Christian rightwing figures warn abortion fight could lead to civil war

[swag]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/26/abortion-ban-rightwing-christian-figures-civil-war-predictions?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&fbclid=IwAR02Fkgc4urR-fe4HnMTQEh0sA1luICDgm89q23xgGnbsSexSn8wSkDhPu0#Echobox=1558850753


by Jason Wilson


Prominent figures on the Christian right in the US ranging from religious magazines to authors to elected politicians have warned that the fight over abortion rights could lead to a new civil war.

Though such dire predictions are not necessarily new on the extreme right wing in the US, the passing of a wave of hardline anti-abortion laws in numerous states this year appears to have amped up the conspiracy-minded predictions that depict abortion squarely as a root cause of a coming conflict.

Republican lawmakers such as Ohio’s Candice Keller have openly speculated that the divide over abortion rights might lead to civil war. Last month, Keller drew explicit comparisons with the antebellum situation over slavery, telling the Guardian: “Whether this ever leads to a tragedy, like it did before with our civil war, I can’t say.”

Earlier this month, the Guardian revealed that the Washington state republican legislator Matt Shea had also speculated about civil war, and the “Balkanization” of America, predicting that Christians would retreat to “zones of freedom” such as the inland Pacific north-west, where Shea is campaigning for a new state to break away from Washington.

Asked on a podcast if the two halves of the country could remain together, Shea said: “I don’t think we can, again, because you have half that want to follow the Lord and righteousness and half that don’t, and I don’t know how that can stand.”

. . . more

Armageddon still a big goal for them.

[greatauntoftriplets]

1. They'll be thrilled when we infidels who support choice get raptured.

[hlthe2b]

2. If Blue and Purple states came together, the red states would have very little coastline...

Let's see how THAT would affect their economies--not to mention the intense brain drain.

No, I'm not supporting any kind of break-up, just contemplating the outcome if it happened. There is a scene in "Gone With the Wind" when Rhett Butler--the ultimate pragmatist, dares to throw reality on the naive sophistry put forth by the "glory" obsessed young rebels, pointing out the South had not a single cannon factory or other vital industry needed to sustain a war effort. Of course, it goes right over their addled heads

[customerserviceguy]

8. Coastlines may have been important during the Civil War

But in the age of flight, they're not nearly as important. Besides, even if you figure that Florida would stick with the blue states, there would still be enough coastline on the Gulf of Mexico and on the eastern seaboard.

Unless someone steps up and actually can unite us again as a nation, we're headed for a split. It doesn't have to be a bloody one, it could be like the breakup of Czechoslovakia.

[hlthe2b]

9. Shipping still matters. And airspace restrictions do make a difference in a non-democracy setting.

There are natural splits already. CO, NM, WA, OR, CA, Hi, (at a minimum). The NE and mid-Atlantic states with NY. The economies of those together would very likely dwarf what is left. Illinois and perhaps a few other upper Midwest states would likely come along as well.

[customerserviceguy]

10. It does

but mainly because our nation is dependent on so much stuff made overseas. If the red states were to take up manufacturing again, they would have less dependence on shipping. Still, you'd have the ports of Alabama, Mississippi and New Orleans, plus the ones in the Carolinas and Georgia. And I think that the Florida panhandle would join with the other red states.

There would be ample ways of flying to anywhere in the world from a red-state American nation, even if you couldn't cross over blue-state America. It might take a bit more fuel, but there's a fair amount of oil in the Gulf of Mexico.

[hlthe2b]

11. I was referring to blue/purple states free ability to fly even if RED states posed restrictions.

and while a red state "confederacy" might thrive in the LONG run, it is undeniable that they are at an economic disadvantage compared to the union of the states I outlined with their very consequential economies.

[customerserviceguy]

15. Maybe

The industrial base in the North that won WWII has been decimated in the decades since then. And a blue-state America might hobble itself with labor and environmental restrictions that cannot be passed now with red-state representatives and Senators opposing them in a unified USA.

[Turin_C3PO]

13. The problem is

that there’s plenty of red-minded people in blue states and vice versa.

[hlthe2b]

14. As there were Muslims in Hindu-dominated India and Hindus in what became Muslim Pakistan

during partition.

It would be ugly, but this is one time when the majority DOES rule.

[Turin_C3PO]

17. True enough but I just don't see it happening.

I kind of wish it would though.

[hlthe2b]

19. "Law of untended consequences".... No one could really predict but it surely would be traumatic.

[customerserviceguy]

16. There would be migration

Either voluntary or forced. Think of what happened to the Tories in the thirteen colonies when what was to become the United States won over England in the Revolutionary War. In fact, you could say that England provided a place for them to go by having kicked out the Acadians a couple of decades earlier.

[aka-chmeee]

3. Wouldn't pro-lifers be at a serious disadvantage

in a conflict with all of us pro-death godless heathens?

[customerserviceguy]

6. I'm guessing

they have more weapons than we do.

[hlthe2b]

18. There are a tremendous amount of military bases in blue states as well as red...

so, I wouldn't be so sure...

[customerserviceguy]

22. I'm just talking about privately owned ones

And, I was responding to a comment about the willingness of red-staters to deal with "pro-death godless heathens".

[Dan]

27. I am thinking that history might show

That in the event of a Civil War - I suspect that the pro-life states will first do a lot of internal killing seeking purity.

[customerserviceguy]

28. It's difficult

to make assumptions based on behavior that happened over one hundred fifty years ago.

And they won't have to drive many out, look at the thread about students from blue-state America avoiding higher education in the pro-life states.

If we do have a split, chances are, it will be relatively bloodless.

[aka-chmeee]

35. I wasn't writing in a literal sense, rather speaking to the irony of people under the banner

of "pro-life" faced with the act of killing to further that cause. Not that I really think the banner or the cause is a particularly
considered or sincere facet of their philosophy.

[LonePirate]

4. Freedom was the defining lesson of the Civil War. These idiots did not learn that lesson evidently.

[wasupaloopa]

5. This is why I wish religion never existed. Never mind science or truth.

My brother is a Catholic priest and he gets mad at me because I don’t see him as someone with a spiritual truth.

[trev]

20. Decades ago, I admired the Franciscans

based entirely on my little-read understanding of them. Then a coworker showed me a newsletter written by his Franciscan priest brother, and to my horror I discovered that the organization is virulently right-wing. Poor Francis. I wonder what he would make of his monastery today?

[hlthe2b]

24. Jesuits were always considered to be the more liberal order. Pope Francis is a Jesuit

though he arguably is highly influenced by Franciscans as well.

[trev]

34. Hm, I would've thought the Church's Warriors

would have been ultra-conservative.

Gotta admit, although I have studied general church history extensively, my knowledge of Catholicism isn't really all that great.

[SWBTATTReg]

7. That's because these filthy and traitorous pieces of trash still believe in this nonsense of 'the...

end times'. Ridiculous. The world is probably (not counting rump) at one of its best times ever, and these nuts instead of joining together with the rest of the human race and making things better for the human race and all who inhabit the earth, instead will attempt to drag down and destroy it all, simply because of their ignorant and bigoted beliefs. We have moved away from these ignorant beliefs (as our forefathers wanted by strictly limiting the role of religion in government (strict separation)).

I have to laugh too, for in a way, these idiots have brought their own 'Armageddon' on themselves, as their outmoded and 2000 year old beliefs, has driven away literally 10s of millions of people away from their corrupt and amoral behavior, as more and more of their leaders are arrested for pedophile (or worse) behaviors, stealing from the till, etc. Every week there is news of some pastor, some preacher, etc., being arrested for some crime. One recent one was one preying on children of their church...disgusting. Another one was caught paying off his pool boy around 1.6 or so million dollars (Falwell Jr.). Hypocrites all.

[trev]

25. Just to be accurate

Christianity as we know it didn't come about until 326CE, under Constantine, when he made it the state religion. Before then, all Christian invective was directed towards "heretics"--i.e., other Christians with differing doctrinal beliefs. Once it became a political entity with a set of doctrines determined at the Council of Nicea (and the 6th-Century Council of Trent) believers turned their attention to the Pagan world and began persecuting followers of other religions and attacking the science of their day.

[SWBTATTReg]

36. I knew this but didn't want to include it in my post, too much info. for post topic...nt

[trev]

38. Ah, cool.

[Archae]

39. There are those far worse than the endtimers.

The late RJ Rushdoony was a fervent theocrat, racist, anti-Semite and corrupt AF.
His brat is no better.

http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2019/05/2195-mark-rushdoony.html

[SWBTATTReg]

40. Yikes. Thank goodness that most of us aren't this gullible or willing to kill their fellow ...

Americans for their religious beliefs. This guy is obviously willing to trample over one's constitutional rights to achieve their dubious and idiotic beliefs. Not when I (and I'm sure 1000s of us fellow DUers too) are still standing ... I'll knock on thousands of doors etc. to get out the vote to make sure that nuts like this never prevail. Take care.

[Turin_C3PO]

12. They're not gonna do shit.

These nutcases won’t pick up a gun and fight, no way.

[Quemado]

21. Another example of hypocrisy.

Being anti-abortion means you are pro-life, right?

Well, if you're pro-life, why are you promoting violence?

Oh, wait a minute, I forgot. You're a hypocrite if you describe yourself as pro-life, but you advocate violence when things don't go your way.

[Downtown Hound]

23. The GOP is predominately middle aged and old white men who are well past combat age

Millennials are overwhelmingly liberal and growing less white all the time. And unlike most of the pudgy, old conservatives, they wouldn't have a coronary if they had to run a mile. Forget about who has more guns. First of all, liberals aren't as unarmed as the right likes to pretend. Second, in this day and age, guns can be manufactured and made very quickly and easily and distributed in no time should a war ever truly break out. A few 3d printers could crank out hundreds of them in no time. Blue states have way more tech industries and natural resources, and ultimately, that's what wins wars. Not fat old, racist white guys playing Rambo in the woods.

Cool AR-15's conservatives. Now check out these hundreds of armed drones we had Silicon Valley make for us.

[trev]

26. Well said.

[sinkingfeeling]

29. No need to fight a war. They can have the old CSA states.

[no_hypocrisy]

30. The upcoming Republic of Gidead won't be satisfied with abortion criminalization.

Expect:

1. Banning of contraception;
2. The return of draconian divorce law, based on the Bible;
3. Criminalization of adultery;
4. Unmarried daughters and sisters not allowed to leave their homes without a male chaperone;
5. The selling of daughters into marriages arranged by their fathers;
6. The rights of women to own land or wealth will be abolished; and
7. Women will lose their constitutional right to vote b/c The Constitution will have been abolished or changed at the Constitutional Convention. (Only 4-5 states left to vote for one.)

[MountCleaners]

31. They're just projecting

The contemporary anti-abortion movement has its roots in segregation. White southern evangelicals like Jerry Falwell were segregationists. By the mid-70's, segregation had become an embarrassment, and Jimmy Carter was still drawing southern votes. Falwell hooked up with Paul Weyrich (an extreme right-wing Catholic) and decided to promote anti-abortion, along with other "family values" issues, to corral people into supporting the Republican Party. But the movement has its roots in segregation, and is still most fervently supported by southern evangelicals.

Their ancestors were certainly not abolitionists, and they are trying to cover it up. Let's also not forget the anti-abortion movement's ties to the racist right. This is their way of avoiding guilt. They also use Holocaust comparisons in their rhetoric. But many of the ringleaders have family roots not only in segregation, but in the Confederate side of the Civil War.

It's just so transparent and phony.

[Nitram]

32. Bring it on, Pseudo-Christians, we've got guns, too.

Not to mention the strongest military force in the world.

[vsrazdem]

33. Since 65% to 70% of the country believe in the right to choose, this would be a losing battle.

[amcgrath]

37. The problem that they are too blind to see is

that should they secede, nobody will give a crap out about them. Their stupid philosophies and hate driven agendas are a joke to Trump and most of those in Washington - you think Trump is a 'man of god'? The republicans - and to a lesser extent, the democrats pay kip service because they represent a block vote.

If they "withdrew" and set up their own independent state, they would be ineligible to vote in a federal election, making them worthless to the Republicans - they'd learn pretty quickly