I'm not sure what all this angry, chest- thumping, bullying, "don't tread on me" thing that we've come to call Christianity is, but here's what I do know:
It isn't the Gospel.
It isn't Good News for the poor and marginalized.
It isn't the Prince of Peace.
It isn't the perfect love that casts out fear.
It isn't Jesus by any measure.
It's a toxic cocktail of power, control, fear, nationalism, and white privilege- and it looks much more like the bloated opulence of Rome than the early Church that resisted it.
I'm part of the "rest of christianity", John, and so are others here, I think. Please don't paint us all with the same brush. There are still many of us who go directly back to what Jesus said as recorded in the Gospel, and not to what His "interpreters" like Paul and others said/say. KJ21-Matt: 24:11:
"And many false prophets shall rise and shall deceive many."
I'm sorry, Bruce, but you and the "rest of Christianity" had better start raising your collective voice a LOT louder, because this Christian Nationalist crowd will steamroll right over you with all the rest of us if you don't. In my opinion, mainstream Christians stood by quietly and let them get this far when it could have been stopped when they first hijacked your faith.
Dear Betsy, please take a deep breath (That's what I have been doing for quite some time now). While doing so, would you consider the reality: There is no such thing as a homogeneous group that I or most Christians today belong to that I would consider joining. 40,000,000 (or more) Americans have also walked away from "churches" in the last 25 years. In the US, church membership has fallen below 50%, and in other countries (EU) it is even higher. Like Groucho Marx said: "I refuse to join any club that would have me..." THERE ain't no "Collective".
"Christianity Today" sometimes offers real oppositional commentary, but even that organization is marbled with darkness.
Liberal christians are far and few between, and when we do raise our voices and are active, it's like you imply..."spit on a hot stone". Thanks for the push though, we need to do more.
How are we to do that? I am a Unitarian Universalist, not necessarily Christian, but a religion none the less. We are speaking up and out, but our voices are not amplified.
I would have never known UUs were speaking up or out, and I suspect no one else does either. All but one US Representative claims to follow a religion. Call those hypocrites out on this.
Do "Christian Nationalists" (i.e. Fascists, White Supremacists) also insist their "members" be Whilte, Male, and Blond ? Or was that just a Hitler thing ?
Betsy, our faith has not been hijacked, however the media has led you to a false conclusion that Jesus People are standing silent against the loud voice media give false prophet evangelical nationalists. The outrageous get noticed by the click bait media. Actual Christians do not. This is not a matter of faith but rather that of an America willing to be suckered by the loudest voice. You are falling for it and blaming us as complicit
The voices are out there. No one in the 'mainstream' media is attentive to them. Example, the NYT once had Peter Steinfels writing on belief that migrated to the Op Ed page with Ross Douthat, not an attentive move.
John did say, "...in the mainstream media..." Certainly, many (most?) Christians do not accept the actions and direction of the MAGA, right wing, fundamentalist, evangelicals pushing their "values" on the rest of us. Please note, I did not write "fundamentalist, evangelicals," but "MAGA, right wing, ..." But, to John's point, to those that do not support those radical actions, the silence is deafening. Whatever opposing Christian views there are sure don't get the airtime or print columns like the crazies get.
We can demand that MSM elevate those voices. They are out there.
“To be clear, I’m not being critical of Christians playing a strong leadership role in our advocacy. Christians are best positioned to reject the idea that Christian Nationalism is rooted in true Christian values. This distinction is critical, especially given how many people (and Christians) are still waking up to the problem. Christian leaders have greater potential to resonate with fellow Christians, who are still hovering around a super-majority in America. And when Christian messengers criticize Christian Nationalism, they are less likely to be perceived as anti-Christian.
So, it’s both heartening and unsurprising that in this moment of threat to church-state separation, there has been a surge of Christian advocates engaging. My friend Amanda Tyler, head of the Baptist Joint Committee, founded Christians Against Christian Nationalism to rally Christians to speak out against this dangerous political movement that warps Christianity. Andrew Whitehead and Sam Perry, leading academics studying and exposing White Christian Nationalism, are Christian. Christian Ethicist David Gushee recently penned a book, Defending Democracy from its Christian Enemies, on the importance of fighting against Christian Nationalism and for church-state separation.
Rob Reiner and Dan Partland’s excellent new film “God & Country,” which exposes and highlights the dangers of Christian Nationalism, is studded with Christian voices. It opens and closes with powerful clips of the Rev. William Barber II speaking from a Christian perspective, showcases Christian scholars like Kristin Du Mez, Anthea Butler and Whitehead, and spotlights conservative Christians like journalist David French and former Christian Nationalist the Rev. Rob Schenck. Not every expert is Christian; I am so proud of our in-house experts, Rob Boston and Andrew L. Seidel, and their amazing contributions to the film. But Reiner, who was raised Jewish, and Partland have made clear that the Christian emphasis is intentional.“
Films and books and such, regardless of how awesome they might be, are “preaching to the choir,” both literally and figuratively. They won’t reach the important audiences, with rare exceptions.
I would argue that they are important means of connecting to others different from selves. Not necessarily the best and not complete. A window into seeing the humanity of people, which a person may have been taught to fear. It can as easily be used for opposite purposes though. It’s always up to us, what we choose, the best in us or the worst in us.
A sobering nightmare of a night for America Joyce as we pass through this unjustified darkness imposed upon us by a cult. How can it possibly be anyone’s business to dictate individual rights. It’s totally political and a sacrilege and affront to those who practice their faith outside that realm. Thank you for your post and the attention you are bringing to all of us on this serious predicament until we take back both houses of Congress
To which you can add Lenard Fenney the anti semeyic Jew hating Jesuit from Harvard. No defending them or the lunatic bishop from Texas , just fired by Francis. The church is sinful and constantly in need of reform, but that nor those noted make it a fascist institution
The term "Christian Nationalism" is an insult to Christians world-wide. Whenever I read the term in print, what I say in my head is, "UnChrist-like Nationalism."
Jesus said to Pilate: “My kingdom is no part of this world.” John 18:36
But the fundamentalists are intoxicated with the prospect of power. This will end badly for them.
Governments have long used true Christian ethics to inform their laws, but that is their voluntary choice; Christians are not directed to impose their values on unwilling people by law. They are only authorized to resist having unchristian values imposed on them by law. (Acts 4:18-20 is an example.)
I should add, these “fundamentalists” are just another perversion of original Christianity. But other commenters have said it better.
"Christians are not directed to impose their values on unwilling people by law. They are only authorized to resist having unchristian values imposed on them by law. (Acts 4:18-20 is an example.)"
I believe you are making an arguably false distinction between Christians as individuals and Christianity as a set of organised religions, that perpetuate themselves through history and time.
For most of history since the Roman Empire, Christianity HAS been forced on the populace, with severe penalties (including torture and gruesome execution) for non-compliance. It has caused untold bloody wars, and set back advancement in science by at least a millennium.
Islam has an an evil history too - and continues to write it still. It is not a defence to simply state that most Christians (and most Muslims) are "good people".
That is what the First Amendment is all about - freedom FROM state religion. Marx was right about it being the opiate of the masses.
As an atheist living in a free, secular society - Australia - what the Alabama Chief Justice wrote is simply astonishing and unbelievable. The separation of church and state has to be fiercely defended against by everyone of good will and possessing rational thought.
I don't want to tar all Christians with the same brush, but I'm not sure Christians can be relied on to defend the ideals of the secular state the way atheists have to do it so passionately. Freedoms seem to be being lost every day.
The distinction is between Christianity and Christendom, which repressed Christianity when it rose to power in an unholy ‘marriage’ of Church and state in the 3rd century (or before). This was the foretold apostasy from original Christianity. It dominated governments for centuries, underwent an incomplete “Reformation” that was not much of an improvement, and then the states began to distance themselves from this stranglehold in the 17th century. But Christendom’s grip has really weakened in the last 50 years or so. The next step is her destruction, also as foretold. She falls first, because of her prostituting what should be holy to greed for wealth and power in this world. So yeah, church will get separated from state one more time. For good. But that doesn’t make the state all sweetness and light. It too is made of corrupt men. Those trying to right the ship cannot keep it afloat.
So the prophecy continues: the nations that bedded with wicked religion will be dealt with. Fantastical, you may say. Delusional. But can you really offer a more plausible hope for mankind’s survival, considering what we are now facing?
The relevant scripture is Rev 17, 18 and 19 (3 chapters) with the key verses at 17:4-6 and 15-18. “Babylon” translates as ‘confusion’. This is the symbol of all forms of religion that dishonors God and sows confusion (you would say that’s all of it, but I think you’d agree that in all matters, truth does exist, while everything that contradicts truth is not-true.) Truth can be hard to find, but we persist in trying to find it, in science, in what works, in right vs wrong.
So, God either exists or he does not. Both cannot be true. And if He exists, he will have standards of good vs bad. Truth is not found in every contradictory belief, and while some say “truth is whatever you believe,” that’s obviously not. Wishing don’t make it so.
Jesus said, “I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth.” Pilate cynically retorted, “What is truth?” Was he right? Is truth unknowable? How do you decide whom to listen to? The confident bloviating demagogue (DJT) or the humble teacher who helps you see inside yourself honestly? (JC)
All that to say that the destruction of false religion is in fact decreed by God, as Rev 18:1-8 makes clear. You should be very happy with that. See 18:20.
Freedom. Set your sights high. Not merely to be free to do as you please, but to be free to live forever. If God exists, that is not out of reach.
I'm sorry mate - and it might seem coarse and blunt - but as soon as anyone quotes Chapter & Verse from the bible, in any political discussion about the church and state whatsoever, I know for a fact that I'm dealing with a snake-eating, happy-clapping god-botherer.
What other position could I possibly take? You cannot deal with the total political theocratic takeover of a sleepy America, by quoting the effing bible! Thank god for atheists!
You decry close-minded prejudice… with close-minded prejudice.
It’s snake-handling, not eating, btw. And that kind of religion is not bible based, despite their ardent zeal and conviction. Following feelings is dangerous.
“The religion that is clean in the view of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself undefiled from the world.” —James 1:27
Christian and nationalism should not be in the same sentence. There is no national religion and the constitution demands separation of church and state. This ruling is abhorrent and is clearly unconstitutional. Every individual is free to be personally guided by their religious beliefs; however, states do not have the right to dictate to the rest of the country! With this approach we are no longer the United States. Perhaps that is still the goal of the confederate states.
Eric Doub: As a practicing Catholic, disillusioned with Christianity, trucking on with Catholic Christianity because of the Holy Presence of Our Lord in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, and the two great commands -- to love the One, God with one's whole heart, one's whole mind, one's whole being, and to love one's neighbor as oneself precisely because the command to love neighbor is a command of the One, the Holy; and because of all of the holy teachings of the Our Father -- including to "give us this day our daily bread" is to ask for the Spirit of God to move our actions to love the One and to love our Neighbor.
Period.
As a Catholic I am totally disillusioned with institutionalized Christianity and attend Mass regularly for the Holy Sacrament and His Glorious Presence and for the good people around me.
But I won't talk about it outside of Mass, because there is too much loud "Christianity" and the priestly abuse has made me look to alternatives in the Lutheran and Orthodox or even Anglo-Catholic wing of Anglicism. But my family keeps me in the Catholic Church, despite my unhealed disillusion.
As a lawyer, with the state of the legal profession, if I were young -- I am 76 -- I might enter the law, but I would seriously consider other professions.
Disillusioned in all respects through Christianity and the law through our Congressmen and national races.
Honestly, all the muscular, flag-driven "piety" and "patriotism" (oh, and my whole life was the Navy and Air Force -- all of my life -- people WHO NEVER SERVED A DAY will loudly wear the American flag as a hat or shorts or shirt or display about 100 flags or oversized ones) is wearying and unappetizing -- and serves effectively an emetic or even a strong, very strong laxative, really.
I applaud your statements, Eric Doub, but the American brand of Christianity is so loud and selfish and commercial to reach untold masses, and for what, for an Orange Snout to drive a right wing agenda into the ground.
I say the political dialogue should leave religion totally out of the discourse. Years ago, I thought otherwise. But disillusion has set irreparably in.
No mistake: Eric Doub: Your comments are good, and if American Christianity were in the spirit you express, I would join you. I do join your spirit.
Armand, you said my thoughts exactly. I’m not a Catholic but a Lutheran. However, I have turned away from organized religion but have not abandoned my spirituality. The government has no business in my personal relationship with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Why is no one challenging the Constitutional separation of Church and State??!
"Eric Doub: As a practicing Catholic, disillusioned with Christianity, trucking on with Catholic Christianity because of the Holy Presence of Our Lord in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, and the two great commands -- to love the One, God with one's whole heart, one's whole mind, one's whole being, and to love one's neighbor as oneself precisely because the command to love neighbor is a command of the One, the Holy; and because of all of the holy teachings of the Our Father -- including to "give us this day our daily bread" is to ask for the Spirit of God to move our actions to love the One and to love our Neighbor."
This is all dead-set creepy to my mind ... Christianity (especially Catholicism) and rational thought about the secular state do not mix.
Eric I was gobsmacked that Alabama Justice Porter quoted extensively from the Bible to justify the ‘embryo ruling.’ I thought that the !st Amendment separated religion from government and that legal precedent was integral to our judicial system.
I’m extremely nervous, since the Old Testament provides some frightful religious precedents. Should courts destroy entire towns? (If so, I have some suggestions). As for slavery, the OT seems to approve.
On balance I prefer judicial decisions based on the Constitution rather than the Bible, though the New Testament expresses some positive thinking.
As for being gobsmacked, Keith, I had a similar reaction. But I think one of the defining characteristics of this era is "no more trying to hide it." So much behavior, so many crimes, so many court decisions, now contain no element of trying to disguise the values driving them.
So I think it is up to us to be less shocked and to simply see clearly what is in front of us. That can help us respond more quickly and effectively.
They “take precedence” because the readers of this comments section are voting to elevate them above other comments, JUDITH, not because nobody wants to hear what you have to say, or that your comments are worthless. More power to you, as a resident of Alabama, to do what you can to protest this Christian Nationalism. As a resident of a state which is, thankfully, not Alabama, there’s nothing I can do, no matter how horrible the outcome of this ‘legislation’.
Ironically, your complaint mirrors the frequent Christianist rhetorical manipulation of the concept of the separation of church and state to indicate that Christians are a protected class that are sworn to take legal action against non-Christians for not believing in Christ, God, etc. As a devout atheist, this mental gymnastic routine is abhorrent, and it has led to violence and murder committed by those who claim to follow Christ. My religious upbringing gave me the knowledge to see the un-Christlike actions of people more willing to pervert Christ’s words to their own ends than follow the actual teachings.
After living most of my life as a Catholic and then as a Muslim, I learned that religion is nothing more than manipulation and social control. Alabama is a perfect example of political power in the guise of religion.
woah there- This is called Civil Discourse. Please don't condemn all people from any given state. Their leadership is terrible. Nothing is helped by dissing due to where they live...
Long but so telling, this quote by Dave Barnhart, a traditional Christian pastor, is on point about these Alabama "justices":
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."
“Love thy neighbor” is pretty hard, because you know who that is. Not yet born people are easier, because they are an abstraction. Even your descendants in the future are hard to imagine, so why fight climate change for their sake? They probably wouldn’t like you or share your values, anyway. Jesus never mentioned climate change, did he?
Wow, Eric, I think you hit the nail right on the head!! That's why I believe the term " Pro Life " is hypocritical. They are NOT pro life because that requires taking care after birth.
And denouncing the death penalty, which, by the way, is on the slate in Alabama for yet another barbarous nitrogen gas execution and coming up soon. These legislators are just sadists. It doesn’t paint their voters in such a sparkling light either. Private schools and homeschooling have played hob with education there it looks like.
Excellent quote. Thank you for posting it. As a former Christian, I've felt sadness for years at how our values have become so twisted in my lifetime. This is a personal observation only, not to attributed to anyone else. My reading of history, especially in Europe, informs me that we have killed so many and destroyed so much in our desire to demonstrate our love for our God, and our need to show we are so God-like in our profession of faith. Careful reading shows these actions overshadow even the horrors of the Holocaust.
I suspect that next we will read that it will be illegal for a woman - or the parents of - unused embryos to discard them. My understanding is that IFV consists of many embryos created, but only a portion of them actually used to create a living child. Will the parent's choice to discard the remaining embryo's because they are no longer needed be considered murder? Society seems to redefine what constitutes life faster than we can adapt. A woman's choice, in my humble opinion, should never be subject to someone else's personal religious beliefs.
Is it the same Alabama claiming the sanctity of life as this Alabama?
“Capital punishment in Alabama is a legal penalty. Alabama has the highest per capita capital sentencing rate in the United States. In some years, its courts impose more death sentences than Texas, a state that has a population five times as large.[1]”
Southern white Xtians are BORN hypocritical. The joys of Fundamentalism: they can sow wild oats six days a week and pray for crop failure on the seventh and be rewarded for so doing.
The misogyny and religious extremism in these rippling legal decisions should compel us all to action. These legal judgments cannot stand. A Republican future is no future.
Next on their agenda; Alito just alluded to it! Contraception should be our rallying cry following warnings about national abortion ban! Every Republican candidate should be asked about those two issues in a public forum in order to put them on record! I respectfully suggest that asking about their position on embryos would not focus the attention of the voting public anywhere as much as contraception! Let’s get all of them on record and then raise it publicly and frequently before the election in every state and congressional districts!
That's because it's actually not about the babies, it's always been about control of humans, specifically women right now. And those using methods they don't approve of to be able to have a baby as we've seen with IVF the past couple of days. But it will then expand to gay marriage, gay adoption, those unmarried and cohabitating, equal rights, the list goes on. Essentially, anything other than what they believe their "God" their "religion" has dictated that they alone are entitled to impose on everyone else.
Exactly! That is what I have been discussing with my friend. I am currently in a country unfriendly to abortion thanks to anti-genocidal laws, but not to birth control. My daughter is in university here. The Morning After pill is easily available by 24 hour pharmacy, with no prescription. In Blue States I understand that many Universities have them available in such ways. Not sure about Red States. These are the kinds of things that Universities in Red States might have but not advertise. It is not good for universities bottom line if pregnant students cannot abort either a chosen or unchosen act that leads to an unwanted pregnancy. Having had conversations with my daughter and her friends on birth control both before and after they have become sexually active, I can only say the schools are not doing a great job of covering birth control, in favor of talking a lot about equality in relationships and honoring gay and transgender students. The problem is not that they are making a more inclusive sex ed, but that they are leaving out the basics. While the good news is that unwanted teen pregnancies are dropping, the bad news is that we still have too many of them and more of them compared to other wealthy nations. Access to birth control is critical in reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22792555/
Hi Linda, I am wondering if you are wondering about sex-education in public schools? It was dropped from the national curriculum during Bush Junior's tenure. Text books were rewritten with all mention of conception and pregnancy prevention removed. Some states chose to continue to teach sex ed - and some of them left it up to individual boards of education. So many kids who previously had guidance from informed teachers, had only their peers to give them information.
Hi Tiggr, I am a university professor as well (education policy, now retired). Indeed, the archaic mess of a lack of sex education in public schools is the result of the Reagan era ('just say no'); and furthered by the Christian nationalist evangelical leadership, whose end-game for fifty years has been to reverse our abortion rights and have promoted an 'abstinence only policy.'
They achieved their primary goal of erasing abortion rights with their support and election of Trump (their Orange Jesus puppet who installed the SCOTUS puppets Kavanaugh, Coney-Barrett, Gorsuch creating a far right voting bloc on the SCOTUS); Bush Jr., who promoted abstinence only sex education: it has taken a perfect storm to get us here. I think one of the best 'outcomes' if we can think of it in those terms, is indeed having the exposure to corruption that Trump has brought. He said he was going to 'drain the swamp.' He has exposed the creatures in it. We at least now know what we are fighting. I have a lot of faith in the American public that they will vote Blue for Biden, establish a Blue bicameral Congress and stay engaged after November to push for cleaning up Congress and their cronies and the SCOTUS. For example, Ginny Thomas could be indicted, forcing Clarence's resignation. We just need to stay on point with educating and working for a Blue vote, up, down and sideways. And stay engaged following November's election. The founding father's wanted an educated citizenry who could challenge and confront their elected leaders. We must be that.
A lot of what is going on in sex education from what I understand in public schools is abstinence only as far as I know. However, sex ed is currently not mandated in Illinois, if taught is supposed to be comprehensive.
When I taught it a long time ago in public schools in IL it was. I have taught it in private schools, in elementary grades where nothing learned is learned if not reinforced. I am currently mostly familiar with private schools. The three young women I spoke with about birth control a few weeks ago each went to a different private school, all supposedly progressive. None of them knew of cervical caps or diaphragms. I consider this a glaring absence of knowledge. When most of your education comes from Tiktok it is bound to be spotty. Shame on American schools for being afraid to teach sex ed. Shame on parents for making it such difficult terrain. The Netherlands remains the model of mandated comprehensive sex ed instruction, and that is why they are one of the 5 countries with the lowest unwanted teen pregnancy and STD rates. According to the UNICEF report card below, the Netherlands has one of the lowest teen birth rates and one of the lowest abortion rates, so they achieve their low unwanted pregnancy rate by other means. I like that the term in the Netherlands for using both condom and pill is Double Dutch. This has led to reduced STDs numbers in teens as well.
The Nordic countries also do well. Scroll to page 23 to read about how they have achieved this. It includes good comprehensive sex education on contraceptives. Page 25 discusses Finland's research on the use of the Morning After pill that is quite interesting.
Here is more information on the Netherlands. Scroll down to see the country facts about the Netherlands.
While comprehensive education has worked in some Northern European countries, I do not know what makes Japan and South Korea so effective. Still, my focus is whether the girls/boys and young women/young men in the USA are being provided with good information to make the best choices for them. I do not think this is so in the USA in public or private schools. Abstinence only, and opt-out/opt-in policies are not helpful for making sure that there is a consistent, widely taught comprehensive curriculum.
Linda, You are correct. The United States public school 'policy' (private schools follow individual curricula) harkens back to Nancy Reagan: 'Just say no.' But how does one say 'no' to hormones raging out of control - with no safe, and solid information? Ultimately, parents are responsible for demanding the schools policy makers form and implement policies that provide sex education - and if that is not happening in the schools, then they should find the curriculum. I think a curriculum exists on CDC (or at least used to).
After the covid year, I met with the school counselor to discuss how they had dropped the ball on sex ed and what were they going to do about it. I also told him how I taught it over many months, a couple of times a week so that my students could grow comfortable with the topic and other things. I then gave him the National Curricular goals, the WHO curricular goals, as well as a lot of material, and some articles on what the Netherlands covers, links to a lists of films that support various topics, and some articles on teachers who got hung out to dry when their principals did not back them in teaching sex ed, after parents could peer into the classrooms during covid. So, he wisely contracted it out to an agency that met all of the national and WHO curricular criteria. There was a parent meeting, and there was an opt-out policy, which I did not hear about anyone using, but who knows. In any case, everyone gets that condoms prevent pregnancy and STDs, but not that it is not a high enough rate of pregnancy prevention. So, there you go. A lot do not want the IUD because they do not have regular enough sex to use one, and others do not want to have the chemical reactions of being on the pill. So, I did not hear one of them knowing about cervical caps or diaphragms, the bread and butter birth control of my youth as well as the pill. Apparently the key to success and the fourth or fifth lowest teen pregnancy rate in countries where it is measured is not so much use of abortion. That is quite low in the Netherlands along with a low STD rate. It is the Double Dutch method of pills and condoms. Condoms are passed out to everyone like candy and schools have health centers that will discuss anything you want to about sex of any kind, except for illegal things like pedophilia.
USA curriculum, you have to scroll a bit to get to the standards by grades.
The curriculum that my daughter's school used met the standards, but in application spent more time talking about feelings than about logistics. I also talked to her classmates about it. They felt that the timeline was way off and repeating things they already knew, and not getting to the things they needed to know.
And more! What scares me is where does this all end? It seems that men ultimately want the position that "life begins at the moment a man decides he wants to have sex with a woman:. Therefore, there can be no such thing as rape. A woman should not deny the potential life. Of course,I think this absurd, but what's next once contraceptions are banned? Men have the power and their brains are not in their heads. Until women truly receive equal power throughout our civilization, we are likely to devolve into a barbaric, doomed species. I hope there is a God and she will save us.
And all of this information makes very clear WHY the ERA was never made into law, doesnt it? Cant give all those females power in any way, can we?
Frankly, how much clearer does it have to be to wake us up? I'm 85 - almost 86 - it sure seems right out in the open to me that "christian nationalism" (NOT capitalized - also NOT Christian) will take over our entire lives IF WE LET IT!
And its not only Christians but look at the other religions - every one has a version of this and has been radicalized (good word) by it. (Israel and Palestine?)
It wouldn't be anything they haven't done in the past. In the 80's there was discussion about making IUDs illegal because it was believed they work by preventing the fertilized egg from attaching itself to the uterine wall.
So if these frozen embryos now have -- in Alabama -- the same legal status as children that have actually been born, do they qualify as dependents for tax purposes? Can their lives be insured? Can they inherit the estates of their parents? The practical consequences of this decision border on the absurd.
Oooh, I like your thinking. You could freeze a bunch of embryos, insure them, and wait for them to degrade and become unviable. Have a nice funeral and the insurance money could fund a very comfortable retirement. Fabulous idea.
Obviously another Supreme Court that refuses to uphold the Constitution; they might as well hold a ceremonial burning of the Constitution at the opening of their season. There was and still is a good reason for holding Amendment 1 as inviolate. The first addition to the Articles of the Constitution establishes the importance of separation of church and state in the United States, not as it was practiced in Europe at that time. Amendment 1 is purposeful, NOT an afterthought. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" That is precisely what it meant. It is not intended as a yes, but.
If any justice of any Supreme Court whether State or Federal, doesn't like, or disagrees with the Constitution, they should and MUST remove themselves from their position.
If they are foolish enough to try, they can write a new Amendment nullifying the First Amendment, then try to get 2/3 of the Senate and the House of Representatives followed by 38 States to agree - good luck with that
Religion belongs in church, temple, synagogue, or place of worship. The Constitution is the ONLY book of matter in any Courtroom in the United States of America. If you don't like that - move to Europe.
As an atheist, I even object to the swearing of Office on any book except the Constitution, it is the Constitution you are swearing to defend and uphold - not some religious tract.
Several months ago I saved the following off of a comment by some guy named Greg. Sorry not to have more to authenticate its veracity:
"And for those of you who believe that the United States was founded as a Christian nation the following quotes in refutation of that erroneous notion, DIRECTLY from the Founding Fathers....
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." -- Thomas Paine
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." -- James Madison
"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."
-- John Adams
"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." -- George Washington
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit." -- Thomas Paine
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries." -- James Madison
I especially like/appreciate the second Thomas Paine quote. Maybe 25 years ago I asked my brother why he doesn’t participate in any “formal religion” anymore. He said he believes that identifying with a religion becomes the root of too many problems in this world. In due time I understood what he meant and agree.
Tom Paine was a true revolutionary. Paine, Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin were deists. The last thing they wanted was a national religion. They are now spinning in their graves.
I believe it was Jefferson who went to the trouble to cut out all of Jesus’ words from the New Testament and bound them(I think I remember that). The very slim result now resides in his collection in the Library of Congress.
I’m wondering if this quoting of Christian biblical passages and references to religion in the Chief Justice’s opinion will make an appeal easier, given the flagrant disregard for separation of church and state. While I’ve been known to read legal opinions for entertainment I don’t have the background to know how common it is to cite religion or how vulnerable that makes such opinion to appeal.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. From there, no appeal is possible. The Supreme Court seems to have decided that these reproductive issues should remain within the states. So they're not likely to accept an appeal.
Yes, I know. But what I was referring to is the fact that the availability of an appeal process on this issue is very, very limited and not likely to be successful on the state level, unless Alabama somehow has a very liberal Supreme Court.
So, if the parents do not eventually implant all embryos, would they then be accused of denying the fetuses their personhood? Would that be murder or manslaughter? Or would they be required to give those fetuses to other people? Would they still be required to support those children after their presumable birth?
And how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
apparently the criminal statute regarding "unborn life" refers to it as "in utero." It will be interesting to see how the court would figure out how to define a vat as a uterus.
ProPublica published two articles about a woman whose fertilized egg planted itself in the scar tissue from her previous caesarean section. Her home state of Tennessee denied her an abortion. This ectopic pregnancy (pregnancies where the embryo attaches to anything other than normal uterine walls are ectopic). She is a poor woman with addiction issues and already had 4 kids.
It certainly seems that the Justices who voted to make frozen embryos "lives" are outside the bounds of the US Constitution. Can they be terminated for this miscarriage of justice by the very nature of having relied on their religious beliefs with this law? I yield back my time.
All it should take is putting similar focus on men’s sperm cells as these misogynists place on women’s eggs to get the whole thing to blow up in their faces. “Every sperm is sacred “ Monty Python
When I first heard about this decision, tonight, I was disgusted!! What is the USA turning in to? If the antics of Trump and the Republican party aren't enough, now there is another battle! As if we don't have enough already!! I am furious 😠! Now , one more very important reason to be sure President Biden is re-elected!! If DT ever gets re-elected, there will be more atrocities in the future!
Thanks for the update Joyce. We are in trouble in this country. The separation of church and state is being vilified by those who want more and more power. They aren’t thinking about anyone else but themselves in that effort. As a result our country is being torn apart piece by piece IMHO😢
And would the Supreme Court conservatives ditch originalism and declare the 1st amendment to be invalid by virtue of being unbiblical, yielding to a higher authority?
Thankfully there are many more of us than there are of them. Even before Dobbs, Dems were winning elections of all kinds across the country. That has accelerated. Momentum for crushing MAGA in 2024 at the polls is strong and getting stronger.
We will not allow these religious zealots to take our country to hell in a Handmaid's basket!
Well, I went down thru the comments & found your earlier one regarding the Democrat running - tried to like it - but a box came up & said I was not allowed to do that on this comment! Dont know why - but I'm guessing THAT is why you have so few "likes" & feel as tho it was buried. Sorry - never had that happen befodre.
Thats kind of strange since shes the one who complained about being "buried"! I would think she would want to know other people were reading her comments.
I'm not sure what all this angry, chest- thumping, bullying, "don't tread on me" thing that we've come to call Christianity is, but here's what I do know:
It isn't the Gospel.
It isn't Good News for the poor and marginalized.
It isn't the Prince of Peace.
It isn't the perfect love that casts out fear.
It isn't Jesus by any measure.
It's a toxic cocktail of power, control, fear, nationalism, and white privilege- and it looks much more like the bloated opulence of Rome than the early Church that resisted it.
Excerpts from John Pavlovitz
And it is not Christianity, it is fascism.
And the rest of Christianity, in the mainstream media…? crickets. Sometimes it’s not what you say, it’s what you don’t say.
I'm part of the "rest of christianity", John, and so are others here, I think. Please don't paint us all with the same brush. There are still many of us who go directly back to what Jesus said as recorded in the Gospel, and not to what His "interpreters" like Paul and others said/say. KJ21-Matt: 24:11:
"And many false prophets shall rise and shall deceive many."
We are in this together raising our voices!
I'm sorry, Bruce, but you and the "rest of Christianity" had better start raising your collective voice a LOT louder, because this Christian Nationalist crowd will steamroll right over you with all the rest of us if you don't. In my opinion, mainstream Christians stood by quietly and let them get this far when it could have been stopped when they first hijacked your faith.
Dear Betsy, please take a deep breath (That's what I have been doing for quite some time now). While doing so, would you consider the reality: There is no such thing as a homogeneous group that I or most Christians today belong to that I would consider joining. 40,000,000 (or more) Americans have also walked away from "churches" in the last 25 years. In the US, church membership has fallen below 50%, and in other countries (EU) it is even higher. Like Groucho Marx said: "I refuse to join any club that would have me..." THERE ain't no "Collective".
"Christianity Today" sometimes offers real oppositional commentary, but even that organization is marbled with darkness.
Liberal christians are far and few between, and when we do raise our voices and are active, it's like you imply..."spit on a hot stone". Thanks for the push though, we need to do more.
How are we to do that? I am a Unitarian Universalist, not necessarily Christian, but a religion none the less. We are speaking up and out, but our voices are not amplified.
I would have never known UUs were speaking up or out, and I suspect no one else does either. All but one US Representative claims to follow a religion. Call those hypocrites out on this.
Me too.
Christian Nationalism has zero to do with any religion. It's a cult. And there's no reasoning with the cult members. None.
Do "Christian Nationalists" (i.e. Fascists, White Supremacists) also insist their "members" be Whilte, Male, and Blond ? Or was that just a Hitler thing ?
Betsy, our faith has not been hijacked, however the media has led you to a false conclusion that Jesus People are standing silent against the loud voice media give false prophet evangelical nationalists. The outrageous get noticed by the click bait media. Actual Christians do not. This is not a matter of faith but rather that of an America willing to be suckered by the loudest voice. You are falling for it and blaming us as complicit
The voices are out there. No one in the 'mainstream' media is attentive to them. Example, the NYT once had Peter Steinfels writing on belief that migrated to the Op Ed page with Ross Douthat, not an attentive move.
John did say, "...in the mainstream media..." Certainly, many (most?) Christians do not accept the actions and direction of the MAGA, right wing, fundamentalist, evangelicals pushing their "values" on the rest of us. Please note, I did not write "fundamentalist, evangelicals," but "MAGA, right wing, ..." But, to John's point, to those that do not support those radical actions, the silence is deafening. Whatever opposing Christian views there are sure don't get the airtime or print columns like the crazies get.
Maybe “good” Christians could take a page from Act-Up? Get noticed.
We can demand that MSM elevate those voices. They are out there.
“To be clear, I’m not being critical of Christians playing a strong leadership role in our advocacy. Christians are best positioned to reject the idea that Christian Nationalism is rooted in true Christian values. This distinction is critical, especially given how many people (and Christians) are still waking up to the problem. Christian leaders have greater potential to resonate with fellow Christians, who are still hovering around a super-majority in America. And when Christian messengers criticize Christian Nationalism, they are less likely to be perceived as anti-Christian.
So, it’s both heartening and unsurprising that in this moment of threat to church-state separation, there has been a surge of Christian advocates engaging. My friend Amanda Tyler, head of the Baptist Joint Committee, founded Christians Against Christian Nationalism to rally Christians to speak out against this dangerous political movement that warps Christianity. Andrew Whitehead and Sam Perry, leading academics studying and exposing White Christian Nationalism, are Christian. Christian Ethicist David Gushee recently penned a book, Defending Democracy from its Christian Enemies, on the importance of fighting against Christian Nationalism and for church-state separation.
Rob Reiner and Dan Partland’s excellent new film “God & Country,” which exposes and highlights the dangers of Christian Nationalism, is studded with Christian voices. It opens and closes with powerful clips of the Rev. William Barber II speaking from a Christian perspective, showcases Christian scholars like Kristin Du Mez, Anthea Butler and Whitehead, and spotlights conservative Christians like journalist David French and former Christian Nationalist the Rev. Rob Schenck. Not every expert is Christian; I am so proud of our in-house experts, Rob Boston and Andrew L. Seidel, and their amazing contributions to the film. But Reiner, who was raised Jewish, and Partland have made clear that the Christian emphasis is intentional.“
https://www.au.org/the-latest/church-and-state/articles/to-all-the-christians-fighting-christian-nationalism-thank-you/#
I really have always liked Rev. Barber and Rev. AL too. Reiner will catch hell for being Jewish but the film is an eye-opener. Have seen excerpts…
The Beat interviewed Reiner a day or so ago:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G0CvtjXFw2I
Films and books and such, regardless of how awesome they might be, are “preaching to the choir,” both literally and figuratively. They won’t reach the important audiences, with rare exceptions.
I would argue that they are important means of connecting to others different from selves. Not necessarily the best and not complete. A window into seeing the humanity of people, which a person may have been taught to fear. It can as easily be used for opposite purposes though. It’s always up to us, what we choose, the best in us or the worst in us.
A sobering nightmare of a night for America Joyce as we pass through this unjustified darkness imposed upon us by a cult. How can it possibly be anyone’s business to dictate individual rights. It’s totally political and a sacrilege and affront to those who practice their faith outside that realm. Thank you for your post and the attention you are bringing to all of us on this serious predicament until we take back both houses of Congress
🇺🇸🗽🗳️🥁☮️💙
American Taliban.
Well the Catholic Church had no problem with fascism the last time around, so no surprise
And so the story ends…
The 3,000 give or take Polish priests murdered by the Nazi’s might beg to differ…God bless!
And the Pope? And Father Coughlin?
To which you can add Lenard Fenney the anti semeyic Jew hating Jesuit from Harvard. No defending them or the lunatic bishop from Texas , just fired by Francis. The church is sinful and constantly in need of reform, but that nor those noted make it a fascist institution
Debatable.
Although I am an Atheist myself I like to recall a saying I once heard... "God gave us Faith, the Devil gave us organized religion"...
The term "Christian Nationalism" is an insult to Christians world-wide. Whenever I read the term in print, what I say in my head is, "UnChrist-like Nationalism."
Evil, self-serving nationalism disguising itself as - Christian Nationalism
Thank you. "Christian Nationalism" is an oxymoron.
Jesus said to Pilate: “My kingdom is no part of this world.” John 18:36
But the fundamentalists are intoxicated with the prospect of power. This will end badly for them.
Governments have long used true Christian ethics to inform their laws, but that is their voluntary choice; Christians are not directed to impose their values on unwilling people by law. They are only authorized to resist having unchristian values imposed on them by law. (Acts 4:18-20 is an example.)
I should add, these “fundamentalists” are just another perversion of original Christianity. But other commenters have said it better.
"Christians are not directed to impose their values on unwilling people by law. They are only authorized to resist having unchristian values imposed on them by law. (Acts 4:18-20 is an example.)"
I believe you are making an arguably false distinction between Christians as individuals and Christianity as a set of organised religions, that perpetuate themselves through history and time.
For most of history since the Roman Empire, Christianity HAS been forced on the populace, with severe penalties (including torture and gruesome execution) for non-compliance. It has caused untold bloody wars, and set back advancement in science by at least a millennium.
Islam has an an evil history too - and continues to write it still. It is not a defence to simply state that most Christians (and most Muslims) are "good people".
That is what the First Amendment is all about - freedom FROM state religion. Marx was right about it being the opiate of the masses.
As an atheist living in a free, secular society - Australia - what the Alabama Chief Justice wrote is simply astonishing and unbelievable. The separation of church and state has to be fiercely defended against by everyone of good will and possessing rational thought.
I don't want to tar all Christians with the same brush, but I'm not sure Christians can be relied on to defend the ideals of the secular state the way atheists have to do it so passionately. Freedoms seem to be being lost every day.
The distinction is between Christianity and Christendom, which repressed Christianity when it rose to power in an unholy ‘marriage’ of Church and state in the 3rd century (or before). This was the foretold apostasy from original Christianity. It dominated governments for centuries, underwent an incomplete “Reformation” that was not much of an improvement, and then the states began to distance themselves from this stranglehold in the 17th century. But Christendom’s grip has really weakened in the last 50 years or so. The next step is her destruction, also as foretold. She falls first, because of her prostituting what should be holy to greed for wealth and power in this world. So yeah, church will get separated from state one more time. For good. But that doesn’t make the state all sweetness and light. It too is made of corrupt men. Those trying to right the ship cannot keep it afloat.
So the prophecy continues: the nations that bedded with wicked religion will be dealt with. Fantastical, you may say. Delusional. But can you really offer a more plausible hope for mankind’s survival, considering what we are now facing?
The relevant scripture is Rev 17, 18 and 19 (3 chapters) with the key verses at 17:4-6 and 15-18. “Babylon” translates as ‘confusion’. This is the symbol of all forms of religion that dishonors God and sows confusion (you would say that’s all of it, but I think you’d agree that in all matters, truth does exist, while everything that contradicts truth is not-true.) Truth can be hard to find, but we persist in trying to find it, in science, in what works, in right vs wrong.
So, God either exists or he does not. Both cannot be true. And if He exists, he will have standards of good vs bad. Truth is not found in every contradictory belief, and while some say “truth is whatever you believe,” that’s obviously not. Wishing don’t make it so.
Jesus said, “I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth.” Pilate cynically retorted, “What is truth?” Was he right? Is truth unknowable? How do you decide whom to listen to? The confident bloviating demagogue (DJT) or the humble teacher who helps you see inside yourself honestly? (JC)
All that to say that the destruction of false religion is in fact decreed by God, as Rev 18:1-8 makes clear. You should be very happy with that. See 18:20.
Freedom. Set your sights high. Not merely to be free to do as you please, but to be free to live forever. If God exists, that is not out of reach.
I'm sorry mate - and it might seem coarse and blunt - but as soon as anyone quotes Chapter & Verse from the bible, in any political discussion about the church and state whatsoever, I know for a fact that I'm dealing with a snake-eating, happy-clapping god-botherer.
What other position could I possibly take? You cannot deal with the total political theocratic takeover of a sleepy America, by quoting the effing bible! Thank god for atheists!
You decry close-minded prejudice… with close-minded prejudice.
It’s snake-handling, not eating, btw. And that kind of religion is not bible based, despite their ardent zeal and conviction. Following feelings is dangerous.
“The religion that is clean in the view of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself undefiled from the world.” —James 1:27
Jews as well are not supposed to impose their religion on others. For the most part they do not, or just, they do not.
Christian and nationalism should not be in the same sentence. There is no national religion and the constitution demands separation of church and state. This ruling is abhorrent and is clearly unconstitutional. Every individual is free to be personally guided by their religious beliefs; however, states do not have the right to dictate to the rest of the country! With this approach we are no longer the United States. Perhaps that is still the goal of the confederate states.
It is the wolf poorly dressed in sheeps clothing.
Eric Doub: As a practicing Catholic, disillusioned with Christianity, trucking on with Catholic Christianity because of the Holy Presence of Our Lord in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, and the two great commands -- to love the One, God with one's whole heart, one's whole mind, one's whole being, and to love one's neighbor as oneself precisely because the command to love neighbor is a command of the One, the Holy; and because of all of the holy teachings of the Our Father -- including to "give us this day our daily bread" is to ask for the Spirit of God to move our actions to love the One and to love our Neighbor.
Period.
As a Catholic I am totally disillusioned with institutionalized Christianity and attend Mass regularly for the Holy Sacrament and His Glorious Presence and for the good people around me.
But I won't talk about it outside of Mass, because there is too much loud "Christianity" and the priestly abuse has made me look to alternatives in the Lutheran and Orthodox or even Anglo-Catholic wing of Anglicism. But my family keeps me in the Catholic Church, despite my unhealed disillusion.
As a lawyer, with the state of the legal profession, if I were young -- I am 76 -- I might enter the law, but I would seriously consider other professions.
Disillusioned in all respects through Christianity and the law through our Congressmen and national races.
Honestly, all the muscular, flag-driven "piety" and "patriotism" (oh, and my whole life was the Navy and Air Force -- all of my life -- people WHO NEVER SERVED A DAY will loudly wear the American flag as a hat or shorts or shirt or display about 100 flags or oversized ones) is wearying and unappetizing -- and serves effectively an emetic or even a strong, very strong laxative, really.
I applaud your statements, Eric Doub, but the American brand of Christianity is so loud and selfish and commercial to reach untold masses, and for what, for an Orange Snout to drive a right wing agenda into the ground.
I say the political dialogue should leave religion totally out of the discourse. Years ago, I thought otherwise. But disillusion has set irreparably in.
No mistake: Eric Doub: Your comments are good, and if American Christianity were in the spirit you express, I would join you. I do join your spirit.
Armand, you said my thoughts exactly. I’m not a Catholic but a Lutheran. However, I have turned away from organized religion but have not abandoned my spirituality. The government has no business in my personal relationship with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Why is no one challenging the Constitutional separation of Church and State??!
I'm Lutheran. We had a worship meeting last night where we all said we need to SPEAK UP. Silence is compliance.
Why hasn't anyone challenged this and other obvious disregard to the Constitution. Wasn't the U.S. founded by many seeking religious FREEDOM!
Maybe they will, Susan, but with the composition of today’s Supreme Court I don’t think they’ll win.
"Eric Doub: As a practicing Catholic, disillusioned with Christianity, trucking on with Catholic Christianity because of the Holy Presence of Our Lord in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, and the two great commands -- to love the One, God with one's whole heart, one's whole mind, one's whole being, and to love one's neighbor as oneself precisely because the command to love neighbor is a command of the One, the Holy; and because of all of the holy teachings of the Our Father -- including to "give us this day our daily bread" is to ask for the Spirit of God to move our actions to love the One and to love our Neighbor."
This is all dead-set creepy to my mind ... Christianity (especially Catholicism) and rational thought about the secular state do not mix.
Difficult history, Armand. Thank you.
I am learning from all these comments. To note: I only quoted others; those were not my writings. But I'm glad the posts were so thought-provoking.
Eric I was gobsmacked that Alabama Justice Porter quoted extensively from the Bible to justify the ‘embryo ruling.’ I thought that the !st Amendment separated religion from government and that legal precedent was integral to our judicial system.
I’m extremely nervous, since the Old Testament provides some frightful religious precedents. Should courts destroy entire towns? (If so, I have some suggestions). As for slavery, the OT seems to approve.
On balance I prefer judicial decisions based on the Constitution rather than the Bible, though the New Testament expresses some positive thinking.
As for being gobsmacked, Keith, I had a similar reaction. But I think one of the defining characteristics of this era is "no more trying to hide it." So much behavior, so many crimes, so many court decisions, now contain no element of trying to disguise the values driving them.
So I think it is up to us to be less shocked and to simply see clearly what is in front of us. That can help us respond more quickly and effectively.
Eric,I will not mention 'God' or 'Godliness' 41 times but, I will tell CJ Parher to take his "7 Mountain" babble & go to hell.
Eric. WWJD? I’m picturing a bunch of tables getting tossed about in the Temple
It’s the Crusades all over again….
They “take precedence” because the readers of this comments section are voting to elevate them above other comments, JUDITH, not because nobody wants to hear what you have to say, or that your comments are worthless. More power to you, as a resident of Alabama, to do what you can to protest this Christian Nationalism. As a resident of a state which is, thankfully, not Alabama, there’s nothing I can do, no matter how horrible the outcome of this ‘legislation’.
Ironically, your complaint mirrors the frequent Christianist rhetorical manipulation of the concept of the separation of church and state to indicate that Christians are a protected class that are sworn to take legal action against non-Christians for not believing in Christ, God, etc. As a devout atheist, this mental gymnastic routine is abhorrent, and it has led to violence and murder committed by those who claim to follow Christ. My religious upbringing gave me the knowledge to see the un-Christlike actions of people more willing to pervert Christ’s words to their own ends than follow the actual teachings.
After living most of my life as a Catholic and then as a Muslim, I learned that religion is nothing more than manipulation and social control. Alabama is a perfect example of political power in the guise of religion.
VOTE BLUE. Yes, it will take time to "undo" the culture of your state. This is certainly a case of "beliefs" v science and originalism.
Judith, I’m just making my way through the comments and haven’t seen yours yet but please tell us how we can help you in Alabama.
Not sure I would brag about being from a racist state….
woah there- This is called Civil Discourse. Please don't condemn all people from any given state. Their leadership is terrible. Nothing is helped by dissing due to where they live...
Maybe they should be reminded of the saying, “open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Long but so telling, this quote by Dave Barnhart, a traditional Christian pastor, is on point about these Alabama "justices":
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."
“Love thy neighbor” is pretty hard, because you know who that is. Not yet born people are easier, because they are an abstraction. Even your descendants in the future are hard to imagine, so why fight climate change for their sake? They probably wouldn’t like you or share your values, anyway. Jesus never mentioned climate change, did he?
As a Christian, I say AMEN!
Wow, Eric, I think you hit the nail right on the head!! That's why I believe the term " Pro Life " is hypocritical. They are NOT pro life because that requires taking care after birth.
And denouncing the death penalty, which, by the way, is on the slate in Alabama for yet another barbarous nitrogen gas execution and coming up soon. These legislators are just sadists. It doesn’t paint their voters in such a sparkling light either. Private schools and homeschooling have played hob with education there it looks like.
Thanks, Rex. (And to be clear, I was quoting someone else.)
Eric, such a perfect response, thank you so much.
Excellent quote. Thank you for posting it. As a former Christian, I've felt sadness for years at how our values have become so twisted in my lifetime. This is a personal observation only, not to attributed to anyone else. My reading of history, especially in Europe, informs me that we have killed so many and destroyed so much in our desire to demonstrate our love for our God, and our need to show we are so God-like in our profession of faith. Careful reading shows these actions overshadow even the horrors of the Holocaust.
I suspect that next we will read that it will be illegal for a woman - or the parents of - unused embryos to discard them. My understanding is that IFV consists of many embryos created, but only a portion of them actually used to create a living child. Will the parent's choice to discard the remaining embryo's because they are no longer needed be considered murder? Society seems to redefine what constitutes life faster than we can adapt. A woman's choice, in my humble opinion, should never be subject to someone else's personal religious beliefs.
Note that these embryos are only a few days old! How is that a person?
It’s not. It’s a blastoma. A mass of undifferentiated cells that can’t be identified as human or any other vertebrate. Idiot ruling.
He forgot that all women are included in the list of those who are thrown under the bus.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. Sums it up nicely, sad as it may be.
Thank you Eric. Right on point.
@Eric Doub: THIS! 👆 💯🎯
You’ve stated a great, needed to be said, mouthful here. The unborn are uncomplicated and uncomplaining.
Is it the same Alabama claiming the sanctity of life as this Alabama?
“Capital punishment in Alabama is a legal penalty. Alabama has the highest per capita capital sentencing rate in the United States. In some years, its courts impose more death sentences than Texas, a state that has a population five times as large.[1]”
Isn’t this HYPOCRITICAL?!
Southern white Xtians are BORN hypocritical. The joys of Fundamentalism: they can sow wild oats six days a week and pray for crop failure on the seventh and be rewarded for so doing.
Yes!
Good one, Kathy!
Yep
As Heather Cox Richardson has explained, they never gave a damn about the Constitution to begin with.
Right. They establish christianity contrary to the first, at least that what iIthink not being a constitutional legal expert. I can only read.
The misogyny and religious extremism in these rippling legal decisions should compel us all to action. These legal judgments cannot stand. A Republican future is no future.
It was said that we’ll become a fascist when it comes wrapped in a flag and dragging a cross. Christian nationalism must be stomped out.
It was only a matter of time. As it is also only a matter of time until contraception is outlawed. Not kidding.
Next on their agenda; Alito just alluded to it! Contraception should be our rallying cry following warnings about national abortion ban! Every Republican candidate should be asked about those two issues in a public forum in order to put them on record! I respectfully suggest that asking about their position on embryos would not focus the attention of the voting public anywhere as much as contraception! Let’s get all of them on record and then raise it publicly and frequently before the election in every state and congressional districts!
I will never understand the concept of antiabortionists supporting laws against the use of contraceptives…
That's because it's actually not about the babies, it's always been about control of humans, specifically women right now. And those using methods they don't approve of to be able to have a baby as we've seen with IVF the past couple of days. But it will then expand to gay marriage, gay adoption, those unmarried and cohabitating, equal rights, the list goes on. Essentially, anything other than what they believe their "God" their "religion" has dictated that they alone are entitled to impose on everyone else.
They definitely DO NOT understand either! You are giving these freaks too much mental credit!
Because their loved ones will always be able to get both (and do).
Exactly! That is what I have been discussing with my friend. I am currently in a country unfriendly to abortion thanks to anti-genocidal laws, but not to birth control. My daughter is in university here. The Morning After pill is easily available by 24 hour pharmacy, with no prescription. In Blue States I understand that many Universities have them available in such ways. Not sure about Red States. These are the kinds of things that Universities in Red States might have but not advertise. It is not good for universities bottom line if pregnant students cannot abort either a chosen or unchosen act that leads to an unwanted pregnancy. Having had conversations with my daughter and her friends on birth control both before and after they have become sexually active, I can only say the schools are not doing a great job of covering birth control, in favor of talking a lot about equality in relationships and honoring gay and transgender students. The problem is not that they are making a more inclusive sex ed, but that they are leaving out the basics. While the good news is that unwanted teen pregnancies are dropping, the bad news is that we still have too many of them and more of them compared to other wealthy nations. Access to birth control is critical in reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22792555/
Hi Linda, I am wondering if you are wondering about sex-education in public schools? It was dropped from the national curriculum during Bush Junior's tenure. Text books were rewritten with all mention of conception and pregnancy prevention removed. Some states chose to continue to teach sex ed - and some of them left it up to individual boards of education. So many kids who previously had guidance from informed teachers, had only their peers to give them information.
College professor. You have no idea how many students have zero clue about their bodies. The religious ideology has caused this stupidity.
Hi Tiggr, I am a university professor as well (education policy, now retired). Indeed, the archaic mess of a lack of sex education in public schools is the result of the Reagan era ('just say no'); and furthered by the Christian nationalist evangelical leadership, whose end-game for fifty years has been to reverse our abortion rights and have promoted an 'abstinence only policy.'
They achieved their primary goal of erasing abortion rights with their support and election of Trump (their Orange Jesus puppet who installed the SCOTUS puppets Kavanaugh, Coney-Barrett, Gorsuch creating a far right voting bloc on the SCOTUS); Bush Jr., who promoted abstinence only sex education: it has taken a perfect storm to get us here. I think one of the best 'outcomes' if we can think of it in those terms, is indeed having the exposure to corruption that Trump has brought. He said he was going to 'drain the swamp.' He has exposed the creatures in it. We at least now know what we are fighting. I have a lot of faith in the American public that they will vote Blue for Biden, establish a Blue bicameral Congress and stay engaged after November to push for cleaning up Congress and their cronies and the SCOTUS. For example, Ginny Thomas could be indicted, forcing Clarence's resignation. We just need to stay on point with educating and working for a Blue vote, up, down and sideways. And stay engaged following November's election. The founding father's wanted an educated citizenry who could challenge and confront their elected leaders. We must be that.
Absolutely!!!
💙
A lot of what is going on in sex education from what I understand in public schools is abstinence only as far as I know. However, sex ed is currently not mandated in Illinois, if taught is supposed to be comprehensive.
https://siecus.org/state_profile/illinois-state-profile-22/
When I taught it a long time ago in public schools in IL it was. I have taught it in private schools, in elementary grades where nothing learned is learned if not reinforced. I am currently mostly familiar with private schools. The three young women I spoke with about birth control a few weeks ago each went to a different private school, all supposedly progressive. None of them knew of cervical caps or diaphragms. I consider this a glaring absence of knowledge. When most of your education comes from Tiktok it is bound to be spotty. Shame on American schools for being afraid to teach sex ed. Shame on parents for making it such difficult terrain. The Netherlands remains the model of mandated comprehensive sex ed instruction, and that is why they are one of the 5 countries with the lowest unwanted teen pregnancy and STD rates. According to the UNICEF report card below, the Netherlands has one of the lowest teen birth rates and one of the lowest abortion rates, so they achieve their low unwanted pregnancy rate by other means. I like that the term in the Netherlands for using both condom and pill is Double Dutch. This has led to reduced STDs numbers in teens as well.
https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/repcard3e.pdf
The Nordic countries also do well. Scroll to page 23 to read about how they have achieved this. It includes good comprehensive sex education on contraceptives. Page 25 discusses Finland's research on the use of the Morning After pill that is quite interesting.
Here is more information on the Netherlands. Scroll down to see the country facts about the Netherlands.
https://www.bzga-whocc.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente/BZgA_CountryFactsheet_Netherlands.pdf
While comprehensive education has worked in some Northern European countries, I do not know what makes Japan and South Korea so effective. Still, my focus is whether the girls/boys and young women/young men in the USA are being provided with good information to make the best choices for them. I do not think this is so in the USA in public or private schools. Abstinence only, and opt-out/opt-in policies are not helpful for making sure that there is a consistent, widely taught comprehensive curriculum.
https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/sex-and-hiv-education
Scroll down to see the chart comparing the states.
Maybe people with a platform, such as Planned Parenthood, etc., should post on Tiktok. If kids are going there they’ll find the information.
Fantastic idea Paula!
Linda, You are correct. The United States public school 'policy' (private schools follow individual curricula) harkens back to Nancy Reagan: 'Just say no.' But how does one say 'no' to hormones raging out of control - with no safe, and solid information? Ultimately, parents are responsible for demanding the schools policy makers form and implement policies that provide sex education - and if that is not happening in the schools, then they should find the curriculum. I think a curriculum exists on CDC (or at least used to).
After the covid year, I met with the school counselor to discuss how they had dropped the ball on sex ed and what were they going to do about it. I also told him how I taught it over many months, a couple of times a week so that my students could grow comfortable with the topic and other things. I then gave him the National Curricular goals, the WHO curricular goals, as well as a lot of material, and some articles on what the Netherlands covers, links to a lists of films that support various topics, and some articles on teachers who got hung out to dry when their principals did not back them in teaching sex ed, after parents could peer into the classrooms during covid. So, he wisely contracted it out to an agency that met all of the national and WHO curricular criteria. There was a parent meeting, and there was an opt-out policy, which I did not hear about anyone using, but who knows. In any case, everyone gets that condoms prevent pregnancy and STDs, but not that it is not a high enough rate of pregnancy prevention. So, there you go. A lot do not want the IUD because they do not have regular enough sex to use one, and others do not want to have the chemical reactions of being on the pill. So, I did not hear one of them knowing about cervical caps or diaphragms, the bread and butter birth control of my youth as well as the pill. Apparently the key to success and the fourth or fifth lowest teen pregnancy rate in countries where it is measured is not so much use of abortion. That is quite low in the Netherlands along with a low STD rate. It is the Double Dutch method of pills and condoms. Condoms are passed out to everyone like candy and schools have health centers that will discuss anything you want to about sex of any kind, except for illegal things like pedophilia.
USA curriculum, you have to scroll a bit to get to the standards by grades.
https://advocatesforyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/NSES-2020-web.pdf
Here is the one for the WHO.
https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/comprehensive-sexuality-education
A discussion of Rutgers the curriculum that is used in the Netherlands. https://rutgers.international/themes/sexuality-education-and-information/
Discussion comparing the USA and Netherlands.
https://dutchreview.com/expat/education/sex-education-in-the-netherlands/
The curriculum that my daughter's school used met the standards, but in application spent more time talking about feelings than about logistics. I also talked to her classmates about it. They felt that the timeline was way off and repeating things they already knew, and not getting to the things they needed to know.
And more! What scares me is where does this all end? It seems that men ultimately want the position that "life begins at the moment a man decides he wants to have sex with a woman:. Therefore, there can be no such thing as rape. A woman should not deny the potential life. Of course,I think this absurd, but what's next once contraceptions are banned? Men have the power and their brains are not in their heads. Until women truly receive equal power throughout our civilization, we are likely to devolve into a barbaric, doomed species. I hope there is a God and she will save us.
And all of this information makes very clear WHY the ERA was never made into law, doesnt it? Cant give all those females power in any way, can we?
Frankly, how much clearer does it have to be to wake us up? I'm 85 - almost 86 - it sure seems right out in the open to me that "christian nationalism" (NOT capitalized - also NOT Christian) will take over our entire lives IF WE LET IT!
And its not only Christians but look at the other religions - every one has a version of this and has been radicalized (good word) by it. (Israel and Palestine?)
Yes, I agree and also vasectomies.
It wouldn't be anything they haven't done in the past. In the 80's there was discussion about making IUDs illegal because it was believed they work by preventing the fertilized egg from attaching itself to the uterine wall.
So if these frozen embryos now have -- in Alabama -- the same legal status as children that have actually been born, do they qualify as dependents for tax purposes? Can their lives be insured? Can they inherit the estates of their parents? The practical consequences of this decision border on the absurd.
Oooh, I like your thinking. You could freeze a bunch of embryos, insure them, and wait for them to degrade and become unviable. Have a nice funeral and the insurance money could fund a very comfortable retirement. Fabulous idea.
The hell I wouldn’t use those in the carpool lane, with a little diagonal sign in the window, “Embryos on Board”
They would also have to be allowed open carry, as concealed carry just isn’t going to work
Thanks for the laugh-snorts, John.
Humor is very helpful, and come to think of it, is a great weapon against the knuckle dragging contingent.
Get them passports. Social sec accounts. State IDs. Bank accounts. Insure them. Enroll them in collage savings plans. …..
Actually I think I saw something about taking them as dependents on one’s tax return. Can’t remember where.
Obviously another Supreme Court that refuses to uphold the Constitution; they might as well hold a ceremonial burning of the Constitution at the opening of their season. There was and still is a good reason for holding Amendment 1 as inviolate. The first addition to the Articles of the Constitution establishes the importance of separation of church and state in the United States, not as it was practiced in Europe at that time. Amendment 1 is purposeful, NOT an afterthought. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" That is precisely what it meant. It is not intended as a yes, but.
If any justice of any Supreme Court whether State or Federal, doesn't like, or disagrees with the Constitution, they should and MUST remove themselves from their position.
If they are foolish enough to try, they can write a new Amendment nullifying the First Amendment, then try to get 2/3 of the Senate and the House of Representatives followed by 38 States to agree - good luck with that
Religion belongs in church, temple, synagogue, or place of worship. The Constitution is the ONLY book of matter in any Courtroom in the United States of America. If you don't like that - move to Europe.
As an atheist, I even object to the swearing of Office on any book except the Constitution, it is the Constitution you are swearing to defend and uphold - not some religious tract.
Several months ago I saved the following off of a comment by some guy named Greg. Sorry not to have more to authenticate its veracity:
"And for those of you who believe that the United States was founded as a Christian nation the following quotes in refutation of that erroneous notion, DIRECTLY from the Founding Fathers....
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." -- Thomas Paine
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." -- James Madison
"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."
-- John Adams
"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." -- George Washington
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit." -- Thomas Paine
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries." -- James Madison
I love Tom Paine.
I especially like/appreciate the second Thomas Paine quote. Maybe 25 years ago I asked my brother why he doesn’t participate in any “formal religion” anymore. He said he believes that identifying with a religion becomes the root of too many problems in this world. In due time I understood what he meant and agree.
Tom Paine was a true revolutionary. Paine, Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin were deists. The last thing they wanted was a national religion. They are now spinning in their graves.
I believe it was Jefferson who went to the trouble to cut out all of Jesus’ words from the New Testament and bound them(I think I remember that). The very slim result now resides in his collection in the Library of Congress.
Yes. It's called the Jeffersonian Bible. He also edited out the supernatural aspects.(miracles) He was a man of the Enlightenment.
And Madison and Adams and Washington. And Jefferson.
This collection of quotes is priceless and deserves to go viral now!
Thanks. Just copied to my notes for future use.
I’m wondering if this quoting of Christian biblical passages and references to religion in the Chief Justice’s opinion will make an appeal easier, given the flagrant disregard for separation of church and state. While I’ve been known to read legal opinions for entertainment I don’t have the background to know how common it is to cite religion or how vulnerable that makes such opinion to appeal.
There's no appeal. There isn't "federal issue."
If it was another State, not in the bible belt, I'd suggest impeachment, but Alabama? not a chance
You mean to say the Alabama constitution doesn't include separation of church and state and that the U.S. Constitution doesn't take precedence?
What I mean is, this Supreme Court would judge it a "state action" and refuse such an appeal.
OK, then if that is a valid argument and ends all further argument on the case, here is another gaping hole that needs to be patched.
Of course. States’ Rights and all that same old same old.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. From there, no appeal is possible. The Supreme Court seems to have decided that these reproductive issues should remain within the states. So they're not likely to accept an appeal.
I was referring to the Alabama Supreme Court and its chief justice who wrote the opinion referenced in the article.
Yes, I know. But what I was referring to is the fact that the availability of an appeal process on this issue is very, very limited and not likely to be successful on the state level, unless Alabama somehow has a very liberal Supreme Court.
Good thought
So, if the parents do not eventually implant all embryos, would they then be accused of denying the fetuses their personhood? Would that be murder or manslaughter? Or would they be required to give those fetuses to other people? Would they still be required to support those children after their presumable birth?
And how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
apparently the criminal statute regarding "unborn life" refers to it as "in utero." It will be interesting to see how the court would figure out how to define a vat as a uterus.
Extrauterine... usually considered as an ectopic pregnancy now includes storage....smdh
ProPublica published two articles about a woman whose fertilized egg planted itself in the scar tissue from her previous caesarean section. Her home state of Tennessee denied her an abortion. This ectopic pregnancy (pregnancies where the embryo attaches to anything other than normal uterine walls are ectopic). She is a poor woman with addiction issues and already had 4 kids.
Actually, I read that the CRIMINAL statute actually has the words in utero. Reliable source but I haven't checked myself.
I haven't either...we are in midterms and I am screaming into the abyss.
Unless they turn out to be LGBTQ, then no.
Is a power failure mass murder?
I've actually just started writing a short story that discusses possibilities...
It certainly seems that the Justices who voted to make frozen embryos "lives" are outside the bounds of the US Constitution. Can they be terminated for this miscarriage of justice by the very nature of having relied on their religious beliefs with this law? I yield back my time.
All it should take is putting similar focus on men’s sperm cells as these misogynists place on women’s eggs to get the whole thing to blow up in their faces. “Every sperm is sacred “ Monty Python
In a patriarchal society? Haha!
Do you think there are any of the Alabama Fundamentalists who run the state government who would bring them up on such a charge?
If you ever think about doing a podcast, we would make great partners!
With everything else I do, I'd need a 30-hour day and a 10-day week. But thank you for the offer. :-)
They should
When I first heard about this decision, tonight, I was disgusted!! What is the USA turning in to? If the antics of Trump and the Republican party aren't enough, now there is another battle! As if we don't have enough already!! I am furious 😠! Now , one more very important reason to be sure President Biden is re-elected!! If DT ever gets re-elected, there will be more atrocities in the future!
Religion has always been an institution created to spread fear and submissiveness in order to generate power and money to its leaders.
And to keep women “in their place.”
I can’t believe other than that they are sowing the seeds of their own downfall… I, for one, am eager to make that happen.
Thanks for the update Joyce. We are in trouble in this country. The separation of church and state is being vilified by those who want more and more power. They aren’t thinking about anyone else but themselves in that effort. As a result our country is being torn apart piece by piece IMHO😢
And would the Supreme Court conservatives ditch originalism and declare the 1st amendment to be invalid by virtue of being unbiblical, yielding to a higher authority?
…and several of the SCOTUS justices would support this AL decision! 🤬
Killer opener ... "In Alabama, women can now be forced to have babies they don't want and can’t have babies that they do."
But Abalama(sic on purpose)is pro life.
Pro - but only some lives?
Joyce this is horrific and we need to shout this out to everyone. We will not be ruled by a minority of haters of freedom and democracy.
Thankfully there are many more of us than there are of them. Even before Dobbs, Dems were winning elections of all kinds across the country. That has accelerated. Momentum for crushing MAGA in 2024 at the polls is strong and getting stronger.
We will not allow these religious zealots to take our country to hell in a Handmaid's basket!
Why am I seeing this multiple times in the thread?
Judith, Derek Smith answered your question hours ago.
Go back and read it.
Well, I went down thru the comments & found your earlier one regarding the Democrat running - tried to like it - but a box came up & said I was not allowed to do that on this comment! Dont know why - but I'm guessing THAT is why you have so few "likes" & feel as tho it was buried. Sorry - never had that happen befodre.
What it said is "you are blocked from liking this comment"! As I said, NEVER had this happen before.
I think it happens when the commenter has blocked you.
Thats kind of strange since shes the one who complained about being "buried"! I would think she would want to know other people were reading her comments.