Alabama embarrasses itself again: Chief Justice says First Amendment applies only to Christians

May 5, 2014 • 5:44 am

Just when I think Southern legislators and judges can’t make themselves look any more stupid, someone comes along to prove me wrong. In this case it’s the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy Moore.  You probably remember that a judge refused to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom wall and also had a pre-session prayer every day. That was Moore. He lost the prayer issue after the state (at the behest of the ACLU and others) filed a lawsuit, but somehow the Ten Commandments remained.

Later, as Chief Justice (an elected position, and Moore is, of course, a Republican), he had a large stone Ten Commandments monument erected in the rotunda of the Supreme Court building in 2001.  He again faced lawsuits over violating the First Amendment, lost in a series of appeals, but vowed to keep the monument anyway. (That, by the way, is an important judge refusing to adhere to the law.) The other judges overruled him, and the monument was removed in 2004.  Here’s the monument before it was deep-sixed:

482px-Roy_Moore's_Ten_Commandments_monument

Moore also tried to uphold the antiquated Alabama statute against homosexual behavior. He lost that one when the U.S. Supreme Court declared such statutes illegal. In 2003, Moore was removed from office for his religiously-motivated intransigence, but it’s a testimony to the right-winginess of Alabama that he was again re-elected Chief Justice in 2012.

And now he’s back in the news, spreading his religious fervor. According to The Raw Story, Moore, in a recent speech, declared that the First Amendment applied (get this) only to Christians (see video below)!

Speaking at the Pastor for Life Luncheon, which was sponsored by Pro-Life Mississippi, Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court declared that the First Amendment only applies to Christians because “Buddha didn’t create us, Mohammed didn’t create us, it was the God of the Holy Scriptures” who created us.

“They didn’t bring the Koran over on the pilgrim ship,” he continued. “Let’s get real, let’s go back and learn our history. Let’s stop playing games.”

He then noted that he loves talking to lawyers, because he is a lawyer who went to “a secular law school,” so he knows that “in the law, [talking about God] just isn’t politically correct.” He claimed that this is why America has “lost its way,” and that he would be publishing a pamphlet “this week, maybe next” that contained copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, thereby proving that all the people “who found this nation — black, white, all people, all religions, all faiths” knew that America was “about God.”

Chief Justice Moore later defined “life” via Blackstone’s Law — a book that American lawyers have “sadly forgotten” — as beginning when “the baby kicks.” “Today,” he said, “our courts say it’s not alive ’til the head comes out.”

“Now,” he continued, “if technology’s supposed to increase our knowledge, how did we become so stupid?” Discussing Thomas Jefferson’s use of “life” in the Declaration of Independence, he said that “when [Jefferson] put ‘life’ in there, it was in the womb — we know it begins at conception. Why aren’t we going the right way instead of the wrong way?”

He later said the “pursuit of happiness” meant following God’s law, because “you can’t be happy unless you follow God’s law, and if you follow God’s law, you can’t help but be happy.”

“It’s all about God,” he continued. “We’ve made ‘life’ a decision taken by man,” he said, and “taken ‘liberty,’ and converted it to ‘licentiousness. We’ve taken ‘pursuit of happiness,’ and reduced it to materialism.”

What a litany of fail!

I’m appalled that such a man can mouth such idiocy.  And I’m even more appalled that Alabamans, knowing his views and actions, chose to re-elect him. Of course the state harbors sensible citizens (I know a few), but, sweet Ceiling Cat, they should get the hell out of there and let the state secede!

Now if the First Amendment (freedom of speech and of religion) applies only to Christians, then it has no purpose at all, for nobody else is given those freedoms. What does it mean if only one religion has the right to proselytize and to speak without censorship? One might as well declare Alabama—and, if Moore had his way, the U.S.—a theocracy. He should be removed from office again, simply on the grounds that he openly opposes the U.S. Constitution.

Here’s a report showing the loon spouting his stuff:

Ask and ye shall receive: Oklahoma’s stupidity brings a monument to Satan to its capitol grounds

May 2, 2014 • 8:11 am

The state of Oklahoma, having insisted on putting a statue of the Ten Commandments on the lawn of the state capitol, has reaped a whirlwind.  Since that Biblical effigy was paid for by State Representative Mike Ritze (guess which political party he belongs to?), it wasn’t considered a violation of the First Amendment. But it is, since its position implies government endorsement. Ritze is an ordained Southern Baptist Deacon and served as a missionary.  As Vice News reports,

As Trait Thompson of the Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission told CNN last December, “Individuals and groups are free to apply to place a monument or statue or artwork.” The applications are then approved or rejected by the Commission.

Well, one group, the Satanic Temple, took that offer seriously, launching an Indiegogo campaign to raise money for a statue of Old Nick. They asked for $20,000, but got $30,000 (hell, I would have kicked in a few bucks just to make a point). So the statue has been designed, but there’s a tiny problem: the state has put a moratorium on applications for other monuments until a lawsuit filed against Oklahoma by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been resolved.

Still, the design for the monument is finished, and the Satanists intend to put a bronze statue on the capitol grounds anyway, claiming that their request was filed before the moratorium.  Here’s what it looks like:

Screen-Shot-2014-05-01-at-1-26-06-PM

Now that is cool! Think of the children! Of course the Satanic Temple is getting all kinds of threats from the good citizens of Oklahoma, but really, the state brought it on themselves. If you promote one religion, you must promote them all. Just to be sure, though, the Satanists are making extra molds of the statue so they can cast replacement copies.  As Vice reports:

The Baphomet, which will stand seven feet tall and be a testament to the glory of the Angel of the Bottomless Pit, would be placed directly beside the sculpture glorifying the laws given to Moses by the Christian God. The idea of a Satanic monument sitting on government property in Oklahoma—which is like the Bible Belt’s Bible Belt—seems a bit far-fetched, but Greaves says that “there has been quite a bit of discussion among legal scholars who recognize how difficult it would actually be for Oklahoma to turn us down… Constitutional law is quite clear on this issue: The state can’t discriminate against viewpoints. If they’ve opened the door for one, they’ve opened it for all.”

Ryan Kiesel from the Oklahoma ACLU seems to agree. He told the Libertarian Republic, “If, at the end of the day, the Ten Commandments monument is allowed to remain on the Capitol grounds with its overtly Christian message, then the Satanic Temple’s proposal can’t be rejected because it is of a different religious viewpoint.”

Vice can’t resist one editorial comment:

One popular argument being used against the Temple’s monument is that it doesn’t have “any historical significance for the State of Oklahoma,” as State Representative Paul Wesselhoft told a local news station in January. “The only reason why the Ten Commandments qualified,” he continued, “is because at the Capitol, what we do is we make laws. We are lawmakers. Well, one of the earliest laws we have are the Ten Commandments.” This, it is important to remember, was said by a current democratically elected member of the legislature.

And what if the statue is rejected? Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves has a backup plan:

And if it doesn’t end up in Oklahoma City and the Ten Commandments are forced to be removed, the Satanists will try to find a home for the Baphomet in another deserving state. Texas, for instance, has had a monument of the Ten Commandments sitting on its capitol grounds for 40 years. As Greaves put it, “There are no shortage of public locations across the US where religious monuments await a contrasting voice.”

Perhaps some will object, saying a monument to Satan is deliberately designed to offend those Christians who promoted the Ten Commandments effigy (and why is there still one in Texas?). But that’s precisely the point, for the Ten Commandments offends nonbelievers. It’s not a basis in any sense for Oklahoman or American law. Lest you think it is, see how much of law is based on the following (remember that the Bible has two versions; this is one of them. I’ve put the stuff “enshrined in law” in bold.)

  1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
  2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
  3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
  4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
  5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
  6. Thou shalt not kill.
  7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
  8. Thou shalt not steal.
  9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
  10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

Maybe #6, #8, and, in some states, #7 are enshrined in law, but civilizations had laws and moral strictures against these three behaviors well before the Old Testament.  The Ten Commandments monuments in Texas and Oklahoma are, pure and simple, attempts to push Judeo-Christian religion down the throats of Americans.

h/t: Luke

 

 

Hobby Lobby-supported religious curriculum introduced into Oklahoma schools

April 28, 2014 • 9:39 am

About a week ago, news surfaced that a suburban district of Oklahoma voted to adopt a public-school curriculum prepared by the Museum of the Bible as a study guide to art, literature, and archaeology.  That, of course, raised fears about religious incursion and proselytizing in public schools, but the Bible folks assured everyone that this would not take place. From the San Jose Mercury-News:

The Mustang School Board in suburban Oklahoma City voted this month to place the Museum of the Bible’s curriculum in its schools as an elective for a one-year trial after being assured that the intent is not to proselytize but to use the Bible to explain key principles in the arts and sciences.

That’s not proselytizing? Then why use the Bible?

What was the school board thinking? Did they really think that Christians wouldn’t use this opportunity to spread the Good News? (More likely, they wanted this to happen.) The curriculum is both supported and promoted by Steve Green, president of the Christian Hobby Lobby chain of stores—the chain that didn’t want its employees covered by Obamacare because they had religious objections to the plan’s birth-control provisions. (Meanwhile, it’s been discovered that Hobby Lobby’s own 401k plan invests in companies that produce birth control devices and contraceptive pills. Beam in their eye?)

And, of course, the Mustang school board certainly must have reviewed the material.  You don’t adopt something without looking at it. The Associated Press did, too, and descried some disturbing things that were just reported(my emphasis):

While the course does explain the inspiration behind famous works of art and holds a prism to historical events, it also endorses behavior for religious reasons and implies that bad things happen as a direct result of disregarding God’s rules.

. . .”This is not about a denomination, or a religion, it’s about a book,” Green told Mustang school board members last November. “We will not try to go down denominational, religious-type roads.”

Among the topics covered by the curriculum are the role of religion in early America, discussing the New World as a haven for those seeking to escape religious persecution. It also talks about the role of religion in art, citing the role of patrons such as the Catholic church and wealthy families during the Renaissance.

The book also uses popular culture, mentioning songs written by U2 that it says are based in the Psalms, to illustrate the Bible’s modern relevance. It does not name specific compositions.

From the outset, the book describes God as eternal, “faithful and good,” “full of love” and “an ever-present help in times of trouble.”

The first pages of the Bible spotlight God’s desire for justice and a just world,” the second chapter says, but adds, “When humanity ignores or disobeys his rules, it has to suffer the consequences.”

The course also says people should rest on the Sabbath because God did so after six days of creation. Green’s stores, following the same principle, are closed on Sunday.

The school board, in a masterpiece of dissimulation, defends the curriculum:

The superintendent of Mustang schools, Sean McDaniel, said if the board believed the curriculum crossed a line it wouldn’t have approved the course.

“We’re not asking kids to believe the stories,” McDaniel said. “This is a purely academic endeavor. If it turns into something beyond that, either we will correct it or we will get rid of it.”

Well, it’s too late: it’s already “turned into something beyond that.” But, thank Ceiling Cat, the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) is on the case:

Andrew Seidel, a lawyer with the Freedom From Religion Foundation, wrote to the Mustang district this week complaining that “negative aspects” of God, such as jealousy or punishing children for the actions of their parents, are not mentioned in the course.

The book phrases contradictory questions and answers — such as references to the Israelites being slaves — in ways designed to favor Christianity, Seidel said. He said it also poses Christian thought as rhetorical questions, such as asking, “How do we know that the Bible’s historical narratives are reliable?” rather than, “Is the Bible historically accurate?”

Welcome to America, where Christians just can’t keep their grubby hands, and their faith, out of the public schools. Isn’t indoctrinating kids in church, or in their homes, enough for them? Apparently not, for, like many who think they’re in possession of the Absolute Truth as well its moral dicta, they have a duty to missionize.

I have a feeling this curriculum won’t last long.

h/t: Mark

______

By the way, if you aren’t a member of the FFRF, I’d urge you to consider joining. They’re this website’s Official Secular Organization™ because they actually get stuff done instead of making a lot of noise but accomplishing little, as many such organizations seem to do. And they don’t get embroiled in internet drama. You can join here; it’s only $40 a year and the monthly newspaper is worth that by itself.

New Jersey rejects atheist license plate, approves Baptist one

April 19, 2014 • 10:58 am

I wish this stuff would just stop happening, and that people would read the U.S. Constitution. On the other hand, if it did stop, what would I have to kvetch about.

Thanks to several readers who sent various links to the story, which appears to be genuine. According to HuffPo, a New Jersey woman applied for an atheist license plate and was turned down. As a controlled experiment, she then applied for a similar sounding but religious plate with the same number of letters, and it was fine:

A New Jersey woman who says she was denied a license plate referencing atheism filed suit this week, claiming her online application was rejected because it was deemed potentially offensive.

Shannon Morgan, of Maurice Township, said in a federal lawsuit filed Thursday that the Motor Vehicle Commission violated her First Amendment rights when its website rejected the plate reading “8THEIST.” She said she received a message stating that her vanity plate request was ineligible as it “may carry connotations offensive to good taste and decency.”

Really? “Good taste and decency”? Well, if flaunting nonbelief on a public motorway is offensive, what about belief? Morgan cleverly did the control experiment:

Morgan then filled out the online application using the phrase “BAPTIST” as a test, which the website accepted. Morgan claims in her lawsuit that she sent the agency a letter of complaint by registered mail and made several attempts to contact them by phone, all of which went unanswered.

I guess flaunting belief in front of nonbelievers, or even non-Baptists, is perfectly fine. That’s unconstitutional, and good grounds for a lawsuit. What makes this particularly puzzling is that New Jersey, after a bit of foot-dragging, had previously approved a request for a license plate that read “ATH1EST” (with a one instead of an “i”). Maybe it’s the “8” they object to!

More public money wasted on a losing state lawsuit. The second most ironic thing is this:

Messages and emails left for the Motor Vehicle Commission by The Associated Press on Friday were not returned. A recorded message said the offices were closed in observance of Good Friday.

 

Another dumb politician doesn’t understand the First Amendment

April 17, 2014 • 10:00 am

From the Raw Story (where there’s a video I can’t embed), we find another example of an ignorant politician—the mayor of Warren, Michigan—who doesn’t understand that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the one that guarantees freedom of religion) also guarantees freedom from religion. You can’t promote religious belief and at the same time ban unbelief. Sadly, that hasn’t penetrated the skull of Warren’s mayor:

A Michigan mayor who says that he believes in freedom of religion has refused to allow atheists to set up a so-called “Reason Station” inside City Hall, saying it could upset Christians visiting the nearby “Prayer Station.”

According to the Detroit Free Press, Warren resident Douglas Marshall proposed the “Reason Station” to promote separation of church and state, and to tell people about using free thought, reason and logic.

But Warren Mayor Jim Fouts rejected the display for a period of one year because of Marshall’s affiliation with a group called the Freedom From Religion Foundation. In a letter to Marshall, Fouts explained that the Freedom From Religion Foundation was not protected under the First Amendment’s Establishment clause because atheism was not a religion.

That’s totally bogus; it’s irrelevant with whom Marshall is affiliated. If they can put up pro-religious stuff, they’re obligated to put up nonreligious or antireligious stuff.

“To my way of thinking, your group is strictly an anti-religion group intending to deprive all organized religions of their constitutional freedoms or at least discourage the practice of religion,” Fouts wrote. “The City of Warren cannot allow this.”

“Also, I believe it is group’s intention to disrupt those who participate in the Prayer Station which would also be a violation of the freedom of religion amendment,” he added. “For these reasons, I cannot approve of your request.”

Curiously, Fouts also rejected the FFRF’s request for an atheist display last year, and that rejection was upheld by the courts. I’m baffled, for that rejection was clearly unconstitutional.

Fout is a deeply ignorant man, as evinced in the story’s last two paragraphs:

WJBK reported that the city of Warren has approved the “Prayer Station,” a Ramadan Display, a Nativity scene and a Day of Prayer — but nothing for atheists.

“I will continue to support all groups regardless of race or religion, but I will not support a group that denigrates those groups,” Fouts told the station.

I emphasize one thing,” he added. “The government cannot restrict an individual’s freedom of speech, but an individual cannot restrict the government’s freedom of speech.”

What does that last paragraph even mean?

This fight never ends, does it? Are these people truly ignorant of the Constitution, or willfully ignorant?

h/t: Barry

Louisiana proposes bill to designate the Bible as The Official State Book

April 11, 2014 • 8:01 am

What is it: silly season for the First Amendment? Apparently, for according to WWLTV in New Orleans, the Louisiana legislature is considering another totally unconstitutional bill:

BATON ROUGE, La. — Lawmakers are moving ahead with a proposal to name the Bible as Louisiana’s official state book, despite concerns the bill would land the Legislature in court. A House municipal committee advanced the bill Thursday with an 8-5 vote, sending it to the full House for debate. Rep. Thomas Carmody, R-Shreveport, said he sponsored the proposal after a constituent made the request. But Carmody insisted the bill wasn’t designed to be a state-endorsement of Christianity or a specific religion. “It’s not to the exclusion of anyone else’s sacred literature,” he told the House committee. Again, later he said, “This is not about establishing an official religion of the state of Louisiana.”

Who is he kidding? Everyone knows that this bill is palpably unconstitutional, making a Judeo-Christian text into an official state emblem. Curiously, four of the eight voting for the bill were Democrats. As usual, the sponsors pretend this doesn’t have anything to do with Christianity:

Rep. Barbara Norton, D-Shreveport, said she didn’t feel qualified to “vote on anything that’s related to the Bible,” so she voted against it. Rep. Ebony Woodruff, D-Harvey, said adopting the Bible as the state’s official book could be offensive to people who live in the state and who aren’t Christian. “You’re OK with offending some of the citizens of this state?” she asked. “It’s not meant to be offensive,” Carmody replied. “There’s no requirement that they would have to follow this particular text.”

This guy is either one neuron shy of a synapse, or, more likely, he’s simply dissimulating. This stupid bill offends everyone who follows the U.S. Constitution, a group that apparently doesn’t include Carmody or many citizens of Louisiana. If they’re going to choose a version of the Bible (Carmody suggested a specific version, perhaps the King James translation), he could at least have used this one

h/t: Jarle

Wisconsin governor issues Christian tw**t

March 23, 2014 • 8:32 am

Scott Walker, the Republican governor of Wisconsin, has a Twi**er feed, and he’s unfortunate enough to be in the same state as the headquarters of the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF). Here’s a tw**t he made on March 16, note that a.) it’s an “official Twitter account”, meaning he’s speaking as governor, and b.) his tweet is a religous—specifically Christian—one:

Picture 3

Picture 2

The King James Bible gives that verse as follows:

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

Bad move! On an official government website, it’s neither kosher nor Constitutional to push religious views. The inevitable result, a letter from FFRF co-presidents Annie Laurie Gaylor and Dan Barker, is reported on their website. (The screenshot below is from the Daily News, and you can extract it and enlarge it if you want to read the whole thing.)

Screen shot 2014-03-23 at 7.34.10 AM

The relevant passage of Annie Laurie and Dan’s letter:

To say, “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me”, seems more like a threat, or the utterance of a theocratic dictator, than of a duly elected civil servant.

After citing the relevant case law prohibiting this kind of behavior, they ask mildly, “May we hear form you at your earliest convenience?”

I don’t think they’ve heard back from him directly, but the governor has issued a statement flatly refusing to remove his tw**t. As The Blaze reported on Friday:

“Governor Walker will not remove the post on his social media,” Walker spokeswoman press secretary Laurel Patrick said in an email. “The verse was part of a devotional he read that morning, which inspired him, and he chose to share it.”

Patrick said Walker’s social media accounts are frequently used “to engage with Wisconsinites on matters of public policy” as well as to give constituents “a sense of who he is.”

She said the scripture reference he posted on March 16 was simply “a reflection of his thoughts for the day.”

That doesn’t seem like a justification for using one’s position as governor to promote Christianity. Of course, had Walker tw**ted a passage from The God Delusion, he’d be in deep doo-doo.

I would have thought that, given the blatant proselytizing here, a lawsuit might be in the offing, but I guess the FFRF doesn’t want to squander its resources on a single tw**t. As they announced (again from The Blaze):

Barker said that the Freedom From Religion Foundation might take definitive action if Walker decided to post Bible messages on a more regular basis, but that in this case they will likely “look the other way.”

“We’re not going to take any legal action on one abuse,” he said. “And it is an abuse — and he should know it’s one.”

I think if Walker knows what’s good for him, he’ll keep any more Bible verses off of his official Twi**er account.

h/t: Tom