Beware of Mike Pence's Dominionism
I know that many on DU are hoping that Trump may impeached or perhaps Section 4 of the 25th Amendment may be invoked:
Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
Section 4 [link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#1987:_Reagan.27s_alleged_incapacity|]was almost invoked late in Reagan's last term when it became apparent that Ronnie was losing it. If either route is taken to remove Trump from office, we still aren't out of the woods; we still have to deal with Mike Pence.
Pence has been labeled a Dominionist. Dominionism may be defined as:
Prominent dominionists in the Republican party include Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz, and Mike Pence.
Pence has been labeled a dominionist numerous times; a Google search on "Mike Pence dominionist" will turn up numerous articles, including this one by Jeremy Scahill: Mike Pence Will Be the Most Powerful Christian Supremacist in US History:
Yeah, I know, Trump is a Trojan Horse for the Russians; but, he's also a Trojan Horse for the religious right! Even if Trump isn't removed from office, Pence is likely to be "the power behind the throne," like Dick Cheney. Trump's son, Don Jr., has said that Pence will be in charge of "domestic and foreign policy," while Trump would focus on the vague mission of “Making America Great Again.”"
= new reply since forum marked as read
That could get us into a shooting war!!!!
And then assumed that their redefinition was the one that had been in use (a) for a couple of decades earlier and (b) by all other groups.
Dominionists believe that God gave man dominion over the Earth. Therefore man should use the Earth; it's not a "we must respect nature and Gaia" creed by any means. But dominionism was strongly coupled with the idea of stewardship, which is that positions of authority are positions of service. If man has dominion over the Earth, then it's as a steward, and each generation has a responsibility to use the resources well and make sure that the next generation has at least as good an Earth. Adam was to tend the garden, not put in a parking lot. Some sub-components had as a caveat that eventually we'd get a new Earth, so non-use of depletable resources wasn't necessary.
At least in the '90s the term "dominionism" was also strongly coupled with "reconstructionism." Reconstructionism called on Xians to reconstruct society along theocratically-defined lines, but explicit in the discussion was that society would become a theocracy when it had been reconstructed. For that to happen the population must turn to God and the theocracy is then installed by popular will, not a coup, and not even just a mere majority. It's a sharply post-millennialist verson of Xianity in which the Christ returns after Xians have reconstructed society and established the "kingdom of God" so that Jesus returns to a righteous nation.
This differs from this guy's redefinition of "dominionism" in some pretty crucial ways. Mostly he took the word "dominion", a big scary word, and decided that it had to mean dominion over others. We're fast to redefine, mostly because it means we don't have to understand.
When using the second definition, it's important to make sure that everybody's on the same page. Otherwise you get the same kind of boneheaded discussions we had with Russians in the '90s: "liberal" meant "free market and laissez-faire economy with a small government"; "liberal" meant "veering towards a command-and-control economy with a large government." American liberals were in many ways Russian conservatives, while American conservatives were in many ways Russian liberals. ("Many ways," not "all ways."
Finally some people decided they had to actually listen and pay attention to what others meant by the words they used. Took years for that to happen. A lot still aren't clear on the concept, 20 years later.
