Watching Jerry Falwell on CSPAN
I happened to watch Reverend Falwell this morning (his name always reminds me of Lucifer's pride and throwdown, only not nearly so beautiful) and I still wonder several things about him:
1. How dumb does he think we are?
2. How dumb is he?
3. How dumb are his congergation members?
BECAUSE --
asked by a caller if he thought there should be a "litmus test" for supreme court appointments, he said:
"No. John Kerry said he would never appoint a pro-life justice -- THAT's a litmus test, but President Bush said he would appoint "strict constructionists," which means justices who will over turn Roe v Wade, because that's a misreading of the constitution."
So again -- does he think we're too dumb to understand that "strict constructionists" is code for an anti-choice litmus test?
Or is he dumb enough to actually think there's a difference?
And do the members of his congregation think he makes sense?
Oh, and one other thing --- he and his pals are so involved in political matters and campaigns and elections, they make a wonderful case for the Libertarians:
TAX THE CHURCHES -- LET THEM PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE
they don't even follow the special rules made on their behalf, to keep the hell out of politics, but those rules should not exist at all, not if one likes "strict constructionists"
A "strict constructionist" interpretation of the First Amendment, i.e., "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" should mean, no prohibition, no support, and especially no exemptions from taxation that allows them to flourish at OUR expense (SOMEONE is going to have to pick up their share of the burden.) We're paying Falwell's salary, the property taxes on the buildings he and his front organizations own -- and if the feds refuse to pay for abortions because some religious folk don't approve, then we CERTAINLY do not have to pay for a fat scold to have enough money to spend his time castigating us for the way we live our lives.
TAX THE CHURCHES -- WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OPPOSITION TO WHAT WE BELIEVE IN -- i.e., science, personal choices in our lives, etc.
Link
1. How dumb does he think we are?
2. How dumb is he?
3. How dumb are his congergation members?
BECAUSE --
asked by a caller if he thought there should be a "litmus test" for supreme court appointments, he said:
"No. John Kerry said he would never appoint a pro-life justice -- THAT's a litmus test, but President Bush said he would appoint "strict constructionists," which means justices who will over turn Roe v Wade, because that's a misreading of the constitution."
So again -- does he think we're too dumb to understand that "strict constructionists" is code for an anti-choice litmus test?
Or is he dumb enough to actually think there's a difference?
And do the members of his congregation think he makes sense?
Oh, and one other thing --- he and his pals are so involved in political matters and campaigns and elections, they make a wonderful case for the Libertarians:
TAX THE CHURCHES -- LET THEM PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE
they don't even follow the special rules made on their behalf, to keep the hell out of politics, but those rules should not exist at all, not if one likes "strict constructionists"
A "strict constructionist" interpretation of the First Amendment, i.e., "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" should mean, no prohibition, no support, and especially no exemptions from taxation that allows them to flourish at OUR expense (SOMEONE is going to have to pick up their share of the burden.) We're paying Falwell's salary, the property taxes on the buildings he and his front organizations own -- and if the feds refuse to pay for abortions because some religious folk don't approve, then we CERTAINLY do not have to pay for a fat scold to have enough money to spend his time castigating us for the way we live our lives.
TAX THE CHURCHES -- WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OPPOSITION TO WHAT WE BELIEVE IN -- i.e., science, personal choices in our lives, etc.
Link
posted by Saintperle at
10:37 AM
