House Whip Sends Bible To Every Hill Office For 'Decision-Making' Guidance

[blackhawk]

With everything wrong in the nation and the world this what makes some peoples sphincter pucker up sending bibles wow.

Chances are, the bibles are printed in red china. Let's see. Putin is a republican hero. You people don't mind your bibles printed in a commie country. What's this about the dems being commies?

You know one would think responses like that would get less stupid over time yet it's actually opposite.

 

[Wildman]

Nope, but I can definitely smell your stinky lying hateful leftist nasty ass. Palin never lied to me. Your nasty fraud president did. Fucking trash.

Do the nails hurt at all, christian boy?

Pitiful creature.

NOT a creature, that would mean he was created in the image of GOD like we were, he was spawned from swamp slime and has just barely losing his fins, or is it his prehensile tail ???? .......

 

[Wildman]

Corrupt trash overruns our govt and a couple cockroaches are upset about bibles. Very sick.

So, you would have no problem with Rep. Keith Ellison handing out copies of the Quran to all House members.

personally i would not, they might need it when toilet paper is in demand.

 

[Lakhota]

Corrupt trash overruns our govt and a couple cockroaches are upset about bibles. Very sick.

So, you would have no problem with Rep. Keith Ellison handing out copies of the Quran to all House members.

personally i would not, they might need it when toilet paper is in demand.

Why not use the Christian Bible to wipe one's ass? It contains more cruelty and violence.

Cruelty and Violence in the Bible

Cruelty in the Quran

Which is more violent, the Bible or the Quran?

 

[Wildman]

These rw'ers who openly tout their convenient christian religion remind me of the C Street House fiasco.

Why do you hate our Christian founders?

You mean our Christian founders who gave us a Godless Constitution?

Our Godless Constitution

do you mind if i try to educate you just a little bit ? good !! read the following,
thank you.

First, the constitutional framers built their structure upon the foundation of Natural Law — a God-centered world view. On this the founders were in agreement. But "Natural Law" to the entire founding generation was defined as the "laws of the Creator." In a 1794 letter to the Massachusetts Legislature, Samuel Adams wrote, "In the supposed state of nature, all men are equally bound by the laws of nature, or to speak more properly, the laws of the Creator." This is precisely why "Congress shall make no law …" initiates the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, of press, of religion had been given by God and no government can legitimately remove it.

Second, it is interesting that the founders relied most heavily upon the Bible for their political justification for the Constitution. William Blackstone, Baron von Montesquieu and John Locke top the list of most-often cited theorists — all of whom believed that God's laws undergird civil law. But the founders quoted another volume much more prolifically than any other. Biblical quotations comprise 34 percent of all the source material offered by the founders!

Third, Supreme Court rulings for the entire first century of American existence boldly declared that "Christianity was a part of the common law of the land." In fact, the Constitution is only officially considered to be one of the fundamental laws of the United States. The Declaration of Independence is another and is so stated in the U.S. Code. As Samuel Adams put it: "Before the formation of the Constitution … this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the states in the Union and has never been disannulled." The Declaration, which grounds our liberties upon God, was always considered to be interrelated to the Constitution in the same sense as articles of incorporation are related to the bylaws of a company. The Articles bring the entity into existence and the bylaws manage how that entity is to be run. Thus, the founders needed not place their sense of values in the Constitution since this had already been done in the Declaration.

Fourth, the Constitution does, after all, mention God. Article VII reads, "done in Convention … the Seventeenth Day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America."

Lord and GOD are one and the same. OK ?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Corrupt trash overruns our govt and a couple cockroaches are upset about bibles. Very sick.

So, you would have no problem with Rep. Keith Ellison handing out copies of the Quran to all House members.

I would. It's a shit covered rag.

 

[Lakhota]

Why do you hate our Christian founders?

You mean our Christian founders who gave us a Godless Constitution?

Our Godless Constitution

do you mind if i try to educate you just a little bit ? good !! read the following,
thank you.

First, the constitutional framers built their structure upon the foundation of Natural Law — a God-centered world view. On this the founders were in agreement. But "Natural Law" to the entire founding generation was defined as the "laws of the Creator." In a 1794 letter to the Massachusetts Legislature, Samuel Adams wrote, "In the supposed state of nature, all men are equally bound by the laws of nature, or to speak more properly, the laws of the Creator." This is precisely why "Congress shall make no law …" initiates the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, of press, of religion had been given by God and no government can legitimately remove it.

Second, it is interesting that the founders relied most heavily upon the Bible for their political justification for the Constitution. William Blackstone, Baron von Montesquieu and John Locke top the list of most-often cited theorists — all of whom believed that God's laws undergird civil law. But the founders quoted another volume much more prolifically than any other. Biblical quotations comprise 34 percent of all the source material offered by the founders!

Third, Supreme Court rulings for the entire first century of American existence boldly declared that "Christianity was a part of the common law of the land." In fact, the Constitution is only officially considered to be one of the fundamental laws of the United States. The Declaration of Independence is another and is so stated in the U.S. Code. As Samuel Adams put it: "Before the formation of the Constitution … this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the states in the Union and has never been disannulled." The Declaration, which grounds our liberties upon God, was always considered to be interrelated to the Constitution in the same sense as articles of incorporation are related to the bylaws of a company. The Articles bring the entity into existence and the bylaws manage how that entity is to be run. Thus, the founders needed not place their sense of values in the Constitution since this had already been done in the Declaration.

Fourth, the Constitution does, after all, mention God. Article VII reads, "done in Convention … the Seventeenth Day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America."

Lord and GOD are one and the same. OK ?

Nice try, sparky. Live and learn...

Note 1: The end of the Constitution records the year of its ratification, "the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." Although, indeed, it uses the word "Lord", it does not refer to Jesus but rather to the dating method. Incredibly, some Christians attempt to use this as justification for a Christian derived Constitution. The term simply conveys a written English form of the Latin, Anno Domini (AD), which means the year of our Lord (no, it does not mean After Death). This scripted form served as a common way of dating in the 1700s. The Constitution also uses many pagan words such as January (from the two-headed Roman god, Janus), and Sunday (from the word Sunne, which refers to the Saxon Sun god). Can you imagine the ludicrous position of someone trying to argue for the justification of a pagan god based Constitution? The same goes to any Christian who attempts to use a dating convention as an argument against the Constitution's secular nature, and can only paint himself as naive, or worse, as dishonest and deceiving.

More: The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

 

[Lakhota]

Goodnight...

 

[Agit8r]

*shakes head* Well, hopefully Eric Cantor sees it and goes Preston Brooks on his ass.

 

[Wildman]

I would - and his Teabagger ass would stay there until he memorized the Constitution.

Fascinating. Where in the constitution is this covered?

The easy part is to simply state it is in Amendment I. Reading it one comes to the establishment clause. But then, one reads further on and comes to the free exercise clause, which the Supremes have determined conflicts with the free exercise clause in some circumstances; see Thomas v. Review Board, 450 U.S. 707.

However, in this particular case it would seem the free exercise clause could only conflict with the establishment clause if the Congressman took some action not involving part of the US Government. Using his US taxpayers paid staff to place the Bibles in stationary paid for by US taxpayers and using the delivery system of the Legislative Branch to distribute the Bibles involves the US Government in a violation of the establishment clause.

Technically, that is an impeachable offense, but hey...

you fucking liberscum really get your panties in a wad over tax payers money going towards a good and righteous gesture , but have no qualms about tax payer money being spent on those illegal alien little vermin, disease carrying kids invading my and other patriots country, THE United States of America.

please go yourself...., OK ?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

These rw'ers who openly tout their convenient christian religion remind me of the C Street House fiasco.

Why do you hate our Christian founders?

You mean our Christian founders who gave us a Godless Constitution?

Our Godless Constitution

God is every part of our Country. It is you who mean nothing.

 

[Wildman]

So, you would have no problem with Rep. Keith Ellison handing out copies of the Quran to all House members.

personally i would not, they might need it when toilet paper is in demand.

Why not use the Christian Bible to wipe one's ass? It contains more cruelty and violence.

Cruelty and Violence in the Bible

Cruelty in the Quran

Which is more violent, the Bible or the Quran?

did you read in your koran where your great allah raped babies and other little girls........ huhhhh ?

 

[Old Rocks]

A Republican congressman recently sent a copy of the Holy Bible to every member of Congress "to help guide you in your decision-making," according to a letter obtained by TPM.

Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS) enclosed the Bible in his letter dated July 29 and sent to all House and Senate offices. The letter, written on an official letterhead in his capacity as assistant majority whip, was confirmed by Capitol Hill aides whose offices received it.

"On a daily basis, we contemplate policy decisions that impact America's future. Our staffs provide us with policy memos, statistics, and recommendations that help us make informed decisions. However, I find that the best advice comes through meditating on God's Word," Palazzo wrote.

"Please find a copy of the Holy Bible to help guide you in your decision-making," the congressman continued, saying the Bibles were donated by one of his constituents from South Mississippi named J.B. Atchison.

Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized the idea of using the Bible as a guide for legislating.

"When a politician calls for using the Bible as the basis for public policy, what he or she is really saying is, 'Let's use the Bible as I interpret it as the basis for public policy,'" Lynn said in response to Palazzo's letter. "When it comes to religion, our nation is pluralistic and diverse. Rather than look to the Bible or any other religious book to craft our nation's public policy, we would do well to examine another source instead, one that was actually created to guide governance. It's called the Constitution."

Palazzo rode into Congress on the tea party wave of 2010. He represents a deeply conservative district in southeastern Mississippi based in Biloxi. His office didn't return a message requesting to discuss the letter.

More: House Whip Sends Bible To Every Hill Office For 'Decision-Making' Guidance

We are governed by the U.S. Constitution - regardless of what this Tea Party nut may think. As an Atheist, I find this very offensive. The Bible should have no influence on how we are governed. God is not mentioned in the Constitution - hence, we have a Godless Constitution.

Well now, were said Congress critters to pay attention to what the Carpenter of Nazerath the result would not be in line with the Conservative Randian philosophy.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I simply don't understand the lefts hate for Christianity. Can someone help me make sense of this?

When you guys check into a hotel do you take the Gideon bible and burn it?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I look forward to every House member having a copy of the Quran.

You are free to practice your Muslim religion. Thank a Chrstian Founder for that.

 

[Wildman]

You mean our Christian founders who gave us a Godless Constitution?

Our Godless Constitution

do you mind if i try to educate you just a little bit ? good !! read the following,
thank you.

First, the constitutional framers built their structure upon the foundation of Natural Law — a God-centered world view. On this the founders were in agreement. But "Natural Law" to the entire founding generation was defined as the "laws of the Creator." In a 1794 letter to the Massachusetts Legislature, Samuel Adams wrote, "In the supposed state of nature, all men are equally bound by the laws of nature, or to speak more properly, the laws of the Creator." This is precisely why "Congress shall make no law …" initiates the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, of press, of religion had been given by God and no government can legitimately remove it.

Second, it is interesting that the founders relied most heavily upon the Bible for their political justification for the Constitution. William Blackstone, Baron von Montesquieu and John Locke top the list of most-often cited theorists — all of whom believed that God's laws undergird civil law. But the founders quoted another volume much more prolifically than any other. Biblical quotations comprise 34 percent of all the source material offered by the founders!

Third, Supreme Court rulings for the entire first century of American existence boldly declared that "Christianity was a part of the common law of the land." In fact, the Constitution is only officially considered to be one of the fundamental laws of the United States. The Declaration of Independence is another and is so stated in the U.S. Code. As Samuel Adams put it: "Before the formation of the Constitution … this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the states in the Union and has never been disannulled." The Declaration, which grounds our liberties upon God, was always considered to be interrelated to the Constitution in the same sense as articles of incorporation are related to the bylaws of a company. The Articles bring the entity into existence and the bylaws manage how that entity is to be run. Thus, the founders needed not place their sense of values in the Constitution since this had already been done in the Declaration.

Fourth, the Constitution does, after all, mention God. Article VII reads, "done in Convention … the Seventeenth Day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America."

Lord and GOD are one and the same. OK ?

Nice try, sparky. Live and learn...

Note 1: The end of the Constitution records the year of its ratification, "the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven." Although, indeed, it uses the word "Lord", it does not refer to Jesus but rather to the dating method. Incredibly, some Christians attempt to use this as justification for a Christian derived Constitution. The term simply conveys a written English form of the Latin, Anno Domini (AD), which means the year of our Lord (no, it does not mean After Death). This scripted form served as a common way of dating in the 1700s. The Constitution also uses many pagan words such as January (from the two-headed Roman god, Janus), and Sunday (from the word Sunne, which refers to the Saxon Sun god). Can you imagine the ludicrous position of someone trying to argue for the justification of a pagan god based Constitution? The same goes to any Christian who attempts to use a dating convention as an argument against the Constitution's secular nature, and can only paint himself as naive, or worse, as dishonest and deceiving.

More: The U.S. NOT founded upon Christianity

i'll bet you are very good at playing dodge ball you fucking libermonkey.

 

[Dot Com]

rw thumpers in this thread aren't helping their argument lol Fucksticks never read about the enlightenment no doubt

Deism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the United States, Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of religious freedom, expressed in Thomas Jefferson's letters and included in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. American Founding Fathers, or Framers of the Constitution, who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, and Hugh Williamson. Their political speeches show distinct deistic influence.

Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly deist. These include James Madison, possibly Alexander Hamilton, Ethan Allen,[47] and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize deism throughout the United States and Europe).

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Fascinating. Where in the constitution is this covered?

The easy part is to simply state it is in Amendment I. Reading it one comes to the establishment clause. But then, one reads further on and comes to the free exercise clause, which the Supremes have determined conflicts with the free exercise clause in some circumstances; see Thomas v. Review Board, 450 U.S. 707.

However, in this particular case it would seem the free exercise clause could only conflict with the establishment clause if the Congressman took some action not involving part of the US Government. Using his US taxpayers paid staff to place the Bibles in stationary paid for by US taxpayers and using the delivery system of the Legislative Branch to distribute the Bibles involves the US Government in a violation of the establishment clause.

Technically, that is an impeachable offense, but hey...

you fucking liberscum really get your panties in a wad over tax payers money going towards a good and righteous gesture , but have no qualms about tax payer money being spent on those illegal alien little vermin, disease carrying kids invading my and other patriots country, THE United States of America.

please go yourself...., OK ?

Besides the LEGAL ASPECT OF THE CONGRESSMAN PASSING OUT BIBLES IN MY RESPONSE TO ANOTHER POSTER'S QUESTION, where did I in this post or any other discuss, approve or in any manner condone anything in your IDIOTIC AND SOPHOMORIC RANT?


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlA35y0bGQc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlA35y0bGQc[/ame]

 

[Delta4Embassy]

A Republican congressman recently sent a copy of the Holy Bible to every member of Congress "to help guide you in your decision-making," according to a letter obtained by TPM.

Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS) enclosed the Bible in his letter dated July 29 and sent to all House and Senate offices. The letter, written on an official letterhead in his capacity as assistant majority whip, was confirmed by Capitol Hill aides whose offices received it.

"On a daily basis, we contemplate policy decisions that impact America's future. Our staffs provide us with policy memos, statistics, and recommendations that help us make informed decisions. However, I find that the best advice comes through meditating on God's Word," Palazzo wrote.

"Please find a copy of the Holy Bible to help guide you in your decision-making," the congressman continued, saying the Bibles were donated by one of his constituents from South Mississippi named J.B. Atchison.

Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized the idea of using the Bible as a guide for legislating.

"When a politician calls for using the Bible as the basis for public policy, what he or she is really saying is, 'Let's use the Bible as I interpret it as the basis for public policy,'" Lynn said in response to Palazzo's letter. "When it comes to religion, our nation is pluralistic and diverse. Rather than look to the Bible or any other religious book to craft our nation's public policy, we would do well to examine another source instead, one that was actually created to guide governance. It's called the Constitution."

Palazzo rode into Congress on the tea party wave of 2010. He represents a deeply conservative district in southeastern Mississippi based in Biloxi. His office didn't return a message requesting to discuss the letter.

More: House Whip Sends Bible To Every Hill Office For 'Decision-Making' Guidance

We are governed by the U.S. Constitution - regardless of what this Tea Party nut may think. As an Atheist, I find this very offensive. The Bible should have no influence on how we are governed. God is not mentioned in the Constitution - hence, we have a Godless Constitution.

He really shoulda read it before suggesting it be used in decision making.

Republican party is against abortion. The Bible isn't.

"Abortion:

Hosea 9:11-16 Hosea prays for God’s intervention. “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” Clearly Hosea desires that the people of Ephraim can no longer have children. God of course obeys by making all their unborn children miscarry. Is not terminating a pregnancy unnaturally “abortion”?

Numbers 5:11-21 The description of a bizarre, brutal and abusive ritual to be performed on a wife SUSPECTED of adultery. This is considered to be an induced abortion to rid a woman of another man’s child.

Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus.

Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”. Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers.

2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong?"
God's Not Pro-Life

 

[OriginalShroom]

We are governed by the U.S. Constitution - regardless of what this Tea Party nut may think. As an Atheist, I find this very offensive. The Bible should have no influence on how we are governed. God is not mentioned in the Constitution - hence, we have a Godless Constitution.

Aren't you one of those claiming that it is the "Christian thing to do" in allowing Illegals in the country and not deport them?