Log in

No account? Create an account
Zer Netmouse
April 4th, 2005
10:30 am


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Another stupid law...
Go read this:


about something coming up in congress that defends the rights of lawmakers and other government employees right to claim God as the sole source of law, their actions, etc.

(3 comments | Leave a comment)

[User Picture]
Date:April 4th, 2005 10:01 am (UTC)
This doesn't sound like just another stupid law... it sounds like the Mother Of All Stupid Laws.

If that comes to pass, I'm afraid I really will have to start seriously looking at countries that are a bit less fanatical.
Date:April 4th, 2005 11:42 am (UTC)
Fortunately, even if this law was to pass, the Supreme Court would almost certainly rule it unconstitutional, preventing it from taking effect. If Congress wants to limit the power of the Supreme Court this way, they need a Constitutional amendment, not a simple law. My guess is that even the bill's sponsors don't expect it to pass, and may not even want it to pass...but it gives them something to show to their fundamentalist constituents in the next election.
[User Picture]
Date:April 4th, 2005 12:33 pm (UTC)
You knew I would comment on this.

As nicegeek says, this attempt is pointless and will fail, so there is little to be concerned about in that regard. It does tell us a lot about what appeals to their constituents, and that's what I tend to think about more often. The question is: Seeing that our nation is composed of so many otherwise nice people who happen to want to emulate the Taliban, is there any appropriate response? Is it best to ignore our theocratic neighbors? Or to express our views to them as often as possible? Well, at least I hear those who support both of those approaches agree that we should not explode in rage.

Religious conservatives exist in an insulated subculture. Non-theocratic views literally sound to them like mental illness or disingenouity; the common sentiment is that their opponents "can't possibly take seriously what they're saying, so they must have an ulterior motive." Even most non-theocrats on the streets speak about the separation of church and state without much thought or passion, supporting it with obvious absurdities, contradictions and double standards (such as getting toleration confused with acceptance). Born-again fundamentalists don't hear a compelling articulation of free thought coming from anyone. They hear us from far away, distorted through the reports of their pastors and radio shows. When will we care as much as the fundamentalists care, and prepare our arguments with that much organization, outreach and eloquence? When will we come out of the closet audibly and visibly in a non-theocratic identity, and make ourselves heard the way that citizens of "King Jesus" now disproportionately make themselves heard?
Netmouse on the web Powered by LiveJournal.com