Can't be a Jedi if you support Trump...?

After reading a good deal of this very long thread I had one primary thought come to mind…
(no, I did not read the entire thing – maybe 60/70 plus percent?)

I find it interesting how politics has become more about people than policy. Maybe we should change it to people-tics

If the last few years has shown anything, I have been witness to a level of moral, ethical and moral bifurcation and partisanship that I honestly never thought the general populace would sink to. All in support of “their man.” I personally don’t care who is representing us so long as they actually represent us. And given what we’ve been shown… I think the politicians we have do represent the populace on a whole.

Getting online and checking everyone’s favorite web site, www.i’mright.com and cherry picking the statistics that supports one argument and representatives position is hardly the way I think we should approach the governance of a society.

How about actual research and careful consideration of what the best option for not only a short term but long term outcome would be? Then putting aside our petty differences to implement a policy that could see it to fruition.

Or whatever. The circus is entertaining. I don’t mind watching for a while longer LOL :laugh:
Sometimes it takes a matter of epic proportion to change the status quo. I just wonder if everyone will really believe it was worth it when that time comes.

Omhu and zealotx I will respectfully disagree with your ideas on this matter and I will refrain from posting on again this specific thread . Because I see your minds are made up on the matter and even if I politely argue with you and the talking points ( specifically from omhu ) it will be an endless debate . Until one of us just decides the matter is no longer relevant to argue because we made our point . My point is this no matter how or who you vote for if you want to be a Jedi then be a Jedi . If some of your personal beliefs conflict with the Jedi way than that is okay , and if your preferred candidate's beliefs or policies doesn't exactly match the temples that's okay too . We have a right to vote for who we want and no one or religion should tell you otherwise and if they do then that is infringement on our rights and that's not good . Also if a religion has a standard on who you can or can't vote for than that religion in that case has bad values . And no I'm not saying that the temple is bad in that sense , personally I love this place and the people within . I like the values ,openness , and acceptance of this temple and in no way am I saying they need to be altered in anyway . I'm just saying that there should be no mandate on who to vote for , or there should be no ( because this candidate has different policies than we endorse you can't vote for them and if you do the you can't be a member or call yourself a Jedi ) .

Omhu Cuspor wrote: The title of this thread - "Can't be a Jedi if you support Trump?" seems to potentially convey two meanings, due to an observation someone once made about the word "you": "When I say 'you', I mean either you, me, or everybody." So, if the intent is to convey "everybody", as in "Could anybody be considered a Jedi if s/he supports Trump?" I am going to sidestep the question. There are people here who clearly think the answer is yes, and perhaps that is correct; I don't see anyone in this thread whom I think is malicious (other than Malicious, heh), Absent any bad intent, I don't wish to start proposing rules about who and who does not belong here.

But, if "you" actually means "you" in this case, so the question is "Do you yourself find being a Jedi compatible with a choice to be a Trump supporter?", a response is more clear.

Dominant in my mind is the prominent statement on the opening page of the Temple: "Jedi believe in the Force, and in the inherent worth of all life within it." With that in mind, I consider various impacts of the political policies of the current U.S. administration:

* Dramatically reversing America's commitment to climate change, placing ever-greater restrictions on the use of scientific evidence
at the EPA and making America one of only two nations on Earth to repudiate the Paris Climate Accord. This denies the inherent
worth of today's young people, future generations, and non-human forms of life.
* Equating asylum seekers with illegal aliens, imprisoning them under harsh conditions, and kidnapping children from their parents. This
denies the inherent worth of non-Americans.
* Making implied threats of a first-strike nuclear war on two occasions (against North Korea and Iran). This arguably denies the inherent
worth of virtually everyone.
* Implementing a tax cut mostly benefitting the very rich while over half of Americans can't afford a $400 emergency. This negates
the inherent worth of the middle class and poor.
* With some justification, withdrawing the American military from Syria - but in a manner that left our Kurdish allies exposed to danger.
This denies the inherent worth of the Kurds - and, as a sideline, has driven them into a tentative alliance with Russia.
* Trying to implement an across-the-board ban on Muslims entering the U.S. This abrogates the inherent worth of Muslims.
* In an admitted extension of longstanding U.S. policy, has participated in the instigation of disorder and violence in Venezuela and Brazil.
This denies the inherent worth of our Latin American neighbors.
* With the help of Congress, has taken no action to secure America's easily hackable election system. This denies the inherent worth
of voters, or at least their desires.

So - could I personally in good conscience be a Jedi if I supported Trump? Easy squeazy lemon peasy -

No.

All good points.

I think the distinction we have to make is that we're specifically talking about Trump and his policies, not about the Republican party, Conservative values, blue collar workers, or any other group that identifies with an overall agenda of "make america great again" because that phrase means different things to different people. There must be a distinction because, in my opinion, Trump is rewriting Republican culture as we speak and its not good for them either. But Republican congress people feel trapped because of his support among "the base", and we can get into who that is, is too strong for them to stand on their conservative principles. But because of their silence the base never hears the full truth, only Trump's story and those who support that story in order to maintain political power.

It is hard for me to believe that conservatives are happy to keep these children in these detention centers for WEEKS. I don't believe THEY are heartless. I believe Stephen Miller is heartless. People can hide behind a policy but it matters how you execute it. For example, Marijuana is illegal on the federal level but isn't being enforced upon states like California. It's schedule 1 just like Heroin. So it kills me how people defend the way in which immigration policy is executed as if there's no choice or room for leniency; as if the violations of federal law make someone deserving of this kind of treatment or even the possibility of losing their children forever.

These EXTREME actions are not the view of a political party but rather strategy cooked up by Miller and rubber stamped by Trump. And I said this before Trump got elected, that he lacks the ability to see secondary and tertiary consequences and that's the main skill you need to be president. That's why Trump never understood Obama and a lot of people react negatively to the executive branch and distrust government in general. What you do for one group of people affects another. That "energy" has to come from somewhere. So Trump was like, "America first" which implied that non-Americans were to blame. Other companies don't pay enough for defense. People come here from "s-hole countries". Muslims are terrorists. Mexicans are taking our jobs. Blacks are getting public assistance. Etc. So Trumpism says F(orget) all these people. Let's make it great again for us... "real" Americans.

And of course someone's going to complain about what I just said but the fact is that everyone is free to interpret MAGA in their own way without knowing how Trump and his allies interpret it themselves. And that's another secondary consequence that Trump either didn't see or doesn't care about. Everyone wants to make "their" [version] America great again. And that involves decisions that will negatively impact the other groups (typically minorities) they don't care about. They think MAGA is good because they believe they are the Americans that Trump wants to protect and defend. So they assume his version of America, and American greatness, is the same as his, without fully seeing that he is acting largely in response to Obama. Trump wasn't against Democrats under Clinton. Trump donated to the Clintons. But Trump lies so easily and convincingly that people in his base simply believe that he thinks the same way they do on all these issues and that he cares.

And so he becomes a kind of white knight Jesus character and people refuse to see him as a real man instead of the fictional character he was on The Apprentice. Think about it. Everyone thinks they know Jesus and Jesus wants to save them but let's apply critical thinking and logic. None of them would need to be saved if they were never born. And if he simply came earlier, they would never have born and never would have needed salvation because they didn't exist. But what do humans do? We start with the notion of self and ego and I and then we work backwards from there. But in reality, for every generation people claim Jesus died for, that's another generation he couldn't come back for before they were born. And if we then cannot answer the question for the next generation, were Jesus to come today, how can we then answer the question for our own generation?

So no offense to believers but the point is that often we try to filter the world through our beliefs and imagine that people are on our side. But Trump's on his own side.He simply knows that being on his own side comes at the cost of making people believe he cares.

I have a hard time reading anything that says if your this you ARE this. Especially when it come to modern day Jediism.
Truth of the matter is - real talk -you can be a jerk and still be a modern day Jeddist. With that said - some may find me the jerk at times and some may not - gotta love the Hero’s journey like that - we can play multiple parts in multiple paths for a multitude of things and people. You can be anything and a Jeddist - it’s kinna a given thing. One of the hidden Joys to all this is ( for me as well) - we know this. It’s like as to family is for me some times - some I wanna hug some I wanna kick some in the head and some I don’t associate with any more- but they are still family. No matter how ya feel some days - get salty or call that crazy lot what ya want - call em to the table and eat.
Sit down and eat already! Lol
We can have the extra seat available mentality or keep letting labels separate ... either way- choice is always ours.

Malicious wrote: Omhu and zealotx I will respectfully disagree with your ideas on this matter and I will refrain from posting on again this specific thread . Because I see your minds are made up on the matter and even if I politely argue with you and the talking points ( specifically from omhu ) it will be an endless debate . Until one of us just decides the matter is no longer relevant to argue because we made our point . My point is this no matter how or who you vote for if you want to be a Jedi then be a Jedi . If some of your personal beliefs conflict with the Jedi way than that is okay , and if your preferred candidate's beliefs or policies doesn't exactly match the temples that's okay too . We have a right to vote for who we want and no one or religion should tell you otherwise and if they do then that is infringement on our rights and that's not good . Also if a religion has a standard on who you can or can't vote for than that religion in that case has bad values . And no I'm not saying that the temple is bad in that sense , personally I love this place and the people within . I like the values ,openness , and acceptance of this temple and in no way am I saying they need to be altered in anyway . I'm just saying that there should be no mandate on who to vote for , or there should be no ( because this candidate has different policies than we endorse you can't vote for them and if you do the you can't be a member or call yourself a Jedi ) .

voting for Trump and being a "Trump supporter" are not the same thing to me. Let's make that clear.

Supporter means you are in favor of HIM. That's not the same thing as voting for him, believing him to be the lesser of two evils. Like I said, i voted in favor of Jill Stein because at that time I didn't want to vote for the lesser of two evils, but that kind of vote is NORMAL. If I support a candidate, that's more proactive. I like them. I'm engaging in activity to "help them" win. I'm not just giving them my vote because "meh... at least he's not Roy Moore".

Plenty of Republicans vote R. Period. It doesn't matter who the candidate is. And especially for local races. Most people don't go vote, knowing all the people they're voting for. They see the D or the R and they check the box based on a general assumption about the candidate's perspective being similar to their own. But this thread isn't talking about those voters. It's not talking about the red team or the blue team. It's specifically about a man. Donald Trump.

If you're voting for him and holding your nose, that's understandable pragmatism. But if you give full throated support because you like what he's doing... that's the support we're talking about. Supporters WANT zero tolerance at the border. That's why someone in his rally crowd said "shoot em" and we don't need to rehash Trump's response. But clearly, he doesn't care about those people. But those people are not less human because they're not American. And NO ONE deserves to lose a parent or child because of some federal law that can be selectively enforced.

And it was the same with Bill Clinton. I didn't agree with what he did with Monica Lewinsky but that was more of a issue in his marriage. I could still vote for him. However the crime bill meant that I can't support him. Based on policy. The other guy might be even worse and so I have to consider that in my voting. I have to consider what not voting for him would mean for other candidates too. But I don't support the man. So if you say, "well I wanted conservative judges on the supreme court", okay. But that's support for a conservative republican agenda; still doesn't mean you have to support the man.

Does that make sense?

Malicious wrote: Omhu and zealotx I will respectfully disagree with your ideas on this matter and I will refrain from posting on again this specific thread . Because I see your minds are made up on the matter and even if I politely argue with you and the talking points ( specifically from omhu ) it will be an endless debate . Until one of us just decides the matter is no longer relevant to argue because we made our point . My point is this no matter how or who you vote for if you want to be a Jedi then be a Jedi . If some of your personal beliefs conflict with the Jedi way than that is okay , and if your preferred candidate's beliefs or policies doesn't exactly match the temples that's okay too . We have a right to vote for who we want and no one or religion should tell you otherwise and if they do then that is infringement on our rights and that's not good . Also if a religion has a standard on who you can or can't vote for than that religion in that case has bad values . And no I'm not saying that the temple is bad in that sense , personally I love this place and the people within . I like the values ,openness , and acceptance of this temple and in no way am I saying they need to be altered in anyway . I'm just saying that there should be no mandate on who to vote for , or there should be no ( because this candidate has different policies than we endorse you can't vote for them and if you do the you can't be a member or call yourself a Jedi ) .

To be fair malicious, you display quite a few of the strategies I've seen trump supporters use: "I don't like him, but he's better than *insert amalgamation of all the worst things about any possible opponent*" "you aren't going to change your mind, so it's pointless for me to try and back up my talking points I introduced" "my vote is my choice" etc.

If we broke down the discussion into clinical little policy quanta, would you stand by some of the explicitly TotJO points (e.g. opposing capital punishment) or would you be closer to someone else's line? Your understanding of how the first amendment works is lacking quite a bit. If you have questions about it, I could answer them over PM.

At any rate, if you don't support someone's policies, don't support them. The US went for the majority of its history without the 2-party hegemony we see today, so why be a sucker for it. Make elections closer, and don't give into ideological laziness

"poop" - George Washington

When I was born it was illegal for a white person to marry a black person in 22 states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States

The US Supreme Court struck down these laws in 1967. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Here's an unsettling article from a couple of years ago. NEARLY 20 PERCENT OF AMERICANS THINK INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE IS 'MORALLY WRONG,' POLL FINDS

If someone supports banning interracial marriage (a constitutional amendment making banning legal) can they be a Jedi?

CaesarEJW wrote: "poop" - George Washington

But what paper would he choose?

Malicious wrote: ... My point is this no matter how or who you vote for if you want to be a Jedi then be a Jedi . ... We have a right to vote for who we want and no one or religion should tell you otherwise and if they do then that is infringement on our rights and that's not good . Also if a religion has a standard on who you can or can't vote for than that religion in that case has bad values . And no I'm not saying that the temple is bad in that sense , personally I love this place and the people within . I like the values ,openness , and acceptance of this temple and in no way am I saying they need to be altered in anyway . I'm just saying that there should be no mandate on who to vote for , or there should be no ( because this candidate has different policies than we endorse you can't vote for them and if you do the you can't be a member or call yourself a Jedi ) .

While our political leanings appear to reflect stark differences, I do agree with you in this, Malicious. Politics perhaps is most focused on how a society attains its goals; members of a religion might be said to be united in what those goals should be. We can align in the latter without aligning in the former.

Br. John wrote: When I was born it was illegal for a white person to marry a black person in 22 states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States

The US Supreme Court struck down these laws in 1967. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Here's an unsettling article from a couple of years ago. NEARLY 20 PERCENT OF AMERICANS THINK INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE IS 'MORALLY WRONG,' POLL FINDS

If someone supports banning interracial marriage (a constitutional amendment making banning legal) can they be a Jedi?

I find this a tough question, especially in light of my recent posts where I endeavored to separate political positions from Jedi ideals. The scenario you described, Br. John, is one that explicitly describes how we apply those ideals to real-world situations.

I have a bias. When younger, I was in a relationship with someone of another race. It was a terrific relationship which, in my immaturity and ego at the time, I botched, to my regret. I can only reflect that if I was in that relationship now, and found myself in a faith where support for banning interracial marriage was not only tolerated but fairly popular, I'd find a new faith. So, I guess I'd say that someone who supports a ban on interracial marriage can still adopt any faith they choose - but depending upon the pervasiveness of that position within the faith, I may no longer be sharing membership in the same tradition.

Under what premise would interracial marriage be banned? That would dictate its platform as a policy. Being impartial doesn't have to mean being ambivalent or indecisive.. it just means (to me) being fair in appraising what and why something exists so an analysis can be made on its purpose and impacts.

Br. John wrote:

CaesarEJW wrote: "poop" - George Washington

But what paper would he choose?

Attachment 617s6Rc7vML._SX522_.jpg not found

Attachment Trump_TP_2019-12-05.jpg not found

You are now my favorite person of the day.
And he would purchase the discount double pack!

DON'T BE A DONKEY OR AN ELEPHANT.

BE LIKE THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

BE A BULL MOOSE.

PAID FOR BY BULL MOOSE 2020

Br. John wrote: When I was born it was illegal for a white person to marry a black person in 22 states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States

The US Supreme Court struck down these laws in 1967. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Here's an unsettling article from a couple of years ago. NEARLY 20 PERCENT OF AMERICANS THINK INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE IS 'MORALLY WRONG,' POLL FINDS

If someone supports banning interracial marriage (a constitutional amendment making banning legal) can they be a Jedi?

Exactly.

What we're talking about are POLICIES that define this president and HIS interpretation of "MAGA". The question is not "can you be republican" or "can you be conservative". You can be both those things and not even know all of what has happened under Trump because the media on his side typically ignores everything bad because of their fear of losing power if too much of the truth got to Trump's base.

This media propaganda where people on FOX TV shows even try to steer Trump away from danger, shows that they are afraid of the public hearing too much, coming from their pro-Trump platform. And that shows me that they're not proud of this man; that they are capitalizing on ignorance to keep up the support for this man.

But if you know....

And if you choose to support THE MAN, full throated, covering up the truth when necessary, because you like his policies, then that's what's going to raise eyebrows and beg the question being asked in this thread. And while a certain level of pragmatism is acceptable I don't know if you can overlook, just for example, Hitler's views on the Jews, just because you like that he's tough of immigration and feel like he's protecting your ability to get a good paying job. That was a big concern in Nazi Germany and eventually, they saw the Jews doing well and they got jealous. This leads to chants like "Jews will not replace us".

The people who chant these things in the street... The racists... The KKK... "white nationalists".... The Alt Right.... All these names to conceal an agenda with their own interpretation of "MAGA". And one of them, even as we speak, is sitting in the West Wing writing policies he knows Trump will support because that's why Trump hired him and that's why he, Steven Miller, has outlasted almost everyone else; him and Ben Carson who is probably, as we speak, ...asleep.

That's not a voting block I can vote with because I don't want their agenda. But a lot of people do. Because they're still the same people that voted to ban interracial marriage and still see those people as traitors to their race. Those people haven't left the US. They simply vote privately at the booth. And when they hear dog whistles of racism they know who to vote for and support.

Naturally, Trump is going to feed his base. Naturally Trump is going to do things to get re-elected: some conservative things (though his spending is definitely not conservative), some republican things, etc. but of course he's mainly going to do things that benefit one person. Donald Trump. And that's why this is different. That's why this is Trumpism. And it is a danger to the Republican party as well as the nation. The guy is actively seeking foreign interference in our elections just to help himself. With that precedent set, why wouldn't other nations basically start cyber WWIII in order to control who the next president is? And governments like Russia, who have an intelligence apparatus are going to be in a different league from your ordinary Super PAC. This means that potentially other countries will have a bigger voice in American politics than Americans themselves. THAT is the threat to Democracy. They don't need to manufacture enough votes to beat all of us. They just need to move enough to tip the scales. But whether the next president wins by 100 or 10,000... a win is a win. And that's what Trump is telling them. As long as he wins, it's okay. That's how you sell out Democracy.

And so the question is, do our values as Jedi prevent us from supporting, not just these policies, but also this kind of corruption and abuse of power? How much of a blind eye can be turned to such things?

A Jedi most vote their conscience. We just use or beliefs to inform our daily life, including voting.

Does your candidate support the inherent worth of all life? Does your candidate support the beliefs you carry about Jediism, or the Doctrine?

These are questions you should she for yourself, because while religion shouldn't tell you who to vote for, if you follow your path it should be obvious inside you.

steamboat28 wrote: A Jedi most vote their conscience. We just use or beliefs to inform our daily life, including voting.

Does your candidate support the internet worth of all life? Does your candidate support the beliefs you carry about Jediism, or the Doctrine?

These are questions you should she for yourself, because while religion shouldn't tell you who to vote for, if you follow your path it should be obvious inside you.

While this is, of course, true. I think the difficulty is the right hand knowing what the left is doing. If pro-Trump outlets only praise him for the things they agree with as accomplishments he looks like a hero to those viewers/listeners. And while people might have been open to other media outlets and more moderated perspectives, Trump is convincing them that anything bad the media says about him is "fake news". So a person's vote is only as good as the information they're armed with. And if we don't exchange ideas in a way that we can all participate fruitfully then we enable those bubbles to form around people. And they're just trying to protect their own interests as a voter. It's easy for a voter to feel lumped into the wrong crowd because both crowds are voting for the same person.

It's like a couple going to a movie together. One of them may like the movie a little or a lot more than the other. Different parts of that movie appeal to each one of them differently. So I think this is where we have to be understanding and careful in how we communicate our own distaste for the movie so they don't feel alienated like we're about to break up over this movie. Of course we're not. Our relationship is first and foremost. But if I say, nah I'm not gonna see that movie, Harriet, because they went out of their way to make the antagonist a black slave catcher in a movie about a historical protagonist and no record in US history of any free black person becoming a slave catcher, I would hope my partner would at least try to understand and wouldn't want to see it either once they found that out.

To any staunch Trump supporter, all I have to say is....
NEENER NEENER! :silly:
(same to anyone who is loyal to a cult-of-personality or is ideologically-blind)

Lest ye believe its only those evil white men who want to ban interracial marriage (which is NOT what the poll was asking) lets look at what the actual study actually said.
AS ALWAYS, heres a link, please check for yourself:
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/y3tke5cxwy/econTabReport.pdf
Scroll down to page 3 where it says "Moral Acceptability of Various Behaviors" and find "Interracial Marriage". It is the 9th entry.

Regardless of whether they should be legal or not, which of the following things do you personally consider to be morally acceptable or morally wrong?

Interracial marriage
Morally Acceptable:
White: 83%
Black: 82%
Hispanic: 85%
Other: 81%

Morally wrong:
White: 17%
Black 18%
Hispanic: 15%
Other: 19%

OB1Shinobi wrote: Lest ye believe its only those evil white men....

I hate white people.
(for the record, I ain't white, I'm Irish)