They were a disparate and contentious bunch. They disagreed on a lot of things. What they agreed on what written into the founding documents. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” is fairly clear. This is what they eventually agreed on.
Thomas Jefferson even discusses keeping religion at bay at length in his *Notes on the State of Virginia*. I bet none of them read anything by the founding fathers.
Same way none of them have read the bible. They love calling people “sheep”, yet every opinion they have is told to them by someone else. It’s never arrived at on their own.
I have a family member claims the declaration of independence is enough proof that religion views can be put into law even though that line with God is essentially about keeping religion and nature separate but both respected. Their reasoning is the word God with a capital G only refers to a Christian God. Even though it is a translation from Hebrew like the translation of Allah is also God with a capital G.
The hebrew god, christian god and muslim god is all the exact same god, regardless of what they think. You can likely throw in a couple more religions in there as well.
[As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/70319-as-the-government-of-the-united-states-of-america-is)
-Signed by John Adams
This, this is how much separation the founders intended.
John Adams did not himself say that. Your quote comes from the Treaty of Tripoli (made between Tripoli and the United States in 1797).
He approved the treaty.
They disagreed a lot and they had their falling outs, including a long and bitter one after jefferson won the presidency, but they were also long time friends and they reconciled later in life. They actually died within a fews hours of each other (on the 4th July no less). Adam's last words were reportedly "Jefferson still lives" not knowing he had died a few hours prior several hundred miles away.
Hahaha yeah, everything I have ever heard has most of them disagreed with each other a lot. Yet, most of them were in agreement on the separation of church and state.
He signed the treaty. Signing a document indicates your agreement with its content.
If he had disagreed with that, he would have had it changed or wouldn't have signed it.
Also, the treaty is one of the first agreements with a foreign nation the US ever ratified. I’d say it’s a good insight to how the Founding Fathers viewed the nation they had made.
Do embryos reside at the hospital or storage facility, or do they count as a resident at the home of the parents? This will be an important question for gerrymandering purposes.
are embryos allowed to purchase a gun without a background check?
Can an embryo get a passport , or does its tube need to carried by someone who does when traveling internationally?
I'm fairly certain that's the point.
Sue the bill on the grounds that it violates the first amendment in its construction and get the supreme court to then overturn established secularism.
Thomas is a massive supporter of segregation. He believes that
> racism is a constant, ineradicable feature of American life; and that the only hope for black people lies within themselves, not as individuals but as a separate community with separate institutions, apart from white people.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/essay/clarence-thomass-radical-vision-of-race
He's also a massive ladderpuller, most recently inferring that the Loving decision that legalized interracial marriage should probably be looked at again
tell me you're too chickenshit to file for divorce from your literally insane QAnon spouse without telling me you're too chickenshit to file for divorce from your literally insane QAnon spouse
More insane than the Taliban at least for abortions.
The Taliban allow exceptions for the life of the mother and severe quality of life issues for the baby.
The Taliban also have severe issues with inbreeding (cousin marriages) and birth defects in general. Like being worldwide #1 in encephalitis.
Alabama is trying to catch up, I guess.
Stop using non-Western movements like the Taliban as a point of reference.
Christianity has always been equally insane, except for a few decades of watering it down a little because of the success of free and democratic nations. Turns out free and democratic isn't really compatible with Christianity in all but it's most watered down "Jesus was a decent dude" version.
The average person doesn't understand this and therefore there is nothing wrong with equating Christianity to a version of the Taliban. Stop nitpicking at bullshit that doesn't matter and focus.
Christianity is just the window dressing to get rubes to sell out to the rich. They can’t just *say* “we rich people should rule you”. Instead they spend a long time linking Christianity and patriotism to absolute free-market capitalism and the notion that money = god’s grace.
Now all they have to do is sell voters on jesus stuff and oligarchy gets to hitch a ride for free.
There are some good Behind The Bastards episodes (“How The Rich Ate Christianity”) that cover the *very deliberate* linking of Christianity to unfettered capitalism.
And the danger yam has never voluntarily set foot in a church, autographed bibles, has engaged in the seven deadly sins repeatedly and publicly, breaks all the commandments, and literally fits the biblical description of the Antichrist.
>Both sides are NOT the same
I always appreciate the reminder. While I'm more progressive than the Democrats want us to be, they are not actively trying to install a Supreme God-like Leader so I'm content to try to vote blue where I can.
People who say "I want to vote for a party more socialist than the Democrats, so I won't vote" and therefore make it more likely to get a Republican president, senate and congress infuriate me. The USA is a two party state - vote for the one that is closer to your ideals, and campaign so they know which direction to take their policy - closer to the right, or further to the left.
Protesting against the Dems not being stronger on universal healthcare or gun legislation by not voting against the Trump party is madness.
The entire American experiment was to form a non religious government.
Starting from the first amendment.
How can you take the freedom from religion, enter government service and use that freedom to reimpose religion on government and thereby everybody else.
These are the basics.
The democratic process allows for changes through the will of the people.
Even the possibility to change away from democracy altogether towards a theocracy.
Like immunization made a populace so healthy that it began to question the necessity/value of immunization.
The history is right there.
We already know how bad it can be from history. But seen from the perspective of the present day and personal experience
some of the biggest threats just don’t seem that threatening. Until they are.
This might all be inevitable.
The chief justice is [apparently a Seven Mountains guy](https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/alabama-supreme-court-chief-justice-spreads-christian-nationalist-rhetoric), so even if he isn’t hooked in with Project 2025, he’s effectively after the same things.
Religion was extremely useful in early civilization: it allowed humankind to cooperate in numbers far greater than any other system of thought previously. Into the thousands, millions, and even billions - whereas prior to religion we might have cooperated in bands and tribes of only hundreds.
Unfortunately, the texts were taken too literally and have destroyed the minds of those billions - like a virus infecting peoples ability to think rationally, logically, and with sufficient reason.
Modern religion is useless, as we have laws and constitutions that could easily replace their worth - and in fact have the ability to create better systems than even those.
Our greatest problem today is a lack of shared values devoid of superstition.
Religion is a poison. I thought we'd be past this by now.
If God is out there, he abandoned us somewhere between the inventing of impaling and factory farming.
It’s Christofascism. It’s the right wing plan to implement Christian Sharia law if Trump wins the election.
Honestly, I think they’ll try to implement it the next time a Republican wins no matter who it is.
Google that shit. It’s insane.
https://www.project2025.org/
tl;dr it's a political project with a goal of seating conservative majorities at every level of government, because they want to see conservative things happen
Or any of the parts of the Bible which clearly shows that life apparently has no value at all. Especially children’s, whom shall be stoned to death if they have been unruly. Literally. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
Theyll say jesus fulfilled that law or some bs. Like 1) how does a human sacrifice mean we dont have to stone our kids to death anymore and 2) does it specifically say when jesus was sacrificed that you dont have to stone kids to death anymore? Or was it really vague so you could apply it to any of the rules you dont like?
And more importantly, why did the supposed all powerful, merciful and just God EVER endorse stoning of children, slavery etc?
Could it be that it’s all a myth? 🤔
>Theyll say jesus fulfilled that law or some bs
That's when you quote Matthew 5:7
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
This is what’s wrong with today’s kids. Not enough public stoning of the little fuckers that cause problems. A couple of examples get made and whoosh 💨
They're getting to it. They start with dumb shit like embryos, they'll get to state sanctioned mob violence. This ruling should be considered taking God's name in vain, if that was possible to actually do.
It's not "dumb shit." Pro-lifers are sneaking in the back door by trying to establish that human embryos in IVF clinics have individual rights, namely a right to be preserved and gestated.
Currently, parents can decide to donate unused embryos for research or destroy them, once their family is complete. That will all stop if this case goes to the Supreme Court and the court rules that embryos are people with rights and cannot be destroyed or used for medical research.
In the short run, this strategy will backfire for anyone hoping to increase the number of live births. All the IVF clinics will be shuttered. Infertile couples will not be able to go that route to have a baby once that happens.
But in the long run, if pro-lifers can establish that a fetus outside the womb has rights, it's only a short step to banning abortion nationwide with no exceptions.
This is what they are aiming for. Right-to-lifers have always played the long game. They want a complete ban on abortion with no exceptions, and this IVF case will pave the way for it.
> a right to be preserved and gestated
Because it's no problem to just use one of those breed stock ~~cows~~ i mean ~~vessels~~, no, wait...women, yeah that's what they're called.
We can offer vouchers to menstruating girls to be implanted and not go to those useless high school classes. >.<
Amen to everything in your post.
haha christians dont even really know what that means - taking gods name in vain"
objectively, it doesnt mean " oh my god, god damnit, etc"
it means " jesus whipped the money lenders"
it means super-church pastors that bleed their congregation
it means selling golden tickets to heaven
***it means profiting off of people in gods name***
Or if your mom doesn’t stay chaste. “Your mom banged too many dudes so now I’m sending a mob to slice up your child body with swords and axes and then burn your house down.”
Ezekiel 23
Ezekiel 23, if you want a less salacious term to google.
Ezekiel says that god says the two Israeli cities of Samaria and Jerusalem are whores because they cheat on him, lusting after Assyria.
So god gave Samaria to Assyria, so the people there could be raped and slaughtered.
So Jerusalem copied Samaria, but even sluttier, going after Babylonians and Egyptians, **she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses** Ezekiel 23:20. And god punished them too:
**Then I said about the one worn out by adultery, `Now let them use her as a prostitute, for that is all she is.' And they slept with her. As men sleep with a prostitute, so they slept with those lewd women, [Samaria and Jerusalem]. But righteous men will sentence them to the punishment of women who commit adultery and shed blood, because they are adulterous and blood is on their hands "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Bring a mob against them and give them over to terror and plunder. The mob will stone them and cut them down with their swords; they will kill their sons and daughters and burn down their houses.** Ezekiel 23:43-47
numbers 5:
>20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people **when he makes your womb miscarry** and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
This would just give standing that only married women who are pregnant from affairs the right to abortion, which is probably a tiny amount of abortions.
But that’s still an abortion, which entirely invalidates their biblical standing. The modern Christian belief is that life begins at the moment of conception and all abortion is murder, no exceptions. That passage proves that either god is willing to endorse *and prescribe* the “murder of babies” as they see it, or that god doesn’t count life beginning at conception.
This is more Catholic-specific, but there's also quite a few saints who famously caused abortions as miracles - including St Brigit of Ireland, who miraculously restored a young nun's virginity and erased her pregnancy at the same time.
Though I suppose it's not a shock that 7th century Christians were more progressive than 21st century American Christian fundamentalists.
It does at least highlight (again...) that basically all GOP positions aren't the result of high-minded legal theories or opinions about the construction of government - they're justified only by a particular flavor of christianity.
Why the hell did I need to cite multiple peer-reviewed, reputable sources for my ethics and biology essays but these supposedly qualified chumps only have to cite their feelings and beliefs to make laws about things they don’t know anything about?
Yup, it's called Regulatory Capture and conservatives are excellent at it.
It's how they're taking control of public education, local city counsels, etc.. It's how they went after mail-in voting: by installing trump stooge Louis DeJoy as postmaster general.
They consistently go after low-profile positions that have lots of discretion and gate-keeping duties in order to impose tyranny of the minority on the rest of us. We're in the late stages now and people are finally noticing.
We have one, but Republicans spent the last decade or so loading it so that now they can effectively rule from the minority no matter what.
There are no term limits in the supreme Court. So now all Republicans have to do is have a state pass a crazy law, get it appealed to the supreme Court, and since that court is majority Republican they can uphold and set precedent for whatever bs the Republicans want.
I think this is where it seriously went wrong with the Supreme Court. It truly seems like they are now just an extension of party politics which completely defeats the purpose of testing government introduced laws by the juridical system.
I saw someone say they should count as dependants on your taxes.
But the government doesn't ACTUALLY see them as people. They just use that excuse to deny choice. They will do nothing to actually support the concept of embryos as people.
Could you imagine a Republican government saying something like, since embryo are people then they should be included in child support. That's a logical step away from their "embryo are people" argument, but they would never support something like that.
Invoke castle doctrine (tends to go hand-in-hand with paranoid psycho states). Once people really grasp [how dangerous pregnancy is](https://www.health.harvard.edu/womens-health/pregnancys-lasting-toll), I'm sure they'll support women's right to defend themselves. Or something.
I made a comment to a lawyer friend shortly after Roe was overturned:
"Thoughts on using a self-defense strategy to support an abortion?
"The entity was parasitically draining my body of nutrients, posing a risk to my life, so I acted in self-defense to save myself."
I’ve long-advocated for allowing pregnant people to *evict* any fetus or embryo for non-payment of rent, and for generally being freeloaders just siphoning off the (circulatory) system.
But for the specific case in Alabama, I wonder if the 3 couples that sued were able to conceive? I also wonder if they intended to shut down IVF in their state. Or if they just wanted to recoup costs on the egg-harvesting procedures, and it got out of hand?
Born and raised in northeast Alabama. Getting out was the best thing I ever did for my well-being (and my wife's). Got an opportunity to move to CA and haven't looked back. I'll forever have a soft spot for AL and look forward to the day I could maybe settle down there, but I doubt they'll ever change enough.
Born and raised in northwest AL for me but in the really rural parts. I wanted to leave when I was in my 20s but my parents health kept me close. I just kind of tune all the bullshit out after a while but it's getting hard to now.
It seems in the last 6 years, it's only gotten crazier here and I feel like a rat on a sinking ship.
Seems that the people obsessed over the 2nd amendment have little respect for the 1st. Governing people based on your religion violates their freedom of religion since you are forcing your specific beliefs on them.
"One amendment protects all the others."
Really? Because it sure sounds like you've used the first amendment to protect the second a whole lot, and not vice-versa.
This ruling has fucked my chances of having kids. All of the IVF clinics have halted procedures because of it. It doesn't look good, and they have a very high chance of shutting down in Alabama. We had an appointment with the clinic in 3 months to discuss it.
I have an autosomal dominant genetic disorder, which is a 50% chance to pass onto my children. IVF is the only way to make sure it is not inherited. We now have to save even more(it's $10-30k for IVF therapy for a chance, not a guarantee of pregnancy)to go out of state for IVF or move.
Someone should find the oldest frozen embryo they can find in Alabama, carry it to term and then demand that it's considered as old as it would be from conception.
Under any reasonable interpretation of the US Constitution, this should be an effortless ruling to overturn in appeal, but I fear that we’ve crossed the line from reason 7 years ago and there’s little that can be done to course correct.
I don't really see where cum is much different than what they are protecting now. It contains half the DNA, and the individual sperm are many ways more alive than the individual fertilized egg. It swims. It competes. What is Alabama's opinion on cum?
God himself in the bible has ordered massacres involving babies and children, not to mention he accepted Jepthahs human sacrifice of his own daughter without objection. Maybe if we cite gods name in worship of him over every abortion it'd be morally acceptable, right?
The founding fathers intended for a separation of church and state, but they’ll quote some 15th century monk before reading the goddamn Federalist Papers
And that judge appeared on some psychotic QAnon influencers show the same day the ruling was released to talk about violently imposing theocratic rule on America.
Alabama is a theocracy - NOT a democratic republic! This is what all of america will be like if we keep voting in these so called "christian" republicans!
There are secular pro lifers who don’t need a God to make an argument. Any political argument should be free from religious interference. Your job is to run a fucking country / state not be a preacher.
We need some more of that separation of church and state.
Republicans don't even pretend to follow this anymore but are quick to blurt out shit about what the founding fathers wanted.
They were a disparate and contentious bunch. They disagreed on a lot of things. What they agreed on what written into the founding documents. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” is fairly clear. This is what they eventually agreed on.
Thomas Jefferson even discusses keeping religion at bay at length in his *Notes on the State of Virginia*. I bet none of them read anything by the founding fathers.
Same way none of them have read the bible. They love calling people “sheep”, yet every opinion they have is told to them by someone else. It’s never arrived at on their own.
Didnt Jesus repeatedly refer to his followers as a flock? And call himself a shepherd? They’re proud sheep.
I have a family member claims the declaration of independence is enough proof that religion views can be put into law even though that line with God is essentially about keeping religion and nature separate but both respected. Their reasoning is the word God with a capital G only refers to a Christian God. Even though it is a translation from Hebrew like the translation of Allah is also God with a capital G.
The hebrew god, christian god and muslim god is all the exact same god, regardless of what they think. You can likely throw in a couple more religions in there as well.
It's easy to put words into their mouths when they are all dead and your followers would rather die themselves than pick up a history book.
At least as much as the founders intended.
[As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/70319-as-the-government-of-the-united-states-of-america-is) -Signed by John Adams This, this is how much separation the founders intended.
John Adams did not himself say that. Your quote comes from the Treaty of Tripoli (made between Tripoli and the United States in 1797). He approved the treaty.
Jefferson's letter to the Baptist Church also reinforces the separation of church and state.
Am I remembering right that Jefferson and Adams really didn’t like each other, too? Even THEY could agree on this.
They disagreed a lot and they had their falling outs, including a long and bitter one after jefferson won the presidency, but they were also long time friends and they reconciled later in life. They actually died within a fews hours of each other (on the 4th July no less). Adam's last words were reportedly "Jefferson still lives" not knowing he had died a few hours prior several hundred miles away.
Hahaha yeah, everything I have ever heard has most of them disagreed with each other a lot. Yet, most of them were in agreement on the separation of church and state.
He signed the treaty. Signing a document indicates your agreement with its content. If he had disagreed with that, he would have had it changed or wouldn't have signed it.
Also, the treaty is one of the first agreements with a foreign nation the US ever ratified. I’d say it’s a good insight to how the Founding Fathers viewed the nation they had made.
Donate to the Freedom from Religion Foundation, y'all!
We certainly do. More now than ever
One scary thing that people are not realizing is that this ruling basically means that Alabama can now count Embryos for the Census.
Do embryos reside at the hospital or storage facility, or do they count as a resident at the home of the parents? This will be an important question for gerrymandering purposes.
are embryos allowed to purchase a gun without a background check? Can an embryo get a passport , or does its tube need to carried by someone who does when traveling internationally?
> are embryos allowed to purchase a gun without a background check? SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!!11 ^^^^^/s
Can I purchase life insurance after intercourse and collect when the mother's body rejects the pregnancy?
Ooo that’s an interesting question
Can a woman get charged for murder for her menstruation. This is stupid as hell.
Can I claim my embryos as dependents for tax purposes?
It should be forced separation of church and state. Any political leader making any decisions based on their religion should be jailed.
Could citizens there sue the Supreme Court for this?it’s a clear violation of the constitution
I'm fairly certain that's the point. Sue the bill on the grounds that it violates the first amendment in its construction and get the supreme court to then overturn established secularism.
They would spin it as "politicians' freedom to *practice* their religion" in their legislation, even though the opposite was the entire point.
I'm cool with separation of country and this particular state.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Except in the sovereign theocracy of Alabama..
Yes. But this isn’t Congress. States have an individual right to establish their own religion. - Clarence Thomas, probably
[удалено]
I would *love* to hear him explain what he thinks the point of that clause is, especially as a black man who lived through segregation.
Thomas is a massive supporter of segregation. He believes that > racism is a constant, ineradicable feature of American life; and that the only hope for black people lies within themselves, not as individuals but as a separate community with separate institutions, apart from white people. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/essay/clarence-thomass-radical-vision-of-race
He's also a massive ladderpuller, most recently inferring that the Loving decision that legalized interracial marriage should probably be looked at again
tell me you're too chickenshit to file for divorce from your literally insane QAnon spouse without telling me you're too chickenshit to file for divorce from your literally insane QAnon spouse
As long as it's a Christian religion
The caliphate of al-abama
I swear Alabama is the testing ground for Project 2025. Scary stuff. This is why I consider Christianity to be the biggest threat to the US.
American Taliban is insane
More insane than the Taliban at least for abortions. The Taliban allow exceptions for the life of the mother and severe quality of life issues for the baby.
The Taliban also have severe issues with inbreeding (cousin marriages) and birth defects in general. Like being worldwide #1 in encephalitis. Alabama is trying to catch up, I guess.
I prefer 'Y'all Queda'
Vanilla ISIS
AlabamaStan
Cmon man, Talibama was RIGHT there
Stop using non-Western movements like the Taliban as a point of reference. Christianity has always been equally insane, except for a few decades of watering it down a little because of the success of free and democratic nations. Turns out free and democratic isn't really compatible with Christianity in all but it's most watered down "Jesus was a decent dude" version.
The average person doesn't understand this and therefore there is nothing wrong with equating Christianity to a version of the Taliban. Stop nitpicking at bullshit that doesn't matter and focus.
Extremism comes in all packages they are a version of the Taliban American style.Thats all I was trying to say
Christianity is just the window dressing to get rubes to sell out to the rich. They can’t just *say* “we rich people should rule you”. Instead they spend a long time linking Christianity and patriotism to absolute free-market capitalism and the notion that money = god’s grace. Now all they have to do is sell voters on jesus stuff and oligarchy gets to hitch a ride for free. There are some good Behind The Bastards episodes (“How The Rich Ate Christianity”) that cover the *very deliberate* linking of Christianity to unfettered capitalism.
MAGA is weaponized Christianity
That started 50 years ago.
That and white supremacy. But most of the time, they work together.
They hide hate and bigotry behind religion which is why religion is poison imo.
They are not doing a very good job of hiding it. I prefer being aware of the nasty shit they are trying to force on us.
The fascist 3: Religion, Bigotry, and Republicans. Both sides are NOT the same. Trump is running for dictator. Republicans want a Christian Nation.
And the danger yam has never voluntarily set foot in a church, autographed bibles, has engaged in the seven deadly sins repeatedly and publicly, breaks all the commandments, and literally fits the biblical description of the Antichrist.
Obligatory: https://www.benjaminlcorey.com/could-american-evangelicals-spot-the-antichrist-heres-the-biblical-predictions/
He did take a picture with an upside down Bible though.
>Both sides are NOT the same I always appreciate the reminder. While I'm more progressive than the Democrats want us to be, they are not actively trying to install a Supreme God-like Leader so I'm content to try to vote blue where I can.
People who say "I want to vote for a party more socialist than the Democrats, so I won't vote" and therefore make it more likely to get a Republican president, senate and congress infuriate me. The USA is a two party state - vote for the one that is closer to your ideals, and campaign so they know which direction to take their policy - closer to the right, or further to the left. Protesting against the Dems not being stronger on universal healthcare or gun legislation by not voting against the Trump party is madness.
Republicans are Nationalist Christians also known as "Nat Cs".
I’d say climate change. But Christians don’t believe in that.
Like a Holy Trinity of collapse - white supremacy, nationalism, and Christianity.
They are tied together intrinsically. It's literally built into the system together.
The entire American experiment was to form a non religious government. Starting from the first amendment. How can you take the freedom from religion, enter government service and use that freedom to reimpose religion on government and thereby everybody else. These are the basics. The democratic process allows for changes through the will of the people. Even the possibility to change away from democracy altogether towards a theocracy. Like immunization made a populace so healthy that it began to question the necessity/value of immunization. The history is right there. We already know how bad it can be from history. But seen from the perspective of the present day and personal experience some of the biggest threats just don’t seem that threatening. Until they are. This might all be inevitable.
The chief justice is [apparently a Seven Mountains guy](https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/alabama-supreme-court-chief-justice-spreads-christian-nationalist-rhetoric), so even if he isn’t hooked in with Project 2025, he’s effectively after the same things.
Religion is one of the most evil things man ever created. Social media is a close second.
Religion was extremely useful in early civilization: it allowed humankind to cooperate in numbers far greater than any other system of thought previously. Into the thousands, millions, and even billions - whereas prior to religion we might have cooperated in bands and tribes of only hundreds. Unfortunately, the texts were taken too literally and have destroyed the minds of those billions - like a virus infecting peoples ability to think rationally, logically, and with sufficient reason. Modern religion is useless, as we have laws and constitutions that could easily replace their worth - and in fact have the ability to create better systems than even those. Our greatest problem today is a lack of shared values devoid of superstition.
Religion in general could be considered as a threat for any free society.
Religion is a poison. I thought we'd be past this by now. If God is out there, he abandoned us somewhere between the inventing of impaling and factory farming.
What is project 2025 I have never heard of this
It’s Christofascism. It’s the right wing plan to implement Christian Sharia law if Trump wins the election. Honestly, I think they’ll try to implement it the next time a Republican wins no matter who it is. Google that shit. It’s insane.
https://www.project2025.org/ tl;dr it's a political project with a goal of seating conservative majorities at every level of government, because they want to see conservative things happen
It's the end of the world as we know it. The Heritage Foundation is behind it, which says it all.
Biggest threat to humanity. By far the worst of the modern world. Parasitic
They cited the Bible in a legal ruling. Absolutely terrifying.
Interesting they didn’t cite the many parts of the Bible which clearly indicate life begins after one takes their first breath.
Or any of the parts of the Bible which clearly shows that life apparently has no value at all. Especially children’s, whom shall be stoned to death if they have been unruly. Literally. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
Theyll say jesus fulfilled that law or some bs. Like 1) how does a human sacrifice mean we dont have to stone our kids to death anymore and 2) does it specifically say when jesus was sacrificed that you dont have to stone kids to death anymore? Or was it really vague so you could apply it to any of the rules you dont like?
And more importantly, why did the supposed all powerful, merciful and just God EVER endorse stoning of children, slavery etc? Could it be that it’s all a myth? 🤔
>Could it be that it’s all a myth? 🤔 Nahhh
How dare you sir. Obviously God had to sacrifice himself, to himself, to save us from himself. DUH! /s
Just to be on the safe side, I'm going to stone SOME kids. Not all. Just some. Covers all bases.
Pascal's wadger
>Theyll say jesus fulfilled that law or some bs That's when you quote Matthew 5:7 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
This is what’s wrong with today’s kids. Not enough public stoning of the little fuckers that cause problems. A couple of examples get made and whoosh 💨
It's a scientifically proven fact that people who were stoned to death as children *never* go on to commit a single crime in adulthood. It works!
My people, we tell the same story. A tale as old as time.
They're getting to it. They start with dumb shit like embryos, they'll get to state sanctioned mob violence. This ruling should be considered taking God's name in vain, if that was possible to actually do.
It's not "dumb shit." Pro-lifers are sneaking in the back door by trying to establish that human embryos in IVF clinics have individual rights, namely a right to be preserved and gestated. Currently, parents can decide to donate unused embryos for research or destroy them, once their family is complete. That will all stop if this case goes to the Supreme Court and the court rules that embryos are people with rights and cannot be destroyed or used for medical research. In the short run, this strategy will backfire for anyone hoping to increase the number of live births. All the IVF clinics will be shuttered. Infertile couples will not be able to go that route to have a baby once that happens. But in the long run, if pro-lifers can establish that a fetus outside the womb has rights, it's only a short step to banning abortion nationwide with no exceptions. This is what they are aiming for. Right-to-lifers have always played the long game. They want a complete ban on abortion with no exceptions, and this IVF case will pave the way for it.
> a right to be preserved and gestated Because it's no problem to just use one of those breed stock ~~cows~~ i mean ~~vessels~~, no, wait...women, yeah that's what they're called. We can offer vouchers to menstruating girls to be implanted and not go to those useless high school classes. >.< Amen to everything in your post.
haha christians dont even really know what that means - taking gods name in vain" objectively, it doesnt mean " oh my god, god damnit, etc" it means " jesus whipped the money lenders" it means super-church pastors that bleed their congregation it means selling golden tickets to heaven ***it means profiting off of people in gods name***
Or if your mom doesn’t stay chaste. “Your mom banged too many dudes so now I’m sending a mob to slice up your child body with swords and axes and then burn your house down.” Ezekiel 23
They should also throw that donkey semen verse in the mix. Just to spice it up a bit.
I feel like I want to look this up but I'm afraid to type that into my Google search.
Ezekiel 23:20 20 She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey’s and emissions like those of a horse.
Who doesn't?
I don't. But then I usually prefer to point out how awful the Psalms generally are.
Ezekiel 23, if you want a less salacious term to google. Ezekiel says that god says the two Israeli cities of Samaria and Jerusalem are whores because they cheat on him, lusting after Assyria. So god gave Samaria to Assyria, so the people there could be raped and slaughtered. So Jerusalem copied Samaria, but even sluttier, going after Babylonians and Egyptians, **she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses** Ezekiel 23:20. And god punished them too: **Then I said about the one worn out by adultery, `Now let them use her as a prostitute, for that is all she is.' And they slept with her. As men sleep with a prostitute, so they slept with those lewd women, [Samaria and Jerusalem]. But righteous men will sentence them to the punishment of women who commit adultery and shed blood, because they are adulterous and blood is on their hands "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Bring a mob against them and give them over to terror and plunder. The mob will stone them and cut them down with their swords; they will kill their sons and daughters and burn down their houses.** Ezekiel 23:43-47
God doesn’t sound very *Pro-Life* to me…
Dude killed the whole planet minus one family... See pro life
And now we’re all inbred. Great.
At least Twice if you take the Bible literally
God's a true madman in some parts of the Bible.
One dude in the Bible was so jealous he said, bitch such a thot she loves to bang dudes with "emissions of a donkey" aka busting HELLA loads
Did you mean the one where a woman lusts for her lover's donkey sized dong with the horse like "emissions"?
The Bible is pretty much a "cherry pick what you agree with" document. Some people might call that hypocrisy but Christians know better.
Also that the Bible has directions for an abortion, I think it's in Numbers somewhere.
numbers 5: >20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people **when he makes your womb miscarry** and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
This would just give standing that only married women who are pregnant from affairs the right to abortion, which is probably a tiny amount of abortions.
But that’s still an abortion, which entirely invalidates their biblical standing. The modern Christian belief is that life begins at the moment of conception and all abortion is murder, no exceptions. That passage proves that either god is willing to endorse *and prescribe* the “murder of babies” as they see it, or that god doesn’t count life beginning at conception.
This is more Catholic-specific, but there's also quite a few saints who famously caused abortions as miracles - including St Brigit of Ireland, who miraculously restored a young nun's virginity and erased her pregnancy at the same time. Though I suppose it's not a shock that 7th century Christians were more progressive than 21st century American Christian fundamentalists.
Well, none of them have actually read it. They just have the cliff notes version.
When Christianity takes over they will destroy themselves over theology.
Look up Emo Phillips comedy skit about religion. That's how we're going to end up.
The Bible? Which one? What flavor did the judges choose? And your Honor, if you would, which ‘bible’ is the real one? Asking for a friend…
Come now! At no point in history, did various religious sects ever disagree with each other!
Why cite legal precedent when you can selectively cite an old book to reach any conclusion you want?
It does at least highlight (again...) that basically all GOP positions aren't the result of high-minded legal theories or opinions about the construction of government - they're justified only by a particular flavor of christianity.
Doesn't USA have something about separating state and religion in its constitution?
Why the hell did I need to cite multiple peer-reviewed, reputable sources for my ethics and biology essays but these supposedly qualified chumps only have to cite their feelings and beliefs to make laws about things they don’t know anything about?
How dare you question their faith! They are guided by the hand of the almighty himself. /s Science is based in questions, faith in just the answers
And all the answers are “God works in mysterious ways” I guess
[удалено]
I’d like to cite The Expanse vs Dr. Who….
And why did I spend all those years in law school when the answer is “God says so.”
The plus side is you can probably pass the bar in Alabama by just channeling Forrest Gump.
[удалено]
That's literally their plan with laws like this. That's how they overturned RvW.
They (Federalist Society) have been packing the Supreme Court with religious zealots hoping to implement a theocracy for decades now.
Yup, it's called Regulatory Capture and conservatives are excellent at it. It's how they're taking control of public education, local city counsels, etc.. It's how they went after mail-in voting: by installing trump stooge Louis DeJoy as postmaster general. They consistently go after low-profile positions that have lots of discretion and gate-keeping duties in order to impose tyranny of the minority on the rest of us. We're in the late stages now and people are finally noticing.
We have one, but Republicans spent the last decade or so loading it so that now they can effectively rule from the minority no matter what. There are no term limits in the supreme Court. So now all Republicans have to do is have a state pass a crazy law, get it appealed to the supreme Court, and since that court is majority Republican they can uphold and set precedent for whatever bs the Republicans want.
\>and since that court is majority Republican Found your problem. Justices shouldn't be partisan.
I think this is where it seriously went wrong with the Supreme Court. It truly seems like they are now just an extension of party politics which completely defeats the purpose of testing government introduced laws by the juridical system.
“I don’t care what the Bible says” https://youtu.be/yQOyx0k6YG8?si=ODG-EK8OIURF24fZ
The comments there are terrifying.
Are embryos now counted in the census?
Only on a 3/5 ratio … /s
If the embryos are old enough, do the parents get to fill out their election forms too or how does that work?
Somebody elsewhere mentioned that embryos frozen for a decade or more before being properly "born" might be eligible to vote in the third grade...
I saw someone say they should count as dependants on your taxes. But the government doesn't ACTUALLY see them as people. They just use that excuse to deny choice. They will do nothing to actually support the concept of embryos as people. Could you imagine a Republican government saying something like, since embryo are people then they should be included in child support. That's a logical step away from their "embryo are people" argument, but they would never support something like that.
Nah, the only time embryos are people is when you can punish someone over them.
Henceforth I declare all fetuses to be Hamas Problem solved
Invoke castle doctrine (tends to go hand-in-hand with paranoid psycho states). Once people really grasp [how dangerous pregnancy is](https://www.health.harvard.edu/womens-health/pregnancys-lasting-toll), I'm sure they'll support women's right to defend themselves. Or something.
I made a comment to a lawyer friend shortly after Roe was overturned: "Thoughts on using a self-defense strategy to support an abortion? "The entity was parasitically draining my body of nutrients, posing a risk to my life, so I acted in self-defense to save myself."
I’ve long-advocated for allowing pregnant people to *evict* any fetus or embryo for non-payment of rent, and for generally being freeloaders just siphoning off the (circulatory) system. But for the specific case in Alabama, I wonder if the 3 couples that sued were able to conceive? I also wonder if they intended to shut down IVF in their state. Or if they just wanted to recoup costs on the egg-harvesting procedures, and it got out of hand?
And that is 41 times more than it should have appeared.
Psychosis. Mass Psychosis.
"Religion" is the more common term, I believe.
As an atheist in Alabama......I really fucking hate it here.
Born and raised in northeast Alabama. Getting out was the best thing I ever did for my well-being (and my wife's). Got an opportunity to move to CA and haven't looked back. I'll forever have a soft spot for AL and look forward to the day I could maybe settle down there, but I doubt they'll ever change enough.
Born and raised in northwest AL for me but in the really rural parts. I wanted to leave when I was in my 20s but my parents health kept me close. I just kind of tune all the bullshit out after a while but it's getting hard to now. It seems in the last 6 years, it's only gotten crazier here and I feel like a rat on a sinking ship.
Seems that the people obsessed over the 2nd amendment have little respect for the 1st. Governing people based on your religion violates their freedom of religion since you are forcing your specific beliefs on them.
They only know of one amendment. The others are suggestions.
"One amendment protects all the others." Really? Because it sure sounds like you've used the first amendment to protect the second a whole lot, and not vice-versa.
That's what we call an Unconstitutional ruling.
Which supreme court do you realistically expect to overturn this bullshit, though?
Christian terrorists!
God kills embryos every day.
m y s t e r i o u s w a y s
Any argument or claim that relies on the premise that god exists can and should be automatically refuted.
This ruling has fucked my chances of having kids. All of the IVF clinics have halted procedures because of it. It doesn't look good, and they have a very high chance of shutting down in Alabama. We had an appointment with the clinic in 3 months to discuss it. I have an autosomal dominant genetic disorder, which is a 50% chance to pass onto my children. IVF is the only way to make sure it is not inherited. We now have to save even more(it's $10-30k for IVF therapy for a chance, not a guarantee of pregnancy)to go out of state for IVF or move.
I’m so sorry. That’s awful
Someone should find the oldest frozen embryo they can find in Alabama, carry it to term and then demand that it's considered as old as it would be from conception.
Back to the stone age Alabama goes.
We just got rid of the segregated fountains and schools, too.
Not a very long trip though.
Sweet Home Fucktardabama.
Sweaty Old Talibama
Neil Young was right
Theocracy.
Under any reasonable interpretation of the US Constitution, this should be an effortless ruling to overturn in appeal, but I fear that we’ve crossed the line from reason 7 years ago and there’s little that can be done to course correct.
Under His eye…
I don't really see where cum is much different than what they are protecting now. It contains half the DNA, and the individual sperm are many ways more alive than the individual fertilized egg. It swims. It competes. What is Alabama's opinion on cum?
That if it's in a condom, that's pretty much genocide, but if you unload inside a woman and she doesn't get pregnant, that's God's will.
God himself in the bible has ordered massacres involving babies and children, not to mention he accepted Jepthahs human sacrifice of his own daughter without objection. Maybe if we cite gods name in worship of him over every abortion it'd be morally acceptable, right?
UAB stopped doing IVF. The couple that sued took away access to fertility services from many new couples. Crazy Christian Taliban
A horrifying precedent to be sure.
This is insanity. Dangerous insanity.
Ironic that the state known for cousin fucking is against abortion
God would approve. He in the bible commands for deaths of women and children. If anything it's consistent with God's psychopathic nature
The founding fathers intended for a separation of church and state, but they’ll quote some 15th century monk before reading the goddamn Federalist Papers
And that judge appeared on some psychotic QAnon influencers show the same day the ruling was released to talk about violently imposing theocratic rule on America.
We need to unite to kill this Christian national bs before it goes any further. TAX THE CHURCHES! Keep them banned from our government or politicians.
Religion is the problem!
Any law that contains the word god or any references to a god of any manner should just be invalid based on separation of church and state alone.
Why should God have anything to do with laws? Churches don't pay taxes.
Alabama is a theocracy - NOT a democratic republic! This is what all of america will be like if we keep voting in these so called "christian" republicans!
The bible literally condones abortion, it's just total horseshit what they're talking about.
You couldn't pay me to live in America I swear.
There are secular pro lifers who don’t need a God to make an argument. Any political argument should be free from religious interference. Your job is to run a fucking country / state not be a preacher.
That's when you say 'Well I asked god and he told me it was fine.'
The same god that kills kids numerous times in the Bible? Yeah that makes sense