Had To Happen Eventually: Idiots Want NC To Declare Official State Religion

[Hardrock69]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/03/north-carolina-religion-bill_n_3003401.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009


Republican North Carolina state legislators have proposed allowing an official state religion in a measure that would declare the state exempt from the Constitution and court rulings.

The bill, filed Monday by two GOP lawmakers from Rowan County and backed by nine other Republicans, says each state "is sovereign" and courts cannot block a state "from making laws respecting an establishment of religion." The legislation was filed in response to a lawsuit to stop county commissioners in Rowan County from opening meetings with a Christian prayer, wral.com reported.

The religion bill comes as some Republican-led states seek to separate themselves from the federal government, primarily on the issues of guns and Obamacare. This includes a proposal in Mississippi to establish a state board with the power to nullify federal laws.

The North Carolina bill's main sponsors, state Reps. Carl Ford (R-China Grove) and Harry Warren (R-Salisbury), could not be reached for comment on Tuesday, The Salisbury Post reported. Co-sponsors include House Majority Leader Edgar Starnes (R-Hickory). Another is state Rep. Larry Pittman (R-Concord), who in February introduced a state constitutional amendment that would allow for carrying concealed weapons to fight federal "tyranny."

The bill says the First Amendment only applies to the federal government and does not stop state governments, local governments and school districts from adopting measures that defy the Constitution. The legislation also says that the Tenth Amendment, which says powers not reserved for the federal government belong to the states, prohibits court rulings that would seek to apply the First Amendment to state and local officials.

The bill reads:

SECTION 1. The North Carolina General Assembly asserts that the Constitution of the United States of America does not prohibit states or their subsidiaries from making laws respecting an establishment of religion.

SECTION 2. The North Carolina General Assembly does not recognize federal court rulings which prohibit and otherwise regulate the State of North Carolina, its public schools, or any political subdivisions of the State from making laws respecting an establishment of religion.

The North Carolina state constitution disqualifies those who do not believe in God from public office. The provision has been unenforcible since the 1961 Supreme Court decision in Torcaso v. Watkins, which prohibited such bans.






So I wonder what God they are going to worship. Ba'al? Satan? Reagan?

[ELVIS]

This isn't the religion forum...

[Satan]

Sure it is.....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWu-ryGeJlY

[Hardrock69]

This isn't the Elbow forum.

Ok Elbow, I will post all my religion posts here, since you want them to be in this forum so badly. :hee:


Tool.

[ELVIS]

You already do, you wasted bastard...

[FORD]

There's no point in debating this. We all know that everything in the Bible is an objective, historical fact. Like bats being birds, and every insect having 6 legs, and that whole part about the sun & moon being a couple of really big light bulbs that God placed in the sky for our convenience.

It's all completely factual. Just ask this fool..........


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F_SVzwd6hQ

[jhale667]

Such bullshit. "The Constitution doesn't apply to us" - Newsflash, the rest of the country begs to differ.

[FORD]

So if the Constitution doesn't apply to them, then why do they love the 2nd Amendment so much? And part of the 1st (as long as it's only freedom of THEIR religion, and THEIR right wing press)

[ELVIS]

Them who ??

[Hardrock69]

See how quickly the morons would object if a Mosque were built in their town.

One of my major interests (in case some of you do not know) is Middle Eastern History.

It IS my opinion that a lot of Biblical stuff IS historically factual.

Definitely when archeological finds support stories......or discovery of actual cities or locations where events took place......

Kind David did exist.....his name was found carved on a contemporary (1100 BC or whenever) piece of rock or some shit only a few years back. And there is a lot that can be found in Egyptian history about events or personages mentioned in the Bubba.

I invoke Occam's Razor.......anything that sounds like some kind of fantastical fairy tale (Undead Zombies wandering around the Middle East, women being raped by Gods and soon becoming pregnant with the future Undead Zombie......, parting of the Red Sea, Jebus going to Hell and telling everyone to shove it, and so on and so forth....) is just THAT: A bunch of embellished crap (who cares if Mary was fucked by the trashman......that is nothing speshul......but being fucked by GOD is something incredible! WOW!) made up by some idiot who was pissed off that everyone else was having a great time partying and he wasn't.

In fact I wrote and recorded a song on the very subject of human-God sexual relations years ago, lol.

In short, anything that someone says is in the Bible, that discriminates against anyone for how they choose to live their lives (as long as they do no harm to anyone else), is a bunch of bullshit written by some puritanical motherfucker who lived in the lice-infected era of Renaissance stink pussy.....and was getting NONE of it.

Supposedly Jebus hung out with the rockers, the drug addicts, the alcoholics, the disease-ridden downtrodden motherfuckers, and took pity on them for their wretched circumstance.......yet the Pope lives in a golden city and craps on a diamond-encrusted, solid gold-and-platinum commode, with some flunky there in a Holy Vatican robe whose job is to wipe the Holy Ass.....

I say NC can have an official State religion....as long as it is not Christianity.

Make Judaism or Islam or Buddhism the State religion.


If they are real Americans the politicians should have no objection......supposedly the Constitution prohibits respecting any single religion anyway......so they should make it law where the State religion is on a rotational basis....one year it is Judaism....the next Shintoism.....the next Human Sacrifice....the next Ba'al worship....then Zeus Worship...then Confucianism......Satanism....Ancestor Worship.....The Force.....(Elvis will LOVE this one)...Southern Baptism Of The Holy Trinity Christ Scientific Pentacostal.....

[ELVIS]

What-the-fuck are you rambling on about ??

[FORD]

Them who ??

Them = fundagelicals (according to that AFA moron Fischer)

Or were you asking about Van Morrison's early band of Stones wannabes??


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9TdJ4Hya-A

[ELVIS]

Well, turn the moron (Fischer) off...

I don't see the point of entertaining that garbage except to paint all Bible believers the same...

[FORD]

Well, turn the moron off...

But he's a great stand up comedian.

Not intentionally of course, but it just ends up that way. :biggrin:

[Hardrock69]

Elbow....First Pteradactyl of the First Christ Jesus Son Of The Holy Bitch Church Scientist Pentacostal.....emitter of the Final Bleatings Of Mindlessness.....Chapter 12, verse 19:

"Lo and Elvis is the true personification of the demon of Stupidity. Watch thou as the demon struggles to maintain some semblance of rationality, yet fails to appear as anything other than a Louisiana White Trash Drag Queen......."


:lol:

[ELVIS]

You're obviously impaired...

[Hardrock69]

You would appear so.

Ho and forthwith do your mumblings yon.....for it is for thee to wear the countenance of a fool.......the Elbow can have no praise save that of the skulls of emptiness.....

[FORD]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_iX2k-Te32dw/RsFwigCwxkI/AAAAAAAAAHQ/YHUdCuknVQ8/s400/dilbert_demons.jpg

[Hardrock69]

:lmao:

[Satan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4xsCpGyq94

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCbmyMqKIlo

[Hardrock69]

What if gays are all part of God's plan to test Christians to see if they can truly love one another.....

[jhale667]

What if gays are all part of God's plan to test Christians to see if they can truly love one another.....

I've said it before...what happens if, when marriage equality happens (and it will), it turns out the gay divorce rate is lower? :headlights:

[ELVIS]

what happens if, when marriage equality happens (and it will), it turns out the gay divorce rate is lower?

You'll still be a douchebag...

[jhale667]

You'll still be a douchebag...

And you'll still be a hack..:lmao:

[ELVIS]

Hack is quite a few steps above FAIL !!


:biggrin:

[jhale667]

Hack is quite a few steps above FAIL !!


:biggrin:

I was being diplomatic. :lmao:

[Hardrock69]

That is a good point, Jay. And what if studies show that children raised in a household by gay parents turn out to be superior human beings?

[jhale667]

That is a good point, Jay. And what if studies show that children raised in a household by gay parents turn out to be superior human beings?

Dunno about "superior", but betting the fear is they'll turn out normal and potentially more well-adjusted than kids born to the Honey Booboo set. Who will they say is destroying society then?

Amazing people can be OK with drive-through wedding chapels, but the thought of gay people being able to use them somehow "ruins the sanctity of marriage".... :rolleyes:

[Warham]

The federal government should only be interested in administering civil unions whether it's hetero or homo couples. It's nothing but a contract as far as taxes, inheritance, property rights, etc. are concerned. Marriage has been defined as the union between a man and woman for 4,000 years and should be left to the individual churches to decide what constitutes marriage.

[jhale667]

So you're OK with drive-thru chapels, just not fer teh gays? And the 4,000 years thing? Utter horse-hockey and you know it. :rolleyes:



I guess we need to review this again.

[78/84 guy]

Them who ??

Guess Who ???

[FORD]

The federal government should only be interested in administering civil unions whether it's hetero or homo couples. It's nothing but a contract as far as taxes, inheritance, property rights, etc. are concerned. Marriage has been defined as the union between a man and woman for 4,000 years and should be left to the individual churches to decide what constitutes marriage.

Separation of church and state would be the sensible approach here, but under current laws in states that have civil unions for same sex couples, and marriage for hetero couples, there are many legal rights the married couples have that the others do not.

That's why the legal designation of marriage is important. And it's also why Federal recognition is important, as many of those legal rights involve taxes.

Churches/mosques/synagogues/Dick Cheney's satanic covens/etc. should absolutely have to right to decide their own ceremonies. But at the end of those ceremonies, the minister/priest/rabbi/whatever always says "By the power of the state of (insert name here) I pronounce you....."

That legal document constitutes the marriage in the eyes of the state. Anything else that takes place before or after in a house of worship is irrelevant from a legal standpoint.

[Warham]

So you're OK with drive-thru chapels, just not fer teh gays? And the 4,000 years thing? Utter horse-hockey and you know it. :rolleyes:



I don't think you read my post very well.

I said the government should only be interested in handing out civil unions. If you go through a drive-through chapel and they "marry you" or "hook you up" or whatever, it doesn't matter. The paperwork you applied for is nothing but a Civil Union contract, nothing more.

The 4,000 year thing is not horse-hockey and you know it. Please produce evidence that gay marriage existed three thousand, two thousand or even a thousand years ago. The members of the Supreme Court in this recent case, even the liberal justices, understood that gay marriage is a very new idea in the world.

[jhale667]

I don't think you read my post very well.

Actually, I did.



I said the government should only be interested in handing out civil unions. If you go through a drive-through chapel and they "marry you" or "hook you up" or whatever, it doesn't matter. The paperwork you applied for is nothing but a Civil Union contract, nothing more.

"Hook you up"? Is that what the kids say these days? :biggrin:



The 4,000 year thing is not horse-hockey and you know it. Please produce evidence that gay marriage existed three thousand, two thousand or even a thousand years ago. The members of the Supreme Court in this recent case, even the liberal justices, understood that gay marriage is a very new idea in the world.


Perhaps it is, not disputing that, so don't need to "produce evidence" -but if you're talking about the "one-man-one-woman" thing, which you referenced, YES it is indeed horse-hockey and yes, you do know it. I guess you didn't watch the educational video carefully? ;)


Bottom line is there is no legitimate objection to gays having the same legally-recognized marriage rights as straight people, particularly when it comes to property, visitation rights, etc. To suggest otherwise is to suggest somehow constitutional rights shouldn't be equally applied to all citizens. Which is kinda fucked up when you think about it...

And please don't go all Ben Carson with your retort. Anyone making that false equivalence should punch themselves in the face.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h217/jhale667/ben_carson1-300x282_zps7a004475.jpg

[ELVIS]

Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution whatsoever, jfail...

[Warham]

Perhaps it is, not disputing that, so don't need to "produce evidence" -but if you're talking about the "one-man-one-woman" thing, which you referenced, YES it is indeed horse-hockey and yes, you do know it. I guess you didn't watch the educational video carefully? ;)

No, I'm talking about men and women. The thing that's required for the human species to continue.


Bottom line is there is no legitimate objection to gays having the same legally-recognized marriage rights as straight people, particularly when it comes to property, visitation rights, etc. To suggest otherwise is to suggest somehow constitutional rights shouldn't be equally applied to all citizens. Which is kinda fucked up when you think about it...

When did I give an objection to them having the same rights? If they want to go through unions and divorces like straight people, more power to them. But like I said, it should be civil unions for all.

[Angel]

Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution whatsoever, jfail...

Really? It is in ours...

[jhale667]

Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution whatsoever, jfail...

Didn't say it was, hick-hack zealot boy.

[FORD]

Some people are bad and they don't give a damn
what they do or who they hurt.
They go through their lives and don't apologize
for the shit that they've disturbed.
But they don't bother me at all cuz I know quite well
When their lives are over and they've done what they've done
They're the people that are going to Hell

Some beat their wives or pull out a knife
and stab a person or two or three
with no repercussions and no one here can touch them
and they get away scott free
But that's not the case you see and I'm glad to tell
When their lives are over and they've done what they've done
They're the people that are going to Hell

They will spend eternity cursing all they've done
faced with karma consequences and nowhere left to run
They will be in agony until the end of time
Cuz they were such assholes while alive

So try and be nice and to do what's right cuz there will come a day
When you're faced with your maker and no one here can save you
No matter what they say.
And be glad that you were good cuz some don't do so well and
when their lives are over and they've done what they've done
They're the people that are going to Hell



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5oOnQYKU88

[ELVIS]

Separation of church and state would be the sensible approach here, but under current laws in states that have civil unions for same sex couples, and marriage for hetero couples, there are many legal rights the married couples have that the others do not.

That's why the legal designation of marriage is important. And it's also why Federal recognition is important, as many of those legal rights involve taxes.



Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit...

First of all, you have a bastardized view of the separation of Church and State...

Secondly, what's the difference between marriage and a civil union to you ??

Thirdly, here you go again wanting the Federal Government to step in and force more shit down our throats while they fucking rob us blind...

Brilliant!

How liberal of you...


:elvis:

[Hardrock69]

No bastardization:

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

How hard is that for you to understand, Elbow?

[ELVIS]

Explain it in your own words...

[jhale667]

Explain it in your own words...

It means that - much to your chagrin, you don't get to dictate what the rest of the country believes, and that you can't set discriminitory policies based on your religious bigotry.


And when someone correctly points out your beliefs have NO basis in fact, you can't be offended by that FACTUAL assertion and scream "oppression".

[ELVIS]

There's one wrong answer...

[jhale667]

There's one wrong answer...

According to who, that Wallbuilders douche David Barton? There is NO state recognized religion - never has been, never should be - never WILL be. Deal with it.

[ELVIS]

Who wants a state religion ??

That's one of the things the early settlers and the Founding Fathers were running from...

You seem to have problems with comprehension...

[jhale667]

Who wants a state religion ??

That's one of the things the early settlers and the Founding Fathers were running from...

You seem to have problems with comprehension...




STFU and read up on your Dominionist buddies, zealotard.

[ELVIS]

I've done plenty of reading, hate filled tacoboy...