In my view, anyone who puts their religiosity forward as something that qualifies them for public office, is unfit for that office by definition. His claims about Christians knowing God and truth in matters of religion are absurd on their face, as these are things that cannot be known. Truth in matters of religion is the opinion that has prevailed. Facts and logic have nothing to do with it. His claims fly in the face of history as well. Christians acting in the name of Christianity have inflicted every imaginable horror on their fellow humans.
For my part, I'm sick of politicians claiming that 'god' told them to run. Curiously, we never hear that from them when they lose. Guess they don't appreciate their god's dark humor.
I agree with you. I would expand that the Constitution says there will be no religious test for public office and I believe that means there should be a prohibition on talking about religion at all. Christians should be allowed to run for office but they should not be allowed to bring their religion to the floor.
I can't upvote, or I would. While I agree in sentiment, I'm not sure how that would square with the First Amendment. Article VI of the Constitution that bans religious tests predates the Bill of Rights, and that says a lot about how the founders felt about the issue.
Has everyone noticed that all sides references the constitution yet interpret it differently? I never forget that the constitution was written by wealthy, slave owning WHITE MEN to protect and make “Devine” their wealth and power. I say that as a white man.
We're supposed to be up in arms and frightened that the brown people will replace us. I think the best thing for humanity is when we're all mutts. It's not like skin color really indicates anything other than melanin content.
I agree. Scientists—unless highly religious— now agree that race is not a real difference in species and historians seem to agree that race and color was rationalizations, primarily in America, to justify slavery on religious grounds.
In Robert Silverberg's novella, 𝘚𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘉𝘺𝘻𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘶𝘮 set in the 50th century, there has been so much mixing that everybody has the same skin color. Which is not white.
Love you point this out! I watch a lot of TV on this stuff. Amazing all the mixing over millennias. I love to see what DNA has taught us, because the primary theory for years was that homo sapien sapien killed off neanderthal- and that Neanderthal was completely stupid, which they were not.
We now know that Neanderthal is alive and well thanks to DNA.......alive in us modern humans.
But don't tell the christian nationalists that.......blasphemy. Lol
Not only that, (but that is a major point of reference to make), but the vernacular of the time, takes a bit of parsing to figure out the statement they are making, one has to be a bit educated to understand it. Same as the bible. you can read for context, and understand it, but they lack good reading comprehensive skills, so they believe any old bullshit they are told it means.
I’m not sure what point you are making. One can have good comprehensive reading skills, read bullshit, comprehend it,believe it and still make bad conclusions. I do not think we disagree, it is just that I’m not understanding exactly what you are saying.
I’ll give you an example. When the Orange Ape was first running, on a forum someone referenced his actions in being a crook, by using the biblical reference” By their fruit you shall know them.” One old lady trumper said” well his kids seem pretty good so he’s fine.” Deeds not his fucking offspring!
I would like them to include in the oath of office that they accept that the US is a secular nation and that they 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒏𝒐𝒕 try to establish their religious beliefs into law.
Please ask him to have his god come and present a seminar on god’s truth so that we can all sit in and listen. Hopefully we will all be able to submit questions so as to clear up any confusion.
I think it's perfectly clear who isn't fit for office. The most prominent christians are hateful dishonest bigots, and the problem is way the eff too many see that as a positive.
We don't want be people who believe that material problems have material causes to be in any position of power. Just think about it, if a person believes that a material problem has a material causes they are going to the demand a material solution, and we cannot have that. Material solutions cost money, time and effort, and that sucks. Immaterial solutions have no such cost and thus are better. What would you rather do? Spend billions and fundamentally change your lifestyle to combat global warming, or would you rather say a prayer and be done with it?
Guns solve problems. Problem: Burglar? Solution: Guns. Problem: Fox stealing all your chickens? Solution: Guns. Problem: Stuck lid on the pickle jar. Solution: Guns. Problem: Feeling afraid and alone because society is changing and groups of people that you feel you are innately better than seem to be improving while you are stuck in a rut of mediocrity? Answer: Guns.
In college, I had to do an art project by making a plaster mold and using it to make a piece out of multiples, one of the instructions was to make an ideological statement. I chose to create a mold of a squirt gun that (though it was a brightly colored transparent plastic) resembled an actual pistol in details. I poured the mold in porcelain slip, and used different materials including newspaper clippings and china paints to decorate the pieces with deaths of people and other incidents that involved guns. Then I broke them all and pieced them back together with bandaids. I then placed them on small pedestals to represent how we put guns above every other right. The statement was that guns are not a solution to systemic or even acute problems, but bandaids to hide true issues in society, generally causing more harm than good. One of the pieces was themed with specifically political speech, meaning many politicians claiming that unfettered access to guns is imperative is just a bandaid measure to ensure votes.
Sorry, no. They were lost a long time ago and the idea was better than the execution anyway. Besides, it is too difficult to post photos here that aren’t already on the internet. I wish I did have a pic or two of it though.
Awesome awesome movie!!! I often think of that scene and laugh. Also when she's at home working out, jumping on the trampoline with her little weights and Ed comes home wanting his dinner- and she's basically yeah fuck you Ed.
Yes, and “I’ll pray for you” weapons grade evil wished upon your head. I live in the south and learned the euphemisms the sweeter something sounded, the worse it meant.
Every time an xtian loudmouth in power lips off about atheists and others outside their anthill, I remember what another Christian thought.
"As National Socialists, we believe in a Godly worldview."
"We believe in a God Almighty who stands above us; He created the earth, the Fatherland and the Volk, and He has sent us the Fuhrer. Any human being who does not believe in God should be considered arrogant, megalomaniacal and stupid and thus not suited for the S.S."
Heinrr.. Henry Shimmler, most people don't know this, but they called him Henry, Great man. Terrible man. Did some great things and not so great things. No one ever heard of him, until I started talking about him. He came up to me, Henry, big tough man, with a tear in his eye and said, no one has ever been as persecuted as you have been. Bigly persecution. Unfair. Terrible shame. Soro's backed DA, you know that DA tried to put windmills on the statue of liberty. Big beautiful liberty, you wonder what's under that dress. Killed so many birds. But Henry didn't cry. No. Only cried when he heard what they did to me.
1. Do you believe that it is not possible for anyone to understand what truth is, or human nature, or the nature of government, etc without first being a Christian?
2. If your answer is yes to my first question, who is a Christian? There are many sects of Christianity, from Catholics and Orthodox to Mainline Protestant to Evangelicals and Pentecostals to Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, among others. Many of these subdivisions do not recognize the others as being Christian. Do you accept them all as Christian, or only a subset?
3. Do you wish to amend the US constitution to eliminate the clause in Article VI prohibiting religious tests, thus paving the way to require a profession of Christianity before being allowed to serve in a public office?
4. Would you repeal or modify the religion clauses of the first amendment so the government could at the least favor heavily and at the most mandate Christianity over every other religious viewpoint?
5. Could you give an example of a "tough decision" during "tough times" that can ONLY be made by someone who you w o uld accept as a Christian?
6. These remarks suggest that you might believe that to be a good Christian, one must vote only for Republicans, and that only good Christians should be in the government. If you could, would you mandate one party rule?
Good questions but I have a problem with an assumption you may be making. You have reasonable—rational—questions. However, would you support my thesis that presenting rational questions to an irrational man would only be an exercise in futility?
Donald Trump is a professed Christian. Do you see a convicted felon as fit for public office? Do you feel Trump understands what truth is? Understands the nature of man? Understands the nature of government? Understands the nature of "God?"
We've seen over and over that it is Christians...Christian Nationalists, in particular...that are unfit for office in this secular nation. You mention Washington, Madison and Lincoln without having the slightest understanding of how they felt about your religion. You are willfully blind and deaf.
Biden campaign has been flooding me with e-mails after the verdict. If it weren't for the lack of halfway decent politicians in this state, I'd cut Beto off for selling my e-mail address to every friggin' Democrat in the country. I get e-mail from Pennsylvania, Georgia, and California. In addition to the ones from Texas and now Biden.
Oregon Legislature investigates Oregon Legislature, finds Oregon Legislature did everything right and nothing wrong. Also Oregon Legislature deserves a raise.
Not after Scotty sabotaged the Excelsior's transwarp computer. Amazing how Scotty was never charged by Starfleet for that act. Oh well. Luckily, that ship would eventually get a better captain. :)
(I think transwarp drive was a failed experiment after repeated attempts to make it work)
When you save the homeworld from a hostile alien probe that wanted to speak to some whales, a lot gets forgiven. The punishment Kirk got was a reward and they knew it.
Do you know why he said that? He was catholic, always deeply suspect by protestants due to a whole host [haha] of reasons. He had to let everyone believe his politics wouldn't be decided by the pope. The catholics and protestants/evangelicals got all buddy buddy when they bonded over their hateful coordinated attacks on abortion.
Those who would break down the barriers between church and state always seem to operate under the assumption it will be their tribe calling the shots for everyone else.
You know what they say: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one." Maybe so, but SOME assholes are a bit worse than others, and Reschke clearly qualifies as such. He seems to think that Christians constitute the only religious segment of the population qualified to hold office, yet when he's called on that spurious statement, he backtracks with the speed of a point guard on defense, and this doesn't mention the flak he's taken from others in the Oregon House.
So congratulations, Reschke. You just shoved your foot in your pie hole, up to the kneecap. Good luck finding anyone from the other side of the aisle to help you extricate it.
Would that this sort of comment were anything unusual. Despite the near-constant cries of persecution, Christians in the US are the group most likely to treat non-members as second class and get away with it. It's become painfully clear that in the average Christian mindset, so long as no Christians were harmed, then no sin was committed and absolution can be had for just pretending to be sorry.
My personal disappointment in Christian behavior like this is one of the major reasons I stopped attending church and eventually became an atheist. Nothing tells people just how much you don't care about them like refusing to insist on an actual apology, contrition, and reparations when they get hurt by one of your own. This sort of garbage is exactly why so many people refuse to believe Christians when they insist they know more about love and forgiveness than anyone else; they never seem to practice what they're preaching. Rep. Reschke isn't sorry, we all know it, and the government isn't going to do a thing about it because his religious tribe is in power right now. If Christians actually cared about others they'd be on the warpath about this, but I assume we all hear the crickets by now.
"You want somebody who understands what truth is and understands the nature of man, the nature of government, and the nature of God.”"
I would argue the last people who fit that bill are the fundamentalist Christians. They are the ones who close their minds the tightest, who are least educated regarding human anatomy and psychology, and are willingly being deceived regarding the nature of our government by folks like David (the liar) Barton. Their perception of God is the most skewed, believing that He is all good all the time, while He (as described in the Bible) and they delight in committing atrocities.
I think that his statement in the interview, while abhorrent, does not rise to the level of harassment or creating a hostile work environment, not in the way the flight attendant in yesterday's article did. The FFRF was reasonable in their letter requesting he apologize or step down, which would be what a decent person should do, and he did neither, making him a less than decent person. I do not think that the committee was wrong in their decision, not if they didn't have evidence of him doing things at work that targeted the minorities. How the minorities choose to navigate their interactions with him are a result of his words, a consequence to his decision to publicize his true feelings about them, but until he actually treats them differently from his Christian peers, and I am sure he will, it needs to be well documented and this is the first incident. I hope they nail him to the wall with the very next slip up. He's certainly deplorable.
I hope that the people of Oregon, being the progressive, tolerant, and diverse people they are, will see him as the antithesis of democracy that he is and vote him out of office real soon. Perhaps a recall election is in order? Though, if no one but we few are talking about his words, then it will get lost to time and he will continue to be a villainous politician. The best course of action is to bring attention to his views in the media, don't let it be forgotten.
He's probably always lying, never a true statement leaves his mouth. He only believes whatever will do him the most good, and for only as long as it does him good.
I find this guy's opinions abhorrent and even dangerous. But they're his opinions, and, therefore, protected by the First Amendment. The Committee on Conduct could have and should have reprimanded him, however, for conduct unbecoming an elected representative in the form of religious bigotry.
People like Reschke love to invoke the Founders without ever reading what they actually had to say or what they publicly professed to believe, or in Washington's case, carefully avoided publicizing about their beliefs.
I would remind him of a few quotes from James Madison, the author of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In his fight against religious establishments with Patrick Henry, Madison made the following points in opposition to Henry's bill requiring taxpayer dollars to pay for the support of Anglican ministers [Henry's bill failed, BTW]:
"The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.”
"If “all men are by nature equally free and independent,” all men are to be considered as entering into Society on equal conditions; as relinquishing no more, and therefore retaining no less, one than another, of their natural rights. Above all are they to be considered as retaining an “equal title to the free exercise of Religion according to the dictates of Conscience.”
"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?"
All quotes are from Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments. The tyranny of the christian majority was nothing new to the Founders, who saw its danger and tried to prevent its influence in the Constitution itself and in the First Amendment. Facts which fly in the face of the christian nationalism being promoted by people like Reschke.
In my view, anyone who puts their religiosity forward as something that qualifies them for public office, is unfit for that office by definition. His claims about Christians knowing God and truth in matters of religion are absurd on their face, as these are things that cannot be known. Truth in matters of religion is the opinion that has prevailed. Facts and logic have nothing to do with it. His claims fly in the face of history as well. Christians acting in the name of Christianity have inflicted every imaginable horror on their fellow humans.
For my part, I'm sick of politicians claiming that 'god' told them to run. Curiously, we never hear that from them when they lose. Guess they don't appreciate their god's dark humor.
Funny how the people claiming God spoke to them never say God told them they're dead wrong, and need to shut the hell up.
And somehow, he always tells them to do exactly what they wanted to do anyway. Weird, eh?
As predictable as the sunrise.
Confirmation bias......
God tells them what they wanted to hear.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6ca119ffc634b8c092e5848874d01cbd9b49ef2b96504f628c020acc93ace7f5.jpg
To be fair: if God did, and they listened... you wouldn't hear from them, would you? Because they would have shut the hell up. ;)
God told Josh Hawley to run (like hell)
The Dems should be holding the Haulin' Hawley 5K every year to mark the anniversary.
I agree with you. I would expand that the Constitution says there will be no religious test for public office and I believe that means there should be a prohibition on talking about religion at all. Christians should be allowed to run for office but they should not be allowed to bring their religion to the floor.
I can't upvote, or I would. While I agree in sentiment, I'm not sure how that would square with the First Amendment. Article VI of the Constitution that bans religious tests predates the Bill of Rights, and that says a lot about how the founders felt about the issue.
Up vote. I can click "LIKE" but I didn't.
Has everyone noticed that all sides references the constitution yet interpret it differently? I never forget that the constitution was written by wealthy, slave owning WHITE MEN to protect and make “Devine” their wealth and power. I say that as a white man.
We're supposed to be up in arms and frightened that the brown people will replace us. I think the best thing for humanity is when we're all mutts. It's not like skin color really indicates anything other than melanin content.
I agree. Scientists—unless highly religious— now agree that race is not a real difference in species and historians seem to agree that race and color was rationalizations, primarily in America, to justify slavery on religious grounds.
In Robert Silverberg's novella, 𝘚𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘉𝘺𝘻𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘶𝘮 set in the 50th century, there has been so much mixing that everybody has the same skin color. Which is not white.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_to_Byzantium_(novella)
Thank you!
Love you point this out! I watch a lot of TV on this stuff. Amazing all the mixing over millennias. I love to see what DNA has taught us, because the primary theory for years was that homo sapien sapien killed off neanderthal- and that Neanderthal was completely stupid, which they were not.
We now know that Neanderthal is alive and well thanks to DNA.......alive in us modern humans.
But don't tell the christian nationalists that.......blasphemy. Lol
Everyone loves sex.......lol
Let me know if you want to talk Sasquatch.... 😄
Not only that, (but that is a major point of reference to make), but the vernacular of the time, takes a bit of parsing to figure out the statement they are making, one has to be a bit educated to understand it. Same as the bible. you can read for context, and understand it, but they lack good reading comprehensive skills, so they believe any old bullshit they are told it means.
I’m not sure what point you are making. One can have good comprehensive reading skills, read bullshit, comprehend it,believe it and still make bad conclusions. I do not think we disagree, it is just that I’m not understanding exactly what you are saying.
I’ll give you an example. When the Orange Ape was first running, on a forum someone referenced his actions in being a crook, by using the biblical reference” By their fruit you shall know them.” One old lady trumper said” well his kids seem pretty good so he’s fine.” Deeds not his fucking offspring!
"No religious test" would include not disqualifying regardless of any personal religious perspective. It's that goose sauce also applying to gander.
(Not sayin' I gotta like it. 🙂)
I would like them to include in the oath of office that they accept that the US is a secular nation and that they 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒏𝒐𝒕 try to establish their religious beliefs into law.
Please ask him to have his god come and present a seminar on god’s truth so that we can all sit in and listen. Hopefully we will all be able to submit questions so as to clear up any confusion.
I think it's perfectly clear who isn't fit for office. The most prominent christians are hateful dishonest bigots, and the problem is way the eff too many see that as a positive.
The fact that he deeply believes in the supernatural, superstition, and myth says much about Rep. Reschke. It tells me that HE is not fit to lead.
We don't want be people who believe that material problems have material causes to be in any position of power. Just think about it, if a person believes that a material problem has a material causes they are going to the demand a material solution, and we cannot have that. Material solutions cost money, time and effort, and that sucks. Immaterial solutions have no such cost and thus are better. What would you rather do? Spend billions and fundamentally change your lifestyle to combat global warming, or would you rather say a prayer and be done with it?
The epitome of 'immaterial solutions' has got to be the 'thought and prayers' offered by every christian after mass shootings, which continue apace.
Guns save lives. Or so a bumper sticker insisted in the McDonald's drive-thru.
Guns solve problems. Problem: Burglar? Solution: Guns. Problem: Fox stealing all your chickens? Solution: Guns. Problem: Stuck lid on the pickle jar. Solution: Guns. Problem: Feeling afraid and alone because society is changing and groups of people that you feel you are innately better than seem to be improving while you are stuck in a rut of mediocrity? Answer: Guns.
In college, I had to do an art project by making a plaster mold and using it to make a piece out of multiples, one of the instructions was to make an ideological statement. I chose to create a mold of a squirt gun that (though it was a brightly colored transparent plastic) resembled an actual pistol in details. I poured the mold in porcelain slip, and used different materials including newspaper clippings and china paints to decorate the pieces with deaths of people and other incidents that involved guns. Then I broke them all and pieced them back together with bandaids. I then placed them on small pedestals to represent how we put guns above every other right. The statement was that guns are not a solution to systemic or even acute problems, but bandaids to hide true issues in society, generally causing more harm than good. One of the pieces was themed with specifically political speech, meaning many politicians claiming that unfettered access to guns is imperative is just a bandaid measure to ensure votes.
Any pictures?
Sorry, no. They were lost a long time ago and the idea was better than the execution anyway. Besides, it is too difficult to post photos here that aren’t already on the internet. I wish I did have a pic or two of it though.
I’m surprised you were not picketed by MAGA Maggots.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Is that you Homer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuG9kUiRC_I
Don't forget about the two cars but only one parking spot in front of Target.
"Face it girls, I'm older and I have more insurance."
Awesome awesome movie!!! I often think of that scene and laugh. Also when she's at home working out, jumping on the trampoline with her little weights and Ed comes home wanting his dinner- and she's basically yeah fuck you Ed.
To quote Dougie O'Connell, AKA General Disarray, "Simpsons did it!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cartridge_Family
You forgot to mention that guns also solve acne and erectile dysfunction.
Guns may solve the insecurities around erectile dysfunction, but Cialis actually does something about it.
Well then, it must be true. They can't put out bumper stickers that aren't true.
GMTA!
Thus their mantra "thoughts and prayers" which essentially means fuck you, we won't fix it.
Yes....just like "have a blessed day" after they disagree with you about something = fuck you southern style
Yes, and “I’ll pray for you” weapons grade evil wished upon your head. I live in the south and learned the euphemisms the sweeter something sounded, the worse it meant.
http://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/
https://whatever.scalzi.com/2016/06/12/thoughts-and-prayers/
Every time an xtian loudmouth in power lips off about atheists and others outside their anthill, I remember what another Christian thought.
"As National Socialists, we believe in a Godly worldview."
"We believe in a God Almighty who stands above us; He created the earth, the Fatherland and the Volk, and He has sent us the Fuhrer. Any human being who does not believe in God should be considered arrogant, megalomaniacal and stupid and thus not suited for the S.S."
-- Heinrich Himmler
Trump would agree.
Heinrr.. Henry Shimmler, most people don't know this, but they called him Henry, Great man. Terrible man. Did some great things and not so great things. No one ever heard of him, until I started talking about him. He came up to me, Henry, big tough man, with a tear in his eye and said, no one has ever been as persecuted as you have been. Bigly persecution. Unfair. Terrible shame. Soro's backed DA, you know that DA tried to put windmills on the statue of liberty. Big beautiful liberty, you wonder what's under that dress. Killed so many birds. But Henry didn't cry. No. Only cried when he heard what they did to me.
That is freakishly good. Now I’m worried about you.
🎯
"𝑇ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑦𝑝𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑠,” 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑘𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑒𝑑. “𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡. 𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑡. 𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑎 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚. 𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑏𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑡ℎ 𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑛, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑜𝑑.”
“𝐼𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠, 𝑦𝑜𝑢’𝑟𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑎 𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 𝑤𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔,” ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑑. “𝐼𝑛 𝑂𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑛 … 𝑤𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑑𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠, 𝑢𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑦, 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑡’𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑.”
Mr Reschke:
Some clarifying questions:
1. Do you believe that it is not possible for anyone to understand what truth is, or human nature, or the nature of government, etc without first being a Christian?
2. If your answer is yes to my first question, who is a Christian? There are many sects of Christianity, from Catholics and Orthodox to Mainline Protestant to Evangelicals and Pentecostals to Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, among others. Many of these subdivisions do not recognize the others as being Christian. Do you accept them all as Christian, or only a subset?
3. Do you wish to amend the US constitution to eliminate the clause in Article VI prohibiting religious tests, thus paving the way to require a profession of Christianity before being allowed to serve in a public office?
4. Would you repeal or modify the religion clauses of the first amendment so the government could at the least favor heavily and at the most mandate Christianity over every other religious viewpoint?
5. Could you give an example of a "tough decision" during "tough times" that can ONLY be made by someone who you w o uld accept as a Christian?
6. These remarks suggest that you might believe that to be a good Christian, one must vote only for Republicans, and that only good Christians should be in the government. If you could, would you mandate one party rule?
Good questions but I have a problem with an assumption you may be making. You have reasonable—rational—questions. However, would you support my thesis that presenting rational questions to an irrational man would only be an exercise in futility?
The answer to six is yes, he would.
It wouldn't be one party very long.
So, Mr. Reschke...
Donald Trump is a professed Christian. Do you see a convicted felon as fit for public office? Do you feel Trump understands what truth is? Understands the nature of man? Understands the nature of government? Understands the nature of "God?"
We've seen over and over that it is Christians...Christian Nationalists, in particular...that are unfit for office in this secular nation. You mention Washington, Madison and Lincoln without having the slightest understanding of how they felt about your religion. You are willfully blind and deaf.
CONVICTED FELON onlly counts against Democrats. It is a Resume' achievement for rethuiglicants.
Maybe so, but it's coming into more increased usage, INCLUDING Joe Biden!
Biden campaign has been flooding me with e-mails after the verdict. If it weren't for the lack of halfway decent politicians in this state, I'd cut Beto off for selling my e-mail address to every friggin' Democrat in the country. I get e-mail from Pennsylvania, Georgia, and California. In addition to the ones from Texas and now Biden.
I remember a while back I got a text from Ted Cruz's campaign begging money. I took glee in my response, but then blocked the number.
I said
Die in a fire, Fled Cruz.
Die in a fire, Fled Cruz.
LOVE IT
We all do now, because we need to help them all as much as we can. Can't give, don't.
They all need money. I wish I could give them all money, but *constantly* begging me for money does not do them any favors.
We get one from Biden asking for a donation at least once a week.
I hadn’t, but I’ve had at least 10 in the last 6 days.
I don't receive any campaign emails.
Donate to one.
No thanks. I can't afford to.
Oregon Legislature investigates Oregon Legislature, finds Oregon Legislature did everything right and nothing wrong. Also Oregon Legislature deserves a raise.
And a pony. And cake.
A cake made of pony. Yes you heard me correctly.
Or a pony made of cake. Either way.....
And a plastic rocket and...
A transwarp starship.
Captain Styles had one of those. It didn't work so good.
Yeah. But he had the gall to chase the Enterprise after letting Montgomery Scott into his engine room.
Not after Scotty sabotaged the Excelsior's transwarp computer. Amazing how Scotty was never charged by Starfleet for that act. Oh well. Luckily, that ship would eventually get a better captain. :)
(I think transwarp drive was a failed experiment after repeated attempts to make it work)
When you save the homeworld from a hostile alien probe that wanted to speak to some whales, a lot gets forgiven. The punishment Kirk got was a reward and they knew it.
....and this ashtray... And this paddle game. - The ashtray and the paddle game.
And this lamp.
Don't forget the thermos.
I'm picking out a thermos for you...
We need John F. Kennedy back. He said it best, “the separation of church and state must be absolute”
Do you know why he said that? He was catholic, always deeply suspect by protestants due to a whole host [haha] of reasons. He had to let everyone believe his politics wouldn't be decided by the pope. The catholics and protestants/evangelicals got all buddy buddy when they bonded over their hateful coordinated attacks on abortion.
Yes about that...https://www.robinmorgan.net/when-the-vatican-thought-abortion-was-moral/
Those who would break down the barriers between church and state always seem to operate under the assumption it will be their tribe calling the shots for everyone else.
What I wouldn't give to hear a Republican say that! [no, I'm NOT holding my breath!]
*sigh* No wonder the rotten Dulles brothers had him killed.
You know what they say: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one." Maybe so, but SOME assholes are a bit worse than others, and Reschke clearly qualifies as such. He seems to think that Christians constitute the only religious segment of the population qualified to hold office, yet when he's called on that spurious statement, he backtracks with the speed of a point guard on defense, and this doesn't mention the flak he's taken from others in the Oregon House.
So congratulations, Reschke. You just shoved your foot in your pie hole, up to the kneecap. Good luck finding anyone from the other side of the aisle to help you extricate it.
Opinions are like assholes. Jellyfish don't have either.
I've heard it go "Opinions are like armpits, everyone's got two and they both stink."
Of course, mine are fresh as daisies, both armpits and opinions. ; )
I would say they are one big asshole, just with two sphincters that excrement exits.
Okay ... so "everybody's got AT LEAST one!" 😁
Would that this sort of comment were anything unusual. Despite the near-constant cries of persecution, Christians in the US are the group most likely to treat non-members as second class and get away with it. It's become painfully clear that in the average Christian mindset, so long as no Christians were harmed, then no sin was committed and absolution can be had for just pretending to be sorry.
My personal disappointment in Christian behavior like this is one of the major reasons I stopped attending church and eventually became an atheist. Nothing tells people just how much you don't care about them like refusing to insist on an actual apology, contrition, and reparations when they get hurt by one of your own. This sort of garbage is exactly why so many people refuse to believe Christians when they insist they know more about love and forgiveness than anyone else; they never seem to practice what they're preaching. Rep. Reschke isn't sorry, we all know it, and the government isn't going to do a thing about it because his religious tribe is in power right now. If Christians actually cared about others they'd be on the warpath about this, but I assume we all hear the crickets by now.
They can't help but blame their deity for their bigotry.
The Nuremberg Defense. It failed at Nuremberg, too.
"You want somebody who understands what truth is and understands the nature of man, the nature of government, and the nature of God.”"
I would argue the last people who fit that bill are the fundamentalist Christians. They are the ones who close their minds the tightest, who are least educated regarding human anatomy and psychology, and are willingly being deceived regarding the nature of our government by folks like David (the liar) Barton. Their perception of God is the most skewed, believing that He is all good all the time, while He (as described in the Bible) and they delight in committing atrocities.
I think that his statement in the interview, while abhorrent, does not rise to the level of harassment or creating a hostile work environment, not in the way the flight attendant in yesterday's article did. The FFRF was reasonable in their letter requesting he apologize or step down, which would be what a decent person should do, and he did neither, making him a less than decent person. I do not think that the committee was wrong in their decision, not if they didn't have evidence of him doing things at work that targeted the minorities. How the minorities choose to navigate their interactions with him are a result of his words, a consequence to his decision to publicize his true feelings about them, but until he actually treats them differently from his Christian peers, and I am sure he will, it needs to be well documented and this is the first incident. I hope they nail him to the wall with the very next slip up. He's certainly deplorable.
I hope that the people of Oregon, being the progressive, tolerant, and diverse people they are, will see him as the antithesis of democracy that he is and vote him out of office real soon. Perhaps a recall election is in order? Though, if no one but we few are talking about his words, then it will get lost to time and he will continue to be a villainous politician. The best course of action is to bring attention to his views in the media, don't let it be forgotten.
Personally, I would love to hear how this guy knows 'the nature of god' when he starts with the presupposition that there is a god.
Today's christianese lesson: Taken out of context = quoting verbatim.
Christ almighty, they’re teaching that fukken lesson AGAIN?
It is one of their basic tenets!
So if someone said Trump supporters weren't fit for public office, that would be OK with him?
Traitors are not fit for public office.
“Well then, which is it? Was he lying to Jason Rapert or was he lying now?”
Ironic that he claimed other people don’t know what truth is. Evangelicalism has become a place for the worst of society to hide in plain sight.
He's probably always lying, never a true statement leaves his mouth. He only believes whatever will do him the most good, and for only as long as it does him good.
I find this guy's opinions abhorrent and even dangerous. But they're his opinions, and, therefore, protected by the First Amendment. The Committee on Conduct could have and should have reprimanded him, however, for conduct unbecoming an elected representative in the form of religious bigotry.
People like Reschke love to invoke the Founders without ever reading what they actually had to say or what they publicly professed to believe, or in Washington's case, carefully avoided publicizing about their beliefs.
I would remind him of a few quotes from James Madison, the author of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In his fight against religious establishments with Patrick Henry, Madison made the following points in opposition to Henry's bill requiring taxpayer dollars to pay for the support of Anglican ministers [Henry's bill failed, BTW]:
"The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.”
"If “all men are by nature equally free and independent,” all men are to be considered as entering into Society on equal conditions; as relinquishing no more, and therefore retaining no less, one than another, of their natural rights. Above all are they to be considered as retaining an “equal title to the free exercise of Religion according to the dictates of Conscience.”
"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?"
All quotes are from Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments. The tyranny of the christian majority was nothing new to the Founders, who saw its danger and tried to prevent its influence in the Constitution itself and in the First Amendment. Facts which fly in the face of the christian nationalism being promoted by people like Reschke.