Roy Moore spokesman gets schooled on CNN

[FFaith]

CNN fake news. Wouldn't a Jew be sworn in with the Torah, or is a Jewish Bible the same thing?

Edit: Apparently the Torah can also be called the Jewish Bible. Never heard it called that before.

[Whateverist]

Who is your arbiter of which news is fake? Hopefully not the shit gibbon or his lobotomized spokespersons. He sure burns through them quickly, doesn't he?

[Rev. Rye]

CNN fake news. Wouldn't a Jew be sworn in with the Torah, or is a Jewish Bible the same thing?

Edit: Apparently the Torah can also be called the Jewish Bible. Never heard it called that before.

Some have used the Tanakh, which contains the Torah and everything Christians wound consider part of the OT, except for the apocrypha. That said, a lot of Jewish senators from agnostic atheist Bernie Sanders to Shomer Shabbos Joe Lieberman seem to have just done it on a Christian Bible, probably out of convenience.

https://www.quora.com/If-Bernie-Sanders-...ic-atheist

Personally, I’d just use a copy of The Brothers Karamazov.

[FFaith]

My post was not meant to be serious. Just joking around. I did not know the meaning of the word bible, but now I've looked it up and do. I've just always thought of it as a Christian thing.

I like Bernie, not Trump. Well, I did like Bernie up until a few days ago. I have no reason to believe that MSM would ever try to deceive me though, so I trust what they tell me. Thankfully Joy Ann Reid from MSNBC clued me in on what a woman hating prick and abusive husband Bernie Sanders is, treating his wife like crap. I can no longer support a man like Bernie Sanders who does these things to women.

[SteelCurtain]

Yet in Pennsylvania, if you are atheist, you are not permitted to hold any office.

Why aren't these types of issues challenged here and in other states where your right to not believe in a deity prevents you from holding office?

Because lawmakers have no incentive to repeal the law, even though it would immediately get overturned in court if it was challenged.

But to be challenged, one needs a challenger. The same law exists here in Tennessee. The thing is, no atheist has a chance of winning at least here in TN, candidates get accused of being an atheist in negative attack ads. So there haven't been challengers to the laws, which could never be enforced.

[Edwardo Piet]

Who is your arbiter of which news is fake? Hopefully not the shit gibbon or his lobotomized spokespersons. He sure burns through them quickly, doesn't he?

Sorry to break it to you but the arbiter is actually the shitgibbon of lobotomized spokepersons.

AKA the SGOLS.

Unfortunately the inventor of an imaginary concept always gets to make the rules for said imaginary concept.

That's also why the theologians always expect to have their cake and eat it too in a formal debate.

"Hey He's my imaginary friend so I am the one who gets to decide what He can and can't do alright?"

Things would be so much easier if people talked that way. Am I right?

[Crossless2.0]

While gorging myself on ribs at L Woods, my Dad showed me this:






Of course, Jake Tapper failed to mention one other point that could have shut him up even more: this issue is addressed in the Constitution, and it's one of exactly two mentions of religion in the Constitution (and the only one in the Constitution proper):

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

One has to wonder how far Crockett's mouth would have ended up opening if Tapper read that to him.

. . . and yet these same fuckwits fancy themselves Constitutional scholars and originalists -- despite apparently not having read the damned thing.

[Brian37]

While gorging myself on ribs at L Woods, my Dad showed me this:






Of course, Jake Tapper failed to mention one other point that could have shut him up even more: this issue is addressed in the Constitution, and it's one of exactly two mentions of religion in the Constitution (and the only one in the Constitution proper):


One has to wonder how far Crockett's mouth would have ended up opening if Tapper read that to him.

. . . and yet these same fuckwits fancy themselves Constitutional scholars and originalists -- despite apparently not having read the damned thing.

It doesn't surprise me this guy might not have read it, but Moore has and that makes Moore even fucking worse. Getting a Law degree does require you to read the Constitution and even in college getting that degree, make arguments in papers and even mock trials basing them on the Constitution. Moore knows better but doesn't give a fuck.

[Rev. Rye]

And given that Roy Moore was, until recently, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, one would expect he'd know the Constitution backwards and forwards. Then again, this is a man who pretty much became famous for right-wing virtue signalling with his giant fucking marble 10 Commandments monument.

[Brian37]

And given that Roy Moore was, until recently, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, one would expect he'd know the Constitution backwards and forwards. Then again, this is a man who pretty much became famous for right-wing virtue signalling with his giant fucking marble 10 Commandments monument.

To the Moore's of society and to their gullible supporters, I'd say go live in Iran or Saudi Arabia if you want to live under a government run on religion.