5 Scary Religious Refusal Bills

Oh you mean like the nut job I just spent almost ten hours dealing with the new Westboro/Phelps thread? ::twitches::

You can actually buy nine inch nails at Orchard Supply Hardware. I'm sure Martha Stewart did an episode on building your own crucifix. Or maybe I'm thinking of the DIY guillotine... either way!
: )

Ten hours? You poor darling! That was very brave.

Oh, sounds like fun!

If you don't want to help every single patient who comes through the door you shouldn't work at a hospital period. Go be a nun or a monk or a politician (hehe) if your faith is more important than someone else's health. & as a man I am sorry & disgusted that any man (besides the potential father) thinks they should have anything to say about abortion.

My rights are more important than your feelings and conceited religious sensibilities. How dare you try to impose your stupid superstitions on others. This country was founded on exactly the opposite principles.

Thank you!

damn skippy

Hey, Sam:

May I please?

Continued rant from me = Was that the same website where a Republican once told me that my "uterus" was NOT a part of my body, so I didn't have the right to control any baby in my uterus??

I guess HE must have been the Master of my Uterus? (lol!)

Yes it would be the same place..and my reply was never to see the light of day- cause I went OFF!
Ignorant ass he was!

Nope, not there but I'll keep you guys posted.

LMAO! emarston- problem is these assholes read the Constitutionat the opening of congress- and were given a pocket copy!
Conclusion: these folks couldn't find two cheeks with two hands - if we spotted them one!
True definition of dumbass!!

I checked all the rocks still nothing. I'm gona look in the tigers cage at the zoo. I'll continue to keep you posted.

No point to look there- I think tigers are Buddhist :)

"You are Correct!!!!"

Science and faith are on two separate roads, and ne'er the twain shall meet.

I agree! Enough already, Leen61.

Especially, when a Republican (Christian) tries to convince me that war is perfectly okay by saying, "Jesus was a warrior. He would have *wanted* war. Therefore, we must always support war."

True story. You can't make this lunacy up.

Their double standards are always so nauseating! To fit their f**ked up religious agenda, their God and Jesus have to do so many contortions it's ridiculous. They can come up with some of the most laughable justifications for their hypocrisy ever heard. Jesus would've wanted war? Oh really. So I guess if he had the chance, he would've carried a glock, I suppose? How stupid this is to my anti-war ears!

Oh, I completely understand your feelings. It was horror to my anti-war ears, too.

Excellent. No more needs to be said.

Riiiiight because i see people get persecuted for being christian all the time... get real.

in the Third Century CE, the newly formed Jewish splinter-cult who called themselves “Christians” ransacked, burned, and pillaged their way through cities across the known world, instigating an almost century-long religious civil war with the polytheistic Roman Empire, who worshipped the Ancient Greek pantheon of Olympian Gods

That made absolutely no sense whatsoever.

You know, you remind me of the man that lived by the river. He heard a radio report that the river was going to rush up and flood the town. And that all the residents should evacuate their homes. But the man said, 'I'm religious. I pray. God loves me. God will save me.'

The waters rose up. A guy in a row boat came along and he shouted, 'Hey, hey you! You in there. The town is flooding. Let me take you to safety.' But the man shouted back, 'I'm religious. I pray. God loves me. God will save me.'

A helicopter was hovering overhead. And a guy with a megaphone shouted, 'Hey you, you down there. The town is flooding. Let me drop this ladder and I'll take you to safety.' But the man shouted back that he was religious, that he prayed, that God loved him and that God will take him to safety.

Well... the man drowned. And standing at the gates of St. Peter, he demanded an audience with God. 'Lord,' he said, 'I'm a religious man, I pray. I thought you loved me. Why did this happen?'

God said, 'I sent you a radio report, a helicopter, and a guy in a rowboat. What the hell are you doing here?

Thank you! Christians pretend to be pacifists, but their history is steeped in blood and intolerance. They are allowed to practice their religion in peace in America, but that's not good enough for them. They insist on forcing their dogma on nonbelievers by any means necessary, including violence. What kind of insanity would lead grownups to attempt to make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions? By the same token, non-believers should have the legal right to kill the doctor killers- let's get some legislation going to allow us a preemptive strike...

Absolutely! Very well stated. The message we've been hearing from the right is "I expect you to respect my religious beliefs while I strip you of personal freedom." My response is "No." (And if they're standing next to me, a sock in the face.) Someone who believes in an invisible sky fairie needs psychiatric help. I do not owe it to anyone else to buy into their delusion or respect it as an alternate reality! When I was a small child, I resented having to say "one nation under god" during the pledge of allegiance, so I just skipped it. It pissed me off though, along with the "in god we trust" BS printed on money. I'm done, though. I'm going to be very outwardly rude to "believers" from now on. What they've done to the women of America is far worse than mere disrespect.

I love the analogy. I'd just change it to Political Parties are like dicks.... everyone thinks the one they have is great but I still don't want you shoving yours down my throat or whipping it out in front of me in public..... thanx...... :)

Comparing "scripture" to the US Constitution constitutes a grave and deep insult. The US Constitution is a secular document and represents one on humanity's highest achievements.

Scripture represents ignorant religious superstition, and is to be scorned as tools of bigotry and oppression. This article is a clear demonstration of the dark and nefarious uses of your precious "scripture."

Just as the Constitution was used to condone and support the owning of another human being as property. In anything written down by man, you will have those willing to pervert the words, or twist them to satisfy ones own selfish ideology. In that sense the Bible, Koran, etc..are no different than the Constitution.

You are operating under a false assumption that both the constitution and the Bible are works of wisdom.

The constitution was written by educated men of the 1700's, based on the prevailing philosophies of the Enlightenment: Natural Law and Human Rights.

The Bible was written by superstitious nomadic sheepherders thousands of years ago who lived in fear of an almighty and jealous supernatural being, and devised rituals to apease it.

I'm sorry, but there is no comparison.

No, it's completely different.

The Constitution was written by flawed men to represent high ideals, and those flawed men fell short.

Scripture was written by flawed men to document their superstitions and petty hatreds, and did so just fine.

You know the men who wrote the Bible? You can make that statement based on documented historical evidence of the men who wrote those books? Or is your assessment based on what men have done in the name of those books since they were written?

You say:
"You know the men who wrote the Bible? You can make that statement based on documented historical evidence of the men who wrote those books? Or is your assessment based on what men have done in the name of those books since they were written?"

My assessment is based on the books themselves.

The Bible is exactly as I described- primitive nomadic people who live in battle against the harsh desert environment that surrounds them, living in fear of an almighty and jealous supernatural being that created such a world, so they devised rituals and codes of conduct to apease it.

Please get help for your schizophrenia. And name one time in history when you religious fucknuts DIDN'T try to legislate your beliefs.

Well stated!!

There were two points I was trying to make in the comparison, both "Judeo/Christian" writings and the constitution are supposed to be based on the principles of fairness and respect for human dignity. They were meant to be flexible meaning applied to many different situations. That's as far as the similarity goes in that statement.

The other point was that both have been corrupted through misapplication or disregard for the underlying principles. That's as far as the comparison goes on that point.

I was not endorsing religion or politics. I was simply pointing out the similarities behind the intent and the eventual corruption and disregard for the intent..

Your hostility is unwarranted,

Now we have the lunatics in the Tea Party and the republicans in general trying to twist and force their interpretation of both the constitution and the scripture on us and I am not a supporter of their theology or their politics.

Exactly what I was trying to say, only you said it better!

You say:
"both "Judeo/Christian" writings and the constitution are supposed to be based on the principles of fairness and respect for human dignity. They were meant to be flexible meaning applied to many different situations. That's as far as the similarity goes in that statement."

The point you are making is wrong, on both counts. Those are attributes of the Constitution, NOT the Bible.

The Bible, which condones rape, slavery, genocide, and various other atrocities, is NOT based on concepts of fairness and respect for human dignity.

It is based on the concept of blind faith and obedience to the King of Heaven.

Those concepts of fairness and human dignity are derived from Humanism, which first appeared in the Renaissance and spread through the Enlightenment, and the founding fathers were scholars of Enlightenment philosophy.

The Bible was NOT meant to be flexible, it was meant to be a narrow and specific guide to reach salvation.

Enter through the narrow gate.
For wide is the gate
and broad is the road
that leads to destruction,
and many enter through it.
But small is the gate
and narrow the road
that leads to life,
and only a few find it.
---Matthew 7:13-14

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights, however, WAS intended to be flexible- it is a living document. While it was created in a time that condoned slavery and sexism, it was based on core principles that allowed civil rights and sexual equality to occur.

Respectfully, I disagree with some of your statements and can't believe I'm even taking the time to respond as I am not into convincing people one way or the other on religion. It really doesn't matter to me what anyone believes.

I spent many years studying the scripture in depth. The ancient laws didn't condone rape, as it was an offense that incurred the death penalty in most cases, unlike modern laws.

The Bible does speak of a lot of brutality but usually the viciousness was directed toward the Jews and Christians by unbelieving barbaric nations. But let me clarify...after the Roman Emperor Constantine gave secular power to the Catholic Bishops "Christians" became quite barbaric also, so when I speak of Christians I'm talking about first century True Christians, not those 300AD and beyond, these are just plain corrupt, violent, power hungry, self righteous hatemongers (opinion). They know little about the principles Christianity was founded on. These Christians allowed the burning alive of those at the stake who disagreed with their interpretation, or they beheaded them, or they imprisoned them, or they impaled. Christianity became violent and corrupt very shortly after those who knew Christ himself passed away. By three hundred AD "Christianity" didn't even resemble the teachings of Christ.

Anyway, the bible doesn't condone slavery in the way Americans are familiar with it either. Yes, slavery was an accepted practice, but there were different types of slavery, a person was allowed to sell himself into slavery to pay off a debt and there were strict laws in regard to the treatment of ones slaves, slave owners were not allowed to treat them harshly or to abuse them and they were to be released after their debt was paid.

The Jews themselves were enslaved but any admonition for subjugation in the scripture was meant to protect them, not to condone slavery, as it was nothing to put a slave to death for even the most minor offenses by unbelieving nations. They didn't mess around, obey or die. Much like the American Christians of the early south.

Genocide was not condoned though it was practiced and mentioned in scripture, and again it was practiced by unbelieving nations not those who worshiped the God of the Bible.

You need to be able to separate those in the scripture those who believed in that God from the surrounding nations that didn't. Just because it's written doesn't mean it was condoned by those who professed belief in the God of the bible, anymore than a narrative text on modern man condones the violence, wars and unfair laws it describes on it's pages.

I'm not out antagonize you or anyone else. I don't profess any religion myself.

I'm sorry, but I can provide you with numerous Bible passes to show you are wrong on each of those points.

You are painting an oddly rosy picture of the Bible that has nothing to do with what the Bible actually says.

RAPE

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. -- Deuteronomy 22:28-29

... yes, the victim was forced to mary her rapist, if she was an unmarried virgin.

If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

... If she was married and not a virgin, then BOTH of them are killed.
If she was a married virgin, then the rules get complex.

BRUTALITY AND GENOCIDE

No, it was not the barbarians against the nice faithful. It was the faithful doing God's bidding.
As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
-- Deuteronomy 20:10-14

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. -- Numbers 31:15-18

... you will notice virgin women were to be raped, everyone else were to be killed, as per the orders of the Lord.

I could go on and on cutting and pasting examples of slaughter, mass-murder and violence done by the faithful at GOd's command, but I'm getting tired.

You say you spent many years studying the scripture in depth, but frankly I don't believe you. These are not obscure hard to find things.

This is not about the Roman Empire corrupting Christianity from it's nice early roots- the early Gnostic christians had highly diverse beliefs nothing like modern Christianity anyway.

My point is the Bible, as a whole, and Yehveh, as an entity described by that Bible, is a violent, jealous, petty, downright evil creature.

Misogyny and slavery were inherent in the Constitution as well. Are you saying they are not? You can cherry pick the Bible as well as any hate filled pastor or minister can, but it is just as easy for someone else to cherry pick as well.

"18So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous." - Romans 5:18-19

YOU can interpret the Bible to say whatever you want, and so can I. You can not make an objective, declarative statement that about what the Bible promotes any more than I can.

As I said, the constitution was the product of flawed men with high ideals.

The flaws are obvious and acknowledged- no one claims it was the creation of an omnipotent being.

What I did is not "cherry picking" the Bible- it's quoting the Bible based on a thorough understanding of the Bible.

Your quote was cherry picking- it says how important obedience to the Lord is.

My quote shows that obedience includes performing atrocities.

Big picture- the Bible is the story of a nomadic people, living in the desert, under harsh conditions. They had strict rules over behavior, and they were necessary for survival.

It is the story of the god these people worshiped- a harsh god, as harsh as the world they lived in.

There is one sin that is regarded as greater than any other sin- and it is the only sin that was the reason for God to destroy whole cities, and even flood the world.

The sin of worshiping any god other than him, primarily through idols.

It is the story of a magical being who is vain and jealous, and treats humanity like a bully with a magnifying glass treats an ant hill.

A woman made from a rib listened to a talking snake, thereby giving us knowledge of good and evil instead of being dumb little puppets for God to play with.

The punishment for having intelligence was to toss us out to the harsh world I spoke of earlier.

That's it.

Life sucks, and it sucks because our distant ancestor disobeyed the tyrant in the sky and learned the wisdom of the gods.

The whole concept of sin and redemption is not loving and compassionate- again, it all about vanity.

The sin is washed away in the standard methodology of appeasing gods in agrarian societies: a blood sacrifice.

Then we must have faith in the Lord who created the sin in the first place, and pledge our love and loyalty to him.

If you read the whole thing, it's a fairy tale where the evil wizard wins.

The only way to get something nice and pretty out of it is to ignore the big picture and just, as you put it, "cherry pick" a few nice things Jesus said before he was sacrificed to the evil god to forgive us of the sin of having wisdom he did not want us to have.

You say you have a thorough understanding of the Bible...just like MILLIONS of other people have claimed. Your opinion has no more validity than any of the others who have spent years and years studying that piece of literature. Since you have already determined that you can not possibly be wrong, and that no other interpretation or rendering of the Bible has any validity since it is not in line with your world view...I would say that YOU are as dogmatic as any religious zealot I have ever met.

You remind me of a saying I heard once "I will not tolerate intolerance."

First of all, I never said anything even close to what you just claimed I said.

Second, what I stated was not some narrow translation of a verse that is disputed- I gave a summary of the overall story. While my tone is my own, no Bible scholar, heck no one who has read the Bible casually, would disagree with that summary.

Harry Potter was a boy who's parents were wizards. His parents were killed by an evil wizard named voldermort when he was a baby, and that act left the boy with a scar that conects him to voldermort. It is now his destiny to grow up, learn to become a powerful wizard, and defeat voldermort.

Do you disagree with that summary? Would anyone?

Same goes with my summary of the Bible- other than my tone, state anything in it that you think is false.

Heck, give me YOUR summary of what the book as a whole says.

"both "Judeo/Christian" writings and the constitution are supposed to be based on the principles of fairness and respect for human dignity"

Are you delusional? The bible is rife with xenophobia, racism, misogyny, violence, cruelty, lies, threats, and every means of psychological coercion that the wretched old men could think of to drag people into their sick cult. Refusing to acknowledge your disgusting parables of bloodshed, rape and murder does NOT make them go away! Nice try.

Except it's only a wedge for the stupid bigoted people who are against it.

^'d I firmly believe the problem started with people being disgusted with their respective parties and registering as independents. When politicians look at the number of registered voters and see the widening gap of what they assume are undecided voters, they move their platform to the center in hopes of courting the crybabies. Ultimately, the party with the most voters registered to it will be able to remain true to their platform.

The Democratic party screwed up big time by accepting "Blue Dogs" and compromising on important issues. It would be better to stick to a solid-left platform and go down in flames, so people could really understand what it's like to get completely fucked over under Rethuglican rule. Then when they come crawling back, they'll have to park their centrist delusions at the door and we can get some real work done to save our country. Bipartisanship only works when both sides are committed to it. I've never seen a Republican willing to compromise on anything. "Reaching across the aisle" is always a giveaway to the right, and has to stop. What are we afraid of? The Rethugs are going to do their worst, no matter if we work with them or fight them. So let's fight them, tooth and claw. Hopefully we're already at the point where people are starting to see the Rethug agenda- rewriting every law in every state to accommodate their extremist dogma, until they finally have enough power to Christianize the Constitution. (Spellcheck didn't even highlight the word "Christianize", though it highlighted "spellcheck" - how scary is that?)

what your right hand can't do your left is will... just make sure you wash your hands when you are done :D

Name it "Bristol" and you'll be good to go.

Just give them time. They have a pretty full "plate" right now. (Pun intended).

Well the bible is the "word of God" afterall. Guess shrimp and lobsters are an abomination... but wait... didnt God create all life and isnt all life precious? Hmmm guess its just one of the hundreds of contradictions in the bible. Jeez youd think a perfect being would be able to get his facts straight huh?

no religion itself is not stupid---- religious fanatics/zealots (of any faith) who misuse and abuse religion to justify hate and racism and bigotry are stupid.

I agree with you. I haven't thought it completely out however. Employers should have a reasonable amount of assurance that who they are hiring will perform the duties of their position within reason.

Nope. The AMA should pull a doctor's license if they are going to allow their religious beliefs to influence treatment. I'm currently struggling to get Kaiser Permanente to approve of a routine surgery that would resolve a serious medical problem. My former ob/gyn refused me the surgery, telling me "it's Kaiser's policy to preserve fertility". I'm in my 40's! Fertility is not an issue, and even if it were, that should be up to me. I'm deathly sick, so pursuing legal action at this time is not an option- I need the surgery asap. Even if I had the energy to sue, I couldn't risk getting kicked off the plan right now. My family doctor has been no help at all. I've had two emergency blood transfusions, so this is not a minor issue.

My dad overheard someone talking about a similar problem at a dinner party, and he was able to get her doc's name. I met with her doc at another Kaiser hospital 60 miles away, and she was outraged I had been denied surgery, but she's booked for months, so she had to refer me back to my regular hospital, but to a different doc. My appointment is on Friday, hopefully the new doc doesn't share the same pro-life mental illness as the first. At least I have an advocate within the system, now. The sickest part of this, is that I'm not even pregnant!!! Who the fuck ever heard of a doctor trying to preserve FERTILITY over the patient's life and health? Especially when the patient has made it clear she doesn't want kids!? He didn't put any notes on my electronic chart, so I can't even prove this happened, though the new doc said it's inappropriate and a very bad sign that he didn't write any notes at all. Who is going to go through every medical choice to see if doctors aren't harming patients by making decisions based on their religion? It's a regulatory nightmare. The only way to handle it is to maintain current medical standards, and forbid doctors from deviating from standard procedure on religious grounds.