PetrChelcicky wrote:I have read all this with great interest, because those are problems I grapple with for a long time.
There is a general gut feeling that Christians ought not to be involved in partisan politics - but the arguments are somewhat unsatisfying. For a part it is simply a use of well-worn catchphrases ("separation of state and church", "two kingdoms") which need themselves to be specified, explained and reasoned.
Another part of the arguments is imho wrong, like the argument that you never must love your country or your nation. This would be correct if a country/nation is understood as an "idea" or an "institution"; but is certainly wrong if a country/nation is understood as "people".
The best motive for avoiding partisan politics is imho a gut feeling that Christians ought not to be involved in "power" or "force" or "coercion" - and in this gut feeling conservative Anabaptists are yet superior to practically all other Christian subgroups I have got to know (Quakers included).
That said, I propose some qualifications.
Blunt partisanship - like in "Amish for Trump" - may be an error, but is by far not as destructive for the soul as a partisanship hidden behind a moral high ground. 
My example for that is the Interfaith Declaration against separation of immigrant families which was signed on by MC USA and published in June 18,2018.
The moral outrage about child detention had begun in 2017, but photoes used as illustrations unintentionally showed that the practice was already in use 2014 (only under Obama no church had taken offence - nor will any church take offence under Biden/Harris, I suppose; they will simply avoid looking into that matter).
I myself will propose a new argument for why it is good to avoid partisan politics and be cautious about involvement into politics in general.
But I will open a new topic for that.
i look forward to your new topic.
Frankly, the current expectation must be that career politicians and their fawning media will strictly control not only reporting, but micromanagement of language reported, as is already well in process.
Already, on the “forever” internet, so much is removed/“scrubbed.”
This new internet wherein we were FIRST told+warned, “whatever appears” will appear forever.
Already we witness, this is false. ^^
We understand, nothing disappears spontaneously, what disappears is chosen to disappear, what remains does so for predetermined reason, by those who benefit from what they choose.
At this point, the need to “copy+paste,” screen shot, or print, anything that might be of future interest - yet vulnerable to deliberately being scrubbed, arises.
“Forever”
When i was a young teen, my best friend’s mother wanted to warn we young girls about the fragility of romantic hearts. They are both passed away. My friend was said to have committed suicide, at 29. i never believed it, neither did my father. i won’t deliberate. i’ve never had answers. Not all murders are investigated/solved on earth.
But when we were young and tender, her mother warned us about the word, “forever.”
She told us (in human use) be prepared, “forever” can be a very short time!!
She warned,
“If someone tells you, ‘i will love you forever,’ forever may not last very long, at all.”
This was shocking to our young hearts. Not forgotten.
Some words belong to God.
So. In short order, the “forever internet” turns out to be not-forever, after all.
i am grateful for this forum. i do not take free speech, free thought for granted.
there were times i feared MennoDiscuss would be shut down for content. i haven’t been as (nervous) about MN, but, the potential exists.
