General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGeorge Takai NAILS it. "Who Died?"
@GeorgeTakei on Twitter:
Link to tweet
mountain grammy
(26,598 posts)CousinIT
(9,218 posts)zentrum
(9,865 posts)...idea of America, which has been so important to the world, is dead.
mountain grammy
(26,598 posts)for many it was damn close.. but now, that idea is exposed. It's just an idea after all, and, if no one believes in it, it's dead.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,106 posts)using our known enemy, but because there are enough of US, YOU and ME willing to elect a known, on the record
Racist
Misogynist
Bigot
Thief
Person who mocks disabled and those with less power than he has
THAT is why.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)...the reality. Racism and income inequality and all the rest of it were baked into the founding of the country.
But I'm talking about the idea of America. Equality. Democracy.
It has inspired hope at Tianamen Square and in the Arab Spring, for a few recent examples. And our greater press freedoms and ability to demonstrate in the streets, our Civil Rights movement, unfulfilled as it is---are like beacons in authoritarian countries around the world.
No more. The idea itself is in a tailspin.
mountain grammy
(26,598 posts)I've never had an unrealistic view our glorious "freedom," but the idea of it and the work it takes to achieve it, that's what's kept us all going.
My mom was the first in her family born in America. America was paradise compared to what they came from, and I don't mean economics, I mean good old fashioned oppression where other citizens had the right to mess with you, even kill you, with no consequences, just because of who you were. Ironically, they found that was also the reality in America, but, there existed this document called the Constitution, that guaranteed certain rights for all citizens, so the idea is planted, and sometimes, against all odds, the idea prevailed. It's the idea that the rule of law applies equally to all, and it's written down for all to see and read, and even amended to extend those rights to even more people. But, it's just a piece of paper, just an idea, and anyone who tries to defend it now will run up against the likes of Neil Gorsuch. A giant leap backwards. The idea will die.
nolabear
(41,932 posts)Clintons, anybody?
IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,075 posts)CHICAGO- HARRY TRUMAN
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Russian Money Trail Tied to McConnell, Cruz, Rubio, McCain, and RNC
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029110343
mountain grammy
(26,598 posts)We are living under an illegitimate government and can't do one damn thing about it.
The question is, how far will this go? At some point, there's no turning back.
spanone
(135,791 posts)why all the black?
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)spanone
(135,791 posts)MontanaMama
(23,295 posts)but 45 looks like he needs a diaper change in this photo and everyone standing next to him knows it.
Virtual Burlesque
(132 posts)As for which president we are pining for? How about Millard Fillmore, who signalled coda for his party.
ailsagirl
(22,885 posts)Fritz Walter
(4,290 posts)Thanks "Uncle George" (Takai).
You nailed it!
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,760 posts)Too many Americans too stupid, racist, selfish, or greedy to stop this walking disaster from fucking up our country.
itcfish
(1,828 posts)Italian women at a Mafioso's wake. Professional mourners.
spanone
(135,791 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,628 posts)"Flying Nun 82nd Airborne Division"!
femmocrat
(28,394 posts)And here is Laura Bush:
Why is that appropriate for the Vatican? Anyone know?
FBaggins
(26,721 posts)Eased up some in the 80s... but still expected for personal meetings.
SergeStorms
(19,186 posts)whose job it is to see that all this ridiculous pomp and circumstance is followed to a tee. Of all the religions, I think the Catholics are the most steeped in traditional rites and rituals. They seem to think it's important. Personally, I think they should lighten up. They could also have a giant yard sale for some of their treasure, and use that money for helping people who are suffering. I'm sure we could convince the Pope to give up an 18K gold trimmed robe or two. My two cents.
purplecale
(3 posts)As with other FLOTUS, the Trump women chose to follow the traditional protocol for an audience with the Pope. It's probably the ONLY protocol that has been followed on the entire trip!
Protocol has changed since the 1980's, but most follow the traditional way.
http://www.lastampa.it/2011/07/15/vaticaninsider/eng/the-vatican/meeting-the-pope-how-will-i-dress-H0cVUXhgYzluWKprwqPkAP/pagina.html
femmocrat
(28,394 posts)angrychair
(8,678 posts)I just find, as an atheist, it amusing that many are against women subjugating themselves in Islamic countries by covering their head but think nothing of it within Christianity.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)whathehell
(29,034 posts)that you equate voluntarily covering your head for an hour
at a once in a lifetime event to being.compelled to cover it
ievery day for the rest of your life.
Nice try, but no.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)There meeting the other day, in a formal event in SA and was a rare event, why not cover your head there?
Plus, the covering of your head for women is as required in Christianity as Islam but it's one of those parts, like many, that some Christians just ignore.
whathehell
(29,034 posts)Last edited Thu May 25, 2017, 07:34 PM - Edit history (1)
as it is in Islam'"?.....Got a link?
I'm guessing you don't, brcause.as a woman with 12 years of Christian schooling, I know for a fact that your claim is utter nonsense.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)1 Corinthians 11:5-6
"But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her headit is the same as having her head shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off"
To a lesser extent
1 Timothy 2 : 9-10, "I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God."
Then this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_headcovering
It has been a common mandate since the founding of Christianity for women to cover their head in church or while in prayer.
It is still a expected practice for Catholics, Anabaptists, Amish, Mennonites, some sects of Church of Christ and so on.
It is Paul who insist on it in Corinthians but it is western evangelical Christians that decided it doesn't apply anymore. Like selling your children into slavery or eating shellfish. I'm not judging, just pointing out inconsistencies.
rusty fender
(3,428 posts)but not since then
angrychair
(8,678 posts)It appears to be a preferred custom for women to veil themselves in an audience with the Pope. So, while it was not in the revised Canon in 1983 it is still an expected custom to be followed in many Catholic settings, including meeting the Pope apparently.
rusty fender
(3,428 posts)but not for just going to mass. Although some women still choose to wear veils on occasion.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)Why women? It is a demand of subjugation of women that is not expected of men. It's sexist.
rusty fender
(3,428 posts)women, upon entering a temple with an uncovered head, could be impregnated by the gods. Because Christianity was, essentially, created by a Greek, the practice of requiring women to wear head covering while in a house of worship was implemented into Christian practice and eventually kept by Catholics. That's my theory.
I was a Catholic for the first 15 years of my life, had 6 years of Catechism(catholic teachings), yet I never learned why, before Vatican II, women were required to cover their heads. When I learned of the Greek belief about the vulnerability of females inside temples, I concluded that that was the origin of Catholicism's practice of it.
I'm sure that Catholic theologians would disagree with me
angrychair
(8,678 posts)Are a Frankenstein mix and match of different ancient belief systems, especially in Christianity (Easter is my personal favorite)
forgotmylogin
(7,520 posts)Saying it's not necessary to dress up to worship. You don't need to fix your hair, or not come to pray if you don't have fancy clothes. Just cover up. Wear your good deeds and not gold.
Wearing a veil may be a symbolic representation of this concept for women, but I think the dudes should need to wear yarmulkes also like the Pope if they want to show similar respect.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)It has been taken literally since the inception of Christianity
I offer the link from my post:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_headcovering
As well as some selected quote:
In the 1917 Code of Canon Law it was a requirement that women cover their heads in church. It said, "women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord
TomSlick
(11,088 posts)The cited passage from 1 Corinthians must be read considering the cultural context. It was important to Paul - who was far less radical than Jesus - that Christians be culturally acceptable. It's easy to find "inconsistencies" in scripture if you're looking for them. I try to look for truth, not consistency.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)That is not about how it is "interpreted".
It is the unfailing, unquestionably "Word of God" when it suits someone's agenda and "interpreted in a cultural context" when it doesn't.
As I stated in my OP, that passage is "interpreted" by many Christian sects as literal. It is still an expected practice for Catholics in at least some cases(see images of veiled women meeting Pope), Anabaptists, Amish, Mennonites, some sects of Church of Christ, Eastern Orthodox, some Lutherans, some Methodist and so on.
Again, not judging, just pointing out that "love thy neighbor" is a lot easier to follow with no "interpretation" than women being told to be submissive and cover their heads...or women being inferior to men and remaining silent (1 Timothy 2:12)....or God killing hundreds of thousands of children (Exodus 12:29)
whathehell
(29,034 posts)A couple of two thousand year old quotes from two churchmen do not a "requirement" make. Sorry.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)While I grant you some may not, it is a generally accepted tenant among Christians that the Bible is the unerring, infallible Word of God.
Paul is no insignificant "church man" but a key figure in Christianity.
Until Vatican II in 1983 it was written in Canon Law that women cover their heads while in prayer and specifically in church solely based on Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 11:5-6.
As I stated in my OP, that passage is "interpreted" by many Christian sects as literal. It is still an expected practice for Catholics in at least some cases(see images of veiled women meeting Pope), Anabaptists, Amish, Mennonites, some sects of Church of Christ, Eastern Orthodox, some Lutherans, some Methodist and so on.
Again, not judging, I'm an atheist (with a degree in religion and philosophy) just pointing out that "love thy neighbor" is a lot easier to follow with no "interpretation" than women being told to be submissive and cover their heads...or women being inferior to men and remaining silent (1 Timothy 2:12)....or God killing hundreds of thousands of children (Exodus 12:29).
Racism, sexism, slavery, rape and murder are always wrong, no matter what book they are written in or who is doing it.
whathehell
(29,034 posts)The Catholic church does NOT insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible and has not since at least the 1950's when I attended Catholic school.
Women put something on their heads once a week in church for 45 minutes, but again, this is hardly the same as being FORCED to cover one's
head and neck OUTSIDE the place of worship every day for the rest of one's life.
I can only conclude that your refusal to concede this OBVIOUS distinction is part of your effort to prove an "equivalence" between
Christian and Islamic treatment of women that in fact, does not exist.
angrychair
(8,678 posts)Your "the Catholic Church does not insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible" statement deserves it own reply. Though an atheist, I graduated from a Catholic university and I am very aware of the catechisms of the Catholic Church.
That being said, on to your other point. There is a big difference between religious dogma and legal obligation.
Our entire conversation has been about religious dogma, not about a legal obligation to dress a certain manner.
Many western nations did have a religiously-inspired, legally mandated dress codes for women, that often included head coverings of some kind, but it has fallen away as time has gone on but you can see many aspects of it that persist in western culture and it's laws to this day (laws requiring women to wear shirts but not men as an example).
Now many Middle Eastern and Asian nations, specifically those that are predominantly Islamic and have theocracies or a dominating Islamic group that has significant influence of their government, and culture, do create laws that create a legal obligation for women to dress a certain way.
So yes, there is a religiously-inspired legal obligation in some nations for women to dress in a brutal and humiliating manner that does not exist in western nations. No one would argue that point.
That being said, in certain archdioceses or Amish or Mennonite communities or Eastern Orthodox communities, while there is no legal obligation, there is a cultural one, one engrained in them from childhood, that women dress a certain way. While they are legally free to dress differently, doing so would put them outside their community's cultural norms and likely cause them to be shut out and shamed for it, even kicked out of their communities. The end result is little different.
In the end it is still men using religion to dominate and control women in the name of their god(s). One of many reasons I find religion abhorrent.
(Just for the record I am a man)
Ms. Toad
(33,992 posts)and couldn't make the image display.
spinbaby
(15,088 posts)It's telling.
SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)just sayin'......
not fooled
(5,801 posts)the thought has crossed her mind.
"'Av anozzer bucket of ze KFC, Donnie"
Ilsa
(61,690 posts)Cirque du So-What
(25,908 posts)as the grieving widow, her hemline would reach mid-thigh.
Atman
(31,464 posts)She's just waiting out the clock at this point.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)If I were a guy in a skirt next to Donald, I wouldn't stand close either.
Demit
(11,238 posts)maddiemom
(5,106 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)LOL!
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Doesn't he realize how inappropriate he is? His hair, his skin color, the way he dresses. He's a hot mess!
lastlib
(23,152 posts)...and his fingers are so small..........
and his belly is SO-O-O-OOO swollen
Lyricalinklines
(367 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,682 posts)Melania is wearing the classic veil, but what is that on Ivanka's head? She looks like the bride of Frankenstein.
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)I was also thinking of that! The veil is too poofed out from her head.
Baitball Blogger
(46,682 posts)your novelty clothing.
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)Yep, I think you're right!!! LOL
MFM008
(19,803 posts)It is a black-and-white situation, only seven women in the world are allowed to wear the non black color in front of a pontiff.
Those would be only Catholic Queens or princesses.
All women are required to wear a head covering but the privilege of wearing white allows you to choose either a white Mantilla or a white Veil.
SergeStorms
(19,186 posts)someone just punched her in the balls. Why so serious? They're in a huge, expensive place. They should be used to that, right? She's probably thinking about what a good time she'd be having if Orangey McFuckstick wasn't with her on this trip.
George II
(67,782 posts)sheshe2
(83,654 posts)ananda
(28,834 posts).. for having to endure 45.
nini
(16,672 posts)He knows he met the devil and didn't like it.
GoCubsGo
(32,074 posts)The Addams Family goes to the Vatican.
niyad
(113,055 posts)tblue37
(65,222 posts)Orrex
(63,172 posts)Earth Bound Misfit
(3,553 posts)Orrex
(63,172 posts)Blaukraut
(5,693 posts)niyad
(113,055 posts)IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)Orrex
(63,172 posts)Earth Bound Misfit
(3,553 posts)septic brained doofus or his evil spawn or golddigger almost porn star spouse but black w/ veil is the traditional way to attend an audience w the Pope.
47of74
(18,470 posts)Of course orange ferret face could take a dump on the altar at St. Peter's Basilica and the same conservative Catholics who complain any time a democrat even breathes would not be saying a word.
The pope looks like he would like to be somewhere else. Anywhere!
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)come here? How soon are they leaving?"
RadiationTherapy
(5,818 posts)"No."
forgotmylogin
(7,520 posts)"I cannot rock this look. I am an Amish person at a funeral."
Conversely, Ivanka: "I am totally rocking this funeral bride look whilst guarding my grabby-bits."
45: "Hey, Pops, why the Jewish hat? I thought we flew out of Hebrewstan. Doesn't Ivanka look so hot in that widow garb? Hey, you got any swords? There's this cool dance I can show you..."
Sugar Smack
(18,748 posts)Ivanka: searching her catalog of demure hand poses & landing on an awkward one.
Melania: "He can't take my hand. He can't touch me. If he tries anything funny, I'll take him down, here, right in front of the Pope".
"Easy D": poseable, manicured little Ken Doll hands (I am personally amazed he controlled his "thumbs up" for once).
The Pope: resignation and weight.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Thanks! I needed that laugh! It's a gem
"Ivanka: searching her catalog of demure hand poses & landing on an awkward one."
forgotmylogin
(7,520 posts)I don't know if that "things not to do in Europe" memo was real or not, but one thing you don't do is point with one finger when you work in a multicultural environment. You gesture with your hands and not your fingers.
He'd be fired by Disneyland for that.
forgotmylogin
(7,520 posts)"I'll take him down, here, right in front of the Pope."
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,494 posts)stopbush
(24,392 posts)but don't cover their heads while visiting Muslim countries?
Are the niceties only to be observed when the religion is Xianity?
rusty fender
(3,428 posts)But it also could be that they were visiting the big kahuna of a big religion, whereas in SA, they weren't visiting the pope of Islam. And if you think about it, in all of history there is no equivalent of the Pope, only the Archbishop of Canterbury comes close and then, not all that close
CountAllVotes
(20,866 posts)No more. Gone. Done. Bye!
You'd think it was Halloween or something give their two-bit "costumes"!!
stopbush
(24,392 posts)with the Pope that is very much in effect.
CountAllVotes
(20,866 posts)My radio tuned into Catholic Radio (not that I listen to it ever). It was discussing the protocol for visiting the Vatican and yes, the wearing of black is the color one wears as well as covering the head.
I guess I flunked out of Catholicism 101 eh?
Boomerproud
(7,940 posts)With J.F.K.'s 100th birthday coming up next Monday, I mourn the America that thrived to be a beacon. I don't know if we can ever get it back.
Igel
(35,274 posts)Wouldn't expect Takei to be aware of something so out of sync with his personal culture.
Would expect him not only to mock cultural or traditional differences he doesn't expect but also to be deeply offended that what he says could be viewed that way.
aeromanKC
(3,322 posts)And Ivanka and Melania know they are not worthy. (It shows in their faces)
matt819
(10,749 posts)That is the unhappiest group of people.
In contrast:
To be fair, Michelle Obama also dressed in black for the official photo. Though she carried it off better than Melania, who always looks utterly miserable.
BarbD
(1,192 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)since I was a teenager. I am 68 and haven't gone to Sunday Mass since I graduated HS. When did it change back?
Retrograde
(10,128 posts)Some time in the late 1960s, IIRC: we had to wear head coverings in grammar school, but not when I was in high school (both Catholic institutions).
When I visited Vatican City about 10 years ago they had no problems letting me into St. Peter's dressed in chinos and a polo shirt (I had a light shawl in my purse but didn't need it): they do prohibit shorts and sleeveless tops. I didn't have a formal audience with the pope, though - which was good because I don't think I owned a dress by then.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Melania not wearing a veil. She could have even worn a pants suit for all he cared.
whathehell
(29,034 posts)and Orthodox Jewish women must cover their heads in public ALL the time, so why all the focus on Catholics?... Easy targets, maybe?
Ms. Toad
(33,992 posts)There's plenty to condemn them for, without ridiculing them on one of the few occasions when they actually are trying to act like resppectful humans.
pnwmom
(108,955 posts)Quite a contrast to the photos of his first meeting with President Obama.
Vinca
(50,236 posts)Oneironaut
(5,486 posts)liberal N proud
(60,332 posts)no_hypocrisy
(46,020 posts)concert dress despite the fact I was never told.
He growled "Why don't you have a black dress!"
I shot back, "Because nobody in my family has died yet!"
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)They all look really cheezy. If you get my drift. Like some mob family trying to act sophisticated. HA ain't workin.
Warpy
(111,141 posts)which they know is coming because they're poisoning his pizzas.
CountAllVotes
(20,866 posts)And I share in his disgust!
What's with all of the black clothing? It is NOT appropriate says this Catholic!
ON EDIT: My Catholic husband took a look and replied, "This is a slap at the pope being he is wearing all white." Often another person's take on a situation is indeed worth its weight in gold! He is so right. No wonder pope Francis looks so disgusted and rightfully so! It is an INSULT!
sandensea
(21,600 posts)Here he is last year with his own's country's president, Mauricio Macri - the "Argentine Trump":
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)amuse bouche
(3,657 posts)They're creepy and they're kooky,
Mysterious and spooky,
They're altogether ooky,
Bear Creek
(883 posts)Help me! I am being held captive by a mangled apricot hell beast."
StarryNite
(9,435 posts)it looks like Melania just saw the ghost of whoever it was!
lindysalsagal
(20,581 posts)Honestly, Francis must be thinking, "Why me? Who are these clowns?"
bdamomma
(63,799 posts)Pope Francis, Why is stupid don smiling, and WTF is it a funeral??? Sickening, we are dealing with some .
dumb fucks. Sorry for the expletives.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)n2doc
(47,953 posts)Demonaut
(8,914 posts)AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)dflprincess
(28,072 posts)when he became a priest.
Hulk
(6,699 posts)Such a dunce. And I used to think W was dumber than a box of rocks. Holy shit!