November 7, 2014 5:12 pm -

[su_right_ad]Oklahoma Senator-Elect James Lankford says a “Biblical worldview” will guide his actions in the upper chamber.

“Budget, for me, is still a huge area. The people have started to step back and say, ‘Well, our deficit is only $480 billion now so we are doing much better in deficit.’ We still have $480 billion. That’s a big deal,” the Republican congressman and Baptist minister told Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Wednesday.

“I come from a biblical worldview in the way I address issues,” Lankford said. “I look at Nehemiah and how he handled things when he stepped into Jerusalem. It was that the people were in disgrace and the wall was broken down, but the two things that he focused in on was the constructive side of things and the debt. Half of the Book of Nehemiah is just getting the people out of debt, so they could actually take on the other things.”


D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

103 responses to Oklahoma’s Senator-Elect To Legislate Using ‘Biblical Worldview’

  1. Hass November 7th, 2014 at 5:14 pm

    It’s nearly 2015 and the delusion continues.

    • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:22 pm

      It’s 2015 and some people still deal in bronze age mythology..(approx 2,000 years BC)

      • Chris19741949 November 10th, 2014 at 10:09 am

        Or they are living in the 19th century when all those religious tent revival shows were traveling around…oh wait. They still do that today–I think they are called mega-churches.

  2. Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 5:39 pm

    How long would it be before I was committed if I said I was going to govern using the Lord of the Rings? A much better written fantasy. And more believable.

    • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 7:27 pm

      Welcome into my agenda 21 hobbit house…:)
      Ted Cruz thinks they are real…(so it must be true)…:)

      • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:29 pm

        Hobbits are real, it’s Ted Cruz that’s imaginary.

        • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 7:29 pm

          High Five~!…
          If only it were so…..:)

  3. tiredoftea November 7th, 2014 at 5:44 pm

    He speaks English pretty well for an Iranian mullah.

    • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 5:45 pm

      Meet the Ayatollah Lankford.

    • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 7:18 pm

      I love that comment~!

  4. Carla Akins November 7th, 2014 at 5:49 pm

    And how is Lankford going to feel when his religion/bible/god is no longer in favor after a fickle society has decided they like the new guy better?

    • tiredoftea November 7th, 2014 at 7:32 pm

      The Flying Spaghetti Monster will conquer all.

      • Jay Hale November 7th, 2014 at 7:54 pm

        He smites with his noodly appendage.

        • searambler November 7th, 2014 at 8:11 pm

          May the sauce be with you. R’amen.

          • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:17 pm

            R’amen brother~!

      • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:16 pm

        Pastafarians unite~!

  5. arc99 November 7th, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    Of course when a non Christian says anything remotely similar, talk radio explodes with hysteria about Sharia law.

  6. Tammy Minton Haley November 7th, 2014 at 5:56 pm

    this can’t be happening…when did i move to a theocracy?

    …govern according to biblical principles?!? hey, bud, how ’bout governing according to the Constitution?!?

    • arc99 November 7th, 2014 at 6:01 pm

      now that the hustle and bustle of campaigning is over, perhaps they will have a chance to sit down and discover that in addition to the 2nd amendment, the Constitution contains a whole bunch of other stuff too. we shall see….

    • ExPFCWintergreen November 7th, 2014 at 6:29 pm

      In the Christian Dominionist world, the Constitution is informed by God’s law and was written to implement it. Welcome to the 2nd century.

    • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:15 pm

      How about just governing?

      • Chris19741949 November 10th, 2014 at 10:06 am

        Nah, that wouldn’t be any fun or productive, Larry. Their greatest accomplishment is not governing.

  7. SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 6:03 pm

    “We still have $480 billion. That’s a big deal,”

    To understand the proper size of the deficit (very few people do, including many economists) requires examination of the sectoral balances. In order for one sector to save some of its income, which is to say spend less than its income, some other sector must spend more than its income. Since, in the case of the US, the foreign sector is saving (a/k/a our “trade deficit”), if we want the domestic non-government sector to save also, then the government must have a deficit, and the deficit must be equal to the savings of the other two sectors. (The sectors always sum to zero as it is an accounting identity.)

    For instance, if the foreign sector saves 3% of our GDP, and the domestic private sector is to save 5%, then the government deficit must be 8% of GDP. If it is not, then all the output doesn’t get sold, and producers cut back production, or accumulate unwanted inventory (which is what is happening now, because the deficit is too small to buy all the output).

    • mea_mark November 7th, 2014 at 6:38 pm

      To put it simply. When you take money out of the economy it shrinks and that is bad. The rich have been taking money out of the economy for a long time now and it needs to be replaced to keep things going, that is what the fed does. A better solution is to tax the rich more since they are the ones pulling money out of the economy and let the government spend that to run the country. That is the best way to reduce the deficit and the debt at the same time while boosting the economy.

      • SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 7:17 pm

        I agree that the rich should be taxed more. Not to raise “revenue” per se, but to reduce the income/wealth and eventually power gap. (If everyone had a million dollars, then no one would be rich. The gap is relative, not absolute.)

        I also believe the middle class and poor should pay less in taxes at the federal level, to reduce the income gap. (The rich who own Congress and the President won’t hear of it of course. Likewise with increased taxes upon the rich.)

        Federal spending creates dollars-federal taxes destroy dollars on the govt ledgers. No money accumulates physically anywhere for the govt as all money remains and is only accounted for in the private sector (on private bank ledgers). Yes, the Treasury has many (private) bank accounts for tax and lend processing.

        As a currency sovereign , the federal government can create all the money necessary to “replace” what I believe you to refer to as essentially “off-shore dollar accumulation/savings.”

        At no time can the federal government run short of dollars, with or without taxation.

        Taxes at the federal level manage aggregate demand, they don’t provide any revenue (dollars) that the monetarily sovereign federal government could not create anyway.

      • SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 7:58 pm

        Why reduce the deficit if by accounting identity, the foreign sector and the private sector wish to save? What do you have against those in the private sector wanting to save THEIR money? Those savings absolutely require an increased federal deficit. Additionally, reducing the debt removes dollar assets (net financial wealth/interest income) from the private sector. So essentially ‘”reducing the debt” removes dollars from the economy. Meaning it acts like a tax. Federal taxes remove dollars from the private economy. How is that a good thing? There is a marked difference between a sovereign currency issuer like our federal govt and a currency user. You appear to be confusing the two.

        • mea_mark November 8th, 2014 at 9:39 am

          SteveD – What do you have against those in the private sector wanting to save their own money? — I don’t have anything against people saving money until it becomes ridiculously huge amounts.

          SteveD – Federal taxes remove dollars from the private economy. How is that a good thing? — If the dollars being removed are coming from people that are letting those dollars sit idle and not moving in the economy, the government can spend those dollars to run the country putting the money back into circulation. The more money actually moving in the economy, the stronger the economy.

          • Candide Thirtythree November 10th, 2014 at 9:31 am

            $35+ billion dollars a year leave the country in remittances, never to return. That is over $100 billion every 3 years gone from the pool of available currency to the US.

            That money is moving alright, it is moving to 3rd world countries to prop up their economies and by extension their despots and corrupt governments.

            Then add in all the money that leaves to country destined for offshore tax evasion banks and aid to foreign countries…is there any wonder why the government has to keep printing money when they are shipping it out as fast as they can print it?

        • Ian November 23rd, 2014 at 5:57 pm

          Steve, you and I are among the few people who understand what I think is obvious — that total income is equal to total savings. Who pays my salary? Everyone and I thank you all. If not for your spending, I would not have any income. I try to return the favor by spending as much as my income as I can. But I understand that some people choose to save for retirement. And if that savings went for example towards mortgages in the form of MBS, then that savings would be offset by borrowing. But in 2014, that is not happening. We need larger Federal deficits to offset the savers.
          Thank You for being one of the few posters who understand this.

  8. Obewon November 7th, 2014 at 6:04 pm

    Surely this BIG OIL repub is for feeding the hungry and Conserving Earth against Toxic Polluters? Who would possibly be against clean renewable energy? A: Koch Oil Bros hypocrites! Solar energy converted into Clean Hydrogen for storage breakthrough!

    • mea_mark November 7th, 2014 at 6:54 pm

      Awesome. I wonder what kind of scale this can be applied to. It would be great if this could be scaled down and used at the homeowner level.

      • Obewon November 7th, 2014 at 8:05 pm

        U.S. DOE Solar cells output hydrogen today at an initial 2% efficiency. Via Moore’s law we can expect 20% or greater solar produced hydrogen efficiency by 2023, rivaling today’s cheaply produced solar-cell electricity falling in cost by 50% in the past 12-18 months.

        Low-Cost Hydrogen Breakthrough Uses Solar Power And Rust: another European solution, notes the lowest cost for producing hydrogen with the photovoltaic cell/electrolyzer combo currently comes in at about 15 € per kilo, and the team’s goal for its rust-based PEC is only about € 5 per kilo.

        B) And bacteria, researchers are already on track to create high-efficiency wastewater treatment systems integrating hydrogen fuel cells with microbial fuel cells.

        C) A good example of this trend is under development at the University of Colorado at Denver, where researchers are working on a system that uses microbial fuel cells to desalinate water and/or treat wastewater while generating electricity, which is used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen can then be used in fuel cells to run equipment at the treatment facility.

    • Candide Thirtythree November 10th, 2014 at 9:24 am

      or we can just go mine the moon for Helium 3, oh wait, the Chinese are already planning that since Americans lost the ability to even go to outer space on our own.

      • Obewon November 10th, 2014 at 9:51 am

        We do have SpaceX robots successfully putting USA back into space and the Obama proposed robot built Moonbase. NASA’s current experiments see which food grows best on the moon in lunar experiments. And The proposed “Asteroid Initiative” lines up with the manned spaceflight priorities of the Obama Administration to get astronauts to an asteroid by 2025, then on to the vicinity of Mars by the mid-2030s. [How it Works; NASA’s Asteroid-Capture Mission in Pictures]

        But some lawmakers contend that the moon should still be NASA’s immediate human spaceflight target. They have reintroduced a 2011 bill called the RE-asserting American Leadership in Space Act (or REAL Space Act for short), which asks NASA to send astronauts to the moon by 2022 with the goal of establishing a long-term moonbase settlement there.

  9. Maxx44 November 7th, 2014 at 6:39 pm

    Please, liberals, don’t stay home the next time you have the opportunity to vote.

  10. SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 6:47 pm

    “Half of the Book of Nehemiah is just getting the people out of debt, so they could actually take on the other things.”

    I’m assuming he means private debt. Now that is a real problem.*

    However, the issuance of public (federal) debt is completely superfluous, except to satisfy demand for interest-earning risk free assets (US Treasuries).

    Congress simply authorizes money to be spent, and those dollars are thusly willed into existence.

    The federal government could do this endlessly, even without collecting taxes or borrowing. In fact, how do you “borrow back” one’s own IOU’s? (It’s impossible.)

    The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.

    *The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

    • mea_mark November 7th, 2014 at 6:57 pm

      With fiat currency many things are possible, that is, as long as there is faith.

      • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:14 pm

        Without faith there is no fiat currency.

        • tiredoftea November 7th, 2014 at 7:20 pm

          Or gold valuations, or platinum, or oil, or gems, or any other commodity that society values.

          • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:24 pm

            But all those commodities have some practical use. Currency has value only because people trust the agency that issues it.

          • tiredoftea November 7th, 2014 at 7:31 pm

            Only to those who don’t gamble on commodity futures. The price assigned is not a function of utility, only presumed value that is de-coupled from the thing itself.

          • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:35 pm

            That’s true, but if there weren’t commodity speculation manipulating their prices, the commodities themselves would still be useful. You can still use crude oil, and gold, and wheat, and corn, etc. Currency has no practical use at all. It’s just paper. It’s value is strictly a result of an agreement between the issuers and the users.

        • SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 7:42 pm

          ALL money is fiat money, in that by definition, it is created by the FIAT of the issuer. Gold (or other such trinkets) included.

          • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 7:49 pm

            But if the money is made from something like gold, that has a value apart from the number assigned to it that everyone agrees to, it’s different from something like paper or base metal coins. With those the only value is what people agree on. If you take a gold coin and hammer it into a blob, it still has value because of the material. The gold can also be used to make things, but paper can’t be used for much at all.

      • SteveD November 7th, 2014 at 7:29 pm

        OK then, if the United States dollar becomes worthless, and the nation becomes destitute, and you own gold (or silver, platinum, titanium, copper, brass, bronze, tulip bulbs, etc.), you will be able to barter them for the food no one can afford to grow and the clothing no one can afford to sew?

        If you think that is a viable financial plan, then I’ve got something to sell you.

        • mea_mark November 8th, 2014 at 9:45 am

          For now there is more faith in the US Dollar than any other currency so it is viable. Change happens though, sometimes unexpectedly and quickly, and faith can go right along with it.

          • Jamie Miller November 10th, 2014 at 12:42 am

            Oh, but think of bitcoins! They are backed by… something or other. Maybe by the full faith and credit of… somebody? something? Anyhow, it’s good that they aren’t fiat money like the dollar is!!! And this is the way we are all supposed to do business in the future. Right?

            Am I right?

  11. StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 7:01 pm

    Now we know why the ‘Okies’ fled from Oklahoma and migrated to California..
    I think it had less to do with hard times and more to do with the crazy fuggers who live there..

    • Obewon November 7th, 2014 at 8:16 pm

      I doubt if this OK Senate-elect knows US record GDP is (64 trillion shekels) $16.2 trillion growing +3.5% APR, or that all U.S. assets were valued at $230 trillion in 2010.

      • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:35 pm

        I dont now why the ‘demos’ didn’t run on the economy…
        I seem to remember..”it’s all about the economy”..

        • mea_mark November 8th, 2014 at 9:52 am

          Sometimes I wonder if it wasn’t sabotaged from within. There were plenty of issues that are popular that dems didn’t run on, why? The people that control the money in the party made decisions that were poor, could that have been done on purpose to benefit the few? I think the oligarchy is having too much say in the democratic party. It may be time for the dems to take hard look at who is in the democratic party and what their real motivations might be.

          • Chris19741949 November 10th, 2014 at 9:59 am

            The Dem candidates lost because they were afraid…afraid to take a stand, afraid to say something that might hurt some republican’s feelings, simply afraid. They were and are spineless jellyfish wusses. Unfortunately, until the Democratic Party actually gets a little courage, it will continue to lose to republicans like this Okie. And what mea mark said too.

      • Chris19741949 November 10th, 2014 at 9:55 am

        Don’t tell him that–he will try to sell them off.

    • fahvel November 8th, 2014 at 3:38 am

      but where did the things that filled the void come from?

      • Kim Serrahn November 8th, 2014 at 12:29 pm

        ET phoned home

      • Candide Thirtythree November 10th, 2014 at 9:19 am

        fundies breed like rats, just look at 19 and counting, a human Pez dispenser.

        • R.J. Carter November 10th, 2014 at 9:21 am

          We vote, too. We’re playing the long game. Try to gerrymander that.

  12. Dwendt44 November 7th, 2014 at 7:10 pm

    Does this mean he will be offering legislation that would bring back slavery, polygamy, chiild abuse and child labor? Not to mention the bible approving of killing those who disagree with you, rape marriage, etc.

  13. StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:33 pm

    I just want to congratulate the Republicans for assuming control of the Most Hated and Despised Institution in America..(Congress)..
    They deserve it…:)
    (if ya get my drift)..

  14. AAASuperPatriot November 7th, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    Let’s hope this includes loving America’s enemies.

    • StoneyCurtisll November 7th, 2014 at 8:44 pm

      it’s a crazy mixed up world…
      Yesterdays enemies are today’s allies…
      Crazy Mixed up World..

      • fahvel November 8th, 2014 at 3:37 am

        WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thanks.

    • fancypants November 7th, 2014 at 8:47 pm

      I sure hope it includes giving 100x more money and help then the American tax payer deserves ?
      Otherwise I would feel cheated

    • Larry Schmitt November 7th, 2014 at 8:53 pm

      Because of course bread cast upon the waters comes back a hundredfold.

  15. Budda November 7th, 2014 at 8:58 pm

    He is a Baptist minister. Where is your allegiance sir? The bible or the Constitution? Your new office REQUIRES you to uphold the Constitution.

  16. Guest November 7th, 2014 at 9:37 pm

    He’s already asked Joni Ernst if she wants to reenact Adam and Eve.

  17. Foundryman November 7th, 2014 at 10:12 pm

    This nut case’s great grand pappy would have spit bullets if John F Kennedy came out the day after his election and said the same thing…

  18. Tommy6860 November 8th, 2014 at 1:08 am

    Not surprising; the GOP is now rife with the mindset that bronze age beliefs, and now economics, should drive federal spending policies. Don’t be surprised if they don’t propose bloodletting as a cure for Ebola.

    • fahvel November 8th, 2014 at 3:36 am

      never insult the bronze age – they had deities for everything rather than one overworked phoney.

  19. ChrisVosburg November 8th, 2014 at 3:23 am

    Lankford added that people should pray as much as they complain.

    What’s the difference?

  20. fahvel November 8th, 2014 at 3:35 am

    and that fella jesus, he just went to the fkn bankers and lenders and scum and knocked over their tables and blasted them right in their own personal wall street. Replace oil and gas with all the bibles – should warm things for quite some time.

  21. nnyl November 8th, 2014 at 10:34 am

    Biblical worldview for the debt? Wouldn’t that be the jubilee? Don’t think the banksters would approve.

  22. crc3 November 8th, 2014 at 11:35 am

    Apparently separation of church and state doesn’t apply here…..

    • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 2:04 pm

      Why would separation of Church and State apply?

      • crc3 November 8th, 2014 at 2:10 pm

        Hello! Religion brought into government? No legislation should be enacted because of some religious belief ….

        • jan November 8th, 2014 at 2:31 pm

          And these same people are terrified of Sharia law.

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 4:56 pm

            This post wasn’t specifically intended to address the Quran, but I don’t think it is wrong to say I prefer my legislators to be informed by the Bible over the Quran and I assume that would hold for most non-Muslims

          • Candide Thirtythree November 10th, 2014 at 9:16 am

            and when a bunch of people with a different religion move into your town and you are suddenly outnumbered and they change the laws to their own religion then you will scream ‘Separation of Church and state!”

            You fundies always think it is a great idea to force your religion on others but never stop to think about just how evil that is.

            Because you are evil like that.

        • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 4:53 pm

          How would it be possible for legislation to be enacted completely free from religious or other worldview beliefs?

  23. Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 1:31 pm

    I think it is better to have politicians that use the Bible to inform their worldview. it scares me to think what is informing those who reject the Bible.

    • William November 8th, 2014 at 2:20 pm

      it scares me to think what is informing those who reject the Bible.
      Oh I dunno?
      Maybe the Constitution?
      Crazy idea huh?

      • jan November 8th, 2014 at 2:29 pm

        Exactly! This is not a theocracy – yet.

      • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 4:58 pm

        What informed the constitution? It has at minimum theistic presuppositions

        • arc99 November 8th, 2014 at 5:23 pm

          One of the main influences on the framers of the Constitution was the unwritten democratic constitution under which the Iroquois Confederacy had operated since the 16th century, according to a group of American Indians and scholars.

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 5:40 pm

            Did you read your own post? It reads ”They contemplated examples from Europe, examples from Greco-Roman times, examples from the Bible,”
            either way, I am not saying the Bible is the law of the land and I don’t think the Senator is either

          • arc99 November 8th, 2014 at 5:43 pm

            yes I read my own post. which clearly indicates that the Founders drew from a wide range of cultural traditions, not just the worship of the God of Abraham. that was my point.

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 5:48 pm

            Well, then you attest that at least in part the constitution was “informed” by the Bible and if you affirm the Constitution as a good document for governance, then you at least in part affirm that the Bible is as well. That was my point. The responses on this page are acting like it is some outrage that a person would consult the Bible for governance.

          • tracey marie November 10th, 2014 at 3:26 am

            the senator is saying just that

    • Kick Frenzy November 8th, 2014 at 2:57 pm

      Being a Christian isn’t what instills human morals.
      It may help instill some of them, but it isn’t how we know that killing someone is bad.

      I can guarantee you that if I grew up as an atheist, but was taught by my parents that hurting people and killing is wrong because it hurts them and pain is bad… if that were the case, I would have just as strong an aversion as a Christian… if not more, as the Bible allows for killing others in several instances.

      Another example is that I have morals that align with treating everyone with equality and fairness.
      To me, that includes any religion and any (human) sexual preference.
      To a Christian, those morals are different.
      I think they’re wrong and they think I’m wrong, but we’re all working on learned guidelines… whether by following what we’re taught or by being guided by personal principles or both.

      • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 5:03 pm

        So what’s the foundation for the worldview here? Some random moralizing from well meaning parents? Autonomous desires to do ones own thing?

        • arc99 November 8th, 2014 at 5:10 pm

          Buddhism, Hinduism, Wicca, Lakota etc. etc.

          There are many spiritual traditions in addition to those which worship the God of Abraham.

          The foundation of any worldview is not complex. Treat others as you want to be treated. That timeless rule along with the United States Constitution is all any politician in this country should need.

          Remember, it is our Constitution which explicitly states in Article 6

          “”””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.””””””

          Your personal belief is contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the United States Constitution. What scares me are people who insist that their religious mythology should dictate the policy of government that we all must live with.

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 5:37 pm

            I am not trying to deny article 6 or say the Bible is the law of the land. What dictates policy of our government but the will of the people as they are informed by their own convictions. There is no neutral secular position from which government operates. Everyone has to commit to a worldview, and everyone’s worldview is informed by something

          • arc99 November 8th, 2014 at 5:50 pm

            you did say this

            “”I think it is better to have politicians that use the Bible to inform their worldview. it scares me to think what is informing those who reject the Bible.””

            I am saying, no it is not better to have politicians using the Bible as opposed to any other cultural or spiritual tradition.

            Whether or not someone prays to Jesus Christ is in my opinion, not a reliable indicator as to who is best suited to serving the interests of the people of the United States

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 5:57 pm

            Then you are preferring your own tradition, which is your prerogative. I our system of government we will vote how we it and we are free to argue that our view is right, but the Senator is not “wrong” or “Biased” because he is using the Bible to inform his decisions.

          • arc99 November 8th, 2014 at 6:05 pm

            and neither are people who use the Koran, the HIndu Vegas or any other spiritual reference, necessarily “wrong” or “biased”.

            you are certainly free to argue that your view is the right one. my point is that preferring one spiritual foundation for our laws is contrary to what the Constitution says, regardless of the fact that yes, as individuals we have the right to form opinions and vote in a manner contrary to what is stated in Article 6.

            I am taking issue with your original premise that a politician who rejects the Bible “scares” you. I can’t see why those who reject the Bible for some other belief are any more “scarey” than those who believe every word in the Old and New Testaments.

          • Mark Tedford November 8th, 2014 at 6:16 pm

            Well, it is a book that contains widely accepted ethical concepts that can serve as a foundation for objective ethics. I don’t think it is very difficult to see that it could be a problem if someone rejects that. At least the framers of the Declaration of Independence understood we needed at least a minimum commitment to theism for there the really be unalienable rights.

          • Kick Frenzy November 8th, 2014 at 7:13 pm

            It also contains reprehensible ethics.

            And no, the founding fathers did not recognize a need for a commitment to theism.
            Most of them were Deists and saying we’re endowed with unalienable rights by a “Creator” can also include non-supernatural evolution with “the Creator” being physics and nature/evolution.

            It wasn’t using religion to form government legislation, it was a statement saying that humans are endowed with certain rights just by nature of existing.

          • tracey marie November 10th, 2014 at 3:25 am

            He is wrong, we are secular with a seperation between our government/laws and any religion.

          • Candide Thirtythree November 10th, 2014 at 9:11 am

            It is basic biology! Even babies cry when they hear another baby crying because we are all born knowing right from wrong, it is religion that teaches people to be evil.

            Babies watch the faces of the people around them to judge when what they are doing is acceptable or not.

            Humans cannot survive on their own, so basic biology hard wires us not to be evil…it is evil adults who make up evil shit like religion to justify killing and rape and plundering and pillaging that are the problem.

        • Kick Frenzy November 8th, 2014 at 7:06 pm

          The foundation should be the same standard for most religions and sensible humans throughout the ages…

          Don’t be a douchebag.

          That’s about it and it’s something we learn by experience as well as we can learn it from our parents, a church or a Flying Spaghetti Monster coloring book.
          I don’t need a religious text to tell me that cold blooded murder is wrong.
          If you think that’s the only viable way for people to learn morality and ethics, then you underestimate human nature… which in turn underestimates the abilities and forethought of God himself.

          The point is, as others have stated, there is supposed to be separation of church and state, for the protection of both from both.
          When an elected official states that he’ll be referring to a religious text to inform his decisions, it’s not only unconstitutional but dangerous to our nation as a whole.
          If we followed all the laws of the Bible, New and Old Testaments, we would all regret it… whether it’s because of wearing a poly-blend or eating shellfish or keeping your hair the wrong length, the majority of the laws in Bible have no place in a decent society.

    • tracey marie November 10th, 2014 at 3:24 am

      you are just afraid all the time of everything and of thinking, educated people. Keep your myths to yourself

    • Chris19741949 November 10th, 2014 at 9:48 am

      How about being informed by reason, rationality, facts, science, current events, even reality? None of those are covered in the bible, and in too short supply even today.

      Question: what does this country persist in trying to live in the world of 19th century religious tent revivals? They were flimflam then, and they are even worse now. No wonder the rest of the world, well, most of it, things we are all stupid and crazy.

  24. KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker November 8th, 2014 at 4:51 pm

    Well if he is going to legislate on the BuyBull’s world view, this is the world perspective you’re getting.