This is a thread about Texas politics (and @GregAbbott_TX specifically). If you're not from Texas, sorry.
Greg Abbott is up for reelection in 2022. Let's talk about why he needs to be voted out. I don't care if it's a republican or a democrat, he just needs to be out (1/)
In 1986 Abbott won a massive lawsuit against the homeowner and the tree removal company that left him in a wheelchair. And I do not want to begrudge him any of that. He's issue a monthly stipend and regular lump sums. He should be, they took his legs (2/)
However, as a politician, Abbott has fought hard to limit the amount of damages anyone may be awarded in a lawsuit in Texas. The total settlement for Abbott is approaching $11 million. The limit on similar suits is now $750,000 (3/)
Local county leaders have been elected by their counties to represent them. Often times the county leaders and the governor have disagreed. The result, either the county wins or a new law is passed. This is the first time I know of where a governor has sued to override county (4/
Officials. The issue: masks in schools (not even widespread masking, just in schools). So much for small government. He is doing so at a time when schools are about to start and COVID is already ravaging the younger population (about 50% of hospitalizations nationwide are kids) 5
Kids under 12 still can't get vaccines, and even worse, if a school identifies that a student is known to have direct contact with someone who had COVID, the parents can elect to send them to school. Without a mask. (6/)
To see anyone in state government buildings, you need proof of vaccination or recent negative COVID test and must wear a mask. I'm sensing a theme (7/)
In February, Texas, on a different from the rest of the US, had terrible freezes as a result of the state regulators not doing basic maintenance. When Abbott called a special session and could have put anything on the agenda, absent was any mention of ERCOT accountability (8/)
Possibly because of friends who work there. Instead the primary item on the agenda was a voting security law that had already failed, but if passed would make it easier to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands (9/)
Abbott is up for reelection in 2022. Remember this. Texas has open primaries and plenty of republicans are also sick of his grift. That means Texans have 2 chances to get rid of Abbott: vote in the GOP primary &, if that fails, vote again in the general election, Nov 8, 2022 /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, champion of the Nicene Creed, original defender of Orthodoxy against Arianism, was Black.
Yet, with the exception of a handful of the oldest icons of him, he is normally depicted in white, European skin tones
He was described by friends as being "short of stature" and with dark skin tone. His enemies' favorite written perjorative was "the black dwarf." He was an Egyptian (oh yeah, ethnic Egyptians (not the later Greek/Roman occupiers) were also Black)
Why does this matter? Because Jonathan Edwards thought that Black people were necessarily inferior to white people. Because too often there is a view in churches that most of Church history is about white people
Here's something that we don't talk about enough in churches. Music is very evocative and emotive. As such it is very easy to be used manipulatively.
In college, I had more than one conversation with music majors about how certain chord progressions can make you feel (1/7)
Some create a euphoric endorphin rush. Others will move you to tears. Not a single play of it, but when put into certain types of progression and layered well, yes. This is why certain songs always have that feeling. That's not inherently a bad thing
However, there is also a well established technique that loud repetitive sounds make one more susceptible to suggestion.
Other than a complex progression and layering of chords, an easier way to elicit an emotional response is to play the same chords over and over
@RedeemedRags I will try to be brief, but I will likely fail because a) I'm pretty verbose and b) there's a lot of variety and nuance within it:
@RedeemedRags CRT, like many Critical Theories, came out of Academic Legal studies. Essentially wanting to know why the gains made in the 1960s in Civil Rights did not continue at the same pacing as during the Civil Rights
@RedeemedRags As a Critical Theory, it roots present conflict in material historical causes (and thus is technically Marxist, but only in the way all Social Sciences are). The cause, here, being slavery and Jim Crow as uniquely distinct from other social ills
Reflecting on Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3, and their converse found in Joel 3 (and the interpretation offered by Jesus in Matthew 26).
God will beat swords into plowshares and spears into fishhooks
Those who stubbornly commit to their instruments of war, and who fight against the way of peace will be destroyed by that very commitment to instruments of violence
This comes out across as an eschatological threat in Joel 3, but in Matthew as a tragic, natural consequence. These two are not necessarily in conflict, especially given the understanding the universe exists and is sustained under God's provision and solely by God's providence
Ok, where to begin. There is so much wrong with this blog that some of it is outright heretical. But let's dive right into.
The biggest mistakes Shenvi makes throughout are primarily overgeneralization based on (his) false assumption and category mistakes. Let's talk about that.
First, let's discuss some of overgeneralizations based on false assumptions. Hardly anyone working in anti-racism is arguing that corporate repentance is required for salvation. Shenvi spends an inordinate amount of time tearing down an argument that, frankly, no one is making
Shenvi also assumes that at issue is only the incidence of past racial sin (specifically Slavery, but we might extrapolate to Jim Crow and other forms of racism). This is not the primary issue. We are concerned with *current* racism
Let's talk about "wokeness" and the bible. When the teacher of the law asks Jesus "who is (εστιν) my neighbor?" in the well known parable of the Good Samartian (Luke 10: 35-37), we could talk at length about the social/power dynamics, or religious and ethnic discrimination (1/)
But I want to focus at the end; Jesus changes the question in typical Midrash style and asks the teacher, "Who became the neighbor?" He doesn't use the same verb as the teacher (εστιν), but uses the much more active verb of being (γινομαι) (here in the perfect γεγονεναι) (2/)
This changes the understanding of the command to "love thy neighbor" away from the neighborliness of obligation that is either individualistic (Kantian/Lockean) or even one with the clear demarcation of society as in Hegel's Sittlichkeit (3/)