He is definitely more electable in Texas than Jasmine. I like her but he can pull some of those on the fence Republican Christians off the fence and into sanity.
What is written about Jesus comes to us through multiple layers of hearsay. No one knows who wrote the Gospels. There are no original copies, and nothing that was signed. No contemporary historian noticed the guy, the Romans never mention him and as Richard Carrier has pointed out the region was swarming with itinerant preachers. So, acting more like Jesus is a problem because we don’t actually know if he even existed, much less how he acted. I’m beyond sick of politicians of any stripe who put their supernatural belief systems forward as solutions to modern day problems.
The Life of Brian explains this well. After taking a year of Religious Studies in college (yes, as an atheist), that film made WAY more sense and I realized just how smart and well informed those Python boys really were.
"The members of the Monty Python comedy group are renowned for their high level of education, with 5 of the 6 members attending elite British universities (Oxford or Cambridge), often participating in student revue troupes before their careers in television.
Cambridge University (Footlights Club)
John Cleese: Studied law.
Graham Chapman: Studied medicine at Emmanuel College and later at St Bartholomew's Hospital Medical College.
Eric Idle: Studied English at Pembroke College and served as the president of the Footlights club.
Oxford University
Michael Palin: Read Modern History at Brasenose College.
Terry Jones: Read English Language and Literature at St Edmund Hall.
Other Education
Terry Gilliam: The only American member, he graduated from Occidental College in California with a degree in political science.
Their educational backgrounds heavily influenced the style of their comedy, which was known for being intellectual, featuring references to philosophy, literature, and history, alongside surreal and silly, often non-sequitur, scenarios."
I have thought for a while (like David Fitzgerald’s book says) that christianity is a Jewish mystery religion. But, the only way I can postulate all the false preachers and Christ mongers Paul complains about is to think christianity is about 100 years older than the reign of Pilate. That would coincide with the origin of the Ebionites and could explain much.
Whether Jesus was a real person is largely irrelevant two centuries down the road. What we have are the Gospels, and the words Talarico cites are from Matthew. The long history of the Church, its divisions, reformations, the sectarian extremism it has created, the ways in which its teachings have been used to incite violence and the opposite, is distinguishable from the core message Matthew told. The Texas GOP is devoted to the authoritarian, paternalistic, censorious Christian tradition…Talarico is bypassing all that and emphasizing the Gospel teachings. I wonder if his campaign will succeed or if Jasmine Crockett can win her way.
I suspect, being Texas he will, win not because he is a good man, (which he is), but because Crocket is a black woma,n and we all know how the Evangelicals, Catholic Latino men, and other fundamentalists and Orthodox feel about that.
I love her, and she is amazing, but I know the south, cause I live in Texas's clone state of Florida. I said the same about Kamala, I love her and want her to win, but she has a hard road, especially with all the misogyny in Texas.
One can identity a primary theme in works of fiction. A piece of literature can be confusing and contradictory and still have a discernible message. As far as the Bible goes, this is the message that stands out to me:
"Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire... Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter." - James 5:1-6
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” -Luke 16:13
"Sell your possessions and give to the poor" - Luke 12:33
I don't have to believe Star Wars happened to say "This is the way" or that Star Trek happened to say "Live long and prosper" and mean it.
Talarico had me at “instead of forcing Bibles into classrooms…”
A lot of Christians mistake non-believers for being Christian haters, which is false for most of us. Freedom of religion works both ways, so I will stand by the right of even snake handlers to believe what they will - the risk is on them - and merely ask for the same in return, and the risk is on me. No hatred, but admittedly some contempt, usually for the ones who hurl their Bibles around with great force and don't heed a single principle that Jesus taught.
I like Talarico and hope that if he doesn't win his election his words get some traction and he helps wrestle his faith away from the Christian Wrong. They are so damn tedious.
The problem with a lot of Christians being, they do not believe in religious freedom for anyone but themselvs and those they agree with. Charlie Kirk said freedom of religion needs to be abolished.
Atheists have never tried to violate my conscience and force me to be an atheist.
Atheists aren't the ones trying to break up same-sex families.
Atheists weren't the ones who used State violence to remove bodily autonomy from women.
Atheists, by and large, aren't the ones trying to further force women into a lesser position in society.
Atheists, by and large, aren't the ones cruelly kidnapping children and executing citizens for speaking out.
That is primarily Christians.
You miss the point of your own scriptures. You call Jesus "Lord" and then you ignore what he said. What he said in your own scriptures was that the Samaritan who showed compassion fulfilled the Law better than the teachers of the Law. What he said was that human need was more important than law. What he did was get angry at the corruption in the Temple.
Your churches are primarily not the heirs of that spirit. They are the heirs of the false prophets of America who preached peace, peace to slavers and who allowed the hangmen of lynch mobs to sit and profane their sanctuaries and defile their pews.
Would that Congress was full of ethical atheists rather than people like you Christians.
I mean, Talarico pretty much explained the Good Samaritan story with his comments and what did the Nationalist Christians do? Call him a false Christian. Him saying that some other religious and non religious people are acting better than some Christians, is exactly the same as the Good Samaritan acted better than the Jewish people who ignored the Jewish man. They can’t stand the lessons in the Bible, they just want the Bible as a weapon.
So, I never tire of the Mitchell and Webb treatment of the Good Samaritan parable. I have occasionally used the “Jesus” perspective on it online to hilarious effect. People are simply appalled when I criticize them for praising modern day Good Samaritans.
They think being a good Christian means enforcing conformity and making it against the law to be other than their narrow interpretation of what a person must be. In reality, being a good Christian means being a decent human being who happens to be a Christian.
Since Jeebus is all knowing, all seeing, and all powerful, I think it odd that he has not put in an appearance and set everyone straight. After all, he is gleefully tossing all the Christians worshipping him incorrectly into the lake of fire…
The men who wrote the Constitution knew their European history and wanted no part of the religious strife that had plagued the old world for centuries.
And had already witnessed plenty of Christian on Christian violence amongst the colonists. Each group vieing to impose their particular version on everyone else.
Christians claim that the entire Bible is God's Word to everyone. That gives Christians an excuse to promote pretty much any political, economic or social position imaginable. The Old Testament contains numerous sections authorising social justice, feeding the poor, punishing the selfish rich. It also contains sections authorising genocide, ethnic cleansing, sex slavery and other favourite activities of the Right. So we atheists can't demand that Christians follow Christ by espousing leftish positions, as apparently he himself said he came only to 'fulfil the Law', i.e. be the Messiah, not abolish all those nasty bits. Faith is nonsense, and this latest spat only confirms it.
It’s moving day. 1st cup of coffee. I’m leaving my home of nearly 28 years for a pretty nice place. I’m hoping that it works out for me. I love my home.
Some people feel the same thing about their religion. Talarico Sounds like one of those. I think it’s still nonsense, but I can respect it if he doesn’t use it as a club— either to exclude others or to whale on others.
TAlarico had this to say about Jeebus: “He walked into the seat of power and He flipped over the tables of injustice. That was a powerful example of non-violent direct action—protest—and it’s what got Him killed.l” actually, it wasn’t a nonviolent. It’s also not what got him killed if you’re going to believe the Bible story. What him killed was that was God‘s plan for him to get killed.
TAlarico isn’t anti-Christian, he’s anti asshole. And for the most part, so was Jesus. Also of course, every accusation as a confession. “ “They love putting Christians down,” that people like Talarico were “counterfeit Christians,” and that Talarico was trying to “bash Christians, placing all other religions and even atheists above them.”
It was Jesus himself who had something to say about the last shall be first, being as little children, being sheep, being humble. So it isn’t Tallarico that’s placing all other religions and even atheists above Christians, it’s the behavior of the so-called Christians themselves. Personally, I would rather know many of the Muslims and hindus I’ve met than the so-called Christians I keep reading about.
If Talarico is who he appears to be— I trust very few politicians to do that anymore— then he will be a force for good in Texas. The question is, how much good is there in Texas?
Allow me to second Maltnothops' wish for an easy and successful move, though "easy" moves are pretty much foreign to me. My gal and I just moved here four months ago, after not quite 16 years at our previous location. The move itself wasn't much fun, and it took a fair while for us to acclimate to the new locale. Things have MOSTLY settled down, though there are still an odd handful of yet-to-be-unpacked boxes, mostly books and such, which still want for attention.
Thank you for the good wishes. I’ve been here for 28 years. It’s my dream home and a wonderful place to live. But there are a lot of reasons behind moving. And in any case, our home is more spacious, requires almost no upkeep, and it still has some but not a lot of views. It will be good..
Despite my partner’s belief to the contrary, I have this whole thing organized. The last time I moved, I had dinner for 10 people two weeks after i moved. That’s how organized it was. And I’m trying to stay that organized for this trip as well
I just filled a 10x5 storage unit with the boxes I haven't unpacked in the 8 years since I moved. Yes, I'm a packrat, I come by it honestly, so was my mother.
In my case, it's a bunch of books that haven't found their way into empty bookcases just yet. I'm being a lazy bum about that, mostly because I'm retired and I LIKE BEING A LAZY BUM, so there, bleaugh! 😝
Mostly books and movies. Half the movies I’ve bought on digital as well, so never get out the discs anyway of the ones I have unpacked, and as for the books, I ended up fill the bookcases with other stuff as it was delivered (they’re right by the front door.
Eight years, and it’s time to say goodbye to some of this stuff. For this move, I got rid of five or 600 books. For the last time I moved, 28 years ago, it was probably 1000 books. I looked at some of these titles, they were important books— 40 years ago. I just decided that I’m not going to read them againif I haven’t read them in 40 years.
I took them to the friends of the library at two different cities. I also got rid of a around 1000 CDs the same way. Eventually, I’ll get rid of all of my CDs because I’ve transferred them to a special player. But I still prefer CDs and seeing what attracts me, rather than going through a list on my iPad
“That was a powerful example of non-violent direct action—protest—and it’s what got Him killed.l” actually, it wasn’t a nonviolent.”
I mean the whipping was pretty violent.
I was going to point that out after my first comment, but you beat me to it. What he did to the money changers was not non-violent by any means.
I will say that it might have had something to do with why he was killed, but in the way that there needs to be a reason for the plot to be believable. The Reason he was killed was for the sacrifice to happen, but the reason he was killed was because he fought the Pharisees, this incident being one of the reasons the Pharisees wanted him dead.
For myself, I think the reason the Pharisees wanted him dead was straight out politics. He was the priest king, descended from David through both his mother and his father, and thus a threat to that religious power, the political power, and their money power, which was the real reason for the upset over the incident with the money changers. The story is all there in the gospels, but buried under layers of magic, myths, and miracleS.
It's not that he knew Mosaic law better than the Pharisees, his claim was that they put more store in Talmudic oral tradition and customs than in the written Law, which was binding and divine in origin and thus should have been considered above all their man-made rules.
Of course, after claiming that not one jot or tittle of that Law should be changed, he immediately exploited the textual contradiction about divorce (Deuteronomy allows it, Malachi forbids it) by claiming that it was Moses, and not God, who allowed it because the Israelites would have been such little bitches otherwise. So screw Moses - now divorce was right out, enjoy the hell of the marriage your parents arranged for you. BTW, the same parents you were supposed to honor but that he expressly came to alienate from you. 🙄
Nope. It was both religious and political, but not for those reasons. The upsetting of the tables of the money-changers would actually have been in *support* of the Temple and its financial power. Judea actually got enormous concessions from the Romans to practice Mosaic law, and minting their own coinage free of graven human images - which would have been an anathema - was one. The only offering that travels well is money, and pilgrims from Parthia and other Roman provinces would have needed to change their coins bearing the heads of rulers for the human-image-free prutah so they could make their Temple offerings. The money changers were necessary, and were allowed to charge a fee for the exchange - the problem lay in charging additional fees on top of that, which would mean the Temple would be short-changed of its full offering.
Jesus was never a priest nor a king, and could make zero claim that he was a direct descendant of David. It's one major reason why he couldn't - and didn't - fulfill any of the messianic prophecies and why his claims of doing so were not just rejected by many Jews, but could actually be legitimately counted as blasphemy and false prophecy. The later Gospels feverishly tried - and failed miserably - to legitimize his connection to Joseph because the messiah was supposed to have sprung directly from the loins of King David, while ignoring that an adoption by Joseph didn't count. The non-Hebrew-speaking ignoramus who wrote Matthew not only knew zip about how Judean tribal lineage worked, but went whole-hog in proving that Joseph was a descendant of Jeconiah - not knowing that all of Jeconiah's line had been cursed and forever barred from sitting on that throne. Oops.
As for his mother, tribal descent is *patrilineal* - it doesn't matter who your mom was or who her relatives were, you belong to your father's house. All that's known about Mary is that she was a kinswoman of a daughter of Aaron - so she was probably a Levite, i.e. a member of the house of Levi, or the priestly line - and not David, which was the royal house of Judah.
We are probably going to disagree about a lot of this, but your perspective is interesting. I think it’s very clear that Jesus was both priest and king. Or more accurately, he was expected to be both priest and king.That’s why he said his kingdom was not of this world and why he was ridiculed as being king of the Jews. The Romans wouldn’t have cared about a minor religious upstart. But a threat to their power they would definitely care about, which is why he was crucified.
LOL game on! And sorry, nope again. First, nowhere in any Davidic messianic prophecy is that anointed one expected to be a priest - it's a physical impossibility, as the messiah has to come from the Davidic branch and the priests were Levites. His role is to be a warlike king who vanquishes Israel's enemies and then sits on the throne of the house of Israel, in a kingdom where the Levitical priesthood keeps on making sacrifical offerings until the end of time. Zachariah makes it clear that the priest and king are not the same person: the priest shall be *by* his throne, not on it.
You got that notion from Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews (which wasn't by Paul, wasn't an epistle and wasn't to the Hebrews) c. 60-69 CE, that in turn got it from Psalm 110 - it refers to David as a priest-king of the order of Melchizedek, but remember that the psalms are largely anonymous and were considered poetry - NOT prophecy. That misconception arises from Christian prefigurement, since they needed to essentially strip-mine the Hebrew Bible for any reference that even vaguely sounded like Jesus and label it prophecy in order to make it fit their typology.
See, there's a need for early Christians to make Jesus represent a better covenant, a better sacrifice, a better tabernacle, a basically better anything than the Jews could come up with - and that means being a better priest, too. The author of Hebrews gets around the roadblock of Jesus not being of the Levite priestly line by pouncing on the Davidic-era insertion of the mysterious Melchizedek, the "King of [Jeru]Salem" in Genesis 14 (the passage was clumsily shoehorned in between two passages about the King of Sodom solely to legitimize David's throne in the newly-conquered city, but that's another story), and proclaiming him to be the priestly archetype or forerunner of Jesus, since he seems to be eternal in that he has no parents, no geneology and no recorded death - to a priesthood that was now superior to the inferior Levite one, which recognized that supremacy because Levi was actually a sperm in Abraham's loins when he made offerings to a non-Israelite priest. It's wild pretzel logic designed to make Jesus an eternal priest in Paul's version of Christianity, and it's got fuck-all to do with any of the messianic prophecies. The rabbis claimed that while God might've made Melchizedek the first priest, that didn't extend to his line. The Talmud enlarged on this and did its own pretzeling, claiming God became displeased with Melchizedek for blessing Abraham before he blessed God, and punished him by transferring his priesthood to the descendants of Abraham, i.e. through Levi. "After the order of Melchizedek" in Psalm 110 means HE was a priest, but his line was not. Again, the NT authors were Gentiles who couldn't read Hebrew and didn't know the backstory.
Claiming that your kingdom isn't of this world is a wonderful excuse for not vanquishing the Romans and fulfilling any of these actual prophecies, but since Mosaic law states that the punishment for sorcery and making false prophecies is death, it's a good bet that move will get you stoned by the Sanhedrin pretty damn quick. And if you start creating a disturbance during Passover, which was a time that tended to rile up the zealots and therefore make the Romans and Herod twitchy, you could come to their attention as a seditionist and would be made an example of.
Which leads me to my second point: there's actually no evidence as to who executed Jesus, or even if he was even executed, let alone for what reason. You're getting that "my kingdom is not of this world" and "ridiculed as being the king of the Jews" bits from the Gospel of John, which isn't one of the earlier Synoptic Gospels - it's actually the least reliable and most historically inaccurate, such as claiming a spear was used to hasten Jesus' death, which would utterly defeat the purpose of crucifixion.
That's primarily because it was written by multiple anti-Semitic Gentile authors in the 3rd century, some 200 years later, and 90% of its embellishments - like the spear - are absent from the Synoptics. It was expressly written to refute the reluctant-to-be-offed Jesus of the Synoptics and instead emphasize the divine aspects of Jesus while presenting a picture of a god-man who willingly handed himself over to the authorities for execution. And because it was obviously added to over centuries it can't be considered reliable and must be rejected as early Church propaganda - for example, the stoning of the adulterous woman doesn't actually appear until a 5thC CE version. C'mon, now. Some of it is just blatantly absurd - a crucifixion isn't meant so much to punish one person as it is to be a deterrent to the local population so you don't have to crucify 100 of them, and if you're going to send a message as to what happens to would-be kings, you don't write a sign in languages like Hebrew, Latin, Greek - which 99.5% of the largely illiterate and Aramaic-speaking population wouldn't be able to read or understand. Seriously, in Latin? Was the intent to strike fear into the hearts of Romans?
Yeah, it ultimately doesn't matter - except when you see all the fuckery that Christianity has been up to for the past 2 millenia to build up this myth, and the damage its followers have caused and are still causing, at some point you have to push back at it and debunk the myths and propaganda by showing they're lies piled on untruths, like that priest-king notion.
Good luck with your move and lots of happiness in your new place - I enjoyed this, I hope it was a welcome distraction.
". . . and most historically inaccurate, such as claiming a spear was used to hasten Jesus' death, which would utterly defeat the purpose of crucifixion."
Yep, historically inaccurate like the letting Barnabas Collins go free.
Good luck with the new place. We've been in our house for 20 something years. I know at some point we will have to move. Not for years I hope. But I will miss it.
Thank you for the good wishes. I know exactly what you’re talking about. It was my dream home and I have so much love for it. I’ve been here for almost 28 years.I knew we were going to have to move eventually. That’s what happens when you’re 75. There are a lot of reasons to move now. The new place is more spacious, doesn’t have quite the wonderful views. But I think we’ll be happy there. I actually feel OK about it, which surprises me. But there are a lot of changes in store, and at least we’re doing this while we can. I don’t think I would be able to manage it in five more years. But right now it’s OK
My sympathies, and positive wishes as well. My spouse wants us to move back to his native Canada in the spring, we have 16 years worth of collections here.
Thanks for both the sympathy and the good wishes. I said during the pandemic that the one thing that made the whole thing tolerable was that I was in my favorite place in the entire world. I still feel like it’s my favorite place, but I have the feeling it’s time to go. So, we’ll see what happens in the new house. Despite my rapidly advancing age, I seem to be fairly adaptable still, and as in control of my emotions as I can be without suppressing them. So I’m pretty sure it’s OK with me.
Why do they think Crockett is less electable? Because they know their base. They want a bigoted white man to run against black woman instead of an unbigoted white man.
unfortunately Joe I think you are right. I have many Texans in the family. They spend way too much time in their cars to pay attention to the "fake" (real) news.
A slap in the face to SOME Christians as a wakeup call, reminding them of what Jesus (allegedly) actually said? Yes it was. A slap in the face to all Christians like the NSGOP is trying to paint it? Absolutely not. Try telling that to the pastors protesting and getting shot at in Minnesota.
I'm not a Christian although I believe in what Christ tried to teach as far as loving thy neighbor and helping the poor and immigrants, at least if you believe the bible is an accurate accounting of a man we can't prove existed. What I love about this guy is how he points out the hypocrisy of these right-wing Christian nationalist types who don't actually follow any of those teachings. Not that they'll ever admit that but, maybe, others who really do want to follow those teachings will wake up to what these people are doing in Jesus name.
It's been said so many times before but... if the Second Coming happened this very day... if Jesus H. Christ on a Pogo Stick Himself descended from on high, in a beam of holy light, directly onto the Capitol Lawn...
He'd be deported by Christian Nationalists so fast his halo would spin.
So the Republican response to him is not news. Duh. He said Jesus is loving and kind and asks of everyone to be helpful. The Republicans can’t do that, how would they ever feel superior to everyone else. Besides, the elected Republicans are the oligarchs and need Jesus to be hateful so the dumb republican voters keep putting them in office.
But here’s the thing. We are in a situation that requires our representatives to have spines and not play nice with the other side. We need Crockett to do the dirty work of cleaning up shop and getting rid of the corrupt politicians and policies. Biden’s policy to work with the right is what has gotten us here, with very little to show for his presidency. Energizing the left, and waking up the apathetic voter is how we have to move forward, reaching out to the so called moderates, centrists, and right will continue to get us the same fucking shit we keep getting. And it will get worse. Mealy mouthed democrats, bought and paid for by the oligarchy, are killing us all. We need the firebrands with conviction, unwilling to compromise on the important issues, standing up for values. Crockett has shown herself to be strong, so what if the cruel, dishonest, corrupt don’t like her and won’t vote for her, they aren’t the majority.
Crockett is what we need, I’m afraid Talarico is what we will get. Either way is better that any Republican, but until we start electing the firebrands and backbones, we will continue to cycle through the republicans tear everything up, democrats start to rebuild fighting the republicans for every inch, then people getting frustrated with the lack of progress and voting for republicans all over again, who tear more shit up and make a bigger mess, the democrats get voted in and try to fix everything but can’t make enough progress, again and again.
Agree with both of you. Val, Crockett meshes with my politics but there is just no way she can win, after all we have the experience of Beto to draw on. There are just too many mouth-breathers in the state. After all if a corrupt AG Paxton couldn't be dealt with appropriately...and of course he is running for senate this year. It's like a fucking horror movie where the monster keeps coming back.
I DO like Crockett. She is a firebrand and more: an informed and intelligent firebrand. Any Republican facing her had better have their facts straight, because SHE WILL.
Apparently, this is the sin of GENEROSITY, which the complainers react against. Giving of themselves to help another must be so contrary to their nature that they may wonder that their bible has such a story in it.
It astonishes me that people can be that MEAN, that incapable of empathy. Then, too, this is what they are getting from their Sunday sermons, and they are clearly swallowing it whole.
Couchfucker Vance claimed this empathy is only supposed to extend to your immediate neighbors (which is exactly why no one wants immigrants or anyone without an Ahnenpass from the Reich living next to them, amirite, wink wink) and loved ones.
Even a "hell no!" correction by his Holy Father didn't sway him, and plenty of evangelicals doubled down on it with him.
Tell him that faith is belief without evidence, and that there is vastly MORE evidence for evolution than there has ever been for his god or any element of his religion!
NSGOP: "Be more like Jesus!" ***𝘛𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘴*** "No, not like that!"
As somebody on the internet said recently: "There's nothing more hateful than christian love."
Which Jesus? 😆
Who’s Jesus?
Whose Jesus?
https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.GD1nAJ4SSQecR4WKSFQavwHaLB?rs=1&pid=ImgDetMain&o=7&rm=3
He is definitely more electable in Texas than Jasmine. I like her but he can pull some of those on the fence Republican Christians off the fence and into sanity.
What is written about Jesus comes to us through multiple layers of hearsay. No one knows who wrote the Gospels. There are no original copies, and nothing that was signed. No contemporary historian noticed the guy, the Romans never mention him and as Richard Carrier has pointed out the region was swarming with itinerant preachers. So, acting more like Jesus is a problem because we don’t actually know if he even existed, much less how he acted. I’m beyond sick of politicians of any stripe who put their supernatural belief systems forward as solutions to modern day problems.
The Life of Brian explains this well. After taking a year of Religious Studies in college (yes, as an atheist), that film made WAY more sense and I realized just how smart and well informed those Python boys really were.
having been raised as a fundie, that movie made SO MUCH sense to me. I regard it as the best of the Python movies.
agree, I recently re-watched it...f'ing great, so insightful.
The Latin scene is my particular favorite, especially given the fact that John Cleese once taught college-level Latin himself.
After seeing Monty Python, I understood why England had become so atheist.
Because all the zealots ended up in America.
Yes, Australia got the better deal with the convicts.
"The members of the Monty Python comedy group are renowned for their high level of education, with 5 of the 6 members attending elite British universities (Oxford or Cambridge), often participating in student revue troupes before their careers in television.
Cambridge University (Footlights Club)
John Cleese: Studied law.
Graham Chapman: Studied medicine at Emmanuel College and later at St Bartholomew's Hospital Medical College.
Eric Idle: Studied English at Pembroke College and served as the president of the Footlights club.
Oxford University
Michael Palin: Read Modern History at Brasenose College.
Terry Jones: Read English Language and Literature at St Edmund Hall.
Other Education
Terry Gilliam: The only American member, he graduated from Occidental College in California with a degree in political science.
Their educational backgrounds heavily influenced the style of their comedy, which was known for being intellectual, featuring references to philosophy, literature, and history, alongside surreal and silly, often non-sequitur, scenarios."
I have thought for a while (like David Fitzgerald’s book says) that christianity is a Jewish mystery religion. But, the only way I can postulate all the false preachers and Christ mongers Paul complains about is to think christianity is about 100 years older than the reign of Pilate. That would coincide with the origin of the Ebionites and could explain much.
Whether Jesus was a real person is largely irrelevant two centuries down the road. What we have are the Gospels, and the words Talarico cites are from Matthew. The long history of the Church, its divisions, reformations, the sectarian extremism it has created, the ways in which its teachings have been used to incite violence and the opposite, is distinguishable from the core message Matthew told. The Texas GOP is devoted to the authoritarian, paternalistic, censorious Christian tradition…Talarico is bypassing all that and emphasizing the Gospel teachings. I wonder if his campaign will succeed or if Jasmine Crockett can win her way.
I suspect, being Texas he will, win not because he is a good man, (which he is), but because Crocket is a black woma,n and we all know how the Evangelicals, Catholic Latino men, and other fundamentalists and Orthodox feel about that.
This is a Democratic primary. She has a chance to win or wouldn’t be too close to call as it is right now.
I love her, and she is amazing, but I know the south, cause I live in Texas's clone state of Florida. I said the same about Kamala, I love her and want her to win, but she has a hard road, especially with all the misogyny in Texas.
One can identity a primary theme in works of fiction. A piece of literature can be confusing and contradictory and still have a discernible message. As far as the Bible goes, this is the message that stands out to me:
"Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire... Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter." - James 5:1-6
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” -Luke 16:13
"Sell your possessions and give to the poor" - Luke 12:33
I don't have to believe Star Wars happened to say "This is the way" or that Star Trek happened to say "Live long and prosper" and mean it.
Talarico had me at “instead of forcing Bibles into classrooms…”
A lot of Christians mistake non-believers for being Christian haters, which is false for most of us. Freedom of religion works both ways, so I will stand by the right of even snake handlers to believe what they will - the risk is on them - and merely ask for the same in return, and the risk is on me. No hatred, but admittedly some contempt, usually for the ones who hurl their Bibles around with great force and don't heed a single principle that Jesus taught.
I like Talarico and hope that if he doesn't win his election his words get some traction and he helps wrestle his faith away from the Christian Wrong. They are so damn tedious.
The problem with a lot of Christians being, they do not believe in religious freedom for anyone but themselvs and those they agree with. Charlie Kirk said freedom of religion needs to be abolished.
Charlie Kirk was wrong on a lot of things.
He was wrong about everything, that was why Charles Koch paid him millions.
From what I've seen, he was wrong on just about everything. The man was a community college drop out with no viable expertise on any subject.
Except being a world class ass.
https://cdn.faithit.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/saved-bible-throw.gif
Atheists have never tried to violate my conscience and force me to be an atheist.
Atheists aren't the ones trying to break up same-sex families.
Atheists weren't the ones who used State violence to remove bodily autonomy from women.
Atheists, by and large, aren't the ones trying to further force women into a lesser position in society.
Atheists, by and large, aren't the ones cruelly kidnapping children and executing citizens for speaking out.
That is primarily Christians.
You miss the point of your own scriptures. You call Jesus "Lord" and then you ignore what he said. What he said in your own scriptures was that the Samaritan who showed compassion fulfilled the Law better than the teachers of the Law. What he said was that human need was more important than law. What he did was get angry at the corruption in the Temple.
Your churches are primarily not the heirs of that spirit. They are the heirs of the false prophets of America who preached peace, peace to slavers and who allowed the hangmen of lynch mobs to sit and profane their sanctuaries and defile their pews.
Would that Congress was full of ethical atheists rather than people like you Christians.
I mean, Talarico pretty much explained the Good Samaritan story with his comments and what did the Nationalist Christians do? Call him a false Christian. Him saying that some other religious and non religious people are acting better than some Christians, is exactly the same as the Good Samaritan acted better than the Jewish people who ignored the Jewish man. They can’t stand the lessons in the Bible, they just want the Bible as a weapon.
So, I never tire of the Mitchell and Webb treatment of the Good Samaritan parable. I have occasionally used the “Jesus” perspective on it online to hilarious effect. People are simply appalled when I criticize them for praising modern day Good Samaritans.
https://youtu.be/66-3pCp6PBM?si=Q94o4fU2ah9P1Uu4
Yes for them, the bible is for beating.
Feed, clothe and house the poor? The GOP sure as hell doesn't want THAT.
Yet I'll wager some of them still wear little cross lapel pins to signal what good Christians they are.
They think being a good Christian means enforcing conformity and making it against the law to be other than their narrow interpretation of what a person must be. In reality, being a good Christian means being a decent human being who happens to be a Christian.
One cross lapel pin and one ar-15 lapel pin.
Not to mention the American flag they wear while dismantling the Constitution.
Republicans pander to the preachers while viewing human decency as a character flaw and something to be ashamed of.
Right next to their AK pins.
Like Betty Bowers says "I'm so glad you told me you were a christian, because by your actions I would never have known!"
"Twisting Christian principles"
The hypocrisy, it burns.
Christians have principles? Given their recorded history and current practices, it seems the opposite is true.
Judging by the staggering number of Christian tribes, Jesus is nothing if not flexible.
Since Jeebus is all knowing, all seeing, and all powerful, I think it odd that he has not put in an appearance and set everyone straight. After all, he is gleefully tossing all the Christians worshipping him incorrectly into the lake of fire…
To be fair, it's easy to be flexible when you're a figment on a storybook page.
These people have nothing on Chubby Checker.
Or Rubik.
Tony.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Twist
"Christian principles" is an oxymoron, emphasis on the "moron" part.
"They don't know how how to fight someone like him."
They did bring out the bagpipes by calling him a counterfeit Christian.
They can't target him with their bigotry, so all that's left is the same internecine warfare that tore Europe apart 3 centuries ago.
The men who wrote the Constitution knew their European history and wanted no part of the religious strife that had plagued the old world for centuries.
And had already witnessed plenty of Christian on Christian violence amongst the colonists. Each group vieing to impose their particular version on everyone else.
The jesus hatin' kkkristians do to christians.
*Bows in your general direction* for the clever reference to the "No true Scotsman" trope.
Christians claim that the entire Bible is God's Word to everyone. That gives Christians an excuse to promote pretty much any political, economic or social position imaginable. The Old Testament contains numerous sections authorising social justice, feeding the poor, punishing the selfish rich. It also contains sections authorising genocide, ethnic cleansing, sex slavery and other favourite activities of the Right. So we atheists can't demand that Christians follow Christ by espousing leftish positions, as apparently he himself said he came only to 'fulfil the Law', i.e. be the Messiah, not abolish all those nasty bits. Faith is nonsense, and this latest spat only confirms it.
I've said it many times: the bible endorses both sides of so many issues that it loses any credibility to be a moral guide for ANYTHING.
In the bird-vs-beast war, it's the foolish bat.
The dark-side cave on Dagobah. You only find what you bring with you.
If you bring kindness, you find plenty of kindness in the Bible.
If you bring hate and violence, you can find plenty of that in there too.
[smile] Well put that is! (in my best Yoda-voice!)
And FAR too many of these people have embraced the Dark Side of the Bible.
Yes. Republicans are the Sith Lords.
It’s moving day. 1st cup of coffee. I’m leaving my home of nearly 28 years for a pretty nice place. I’m hoping that it works out for me. I love my home.
Some people feel the same thing about their religion. Talarico Sounds like one of those. I think it’s still nonsense, but I can respect it if he doesn’t use it as a club— either to exclude others or to whale on others.
TAlarico had this to say about Jeebus: “He walked into the seat of power and He flipped over the tables of injustice. That was a powerful example of non-violent direct action—protest—and it’s what got Him killed.l” actually, it wasn’t a nonviolent. It’s also not what got him killed if you’re going to believe the Bible story. What him killed was that was God‘s plan for him to get killed.
TAlarico isn’t anti-Christian, he’s anti asshole. And for the most part, so was Jesus. Also of course, every accusation as a confession. “ “They love putting Christians down,” that people like Talarico were “counterfeit Christians,” and that Talarico was trying to “bash Christians, placing all other religions and even atheists above them.”
It was Jesus himself who had something to say about the last shall be first, being as little children, being sheep, being humble. So it isn’t Tallarico that’s placing all other religions and even atheists above Christians, it’s the behavior of the so-called Christians themselves. Personally, I would rather know many of the Muslims and hindus I’ve met than the so-called Christians I keep reading about.
If Talarico is who he appears to be— I trust very few politicians to do that anymore— then he will be a force for good in Texas. The question is, how much good is there in Texas?
"TAlarico isn’t anti-Christian, he’s anti asshole."
↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
THIS!!!!!
Allow me to second Maltnothops' wish for an easy and successful move, though "easy" moves are pretty much foreign to me. My gal and I just moved here four months ago, after not quite 16 years at our previous location. The move itself wasn't much fun, and it took a fair while for us to acclimate to the new locale. Things have MOSTLY settled down, though there are still an odd handful of yet-to-be-unpacked boxes, mostly books and such, which still want for attention.
In any case, best wishes.
Thank you for the good wishes. I’ve been here for 28 years. It’s my dream home and a wonderful place to live. But there are a lot of reasons behind moving. And in any case, our home is more spacious, requires almost no upkeep, and it still has some but not a lot of views. It will be good..
Despite my partner’s belief to the contrary, I have this whole thing organized. The last time I moved, I had dinner for 10 people two weeks after i moved. That’s how organized it was. And I’m trying to stay that organized for this trip as well
Thanks again
I just filled a 10x5 storage unit with the boxes I haven't unpacked in the 8 years since I moved. Yes, I'm a packrat, I come by it honestly, so was my mother.
In my case, it's a bunch of books that haven't found their way into empty bookcases just yet. I'm being a lazy bum about that, mostly because I'm retired and I LIKE BEING A LAZY BUM, so there, bleaugh! 😝
Mostly books and movies. Half the movies I’ve bought on digital as well, so never get out the discs anyway of the ones I have unpacked, and as for the books, I ended up fill the bookcases with other stuff as it was delivered (they’re right by the front door.
If you have retired, then being a lazy bum is your prerogative.
But we don’t call it being a lazy bum. That is unfair and pejorative.
I’m way too busy to be a lazy bum. But if it doesn’t get done with, oh well. As long as nobody dies.
Eight years, and it’s time to say goodbye to some of this stuff. For this move, I got rid of five or 600 books. For the last time I moved, 28 years ago, it was probably 1000 books. I looked at some of these titles, they were important books— 40 years ago. I just decided that I’m not going to read them againif I haven’t read them in 40 years.
Have you considered donating them to a library?
I took them to the friends of the library at two different cities. I also got rid of a around 1000 CDs the same way. Eventually, I’ll get rid of all of my CDs because I’ve transferred them to a special player. But I still prefer CDs and seeing what attracts me, rather than going through a list on my iPad
“That was a powerful example of non-violent direct action—protest—and it’s what got Him killed.l” actually, it wasn’t a nonviolent.”
I mean the whipping was pretty violent.
I was going to point that out after my first comment, but you beat me to it. What he did to the money changers was not non-violent by any means.
I will say that it might have had something to do with why he was killed, but in the way that there needs to be a reason for the plot to be believable. The Reason he was killed was for the sacrifice to happen, but the reason he was killed was because he fought the Pharisees, this incident being one of the reasons the Pharisees wanted him dead.
For myself, I think the reason the Pharisees wanted him dead was straight out politics. He was the priest king, descended from David through both his mother and his father, and thus a threat to that religious power, the political power, and their money power, which was the real reason for the upset over the incident with the money changers. The story is all there in the gospels, but buried under layers of magic, myths, and miracleS.
I suspect that what Jesus represented to the Pharisees was COMPETITION and worse, competition that knew their scriptures better than they did.
Can't have that. ☠
It's not that he knew Mosaic law better than the Pharisees, his claim was that they put more store in Talmudic oral tradition and customs than in the written Law, which was binding and divine in origin and thus should have been considered above all their man-made rules.
Of course, after claiming that not one jot or tittle of that Law should be changed, he immediately exploited the textual contradiction about divorce (Deuteronomy allows it, Malachi forbids it) by claiming that it was Moses, and not God, who allowed it because the Israelites would have been such little bitches otherwise. So screw Moses - now divorce was right out, enjoy the hell of the marriage your parents arranged for you. BTW, the same parents you were supposed to honor but that he expressly came to alienate from you. 🙄
Quite possibly.
Nope. It was both religious and political, but not for those reasons. The upsetting of the tables of the money-changers would actually have been in *support* of the Temple and its financial power. Judea actually got enormous concessions from the Romans to practice Mosaic law, and minting their own coinage free of graven human images - which would have been an anathema - was one. The only offering that travels well is money, and pilgrims from Parthia and other Roman provinces would have needed to change their coins bearing the heads of rulers for the human-image-free prutah so they could make their Temple offerings. The money changers were necessary, and were allowed to charge a fee for the exchange - the problem lay in charging additional fees on top of that, which would mean the Temple would be short-changed of its full offering.
Jesus was never a priest nor a king, and could make zero claim that he was a direct descendant of David. It's one major reason why he couldn't - and didn't - fulfill any of the messianic prophecies and why his claims of doing so were not just rejected by many Jews, but could actually be legitimately counted as blasphemy and false prophecy. The later Gospels feverishly tried - and failed miserably - to legitimize his connection to Joseph because the messiah was supposed to have sprung directly from the loins of King David, while ignoring that an adoption by Joseph didn't count. The non-Hebrew-speaking ignoramus who wrote Matthew not only knew zip about how Judean tribal lineage worked, but went whole-hog in proving that Joseph was a descendant of Jeconiah - not knowing that all of Jeconiah's line had been cursed and forever barred from sitting on that throne. Oops.
As for his mother, tribal descent is *patrilineal* - it doesn't matter who your mom was or who her relatives were, you belong to your father's house. All that's known about Mary is that she was a kinswoman of a daughter of Aaron - so she was probably a Levite, i.e. a member of the house of Levi, or the priestly line - and not David, which was the royal house of Judah.
We are probably going to disagree about a lot of this, but your perspective is interesting. I think it’s very clear that Jesus was both priest and king. Or more accurately, he was expected to be both priest and king.That’s why he said his kingdom was not of this world and why he was ridiculed as being king of the Jews. The Romans wouldn’t have cared about a minor religious upstart. But a threat to their power they would definitely care about, which is why he was crucified.
But it all ultimately doesn’t matter.
LOL game on! And sorry, nope again. First, nowhere in any Davidic messianic prophecy is that anointed one expected to be a priest - it's a physical impossibility, as the messiah has to come from the Davidic branch and the priests were Levites. His role is to be a warlike king who vanquishes Israel's enemies and then sits on the throne of the house of Israel, in a kingdom where the Levitical priesthood keeps on making sacrifical offerings until the end of time. Zachariah makes it clear that the priest and king are not the same person: the priest shall be *by* his throne, not on it.
You got that notion from Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews (which wasn't by Paul, wasn't an epistle and wasn't to the Hebrews) c. 60-69 CE, that in turn got it from Psalm 110 - it refers to David as a priest-king of the order of Melchizedek, but remember that the psalms are largely anonymous and were considered poetry - NOT prophecy. That misconception arises from Christian prefigurement, since they needed to essentially strip-mine the Hebrew Bible for any reference that even vaguely sounded like Jesus and label it prophecy in order to make it fit their typology.
See, there's a need for early Christians to make Jesus represent a better covenant, a better sacrifice, a better tabernacle, a basically better anything than the Jews could come up with - and that means being a better priest, too. The author of Hebrews gets around the roadblock of Jesus not being of the Levite priestly line by pouncing on the Davidic-era insertion of the mysterious Melchizedek, the "King of [Jeru]Salem" in Genesis 14 (the passage was clumsily shoehorned in between two passages about the King of Sodom solely to legitimize David's throne in the newly-conquered city, but that's another story), and proclaiming him to be the priestly archetype or forerunner of Jesus, since he seems to be eternal in that he has no parents, no geneology and no recorded death - to a priesthood that was now superior to the inferior Levite one, which recognized that supremacy because Levi was actually a sperm in Abraham's loins when he made offerings to a non-Israelite priest. It's wild pretzel logic designed to make Jesus an eternal priest in Paul's version of Christianity, and it's got fuck-all to do with any of the messianic prophecies. The rabbis claimed that while God might've made Melchizedek the first priest, that didn't extend to his line. The Talmud enlarged on this and did its own pretzeling, claiming God became displeased with Melchizedek for blessing Abraham before he blessed God, and punished him by transferring his priesthood to the descendants of Abraham, i.e. through Levi. "After the order of Melchizedek" in Psalm 110 means HE was a priest, but his line was not. Again, the NT authors were Gentiles who couldn't read Hebrew and didn't know the backstory.
Claiming that your kingdom isn't of this world is a wonderful excuse for not vanquishing the Romans and fulfilling any of these actual prophecies, but since Mosaic law states that the punishment for sorcery and making false prophecies is death, it's a good bet that move will get you stoned by the Sanhedrin pretty damn quick. And if you start creating a disturbance during Passover, which was a time that tended to rile up the zealots and therefore make the Romans and Herod twitchy, you could come to their attention as a seditionist and would be made an example of.
Which leads me to my second point: there's actually no evidence as to who executed Jesus, or even if he was even executed, let alone for what reason. You're getting that "my kingdom is not of this world" and "ridiculed as being the king of the Jews" bits from the Gospel of John, which isn't one of the earlier Synoptic Gospels - it's actually the least reliable and most historically inaccurate, such as claiming a spear was used to hasten Jesus' death, which would utterly defeat the purpose of crucifixion.
That's primarily because it was written by multiple anti-Semitic Gentile authors in the 3rd century, some 200 years later, and 90% of its embellishments - like the spear - are absent from the Synoptics. It was expressly written to refute the reluctant-to-be-offed Jesus of the Synoptics and instead emphasize the divine aspects of Jesus while presenting a picture of a god-man who willingly handed himself over to the authorities for execution. And because it was obviously added to over centuries it can't be considered reliable and must be rejected as early Church propaganda - for example, the stoning of the adulterous woman doesn't actually appear until a 5thC CE version. C'mon, now. Some of it is just blatantly absurd - a crucifixion isn't meant so much to punish one person as it is to be a deterrent to the local population so you don't have to crucify 100 of them, and if you're going to send a message as to what happens to would-be kings, you don't write a sign in languages like Hebrew, Latin, Greek - which 99.5% of the largely illiterate and Aramaic-speaking population wouldn't be able to read or understand. Seriously, in Latin? Was the intent to strike fear into the hearts of Romans?
Yeah, it ultimately doesn't matter - except when you see all the fuckery that Christianity has been up to for the past 2 millenia to build up this myth, and the damage its followers have caused and are still causing, at some point you have to push back at it and debunk the myths and propaganda by showing they're lies piled on untruths, like that priest-king notion.
Good luck with your move and lots of happiness in your new place - I enjoyed this, I hope it was a welcome distraction.
". . . and most historically inaccurate, such as claiming a spear was used to hasten Jesus' death, which would utterly defeat the purpose of crucifixion."
Yep, historically inaccurate like the letting Barnabas Collins go free.
That reminds me. I must remember to read the Jefferson bible.
Good luck with the new place. We've been in our house for 20 something years. I know at some point we will have to move. Not for years I hope. But I will miss it.
Thank you for the good wishes. I know exactly what you’re talking about. It was my dream home and I have so much love for it. I’ve been here for almost 28 years.I knew we were going to have to move eventually. That’s what happens when you’re 75. There are a lot of reasons to move now. The new place is more spacious, doesn’t have quite the wonderful views. But I think we’ll be happy there. I actually feel OK about it, which surprises me. But there are a lot of changes in store, and at least we’re doing this while we can. I don’t think I would be able to manage it in five more years. But right now it’s OK
Thanks again.
My sympathies, and positive wishes as well. My spouse wants us to move back to his native Canada in the spring, we have 16 years worth of collections here.
Thanks for both the sympathy and the good wishes. I said during the pandemic that the one thing that made the whole thing tolerable was that I was in my favorite place in the entire world. I still feel like it’s my favorite place, but I have the feeling it’s time to go. So, we’ll see what happens in the new house. Despite my rapidly advancing age, I seem to be fairly adaptable still, and as in control of my emotions as I can be without suppressing them. So I’m pretty sure it’s OK with me.
May you find happiness in your new abode.
Thank you. I certainly hope so. I’m just not sure what it’s going to look like. Basically I am a happy person, which really helps..
Agree with Troublesh00ter, the new golden rule for our time--anti-assholism!
Too many assholes, not enough non-assholes. But the real problem are the people who can’t decide if asshole people are a problem.
My spouse refers to it as the "asshole quotient," being high here in Florida.
about 45% judging by 2020.
𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑤𝑎𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑎𝑣𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑡, 𝑤ℎ𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑒.
Why do they think Crockett is less electable? Because they know their base. They want a bigoted white man to run against black woman instead of an unbigoted white man.
It worked so well in 2020. So of course they want to try it again.
unfortunately Joe I think you are right. I have many Texans in the family. They spend way too much time in their cars to pay attention to the "fake" (real) news.
𝐼 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝐻𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠, 𝐵𝑢𝑑𝑑ℎ𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠, 𝑆𝑖𝑘ℎ, 𝐽𝑒𝑤𝑠, 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑠, 𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠, 𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑠 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡-𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝐼 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑠 𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒.
[𝑂]𝑛𝑒 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑡 𝑎 “𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑝 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒.”
A slap in the face to SOME Christians as a wakeup call, reminding them of what Jesus (allegedly) actually said? Yes it was. A slap in the face to all Christians like the NSGOP is trying to paint it? Absolutely not. Try telling that to the pastors protesting and getting shot at in Minnesota.
"The man who tells the truth is driven out of nine villages."
I'm not a Christian although I believe in what Christ tried to teach as far as loving thy neighbor and helping the poor and immigrants, at least if you believe the bible is an accurate accounting of a man we can't prove existed. What I love about this guy is how he points out the hypocrisy of these right-wing Christian nationalist types who don't actually follow any of those teachings. Not that they'll ever admit that but, maybe, others who really do want to follow those teachings will wake up to what these people are doing in Jesus name.
It's been said so many times before but... if the Second Coming happened this very day... if Jesus H. Christ on a Pogo Stick Himself descended from on high, in a beam of holy light, directly onto the Capitol Lawn...
He'd be deported by Christian Nationalists so fast his halo would spin.
tiktok.com/@shaunderick/video/7515474167618129183
There's also tons of merch with Jesus being arrested by ICE
SMITE! 🤣🤣🤣
So the Republican response to him is not news. Duh. He said Jesus is loving and kind and asks of everyone to be helpful. The Republicans can’t do that, how would they ever feel superior to everyone else. Besides, the elected Republicans are the oligarchs and need Jesus to be hateful so the dumb republican voters keep putting them in office.
But here’s the thing. We are in a situation that requires our representatives to have spines and not play nice with the other side. We need Crockett to do the dirty work of cleaning up shop and getting rid of the corrupt politicians and policies. Biden’s policy to work with the right is what has gotten us here, with very little to show for his presidency. Energizing the left, and waking up the apathetic voter is how we have to move forward, reaching out to the so called moderates, centrists, and right will continue to get us the same fucking shit we keep getting. And it will get worse. Mealy mouthed democrats, bought and paid for by the oligarchy, are killing us all. We need the firebrands with conviction, unwilling to compromise on the important issues, standing up for values. Crockett has shown herself to be strong, so what if the cruel, dishonest, corrupt don’t like her and won’t vote for her, they aren’t the majority.
Crockett is what we need, I’m afraid Talarico is what we will get. Either way is better that any Republican, but until we start electing the firebrands and backbones, we will continue to cycle through the republicans tear everything up, democrats start to rebuild fighting the republicans for every inch, then people getting frustrated with the lack of progress and voting for republicans all over again, who tear more shit up and make a bigger mess, the democrats get voted in and try to fix everything but can’t make enough progress, again and again.
Frankly, we need BOTH Crockett and Talarico, each for their qualities. Would that they could be in different districts, eh?
Agree with both of you. Val, Crockett meshes with my politics but there is just no way she can win, after all we have the experience of Beto to draw on. There are just too many mouth-breathers in the state. After all if a corrupt AG Paxton couldn't be dealt with appropriately...and of course he is running for senate this year. It's like a fucking horror movie where the monster keeps coming back.
They are running for Senate. Maybe one wins this year and the other one prevails whenver Cruz is up again.
ETA: Everyone else beat me to it.
I agree, both would be ideal, but in this moment Crockett is my first choice.
I DO like Crockett. She is a firebrand and more: an informed and intelligent firebrand. Any Republican facing her had better have their facts straight, because SHE WILL.
She's also a lawyer.
I came here to say similar. I like Talarico, but Crockett is one hell of a fighter and I think we need that more.
They are running for the senate.
Can't we get Ted Cruz thrown out so one of them can run for his seat?
Edit: Sorry, I should have written Fled Cruz.
No. He was up for re-election in the hellscape of 2020. Allred lost to him. We're stuck with him for 5 more years, unless the pump in his chest fails.
Let us pray...
Tots and pears!😆
*snerk* That will never be old.
OOPS! My bad! 😝
That's almost certainly by design.
Seriously, this is killing me here. Someone - looking at you, Talarico - move, dammit!
Further Thought: Let's spell out just what those upset Christians are talking about, shall we?
𝐹𝑜𝑟 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑠 ℎ𝑢𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑔𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑒𝑎𝑡, 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑔𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘, 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛, 𝐼 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑚𝑒, 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑘 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑘𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑒, 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑐𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡 𝑚𝑒.’
“𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑒𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑖𝑚, ‘𝐿𝑜𝑟𝑑, 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑤𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 ℎ𝑢𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢, 𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘? 𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑤𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑖𝑛, 𝑜𝑟 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢? 𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑤𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑘 𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑜 𝑡𝑜 𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢?’
“𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐾𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑦, ‘𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑙𝑦 𝐼 𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑦𝑜𝑢, 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑒, 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑒.’"
-- Matthew 25:35-40
Apparently, this is the sin of GENEROSITY, which the complainers react against. Giving of themselves to help another must be so contrary to their nature that they may wonder that their bible has such a story in it.
It astonishes me that people can be that MEAN, that incapable of empathy. Then, too, this is what they are getting from their Sunday sermons, and they are clearly swallowing it whole.
Couchfucker Vance claimed this empathy is only supposed to extend to your immediate neighbors (which is exactly why no one wants immigrants or anyone without an Ahnenpass from the Reich living next to them, amirite, wink wink) and loved ones.
Even a "hell no!" correction by his Holy Father didn't sway him, and plenty of evangelicals doubled down on it with him.
Narrow-minded point of view, too typical of Republicans. Assholes can't hardly think outside of themselves.
So true - I'm OK with your limiting it to "Assholes can't hardly think."
Outside of their pack.
Empathy that they now claim is toxic.
Oh, FFS. Someone at Christian Post is telling me I have a religion because I believe in evolution and that takes faith.
Tell him that faith is belief without evidence, and that there is vastly MORE evidence for evolution than there has ever been for his god or any element of his religion!
He won't like that, but so fucking what?
Air is a religion because it's invisible, so it takes faith yadda yadda.
People like that don't have enough intelligence to be worth arguing with.