Show of Hands

It's stupid. If you don't think it violates the US Constitution because of states' rights, how about the Tennessee state constitution?

"The state Senate voted 19-8 in favor of the bill despite arguments by the state attorney general that the measure conflicts with a provision in the Tennessee Constitution stating that 'no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship.'" --AP

How is this not a slap in the face to any Tennessee citizen who is not a Christian?

Assholes.

(I have no issue with things designated as "state" this-or-that; I think it's kind of fun. But not when it does something like this.)

This user is currently being ignored

No. Having "official" books, birds, dogs, flowers, etc. is just stupid and a total waste of time.

"Unless they are endorsing it for its merit as a work of literature, of which I highly fucking doubt, this is totally disgusting. No Holy Book should be endorsed by the state."~Same answer on Sk8border's poll.

Theocratism must be destroyed in any form.

Can you imagine the outcry by conservatives if some state somewhere made the Koran The official state book?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Establishment clause which is a pronouncement of the first amendment of the US Constitution. I would think declaring a religious book which some declare as the word of their god as the state book in a way shows an establishment of a specific religion for that state. Seems like a dumb gesture to me, actually.

Yep. I think its fine. Its stupid but it doesn't bother me. It makes Christianity look like a joke putting it on a platter next to the state bird. I'm ok with that. Isn't Nessie the official State mythical being for Scotland? Now Jesus is the State mythical being for Tennessee.

This user is currently being ignored

No but I'm sure someone will argue that separation of church and state isn't real and that you don't have to accept it but you have to get over it. The south refuses to acknowledge the first amendment and other religions for some reason.

I bet there would be more no answers here if it was.

This user is currently being ignored

This user is currently being ignored

I have nothing against those who follow a religion. I was raised in the church and left it as an adult. However, maybe it's time for an object lesson. An atheist opens a restaurant and sees someone wearing a cross necklace or praying before a meal and then promptly kicks their butts out. Refuses to serve them because the fact that they believe in a god goes against what the atheist believes, that there is no god. Get some of their own medicine and see if they still think it's a good idea. If you are in a job that requires service, serve all or find another job.

I always love when people say where does it say the words "separation of church and state" in the Constitution? Establishment clause of the 1st Amendment. Yes, amendments are part of the Constitution. Just because it doesn't use those exact words doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The day will come when we have to dumb down the language in the Constitution like we've dumbed down everything else.

No, but I don't see any harm in naming it the state book either. That there even is such a thing is pretty meaningless. Seems like in that part of the country a big-print edition of a kid's picture book would be a more appropriate choice though.

Wow. It's some kind of magical honor to be regarded as "Dead on balls accurate" by Tilt! (And thanks to you too, CrzyChica; wasn't ignoring your comment, but there's a bit of a history here...)

If you don't believe the US Constitution applies to what a state does regarding religion, how about the *Tennessee* state constitution?

"The state Senate voted 19-8 in favor of the bill despite arguments by the state attorney general that the measure conflicts with a provision in the Tennessee Constitution stating that "no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship." --AP

Chica, you are a sane voice of reason in a sea of SOH craziness. Think about this. The future: A few Muslims get into public offices, state level. They start wanting to change laws. Religious liberties laws, maybe implement their religious rules in some areas. Because the religious right did it in the years past, it sets the precedent. Next round, atheists. Next round, gays. Pretty soon, the entire document is shredded because supposed constitutional loving Religious couldn't learn the meaning of establishment clause in 2016.

This user is currently being ignored

This user is currently being ignored

Absolutely not. Violates first amendment.

This user is currently being ignored

This user is currently being ignored

I actually laughed out loud at that. 😂

No, but it's not my state so why should I care? They can do what they want even if it's not inclusive of the entire population of TN. What does the average Tennessean say?

No. That's not religious freedom. That's endorsing a particular religion.

It's the best book! Sounds good to me!

I think it does violate the establishment clause, but also violates their own state constitution, see Susan's comment above.

I get the religious objection to a "gay cake." I don't get the religious objection to be a pharmacy owner and refuse to dispense medications to gays or a small grocery refusing to serve blacks or Muslims or a waitress at a restaurant refusing to serve a Jew because she's Asked for dietary restrictions. Where does it end? And does that protection apply equally to any religion? Pretty soon no one is doing business with anyone. Ridiculous

This user is currently being ignored

Making the bible the state book is not the same as establishing a state religion.

This user is currently being ignored

The comparison is not retarded, but thanks for playing. The point he's making is that whether the particular religion in a state/country is the majority or minority has no bearing. Upholding any one religion over any other is wrong. His example is a good one. Any time a decision's made to spotlight the majority religion or its guiding book, the Bible, replace that religion with one of the minority religions and its holy book. Now once you've thought of this hypothetical situation think to yourself, does it bother me that a religion other than my own is getting special treatment? If your answer is yes, now you know what all of the non-Christian people in the US feel like all the time.

I get it, you are saying they are dumb people. That's funny because you are so freakin smart and they aren't. Man you are a riot for saying a stereotype that isn't true. I gotta follow you now you nut.

Exactly. If you try to out one religion first in any way, then that opens the door for other religions to want the same preferences. Mississippi's new law allowing religious people to discriminate on the basis of their religious beliefs, for instance. So what, we're now going to take steps backward to Civil Rights era and allow anyone to discriminate for anything as long as they claim it is their truly held religious belief? Colbert showed how easy it was to create your own tax exempt religious group recognized by the go er meant in an episode once. Maybe I should create the Church of CrzyChica.

Dead on balls accurate.

To the letter.

well said!

If it was the Quran people would have a huge hissy fit for sure. Let's say who says, oh, but it's a meaningless thing like a state book, then.

If I'm smart and live in one of these states, I'm opening a gay friendly business. For the love of Pete...

Why in the hell do they need a state book??!

This user is currently being ignored

You know me better than most.

Their State Constitution clearly forbids this.

This user is currently being ignored

This user is currently being ignored

No.

I'm a Christian mind you.
I wouldn't support that in Illinois.

Yep. Exactly.

Haslam A walai küm?

I agree with Tilton. That's basically establishing a state religion. Bring on the haters, if you're a constitution believing conservative, regardless of religion, it's an easy call.