So much for the Constitution, eh, Mike? Can you point to any historical basis for the US being a "Christian nation" or nation of any religion?
Just like the Bible, the guys only cite the Constitution when it suits them, but ignore the rest.
it says "in god we trust" on the dollar...oh! you mean the actual constitution?
Which was added in the 50s in response to us shitting our pants over "godless communists." Even that has no real history
I prefer "E pluribus unum." Why can't I have that on my license plate? I think it should be a better descriptor of what the US is.
Also, "In God we trust," isn't a religious endorsement, if you go with court ruling.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-religion-motto-idUSKCN1LD24K
I personally believe it is, unless you look at "God" in this instance being the money itself. Which could actually track if you wanted.
The cons want to have it both ways, naturally. Having it on currency provides "proof" that this is an xtian nation and it's also TOTE LEGITZ and doesn't violate the First Amendment!
I've often seen people say that GOD = "Gold, Oil and Diamonds/Drugs" when it comes to it being on currency.
What's most amusing is that the Christopaths are in general so provincial that when they make such arguments for putting "in god we trust" on our currency, it not only violates a key tenant of their supposed scriptures, but they also fail to realize the "god" in question is not even spelled out.
They just assume the term "god" is equivalent to the Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah of the Abrahamic faiths. That may be the case for their pea-sized brains, I guess...
didn't know that, that's interesting.
It's about as "historic" as most of those stupid statues put up to honor their Confederate traitors.
The rocket surgeons on the right probably think we should learn about the Constitution from a slogan on currency and history from statues put up to racist traitors.
Or the “under God” they added to the pledge and divided one nation, indivisible
What do you think the reasoning was to put it on our coins in the mid 1800s?
Bending the knee to Christians same as now.
Were godless communists a concern then? Or do you think the majority of the population was Christian, so it was widely accepted?
Are you trying to make a point?
Also, it doesn't even spell out which god it is. Is it Pan? Zeus? Odin? Shiva?
THOR! can it be thor? :D
Sure, why not. Could set up a randomizer and select one from here....
Yep. Not one mention of their favorite character from "the" bible. If anything, the First Amendment DIRECTLY contradicts the so-called "first commandment".
Their favorite biblical character is likely Pontius Pilate.
The most they get is "endowed by their Creator" in the Declaration of Independence. One word in one document that isn't even an official part of our laws and doesn't refer to a specific "Creator." But they're ready to spin that into "this is really a Christian nation and anyone who isn't Christian or our flavor of Christianity isn't really a citizen!"
I find it really weird that they are now walking back all this stuff about his christofascism. When Johnson was asked about some of this directly, he claimed to not remember many of the things he wrote. And here, when they realized all the attention it was getting they took it down.
They're doing damage control over some of his core beliefs, which can never be good for someone who has a political job with a National profile.
I remember some of the magoos gnashing their teeth, crying, and almost literally tearing their garments over the early leak about the abortion decision. They were beside themselves - not just over the "leak" either, but about what they thought it would do to the party's chances.
I think many of them don't really want to show the naked fascist face of the party - just yet.
I'm already sick of seeing his punchable face in my feed.
It sure doesn't help that a weird little man with such weird ideas about my country has such a face...
FUCK THIS GUY AND FUCK THE GOP
Mike Johnson is...
(not mine, but worth sharing and adding to)
Keep pasting this. Raise awareness. Too many people have no idea how backwards this guy is. If he gets hos way in even some of that stuff it's going to be really bad.
So, like, if being gay becomes illegal somehow, will they just round all us gay folks up and put us in jail? I wouldn't be opposed to going back into the closet if it would ensure my freedom.
None of us should ever have to go back. We need to vote them out of office like our lives depend on it. Because they very much may be if the right wing decides to go full Gilead.
I'm trying my best and voting against the fuckers. I'm genuinely afraid for myself as a gay woman. I'm afraid for all of my LGBTQ+ friends and family and I'm afraid for every woman I know. I hope this country doesn't go full Gilead.
One bullet-point is missing.
Can he eat a brick? I think he should.
That should instantly disqualify him for holding office.
Agreed. We need to start enforcing the separation of Church and State. A politician shouldn't be pushing policy based on some religious belief. Not everyone in the US is Christian, and then among those that do identify as such, you have a hundred branches of groups that didn't like something the trunk was doing and branched off to do their own thing. Basing any policy on something that sub group can't even agree upon seems insane.
Every time these people come out and say we need to do xyz because of some religious belief they have, that policy should be null and void on the spot and that person removed from office.
To paraphrase many others....those religious rules are for the believers in that religion, not for others. If I'm not in their little book club, I simply don't care what their "god" says, nor do I ever have to be concerned with it, ever. Only they have to listen to their "god". But there is no fun in that for those afflicted with the authoritarian mindset - they want to busybody others and be full-time Karens for everyone in the nation, if not the world.
The freedom of others to not only outright ignore their little bookclub's rules, but also to mock their beliefs is exactly what the Christopaths hate and loathe about this country, though, since it was founded as a secular one. If anyone were to doubt this is not a thing with them, one only need to point out the phenomenon known as "fatwa envy". I think if they are that unhappy about it, they should move somewhere more receptive to their regressive views about ruling over others in the name of their "god".
Well, Qbert said she's tired of hearing about separation of church and state, meaning she should be disqualified for the same reason, but even after the vaping and the groping on top of that, she's still in office, sadly.
Don't you know? Public indecency is only a crime for democrats.
The xtians always use the "I'm not perfect, just forgiven" thing which just says it all, really. The not very subtle implication being that, even if caught doing things in public like having your yabbos given a good fondling while you yank the crank of your BF (was her divorce finalized at this point? Isn't that adultery? Does xtianity even allow divorce in the eyes of their god?) after some vaping, she is still better than you are if you've not accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior.
If there is a certain type of Merrikan that is truly insufferable, it's those that claim this is a xtian country.
This is the first instance of a country that was spelled out as a secular one, in writing. Not one reference to any god or gods, including their Yahweh/Allah/Jehovah. And for the dingleberries that want to hang their argument on the mechanism of dating used (anno domini) - LOL.
The closest America comes is in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
"Their Creator" is about as non-denominational as it gets. It's not like it's saying "endowed by Jesus God." It's more of a generic "men are born with these rights" statement than any statement of religion.
Yet the Christian Fundamentalists will point to that and say "See? That means God and clearly it refers to our God so that means it's a Christian country!"
Oh, and a big reason why the US is secular? We broke off from England where the king was the head of the Church. If you weren't part of the Church of England, you were persecuted against. The founding fathers were trying to avoid that in the US.
Yep, good points. Even though the Declaration holds no legal bearing, they will try to point to that (but ignore the Treaty of Tripoli, LOL). Though I think some of today's Christopaths would probably burn the Deist Founders as heretics if they had the chance.
Lastly, yes, the Founders were well aware of the worst impulses and excesses of religion that is given any power, given that the Inquisition was still going during their lifetimes. Given that many were Deists, surely they had to know that kind of heresy [1] would not be tolerated by the most fanatical of xtians.
[1] - Heresy literally means "choice". Kind of ironic that today's right wing that has co-opted terms like "liberty" and "freedom" are the very ones that would be America's own Morality Police, zealously trying to stamp out any and all heresy (choice) if they had the chance. Also, the same bunch constantly concern troll over things like "Shariah Law" - more irony, I guess, since they only differ on small matters of doctrine dealing with unverifiable superstitions, but don't really differ at all on the outcomes and the methods on who should be subjugated (women, LGBTQ, the "other" faiths).
imagine my surprise
Is this news supposed to be surprising?
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News