US Theocracy

[The_Squid]

As a reference resource in education, the Bible, Qu'ran, other texts, symbols, spoken word, and physical artifacts developed throughout human history have a lot to offer. They document context, continuity, specimens, social development, "moral" purposes and objectives, etc., etc.

Anyone, even a devout atheist, who has spent just a few hours conversing with a well educated seminarian will quickly gain an appreciation for the historical relevance and impact of religious documents on the development of western civilization. It is misguided....no...it is ignorant... to believe that the Bible has not had an impact on science and history and should/must be excluded as a reference text.

No one said that the history of the bible shouldn't be taught. The argument is whether it should be legislated that the bible be used as a textbook of biology, geography, etc.

You can try and twist the meaning of the proposed legislation, but no one here is that dumb. LOL. Nice try though.

[Argus]

Maybe, but quite irrelevant to this topic.

Nonsense. How can the US be a Christian theocracy when none of its leaders are really Christians, don't understand the bible, and have no interest in what it teaches?

If Jesus showed up today the Republican Party leadership would mock, jeer and ridicule him as a bleeding heart liberal with no notion of how a righteous society ought to be run.

[bush_cheney2004]

No one said that the history of the bible shouldn't be taught. The argument is whether it should be legislated that the bible be used as a textbook of biology, geography, etc.

It should be so legislated if the Bible is purposely excluded as a reference text by school boards when developing curriculum.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nonsense. How can the US be a Christian theocracy when none of its leaders are really Christians, don't understand the bible, and have no interest in what it teaches?

If Jesus showed up today the Republican Party leadership would mock, jeer and ridicule him as a bleeding heart liberal with no notion of how a righteous society ought to be run.

The United States is not a Christian theocrcracy...it is a constitutional republic. It was founded on the notion that worshiping God was a lot better than worshiping a monarch with funny hats.

[kimmy]

You seem to be under the faulty assumption that I said there are no threads critical of Islam. I think it's ridiculous that every time I pop into a thread critical of Christians or the bible, there you are goin', "Me too!" People that frequent all of the hate threads are people that are unbalanced in my book. And this is just one more thing that the internet does to people.

And I have raised the same complaint against those who try to deflect criticism of Islam by saying "yeah but look what Israel does" or "yeah but the Crusades" or so on.

I can't imagine what reason you have to believe this is a "hate thread". Legitimate criticism isn't hate, and people who try to silence legitimate criticism by by crying "this is hateful!" or "this is racist!" or "this is ___phobic!" are doing themselves and their causes no favors. You think that it's ridiculous that I'm always involved in these threads... I think it's ridiculous that you always show up in these threads complaining that people want to talk about these things.

-k

[kimmy]

Is there a single candidate for the Republican leadership Jesus Christ would respect and call one of His followers?

I think he would probably approve of Bernie Sanders. I can't think of any of the rest he'd have much stomach for.

Interesting factoid: Sanders is the first non-Christian in history to win a US presidential primary, in either party.

When I watch Republican candidates during the primaries I sometimes wonder if they're politicians or televangelists. There's a widespread belief among Republicans that if you can't win the Evangelicals, you can't win the nomination or the Presidency. But there's another side to this too... if you go too far trying to win over the Evangelicals, you could alienate everybody else. Romney's campaign chief Eric Fehrnstrom addressed this in the 2012 primaries. Asked whether Romney's newfound conservatism would hurt his chances with moderate voters in the general election campaign, Fehrnstrom said that when the general election rolled around the would just "shake the Etch-A-Sketch" and start over again.

Except "shaking the Etch-A-Sketch" didn't really work for Romney. In the 2012 election, Romney got slaughtered among the non-religious almost as badly as he got slaughtered among non-whites and non-old-people.

As the non-religious become a larger portion of the US voting public with each passing year, pandering to religious Americans or insulting non-religious Americans will become a less successful strategy.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

....As the non-religious become a larger portion of the US voting public with each passing year, pandering to religious Americans or insulting non-religious Americans will become a less successful strategy.

Such a pity...what will the superior atheists in Canada do each American election season ?

[kimmy]

Such a pity...what will the superior atheists in Canada do each American election season ?

Not to worry, I am sure there'll still be plenty of zany hijinx to enjoy!

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Seems odd that the oh so superior atheists and Bible bashers want to exclude a very important reference for the development of western civ, social sciences, government, astronomy, psychology, sexuality, religion, architecture, transportation, geography, etc.

What are they so worried about ?

[kimmy]

Seems odd that the oh so superior atheists

Passive-aggressiveness is unbecoming.

and Bible bashers want to exclude a very important reference for the development of western civ, social sciences, government, astronomy, psychology, sexuality, religion, architecture, transportation, geography, etc.

What are they so worried about ?

I have no complaint about the Bible being part of the curriculum in courses where it's actually relevant. (geography? astronomy? how do you figure? transportation? huh?)

But the concern here is, obviously, that this is just another attempt to get creationism into biology class.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

But the concern here is, obviously, that this is just another attempt to get creationism into biology class.

So do the textbooks in Canada teach that life begins upon birth from the Magic Vagina ?

[kimmy]

So do the textbooks in Canada teach that life begins upon birth from the Magic Vagina ?

What's that got to do with creationism?

-k

[On Guard for Thee]

So do the textbooks in Canada teach that life begins upon birth from the Magic Vagina ?

Sounds like you have been reading the bible too much. Perhaps get an actual science text.

[bush_cheney2004]

What's that got to do with creationism?

A poem has a poet, a painting has an artist, so creation must have a creator !

[On Guard for Thee]

A poem has a poet, a painting has an artist, so creation must have a creator !

Unfortunately people, probably acting out of nothing more than fear, have tried to create the creator, and they have no idea what the hell they are doing. Too bad they didn't stick to poems or paintings.

[The_Squid]

It should be so legislated if the Bible is purposely excluded as a reference text by school boards when developing curriculum.

A reference text for biology?

[bush_cheney2004]

A reference text for biology?

Why not ?

"Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Genesis 1:28).

[On Guard for Thee]

Why not ?

"Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Genesis 1:28).

And that would give us a bunch of kids who know nothing about where babies come from raping and pillaging the planet. Good idea.

[The_Squid]

Why not ?

"Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Genesis 1:28).

ummm.... how does that bible passage teach biology?

[August1991]

Nonsense, August. There's no shortage of criticism of Islam and its beliefs here on the forum.

This thread isn't making fun of the Bible, it's asking how religious fundies have attained such political influence in the US.

Why talk about the US when Middle Eastern countries are way dumber?

Kimmy, you make several good points.

On this forum, there is a thread on "Islamic Extremism". True, we criticize Islamic extremists.

"... religious fundies have attained such political influence in the US... "

Wait a second Kimmy, you equate American "religious fundies" with "Islamic Extremism". I don't. Ted Cruz is no Ayatolah.

=====

As to "making fun of the Bible" or "The Book of Joe Smith", how about a musical on "The Story of Sayida Zainab".

[eyeball]

ummm.... how does that bible passage teach biology?

It doesn't. Genesis 1:28 was for teaching economics. Edited February 23, 2016 by eyeball

[Guest]

Is there a single candidate for the Republican leadership Jesus Christ would respect and call one of His followers?

I think he would probably approve of Bernie Sanders. I can't think of any of the rest he'd have much stomach for.

Excellent point. It seems that the Republican party is against what Christians often refer to as the "true" or core message of Christ. Love thy neighbour, compassion and help for the poor, sick, weak, etc.

The United States is not a Christian theocrcracy...it is a constitutional republic. It was founded on the notion that worshiping God was a lot better than worshiping a monarch with funny hats.

The US was founded with a distinct separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson, a deist, considered organized religion to be a corrupt and even tyrannical force. He had no problem with religious beliefs, as long as they were kept separate from affairs of state. That barrier has been eroded since the founding of the nation. Do you consider that a good thing? Do you endorse teaching non-evidential religious beliefs as scientific theories or forcing the religious derived morality of some on everyone through codified laws?

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." -Jeffereson

"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." -Jeffereson

[Guest]

A poem has a poet, a painting has an artist, so creation must have a creator !

We know a great deal about how stars, planets and galaxies form. We know how life evolves, changes and adapts on Earth. We have some solid leads on the origins of the chemicals responsible for the first self replicating organisms. However there are gaps in our understanding. Fewer every day, but gaps nonetheless.

People are free to fill these gaps with any fantastical ideas they wish. People are even free to deny or hide from evidence that contradicts their preferred beliefs. Though, it is certainly important to learn about world and historical religions and their role in shaping human history, it is not at all acceptable to present the fantasies as fact in a science class.

For those that endorse teaching religious ideas as science fact or codifying religious morality in laws, whose beliefs do we use? Should public school teachers be permitted to teach that the universe is governed by Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva? Should others be permitted to teach that life was seeded and guided by an intelligent alien species?

The church/state barrier exists for a reason and its erosion by the Christian right is a problem for reason, liberty and the reputation and image of your nation.

Edited February 25, 2016 by Guest

[bush_cheney2004]

The church/state barrier exists for a reason and its erosion by the Christian right is a problem for reason, liberty and the reputation and image of your nation.

Not much of a barrier when it comes to school funding in Canada. Not good for your nation's image.

[bush_cheney2004]

The US was founded with a distinct separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson, a deist, considered organized religion to be a corrupt and even tyrannical force. He had no problem with religious beliefs, as long as they were kept separate from affairs of state. That barrier has been eroded since the founding of the nation. Do you consider that a good thing? Do you endorse teaching non-evidential religious beliefs as scientific theories or forcing the religious derived morality of some on everyone through codified laws?

No more that forcing other non-evidence based concepts (e.g. beginning of life, "social justice", etc.)

The United States was not founded with a distinct separation of church and state as several colonies had official religions. The concept was not well developed until well after 1800.