4 ms·

What other word should I use to describe a de facto government of America that blatantly, and loudly, refuses to follow the American constitution? This is not m

What other word should I use to describe a de facto government of America that blatantly, and loudly, refuses to follow the American constitution? This is not my opinion. The courts have agreed with me that religious service is an essential activity, despite many governor's and the federal government's attempts to ban it. Moreover, the current federal regime has unequivocally said that although the Supreme Court itself has ruled its eviction moratoria illegal, it would enforce them anyway (despite the SC ruling unequivocally that this constituted a violation of the takings clause). That is a constitutonal crisis, that was only glossed over because the media decided it didn't exist. My use of the word regime befits the current US government. The American heritage dictionary says that regime means: A usually heavy-handed administration or group in charge of an organization. That is exactly what the current federal government and many state governments (including my own) are by the admissions of our own courts.

selykg 5y ago
I was mostly pointing out the hypocrisy of what you were saying. > I feel sorry for those who have to substitute something so vile for something so wholesome. Here you are trying to proclaim how your church is so wholesome, while you yourself are being an unwholesome person. You're continuing to divide people with your rhetoric. So wholesome. If you're a representation of your church, I am glad I am not part of your church, or any church for that matter. I've found that this type of behavior you're spewing is quite common and a reason why I hope organized religion finds its deathbed sooner rather than later.
- iammisc 5y ago
  This has nothing to do with my church in particular but has to do with the idea of a church. Honestly society benefits if people were members of churches other than my own as well. Even a church not my own would foster community and hopefully want people to become better. And provide a community where people can have true connection And yes, social media is vile. I'm sorry you don't see that. There is nothing dismissive about calling a piece of software vile. Do you see how confused you've become under it's influence? I literally called a software service vile, after decades of published studies and news reports indicating it's I'll effects, and I've been accused of fostering division among people. This is the great problem with social media. It confuses fake for real, virtual for physical, and computer programs for human beings.
  - selykg 5y ago
    No, I agree social media is awful. I was talking about your rhetoric being divisive. Notably with use of words like "regime" which is often used to describe authoritarian governments. No matter what you think of our particular government in the US, it is not authoritarian and I suspect if you ever actually lived in a location where that was the case you'd still realize there's far more good about the US government than there is bad. But hey, you can keep blaming me for your shortcomings, that's what religious people like to do.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Our government is a regime, and has been for a very long time. Presidents today rule almost exclusively by executive order. Each administration takes yet more drastic action, completely obliterates past precedent, etc. Why can't we say this really? Is the US as bad as Iran? No of course not. But that's like a the bare minimum here. I'd rather we not get there. > But hey, you can keep blaming me for your shortcomings, that's what religious people like to do. You're the one worshipping at the feet of Uncle Sam.
      - selykg 5y ago
        >You're the one worshipping at the feet of Uncle Sam. Far from it. But I'm not stupid enough to not grasp that we have it a lot better here in the US than others do. It may not be perfect, but it is far from authoritarian or a regime. You're the one using the incorrect words trying to stir shit up.

selykg 5y ago

I was mostly pointing out the hypocrisy of what you were saying. > I feel sorry for those who have to substitute something so vile for something so wholesome. Here you are trying to proclaim how your church is so wholesome, while you yourself are being an unwholesome person. You're continuing to divide people with your rhetoric. So wholesome. If you're a representation of your church, I am glad I am not part of your church, or any church for that matter. I've found that this type of behavior you're spewing is quite common and a reason why I hope organized religion finds its deathbed sooner rather than later.

iammisc 5y ago
This has nothing to do with my church in particular but has to do with the idea of a church. Honestly society benefits if people were members of churches other than my own as well. Even a church not my own would foster community and hopefully want people to become better. And provide a community where people can have true connection And yes, social media is vile. I'm sorry you don't see that. There is nothing dismissive about calling a piece of software vile. Do you see how confused you've become under it's influence? I literally called a software service vile, after decades of published studies and news reports indicating it's I'll effects, and I've been accused of fostering division among people. This is the great problem with social media. It confuses fake for real, virtual for physical, and computer programs for human beings.
- selykg 5y ago
  No, I agree social media is awful. I was talking about your rhetoric being divisive. Notably with use of words like "regime" which is often used to describe authoritarian governments. No matter what you think of our particular government in the US, it is not authoritarian and I suspect if you ever actually lived in a location where that was the case you'd still realize there's far more good about the US government than there is bad. But hey, you can keep blaming me for your shortcomings, that's what religious people like to do.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Our government is a regime, and has been for a very long time. Presidents today rule almost exclusively by executive order. Each administration takes yet more drastic action, completely obliterates past precedent, etc. Why can't we say this really? Is the US as bad as Iran? No of course not. But that's like a the bare minimum here. I'd rather we not get there. > But hey, you can keep blaming me for your shortcomings, that's what religious people like to do. You're the one worshipping at the feet of Uncle Sam.
    - selykg 5y ago
      >You're the one worshipping at the feet of Uncle Sam. Far from it. But I'm not stupid enough to not grasp that we have it a lot better here in the US than others do. It may not be perfect, but it is far from authoritarian or a regime. You're the one using the incorrect words trying to stir shit up.