The Bible could be adopted a symbol of Tennessee, after the legislature narrowly approved a bill designating "the Holy Bible as the official state book." The measure now goes to Gov. Bill Haslam. Do you support this piece of legislation?
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 don't miss it, thanks. Your first statement is that you are against the bill. Good for you. I was addressing the rest of your statement. We will agree to disagree. You have no explanation why you think the comparison is retarded. I gave an explanation why I disagree.
Yes, actually I do. If a state is majority Christian, it's not surprising if they want their Christian book to be part of their state government. But to put the Koran in there in an area of mostly Christians makes no sense and is just something an edgy neckbeard would say
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.
I've seen the right attack anyone that doesn't fall in line with what they perceive to be the right way of thinking. I've come out against my fellow Christians on many issues and they don't seem to be too forgiving.
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.
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.)
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...)
It doesn't violate the US Constitution. Would I support it in my state even as a Christian? No. But this act does not violate the US Constitution. Just like it's perfectly okay for North Carolina to have this in the preamble to its constitution:
"We, the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for the preservation of the American Union and the existence of our civil, political and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those blessings to us and our posterity, do, for the more certain security thereof and for the better government of this State, ordain and establish this Constitution."
I'm learning that some Southern Conservatives, not all I'm sure, don't give a rat's tookus what actual laws or Constitutions say. They just make stuff up as they go and call it good if it's what they want to do.
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, 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.
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.
There are certainly other states with higher illiteracy rates, and the rates are embarrassing low for the country as a whole. But those other states haven't been in the news for naming a state book, much less naming one that few who are actually competent readers have or will ever read. The Bible isn't what most would call a "page turner". Should've picked something by Dr Seuss.
"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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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
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.
MCW, separation of church and state doesn't exist, but this isn't that, this is more of violating the establishment clause, which is actually in the constitution. And also violates their own state constitution apparently.
No. There are quite a few translations of the Bible too. Not a good idea. I think it's wonderful to believe in the Bible but not everybody does and they certainly have that right.
"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.
That's not what I'm saying exactly. The Constitution basically trumps anything a state does. So if a state decides to do something that's against the Constitution the Supreme Court can say, sorry. You can't do that. While this silly state book as Bible thing doesn't directly impact that state's laws, a non-Christian could pitch a fit saying it indicates that state is encouraging one religion over all others in that state.
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
Show of Hands
Comments: Add Comment