Quantcast

«

»

Feb 27 2014

Starnes: Bible Will Be Criminalized

When Todd Starnes isn’t making up fake persecution stories in the present day, he’s predicting future tales of martyrdom. He told Bryan Fischer that “we are going to see, within our lifetime, an attempt to outlaw or criminalize parts of the Bible or even perhaps pulling out parts of the Bible that have to deal with those issues.”

26 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    D. C. Sessions

    By choosing a value of “our lifetimes” of the next century (hey, there’s bound to be a couple of Americans alive today who will be alive in 100 years, right?) he’s pretty safe from any kind of accountability.

    Otherwise, I’d be happy to spot him a few thousand at even money on that prediction, held in escrow and payable when either of us dies.

  2. 2
    Chiroptera

    Well, to be honest, I don’t see much difference between what’s in the Bible and what’s in literature that the radical right keeps wanting to be banned.

  3. 3
    matty1

    Well, to be honest, I don’t see much difference between what’s in the Bible and what’s in literature that the radical right keeps wanting to be banned.

    I think the Bible is more likely to advocate the bad things it describes – like genocide.

  4. 4
    David Simms

    To be fair, we have already criminalized parts of the Bible. For instance, we have outlawed the murder of homosexuals and the owning of human beings as property (i.e. slavery). The Bible clearly endorses both of these things.

  5. 5
    heddle

    David Simms,

    To be fair, we have already criminalized parts of the Bible. For instance, we have outlawed the murder of homosexuals and the owning of human beings as property (i.e. slavery). The Bible clearly endorses both of these things.

    That makes no sense. There is a obvious difference between criminalizing the acts described by the words and criminalizing the book containing the words. A semi-infinite number of books describe and possibly endorse criminal activities–but the books are not criminalized.

  6. 6
    raven

    As others have pointed out already, much of the OT bible is already banned.

    1. Slavery is illegal.

    2. You can no longer sell your kids as sex slaves for a few bucks.

    3. Biblical marriage is illegal i.e. polygamy and concubines.

    4. You can no longer stone to death gays, adulterers, nonvirgin brides, sabbath breakers, false prophets, atheists, heretics, or apostates.

    Anyone living a biblical law lifestyle today would end up doing multiple life sentences in prison. Warren Jeffs of the FLDS tried it and got life + 20 years.

  7. 7
    raven

    No one is ever going to criminalize the bible. We Militant Atheists love the bible!!!

    It’s one of our two best weapons.

    It’s just a kludgy old book of mythology, fairy tales, obsolete pretend morality, and atrocities. If you want a better book on how to live, there are many better. Try The Lord of the Rings.

    The other weapon of Militant Atheists are xians like Todd Starnes. A hater, liar, and hypocrite, the three main sacraments of fundie xianity. Xians like Todd Starnes create more atheists in a day than Dawkins, Myers, and Hitchens do in a year.

  8. 8
    somnus

    I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s right. There’s always some segment of society that wants to ban things they find offensive, and much of the Bible is deeply offensive. I wouldn’t support a ban, personally, but that doesn’t mean others wouldn’t. Whether such an idea gets taken seriously by the majority is, of course, a different matter.

    It’s a little funny him getting alarmist about people perhaps trying to remove portions of the Bible, though, since it’s pretty much guaranteed that whatever version he’s holding sacred was arrived at, at least partially, by removing sections from previous versions. There is no “one true Bible” currently in circulation.

  9. 9
    whheydt

    It’s WORSE than he thinks. The Bible won’t be banned, it’ll be studied in Mythology courses.

    Oh, wait…Fonterose covered Genesis in his Mythology course at UC Berkeley 50 years ago when my mother took the course.

  10. 10
    jba55

    “we are going to see, within our lifetime, an attempt to outlaw or criminalize parts of the Bible or even perhaps pulling out parts of the Bible that have to deal with those issues. ”

    How come we’ve never had that happen before when the constitution contradicts the Bible, buddy? What’s so special about gay marriage (assuming that’s what he’s on about) that it’s going to make the government censor your holy book when, say, slavery and more equal rights for women didn’t? Or am I wrong and people were saying that the Bible was going to be outlawed then, too?

  11. 11
    busterggi

    “David Simms,

    “To be fair, we have already criminalized parts of the Bible. For instance, we have outlawed the murder of homosexuals and the owning of human beings as property (i.e. slavery). The Bible clearly endorses both of these things.”

    That makes no sense. There is a obvious difference between criminalizing the acts described by the words and criminalizing the book containing the words. A semi-infinite number of books describe and possibly endorse criminal activities–but the books are not criminalized.”

    Nice side step to avoid the fact that your bible condones all sorts of nasty crap that is now illegal.

    Oh right, those are the parts you ignore as a ‘true’ Christian.

  12. 12
    Ellie

    Oh, Toddles….if you were alive in T. Jefferson’s time, you would have been one of those early wingnuts who proclaimed, “If Jefferson is elected, soldiers will break into your homes and confiscate your Bibles!!11!”, wouldn’t you?

  13. 13
    Michael Heath

    David Simms:

    To be fair, we have already criminalized parts of the Bible. For instance, we have outlawed the murder of homosexuals and the owning of human beings as property (i.e. slavery). The Bible clearly endorses both of these things.

    heddle responds:

    That makes no sense. There is a obvious difference between criminalizing the acts described by the words and criminalizing the book containing the words. A semi-infinite number of books describe and possibly endorse criminal activities–but the books are not criminalized.

    One can read what Simms says generously and get the correct gist of his point. The crucial point Mr. Simms brings up is that the Bible advocates and even commands humans to commit horribly evil, immoral acts. Acts that have been justifiably rejected by liberal democracies who criminalize such behavior. Pointing to an arguably pedantic failure on Simms’ parts reads here as a red herring. Is that in order to avoid Simms’ central point? Is there a cognitive dissonance reduction effort in play here heddle?

    And Simms’ point also leads to how Starnes is being disingenuous. Starnes is predicting events that have already occurred, and for reasons that most Christians would also support; especially when you consider liberal Christians.

  14. 14
    David Simms

    There is a obvious difference between criminalizing the acts described by the words and criminalizing the book containing the words.

    Starnes said:

    criminalize parts of the Bible

    Those are “parts” of the Bible.

  15. 15
    heddle

    busterggi,

    Nice side step to avoid the fact that your bible condones all sorts of nasty crap that is now illegal.

    I have never avoided a discussion about the horrible parts of the bible. I have been in many such discussions here on this blog.

    Oh right, those are the parts you ignore as a ‘true’ Christian.

    Oh, right, and you’re an idiot, a ‘true’ idiot.

    Michael Heath,

    Is that in order to avoid Simms’ central point? Is there a cognitive dissonance reduction effort in play here heddle?

    Um, I don’t think so, but feel free to engage in internet psychoanalysis. My point is as I made it: banning the bible is a separate question from pointing out that it advocates acts that are now criminal. You can read more into that from your position of omniscience, but that’s all I meant.

  16. 16
    heddle

    David Simms,

    Those are “parts” of the Bible.

    What’s your point. The bible (in the OT) commands killing adulterers. It is illegal to kill adulterers. Starnes (at least based on the clip) has a chicken-little whine that “someone”, some boogeyman, will make him delete the text from the bible. That is what he talks about in the clip: a fear on his part that the biblical text itself (or portions of it) will be illegal. He is not complaining (at least here) that we have made summarily executing adulterers illegal. If you can’t tell the difference then you are friggin’ clueless.

  17. 17
    Nick Gotts

    I have to agree with heddle here. Starnes, AFAIK, hasn’t advocated stoning adulterers or reinstituting slavery, so the fact that the Bible commends or commands many such immoral acts is irrelevant to his silly claims, and we (or rather, you, since I’m not American) haven’t criminalized parts of the Bible, only some of these acts.

    On another point, I’m interested to note that Starnes implicitly admits that Obama will be leaving the Presidency at the end of his term.

  18. 18
    eric

    @2 – true that….but sadly, probably true for censorious types on the radical left too.

  19. 19
    RickR

    eric @18

    LOL @ “radical left”. The U.S. doesn’t have a “radical left”, certainly not one that anyone is paying any attention to, or that even manages to leave evidence of its existence anywhere.

  20. 20
    Chiroptera

    RickR, #19: eric said “probably.” He was making a hypothetical.

    -

    eric, #18: Maybe, but I was commenting on the hypocrisy of the paricular group under discussion on their fear that people might do to them what they do or try to do to others.

  21. 21
    felidae

    Haven’t we already outlawed that part in the Bible about having multiple wives or stoning adulterers?–who knows what they will outlaw next, getting tattoos, eating lobsters, working on Saturday…

  22. 22
    freehand

    whheydt: It’s WORSE than he thinks. The Bible won’t be banned, it’ll be studied in Mythology courses.
    .
    Soon after, like Thor and Hercules, Jesus will become a superhero, perhaps a cartoon. His apostles will be a league of heroes. The rich details of the mythical background, especially when poorly understood and largely ignored by the writers, can provide the usual stereotypical props and plots. The legendary Coat of Many Colors… the Ass Bone of Samson… the key to Eden, his Fortress of Solitude. Maybe a spinoff, perhaps of one of his unnamed siblings.
    .
    Or his mom. Satan goes back in time to prevent the birth of Jesus: “The Maria Chronicles”.
    .

  23. 23
    D. C. Sessions

    Soon after, like Thor and Hercules, Jesus will become a superhero, perhaps a cartoon.

    Or a zombie movie?

  24. 24
    had3

    Nick @ 17: isn’t banning the acts proscribed in the bible the same as banning parts of the bible? The bible tells me I can, nay should, kill those who work on the sabbath. That act is illegal now. Wouldn’t that be a part of the bible that is now illegal? Or do you read it as the words themselves would be illegal, irrespective of the acts associated with them?

  25. 25
    dingojack

    OK I’ve got to wade in here.

    Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D H Lawrence was banned in England (it isn’t now). Book stores were not permitted to sell it (openly), nor were Libraries allowed to lend it out.

    Is this true of the Bible in the US*? It is likely to be true, in the foreseeable future, within the US*?

    As far as I am aware murder is a criminal act in most jurisdictions. Are the works of P D James, Reginald Hill, Ian Rankin, Agatha Christie, Truman Capote etc. illegal? Have the actual bits about the murders (and/or other crimes) been redacted or abridged in subsequent editions?

    Have the criminal (or even the immoral bits) of the Bible (ever) been redacted or abridged in the US*?

    Dingo
    ——–
    * The country we are speaking of here specifically

  26. 26
    matty1

    Out of interest here is the most extensive list of books of the Bible I can find, how many of these does Starnes accept in his Bible? How does he feel about the exclusion of divinely inspired works like Ser`atä Seyon from the text he most likely uses?

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site