2020 election.

Raiklin also claimed to have contacted multiple members of Congress to push his plan.

During a June 7 X Space, which was seemingly hosted by a QAnon supporter, Raiklin presented his ideas on how to get “a little bit of retribution,” suggesting they needed to use “phases of the operation” like releasing “evidence” of the supposed crimes of what another participant called “deep state individuals” and then using the “raw power” of sheriffs to make arrests.
In response to Ben Moore — who is a QAnon influencer known online as “Sun Tzu” and a member of Flynn’s organization America’s Future — asking Raiklin what kinds of “trials” he would conduct if he was “deputized tomorrow to carry out arrests,” Raiklin suggested that arrests or trials would not happen “until we get the evidence to the court of public opinion, the American jury pool, en masse.”

Ivan Raiklin answering question from QAnon influencer about "trials" for perceived enemies

JUNE 7, 2024

Audio file - 01:00

CitationFrom a June 7, 2024, Twitter/X Space

BEN MOORE (QANON INFLUENCER): The question I’m getting: Let’s assume you were deputized tomorrow to carry out arrests. What would it look like from a practical standpoint? Who would be the ultimate judge and jury in these trials? Would it be like a military tribunal or are you calling for like a judicial or are you calling for a civilian tribunal, something instituted under the Constitution of the republic? Practically speaking, what would that look like? Because I keep getting that question. I just wanted to let you answer.

IVAN RAIKLIN: Yeah. Everyone gets the salacious, you know, climax of the movie. That doesn’t happen until we get the evidence to the court of public opinion, the American jury pool, en masse.

Later on, Raiklin described the other “phases of the operation,” claiming that he “had a long conversation with Sheriff [Richard] Mack yesterday.” Mack is a former Oath Keepers board member and founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Police Officers Association (CSPOA), which falsely claims that sheriffs are the highest law of the land, superseding any federal or state authority. Raiklin noted that “we were quote, unquote, brainstorming Sun Tzu’s ultimate, let’s just say, climax to the phased approach of getting a little bit of retribution.”

Ivan Raiklin saying he spoke with Richard Mack about "getting a little bit of retribution"

JUNE 7, 2024

Audio file - 01:55

CitationFrom a June 7, 2024, Twitter/X Space

IVAN RAIKLIN: And just like the FBLie, what do they do when they go after someone? They pull all of their digital assets. Well, why can’t our counties and states do the same thing, especially when the entire country is clamoring and demanding it? Particularly now that they’ve woken up in response to what Chubby Bragg over in Manhattan and Chubby Willis down in Fulton County are doing, right? Obesity kills, and truth sometimes also does that through the lawful process.
…
RAIKLIN: The last thing I’ll say on that is I had a long conversation with Sheriff [Richard] Mack yesterday as we were quote, unquote, brainstorming Sun Tzu’s ultimate, let’s just say, climax to the phased approach of getting a little bit of retribution. So you can't just think of something and not basically plan and execute via phases of the operation. So I’m trying — I’m working the problem, and I am getting a lot of inbound traffic. So I’m doing the best I can.

Earlier this month, a newly formed militia group organized by far-right media figures claimed that it would be working “in collaboration with” CSPOA, though Mack has denied involvement with the militia.

During the Space, Raiklin also urged people to “help identify and motivate” sheriffs who were “maybe in the ballpark of” carrying out arrests, and to “find out the five people that influence that individual the most” in order to give them “the necessary impetus and motivation to take that bold step” of arresting those supposed “deep state individuals.”

Arizona Man Charged with Selling Guns for Use in Mass Shooting

PHOENIX, Ariz. – Mark Adams Prieto, 58, of Prescott, was indicted by a federal grand jury today on Firearms Trafficking, Transfer of a Firearm for Use in a Hate Crime, and Possession of an Unregistered Firearm.

www.justice.gov

Arizona Man Charged with Selling Guns for Use in Mass Shooting

PHOENIX, Ariz. – Mark Adams Prieto, 58, of Prescott, was indicted by a federal grand jury today on Firearms Trafficking, Transfer of a Firearm for Use in a Hate Crime, and Possession of an Unregistered Firearm.

The indictment alleges that, between January 2024 and May 2024, Prieto had discussions with two individuals working with the Federal Bureau of Investigation to devise a plan to commit a mass shooting of African Americans and other minorities to incite a race war prior to the 2024 United States Presidential Election. Prieto did not know the individuals were working with the government, but instead believed that they shared his racist beliefs and wanted to commit a mass shooting to incite a race war. The targeted event was a concert in Atlanta that was going to be held on May 14 and May 15, 2024.

The indictment further alleges that, having discussed specific details about the planned attack, Prieto sold two rifles to one of the individuals, an AK-style rifle on February 25, 2024, and an AR-style rifle on March 24, 2024. During the entire investigation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation closely monitored Prieto’s movements. On May 14, 2024, Prieto was stopped by law enforcement driving east from Arizona through New Mexico along Interstate 40. Prieto was in possession of seven firearms and was taken into federal custody. Law enforcement then executed a search warrant at his home in Prescott. Law enforcement found more firearms in his residence, including an unregistered short-barreled rifle.

Each conviction for Firearms Trafficking and Transfer of Firearm for Use in a Hate Crime carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison, a fine of $250,000, or both. A conviction for Possession of an Unregistered Firearm carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, a fine of $250,000, or both.

An indictment is simply a method by which a person is charged with criminal activity and raises no inference of guilt. An individual is presumed innocent until evidence is presented to a jury that establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Phoenix Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted the investigation in this case, with assistance from the Phoenix Field Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Albuquerque Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Veteran’s Affairs Office of Inspector General, the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, and the Prescott Police Department. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico. The U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, Phoenix, is handling the prosecution, along with the U.S Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and the U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section.

A January 6 Rioter Is Leading an Armed National Militia From Prison

As the US election approaches, Edward “Jake” Lang says that the militia will focus on potential “civil unrest” around the vote and will be ready to activate at a moment’s notice.

www.wired.com

A January 6 Rioter Is Leading an Armed National Militia From Prison

As the US election approaches, Edward “Jake” Lang says that the militia will focus on potential “civil unrest” around the vote and will be ready to activate at a moment’s notice.

PHOTO-ILLUSTRATION: JACQUI VANLIEW; GETTY IMAGES

Years after being accused of swinging a baseball bat at police officers during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, Edward “Jake” Lang is now using encrypted messaging channels to create a nationwide network of armed militias in all 50 states.

Though he has been in prison for over 1,200 days, Lang is working with a network of election deniers and conspiracists to promote the North American Patriot and Liberty Militia, or Napalm for short. The group officially launched last week with 50 state-specific militia groups on Telegram.

Lang claims that the Telegram groups already have 20,000 members, including pastors, farmers, former military personnel, and currently serving sheriffs. However, multiple experts who reviewed the channels tell WIRED that figure was wildly overestimated, and that the real figure was closer to 2,500 members. But a group this size, they warn, is still large enough to cause a serious threat. And while unarmed members are welcome, the group is, at its core, a pro-gun organization. “We are pro open carry, pro always have it on you, rather than waiting for somebody else to be able to defend your life,” says Lang.
Featured Video

As the 2024 US election approaches, Lang says that Napalm will be focusing on potential “civil unrest” around the vote. “We have to make sure that we're prepared for any real-time scenarios, any eventualities,“ says Lang. “Civil unrest at any given moment, especially around an election time, is something that could come along, and so we have to plan for that contingency as well.”

Tensions around the November vote are already at an all-time high, and many Republicans refuse to say if they will peacefully accept the outcome of the November election. Over one-third of Americans now baselessly claim that President Joe Biden’s victory in 2020 was illegitimate. These conspiracies have led to a resurgence in far-right activity, of which Napalm is just the latest facet: Lang, along with all other members of the group’s leadership council, ardently believes that the 2020 election was stolen from former president Donald Trump.

“We've noted considerable energy being put into resurrecting far-right paramilitary activism right now,” Devin Burghart, the executive director at the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights (IREHR), tells WIRED. “The growing talk of ‘Second Amendment remedies’ to unfavorable electoral outcomes is a serious cause for concern. Militia groups like Napalm promote political violence and sow the seeds for another potential insurrection.”

In addition to the election, Lang says that Napalm will respond to everything from natural disasters to Federal overreach, political protests, and potential Chinese invasions.

“I thought it was necessary to get organized in case these encroachments, these violations of our civil liberties, our natural rights were to escalate to a point where it'd absolutely be untenable and that we would need to defend ourselves.” Lang tells WIRED from the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where he is awaiting a trial set for September. “There is a tyrannical wave that has hit America that we've never seen before. And so it's time that people get organized in case they escalate to something that basically puts our very lives in danger.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/13/texas-man-arrested-threats-fbi-agent-hunter-biden-case-00163370

PDF: https://t.co/AUSxoGkGlm

‘We’ll hunt you’: Texas man arrested for allegedly threatening FBI agent on Hunter Biden case

The case is the latest involving charges of threats against law enforcement tied to politically sensitive investigations around Trump.

A Texas man was arrested Thursday after he allegedly threatened to murder FBI agents, including those who worked on the investigation that led to Hunter Biden’s felony gun conviction Tuesday by a federal jury in Delaware.

Timothy Muller, 43, of Fort Worth, was taken into custody outside his home Thursday morning and charged in a criminal complaint with making threats and with influencing, impeding or retaliating against a federal official, the Justice Department said in a news release.

A supervisory special agent from Baltimore who worked on the Biden case received a threatening voicemail and text messages on his FBI cell phone just hours after the guilty verdicts against the president’s son Tuesday morning, according to court documents describing the fast-moving investigation.

Muller allegedly told the agent that should Trump win the 2024 election, FBI officials would be thrown in jail and that if he appeared to lose the consequences would be even worse.

“You can steal another election and the guns will come out and we’ll hunt you c---suckers down and slaughter you like the traitorous dogs you are,” he said in the minute-long voicemail, according to the complaint. “The last thing you’ll ever hear are the horrified shrieks of your widow and orphans.”

“You’re going to jail-if you’re lucky. But I suspect you won’t be,” said one of the text messages, which were laced with additional expletives and homophobic slurs.

Muller appeared briefly in federal court in Fort Worth Thursday afternoon and a federal magistrate judge ordered him detained temporarily, pending a bail hearing scheduled for next Tuesday, according to court records.

Biden says he won’t pardon Hunter after conviction

The case is the latest involving charges of threats against law enforcement tied to politically sensitive investigations around Trump. Attorney General Merrick Garland has argued that political misinformation about the cases has stoked calls for violence against the FBI, including recent false claims by Trump and his allies that the bureau authorized an assassination attempt when they searched his Mar-a-Lago home.

Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s team have asked a federal judge in Florida to impose a gag order barring Trump from publicly leveling the assassination claims. Trump was not home when his Florida residence was searched.

“It is absurd and dangerous that public servants, many of whom risk their lives every day, are being threatened for simply doing their jobs and adhering to the principles that have long guided the Justice Department’s work,” Garland said in a Washington Post op-ed published Tuesday.

Trump’s campaign and his allies have argued without evidence that Hunter Biden’s criminal conviction — for possessing a firearm while addicted to drugs — was an effort to distract from other misconduct by the Biden family.

The court filings refer to the agent only as J.W., but note that he “was previously named in open source reports” about the handling of Hunter Biden’s controversial laptop computer.

In a story published prior to the 2020 presidential election, the New York Post reported that Supervisory Special Agent Joshua Wilson’s name appeared on a federal subpoena related to the laptop. Jurors at Hunter Biden’s trial were shown the laptop in question and heard testimony from a different FBI agent about its contents, but Wilson did not testify.

Must be election year.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

Keeping this separate, but Sean Feucht am harbouring hate on the level of Kendrick's towards Drake tbh. His slick shiny expensive promotional videos, his god-awful music and pretentions of Aryan Pentecostal rock stardom, his creepy clone children, his unsettling mass hypnosis tactics to smuggle in his harmful conspiratorial beliefs through aforementioned god-awful music, all adds up to a specific breed of demon that raises every defense hackle on the neck.

Sean Feucht files lawsuit against Spokane, claims city violated establishment clause

(RNS) — The lawsuit is the latest in an ongoing controversy that dates back to last August.

religionnews.com

Sean Feucht files lawsuit against Spokane, claims city violated establishment clause

The lawsuit is the latest in an ongoing controversy that dates back to last August.

Musician Sean Feucht, from left, pastor Matt Shea and others pray over Spokane Mayor Nadine Woodward, center, during a “Let Us Worship” event in Spokane, Wash., Aug. 20, 2023. (Video screen grab via Twitter/@josephdpeterson)


(RNS) — Worship leader and conservative activist Sean Feucht has filed a lawsuit against the city of Spokane, Washington, claiming the city council violated his religious freedom when it passed a resolution last year condemning an event he headlined and referring to him as an “anti-LGBTQ extremist.”

The lawsuit, which was filed on Wednesday (June 5) in Spokane County Superior Court, claims four current and former members of the Spokane City Council violated the Washington State Constitution and U.S. Constitution, including the establishment clause that bars the government from establishing a single religion.

The city’s resolution “was enacted in violation of FEUCHT’s Free Exercise of Religion as established by the First Amendment,” the lawsuit claims, later calling the city’s motion “a direct action that condemned and punished the public worship of FEUCHT.”


City officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday, but Feucht framed the lawsuit in combative terms.

“Liberals have gotten away with using the power of government to bully Christians for too long, and we’re not putting up with it anymore,” Feucht said in a statement sent to Religion News Service. “We’re Americans. This is still a free country. We have the right to gather and worship and pray without being attacked and maligned by our own government, so we are going to fight back.”

The lawsuit is the latest chapter in a controversy over an incident that occurred last August, when then-Spokane Mayor Nadine Woodward drew backlash for attending an event in the city organized by Feucht. The event was part of Feucht’s “Let Us Worship” tour, which kicked off during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and drew criticism for hosting in-person concerts across the country — often in defiance of local pandemic restrictions.

The events were marked by controversy: At one gathering in Portland, Oregon, Feucht’s security included at least one member of the extremist group Proud Boys and a person charged in connection with the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

“If you mess with them or our 1st amendment right to worship God – you’ll meet Jesus one way or another,” Feucht once tweeted alongside a picture of his security team.

Feucht has also been an outspoken critic of LGBTQ+ rights campaigns, using the term “groomers” to refer to their supporters and once tweeting “The LGBTQ+ mafia is a cult bent on perverting and destroying the innocence of every child they can.”

Spokane Mayor Nadine Woodward, center, is prayed over by pastor Matt Shea, second left, during a Sean Feucht, left, “Let Us Worship” event in Spokane, Washington, Sunday, Aug. 20, 2023. (Video screen grab via Twitter/@josephdpeterson)

Last year’s worship event in Spokane also featured local pastor Matt Shea, the head of On Fire Ministries who has appeared at multiple events associated with Christian nationalism and a regional Christian separatist movement known as the American Redoubt. Known for his far-right rhetoric, Shea was once a Republican state lawmaker but was kicked out of the state GOP caucus after an independent investigation found him guilty of domestic terrorism due to his involvement with the armed takeover of Oregon’s Malheur Wildlife Refuge in 2016. It was later revealed Shea had distributed a document, titled “Biblical Basis for War,” which, among other things, condemned same-sex marriage and suggested murdering all non-Christian males “if they do not yield” in a hypothetical war.

Shea also attended a protest in 2022 of an LGBTQ+ pride event in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, which sits just across the state border from Spokane. Two people connected to his church were among the 31 members of the white supremacist group Patriot Front who were arrested in the back of a U-Haul at the event, with police claiming the men were planning to riot.

Shea prayed over Woodward during the August event in Spokane, standing behind the mayor, her family and Feucht as he asked God to urge Woodward and other political leaders to “stand on the foundation, the rock of Jesus Christ.”

The appearance sparked immediate backlash from critics, both for its content and for Woodward’s decision to attend the service even as wildfires engulfing nearby forests blackened the sky. Woodward eventually issued a statement distancing herself from Shea, saying the pastor “politicize(d) a gathering of thousands of citizens who joined together yesterday to pray for fire victims and first responders.” She lost her reelection bid in November.

City council members listed Shea’s past controversies in their resolution last September, condemning Woodward’s appearance at the event. The resolution also referred to Feucht as an “anti-LGBTQ extremist,” and noted city council members had received a letter signed by local faith leaders condemning Christian nationalism and calling on elected officials to “hold fast to the separation of church and state.”


“Feucht was well advertised as being featured at this event and is known for his bigotry toward LGBTQ+ people and his embrace of the label of ‘Christian nationalist,’” read a copy of the faith leaders’ statement obtained by RNS. The letter, which was signed by Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders, also referred to Shea as ascribing to “violent Christian dominionist and white supremacist ideology.”

Feucht’s lawsuit, which was organized in part by a conservative legal outfit known as the Silent Majority Foundation, references the letter, arguing that mention of it alongside other language in the city council’s resolution effectively “declared the religious views of certain people to be acceptable or unacceptable.” Elsewhere, it argues the city council targeted Feucht in part because he “does not support the LGBTQ agenda.”

The lawsuit concludes: “This Resolution constitutes speech, and it violated the restrictions of the establishment clause.”

Pastor Matt Shea records a video in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, shortly after members of a white nationalist group were arrested. (Video screen grab)

Feucht initially appeared to distance himself from Shea’s views when controversy erupted last year. In a statement sent to RNS at the time, Feucht said he prays with a broad swath of people during their services, and while “not all of them agree with each other on every issue … we all agree that there is only ONE WAY under heaven to be saved, and that’s by the blood of Jesus Christ.”

But Feucht has continued to associate with Shea since. According to the Inlander, his legal representation in the new lawsuit include’s Shea’s former law partner, and Feucht first announced his intent to sue the city last Saturday during an appearance at Shea’s church.

“We are taking a stand against the bigotry and hatred against Christians in the city of Spokane,” Feucht told church members this past weekend while holding a copy of the lawsuit aloft. The congregation responded with applause.

During that same appearance, Feucht derided LGBTQ+ Pride Month, saying that “God is rebranding June to be Family Month in America,” before adding, “it’s takeover season.”

Expressing concerns about the establishment clause is something of a turn for Feucht, who declared before an Oklahoma church last April that he prefers laws written by believers. He was even more explicit later that year, saying in an interview, “I want a country where Christians are making the laws.”

Feucht did not respond to questions regarding how he reconciles his new lawsuit with his past rhetoric.

The new lawsuit, which also claims Feucht’s free speech rights were violated, goes on to insist Feucht was “damaged in emotional distress and other non-economic damages” by the city’s resolution and demands he be compensated. According to the InLander, Fuecht initially filed a damages claim in January, arguing city council members who backed the resolution “acted under the color of law to reprieve Feucht of his federally guaranteed First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights, privileges and immunities.”

 

[tstorm823]

Wikipedia calls that negative (or weak) and positive (or hard) atheism, meaning both positions are labeled as atheism. Why would it be the latter that defines atheism?

Wikipedia can call it whatever it wants, wikipedia is wrong.

The oldest uses of the concept of atheism weren't even actually a belief about god, it was a pejorative. It was akin to calling someone godless. It evolved eventually to describe those who would deny the existence of God, but again was aimed at insulting someone. The use of self-description as atheist started basically to say "yeah, I'm everything you hate, suck it!"

Historically, self-identified atheists are just shameless edgelords for the last couple centuries. The militant internet atheist of today is the same as atheists 100 years ago, it's people who pick up that moniker because its contrary to others do so. It's the same reason people call themselves satanists. Even if you don't believe in God, atheist isn't a title you have to take. There are infinite things for you not to believe in, you don't have a word for not believing in all of those things. Using a word for this one is an active statement of conflict with those who do believe. That is the purpose of people calling themselves "atheists". That's why lots of non-believers don't use the term, that is why even a highly secular society disproportionately dislikes atheists.

I'm not budging an inch on people trying to define "weak atheism" or "strong atheism" because they're tired of people not taking a side in the fight they're picking.

It seems to me that most religions have a great deal to say about belief in god(s).

It's very hard to interpret "don't know" - the absence of belief - as belief.

You are choosing to define anyone who isn't religious as an atheist. That would be historically, socially, and philosophically illiterate, but I don't believe you are those things, so I'm sticking with dishonest on this one.

The body that undertook the Reign of Terror-- the actual repression, the repression you cited-- were explicitly religious.

You just called them deists. Deism is irreligious belief.

Because that better suits Tstorm's narrative that religion (and more specifically, his religion) is the only thing keeping humanity from murdering itself.

A) Nothing keeps humanity from murdering itself.
B) Really just point A over again.

I'm not here to tell you that Christianity, or any religion, leads to total peace among all people. I'm here to argue against the idea that religion makes people kill each other, as though without it things get more peaceful.

 

[Agema]

You are choosing to define anyone who isn't religious as an atheist. That would be historically, socially, and philosophically illiterate, but I don't believe you are those things, so I'm sticking with dishonest on this one.

"Non-religious" tells us a great deal about what we should think about someone's belief in deities.

Deities are after all accompanied by doctrine, ethics, ritual and all. Without any observance or belief in them, it's already looking extremely marginal. "Yeah, god might exist" is about the most drab and feeble assertion of theism imaginable: so vague, imprecise and tenuous that it is closer to non-belief. After all, the Christian god does very explicitly say "Believe in and honour me - or else". Someone then not doing so with any of that docrtrine and ritual is as eloquent a statement as there needs to be about where we should consider their belief.

I am of course aware that there are observant agnostics, and agnostics well-versed in doctrine, ethics, etc. I think they are very much the minority. In the UK, about 50% say they are religious, but only 10-15% are regularly observant. I would strongly suggest to you that the "benefit of the doubt" theists are more in that missing 35-40% than they are in the ranks of the self-described agnostics. Your average agnostic doesn't care about gods, base anything they do around gods, or even think about gods unless specifically prompted. I would simply round to the nearest integer, so to speak, and for the vast majority of agnostics when it comes to belief in deities, that's a 0.

 

[Silvanus]

You just called them deists. Deism is irreligious belief.

That's highly arguable and dependent on the formulation. I'd classify anything that involves doctrines about metaphysics, the human 'soul', theology and superstition as a religion-- especially if they're deriving codes of ethics from those stances. Religion doesn't require scripture or organisation-- though in some incarnations, deism has had both. Though even this is a bit of a distraction considering you originally brought the Reign of Terror up in an exchange about atheism.

Much of the rest of that post is pure shit-slinging and an arrogant refusal to even try to understand or engage with your opponents' positions.

 

[tstorm823]

Someone then not doing so with any of that doctrine and ritual is as eloquent a statement as there needs to be about where we should consider their belief.

That's highly arguable and dependent on the formulation. I'd classify anything that involves doctrines about metaphysics, the human 'soul', theology and superstition as a religion-- especially if they're deriving codes of ethics from those stances.

Religion isn't just what you believe, it's what you practice, it requires practice. The practice of religion. You can believe in the things someone else does while following different practices, there are numerous denominations of Christianity that share beliefs but practice differently, thus belonging to different religions.

Believing in God doesn't make you religious if you don't practice it. Not practicing religion doesn't mean you don't believe in God.

Point to Silvanus between the two of you for saying things without casually condescending on millions of people who aren't here to defend themselves.