If we legislate laws in U.S. based on the Bible . . .

[MrFun]

How many retail and restaurant employees will we have to put to death for working on the Sabbath?

How many adulterous women will we have to stone to death?

What will be the impact on the fashion industry once we ban clothing made of mixed fibers?

What will we do without football (as touching skin of dead pig makes one unclean)?

Should we burn to the ground all farms owned by farmers who plant different crops side by side?

How can we empower the police to make sure that guys are not masturbating, in violation of the Bible?

What will take Red Lobster's place once shellfish is banned in the U.S.?

What should the punishment be for women who speak their minds publicly - especially those who are running for office, or holding a political office?

How difficult will it be to repeal the 13th Amendment, as it violates the Bible's positive sanctioning of slavery?

[Al B. Sure!]

What are you? 12 and you just learned the Bible says some stupid ****? 1 star.

Oh and footballs haven't been made from pig's bladders for several decades.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Clearly it would be an improvement to what you have now .

[onodera]

It might be another unfun thread by MrFun, but that's the actual political agenda of Israeli ultra-orthodox Jews.

[Zevico]

I thought religion was a "multicolored lantern." Why not let some light into the state?

In all seriousness, why do you bother posting threads like these? Is your purpose to discuss something, or just post a bunch of sad faces?

First, I am not a Christian but theologically speaking most of the Commandments set out above have been abrogated according to the Christian faith. So if it were legislation based on the Christian Bible then some of those proposals would not be in force.

Second, there is no substantial political movement that calls for biblical law to form the law of the United States. The suggestion is simply unfounded in fact. Name one such movement and prove me wrong.

Sharia law, yes. But those calls are from Islamists. Given that Sharia means death for homosexuals, you should be more concerned about Islamists. The people who don't want you to have the benefits and drawbacks that come with obtaining marriage licenses do not want you dead.

[MrFun]

Second, there is no substantial political movement that calls for biblical law to form the law of the United States. The suggestion is simply unfounded in fact. Name one such movement and prove me wrong.

Uh, yes there is; there's a movement among Christian fundamentalists to legislate laws based on the Bible in regards to gay people and abortion.

I was applying the same "reasoning" to other Bible passages that these Christian fundamentalists are conveniently ignoring.

[Elok]

While this thread is nothing we haven't heard from MrFun at least five times before...

Second, there is no substantial political movement that calls for biblical law to form the law of the United States. The suggestion is simply unfounded in fact. Name one such movement and prove me wrong.

I believe the answer to this question depends on how one defines "substantial." There are people known as Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists who do want old-covenant law. I don't know much about the exact nature of their beliefs, or the degree of overlap between them, but they apparently do exist and have a certain amount of support and/or influence. It's hard to say how much, though, since few people advertise such opinions.

...yeah, that's a lot of waffle. I haven't done much research because I don't like to think about this sort of whackadoo. I know some guy named "Rushdoony" was a major player before he mercifully died.

And MrFun, the Bible never mentions abortion. It certainly never states a proscription of it, nor a penalty for it. There is a very old tradition of Christian opposition to abortion, but it's not biblical per se.

[Felch]

Elok's right, opposing abortion isn't in the Bible, it's progress towards a less barbaric future.

[Elok]

Hmm, Wiki says that "Dominionist" is a controversial term that's allegedly used mostly by critics to try to lump the merely hardcore Calvinists like the late Francis Schaeffer in with the utterly crazy ones like Rushdoony. However, Reconstructionism does apparently have a certain amount of influence; Pat Robertson, for example, admires Rushdoony, and the guy did appear on the 700 Club.

[Lorizael]

Rushdoony? Really?

[loinburger]

There's some dude wielding a terrible haircut on Youtube who posted a bunch of videos about how only Catholics should be allowed to vote, but I doubt that few people besides Ben Kenobi take the guy seriously

[loinburger]

Found him - surprisingly, a google search for "youtube catholic with bad hair" didn't locate him



I think he might have taken down the "only catholics can vote" video

edit: Hooray, somebody reposted it

[Hauldren Collider]

It might be another unfun thread by MrFun, but that's the actual political agenda of Israeli ultra-orthodox Jews.

Yes, and no one likes them, least of all most Israelis. They get a couple seats in the parliament who vote with whoever will send them the most government money. That's it.

[Elok]

Rushdoony? Really?

Are you reacting to the silliness of his name, or what I said about him?

[Felch]

I agree with his contempt for democracy. I should be the absolute ruler of the entire world. I promise to pour LSD into the water supply, add firearms training to the grade school curricula, and prohibit MrFun from reposting decade old memes that we've all seen a million times.