The sycophantic cowardice and reverence towards a weak man of no virtue, no integrity, and no honor is how the entire Right Wing thinks they can keep power for themselves.
Whoever can eat the most deplorable shit wins.
Conservatives' sex trafficking obsession is a confession.
I was going to say that the only thing that surprised me here was that the court decided "against" mandatory religion but then the article said that the ruling came from a FEDERAL district court.
Cuz if there's one thing these red states believe in more than guns its theocracy.
RWW News: Sen. Tim Scott Says the Government Should Be ‘Bowing the Knee to the Church’
According to Right Wing Watch (RWW), in April, Sen. Tim Scott went to Iowa for a “Faith Wins” event. RWW reported that Faith Wins sponsors speaking engagements at U.S. churches by “Christian nationalist pseudo-historian David Barton,” who “regularly spreads disinformation about the founding of this nation.”
Although RWW couldn’t find a video of Scott at the Faith Wins event, they did find the above video of Scott at a Q & A where Steve Rowland, Pastor at the Rising Sun Church, read audience questions to Scott. Below is a transcript of the above video:
TRANSCRIPT* STEVE ROWLAND: As Christ is being shoved out in America through media and government, and being replaced by evil, um even evil gods, how do we change that? TIM SCOTT: Well, number one we have to recognize that the Constitution of the United States affords each and every one of you your First Amendment rights to exercise your faith wherever you go. We are supposed to have the government bowing the knee to the church, not the church bowing the knee to the government. [emphasis added]
There are soooo many things wrong with both the question asked and Scott’s response.
Clearly neither Scott, Rowland, nor the audience understand what the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause means. But one thing is clear, it certainly DOESN’T mean that the government should be “bowing the knee” to the church.
And the audience question about what should be done about Christ “being replaced by… evil gods”?
Although I imagine the person who wrote the question was referring to the right-wing “Christian”/ QAnon fears of devil worship, it is also possible the person who wrote the question might be talking about Hindu deities, or Buddha (who is not considered a god by Buddhists), etc.
The reality is the Establishment Clause makes it clear that the government is NOT to establish a state religion or promote any specific religion (like Christianity or a specific Christian sect) over others to the extent that it steps on the Free Exercise Clause, that according to the United States Courts website,
protects citizens’ right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a “public morals” or a “compelling” governmental interest.
So people are free to worship any god of their choosing, as long as their religious practices don’t stomp on common “public morals” or go against a “compelling” state interest like protecting the health and safety of others.
So if a person wants to worship even an “evil god,” they are free to do so, as long as their practices don’t involve, say, having orgies in the streets, and/or are dangerous to people’s health and wellbeing (i.e., a a parent refusing to treat a seriously ill child with modern medicine for religious reasons, even though the child is likely to die if not treated).
In a world where U.S. senators understand the separation of church and state, THAT should have been Scott’s answer.
That Scott’s reply was so far from the mark, tells us we should NEVER let him become our president. Actually, I question whether he should continue to be a U.S. senator, since he is clearly not willing to take his Senate oath to “support and defend the Constitution” seriously.
__________________ *The transcript was based on the auto-generated YouTube transcript, the video, and quotes from the related Right Wing Watch article. NOTE: The First Amendment image is from this source.
Source: youtube.com
This abuse of power and the subsequent obstruction disqualifies the GOP.
Scum of the Earth. Pathetic coattail-riders of the shittiest human. #CalculatingFascists
T E R R O R I S T S
The racism and misogyny were always there. The anti-intellectualism to sell the corporate agenda was always there. The imagined victimhood and spiteful grievances were always there.
Trump added the overt white supremacy.
The racism and misogyny were always there. The anti-intellectualism to sell the corporate agenda was always there. The imagined victimhood and spiteful grievances were always there.
Trump added the overt white supremacy.
Conservatives will do all they can to avoid the conversation and/or attack the messenger, ad hominem.
You have conservative beliefs? Defend them.
Sadly, I see plenty on the Left also jumping to personal attacks instead of staying on topic. We all need to do better to get better.
This is a great quote! Carlin was also somewhat prescient because he said this in 2005:
- FIVE years before the Citizens United v. FEC decision opened the floodgates for corporations and the wealthy to influence elections through contributing to PACs that fund politicians.
- NINE years before the McCutcheon v. FEC decision, which allowed unlimited individual political contributions, creating a form of “legalized bribery,” as long as there was no overt quid pro quo.
- TWELVE years before Betsy DeVos became the Secretary of Education and took a wrecking ball to many of the Department of Education’s policies and to public education, while championing vouchers for private/charter schools.
- SIXTEEN years before Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas became the first of 18 states to ban CRT and related concepts in the classroom. Nine other states are considering similar laws or “emplacing” ant-CRT school policies.
- SEVENTEEN years before Florida passed the first “Don’t Say Gay” law. Since that time, Alabama and Arkansas have passed similar laws and 16 states are considering similar laws.
- SEVENTEEN years before the Supreme Court decided in Carson v. Makin that if a state uses vouchers for private schools, it must allow vouchers for religious schools.*
- SEVENTEEN years before Arizona’s universal school voucher program (considered a model for other states) was signed into law. It provides $7000 a year for students to attend private and religious schools. Currently sixteen states plus the District of Columbia offer vouchers for private and/or religious schools.** In addition, six states have education savings account programs, and nineteen states offer scholarship/tuition tax credits, which are a roundabout way of paying tuition for private and/or religious schools.
______________ *However, according to The First Amendment Encyclopedia, in 2002, THREE years before Carlin’s Life Is Worth Losing comedy special, the Supreme Court decided in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (regarding an Ohio voucher program) “that publicly funded vouchers could be used to send children to religious schools, provided certain constitutional prerequisites were met.” [emphasis added] **In 1990, FIFTEEN years before Carlin’s Life Is Worth Losing comedy special, Wisconsin initiated the first pilot program for vouchers for private schools. As was noted above, the Ohio voucher program allowed the vouchers to be used for private religious schools. Ohio started it’s voucher program in 1996, NINE years before Carlin’s Life Is Worth Losing comedy special.