ONTD Political



Does anyone know what's the context for the second part of the video? Lord Jesus.

UPDATE: Apparently this video is from last year. Here's more context via Jezebel. Also, check out this opinion piece from the NYT.

Source
Cruz announces anti-LGBT 'religious liberty' council

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz has created a "religious liberty" advisory council for his campaign that seems intent on undermining LGBT rights.

The Cruz campaign announced the council on Monday, the day before many conservative Southern states were up for grabs in the Republican primary on Super Tuesday. (Cruz would ultimately win Texas, Oklahoma and Alaska, although Donald Trump took the lion’s share of the night.)

The Zodiac Killer"s Secret Plan Revealed...Collapse )

Source has the full list of board members.

I know we're all focused on Trump because lol trump, but honestly the thought of Ted Cruz becoming president straight-up scares me.
"The vast majority of nations manage to function without religious verbiage on their money," writes lawyer Michael Newdow.


The phrase "In God We Trust," which appears on the reverse side of a $20 bill, is being challenged by 41 plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed in Ohio this week.

A group of atheists seeking to drop the phrase "In God We Trust" from U.S. currency filed a federal lawsuit this week in Akron, Ohio, arguing the expression violates the separation of church and state.

The group of 41 plaintiffs is led by Sacramento attorney Michael Newdow, who has previously sued the government to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, but was unsuccessful.

Because the plaintiffs regularly handle money as a part of daily life, the suit argues, the phrase "In God We Trust" imposes upon them each time they do so.

One plaintiff "handles U.S. currency almost daily. As a Humanist, she does not believe nor trust in any g-d," the complaint reads, substituting "God" for "g-d."

It continues, "Rather, her beliefs require that she trust in her own abilities and a general responsibility to lead an ethical life. In handling the money, therefore, she is repeatedly unwillingly confronted with the words 'In G-d We Trust.' Thus, she is forced against her will to accept and re-distribute to others a message that goes wholly against her beliefs. Yet it is neither realistic nor reasonable for her to abandon the nation’s currency and use other forms of payment for all of her transactions."


Michael Newdow, an atheist lawyer from California who challenged the Pledge of Allegiance, leaves the Supreme Court after a hearing in 2004.

Unsurprisingly, the campaign has encountered resistance from religious commentators. Aclj.org, which is associated with the nonprofit religious organization Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism, Inc., framed the suit as an “attempt to eviscerate our National Motto - and with it our religious heritage.”

Newdow didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from The Huffington Post. However, in a 2015 blog on Patheos, a website focused on religion, spirituality and faith, he argued that the phrase "In God We Trust" not only violates the First Amendment of the Constitution ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”), but also violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which prohibits the government from burdening a person's exercise of religion unless it furthers a "compelling governmental interest."

"There is obviously no compelling government interest in having 'In God We Trust' on our money," Newdow wrote. "We did fine for the 75 years before the phrase was ever used at all, and continued to do fine for the subsequent 102 years before such inscriptions were made mandatory on every coin and currency bill. Similarly, the vast majority of nations manage to function without religious verbiage on their money."

By Ryan Grenoble, News Editor, The Huffington Post. 01/15/2016 04:53 pm ET.

Source
“I personally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with was something that was encouraged by the adversary, and it has become what is scientifically, politically correct.”

In a speech delivered in 2012, Ben Carson said the big bang theory was part of the “fairy tales” pushed by “high-faluting scientists” as a story of creation.

Similarly, Carson, a noted creationist, said he believed the theory of evolution was encouraged by the devil.

“Now what about the big bang theory,” said Carson at speech to fellow Seventh-day Adventists titled “Celebration of Creation,” about the theory for the origin of the universe.

“I find the big bang, really quite fascinating. I mean, here you have all these high-faluting scientists and they’re saying it was this gigantic explosion and everything came into perfect order. Now these are the same scientists that go around touting the second law of thermodynamics, which is entropy, which says that things move toward a state of disorganization.

“So now you’re gonna have this big explosion and everything becomes perfectly organized and when you ask them about it they say, ‘Well we can explain this, based on probability theory because if there’s enough big explosions, over a long period of time, billions and billions of years, one of them will be the perfect explosion,” continued Carson. “So I say what you’re telling me is if I blow a hurricane through a junkyard enough times over billions and billions of years, eventually after one of those hurricanes there will be a 747 fully loaded and ready to fly.”

Carson added that he believed the big bang was “even more ridiculous” because there is order to the universe.

“Well, I mean, it’s even more ridiculous than that ‘cause our solar system, not to mention the universe outside of that, is extraordinarily well organized, to the point where we can predict 70 years away when a comet is coming,” he said. “Now that type of organization to just come out of an explosion? I mean, you want to talk about fairy tales, that is amazing.”

Later, Carson said he personally believed Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution was encouraged by the devil.

"I personally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with was something that was encouraged by the adversary, and it has become what is scientifically, politically correct,” said Carson.

“Amazingly, there are a significant number of scientists who do not believe it but they’re afraid to say anything,” Carson added, saying he would be writing a book, “The Organ of Species,” that shows how the organs of the body refute evolution.

Carson, whose views on creation have caused controversy in the past, is outspoken about his beliefs. He even once famously debated leading atheist Richard Dawkins.

Source has two videos of Carson saying wacky things that I don't know how to embed here.


Daniel Keller, the older brother of Anna Duggar, echoes the thoughts of the nation by wondering what the heck his sister is doing by staying with her cheating and (worse yet) child-molesting husband, Josh Duggar. The answer—like all things Duggar—is horribly depressing.

In response to Jessa Duggar’s Facebook post about forgiveness, Daniel wrote, “You have to confess and forsake your sin to have mercy. Not sin, confess, repeat.”

This poor woman.Collapse )


SOURCE

__________
How sad is it that we're all so shocked that there is a reasonable-sounding person among the Duggars' extended in-laws? Damn...

This is a "truncated" Josh Dugger Sex Scandal Mega Post.



"Family Values Activist Josh Duggar Had a Paid Ashley Madison Account"

In 2013, conservative reality TV star Josh Duggar—of TLC’s 19 Kids and Counting fame—was named the executive director of the Family Research Council, a conservative lobbying group in D.C. which seeks “to champion marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society.” During that time, he also maintained a paid account on Ashley Madison, a web site created for the express purpose of cheating on your spouse.

YOWZA.Collapse )



Crazy follow-up developments:



Treat this as a mega-post and add all new Duggar developments in the comments, but feel free to commit new sources  submissions uproarious enough to their own posts.

Kansas Governor Brownback issues religious objection executive order

[I tagged this story with 'opinion' because it was posted in Equality Kansas News by the Equality Kansas organisation. They are well informed and quoted the whole order. My personal note: I've known for years that Brownback is not only deeply religious conservative, he is in fact a radical zealot of the highest order who truly believes that the U.S. Government should be a Christian theocracy. I've heard from inside sources that this man has actually proposed that language from the bible should be directly quoted into the state's constitution. If people could hear the shit he says behind closed doors, they would be disturbed.]

July 7, 2015.
Early this afternoon, Governor Sam Brownback issued a “religious objection” executive order. The Governor, who earlier this year criticized and rescinded former Governor Sebelius’ 2007 non-discrimination order as an abuse of executive authority, has taken it upon himself to abuse the United States Constitution.

Our initial interpretation of this order is simple: It’s one part scare tactics, one part ducking his constitutional responsibility.

According to the order, clergy will not be required to officiate at same-sex marriages. No kidding. This has never happened, is not happening, and will never happen. This part of the order is nothing but political scare tactic.

The rest of the order is more problematic. The plain language seems to suggest that religious organizations that have contracts to provide taxpayer-funded social services will be able to deny taxpayer-funded services to LGBT Kansans. We are still having this analyzed by our attorneys, but if this proves to be the case, the Governor should be prepared to find himself on the losing end of more expensive litigation.

We are incredibly disappointed by Governor Brownback. Instead of treating LGBT Kansans fairly, his only act has been to double-down on treating us as second class citizens.

We’re having our attorneys evaluate the specifics of the order. What follows is the full text. Be prepared to be angry.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 15-05
Preservation and Protection of Religious Freedom
The garbage is below this lid.Collapse )


Or pick through this Garbage
at the source if you like.


Oklahoma’s Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state must remove its Ten Commandments monument at the state Capitol because it violates the state Constitution, which bans using public property for the benefit of a religion.

In a 7-2 decision, justices found that the statue violated Article 2, Section 5 of the state’s Constitution, which says: “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.”

The justices ruled that “the Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths.” The lawsuit was brought by the ACLU of Oklahoma on behalf of four plaintiffs. An Oklahoma County judge ruled last September that the monument could stay in place.

“I think that at the end of the day it is the right decision simply because it acknowledges limits on the government’s power to effectively decide what religious edicts are right and wrong,” said Brady Anderson, the legal director for ACLU of Oklahoma, according to the Tulsa World.

A spokesman for Gov. Mary Fallin reacted with disappointment.

“Gov. Fallin is disappointed with the court’s opinion that a privately funded monument acknowledging the historical importance of the Ten Commandments is not allowed on Capitol grounds,” spokesman Alex Weintz said, according to the World’s report. “She will consult with the attorney general to evaluate the state’s legal options moving forward.”

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt vowed to file a petition for a rehearing, saying that “the court completely ignored the profound historical impact of the Ten Commandments on the foundation of Western law,” according to local reports.

Before the statue was installed in 2012 as a gift from Republican state lawmaker Mike Ritze and his family, legislators argued that it was not religious, but historic. Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court found that a similar monument in Texas did not violate the establishment clause because it was intended to convey a historic and social meaning and did not constitute a religious endorsement.

The 6-foot-tall monument’s installation prompted other groups, from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster to Satanists, to try to get permission to build their own monuments on the grounds of the state Capitol to mark what they also characterize as historical events.

The marker was replaced in January after a man drove across the Capitol lawn and smashed it with his car last October, telling officers that Satan made him do it. In March, a judge dismissed a case from an atheist group that wanted to remove the marker, saying that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the case.

“From the start, we expected this case would likely go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Mike Reynolds, a former state lawmaker who helped replace the marker, in a statement to local media.

By Nick Gass. 6/30/15 3:53 PM EDT.

Source
Kate Williams was 21 weeks pregnant in 2011 when she had an ultrasound anatomy scan to check on the progress of her baby. The news was not good: Her unborn son had Potter syndrome, a fatal condition in which the kidneys fail to develop in the womb.

The doctor told Williams, then 31, that her baby had no kidneys and no bladder and would not develop lungs, and there was very little amniotic fluid left to support his life. She was told she could either choose to induce labor right then and go through a full delivery, only to have the baby die in the process, or she could undergo anesthesia and have an abortion procedure.

"I was absolutely devastated to get that news," Williams told The Huffington Post in an interview. "I called my regular OB-GYN to discuss with her if there was any chance this might not be true. But she looked at the ultrasounds and told me, 'No, this is the situation.'"

Williams, a retail store manager with a 9-month-old son at the time, decided to have the abortion procedure to avoid having to go through the labor and delivery. Because she lives in Philadelphia, where there are abortion providers who are trained to perform the second-trimester procedure, and because the abortion was covered by her insurance, she could afford to make that choice. "If I wasn't in Philadelphia, who knows where I would have had to go," she said.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill on Wednesday that bans the procedure Williams chose to have. The so-called Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act aims to prohibit doctors from performing abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger. There is no exception for severe fetal anomalies, and the bill requires a neonatal doctor to try to save the fetus if there is any chance it could survive outside the womb.

Republicans claim the 20-week limit is based on the disputed theory that fetuses can feel pain at that point in their development.


Anti-abortion activists hope the 20-week abortion ban will be their opening to challenge and ultimately overturn Roe v. WadeCollapse )

By Laura Bassett. Posted: 05/13/2015 1:36 pm EDT.

Source
Indiana's Anti-Gay Law Prompts Thousands Of Businesses To Stand Up For Diversity

Indiana's controversial "religious freedom" bill was signed into law by Gov. Mike Pence last Thursday, but one grassroots campaign promoting inclusion is growing in its aftermath -- and rapidly.

Open For Service, an initiative aimed at supporting "businesses that open their doors for everyone -- black, white, gay, straight, Christian, atheist, disabled," is selling stickers to businesses so they can display their stance against discrimination for the public to see. Participating businesses also get their name placed into an online business directory accessible to consumers.

Since the campaign's March 11 launch, 3,121 businesses have signed up to be included in the directory and purchased a $10 sticker -- which reads, "this business serves everyone" -- a representative of Open For Service told The Huffington Post in an email.

“I am still playing catch-up from everything that is happening,” Josh Driver, the Indianapolis-based philanthropist behind the initiative, told NUVO News of the campaign's quick growth.

.Read more...Collapse )Source

Reactions To Indiana's 'Religious Freedom' Law
This page was loaded Aug 29th 2016, 2:01 am GMT.