(04-06-2016 04:41 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 04:36 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 04:28 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 04:19 PM)Crebman Wrote:  I guess what I find most amazing is how politicians (in this case right leaning ones) absolutely waste time on things that really aren't of much importance. I mean, if the Tennessee lawmakers were to make a list of priorities for their state and doing what is of most import for the folks of Tennessee - I'm betting the ranch that "Making the Bible the state book" is far down the list of things Tennesseans would like to see their state government get done.

We spend such an inordinate amount of time and effort on silly stuff that doesn't make a tinkers damn of a difference in the lives of the people.

In 2009 the SC Legislature passed Act 58 of 2009. It designated a state duck, a state marine mammal, and a state migratory marine mammal. All told from introduction to committee to the three floor readings to the floor vote it might have took 30 minutes total.

Oh, I know - some of these things don't take much time at all. I guess I'm just at a point where I don't believe those in office often have the best interests of the people in what they do. I'm a skeptic of their intentions............

Of course they are political. The Bible is pretty historic, good choice IMHO

Yep. I meant not necessarily this particular kerfuffle - just generally what goes on in politics.

(04-06-2016 04:26 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Yea, most state lawmakers don't make much. I think it is like 42k here in Alabama. It isn't bad for part-time but you certainly aren't going to get rich on your salary.

A representative in NC only makes $13,000. If they're on special committees or hold other special positions they make a little more, but nobody makes much.

Even the speaker of the house only makes in the 30's here.

$42,000 is a lot of money for people that don't really work much.

(04-06-2016 04:47 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 04:26 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Yea, most state lawmakers don't make much. I think it is like 42k here in Alabama. It isn't bad for part-time but you certainly aren't going to get rich on your salary.

A representative in NC only makes $13,000. If they're on special committees or hold other special positions they make a little more, but nobody makes much.

Even the speaker of the house only makes in the 30's here.

$42,000 is a lot of money for people that don't really work much.

I think Alabama is on the high end of most of our public employee salaries.

Judges do pretty well here compared to other states.

I like it.

That's 30 minutes they won't get back. A state marine mammal? I don't see the significance of most of these.

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

Hell no - they are expecting that with the passage of this law that the state of Tennessee will wholly be governed by the teachings of the Bible........................oh wait, I forgot - it's the Koran and Sharia that should govern...........

I don't care anymore....the elected are simply tard.....

Do other states have a "state book"? I've never heard of that, though plenty of other dumb things like that.

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

(04-07-2016 01:30 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

I don't see how any of that is happening. There is no infringement, and it does not make any state religion. The Bible is not represented by any 1 Religion. Christianity is not a religion. Baptist, Lutheran, Christ of Christ, Roman Catholic etc., are Religions.

If the state refused building permits or stripped away tax exemptions form some and not 1, that would be creating a preference.

The Bible is a historical text used by many Religions.

(04-07-2016 01:46 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:30 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

I don't see how any of that is happening. There is no infringement, and it does not make any state religion. The Bible is not represented by any 1 Religion. Christianity is not a religion. Baptist, Lutheran, Christ of Christ, Roman Catholic etc., are Religions.

If the state refused building permits or stripped away tax exemptions form some and not 1, that would be creating a preference.

The Bible is a historical text used by many Religions.

The problem I have with it is that it literally has no connection to our state at all except through Christianity which is the big-tent religion we're talking about here. Christianity IS in fact a religion and Baptist, Catholic, etc. are denominations just like in Islam you have Sunnis, Shi'ites, non-denominational, etc. The Bible as state book is just a ridiculously dumb idea when the folks in charge haven't read it enough to realize that if they liked the book they'd be doing things like Insure Tennessee (more healthcare access using money WE LITERALLY ALREADY HAVE SET ASIDE OFF IN A CORNER FOR INCREASING INSURANCE ACCESS -- it's a Medicare type system). Sigh.

They're just asking for problems.

(04-07-2016 01:46 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:30 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

I don't see how any of that is happening. There is no infringement, and it does not make any state religion. The Bible is not represented by any 1 Religion. Christianity is not a religion. Baptist, Lutheran, Christ of Christ, Roman Catholic etc., are Religions.

If the state refused building permits or stripped away tax exemptions form some and not 1, that would be creating a preference.

The Bible is a historical text used by many Religions.

Dude. Come on. There are definitely valid arguments in defending Tennessee's move, but saying "Christianity is not a religion" is either a joke or otherwise. Those religions you mentioned are all denominations of a sub-division of the general religious belief that is Christianity. It would be akin to saying Islam is not a religion because it's divided into Sunni and Shia (and other denominations). If the bible can be considered a historical document, so can the Quran, and there'd be mass hysteria if a state made that it's state book.

Tax exemptions are also not the only way a government can discriminate against a certain religion. Suggestions like these can destructively empower people of a certain religion by putting them in the mindset of "My religion is the right one, because the government says so!" which could give them reason to personally discriminate against those of other faiths.

(04-07-2016 02:05 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:46 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:30 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 03:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Which interpretation though? Honestly, this doesn't seem like a very good idea. Does the Tennessee constitution have provisions about freedom of religion like the U.S. constitution? If so, this gets dangerously close to sanctioning a state religion IMHO - or at least lawyers could argue such.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/pol.../82625250/

?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

I don't see how any of that is happening. There is no infringement, and it does not make any state religion. The Bible is not represented by any 1 Religion. Christianity is not a religion. Baptist, Lutheran, Christ of Christ, Roman Catholic etc., are Religions.

If the state refused building permits or stripped away tax exemptions form some and not 1, that would be creating a preference.

The Bible is a historical text used by many Religions.

Dude. Come on. There are definitely valid arguments in defending Tennessee's move, but saying "Christianity is not a religion" is either a joke or otherwise. Those religions you mentioned are all denominations of a sub-division of the general religious belief that is Christianity. It would be akin to saying Islam is not a religion because it's divided into Sunni and Shia (and other denominations). If the bible can be considered a historical document, so can the Quran, and there'd be mass hysteria if a state made that it's state book.

Tax exemptions are also not the only way a government can discriminate against a certain religion. Suggestions like these can destructively empower people of a certain religion by putting them in the mindset of "My religion is the right one, because the government says so!" which could give them reason to personally discriminate against those of other faiths.

It is not a religion. Similar mistake that is made if one has to check the
box "Hispanic" when referring to race or ethnicity. Hispanic has nothing to do with race or ethnicity.

(04-07-2016 02:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 02:05 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:46 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-07-2016 01:30 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-06-2016 05:54 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  ?????

Seriously, isn't this just some sort of ceremonial thing...like the state bird, or flower, or rodent?

Is it really a freedom of religion thing?

It can be interpreted as a separation of church and state issue. Since the US is a secular government as to not infringe on the beliefs of any religious person, it could be construed making a religious text the state book would make it the de facto state religion as well. Even if it is not officially the state religion it could infringe on the rights of others by showing a governmental preference to one religion over all others.

It by itself really isn't a big deal, but it presents a poor precedent and is a bad move for public perception.

I don't see how any of that is happening. There is no infringement, and it does not make any state religion. The Bible is not represented by any 1 Religion. Christianity is not a religion. Baptist, Lutheran, Christ of Christ, Roman Catholic etc., are Religions.

If the state refused building permits or stripped away tax exemptions form some and not 1, that would be creating a preference.

The Bible is a historical text used by many Religions.

Dude. Come on. There are definitely valid arguments in defending Tennessee's move, but saying "Christianity is not a religion" is either a joke or otherwise. Those religions you mentioned are all denominations of a sub-division of the general religious belief that is Christianity. It would be akin to saying Islam is not a religion because it's divided into Sunni and Shia (and other denominations). If the bible can be considered a historical document, so can the Quran, and there'd be mass hysteria if a state made that it's state book.

Tax exemptions are also not the only way a government can discriminate against a certain religion. Suggestions like these can destructively empower people of a certain religion by putting them in the mindset of "My religion is the right one, because the government says so!" which could give them reason to personally discriminate against those of other faiths.

It is not a religion. Similar mistake that is made if one has to check the
box "Hispanic" when referring to race or ethnicity. Hispanic has nothing to do with race or ethnicity.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/christianity

Quote:Christianity
noun
1. The Christian religion, including the Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches.

They are probably doing this in order to invite the inevitable ACLU lawsuits, etc. Therefore they can fundraise by beating the drum about "the war on Christmas/Christians" and get one of those "religious liberty" bills passed.

I actually don't know anything about Tenn internal politics, maybe they already have a "religious liberty" bill.

There is zero reason for a state to try and name The Bible as it's state book other than to try and get people to call them out about it so they can start fights. And while we're at it, these "State fill-in-the-blanks" are pretty stupid all the way around.

(04-07-2016 03:47 PM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  They are probably doing this in order to invite the inevitable ACLU lawsuits, etc. Therefore they can fundraise by beating the drum about "the war on Christmas/Christians" and get one of those "religious liberty" bills passed.

I actually don't know anything about Tenn internal politics, maybe they already have a "religious liberty" bill.

There is zero reason for a state to try and name The Bible as it's state book other than to try and get people to call them out about it so they can start fights. And while we're at it, these "State fill-in-the-blanks" are pretty stupid all the way around.

Agree with all of this.