403 Comments
User's avatar
NOGODZ20's avatar

When Christians speak of the founders of this country, they need to be given a dose of reality.

There are only 7 key founders that actually shaped our secular form of government. They consisted of 5 Deists, 1 Christian who only followed his faith when it was convenient but otherwise ignored it and 1 orthodox Christian. That's it.

And the Deists neither liked nor trusted Christians and Christianity. The saw what Christian rule led to in both the Old World and the previous century on these shores. They wanted no part of it.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

They don't want a dose of reality. They prefer their religious fantasy.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

More than anything, they want their biases reinforced. This is what my daughter ran onto when she worked as a news producer in a fairly large (Southern) market. I know she worked hard to hone her skills, and she was damned good at what she did.

Madison said that our democracy depends on an educated electorate. What happens when the electorate doesn't want to be educated?

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

Orange people win elections and fascism rises.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Orange PEOPLE? PLURAL??? You mean it ain't just Trump?!?

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

Have you looked closely at MTG's skin tone?

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I'd sooner look at the Gorgon!

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Looks vaguely reptilian to me.

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

My observation of almost every photo of MTG is that her mouth is wide open. She is a talker, not a listener.

ETA : and the chances of learning something while you are talking are pretty slim.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Well, there's always Eric and Junior. Dumb as a box of rocks, but still got that T name that enthralls the MAGA-ites

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

That. Is. Astonishing! 👀

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Then the “dumbing down of America” is a complete success and the minority will rule. Just like what we have today.

Rupert Murdoch, come on down!

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I've posted the following before, but it bears repeating:

𝐴𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑦 𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠, 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑦, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑜𝑢𝑙 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒. 𝑂𝑛 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑙𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑑𝑎𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑙𝑘𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑡'𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒 𝑎𝑑𝑜𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑎 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑜𝑛.

-- H.L. Mencken, On Politics: A Carnival of Buncombe

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Classic!

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

That future is now.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Yeah ... I kinda noticed that too. [sigh]

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Just going by her words in the transcript, it's obvious that Ms. Noble knows what she knows what she knows about the ten commandments being our "foundational document," as she keeps harping on that same point no matter what the question and no matter how many facts to the contrary she is presented with. Nothing is going to get through to her, and her statement that she "loves history" is downright ludicrous. Obviously she learned some kind of rewritten whitewashed christianized history. Since she also mentions being a former school teacher, goddess only knows what rubbish she indoctrinated her students with.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

I bet I know more about USA history than her and I know next to nothing post European colonisation or north of Mexico.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I just watched a YouTube Short where Kristi Noem showed off how little she knows about Habeas Corpus. That is some scary shit right there, and I would bet a glass / cup of your favorite beverage that YOU know what the principle of Habeas Corpus is.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Only after I watched a video about this disaster (Farron or BTC).

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Still, you did the legwork. I doubt that Noem could have been bothered, up until she went before that committee and got her nose rubbed in it (which she deserved!).

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

It's Dunning-Kruger on steroids!

Expand full comment
Septuagenarian Contrarian's avatar

I do! and he actually shocked me too. She is obviously totally unqualified for her position.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

I bet you're right about that. She can't tell how ludicrous her misconceptions are, nor can she see how far removed they are from the Constitution, EVEN WHEN SOMEONE LAYS OUT THE FACTS FOR HER AND THEY ARE STARING HER RIGHT IN THE FACE.

That is a whole new level of stubborn, willful ignorance honed into an art form.

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

She understands that there is no upside to her clearing up her misconceptions or admitting that she actually knows she is wrong (if she does know).

There’s an old Sinclair Lewis (I think) line about how difficult it is for someone to say one thing when their paycheck depends on them saying the opposite.

ETA. Upton Sinclair.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

― Upton Sinclair

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

I think she knows what it means, but is dedicated to her job...homeland security bullhorn of Trump.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

You care about learning, and I suspect you enjoy it more than a little. Rep. Noble? Not so much.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Her favorite historian is probably David Barton. 🤢🤮

Expand full comment
Kiwiwriter47's avatar

Or David Irving....

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

Evidently she sort-of-loves 13 colonies history, not Texas history. The founders of the Texas territory were swarthy, spoke Spanish, said the rosary, and had zero interest in the idea of freedom of religion.

Expand full comment
Septuagenarian Contrarian's avatar

She should be locked in a room and be required to read "The Founding Myth" by Andrew Seidel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Founding_Myth

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

They knew their European history and wanted no part of the sectarian strife that had plagued Europe for centuries. The Thirty Years War was nearer to them, than the American Civil war is to us. Millions perished in that war trying to determine who was, or was not, a TRUE Christian.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Precisely! Committing horrors over differences about an imaginary being.

Religion is insanity.

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

Religion excuses a lot of mental illness.

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

Actually, don't take that 'we're fighting for our version of the deity' too literally, there were often if not always proper power-play reasons for their actions. Especially the 30-years war.

On the point of the 30-years war, one of my history teachers called it a 'world war', because it encompassed the whole of Europe. (Yes, Europe is not the whole world, but it was the location of all the major powers at that time.)

Expand full comment
Brianna Amore's avatar

I wish Talarico quoted those Founders in his questioning.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Me too. I hope he’s read “The Founding Myth: Why Christian Nationalism is Un-American.”

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

I want to give the guy a bit more (!) credit: At one point he said that he was a christian and that he followed the teachings of those rules the bill wanted to put into the classrooms. But he clearly is able to distinguish his private religiosity and his responsibilities as a lawmaker in a secular state.

Expand full comment
Crowscage's avatar

When these scum talk about the founders they are talking about themselves founding a theocratic dictatorship and dressing it up in the freshly flayed skin of the USA.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

"And I worry that these kinds of bills will actually create a new generation of atheists who think our religion is more about power than love."

NO KIDDING! It's about Christian Nationalists marking their territory and attempting to gain back the influence and power they have generally lost over the last quarter-century. It is an act of desperation which, as both Hemant and Talarico point out, has the potential to backfire on those who so fervently want the 10Cs in classrooms.

I think it's indicative of something else, too, something which Representative Talarico said which I cited above and which has been spreading through our government since Trump won the White House ... and that is this:

𝐹𝑎𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑚 𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑛𝑜𝑟 𝑎 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑚𝑎𝑑𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠. 𝐼𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑒.

-- Emma Goldman

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

The Christianity of the Christian Nazionalists 𝗶𝘀 about power. Love has nothing to do with it.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

All organized religion is about power. Most of the unorganized ones too.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

I will be here for every minute of that backfire when it happens and it will happen!

Let

It

Burn

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

🎯✨

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

The people who want to plaster these rules up everywhere are the ones who follow them the least...

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

How many times have we said it? "Rules for thee, not for me."

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

And why this set? The Decalogue occurs in various places in Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. And there is substantial difference among them in various translations. The KJ words them differently from the NSRV, words them differently from the Roman Catholic Bible and all those are worded differently from the Jewish Study Bible. Why is a TX statute endorsing the KJ? Especially since there are 5 or 6 Roman Catholics on the SCOTUS. The TX legislature isn’t there to govern. Not there to solve problems. They are there, apparently, to cause division in society.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

They don't want no Cath-a-lick version.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

For sure!

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

That’s because rules are for followers and these brave souls are Leaders!

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

These people see the Constitution as something to be overcome and gotten around. They would be going out of their tiny little minds at the mere suggestion any other religious tradition be represented in the public schools, but assume it's okay if they do it. The people who would break down the barriers between church and state always assume it will be their tribe calling the shots for everyone else, when they should be imagining the tribe they hate most having control over their lives. Rights are not matters of majority rule. They exist to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority as is represented by these Texas Republicans in this case. At the end of the day, it's just more performance art.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Yes yes yes, oraxx! Everything is obfuscation. The MAGATS keep pushing their Constitution breaking laws, varying the language, looking for loopholes. It is their way.

They offer the people NOTHING constructive. Everything they do is a restriction of civil rights - human rights - in their mad quest for power, power and more fucking power.

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

Quote: "Rights are not matters of majority rule. They exist to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority "

This. They protect the weak, the ugly, the criminal, the unpopular .... Deliberately. Very deliberately!

Here in Europe we created the ECHR, the European Convention of Human Rights, it is the foundational documents of many of our European constituencies (not the UK, but that's a different story) and the language was shaped by the experiences of WW2 and in particular the fashist, authoritarian, nazi governments. There rights to religion, jobs, property and ultimately life was taken away from minorities. The ECHR is there to protect those minorities. Deliberately. Very deliberately.

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

In most cases, the majority can take care of itself.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Took nearly 30 minutes to read this article. Pretty much made every point I wanted to address.

I did make note of one thing Noble said: Faith-based prisons. I wasn't aware that such a thing existed (it doesn't). I do believe she meant faith-based prison programs. I'd like to ask her the following: If the 10 Commandments are so wonderful, why is the largest prison population the US Christian? The 10 C would appear to be a monumental failure.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

Hmm. "Faith based prisons" seems like concentration camps for people who don't have the correct "faith". Noble probably wouldn't admit to it publicly, but there is definitely a non-zero chance that's what she wants.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Can you say, "Reeducation Center," boys and girls? I KNEW that you could! 😝

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

What would a faith-based prison imply about religion? Of Christians in particular? Does it say that the religious are dangerous and need to be incarcerated?

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

At minimum, it would say that those who espouse religion don't follow its rules and regs very well! It might further say that said rules and regs are probably in need of considerable revision, if not throw them out and start with a clean sheet of paper!

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

I suspect that, if her statistics are accurate (which I'm only willing to entertain the possibility of as a thought experiment), the lower recidivism rate would likely have more to do with convicts understanding that their best chance at freedom and a second chance at life lies 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 those religious programs, which the conservative-Christian-dominated parole boards they'll face are 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘧𝘶𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 biased towards. Thus, if a prisoner believes they deserve to be released- whether because they're genuinely reformed, or because they were wrongfully convicted (because, let's face it, this is Texas, where exonerating evidence is not regarded as cause enough to overturn a conviction)- they'll sprinkle some Jesus on their resumé to better their odds. And I'm sure that's the advice their attorneys, if they can afford them, would offer them as well.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

𝑇𝐴𝐿𝐴𝑅𝐼𝐶𝑂: 𝑊𝑒𝑙𝑙, 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛, 𝑤𝑒’𝑣𝑒 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝐹𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐹𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒.

𝑁𝑂𝐵𝐿𝐸: 𝐼 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡. 𝐼 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑑 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡.

𝑇𝐴𝐿𝐴𝑅𝐼𝐶𝑂: 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑦. 𝑌𝑒𝑠. 𝐻𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡…

𝑁𝑂𝐵𝐿𝐸: 𝐼 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡…

"I disagree with that." Says it all, really. Noble does not want to acknowledge what the Establishment clause and the Free Exercise clause work together to accomplish. She refused to answer the question about forcing Christianity because she knows that is what this bill does. She wants to force Christianity, and deflects when called out for it because she knows it is a bad look to say it out loud. And we all know what variety of Christianity she is pushing here.

Ms Noble: Shame on you for denying that your religious freedom depends on the freedom to hold religious ideas that are opposed to yours. Shame on you for trying to make our country into a Christian version of Iran.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

"Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion..."

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

That good enough for you, Representative Noble?

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

They cherry pick the Founder's writings, too. Doing it so much with the bible has made them pros. I think it might be an automatic reaction with them, just never register the words they don't like.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Willful ignorance…the worst kind.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Which is why I would have recited the Establishment Clause to her verbatum, THEN get her reaction. Noble needs to have her nose rubbed in it, whether she likes that or not.

This purposeful cluelessness has got to stop somewhere, and she's as likely a candidate as any.

Expand full comment
Ed Buckner's avatar

It's just not fair making Rep Noble have to defeat Thomas Jefferson in these matters--have you no compassion, Trouble?

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Not if she can't be bothered to respect a fundamental principle upon which our government was founded, no! Stipulated that she doesn't want the Establishment Clause to be true, but there's still this:

𝑌𝑜𝑢 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑎 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒅𝒐 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒂 𝒓𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒐𝒘𝒏 𝒇𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒔. [emphasis mine]

-- Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

“I disagree with that.”

Too bad, this isn’t a matter of opinion. Disagree all you want, it won’t change reality.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Yes, Ms. Noble, disagree all you want, since that's all you know how to do. Facts is facts.

We all disagree with the idiots who voted for you, but that won't change reality. Your sorry ignorant ass is still in the Texas legislature. That's how reality works. Opinions and disagreement don't change anything. They just reveal how delusional some people are for thinking it will.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

"Thou Shalt Not Have Other Gods Before Me."

Doesn't this Commanment boldly state that the Christian claim of there being only one god (theirs) is a bald-faced lie?

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

I am afraid it's a win win for the nastcs. If nobody challenges the bill, these useless posters will be put up where they do NOT belong. If someone does, then it's a waste of taxpayers money in two ways, first there will be less money for public school, second it will be a other push to divert more money to religious schools via vouchers and others scams because they are better than public schools 🙄

"And did you know that the recidivism rate in a regular prison is 68%, but the recidivism rate in a faith-based prison is 8%?"

Source ? Because AFAIK regular prisons are full if both chaplains and christian inmates.

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

I'd definitely rather it not be in classrooms, but I think the long-term impact is going to be greater student cynicism and thus less faith.

Not only do teenagers have a knee-jerk response against school/state telling them what to think, but when they read 'honor the sabbath' and then the loudspeaker reminds them to go to the track meet this Saturday (and so many many other examples of hyporcrisy), the main lesson they will take away is "these are nice, but Texas wants you to break them."

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I suspect no small amount of vandalism aimed at those stupid posters, either, and not all of it done by non-Christians!

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Is there any provision explicitly stating that these shitty posters be hung up facing outward? If not, hang them facing the wall.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Now THERE's a concept!

Expand full comment
Jaime Ramirez's avatar

And/or putting another poster or object on top of it.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

That’ll work too.

Expand full comment
James Clark's avatar

I would think that non-Christians wouldn't bother with vandalizism, it will be the children of fake Christians, but not to worry, their God will forgive them for any sins they commit.🤮

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Regardless of who does it, I don't see those posters going unscathed for very long.

Expand full comment
James Clark's avatar

I suggest a large stamp with "UNLESS CONSIDERED INCONVENIENT". Or maybe stickers? Kids really like stickers.😁

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Under No. 10, I'd pencil in: "THOUGHT CRIME!"

Expand full comment
Kay-El's avatar

Hahaha! Thinking the same. I hope we get to see photos at some point.

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

I propose annotating each poster with examples of Republicans violating each Commandment.

Particularly those who voted for the bill.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Ba-da-bing!

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

And we could watch heads explode when word of that gets back to the Texas GOP.

"Rally the troops! Grab your Bibles and your Smith & Wessons! Head for the elementary school!"

"What is it? Another school shooting?"

"No, worse! They're defacing our Ten Commandments posters!"

"Fuck! Hand me that pitchfork, ma. Let's get those little bastards!"

Expand full comment
Greg Aydt's avatar

If the state of Texas is going to require the Ten Commandments hanging every classroom, then those Commandments need to be enacted into state law -- with stoning being the punishment for any violation. That should immediately resolved in the reduction of the number of Republican elected officials by 90%.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Only 90 % ?

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

The other 10% succeeded in following the unwritten 11th Commandment: "𝘛𝘩𝘰𝘶 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘵 𝘕𝘰𝘵 𝘎𝘦𝘵 𝘊𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵."

Expand full comment
Bensnewlogin's avatar

For once, I don’t really have much to say. These people are totally exhausting, which is their intention.

There’s a reason why they want the 10 Commandments, rather than the beatitudes. They like the Old Testament God. He murders anybody who gets in his way. He doesn’t talk much about loving other people, concern for others. Half of the 10 Commandments simply concern how you will worship him in the way that he demands. And that’s what they’re interested in.

This has been true for as long as I’ve been an activist. The Old Testament is for you. The New Testament is for me.

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar
2dEdited

𝐼 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑘 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎 𝑓𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑡.

Many of the early forefathers came to the Americas because they DIDN'T want to be told by the state how to worship. The ability to worship freely without government intrusion was what made this place one they wanted to come and live in.

𝑁𝑂𝐵𝐿𝐸: 𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑚𝑠...[𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟]...𝐴𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛, 𝐼 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑘 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎 𝑔𝑜𝑜𝑑 𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎 𝑔𝑜𝑜𝑑 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑚

So Texas schools are going to tell it's students not to participate in Saturday varsity athletics competitions, because it's not good citizenship? It's not being a good member of the classroom to go to the track meet?

Hypocrisy like this is how you make atheists.

𝑊ℎ𝑦 𝑑𝑜 𝑤𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑠, 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑎𝑢𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦?

And there it is. Respect our authoritah!

This doesn't respect others. It does the opposite - ignores their different beliefs. And while I certainly have authority figures in my life I respect, celebrating the need to respect them? FFS why? That's not even a sensible thought.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

Respect for another is given provisionally until that other individual shows they do not deserve it. Respect for authority is given only when that authority has earned it.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Which the MAGATS just don’t understand. Their demands to be respected generate the opposite response.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Thing is, MAGATs don't respect. They WORSHIP and GENUFLECT, even if they don't know what that second word means! 🤪

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

Respect for authority needs to be re-assessed on a moment-to-moment basis, these days. You did a good thing today? Great, here's a lollipop. You get another when you continue doing good things tomorrow. We've seen far too many supposedly-respectable authority figures capitulate to and collaborate with evil to trust that even the best of them couldn't or wouldn't turn on us if they're offered a high enough price- or subjected to a severe enough threat.

Expand full comment
Straw's avatar
2dEdited

So the founding fathers wanted to be free from religious pressure in Europe. But why did they have to kill so many of those that already was living in those continents? And why did the occupation authority have to buy and steal people from Africa and force them into slavery and force them to convert to a religion that was not theirs? Does that sound like freedom?

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

That is one hell of an confounding question, at least for me. I'm sure a few scholars somewhere have studied that phenomenon and written a few books about it.

I think the main reason might be that slavery is condoned in the Bible. There's a verse somewhere that instructs slaves to obey their masters. I've heard about it, but don't know exactly where it is.

Also, the story of the Israelites' journey to the "land flowing with milk and honey" is rife with horrific stories of the raiding and burning of cities and settlements, along with the slaying of entire populations -- but hey, that's alright because those people were heathens who dissed Yah-hoo by worshiping false gods, so of course they deserved genocide. Besides, those heathens were in the way of Yah-hoo's chosen people, and besides that, "Yah-hoo tole us to do it!"

Some did indeed come to America with hopes of a new form of government born of the Enlightenment, to be brought to fruition in the New World, but far too many others came over with a ramrod up their puritanical asses, salivating over the idea of cosplaying a Bronze Age tribe of warmongering nomads. They wanted to live out their own Exodus, in all the brutal and gory details. Glory!

Determined to remake this New World into The Promised Land 2.0, using the tired old "Gawd hath ordained it as our Manifest Destiny" (although that particular phrase didn't come into vogue about until about 70 or so years later -- applied to the growing belief that control of the North American Continent was divinely ordained -- the motivation of the original religion warriors was the same), they proceeded to do just that. "We're here now, we're in charge. Gawd says so." Gawd, they believed, justified both enslaving heathens (African Americans) and slaughtering them outright (Native Americans).

This is just my unscholarly opinion. I would be interested in reading what real scholars and historians who have studied this in detail have to say. I'm particularly interested in any discussion of the psychological angle.

I hope this was helpful, even if it's mostly conjecture on my part.

Edited for typo.

Expand full comment
Straw's avatar

That the bible condone slavery was one of the reasons I puked a lot while reading the old and the new testament app 40 ya.

Expand full comment
Old Man Shadow's avatar

"Repect authority" was not foundational to a violent rebellion against the legal authority.

Expand full comment
Kiwiwriter47's avatar

That theory works for Eric Cartman...

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

Rep. James Talarico has a bright future ahead. It’s been a complete pleasure watching him defend our constitution day in and day out against all odds.

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

“It’s foundational…”

“It’s foundational…”

“It’s foundational…”

No matter how many times you say it, Noble, it’s not going to just become true. You sound like a squawking parrot reciting this lie.

There is no real historical support to your idea that the Ten Commandments are foundational to the United States. Barton is a fraud and a liar. Where in the constitution does any of the commandments show up? No religious test along with the establishment clause makes the first few commandments unconstitutional. Coveting is the most American thing ever so there’s two more down. The constitution doesn’t get into legislating the sex lives of the citizens, so adultery is out of the running. Stealing, lying and killing are all universal offenses, so no need to cite the ten big no-nos to justify these in our laws. So, tell me how the Ten Commandments are foundational to our country and laws.

You can’t. And just because the budding education system used the most commonly available writings of the times doesn’t mean it justifies overstepping the constitution to demand your religious nonsense be put up in every classroom. We stopped using Dick and Jane readers when we developed better aids. We have better morality guides than the list of ten naughty acts, let’s just move on from them too. I mean, we’ve developed better morals eons before these were even pulled from the goat herders asses to be put down in the Bible, or Torah or whatever got them first. As a teacher, this is just more shit to wade through that just gets in the way of educating and will have little to bad effect on classroom management.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Val, parrots can learn and use their brains.

Expand full comment
dammit barry's avatar

Religion makes people stop thinking. Al they hear from clergy is "YOU MUST OBEY US!!! WE ARE OF GOD. WE WILL TELL YOU WHO TO HATE. WE WILL TELL YOU WHO YOU MUST VOTE FOR> WE CONTROL YOUR EVERY THOUGHT, WORD, DEED AND DREAM!!!"

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

When I was a child in Sunday School, I was taught that it was a sin to even question god. That was what all the ministers would say after they got through delivering his latest message. So questions were not allowed of the preachers either, no matter how troubling or confusing their messages were.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

Thou shalt not kill.

DEATH PENALTY

She said, “We are talking about murder here” as if that wasn’t state sanctioned MURDER. What about all the antiabortion extremists and legislators currently sentencing women to death in their ERs? I’d say that’s “murder” too.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

And Brainworm Bob has now decided that pregnant women don't need a COVID vaccine shot.

So much for all those "pro-life" xtians.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Brainworm Bob needs to die, just like Trump. Two of the unhealthiest old farts in the country are shitcanning health care access for everybody who needs it.

For some reason I can't fathom, those two rotting zombies will probably outlive every last one of us, wreaking havok their every waking moment.

Expand full comment
Tinker's avatar

This is particularly stupid in Texas where they execute more people than anywhere else, several who have been found innocent AFTER they were murdered by the state. Not to mention the racial disparity. According to this site: https://tcadp.org/get-informed/texas-death-penalty-facts/, Texas death row is comprised of 46.5 percent black and 26.2 percent hispanic.

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

IIRC, some of them were found to be innocent 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 they were executed by the state.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

I read about that. It was horrifying. Once the state "proves" you are guilty, then goddammit you're guilty no matter what. I used to think that happened only in places with brutal dictatorships.

Of course that's what we have now, but I'm sure people proven innocent were still being executed. I seem to recall news stories in which various states refuse to vacate death sentences even when DNA exonerated them. And I'm pretty sure that was well before I heard of MAGA.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

It's only murder when they aren't the ones doing it.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Indeed it is. But they don't see it that way. If a woman dies of a high risk pregnancy, that's god's will or some such rubbish.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

I will continue to shout murderers at them until I’m no longer able.

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

And apparently it’s preferable to a living incubator, since she can’t talk back.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

https://youtu.be/Hyph_DZa_GQ

The best Onion Breaking News ever.

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

Since so many of these folk think abortion or even discarding unused embryos after an IVF is “murder”, her attempt to narrow the meaning of “kill” to “only” murder doesn’t get her nearly as far as she thinks.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

Never any consistency with these folks. They get to decide who lives and who dies.

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

Did you read that story about the little girl, who's getting healthcare in California but has been ordered to be deported? Tell me again how that bl**dy party is 'pro life'??

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-05-27/deportation-trump-healthcare-immigration-humanitarian

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

To the Texass legislature...

Get it through your thick skulls: The 10 Commandments were meant for the Chosen People and the Chosen People alone, NOT for Gentiles.

Expand full comment
larry parker's avatar

Texans are the chosen people. Don't you remember the Alamo? ; )

Expand full comment
Zizzer-Zazzer-Zuzz's avatar

Did they have the high ground?

Expand full comment
Zizzer-Zazzer-Zuzz's avatar

Maybe higher than the guys in the basement then.

Expand full comment
Daniel Rotter's avatar

Yeah , the Big 10 were written for Jackie Mason, not Jackie Gleason!!!!!!!/s

Expand full comment