Hey, remember when I told you Louisiana Governor Bobby
Jindal signed a bill that funneled large sums of public education money through
vouchers into the private school Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) program?
The program that teaches that since the Loch Ness Monster exists, it is proof
that the theory of evolution is a fraud and creationism is real?
Well, it turns out that when you sign a bill that allows
government funds to pay for religious teachings, it doesn’t mean only Christian religious teachings. It means ALL religious
teachings. Louisiana is mad that it can go to Muslim schools as well. After
massive protesting by citizens and Republican politicians, The Islamic School
of Greater New Orleans was forced withdraw its application. Who are the
militant, tyrannical, freedom-suppressing fuckheads here? Republican State
Representative Kenneth Harvard said he wouldn’t back funding for Islamic
teaching. Well, poo. I guess only the completely unbelievable Christian myths
should be taught in school and not the completely unbelievable Muslim ones.
Valerie Strauss of the Washington Post points out:
“The state is sending millions of tax dollars that would
have gone to public schools that need it to private schools run by church leaders,
businessmen and others — with no initial effort to find out whether the schools
are any good or not.
This is where support of vouchers is leading us — to the
public paying for a child to learn that the Loch Ness Monster was a dinosaur
and co-existed with humans.
If people want to believe this and they want their children
to learn it in school, that’s fine. The public shouldn’t have to pay for it.”
See, that whole ‘separation of church and state’ thing in
the Constitution was written EXACTLY for this reason. The government can either
support ALL religions EQUALLY or NONE at all. Both options allow them the
freedom from persecution.
However, Christians seem to think the world revolves around
them. When you write a law allowing the government to fund religious teachings
and wish it ONLY pertains to YOUR religion, that is ANTICONSTITUTIONAL. You
ignorant fuckheads. Also, writing laws that ban Muslim Sharia law is redundant
because there is that thing called the Constitution which ALREADY outlaws it. Because
there IS a separation of church and state. You ignorant fuckheads.
The right-wing likes to express a false belief that there is
no separation between church and state, but they only believe that applies to
Christianity. They don’t seem to grasp that that would mean there would be no
separation between the government and Christianity, Scientology, Buddhism,
Rastafarianism, Pastafarianism, Hinduism, Islam, Jewish, Mormon, Hari Krishna,
Babism, Baha’I Faith, Roman Catholic, Nontrinitarianism, Unitarianism,
Ebionite, Samaritanism, Bhakti Movement, Sikhism, Mithraism, Confucianism,
Shinto, Tao, Shakers, Quakers, all the Native American belief systems, Odinism,
Zoroastrianism, Tantra, Voodoo, Wicca…
Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc……………
Fuckheads.
The right-wing wishes to impose a tyranny of uniformity
based on their own narrow-minded views. This mental slavery never has and never
will succeed in doing anything other than causing more mayhem.
The right-wing also loves to insist America was founded on
Christianity. It was not. The Founding Fathers were Deists
, not Christians - big difference. Proof, Bill. PROOF!
Ok. Here is an example or two…
Benjamin Franklin:
"I think vital religion has always suffered when
orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue. The scriptures assure me that at the
last day we shall not be examined on what we thought but what we did." ---
Benjamin Franklin, letter to his father, 1738
"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite
Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even
infinitely above it." --- Benjamin Franklin, from "Articles of Belief
and Acts of Religion", Nov. 20, 1728
"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good
works ... I mean real good works ... not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing ...
or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise
men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity."--- Benjamin Franklin,
Works, Vol. VII, p. 75
"If we look back into history for the character of the
present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns
been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians
thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one
another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in
the Romish Church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. They found it wrong in
Bishops, but fell into the practice themselves both there (England) and in New
England."--- Benjamin Franklin
“A Firehouse is more useful than a church.” ~ Benjamin
Franklin.
James Madison:
“In no instance have the churches been guardians of the
liberties of the people.” ~James Madison.
"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.
John Adams:
"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and
is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales,
legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have
made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" --- John Adams,
letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the
most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has
preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has
produced!" --- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson
"What havoc has been made of books through every
century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by
the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the forty wagon-loads of Hebrew
manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because suspected of
heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the stake, the
axe, the halter and the guillotine." --- John Adams, letter to John Taylor
"The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly
monopolized learning. And ever since the Reformation, when or where has existed
a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest
billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality, is
patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn
truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest
proof, and you will find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm
about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes." --- John
Adams, letter to John Taylor
Thomas Jefferson:
"The clergy...believe that any portion of power
confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes.
And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal
hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all
they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." --Thomas
Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800.
"In every country and every age, the priest has been
hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have
perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon,
unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their
purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson, to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
"Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men,
women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt,
tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards
uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools,
and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the
earth." --- Thomas Jefferson, from "Notes on Virginia"
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under
which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and
call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even
the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the
homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." --- Thomas Jefferson,
letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to
pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is
three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this
constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests." ---
Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1803
"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great
reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by
those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine
for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and
State." --- Thomas Jefferson to S. Kercheval, 1810
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a
priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest
grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will
always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson to
Baron von Humboldt, 1813
"On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral
principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been
quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions
unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the
comprehension of the human mind." --- Thomas Jefferson to Carey, 1816
"But the greatest of all reformers of the depraved
religion of his own country, was Jesus of Nazareth. Abstracting what is really
his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre
from the dross of his biographers, and as separable from that as the diamond
from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system of the most sublime
morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man. The establishment of the
innocent and genuine character of this benevolent morality, and the rescuing it
from the imputation of imposture, which has resulted from artificial systems,
invented by ultra-Christian sects (The immaculate conception of Jesus, his
deification, the creation of the world by him, his miraculous powers, his
resurrection and visible ascension, his corporeal presence in the Eucharist,
the Trinity; original sin, atonement, regeneration, election, orders of the
Hierarchy, etc.) is a most desirable object." --- Thomas Jefferson to W.
Short, Oct. 31, 1819
"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus
Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of
Spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentence toward forgiveness of sin;
I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it. Among the sayings and
discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine
imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others,
again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism
and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should
have proceeded from the same being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the
dross; restore him to the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of
some, the roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and
imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corruptor of the
doctrines of Jesus." --- Thomas Jefferson to W. Short, 1820
"The office of reformer of the superstitions of a
nation, is ever more dangerous. Jesus had to work on the perilous confines of
reason and religion; and a step to the right or left might place him within the
grasp of the priests of the superstition, a bloodthirsty race, as cruel and
remorseless as the being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of
Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel. That Jesus did not mean to
impose himself on mankind as the son of God, physically speaking, I have been
convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore."
--- Thomas Jefferson to Story, Aug. 4, 1820
"The truth is, that the greatest enemies of the
doctrine of Jesus are those, calling themselves the expositors of them, who
have perverted them to the structure of a system of fancy, absolutely incomprehensible,
and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come, when
the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the
womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva
in the brain of Jupiter." --- Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, Apr. 11,
1823
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common
law.” ~ Thomas Jefferson in an 1814 letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper.
James Madison:
"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments
had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual
tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been
seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been
the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the
public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A
just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."
--- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical
establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion,
have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal
establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or
less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility
in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." --- James
Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785
George Washington:
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli included this statement:
"the government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the
Christian religion." President George Washington approved the treaty and
the Senate supported it unanimously.
George Washington never said anything personally about
Christianity. He was a deist and let people believe what they wish.
Thomas Paine:
Every person, of whatever religious denomination he may be,
is a DEIST in the first article of his Creed. Deism, from the Latin word Deus,
God, is the belief of a God, and this belief is the first article of every
man's creed.
It is on this article, universally consented to by all
mankind, that the Deist builds his church, and here he rests. Whenever we step
aside from this article, by mixing it with articles of human invention, we
wander into a labyrinth of uncertainty and fable, and become exposed to every
kind of imposition by pretenders to revelation.
The Persian shows the Zend-Avesta of Zoroaster, the lawgiver
of Persia, and calls it the divine law; the Bramin shows the Shaster, revealed,
he says, by God to Brama, and given to him out of a cloud; the Jew shows what
he calls the law of Moses, given, he says, by God, on the Mount Sinai; the
Christian shows a collection of books and epistles, written by nobody knows
who, and called the New Testament; and the Mahometan shows the Koran, given, he
says, by God to Mahomet: each of these calls itself revealed religion, and the
only true Word of God, and this the followers of each profess to believe from
the habit of education, and each believes the others are imposed upon.
But when the divine gift of reason begins to expand itself
in the mind and calls man to reflection, he then reads and contemplates God and
His works, and not in the books pretending to be revelation. The creation is
the Bible of the true believer in God. Everything in this vast volume inspires
him with sublime ideas of the Creator. The little and paltry, and often
obscene, tales of the Bible sink into wretchedness when put in comparison with
this mighty work.
The Deist needs none of those tricks and shows called
miracles to confirm his faith, for what can be a greater miracle than the
creation itself, and his own existence?
There is a happiness in Deism, when rightly understood, that
is not to be found in any other system of religion. All other systems have
something in them that either shock our reason, or are repugnant to it, and
man, if he thinks at all, must stifle his reason in order to force himself to
believe them.
But in Deism our reason and our belief become happily
united. The wonderful structure of the universe, and everything we behold in
the system of the creation, prove to us, far better than books can do, the
existence of a God, and at the same time proclaim His attributes.
It is by the exercise of our reason that we are enabled to
contemplate God in His works, and imitate Him in His ways. When we see His care
and goodness extended over all His creatures, it teaches us our duty toward
each other, while it calls forth our gratitude to Him. It is by forgetting God
in His works, and running after the books of pretended revelation, that man has
wandered from the straight path of duty and happiness, and become by turns the
victim of doubt and the dupe of delusion.
Except in the first article in the Christian creed, that of
believing in God, there is not an article in it but fills the mind with doubt
as to the truth of it, the instant man begins to think. Now every article in a
creed that is necessary to the happiness and salvation of man, ought to be as
evident to the reason and comprehension of man as the first article is, for God
has not given us reason for the purpose of confounding us, but that we should
use it for our own happiness and His glory.
The truth of the first article is proved by God Himself, and
is universal; for the creation is of itself demonstration of the existence of a
Creator. But the second article, that of God's begetting a son, is not proved
in like manner, and stands on no other authority than that of a tale.
Certain books in what is called the New Testament tell us
that Joseph dreamed that the angel told him so, (Matthew i, 20): "And
behold the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph, in a dream, saying, Joseph,
thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is
conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."
The evidence upon this article bears no comparison with the
evidence upon the first article, and therefore is not entitled to the same
credit, and ought not to be made an article in a creed, because the evidence of
it is defective, and what evidence there is, is doubtful and suspicious. We do
not believe the first article on the authority of books, whether called Bibles
or Korans, nor yet on the visionary authority of dreams, but on the authority
of God's own visible works in the creation.
The nations who never heard of such books, nor of such
people as Jews, Christians, or Mahometans, believe the existence of a God as
fully as we do, because it is self-evident. The work of man's hands is a proof
of the existence of man as fully as his personal appearance would be.
When we see a watch, we have as positive evidence of the
existence of a watchmaker, as if we saw him; and in like manner the creation is
evidence to our reason and our senses of the existence of a Creator. But there
is nothing in the works of God that is evidence that He begat a son, nor
anything in the system of creation that corroborates such an idea, and,
therefore, we are not authorized in believing it.
What truth there may be in the story that Mary, before she
was married to Joseph, was kept by one of the Roman soldiers, and was with
child by him, I leave to be settled between the Jews and Christians. The story
however has probability on its side, for her husband Joseph suspected and was
jealous of her, and was going to put her away. "Joseph, her husband, being
a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was going to put her
away, privately." (Matt. i, 19).
I have already said that "whenever we step aside from
the first article (that of believing in God), we wander into a labyrinth of
uncertainty," and here is evidence of the justness of the remark, for it
is impossible for us to decide who was Jesus Christ's father.
But presumption can assume anything, and therefore it makes
Joseph's dream to be of equal anthority with the existence of God, and to help
it on calls it revelation. It is impossible for the mind of man in its serious
moments, however it may have been entangled by education, or beset by
priestcraft, not to stand still and doubt upon the truth of this article and of
its creed.
But this is not all. The second article of the Christian
creed having brought the son of Mary into the world (and this Mary, according
to the chronological tables, was a girl of only fifteen years of age when this
son was born), the next article goes on to account for his being begotten,
which was, that when he grew a man he should be put to death, to expiate, they
say, the sin that Adam brought into the world by eating an apple or some kind
of forbidden fruit.
But though this is the creed of the Church of Rome, from
whence the Protestants borrowed it, it is a creed which that Church has
manufactured of itself, for it is not contained in nor derived from, the book
called the New Testament.
The four books called the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John, which give, or pretend to give, the birth, sayings, life, preaching,
and death of Jesus Christ, make no mention of what is called the fall of man;
nor is the name of Adam to be found in any of those books, which it certainly
would be if the writers of them believed that Jesus was begotten, born, and
died for the purpose of redeeming mankind from the sin which Adam had brought
into the world. Jesus never speaks of Adam himself, of the garden of Eden, nor
of what is called the fall of man.
But the Church of Rome having set up its new religion, which
it called Christianity [but which in truth is Athanasianism/Constantinism], and
invented the creed which it named the Apostles's Creed, in which it calls Jesus
the only son of God, conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary;
things of which it is impossible that man or woman can have any idea, and
consequently no belief but in words; and for which there is no authority but
the idle story of Joseph's dream in the first chapter of Matthew, which any
designing imposter or foolish fanatic might make.
It then manufactured the allegories in the book of Genesis
into fact, and the allegorical tree of life and the tree of knowledge into real
trees, contrary to the belief of the first Christians, and for which there is
not the least authority in any of the books of the New Testament; for in none
of them is there any mention made of such place as the Garden of Eden, nor of
anything that is said to have happened there.
But the Church of Rome could not erect the person called
Jesus into a Savior of the world without making the allegories in the book of
Genesis into fact, though the New Testament, as before observed, gives no
authority for it. All at once the allegorical tree of knowledge became,
according to the Church, a real tree, the fruit of it real fruit, and the
eating of it sinful.
As priestcraft was always the enemy of knowledge, because
priestcraft supports itself by keeping people in delusion and ignorance, it was
consistent with its policy to make the acquisition of knowledge a real sin.
The Church of Rome having done this, it then brings forward
Jesus the son of Mary as suffering death to redeem mankind from sin, which
Adam, it says, had brought into the world by eating the fruit of the tree of
knowledge. But as it is impossible for reason to believe such a story, because
it can see no reason for it, nor have any evidence of it, the Church then tells
us we must not regard our reason, but must believe, as it were, and that
through thick and thin, as if God had given man reason like a plaything, or a
rattle, on purpose to make fun of him.
Reason is the forbidden tree of priestcraft, and may serve
to explain the allegory of the forbidden tree of knowledge, for we may
reasonably suppose the allegory had some meaning and application at the time it
was invented. It was the practice of the Eastern nations to convey their
meaning by allegory, and relate it in the manner of fact. Jesus followed the
same method, yet nobody ever supposed the allegory or parable of the rich man
and Lazarus, the Prodigal Son, the ten Virgins, etc., were facts.
Why then should the tree of knowledge, which is far more
romantic in idea than the parables in the New Testament are, be supposed to be
a real tree? The answer to this is, because the Church could not make its
new-fangled system, which it called Christianity, hold together without it. To
have made Christ to die on account of an allegorical tree would have been too
barefaced a fable.
But the account, as it is given of Jesus in the New
Testament, even visionary as it is, does not support the creed of the Church
that he died for the redemption of the world. According to that account he was
crucified and buried on the Friday, and rose again in good health on the Sunday
morning, for we do not hear that he was sick. This cannot be called dying, and
is rather making fun of death than suffering it.
There are thousands of men and women also, who if they could
know they should come back again in good health in about thirty-six hours,
would prefer such kind of death for the sake of the experiment, and to know
what the other side of the grave was. Why then should that which would be only
a voyage of curious amusement to us, be magnified into merit and suffering in
him? If a God, he could not suffer death, for immortality cannot die, and as a
man his death could be no more than the death of any other person.
The belief of the redemption of Jesus Christ is altogether
an invention of the Church of Rome, not the doctrine of the New Testament. What
the writers of the New Testament attempted to prove by the story of Jesus is
the resurrection of the same body from the grave, which was the belief of the
Pharisees, in opposition to the Sadducees (a sect of Jews) who denied it.
Paul, who was brought up a Pharisee, labors hard at this for
it was the creed of his own Pharisaical Church: I Corinthians xv is full of
supposed cases and assertions about the resurrection of the same body, but
there is not a word in it about redemption. This chapter makes part of the
funeral service of the Episcopal Church. The dogma of the redemption is the
fable of priestcraft invented since the time the New Testament was compiled,
and the agreeable delusion of it suited with the depravity of immoral livers.
When men are taught to ascribe all their crimes and vices to the temptations of
the devil, and to believe that Jesus, by his death, rubs all off, and pays
their passage to heaven gratis, they become as careless in morals as a
spendthrift would be of money, were he told that his father had engaged to pay
off all his scores.
It is a doctrine not only dangerous to morals in this world,
but to our happiness in the next world, because it holds out such a cheap,
easy, and lazy way of getting to heaven, as has a tendency to induce men to hug
the delusion of it to their own injury.
But there are times when men have serious thoughts, and it
is at such times, when they begin to think, that they begin to doubt the truth
of the Christian religion; and well they may, for it is too fanciful and too
full of conjecture, inconsistency, improbability and irrationality, to afford
consolation to the thoughtful man. His reason revolts against his creed. He
sees that none of its articles are proved, or can be proved.
He may believe that such a person as is called Jesus (for
Christ was not his name) was born and grew to be a man, because it is no more
than a natural and probable case. But who is to prove he is the son of God,
that he was begotten by the Holy Ghost? Of these things there can be no proof;
and that which admits not of proof, and is against the laws of probability and
the order of nature, which God Himself has established, is not an object for
belief. God has not given man reason to embarrass him, but to prevent his being
imposed upon.
He may believe that Jesus was crucified, because many others
were crucified, but who is to prove he was crucified for the sins of the world?
This article has no evidence, not even in the New Testament; and if it had,
where is the proof that the New Testament, in relating things neither probable
nor provable, is to be believed as true?
When an article in a creed does not admit of proof nor of
probability, the salvo is to call it revelation; but this is only putting one
difficulty in the place of another, for it is as impossible to prove a thing to
be revelation as it is to prove that Mary was gotten with child by the Holy
Ghost.
Here it is that the religion of Deism is superior to the
Christian Religion. It is free from all those invented and torturing articles
that shock our reason or injure our humanity, and with which the Christian
religion abounds. Its creed is pure, and sublimely simple. It believes in God,
and there it rests.
It honors reason as the choicest gift of God to man, and the
faculty by which he is enabled to contemplate the power, wisdom and goodness of
the Creator displayed in the creation; and reposing itself on His protection,
both here and hereafter, it avoids all presumptuous beliefs, and rejects, as
the fabulous inventions of men, all books pretending to revelation. -Thomas
Paine, "Of The Religion Of Deism Compared With The Christian
Religion"
The Louisiana Governor Monster "Govvie" He's real! |
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"How are we to interpret the Bible? Although they place such importance on it, the fundamentalists, in my experience, strangely misuse the Bible. Actually the term "Fundamentalist" is a misnomer. The more proper term is "inerrantists", those who believe that the Bible is not only the divinely inspired word of God but the actual transcribed, unaltered word of God, and that it is subject to only one kind of literal interpretation, namely theirs. Such thinking, to my mind, only impoverishes the Bible."
"How are we to interpret the Bible? Although they place such importance on it, the fundamentalists, in my experience, strangely misuse the Bible. Actually the term "Fundamentalist" is a misnomer. The more proper term is "inerrantists", those who believe that the Bible is not only the divinely inspired word of God but the actual transcribed, unaltered word of God, and that it is subject to only one kind of literal interpretation, namely theirs. Such thinking, to my mind, only impoverishes the Bible."
- M. Scott Peck, MD, psychiatrist and theologian, in his
1978 book "Farther along the Road Less Traveled"
May you all continue to believe what you believe. Just don’t
force your own personal beliefs upon others and don’t try to use them to deny
anyone else their inalienable rights. Providing contraception does not harm
your ability to practice your religion, you self-righteous hypocrite. But it
does cause harm to those you deny it to.
Good day.
No comments:
Post a Comment