The Weekly White House Bible Study.

Photo via AP.

Evangelism everywhere, promoting a theocracy, with a firm footing in the white house.

…The schedule does not list who attended that session, but Ralph Drollinger, a right-wing pastor with a long history of ties to Perry and other Trump Administration officials, claims on his web site to be running weekly Bible sessions specially for the Trump Cabinet. He has praised the new administration for its power to “change the course of America in ways that are biblical.”

[…]

In a January radio interview, Drollinger praised then-senator Jeff Sessions, who “hungers and thirsts for the Scripture,” for his performance during his confirmation hearing, when he provided a Biblical justification for his draconian views on immigration. “I’ve had the distinct honor of teaching him on this subject, and many others,” Drollinger said. “There’s nothing more exciting, when you’re a Bible teacher, to see one of the guys you’re working with—to see him or her articulate something you’ve taught them when they’re under the gun.”

Vice President Mike Pence, HUD Secretary Ben Carson, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, nominee for Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, HHS Secretary Tom Price, and Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, have all sponsored the Capitol Ministries Cabinet Bible study, according to literature put out by Capitol Ministries.

The Cabinet Bible study is the just newest piece of what Drollinger has described as a “para-church ministry” with a “target audience” of political members. In a September 2015 interview, Drollinger described his mission as creating a “factory” to mass-produce politicians like Michele Bachmann, who is on the Capitol Ministries board. “She thinks Biblically,” Drollinger said. “She doesn’t need a whole lot of time to figure out how to vote because she sees the world through a scriptural lens. We need more men and women like her in office.”

[…]

For an outside group to hold an event in a Congressional building, they must be sponsored by a senator or representative; dozens of Members of Congress sponsored Drollinger’s group, including Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Tom Price, and Sessions while they were all still on Capitol Hill. Rep. Mike Conaway, who recently took over the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election from Devin Nunes, is also a Capitol Ministries sponsor.

Now, Capitol Ministries holds three separate Bible Studies each week which it describes in its literature: one for Cabinet members (“7:00 am Wednesdays Mornings. Location Undisclosed. Light Refreshments Served.”); one for the Senate (“8:00 am Tuesdays, Rotating Offices of Senators. Hot Breakfast Served.”); and one for members of the House (“Capitol H324: Monday or Tuesday Evenings after First Votes Back. Dinner Served.”) In an interview in January, Drollinger described the House study as feeling like a truck stop and the Senate study feeling like a country club.

Everything in the article is highly disturbing and frightening. Recommended Reading. Fusion has the full story.

Sunday Facepalm: Beastly!

Kevin Swanson is being rather beastly over Beauty and the Beast, and for a different reason than the standard Christian zealot reason of “gay character”. Swanson is concerned with the promotion of inter-species breeding. Yep. Obviously, Mr. Swanson’s knowledge of how that whole breeding business works is deficient, but let’s take a look at La Belle et la Bête by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve, published in 1740. The original work was more in line with a novella than a brief tale, and it was for adults, not children.

Villeneuve’s work is more novella than simple tale with its elaborate prose and numerous details, including stories told within stories. Her narrative is far from complete upon the Beast’s transformation into a man. Then we meet his mother and learn his backstory as well as Beauty’s own hidden history, for she is not the true daughter of a merchant, but a princess in disguise herself. All of this combines into an elaborate literary creation, not a traditionally truncated folktale. Villeneuve imagined new material, uniquely her own, while incorporating traditional folklore elements, many of which exist in the version we are most familiar with today. She writes about romantic love and marriage while exploring themes like women’s marital rights, although those themes are somewhat hidden in most English translations of the tale.

Two different English translations of Villeneuve’s tale are presented in this collection. The first one, by Ernest Dowson, was first published in 1908. It is one of the most accurate translations of Villeneuve’s content into English, including elements often changed or omitted in other translations. However, Dowson’s language is less ornate than Villeneuve’s and doesn’t capture the same essence as another favored translation, one by J. R. Planché, first published in 1858.

Planché’s translation includes footnotes by the present editor to show where he modified the text, changes he briefly touches upon in his comments to his Victorian audience. The changes, although small, are far from minor for they change an essential element of the tale. Instead of asking Beauty to marry him each night—a familiar refrain in modern versions of the story—the Beast asks Beauty, “May I sleep with you tonight?”

The question, while risqué, is not merely suggestive or erotic. It implies control and choice for Beauty over her own body and sexuality, something that was not legally hers or that of any woman who was handed over as property in marriage to a husband in centuries past. The Beast is no true beast since he never forces his physical desires upon her despite any rights implied by her presence in his home in what today may be considered a common law marriage, although the construct didn’t exist in Villeneuve’s time.

Another important change is in the Beast’s transformation scene. Beauty finally agrees to sleep with the Beast and marry him in the original Villeneuve. The Beast then sleeps beside her during the night, although no other activities beyond Beauty’s mysterious dreams are described. When she awakens the next morning, a man—one whom she has come to love in her dreams—is sleeping beside her instead of the Beast.

That, and more is from SurLaLune Fairytales. All of the above elevates the tale considerably from the versions which are familiar today, and it’s easy enough to figure out why Disney certainly wouldn’t touch upon such complexities. The Disney version is a simplified tale of love, with the requisite lesson about how appearances are not what matters, don’t judge a book by its cover, and so on. For Mr. Swanson, that’s quite bad enough, as somehow or another, along with the horrible effort to ‘homosexualize’ whole generations, claims the movie promotes ‘Inter-Species Breeding’, oh, the horror!

Swanson said that the movie was an “insidious” effort to “homosexualize the next generation of eight and ten-year-old kids” and ensure that they are “indoctrinated into the homosexual lifestyle.”

“This is how revolutions take place,” he said. “You are in the middle of a cultural revolution in the United States of America. No, this is not the cultural revolution that Mao Tse-tung brought to China; this is a different kind of cultural revolution, but I’m going to say it’s just about as dangerous … though a bit more insidious.”

Oooh, look at that nicely done twist into communism. You can’t have the gay without the commie in the christian version of the gay agenda. From what I understand, a minor character in the movie has a crush on his mean boss. This is hardly a gay version of Beauty and the Beast. (As the commonly known tale has little to do with the original these days, that would be a fun movie!) It’s not as though the current flick has become mandatory, and all people must have their eyelids taped open and have no choice but to watch it.

Even worse, Swanson said, the film is promoting inter-species breeding, which he said Hollywood has been pushing since the days of Star Trek.

“Christians, I don’t believe, can allow for this,” Swanson stated. “Humans are made in the image of God. Humans are assigned a spouse which happens to be a member of the opposite sex. Friends, God’s law forbids it … Christians should not allow for this, man. We cannot allow for humans to interbreed with other species. It’s just wrong, wrong, wrong. It’s confusion, it’s unnatural.”

“We are in some of the most radical, most anti-biblical, the most immoral, the most unethical, the most wicked sexual environment that the world has ever known, right now,” he warned.

Star Trek? Oh my. Does the not very thoughtful Mr. Swanson not know that we don’t have a federation, starships, or zillions of extraterrestials around to get sexy with? Yes, I had one hell of a crush on Mr. Spock when I was 9 years old, it was those ears. Unfortunately for me, there weren’t any neato trips to Vulcan happening. Given the limitations of television back then, and the lack of imagination now, most all the aliens pictured were suitably humanoid, barely distinguishable from the bog standard human. Even so, there’s no inter-species breeding going on in the Star Trek sense.

Humans are assigned a spouse? So all that dating stuff is not necessary? You had better let people know where the ticket center is, so they can grab their god ticket and see who has been all lined up for them. I think the only confusion going on here is in the mind of Mr. Swanson, a steamy mess of muddle. After all, there really isn’t a beast in Beauty and the Beast, he’s a prince in disguise, remember? A human type prince. Everyone gets all human prior to the happily married business.

Via RWW.

And we have a bonus facepalm today, in the form of Rick Wiles, who is now officially unhappy with the Tiny Tyrant over the Syria bombing. Mr. Wiles has now decided that the evil is in the form of Ms. Kushner and her husband:

Wiles went on to compare Ivanka with the daughter of Herod who, in Matthew 14, convinced her father to behead John the Baptist.

“That’s who I think Ivanka Trump is,” Wiles said. “She’s a Kabbala practicing, evil woman whispering evil things in the ear of her father. She’s going to the grave site of an old dead Kabbala practitioner and getting spirits telling her what to do … We have to pray against witchcraft in high places, witchcraft that plans to kill millions of people. … [Ivanka and Jared] are cleaning out the White House to surround President Trump with their Kabbala practitioners, and the only advice he is going to get will be from people who are evil. And the church is letting this happen.”

Oh my, now it’s a Jewish witch in the white house! I think it’s wars and bombs which are killing people, and it’s the Tiny Tyrant’s notion that it’s his military and his toys that are the actual problem.

Via RWW.

Jesus: Mything in Action.

David Fitzgerald, Author of Nailed, has a new trilogy out, Jesus: Mything in Action. A lot of people, including most atheists, aren’t overly willing to concede that christianity could have happened with some sort of actual Jesus somewhere in the mess. Most people have settled on “yes, there was, or might have been, a rabbi who wandered about preaching outside the box stuff, and it all blew up from there.” Fitzgerald argues that it’s more likely the case there was no outside the box rabbi at all. Valerie Tarico has an interview with him about Mything Jesus, and the difference between historicized mythology and mythologized history. Interesting reading!

Tarico: Walk us through how Christianity could have emerged if Jesus never existed.

Fitzgerald: There’s nothing implausible about Christianity beginning with a wandering teacher and his followers. And it’s no skin off my nose if there was – but that’s not what our evidence points to. The further we go back in Christian history, the more diverse it appears, and the less likely it began with a single founder. Instead there are abundant indications that its origins are tied to the pagan mystery faiths.

Not that Christianity is some cookie-cutter copy of the mystery faiths – it is a mystery faith; a uniquely Jewish version of this Hellenistic theology. When the Gospel of Mark is written generations later, the mystery faith savior of Paul, the book of Hebrews, and the earliest Christians becomes an allegorical figure built from pastiches from the Hebrew scriptures. Jesus doesn’t fulfill prophecy; Jesus is a collage constructed from prophecy and other writings. And his story grows by leaps and bounds in the second century.

As Bart Ehrman and other biblical scholars have demonstrated beyond a doubt, most of our New Testament books are forgeries. None are written by anyone who actually knew a Jesus. The only genuine books are seven of the letters attributed to Paul (though even these have been tampered with). And of course, Christian scriptures were edited and re-edited to suit the needs of different religious factions over centuries. We have no way of knowing how much has changed from the original writings; for the first 150-200 years, we have a blackout period with nothing but tiny fragments of New Testament texts until complete books begin to appear at the end of the second century. Our earliest complete New Testaments only go back to the 4th century; although they differ from each other – and from ours.

And of course Christianity continues to evolve and mutate for the next two millennia, a process still alive and well – a perfect textbook example of Darwinian evolution in action. Modern Christians would have a hard time recognizing their religion in the beliefs of their earliest spiritual ancestors. In fact, most Christians of today would be the heretics of 500 years ago. Please note that all these problems of evidence remain – whether there was a Jesus or not.

The full interview is here.

NC: Gay Marriage Ban.

North Carolina is going after a gay marriage ban now. I expect we’re going to be seeing this move all over the place, as a lot of rethugs and Christians are now convinced they can kill same sex marriage everywhere now that they broke all the rules to get Gorsuch on the court. Right now, it doesn’t look it did much good to oust McCrory.

Raleigh, N.C. — A bill filed Tuesday in the state House would outlaw same-sex marriage in North Carolina and refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

According to House Bill 780, the state would declare that the federal government is not legally authorized to regulate marriage. Therefore, the state’s 2012 constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage would remain in effect.

The proposal presumes that the state could simply refuse to recognize the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. According to the bill, that ruling “exceeds the authority of the Court relative to the decree of Almighty God that ‘a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’ (Genesis 2:24, ESV) and abrogates the clear meaning and understanding of marriage in all societies throughout prior history.”

The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Larry Pittman, R-Cabarrus, is a Christian minister. He refused to comment on the legislation he filed.

The bill’s second sponsor, Rep. Michael Speciale, R-Craven, first denied that the bill would outlaw same-sex marriage in the state, then said that, since the constitutional amendment remains on the books despite the Supreme Court ruling, state lawmakers should “do something about it.” He declined to say what action that should be, and he turned down an interview request, accusing reporters of misrepresenting his positions in earlier stories.

Well, there’s rabid Christians for you – their uptight view of things, based on their particular book of psychopathic myths, everyone must comply! I have one simple answer to that one: Fuck No. It would be past nice if Christians would figure out, once and for all, that not everyone believes the same shit they do.

Full story at WRAL.

Lemme Guess, Unicorns.

unicorns-in-the-bible

Oh, the verse on that image? Yeah, Psalm 92:10, the psalmist is referring to his penis, which will be mighty, with a bit of help from god or someone. Rick Joyner has been rehashing an eight hour trip to heaven he took a few years ago. I haven’t watched the video, because I haven’t had enough tea. Not sure there is enough tea for this kind of thing. There’s a tiny bit of info though:

As Joyner recounted to students attending his MorningStar University, he was once “so physically sick” that he was convinced that he had “Ebola plus the bird flu” and was utterly unable to get out of bed. During that illness, he went to sleep one night and “went straight to heaven.”

If you had ebola virus, with or without bird flu, you’d be decaying someplace, and we would be free of your bullshit. So much for that awful exaggeration.

“I had an eight hour earth-time experience in heaven,” he said. “I’ve had experiences where I was caught up to heaven a number of times and every time, I’m in a different place. I’ll tell you, heaven is so unbelievably diverse. There are more species in heaven than there are species upon the earth, spiritual species. You get a taste of it as you read the Scriptures and all the different beings and everything that there are; angels are just one little group in heaven.”

Oh, heaven is diverse. How about that. Seems odd you Christians have a pathological hatred of all diversity here on the planet. I’m pretty sure you don’t know jack shit about any species here on the planet, but I’d be willing to bet your heaven includes unicorns with mighty erect horns, and of course, dinosaurs. Probably with saddles on.

Via RWW.

Give God His Rainbow Back! Now!

“Worst example of cultural appropriation ever: LGBTs stole the rainbow from God. It’s his. He invented it. Gen. 9:11-17. Give it back.”

People have been making nonstop fun of Mr. Fischer for his indignant tweet, but rather than just letting it slide, he’s back, with a double down demand.

“The rainbow is God’s,” Fischer said. “God invented the rainbow—look at Genesis 9:11-17—He invented it, it’s His thing, He put it in the sky as a promise that he would never again destroy the earth through a flood. Are you listening Al Gore? Al Gore, you do not need to worry about the planet being destroyed by floodwaters. Why? Because God has put His rainbow in the sky to let you and everybody else know, ‘I’m never going to do that again.’”

The LGBTQ community, Fischer warned, “is using something that doesn’t belong to you. That’s cultural appropriation … You’ve culturally appropriated something that doesn’t belong to you, it belongs to God, it’s His idea and you need to give it back.”

The first thought here is how any being so utterly weak as to not be able to retake a rainbow, well why bother with it? Apparently, it never bothers Christians that they simultaneously exalt the might of Jehovah, and his absolute weakness. Also, Jehovah is a latecomer in the god business, and a fair amount of the old testament stories are lifted from earlier peoples and their mythologies, so there’s no reason to think ol’ Jehovah had a lock on a rainbow. There is the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, which the OT writers shamelessly stole from when hammering out Genesis. What about the Bifrost? That’s a whole rainbow bridge, from Asgard to Midgard, which would kind of put Jehovah’s measly rainbow to shame, yeah? What about Cuchavira, god of the rainbow? How about the Greek Goddess Iris, who is the personification of the rainbow, a messenger, and the link between the gods and humanity? Iris had long been in business before your sorry god was dreamed up, so that weak god of yours loses this one. There are plenty of other rainbow ties to various mythologies as well.

You also lose the whole “you can’t have a rainbow flag!” tantrum, too. Rainbow flags are not new, have been used for centuries. So, about that cultural appropriation business…of all people, Christians need to shut the fuck up about cultural appropriation of any kind, seriously, because the list of your crimes in that category are damn near endless.

Via RWW.

Sunday Facepalm: Jesus’s Nets of Neo-Porn.

Then-Bishop Vincenzo Paglia appears in an "erotic" net in his cathedral mural clutching another semi-nude man.

Then-Bishop Vincenzo Paglia appears in an “erotic” net in his cathedral mural clutching another semi-nude man.

A mural in a cathedral-church has gotten much attention, of the “blasphemous, disgusting, and demonic” kind. It is deliberately erotic, which is what has so many uptight knickers in a knot. Why, you can even sort of see Jesus’s tarse, oh no! Naturally, this isn’t just about the mural, it’s about Paglia’s oh-so-debased nature in designing a sex-ed class which was decried as “thoroughly immoral,” “entirely inappropriate,” and “quite tragic.”

Personally, I don’t see a problem with depicting people in a body-based manner, we are our bodies after all. When it comes to Christian thought, the idea is that while people might strive to overcome their carnal nature, this doesn’t happen until after death, and you get to heaven or wherever, yada, yada. In that sense, the mural would be accurate. Anyroad, this is being dragged into the limelight again, because Paglia has been promoted in the church.

Paglia commissioned homosexual Argentinean Ricardo Cinalli to paint the cathedral mural in 2007. It depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions.

[…]

Dr. Ward questioned Paglia’s recent appointments to influential posts within the Vatican given his artistic sensibilities.

“Given that Archbishop Paglia is in the net of erotic figures going to heaven, and given that he discussed every detail with the painter, the question has to be asked by parents worldwide why was this man put in charge of a prototype of sex education aimed at Catholic children throughout the world?” he said.

“Catholic parents must look at the scale of evil [that has infiltrated the Church at the highest levels]. They have to wake up to what is going on: It’s a moral nuclear wasteland,” he added.

Christine Vollmer, president of the Latin American Alliance for the Family as well as a founding member of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, called the mural “disgusting.”

[…]

Wilson said it is “incomprehensible” that Pope Francis appointed Paglia not only as head of the Academy for Life but also as the Grand Chancellor of the Saint John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family. She also called it “scandalous” that he was selected to oversee the launching of the Vatican sex-education course for teens, a course that she said is “repulsive and destructive to the innocence of children” as well as “contrary to the true teachings of the Catholic Church.”

[…]

Catholic artist and author Michael D. O’Brien criticized the mural for giving the viewer the “false message” that “all sexual activity, regardless of how depraved, is blessed by God.”

You can read much more here.

Christians Hating Christians, Progressive Equals Monstrous.

Janet Mefferd.

Janet Mefferd.

A story from Reuters has fired up the Religious Reich. The story has to do with the increasing political activism on the part of progressive Christians, who lean left rather than reich. They are all false prophets, false teachers, and generally horrible people all around. They twist the bible to pieces, oh my! That latter accusation based on taking the very few decent bits of the New Testament seriously, like be kind to the poor and so on. Turns out it’s quite monstrous to interpret “feed the poor” as “feed the poor”. Oh, and of course, blame is placed squarely on women. Seems that horrible progressive type Christianity has been infested with women, oh my!

On Thursday, the American Pastors Network’s Sam Rohrer, along with his guests Gary Dull and Dave Kistler, devoted their entire “Stand in the Gap” show to trashing the religious progressives highlighted in the Reuters story.

Rohrer was quite fond of his formulation that, unlike the Religious Right, the “religious left” is in fact “irreligiously wrong.”  Rohrer and his co-hosts were not shy about judging the progressive religious activists as “false prophets” and “false teachers” that the Bible warns against.

Dull said that progressives deny the “authority of scripture” and a “biblical worldview” and he offered one possible explanation:

I have found that a lot of the leaders and pastors, a lot of the pastors in this particular movement are ladies, and we believe as we look at the word of God in its true sense, that the word of God teaches us that ladies do not, well, they should not be in the pastorate.

Rohrer has previously said that having women in political leadership is a mark of God’s judgment upon a nation.

Oh that pesky “true sense”. It’s a pity there’s no such fucking thing when it comes to the Christian Book of Myths. It can be interpreted any way a person wants, which would be why there are so damn many types of Christianity. Most of them, however, do agree on the women leaders icky stance.

Kistler ticked off a list of issues motivating progressive activists—providing sanctuary for undocumented immigrants, protecting LGBTQ people, defending Obamacare, denouncing Trump’s proposed cuts in foreign aid—and decreed them “all leftist causes…that are very, very unbiblical in nature.” Kistler said flatly that it is not possible for a “Bible-believing Christian” or “genuine, true believer in Jesus Christ” to be part of the “religious left.”

Time to play No True Christian! They are right about all those things being unbiblical in nature, given that the bible is basically a long treatise on how to be a psychopath. There are decent bits sprinkled here and there in the New Testament, such as found in the slim Jefferson Bible. It should not be forgotten though, that the NT also has Jesus saying he is there to uphold every jot and tittle of the old laws. Of course, there follows a number of passages which refute Jesus’s statement, so we’re back to where we started, and the bible can mean anything you like, making it quite meaningless.

There’s more about Sam and his companions here. Moving on to the ferocious Janet Mefferd…

On her Tuesday “Janet Mefferd Live” show, Mefferd was quick to challenge the faith of progressive Christians included in the article. “These people are progressives,” she said. “They’re progressives! And for many of them progressivism is their religion. It’s not Christianity.”

No, it’s not filled with hate, so it can’t be Christianity! I didn’t listen to the soundcloud, but I’d bet there’s a serious amount of poison in her spitting out of “progressives!” Everyone should know that true Christianity is all about being a regressive, hateful asshole!

“The problem is when they start quoting scripture, it turns into something monstrous, and really, really, out-of-control not biblical,” Mefferd said, warning that progressive politics are “popping up” even in evangelical circles and among millennial evangelical Christians.

Oh no, someone leaked compassion into Christians, the horror of it all! Better get that nasty stuff out of there right now, it’s infectious.

Mefferd read from Jeff Jacoby’s March 23 guest column in the Boston Globe, entitled, “Deliver us from Scripture-citers,” in which Jacoby says biblical exhortations to feed the hungry and clothe the naked are “personal, not political.” Mefferd said of a recent letter from religious progressives that cited those verses, “They’re constantly taking the Bible and twisting it.  They twist it. They take it out of context.”

Whereas the Religious Reich, always looking for confirmation of their hatred and biases, would never ever twist scripture or take it out of context, no.

Mefferd also cited Kelly Monroe Kullberg, who has a record of rallying conservative Christians in opposition to progressive religious voices; a few years ago she organized Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, which was meant to counter the Evangelical Immigration Table, and Christians for a Sustainable Economy, which criticized progressive Christians who argued against cuts to federal programs that serve the poor. Kullberg spearheaded  a group of more than 600 conservative Christians who last year called on progressive Christians to “repent” for “work that often advanced a destructive liberal political agenda.”

Well, here’s hoping Christians with a conscience and glimmerings of empathy win the day. I would ask Ms. Mefferd how she squares the regressive attitude towards women preachers/teachers with her mouthing off, but I’m sure I’d get sprayed by a mouthful of shit, so I’ll refrain.

Via RWW.

Suing Italy and Israel on Behalf of Jesus.

Dola Indidis.

Dola Indidis.

A Kenyan lawyer, Dola Indidis has decided to sue some very long dead people, along with Israel and Italy, for the unlawful trial and execution of Jesus. Why? Well, someone has to uphold the dignity of Jesus. (Jesus can’t do that, because he’s stuck in an oak tree right now.)

A Kenyan lawyer has filed a petition with the International Court of Justice in The Hague, suggesting that the trial and crucifixion of Jesus Christ was unlawful. … The former spokesman of the Kenyan Judiciary is reportedly attempting to sue Tiberius (emperor of Rome, 42 BCE-37 CE), Pontius Pilate, a selection of Jewish elders, King Herod, the Republic of Italy and the State of Israel.

“Evidence today is on record in the Bible, and you cannot discredit the Bible,” Indidis told the Kenyan Citizen News.

Oh, sure you can discredit the bible. It’s one of the easiest messes to discredit. Barely takes any time or work at all. It’s a bit bothersome that an attorney doesn’t realize that the bible is a mashed up mess of stories, heavily edited over the years, with many different versions, which often contradict one another, and that does not constitute evidence. I would seriously hope that attorneys have a grasp on the concept of evidence.

Although those he suggests should have been convicted during the original trial have not been alive for more than 2,000 years, Indidis insists that the government for whom they acted can and should still be held responsible.

“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the ICJ to seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian.

“His selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”

Dude, Jesus is supposed to be a god, so I’d think he can handle his own dignity issues. Also, the whole crucifixion nonsense was set up by Jehovah in the first place – that’s why he got busy with little Mary in the first fuckin’ place. Jehovah isn’t much good at planning, that much shows up clearly in the bible – he’s basically good at genocide, rape, and various gruesome punishments, so the whole “I’ll have kid and kill him” plan, yep, that’s Jehovah all over.

He is challenging the mode of questioning used during Jesus’s trial, prosecution, hearing and sentencing; the form of punishment meted out to him while undergoing judicial proceedings and the substance of the information used to convict him.

The substance of information? I’m pretty sure you don’t know what that means at all, Mr. Indidis, given that you think the bible is evidentiary in nature. I’m also curious as to who is footing the bill for all this nonsense.

Full story here.

Jesus Tree.

Copyright 2017 by KPRC Click2Houston - All rights reserved.

Copyright 2017 by KPRC Click2Houston – All rights reserved.

Do you see Jesus? Right there, in the tree, for true! A woman has claimed to see Jesus in an oak tree, and if you click over and watch the video, it’s easy enough to see why. Her house is crammed full of religious icons, statues, paintings, all that. I did laugh, watching part of the video, where they zoomed back from the tree, and superimposed a white Jesus image over the tree, so that people would know how to locate Tree Jesus.

“I was looking out the window and there he was,” Clack said. “I have little square panes in my windows, and it looked like it was framed. I just laughed and said, ‘Lord, you even framed it for me.’”

Clack, who is Catholic, said she noticed it around 4 p.m. when the sun shone on it. She describes the figure as “a big face.”

“Remember, it’s bark,” she said. “When you stand back 15 feet or so, (you can see it) — it’s a big face.”

Now I’m curious – do all the acorns have tiny baby Jesuses? This would also make Jesus a Dryad. Uh oh, he fell into the wrong mythos.

Via KPRC.

The Benedict Option.

Youtube screenshot.

Youtube screenshot.

Oh, a book on how Christians can hide from all the icky queer folk! Not only hide, but build shadow societies until they can take over, proper like. Think Progress has a fun and informative Atheist and a Christian Review…

ZF: I mean, that’s not even the most extreme outcome! Dreher specifically calls on those who are committed to Benedict Option communities to sacrifice educations and careers to avoid having to function in environments that might require affirming LGBT people. “A young Christian who dreams of being a lawyer or doctor might have to abandon that hope and enter a career in which she makes far less money than a lawyer or doctor would,” he writes. “An aspiring Christian academic might have to be happy with the smaller salary and lower prestige of teaching at a classical Christian high school.” I’m not really surprised by the indoctrination mentality of limiting one’s education to a Biblical framework, but how can anyone argue that having fewer doctors is a good thing for any community?

JJ: Yeah, I think this is all wrapped up in Dreher’s dream of creating a sort of shadow conservative Christian society. As he puts it: “Rather than wasting energy resources fighting unwinnable battles, we should instead work on building communities, institutions, and networks of resistance that can outwit, outlast, and eventually overcome the occupation.”

Head on over to read about the latest Christian scheme.

The Fuck You Fuck You Fuck You Care Plan. UPDATED.

The Message to Women Everywhere.

The Message to Women Everywhere.

As most everyone now knows, the bill was withdrawn before a vote. Yes, be happy. That said, go ahead and read all the following, and remember. Remember just what they wanted to do, and still want to do. We cannot afford to forget.

 
This post brought to you with a leaden heart sinking in a simultaneous sea of fury and despair. It’s going to be a roundup, because I just can’t. I can’t.

Trump budget boss: If you want insurance to cover maternity care, lobby your state legislature. Trumpcare: Giving you the freedom to purchase health insurance that covers nothing.

On Thursday, President Trump and the House Freedom Caucus tentatively worked out a deal: Trump would agree to remove mandatory coverage of “essential services” from his health care bill in order to win the far-right caucus’ support for it.

Essential services include maternity and newborn care, pediatric care, emergency services, substance abuse treatment, and prescription drug coverage. Under the Affordable Care Act, every health insurance plan sold in the US must cover them.

White House says maternity care won’t be more expensive for women —if they’re on a family plan: A story of male priorities on women’s health care, in two acts.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters on Thursday that women wouldn’t have to worry about paying more for maternity care under Trumpcare, as long as they’re on a family plan.

The exchange came as a reporter pressed Spicer on reports that the GOP is considering repealing Obamacare’s 10 essential health benefits mandate — a requirement that all insurance plans cover services such as hospitalizations, prescriptions, preventative care, and pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care.

Spicer called the furor over these benefits a “philosophical discussion,” and argued that repealing them was a way to bring premiums down.

The White House may have skirted federal law to try and save its failing health care bill: Several official Twitter accounts lobbied Congress in support of the AHCA bill.

On Thursday morning, as the Trump administration frantically tried to save its deeply unpopular Affordable Care Act replacement bill, White House social media director Dan Scavino Jr. tweeted out a message to Trump’s dwindling pool of supporters urging them to call their congressperson in support of the American Health Care Act.

Hours later, similarly worded tweets were sent from the official @POTUS account and Donald Trump’s personal account.

But as some people were quick to note, directly lobbying Congress in support of (or opposition to) a bill using federal dollars—including White House staff who earn federal salaries—is strictly forbidden under 18 U.S.C. § 1913.

The Trump White House seems confused about how pregnancy works: Let me teach you about the birds and the bees.

The House is expected to vote Friday on a bill that, if a faction of the most conservative House Republicans gets its way, will eliminate the requirement that insurance plans cover certain essential health benefits. These benefits include maternity care, a fact that the Trump White House views as an opportunity to pit men against women.

It’s a common joke among the Affordable Care Act’s opponents. Why should a man pay for women’s health care? Hilarious!

At least with respect to maternity care, however, there’s a very simple answer to this question. Because of the unusual nature of pregnancy, either everyone must pay for pregnancy coverage, or no one will have pregnancy coverage.

The reason why is a problem known as “adverse selection.”

In last ditch effort for votes, Trump says goal of Trumpcare is to end Planned Parenthood: Trump quite literally plays politics with women’s health.

A photo of the House Freedom Caucus and Mike Pence went viral on Thursday, and for good reason — it showed that in a discussion over the future of women’s health insurance plans, the only people in the room were white men.

In a bid to get the far-right Freedom Caucus on board, President Trump and GOP leadership (again, all men) offered to repeal Obamacare’s Essential Health Benefits provision, which mandates that health insurers offer coverage for basic care like hospitalizations, prescriptions, and notably for women, pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care.

According to reports, however, the Freedom Caucus still doesn’t think the bill goes far enough. And on Friday, Trump took to Twitter to levy one more threat at its members, dangling women’s health coverage in front of them as bait:


The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!

There’s many ways in which Trumpcare would disproportionately affect women. It would price abortion care out of reach for many women, even some on employee-sponsored plans. It would roll back Medicaid and charge seniors more for health insurance, hurting two populations that are predominately female. With the new revisions, it will roll back maternity coverage.

And, as Trump alludes to, it would federally defund Planned Parenthood —which in practice, actually means preventing low-income and rural women and men who depend on Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings, STD testing, and birth control consultations. In 105 counties, Planned Parenthood is the only birth control clinic. Annually, 2.5 million women and men seek care at Planned Parenthood clinics.

Trump knows this.

Ware Christians Offering Cake.

maxresdefault

While perusing Right Wing Watch yesterday, I came upon a story, told by one Lance Wallnau, about a magic cake. This cake was so gosh darn magic, it completely changed someone’s sexual orientation.

While streaming a video over Periscope last weekend, right-wing pastor Lance Wallnau received a message from a viewer saying that she needed prayers that would help deliver her son from homosexuality. That message prompted Wallnau to recall an incident he heard about recently in which a gay bar owner was supposedly delivered from his life of sin after eating a cake which had been prepared and prayed over by Christians.

As Wallnau told it, there were some hookers who used to hang out at a bar who were saved by a fellow patron who had found Christianity. Together, Wallnau said, these individuals “baked a cake for the owner of the bar, who was gay and very adamantly anti-Christian” and prayed over it that he would leave homosexuality.

They didn’t pray for him to lose his adamantly anti-Christian views? Oh, what am saying, of course praying away the gay was much more important. Anyway, on with the magical cake!

“It was an anointed cake,” Wallnau said, “and they made the cake and gave it as a gift. And when he ate the cake … the power of God hit him.”

The “presence of God” fell upon the bar owner, Wallnau recounted, and he then got baptized, at which point “the spirit that was working him got broken off,” thus freeing him from his life of homosexuality.

Aw, I’m disappointed. No recipe? How are you supposed to concoct the special anointing oil? I grew up Catholic, that shit’s serious, you have to have the magic recipe! So, ware Christians bearing cake. Now I’m wondering, is there a special cake us atheist types can make and offer? Perhaps a really good magical cake recipe for republicans?

Via RWW.