Partying like its 1870 in Oklahoma– Radical Christian Theocracy in action

Posted by ERV on February 24, 2012
(5)
More »

Posted without comment:

Anti-abortion “personhood” bill clears Oklahoma senate

The bill offers no exceptions in the case of a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest and could mean some forms of contraception such as the “morning after pill” would be unavailable, she said.

—–

Oklahoma State Representative Gus Blackwell, whos educational and employment qualifications appear to be composed entirely of “JESUS! YAAAY! I CAN MANAGE NOT TO CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING USEFUL TO SOCIETY FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE JUST BY SCREAMING JESUS ALL DAY!!! YAAAAAAY!” just reintroduced our Blog Buddy Sally Kerns anti-science bill from 2011.

But he TOTALLY DIDNT DO IT FOR JESUS.

**WIIIIIINK!!**

He TOTALLY did it cause there are like, controversies, and stuff. Or something. FOR REALSIES!

Boy, I sure am glad we have these fine, Christian politicians here in Oklahoma feeding the hungry, healing the sick, comforting those in despair using tax payer dollars to publicly jack off into the Bible.

I will hand it to King Gus. Though he is indistinguishable, in many ways, from a Oklahoma State Senator, Ralph Shortey (twinsies?), at least Gus could manage to not put a typo in his name on his fucking Facebook page.

—–

An oh-so-Conservative-PROTECT-THE-CONSTITUTION Republican is trying to repeal a portion of the Oklahoma state constitution.

Youll never guess which part.

Article II, Section 5, adopted in the 1870s:

Public Money or Property – Use for Sectarian Purposes

No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.

Gee, I cant imagine why radical Evangelical politicians who appear hell-bent on destroying public education in this country (see above, also see printing press) would be against this particular portion of the state constitution!

I just cant imagine!

On the bright side, this bill was authored by some asshole, Jason Nelson. Guess who is running against Nelson this fall? None other than OKCAtheists own Nick Singer. Nick isnt just complaining about the religious, political insanity going on in this state– he is running for office to do something real for the people of Oklahoma. Hell yeah!

Keywords:
(5)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 Eric Lund
    February 24, 2012

    Okay, has anyone explained to these Einsteins that repealing that section of the constitution (which has been in effect since Oklahoma became a state) would mean that Oklahoma can be required to spend public funds for madrassas? And how much support would this amendment have once this is explained to the Legislature? As Oklahomans should recall with their anti-Sharia amendment, the First Amendment of the US Constitution means that they can’t fund Joe Bob’s Christian School without also funding Abdul’s Madrassa (assuming the facilities to be roughly comparable) as that would be favoring/disfavoring a particular religion. (Not that memory is a prominent attribute among state legislators.) For that matter, are these evangelicals really willing to support Catholic schools (which have the advantage of a large international organization backing a network of such schools)? There is a reason Blaine amendments were passed in most states, and curiously, most of the states that didn’t pass such amendments are in the Northeast, where Catholic schools are stronger than elsewhere in the US.

  2. #2 Mind Over Splatter
    February 24, 2012

    Nick, Yea, Oh, Hell yeah!

  3. #3 Childermass
    February 24, 2012

    It is not possible for any element in the Oklahoma Constitution to date back to the 1870s as the Oklahoma Territory did not exist until 1890 and the Oklahoma Constitution was not a carryover from territorial day. The Oklahoma Constitutional Convention used the document produced by the Sequoya Constitutional Convention, which was a failed attempt to make an Indian state, as its basis.

    That being said, anything which repealing the section will allow is also prohibited by the Federal First Amendment.

    I really don’t think I take Nick’s running more seriously than as we-need-someone-on-the-ballot-just-in-case-the-Republican-murders-someone candidate. An openly-atheist candidate simply is not viable in Oklahoma.

    The Oklahoma Gazette has an article on the creationist SB 1742. I would expect that means we will soon see yet another Steve Kern diatribe in the letters column.

  4. #4 Tone
    February 24, 2012

    Not in the same vein[sorry] but yesterday in Australia, the preLudditites were at it again…
    “AN anti-vaccine group has won its case against the health care watchdog after the group was ordered to warn that its website “should not be read as medical advice”.
    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/anti-vaccine-group-wins-court-case/story-e6frf7jx-1226280670915

    Hopeless.

  5. #5 Prometheus
    February 27, 2012

    “It is not possible for any element in the Oklahoma Constitution to date back to the 1870s as the Oklahoma Territory did not exist until 1890…”

    You missed the point.

    The Blaine amendment was authored in the 1870s and after made a general condition of the conference statehood by the federal executive.

    You might want to salt my late pal Danny Goble’s take on the State of Sequoya Constitution being a basis for anything. His source was Oklahoma Chronicles which consists of Alfalfa Bill on Alfalfa Bill.

    Bill and Haskell were offering the tribes the land they had to cede to their former slaves in exchange for tin crowns for life and a state without republicans Catholics Jews etc..