Get MY "Judeo" out of YOUR "Judeo-Christian Values!"

[Bicoastal]

Everyone knows Conservatives adapted that phrase to try and recruit more Jewish voters into the Republican Party. Of course, judging by the percentage of Jews who voted for the Democrats in the last election, it isn't working--but that hasn't stopped them yet.

At its core, "Judeo-Christian" is complete nonsense--the Old and New Testaments couldn't be more different. Plus, true Religious Righties think Jews are going to hell anyway, so what's the point?

Bottom line is, I'm offended by the GOP's transparent attempt to cozy up to me and the rest of The Tribe, and I wish they'd knock it off.

[11cents]

1. The Tribe doesn't call that book "the Old Testament" --

See Lewis Black's rant on this subject.

But I also hate the "Judeo-Christian" business.

[Bicoastal]

2. Hell, I know...

...but I figured that's how most people here know it.

[11cents]

7. Sure, but it doesn't hurt to help people see things from a different angle.

I suspect relatively few Christians know that Jews don't call their scripture "the Old Testament." And referring to Old and New Testaments (that is, folding the Hebrew Bible into a Christian package) actually buttresses the notion that there's a "Judeo-Christian" religious orientation.

[Undercurrent]

3. Don't know what you mean

by "Conservatives invented that phrase"? The term Judeo-Christian was in the Oxford English Dictionary in 1899.

Not sure when the "values" was added, but adding it is in keeping with their pattern of using all sorts of word games to lure disparate groups to support them. (Most infamously is their use of Orwellian Speak.)

[Bicoastal]

8. Gotcha and corrected. They may not have come up with it...

...but they sure have been careful to use it ever since Jews stopped being "The Other" and started being "Possible Republican Voter Due To Israel Agitprop"

[villager]

4. And actually, a lot of the philosophies that fundies think are original with ol' J.C.

...are in fact enunciated, to some degree, by the Hebrew prophets in the, er, "Old Testament's" later books...

[Bad Thoughts]

10. Yeah, fundies are big on the prophets

Especially those who "damned the nation" or complained about lack of compassion for the poor.

[villager]

14. well, fundies aren't so big on compassion for the poor, certainly

Not when it comes to the policies of those they support for public office.

Also, I think the fundamentally (pun?) oppositional or dissenting nature of prophets totally eludes them, especially when busy worshipping their own temporal kings -- like Li'l George, Cheney the Dick, etc., etc....

[snake in the grass]

16. You mean big on the "profits", right?

That seems to be their greatest concern, aside from whining about everybody they don't like.

[Bad Thoughts]

5. There's nothing "Judeo-Christian" that isn't just "Christian"eom.

[mucifer]

6. I feel like they view us as their little mascots. They send money to Israel and

try to convert us and get us into the Jews for Jesus thingy and it's all gross. They want their rapture. That said, there are plenty of high powered Jews in the republican party. Makes me sick when I think about william kristol and norm coleman and eric cantor etc etc etc. :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Rageneau]

9. The people with the best Judeo-Christian values are Buddhists

[11cents]

13. Like the Zen priests who avidly supported Japan's brutal imperial expansion?

Zen was also the favored practice of the samurai. And I believe Sri Lankan Tamils are unimpressed with the "Judeo-Christian" values of Buddhists.

I think this statement requires a simplistic view of Buddhists/Buddhism, and a content-free notion of Buddhism, Christianity, and Judaism alike.

[Bicoastal]

15. There is NO major religion that has not advocated horrific violence for "a greater good..."

...at one time or another.

[sampsonblk]

17. Whoa. Religions don't advocate that stuff, PEOPLE do...

...in the name of religion.

Not the same thing.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Yes it is the same thing

Religions do not exist outside of the people that practice them. A religion without a believer is a thing that does not exist. So your point is as moot as they make 'em.

[sampsonblk]

23. No, it isn't the same thing

Religions DO exist outside the people who practice them. If christianity IS what its adherents say and do, then Jesus would be responsible for all the things done in his name. No way.

In bible the, Jesus made plain that there would be many who claimed his name but did not do what he said. That's for damn sure. You can't blame christianity (or Jesus himself) for the acts of people who ostensibly are christians.

You have to seperate the religion from the people who claim it. Just my opinion.

[Occam Bandage]

26. And like the Tibetan Buddhists who had a brutally oppressive theocracy

before the Chinese kicked them out and introduced Tibet to modern repression.

[dflprincess]

11. I always thought they used the phrase to make themselves

appear open minded and tolerant of other beliefs.

[customerserviceguy]

12. It's just a way to paper over differences

when trying to put up that big tent, regardless of its original meaning. I do a bit of lurking over at the freeptard board, and when they start discussions about exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, you'll see religious "tolerance" in action, all right!

Right now, there is a Mormon offshoot group that is on the outs with RimJob, and he's declared counter-war against them. The battles at that site over simply whether or not Mormons are Christians regularly depletes the supply of microwave popcorn in my house!

[SanchoPanza]

18. Not Jewish voters

Christian Zionists, mostly, which is a subset of the Dispensationalist movement. People who believe that the creation of Israel in 1948 was a part of Biblical prophecy, and that the restoration of a Jewish state in Palestine is a necessary prerequisite for the Second Coming. The term "Judeo-Christian" was co-opted by the movement in the 50s and 60s. Prior to that it was widely used as a defense against the long-festering antisemitism in Christian churches by liberal priests and pastors such as Reinhold Neibuhr, and probably reached its apex in use around the time that WWII was ending in Europe.

It has little to do with any sort of acknowledgment of Jewish scholarship, particularly the Talmudic tradition, either in theology or law. I doubt many of these people even know who Maimonides is, for instance, let alone anything about his writings.

[LiberalFighter]

19. Christianity was piggy backed on the Jewish religion to gain credibility.

The Jewish religion gave Christianity a history.

Jesus was a man of the Jewish faith. He did not renounce his religion.

His disciples were Jews. They did not renounce their religion.

Paul never met Jesus. He wrote 13 epistles (books) of the 27 in the New Testament.

[MellowDem]

21. Well, among religious Jews I know

they voted McCain. But they were Orthodox types with an 'Israel first' mindset, and Barack Hussein Obama made them nervous in that regard. If the word really was created to recruit Jews, I'm guessing it would be to recruit religious Jews, of which there are not that many in the US.

I always just figured it was implying the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, which, even with the New Testament, is a pretty big part of Christianity. After all, Jesus was Jewish, so I doubt even fundamentalist Christians would have trouble admitting their religion's foundation.

[Kalyke]

22. Actually, CONservatives adapted that phrase to co-opt Israel.

They really only want to use Israel as a staging ground and/or aggressor against "Muslin" (intentional spelling) countries full of the brown-skinned people they don't like.

It has nothing to do with Judaism.

[riqster]

24. Fundagelicals actually take from the Old and New

Testaments. It's easier to cherry-pick one's message that way, than to actually follow Jesus and live by his teachings.

So, in a way, they are "judeochristians": neither good Jews nor good Christians, but an unholy compromise.

[Occam Bandage]

25. Well, if they didn't include "Judeo-," it would be a lot harder to lean on Leviticus.